Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes

29 September 2020

MINUTES OF Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council
Ordinary Council Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chambers, Gundagai
ON Tuesday, 29 September 2020 AT 6:00 PM

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 and Cr Craig Stewart

IN ATTENDANCE: Phil McMurray (General Manager), Kay Whitehead (Interim Deputy General Manager), Ganesh Ganeshamoorthy (Manager Assets), 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), Matt Stubbs (Manager Technical 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.

2 Open Forum

Open Forum is not held due to COVID-19 Restrictions. No submissions for Open Forum were received prior to the meeting.

3 Apologies

Nil

4 Disclosures of Interest

Cr Phillips disclosed a significant non pecuniary interest in item 11.2 Cootamundra Aquatic Centre and Sports Stadium Expressions of Interest and 11.3 Cootamundra Aquatic Centre and Sports Stadium Expressions of Interest – Late Report

5 Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday 25 August 2020

Resolution 259/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Charlie Sheahan

The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday, 25^th August, 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record of the meeting.

Carried

6 Mayoral Minutes

6.1 Mayoral Minute - Councillor Engagement

Resolution 260/2020

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

The information in the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

Carried

7 Reports from Committees

Nil

8 General Manager’s Report

8.1 Business

8.1.1 Cootamundra Floodplain Risk Management Committee - Minutes

Resolution 261/2020

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

The Minutes of the Cootamundra Floodplain Risk Management Committee Meeting held on Thursday 9 September 2020 (attached) are submitted for adoption.

Carried

8.1.2 Amendments to the Model Codes of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedure Effective 7th August, 2020

Resolution 262/2020

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

1. The following three (3) amended draft Codes of Conduct, attached to the report be adopted:

(a) Code of Conduct for Councillors

(b) Code of Conduct for Staff

(c) Code of Conduct for Delegates and Committee Members

2. The draft Procedures for the Administration of the Code of Conduct, attached to the report be adopted.

3. Council increase the existing $50 cap on the value of gifts to $100.

4. The Circular 20-32 Amendments to the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW and Procedures be noted.

Carried

8.1.3 Amendments to the Code of Meeting Practice

Resolution 263/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr David Graham

1. The report on amendments to the Model Code of Meeting Practice, including amended Model Code of Meeting Practice and Circular 20-31, attached to the report, be received and noted.

2. The amended Model Code of Meeting Practice attached to the report be adopted.

Carried

8.1.4 Amendment to Resolution 169/2020 Liquid Waste Charges Billing Period

Resolution 264/2020

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

The Liquid Trade Waste Charges incorrectly identified as being charged ‘bi-annually in arrears’, in resolution 169/2020, in respect of the billing period, be amended to be charged ‘quarterly in arrears,’ and be adopted as follows:

10. Liquid Trade Waste Charges

The annual trade waste charges as identified below are charged quarterly in arrears. In accordance with the provisions of Section 535 and 502 of the Local Government Act, 1993, Council hereby resolves to make the following trade waste charges for the 2020/21 rating year:

a) Trade Waste Annual Fee on non-residential land connected to the sewerage service of $231.00 where liquid trade waste is discharged.

b) Trade Waste Usage Charge on (Category 2) non-residential land connected to the sewerage service of $4.00 per kilolitre of the estimated volume of liquid trade waste discharged to the sewerage system with prescribed pre-treatment. The volume of liquid trade waste discharged shall be calculated by multiplying the volume of water measured at the water meter(s) connected to the property, based on actual usage per kilolitre, by the trade waste discharge factors (TWDF) for the predominant use of the property. An indicative list of the applicable trade waste discharge factors is as follows:

PROPERTY USE	TWDF %
Concrete Plant, Park Watering and Sewer Well	1
Pool, Bowling Green, Clubhouse and General Business	10
RLPB, Pharmacy, Medical Centre	20
Caravan Park, School and Bakery, Community use (as defined in Community Based Not for Profit Organisations)	25
Motel, Restaurant, Hotel, Club	30
Takeaway food	50
McDonalds	62
Service Station	70
Dentist	80
Hospital	85
Butcher, Hairdresser, Supermarket, Carwash	90

Carried

8.1.5 Cootamundra Development Corporation - Nomination for second Councillor Board Member

Resolution 265/2020

Moved: Cr Gil Kelly

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

Council appoint Cr Stewart to the Cootamundra Development Corporation Board.

Carried

8.1.6 Update on s355 Committees

Resolution 266/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Council receive and note the report, and that

1. Council note the Cootamundra Concert Band’s decision not to reconvene as a s355 Committee.

2. Council dissolve the Cootamundra Beach Volleyball s355 Committee, for reasons detailed in the report.

3. The Cootamundra Beach Volleyball Committee be thanked for their long standing and continued efforts.

4. Council acknowledge the community benefits of the Cootamundra Beach Volleyball event and community donations of $35,000, and

5. Council review any future in-kind support to the Cootamundra Beach Volleyball event during its normal annual budgeting process.

Carried

8.1.7 The Arts Centre Cootamundra s.355 Committee Meeting Minutes

Resolution 267/2020

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

The Minutes of the Art Centre Cootamundra s355 Committee meeting held on 20 August, 2020, attached to the report, be received and noted.

Carried

8.1.8 The Art Centre Cootamundra s.355 Committee Meeting Minutes and Membership

Resolution 268/2020

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

1. The Minutes of The Art Centre Cootamundra s355 Committee meeting held on 17 September, 2020, attached to the report, be received and noted.

2. The office bearers and membership of The Art Centre Cootamundra s355 Committee as detailed in the report, be endorsed.

Carried

8.1.9 The Cootamundra Tourism Action Group s.355 Committee Meeting Minutes

Resolution 269/2020

Moved: Cr Craig Stewart

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

The Minutes of the Cootamundra Tourism Action Group Section 355 Committee meeting held on 3 September 2020, be received and noted.

Carried

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

Resolution 270/2020

Moved: Cr Craig Stewart

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

The Minutes of the Cootamundra Heritage Centre Management s.355 Committee meeting held on 7 September, 2020, attached to the report, be received and noted.

Carried

8.1.11 Cootamundra Showground Users Group s.355 Committee Meeting Minutes

Resolution 271/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

The Minutes of the Cootamundra Showground Users Group s.355 Committee Ordinary Meeting held on 16 September, 2020, attached to the report, be received and noted.

Carried

8.1.12 Information Bulletin

Resolution 272/2020

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

1. The information and correspondence attached to the report, be received and noted.

2. That Council write to the Hon. Mark Coulton, MP thanking him for the first quarterly payment of its Financial Assistance Grant and tell him of some of our local priority projects and stressing that the amount of the Financial Assistance Grant grant is insufficient for Councils local infrastructure.

3. Council correspond with the Hon. Shelley Hancock MP and express interest in having a workshop for Women held in the Cootamundra-Gundagai Local Government Area.

Carried

8.1.13 Updated Council Meeting Action Report

Resolution 273/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr David Graham

The Updated Council Meeting Action Report be noted.

Carried

8.1.14 Australia Day 2021

Resolution 274/2020

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

1. Information on Australia Day Awards 2021 be received and noted.

2. Council support the submission of an application for funding for local Australia Day 2021 activities, from the $500,000 Australia Day 2021 event branding grants program.

3. Council staff further investigate the viability of Council applying for funding from the $7.5 million Australia Day 2021 COVIDsafe Events grant program.

Carried

8.2 Finance

8.2.1 Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Sewerage Fund Replenishment Loan

Resolution 275/2020

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

That authority be granted to the General Manager to execute the loan agreement on behalf of Council.

Carried

8.2.2 Monthly Finance Report for August 2020

Resolution 276/2020

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

The Finance Report for August, 2020 be received and noted.

Carried

8.2.3 Investment Report - August 2020

Resolution 277/2020

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

That the Investment Report as at 31^st August, 2020 be received and noted.

Carried

8.2.4 Updated Monthly Major Projects Program and Projects Schedule

Resolution 278/2020

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

The Updated Monthly Major Projects Program Report, and Updated Monthly Major Projects Schedule, attached to the report, be received and noted.

Carried

8.3 Community and Culture

8.3.1 Cootamundra-Tumblong Rail Trail Detailed Development Plan

Resolution 279/2020

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

That Council allocate an amount of $10,000 from the existing budget for the Recreational Needs Study to complete initial project consultation with primary producers neighbouring the Cootamundra-Tumblong Rail Corridor.

Carried

8.3.2 Old Mill Gundagai Stabilisation Work Request for Quotation

Resolution 280/2020

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

1. The report on the Old Mill Gundagai Stabilisation Work, Request for Quotation and the Old Mill Gundagai Stabilisation Work, Request for Quotation Confidential (under separate cover) be received and noted.

2. Council delegate authority to the General Manager to negotiate with Adaptive Interiors (the preferred supplier) to determine whether all or part of the project can be delivered within existing budget, by utilising local suppliers or different methodology.

3. That further funding be sought to enable the project to proceed, if required.

Carried

8.3.3 Gundagai Tourism Action s355 Committee - Minutes

Resolution 281/2020

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr Charlie Sheahan

1. The Minutes of the Gundagai Tourism Action Group S355 Committee attached to the report, be received and noted.

2. That Madeline Ryan be appointed as member of the Gundagai Tourism Action Group s355 Committee as the Gundagai Regional Enhancement Group Representative.

Carried

8.4 Development, Building and Compliance

8.4.1 Development Application - 110/2020 - Pump Track - Lot 7009 DP1021379, Bourke Street, Cootamundra

Resolution 282/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

Council approve development application 110/2020 for a pump track on Lot 7009 DP1021379, Bourke Street, Cootamundra, subject to the following conditions:

GENERAL

1. Compliance with plans

The developer shall carry out the development generally in accordance with the following plans and documentation:

Development application form dated 15 July 2020, submitted 17 August 2020
Summary Environmental Report dated 6 July 2020, submitted 17 August 2020
The following plans prepared by Trailscapes Pty Ltd:
Drawing No:	Issue/Version	Content	Date of Plan	Date lodged
20027 SK01	B	Concept Plan	03 July 2020	17 August 2020
20027 SK02	B	Concept Section	03 July 2020	17 August 2020
Survey Plan drawn by CMS Surveyors title 19376 detail dated 18/05/2020

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

2. Inconsistencies between approved plans and documents

In the event of an inconsistency between the documents and/or plans referred to above, the latter documents and/or plans, shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Reason: To manage any inconsistencies between the approved plan and documents.

3. Inconsistencies between approved plans/documents and conditions of consent

In the event of an inconsistency between the conditions of this consent and the documents and/or plans referred to above, then the conditions of this consent shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Reason: To manage any inconsistencies between he approved plan/documents and conditions of consent.

PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION

4. Tree protection

Existing trees located on site and not identified for removal shall be protected during the construction period.

Reason: The amount of vegetation in the Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Area should continue to increase to improve climate and appearance.

5. Utilities

Approval is given subject to the location, and protection, of any/or necessary modifications to any existing public utilities situated within or adjacent to the subject property.

Reason: To ensure that public utilities are maintained and protected from damage.

6. Section 7.12 Contribution

The applicant shall pay all monies relating to Section 7.12 Contributions prior to the commencement of works.

Section 7.12 contributions are calculated on the estimated cost of the development as specified on the Development Application at the time of lodgement. The cost of development as lodged is $165,000; the applicable percentage of contribution under Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Section 7.12 Contributions Plan is 0.5% of the development cost. The amount payable is $825.00.

Reason: To ensure that the applicable developer contributions are paid in accordance with Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Section 7.12 Contributions Plan.

7. Imported fill material

Any and all imported fill material shall be from an approved source. Prior to use of fill on site the applicant shall submit to Council details of the source of fill, haul route and documentary evidence that the fill material is free from contaminants.

Reason: To ensure that all imported fill material transported to the site is not contaminated and is suitable for use.

8. Public Safety

A hoarding or fence must be erected between the construction site and the public place (street frontage). If necessary, an awning sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the works falling onto a public place is also to be erected. Such hoardings required separate approval by Council and must comply with the requirements of SafeWork NSW.

The hoarding or fence is to be kept lit during the time between sunset and sunrise if the work may be a source of danger to persons using the public place.

The hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed when it is no longer required for the purposes for which it was provided. Restriction of public access to the construction site shall restrict entry by members of the public or equipment to the site when construction work is in progress or the site is otherwise unoccupied.

Reason: To protect the general public.

DURING CONSTRUCTION

9. Hours of construction

Construction site works including the entering and leaving of vehicles is limited to the following hours:

Monday to Friday 7:00am – 7:00pm

Saturday from 8:00am to 5:00pm

Sunday and public holidays from 8:00am to 12 noon.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the neighbourhood.

10. Waste storage during construction

Provision shall be made on site for the proper storage and disposal of waste such that no waste shall be left in the open. Specific attention should be given to items which are subject to relation by the action of the wind.

Reason: To ensure the site is not a source of wind-blown litter.

11. Soil erosion control

Site erosion measure shall be incorporated into site management during construction. Seepage and surface water shall be collected and diverted clear of the construction site by a drainage system. Care shall be taken to ensure that no nuisance is created to adjoining properties or public space by way of sediment run off.

Reason: To ensure that adequate measures are in place so that damage from sediment run off to adjoining sites and waterways is minimised.

DURING OPERATION

12. Clean and tidy

The premises are to be maintained in a clean and tidy condition at all times.

Reason: So that the development does not reduce the amenity of the area.

13. Amenity general

The development is to be conducted in a manner that will not interfere with the amenity of the locality by reason of the emission of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, wastewater, waste products, grit, oil, by causing interference to television or radio reception or otherwise.

Reason: so that the development does not reduce the amenity of the area.

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 Development Application 109/2020 - Internal Rock Climbing Wall - Lot 1 DP7740, Adams Street, Cootamundra

Resolution 283/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Doug Phillips

Council approve development application 109/2020 for an internal rock climbing wall Lot 1 DP758287, Adams Street, Cootamundra, subject to the following conditions:

GENERAL

1. Compliance with plans

The developer shall carry out the development generally in accordance with the following plans and documentation:

Development application form dated 23 July 2020, submitted 17 August 2020
Summary Environmental Report dated 22 July 2020, submitted 17 August 2020
The following plans prepared by Summit Climbing Walls:
Drawing No:	Issue/Version	Content	Date of Plan	Date lodged
-	-	Project Proposal	03 July 2020	17 August 2020
Floor Plan, undated, submitted 17 August 2020

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

2. Inconsistencies between approved plans and documents

In the event of an inconsistency between the documents and/or plans referred to above, the latter documents and/or plans, shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Reason: To manage any inconsistencies between the approved plan and documents.

3. Inconsistencies between approved plans/documents and conditions of consent

Reason: To manage any inconsistencies between he approved plan/documents and conditions of consent.

PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION

4. Prior to work commencing

The erection of a building in accordance with the development consent must not commence until:

a) a construction certificate for the building work has been issued by the consent authority, the council (if the council is not the consent authority) or an accredited certifier, and

b) the person having the benefit of the development consent has:

· appointed a principal certifying authority for the building work, and

· notified the principal certifying authority that the person will carry out the building work as an owner-builder, if that is the case, and

c) the principal certifying authority has, no later than 2 days before building commences:

· notified the consent authority and the council (if the council is not the consent authority) or his or her appointment, and

· notified the person having the benefit of the development consent of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work, and

d) the person having the benefit of the development consent, if not carrying out the work as an owner-builder, has:

· appointed a principal contractor for the building who must be the holder of a contractor licence if any residential work is involved, and

· notified the principal certifying authority of any such appointment, and

· unless that person is the principal contractor, notified the principal contractor of any critical stage inspection or other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation.

5. Site signage

Site signage shall apply and must be erected on the site in a prominent, visible position for the duration of the construction. The signage must include:

· statement that unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted

· show the name of the builder or another person responsible for the site and a telephone number at which the builder or other person can be contacted outside working hours, and

· the name, address and telephone contact of the principal certifying authority for the work.

Any structures erected to meet the requirements of this condition must be removed when it is no longer required for the purpose for which it was erected.

Reason: to meet the minimum requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation.

6. Notice of commencement

Prior to work commencing a ‘Notice of Commencement of Building Work and Appointment of Principal Certifying Authority’ shall be submitted to Council a t least 2 days prior to work commencing.

Reason: To meet the minimum requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation.

PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

7. Additional details

The applicant shall submit to Council prior to issue of a construction certificate a structural engineer is to provide a design for any structural changes to the existing building and for the proposed climbing wall.

Reason: To ensure the structural adequacy of the building is maintained.

8. Payment of developer contributions

The applicant shall pay all monies relating to Section 7.12 Contributions prior to the commencement of works. Section 7.12 contributions are calculated on the estimated cost of the development as specified on the Development Application at the time of lodgement. The cost of development as lodged is $200,000; the applicable percentage of contribution under Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Section 7.12 Contributions Plan is 0.5% of the development cost. The amount payable is $1,000.00.

Reason: To ensure that the applicable developer contributions are paid in accordance with Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Section 7.12 Contributions Plan.

9. Clause 94 consideration

In determining the development application Council has considered it would be appropriate to require the existing building to be partially upgraded to meet the Building Code of Australia. In this regard the building will require a current annual fire safety statement, egress paths, door hardware and fire services to be upgraded on the ground floor of the building. A plan demonstrating this is to be submitted prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

Reason: To ensure regulatory compliance.

10. Construction management and egress plan

If the building is to be used or occupied whilst construction is underway a detailed construction management and egress plan is to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

Reason: To ensure safety of occupants.

DURING CONSTRUCTION

11. Waste storage during construction

Provision shall be made on site for the proper storage and disposal of waste such that no builders’ waste shall be left in the open. Specific attention should be given to items which are subject to relocation by the action of wind.

Reason: To ensure that the site is not a source of wind blown litter.

12. Hours of construction

Construction site works including the entering and leaving of vehicles is limited to the following hours:

Monday to Friday 7:00am – 7:00pm

Saturday from 8:00am to 5:00pm

Sunday and public holidays from 8:00am to 12 noon.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the neighbourhood.

13. BCA Compliance

All building work (other than work relating to the erection of a temporary building) must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia (as in force on the date the application for the relevant construction certificate was made).

Reason: To ensure the building complies with the BCA.

POST CONSTRUCTION

14. Occupation certificate

A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of the building unless an occupation certificate has been issued by the appointed Principal Certifying Authority.

Reason: So that the development is substantially completed to a safe standard to allow use or occupation of the building.

ONGOING USE

15. Annual Certification

The owner of the building shall submit to Council an ‘Annual Fire Safety Statement’ (Form 1) by 1 July each subsequent year after obtaining a ‘Fire Safety Certificate’ for the building from Council.

The ‘Annual Fire Safety Statement’ shall comply with the provisions set out in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. Forms for this purpose can be collected from Council’s offices.

Reason: To ensure that fire and other safety measures are maintained in a proper working condition.

16. Hours of operation

The development shall only be conducted between the hours of:

Monday to Sunday – 8:00am to 10:00pm

17. Clean and tidy

The premises are to be maintained in a clean and tidy condition at all times.

Reason: So that the development does not reduce the amenity of the area.

18. Amenity general

The development is to be conducted in a manner that will not interfere with the amenity of the locality be reason of the emission of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, wastewater, waste products, grit, oil, by causing interference to television or radio reception or otherwise.

Reason: So that the development does not reduce the amenity of the area.

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 Activities Approval Policy

Resolution 284/2020

Moved: Cr Leigh Bowden

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

1. Council place the draft Activities Approval Policy on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

2. Council endorse the adoption of the Activities Approval Policy without a further report to Council if there are no submissions received during the exhibition period.

Carried

8.4.4 Development Applications Approved August 2020

Resolution 285/2020

Moved: Cr Charlie Sheahan

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

The information on Development Applications Approved in August, 2020 be noted.

Carried

8.5 Regulatory Services

Nil

8.6 Assets

8.6.1 Construction of Water Supply Extension to Dog on the Tucker Box, Gundagai

Resolution 286/2020

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr David Graham

1. The report on the construction of Water Supply Extension to the Dog on the Tucker Box, Gundagai be noted.

2. In accordance with section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act, 1993, Council resolve that the requirements for tendering do not apply to this contract due to extenuating circumstances as detailed in the report.

3. Council enter into a contract as detailed in the Water Supply Extension documentation, circulated under Confidential Cover in this unique circumstance.

Carried

8.7 Civil Works

8.7.1 Civil Works and Technical Services Report - September 2020

Resolution 287/2020

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Craig Stewart

The Civil Works and Technical Services Report for the month of September 2020 be received.

Carried

8.8 Technical Services

8.8.1 Replacement of Medium Rigid Tipper - Plant 3204

Resolution 288/2020

Moved: Cr David Graham

Seconded: Cr Penny Nicholson

1. The Report for the replacement of 2014 Hino FD1124 Truck, Plant No 3204 be received and noted.

2. The quotation of $151,961.28 (ex. GST)received from Wagga Trucks for the purchase of a 2020 Hino GH1828 500 series Truck (with fitted tipping body) be accepted.

3. The trade in offer of $40,909 (ex. GST) received from Wagga Trucks for the 2014 Hino FD1124 Truck, Plant No 3204 be accepted.

4. The additional funds of $21,052.28 required above the plant reserve allocation be funded from within the Gundagai operational component of the plant fund.

Carried

8.8.2 Replacement of Volvo Backhoe - Plant 2102

Resolution 289/2020

Moved: Cr Penny Nicholson

Seconded: Cr David Graham

1. The Report for the replacement of the Volvo BL71 backhoe, Plant No 2102 be received and noted.

2. The quotation of $181,900 (ex. GST) received from Westrac Pty Ltd for the purchase of a 2020 CAT 432F2 backhoe loader be accepted.

3. The trade in offer of $33,000 (ex. GST) received from Westrac Pty Ltd for the Volvo BL71 backhoe, Plant No 2102 be accepted.

4. The additional funds of $21,900 required above the plant reserve allocation be funded from within the Gundagai operational component of the plant fund.

Carried

8.8.3 NSW Road Classification Review and Transfer

Resolution 290/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Charlie Sheahan

1. That Council proceed to nominate Annie Pyers Drive for reclassification.

2. The merits of nominating Muttama Road for reclassification be discussed by Council’s Operations and Finance staff with a further report to come to Council for consideration if reclassification is recommended.

Carried

8.9 Facilities

Nil

8.10 Waste, Parks and Recreation

Nil

9 Motion of which Notice has been Given

9.1 Acquisition of Land for Residential and Industrial Expansion at Gundagai

Resolution 291/2020

Moved: Cr Abb McAlister

Seconded: Cr Charlie Sheahan

1. That Council investigate the purchase of suitable industrial and residential land for expansion of North and South Gundagai.

2. That Council consult local developers and real estate agents about opening up further blocks for residential growth in Cootamundra.

3. That Council fast track the provision of services to the Turners Lane industrial blocks and list them with the local real estate agents.

Carried

9.2 Council Meet with the Cootamundra Hospital Board to Discuss Lobbying the State Government for a New Hospital

Resolution 292/2020

Moved: Cr Abb McAlister

Seconded: Cr Dennis Palmer

Arrangements be made for Council to meet with the Cootamundra Hospital Board and discuss a proposal of lobbying the State Government for a new hospital to be built in Cootamundra.

Carried

10 Questions with Notice

Nil

11 Confidential Items

Having disclosed a significant non pecuniary interest in the items in the Confidential Report Cr Phillips left the room.

11.1 Confidential

Resolution 293/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Gil Kelly

1. Item 11.2 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 Item 11.2 be withheld from the press and public.

11.2 Cootamundra Aquatic Centre and Sports Stadium Expressions of Interest

Provisions for Confidentiality

Section 10A (2) (c) – The Confidential Report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

Public Interest

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

Carried

11.2 Cootamundra Aquatic Centre and Sports Stadium Expressions of Interest

Resolution 294/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

1. The report on the Cootamundra Aquatic Centre and Sports Stadium Expressions of Interest be received and noted.

2. Council hold an Extraordinary Meeting following negotiations with shortlisted firms in order to make a timely decision about operating arrangements for the Cootamundra Aquatic Centre prior to the peak summer season on Tuesday 6^th October, 2020 in Gundagai at 4:00pm.

Carried

11.3 Cootamundra Aquatic Centre and Sports Stadium Expression of Interest - Late Report

Resolution 295/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr Leigh Bowden

1. The report on the Cootamundra Aquatic Centre and Sports Stadium Expressions of Interest be received and noted.

Carried

11.4 Resumption of Open Council Meeting

Resolution 296/2020

Moved: Cr Dennis Palmer

Seconded: Cr David Graham

The Open Council meeting resume.

Carried

11.5 Announcement of Closed Council Resolutions

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

The Meeting closed at 8:53:00PM .

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 27 October 2020.

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

CHAIRPERSON GENERAL MANAGER

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 October 2020

8.4 Development, Building and Compliance

8.4.1 Development Application 2020/131 - Use Fish as a Feedstock for Existing Rendering Plant - Lot 1 DP611755, 572 Stockinbingal Rd Cootamundra

DOCUMENT NUMBER

337679

REPORTING OFFICER

Sharon Langman, Manager Development, Building and Compliance

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Phillip McMurray, General Manager

RELEVANCE TO COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN

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

3.1 The natural environment is valued and protected

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

4.2 Active participation and engagement in local decision-making

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

1. Attachment A - Environment Protection Authority General Terms of Approval ⇩

Recommendation

Council approve the following development, subject to the consent conditions below:

Application Number: DA2020/131

Property: Lot 1 DP611755

572 Stockinbingal Road

COOTAMUNDRA NSW 2590

Development: Livestock Processing Industry – use of fish as feedstock for existing

rendering plant

A. Administrative Conditions

Compliance with Council

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

Document Reference	Description	Author	Date
	Statement of Environmental Effects and Planning Report	Jason Graham, Australian Meat Group	March 2020
	Annexure 1a Modifications to the Existing Rendering plant at AMG PTY Ltd	TF Consultants
	Annexure 2a Draft Environmental Impact of Conversion from High Temperature to Low Temperature Rendering	ProAnd Associates Australia Pty Ltd	August 2020
	Response and Medli v2.1.0.0 (20/9/2020)	ProAnd Associates Australia Pty Ltd	17/9/2020
	Annexure 3 Safety Data Sheet “Mackerel Fish Meal	Manildra Group	15/8/2019
	Annexure 4 Waste Management Plan	Australian Meat Group
191179_NIA_Rev3	Noise Impact Assessment	Bendow Environmental	6/9/2019
1053r01v1	Traffic Impact Assessment	Ason Group	23/07/2019
	Trial Period Environmental Audit Report	Jason Graham, Australian Meat Group
	Odour Management System Review Assessment	The Odour Unit	22/9/2020
	Survey Plan	C.M.S Surveyors Pty Limited	5/9/2020
	Drawing titled: AMG Cootamundra Low Temp Process Layout		undated
	Drawing titled: Tender Plan mark up		undated
	Rendering Procedures Manual		4/8/2020
Controlled Copy No 1	Letter: Response to EPA	Australian Meat Group	26/9/2020
	Upgrade Photos	Australian Meat Group
	Email to Council	Australian Meat Group	22/9/2020
	Email to Council	Australian Meat Group	23/9/2020

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

Payment of Section 7.12 Contribution

2. The applicant shall be a levy as applicable under Council’s adopted Section 7.12 Contributions Plan. The applicable rate is 1% of the development costs as follows:

Cost of Development $700,000 x 1% = $7,000 contribution payable.

Reason: To ensure that all development pays the applicable fees as a contribution to the provision of community facilities.

Compliance with Legislation

3. Regardless of consent, the applicant is still responsible for adhering to the requirements of State Legislation including (but not limited to) the Protection of the Environment Operations Act and Dangerous Goods (Road and Rail Transport) Act.

Reason: This consent does not remove obligations imposed by State and Federal Legislation.

Parameters of Consent

4. During the time that this consent is in operation, fish are to be the only feedstock for the rendering plant. The processing of other animal by-products and the operation of the abattoir is not to occur during the period of this consent.

Reason: To comply with odour limits and requirements of the NSW Environment Protection Authority.

Inconsistencies between approved plans and documents, conditions of consent and licence

5. In the event of an inconsistency between the documents and/or plans referred to above, the latter documents and/or plans, shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Reason: To provide clarity to the hierarchy and importance of documents in the consent.

6. In the event of an inconsistency between the conditions of this consent and the documents and/or plans referred to above, then the conditions of this consent shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Reason: To ensure that conditions of consent prevail.

B. During Operations of the Facility

Render Fish Only

7. This consent authorises the render of fish only, all other abattoirs operations are suspended while this consent is in operation. The operations of the abattoirs and the rendering of fish are NOT to occur concurrently.

Reason: The cumulative impact of the combined operations has not been assessed and the resultant impact on the environment cannot be predicted.

Hours of Operation

8. During the time that this consent is operational, plant operations are restricted to the hours of 12:00am Monday to 11:59pm Saturday. No operations shall occur on Sundays or Public Holidays.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the neighbourhood.

Validation Report

9. The applicant shall submit to Council an Odour Control System Validation Assessment Report within forty-eight (48) days of the commencement of operations at the site. The Assessment is to be completed with the first six weeks of operation.

Reason: To protect the receiving environment and monitor the effectiveness of odour mitigation measures.

Temperature Control of Feedstock

10. Fish stock is to be maintained under temperature control until processing, and any actions taken to maintain temperature are to be recorded. A record of temperature of raw material deliveries is required to be kept for each load that is delivered to site upon delivery and at unloading.

Reason: To maintain product integrity and limit odour generation.

Waste Storage and Disposal

11. All waste generated from the process onsite (i.e. fish product unsuitable for processing) shall be stored in a bunded area with an impermeable surface and shall be removed from the site and disposed of at a waste management facility lawfully permitted to accept the waste.

Reason: To ensure that waste control and disposal measures are adequate for the development

NOTE: Council’s Cootamundra landfill facility does not have capacity to accept mass disposal of fish.

Truck Washing

12. All trucks used for the transport of feedstock are to be washed out on site. The truck wash area onsite shall be bunded and washwater directed to the effluent system, away from the stormwater system.

Reason: To ensure that stormwater is not contaminated.

Bunding of Processed Material

13. Processed material shall be stored in covered bunded areas sized to contain a spill of 150% of the material in the bunded areas.

Reason: To ensure that pollution does not occur in the event of a spill on site.

Complaints Management System

14. Upon commencement of this consent the applicant shall implement a complaints management system, which shall be published on their website. Contact details for complaints will be provided on the website and on the gate to the premises.

Reason: To ensure that complaints are followed through, rectification measures are implemented, and the community informed of the rectification actions.

Records

15. A record shall be kept during the fish rendering consent period of any complaints received from the general public including: a) the date and time of the complaint; b) the method by which the complaint was made; c) any personal details of the complainant which were provided by the complainant or, if no such details were provided, a note to that effect; d) the nature of the complaint; e) the action taken in relation to the complaint, including any follow-up contact with the complainant; and f) if no action was taken the reasons why no action was taken. Records of will be made available to Council Officers and the NSW Environment Protection Authority on request.

Reason: To ensure the amenity of the neighbourhood is protected.

Irrigation Areas

16. The applicant is to map and record the regime of irrigating effluent to land to ensure that soil capability, capacity and stability is not impacted and to ensure that areas of terrestrial biodiversity are avoided.

Reason: To ensure the amenity of the receiving environment is maintained and the activity is managed in a sustainable manner.

Amenity

17. The development is to be conducted in a manner that will not interfere with the amenity of the locality by reason of the emission of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit, oil, by causing interference to television or radio reception or otherwise.

Reason: So that the development does not reduce the amenity of the area.

Monitoring

18. Regular oil and grease analysis is be conducted on wastewater samples taken at the EPA designated monitoring points and at the discharges from the anaerobic and aerated ponds, as part of the normal sampling program.

Reason: To ensure that the receiving environment is not subject to pollution.

Amendment to Environment Protection Licence (EPL)

19. Prior to the modification being acted upon, the Applicant shall apply to the Environment Protection Authority for a variation to Environment Protection Licence No. 3889, and the licence variation shall be approved.

Reason: Requested by Environment Protection Authority to ensure that activities carried out onsite are consistent with the Environment Protection Licence.

Environment Protection Authority General Terms of Approval

20. The operation of the site must be done in accordance with the General Terms of Approval issued by the Environment Protection Authority in Attachment A, which form part of this consent (Notice No. 1600465).

Reason: Legislative requirement to comply with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act, 1997.

Management of Negative Pressure

21. The applicant shall ensure that negative pressure is maintained within the rendering plant at all times, except when loading of raw feedstock material occurs. Staff are not permitted to open doors to allow greater air exchange.

Reason: To ensure that odour management is maintained in accordance with the limits contained in the EPL.

Spray Irrigation of Biofilter

22. The applicant shall implement the minimum spray irrigation program as recommended in The Odour Unit report.

Reason: To maintain optimum bed moisture and ensure sustainable biofilter bed operation.

Introduction

Council has received an application for the use of fish as feedstock for the existing rendering plant at the abattoir site on Stockinbingal Road, Cootamundra. The applicant seeks approval 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.

Council approved a three month trial of this process in December, 2019 and numerous odour complaints were received by both Council and the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA). The plant ceased the activity in April, 2020 and closed the plant to undertake upgrades to the odour capture system and convert from a high temperature rendering process to a low temperature rendering process.

The matter was notified to adjoining and potentially impacted property owners with 1 submission received in response to the notification. In accordance with the delegations issued to staff this matter is referred to Council for determination.

Discussion

Details of the Proposed Development

Applicant: Australian Meat Group

Site: Lot 1 DP611755, 572 Stockinbingal Road, Cootamundra

Development: Rural Industry – Use fish as feedstock in rendering plant at existing abattoirs as an interim measure until red meat processing recommences.

Date Received: 26 August 2020

Zone: RU1 Primary Production, Cootamundra Local Environmental Plan 2013

History of Proposal

Council records indicate that the site has operated as an abattoir in some form since the early 1970’s. Numerous additions and amendments have occurred over time, including the construction of additional killing floors, chillers, boning areas, by products plant, yards, and effluent systems. Due to a series of cumulative factors the use of the site as an abattoir significantly declined with the plant being put into maintenance mode and other forms of externally sourced material were processed in an effort to have an economic return from the site.

In May, 2019 the former owner of the site, Manildra Meat Group, approached Council and NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) to discuss a proposal to process mackerel caught near southern coastal NSW in the existing rendering plant at the site. The applicant verbally indicated that it was uncertain if the rendering plant would be suitable or capable of being put to such a use. The use of fish as a feedstock at the rendering plant commenced in July, 2019. Council and the EPA received numerous odour complaints during July, 2019 and the complaints continued despite the applicant making several attempts to address the odour issues.

An application for a trial of fish as feedstock for the rendering plant was lodged with Council in August, 2019 (DA 2019/103) with odour complaints to both Council and the EPA continuing. On 10 December, 2019 Council granted consent for a three (3) month time limited trial of fish as a feedstock for the rendering plant. This permitted the rendering of fish until 12 March, 2020, at which point operations were to cease unless development consent was obtained that permitted continued use.

The trial commenced on 10 December, 2019 and although limited in operation during January and early February, 2020 due to bushfire impacts on transport, numerous odour complaints were received in mid February and continued until the site ceased rendering fish in June, 2020. Australian Meat Group took control of the site in mid February, 2020 and despite the consent for the rendering of fish was for a three month trial period only (until 12 March, 2020) operations continued until June 2020.

An odour assessment undertaken by Ektimo during the trial period demonstrated that the biofilter attached to the rendering plant was functioning well. Nonetheless odour continued to be a problem and was often detected off site. The NSW EPA issued a penalty notice and prevention notice to Australian Meat Group which required upgrade works be completed to mitigate odour. The applicant ceased using fish as a feedstock and undertook the upgrades required by the prevention notice. The works included conversion from a high temperature rendering process to a low temperature rendering process (LTR).

This application for the ongoing use, post plant upgrades, of fish as a feedstock for the low temperature rendering plant until such time as red meat processing recommences at the plant. The applicant has also sought consent to demolish the partially erected beef kill floor and preliminary pre lodgement discussions have also been held with Council regarding reconstruction of a beef kill structure.

Site

The abattoirs and associated infrastructure is located on a 39.7ha allotment on the eastern side of Stockinbingal Road approximately 3.8km due north of the Cootamundra Central Business District. The site slopes to east toward the Lake Cargelligo rail line. The surrounding land is predominantly rural in nature with closest dwelling being located on the lot immediately to the south less than 100metres from the property boundary with a further three dwellings located within 500metres from the centre of the subject site. Cootamundra Racecourse is situated approximately 1km from the boundary of the subject site and Rathmells Lane, which contains small rural holdings and dwellings is located 550metres from the southern boundary of the site.

Figure 1 - Location of Site Source: Six Maps

Figure 2 – Aerial View - site in context of surrounding development Source: CGRC Intramaps (2020)

Figure 3 – Location of existing rendering plant on site Source: Google Earth

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979

1.3 Objects of the Act

In determining a development application, the consent authority must consider whether the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objects of the Act, which are numerous and varied. It is considered that the following objects are most relevant to the merit assessment of this application:

(a) to promote the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment by the proper management, development and conservation of the State’s natural and other resources - the proposal to use fish as a feedstock for the render plant provides an opportunity for an economic return whilst conditions for processing red meat are less than ideal and provide some local employment opportunities. If the proposal does not generate adverse odour impacts the social fabric of the community will not be impacted. The proposal will not impact upon the management, development or conservation of State resources in terms of land, soil, or water use and providing no adverse odour impact is expected air quality resources will not be significantly affected. Management, conservation and protection of fish populations used as feedstock is not the subject of this application and subject to separate approvals under other legislation outside of the control of Council and the provisions of this Act.

(b) to facilitate ecologically sustainable development by integrated relevant economic, environmental and social considerations in decision-making about environmental planning and assessment - this upgrades undertaken to the plant to permit this activity to be undertake have been designed taking account of the local environmental conditions and proximity of the proposal to residential areas and nearby dwellings.

(c) to promote the orderly and economic use and development of land – as indicated above the structures to support this proposal already exist on site. There have been recent upgrades to the plant which limited off site odour impacts previously associated with the development. The land is suitably zoned primary production and the proposal is an efficient and economic use of the site whilst further upgrades are undertaken to efficiently process red meat when economic conditions are appropriate for this to occur.

(e) to protect the environment, including the conservation of threatened species and other species of native animals and plants, ecological communities and their habitat – subject to compliance with best practice, EPA licence conditions, commitments and recommendations provided in the documents supporting the Statement of Environmental Effects and Council’s conditions of consent, the proposal is unlikely to have any adverse environmental impacts including impact on threatened species.

(i) to promote the sharing of the responsibility for environmental planning and assessment between the different levels of government in the State – the proposal is integrated development, in that approval is also required from the EPA. That agency was consulted during the assessment of this application, as they are responsible for ensuring compliance with odour, noise, water and pollution control at the site. The EPA have provided their general terms of approval after assessing the application and supporting documentation as submitted by the applicant.

(j) to provide increased opportunity for community participation in environmental planning and assessment - the application was notified to adjoining and potentially impacted property owners as well as being advertised on Council’s website, social media and local newspaper in accordance with the relevant requirements (see Section 2.22 below) to provide the community an opportunity to be involved and participate in the assessment of this application.

1.7 Application of Part 7 of Biodiversity Conservation Act, 2016 and Part 7A of Fisheries Management Act, 1994

These sections of the Acts require Council to consider whether the development or activity is likely to significantly affect threatened species, populations or ecological communities (as per the relevant test in each Act). Pursuant to these sections and tests, it is not considered that the development is likely to significantly affect threatened species, populations or ecological communities because:

Biodiversity Conservation Act, 2016

· the site has not been declared as an area of outstanding biodiversity value,

· the development does not exceed the biodiversity offsets scheme thresholds (is not mapped as high biodiversity value on the Biodiversity Vales Map and does not exceed the clearing threshold),

· it does not involve the removal of trees (native or otherwise), and there is no native groundcover disturbance,

· the proposal is to occur in an existing building with no increased footprint in an already highly developed site,

· the site does not contain any of the tree, shrub or grass species that are typical of the four Endangered Ecologically Communities known to occur across the Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council local government area,

· the proposal is not a key threatening process.

Fisheries Management Act, 1994

· all threatened species, endangered populations and endangered ecological communities know to occur in the area, or thought to be extinct in the area, are confined to the Murrumbidgee River or river system, the development is remote from the River,

· there is no declared critical habitat in the region,

· the proposal is not a key threatening process.

2.22 Mandatory Communication Participation Requirements

Part 1 (Mandatory Communication Participation Requirements) of Schedule 1 (Community participation requirements) sets out the mandatory requirements for community participation by planning authorities with respect to the exercise of relevant planning functions, which includes, amongst other things, notification of development applications.

The relevant section that applies to this development is:

8A Application for development consent for nominated integrated development of threatened species development

(1) Minimum public exhibition period for an application for development consent for nominated integrated development or threatened species development – 28 days.

Accordingly, the application was notified to adjoining and potentially impacted property owners within a 1 kilometre radius. The application was also advertised in the local newspaper, on Council’s website and social media. One submission was received. The issues raised were predominantly around amenity and odour impacts.

4.5 Designated of consent authority

The development is not State or regionally significant development or infrastructure (as defined by SEPP (State and Regional Development) 2011), therefore Council is the consent authority.

4.10 Designated development

Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000 defines the various types of development considered to be designated development. Designated development is development for which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is required. Designated development is also subject to third party appeal by an objector under Section 8.8 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

Modifications or additions to designated developments do not necessarily constitute designated development in their own right and an EIS may not be required providing that it can be demonstrated that the cumulative environmental impacts of the modification and the original applications are no greater than that of the original designated development. Whilst livestock processing industries (being industries for the commercial production of products derived from the slaughter of animals or the processing of skins or wool of animals, including rendering or fat extraction plants with an intended production capacity of more than 200 tonnes per year of tallow, fat or their derivatives or proteinaceous matter) when certain thresholds are met, are considered to be designated development there is provision in Clause 35, Part 2 for Council to be satisfied that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required for alterations and additions to approved designated developments.

In order for Council to consider the application in its current form, 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 EIS is not required for the proposed alteration to the existing approved 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 use 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 proposed use are not significantly greater when compared to existing approved operations. This Clause permits alterations and additions to a development that is not designated development if, in the opinion of the consent authority, the alterations or additions do not, when proposed mitigation measures are in place, 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. The factors for consideration 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,

Over the years there have been numerous activities undertaken to improve environmental performance of the operations. The applicant has provided a list of improvements to the operations on site since 2003 in the Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) submitted with the application.

The significant odour impacts experienced within the community during non authorised use and the trial period allowed the previous applicant and now the current applicant to identify potential sources of the odour throughout the plant and process. Mitigation works that were undertaken before the trial or during the trial included:

· Biofilter upgrades to increase capacity,

· Replacing the biofilter fan,

· Installation of a new biofilter for the press pit,

· Improvements to the anaerobic pond, including removal of solids which prevented effluent from discharging into the pond and being diverted straight to the aerobic pond;

· Dosing of the aerobic pond;

· Replacing the aerator on aerobic pond; and

· Covering of sumps.

Following numerous odour complaints to both Council and the EPA, the applicant has undertaken further odour reducing activities since the cessation of fish rendering in June, 2020. These works include connection of additional odour sources to the odour control system (fish meal storage area, fish oil tanks), installation of rapid roller doors, recladding and sealing protrusions from the rendering shed and installation of equipment to convert to a low temperature rendering process.

Whilst it is acknowledged by the applicant that rendering of fish has been occurring on the site since early July, 2019, the SEE argues that the applicant has demonstrated sufficient past environmental management performance and a commitment to continuous environmental improvements. The SEE notes that the applicant has worked with EPA to identify and reduce odour sources in accordance with the licence requirements. The applicant held the belief that as the EPA licence is separate from development consent and does not require a variation to use fish as a feedstock that they were acting in accordance with legislative requirements.

(ii) rehabilitation or restoration of any disturbed lands

The proposal does not require the rehabilitation or restoration of any disturbed land. The site has approval to operate as an abattoir and associated rendering plant for the by-products of the abattoir process. There is an existing effluent system in place. The alteration of feedstock for the rendering plant does not result in the need to rehabilitate or restore any disturbed lands.

The applicant has provided a wastewater assessment that indicates that wastewater from the fish rendering process is less than that of an operating abattoir. The reduction in wastewater resulting from an overall decrease in water usage at the plant as no slaughtering is taking place. The same wastewater assessment indicates that nutrients within the effluent from the rendering process will have lesser impacts on soil quality when used for irrigation than that of effluent from slaughter operations.

(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 alteration, 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 not process fish when the abattoir is operating for the slaughtering of animals. An assessment of the effluent system indicates that less wastewater is produced by the rendering of fish and the impacts on soil quality are also less than effluent from an operating abattoir.

It is acknowledged that the odour profile of fish rendering and abattoir operations is significantly different. Nonetheless the environmental protection licence requirements are the same in that, irrespective of the feedstock, the requirement to limit odour impact remains the same. The mitigation works and changes made to the rendering plant and odour control system would not only be of benefit for fish rendering but also during operation of the abattoir and the associated by products rendering.

(b) the likely impact of the proposed alterations or additions having regard to factors including:

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

The proposal does not involve any new construction nor additional heavy vehicle movements and animal noise impacts are likely to be less than when the site operated as an abattoir.

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.

Revised odour modelling and continual upgrades to the odour extraction and management system together with improvements to the effluent system indicate that the odour impact is able to be managed. It is however unclear how the effluent system would respond and the timeframe for that response if abattoir operations were to recommence.

(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 provided general terms of approval. Nonetheless considerable odour complaints have been received both during the unauthorised use periods and approved trial period. Notwithstanding the complaints and the unauthorised use EPA staff have continually worked with the site operators to reduce odour impacts. A revised SEE including an assessment of the odour control system and the effluent system assessment have been received. These documents have provided recommended actions to monitor and manage the onsite systems to further reduce odour impacts. A monitoring regime is also proposed together with a complaints management which will allow the operator and regulators to work together to manage adverse impacts.

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 composition of the effluent is different and the ability of the existing effluent system, designed to cater for abattoir wastewater, to adequately cater for the wastewater needs to be considered. An assessment of the effluent system’s ability to cater for the different effluent has been provided. This assessment indicates that the volume of wastewater is significantly reduced from that of an operational abattoir. Similarly, the nutrient content of the effluent from fish rendering is likely to have significantly less impact on the receiving soils. This assessment indicates that the existing effluent system is able to cater for the altered effluent.

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 cool room compressor equipment and the like.

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

The rendering of fish at the site was undertaken from July, 2019 until June, 2020, and the environmental impacts of this process are mainly in relation to odour. The applicant has undertaken odour modelling on at least two separate occasion since the commencement of fish rendering. The first assessment identified a number of actual odour sources and made recommendations for the upgrading of the biofilter in particular. The second assessment, an Odour Impact Statement (OIA) prepared by GHD, contained odour sampling as well as modelling to predict odour distribution and impact. It is noted that although the OIA found that the fish processing activities at the site would not adversely impact surrounding sensitive receptors that the reality during the trial period did not support the modelling.

The applicant has submitted a revised OIA with this application, which is based on sampling undertaken before (The Odour Unit November, 2019) and during the trial (Ektimo Pty Ltd April, 2020). As it was known that odour was detected off site during this period, further information was requested from the applicant regarding the Odour Control System, including odour capture, negative pressure and capacity. The applicant has submitted an additional report from The Odour Unit (Odour Management System Review Assessment September, 2020) which concludes that the odour control system as upgraded is suitable for process operations. The report does make some recommendations regarding management for optimal performance but no further upgrades are recommended.

(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 three potential odour sources.

The first source being the rendering (heating and cooking) process itself. The process changes from High Temperature to Low Temperature Rendering should reduce the amount of odour produced within the rendering plant. The applicant has also undertaken significant works to remediate potential fugitive emissions by sealing all identifiable leak points, capturing additional odour sources and directing all air, including building ventilation, to biofilter. The most recent revised odour assessment demonstrates that with controlled air inputs and fan settings, negative pressure can be maintained in the building and all air from the rendering plant will be directed to the biofilter. In addition, the applicant has changed processes to enable the trucks to empty into the receival bin within 5 minutes rather than 30 minutes per trailer taken during the trial. This will limit the amount of time that doors are open and correspondingly reduce the time that the plant is unable to remain under negative pressure during the receival process.

The second odour source is the wastewater, effluent and irrigation systems. The revised additional information and modelling provided by ProAnd makes an assessment of the effluent and irrigation systems and indicates that the effluent system is able to cater with altered feedstock.

One significant difference between High and Low Temperature Rendering (LTR) is the production of stickwater. Stickwater contains proteinaceous material (soluble and insoluble), minerals and fats. Although the volume of oil and grease from LTR is still less than the volume produced from meat processing, the high concentration of the effluent can have impacts if not controlled. As stated in the application, fish oil and grease ‘..comprises of lipids that are lighter (shorter organic chains), more volatile and more susceptible to a higher rate of oxidation than land based animal lipids. Odour problems can occur if significant levels of fish O&G passes from the Anaerobic to the Aerobic treatment pond’. Unlike in the High Temperature Rendering process, where oil and grease was to be recycled through the rendering plant, this application proposes that the stickwater be discharged to the effluent system. To mitigate the risk of heavy contamination loading on the system, the applicant has engaged a wastewater specialist to monitor the effluent and adjust chemical treatment as required to ensure that the anaerobic pond maintains an adequate crust to mitigate odour and maintains functionality.

The end product itself, being fishmeal and fish oil, also has a high odour output. The applicant has completed works to mitigate odours from this source including the installation of rapid roller doors between the rendering plant and the storage area, rapid roller doors from the meal storage area to the outside for loading, instigated the use of barrier plastic to cover the bulker bags used to store and transport meal, installed an exhaust fan to draw air from the meal storage area into the odour control system, and directed vent air from the oil storage tanks to the Odour Control System.

(c) 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 revised and additional documentation indicates that the current facility, with good management, is able to manage the greatest environmental impact, being odour. The application indicates that the upgrade works to the effluent and odour control systems have been completed, and the assessment of the system indicates that improvements in odour control have been made.

(ii) to facilitate compliance with relevant standards, codes of practice or guidelines published by the department or other public authorities. The revised statement of environmental effects and supporting documentation provides a suite of recommendations to mitigate, monitor and evaluate the proposed and actual measures to reduce the off-site impact of the proposed development.

The above assessment indicates that the overall environmental impact of the proposal is not significantly greater than that of the total development when compared with the existing approved development. The reduction in noise, wastewater output, and soil impact as a result of effluent irrigation are less for fish rendering when compared to the abattoir’s operations of 4,000 sheep and 200 cows per day. As a result of upgrades completed to reduce odour, the distribution of odour is not likely to be significantly different to that of the approved development. It is however acknowledged that odour strength and profile is different. In the instance the applicant has satisfied Council that the alterations or additions to the processes on site do not significantly increase the environmental impacts of the total development compared with the existing approved development.

Having satisfied the consent authority that an EIS is not required in accordance with the provisions of Part 3, Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000 consideration must now be given to the provisions of Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

4.13 Consultation and concurrence

If required by an environmental planning instrument, this section requires Council to consult with or obtain the concurrence of the person. No consultation was required in this instance - see comments below relating to NSW Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS), Essential Energy, Transport for NSW (TfNSW), and integrated development.

4.14 Consultation and development consent—certain bush fire prone land

The land is not bushfire prone and the development is not for residential or rural residential purposes, and is not for a special fire protection purposes, and therefore no referral to the NSW RFS was required.

4.22 Concept development applications

The development is not a concept development (a development application that sets out concept proposals for the development of a site, and for which detailed proposals for the site or for separate parts of the site are to be the subject of a subsequent development application or applications).

4.33 Determination of Crown development applications

The development is not a Crown development (a development application made by or on behalf of the Crown).

4.36 Development that is State significant development

The development is not State significant development (of a size, type, value or with impacts deemed to be significant), as it is not identified in State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011.

4.46 Integrated development

The proposal is integrated development as it requires approval from another government agency to carry out a scheduled activity at the premises under Section 48 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act, 1997, being livestock processing industry. Accordingly, general terms of approval were sought from EPA. These have been provided and are included as recommended conditions of consent.

4.55 Modifications of consent – generally

Not applicable.

SECTION 4.15 CONSIDERATIONS UNDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979

4.15(1)(a)(i) The provisions of any environmental planning instruments

State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) and deemed SEPP’s

The following SEPPs are considered relevant to the development:

SEPP No 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development

This SEPP applies to hazardous and potentially hazardous industries, and offensive and potentially offensive industries. In determining whether the proposal is a potentially offensive industry, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment guideline Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines – Applying SEPP 33, was consulted.

“Question 6.5 Does SEPP 33 apply to rural industry, such as cattle feedlots and similar development?

Whether SEPP 33 applies to a particular proposal depends upon whether the proposal falls within the definition of ‘industry’ as defined in the planning instrument which applies.

Developments such as cattle feedlots may not fit within this definition (for example, where they are separately defined as ‘animal establishments’, ‘rural industry’ or something similar). It is, however, a matter for the consent authority to interpret its own planning instruments in deciding whether any proposal is affected by SEPP 33.

Should the consent authority decide that SEPP 33 does not apply to a development because it is not an ‘industry’ or ‘storage establishment’, the degree of hazard or offence should still be considered as a matter under section 79C of the EP&A Act. In such cases, the SEPP 33 methodology may still be applicable, even if the policy itself does not strictly apply.”

Under the Cootamundra Local Environmental Plan, the proposed development is a subcategory of rural industry wherein rural industry ´are not a type of industry’. Accordingly, the SEPP does not apply, however, all the relevant issues will be addressed under section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

SEPP No 55 – Remediation of Land

Clause 7(1) prescribes that a consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land, unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated. Council has no evidence to indicate that the land is a site of possible contamination. Although the site has been used for an abattoir for some considerable time, abattoirs activities of themselves are not considered to be potentially contaminating activities unless associated with other processes such as dipping, tanning, wool scouring and the like. Accordingly, no further investigation is warranted.

SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007

The sections of this policy that may be relevant to the assessment of this proposal are:

Clause 45 (Determination of development applications – other development) applies to a development application for development in proximity to electricity infrastructure (within 5m of an exposed overhead power line). The proposal does not meet any of the criteria and no formal referral to Essential Energy was required.

Clause 66C (Development adjacent to corridor) applies to developments adjacent to a gas pipeline corridor. A pipeline corridor does traverse the lot upon which the proposal is to be located, however the site of the proposal is greater than 20m (being approximately 260m) from the centreline of the pipeline and within an existing structure. Accordingly, the proposal was not referred to Jemena.

Subdivision 2 (Development in or adjacent rail corridors), including Clauses 84, 85, 86 and 87 – whilst the site is adjacent a rail corridor (Lake Cargelligo Line) it is does not trigger any of the criteria that require referral to the rail authority.

Clause 101 (Development with frontage to classified road) - the site does not have frontage to a classified road,

Clause 102 (impact of road noise or vibration on non-road development) – this clause does not apply as the activity is not identified in the SEPP,

Clause 103 (Excavation in or immediately adjacent to corridors) – this clause does not apply as the development will not result in any excavation,

Clause 104 and Schedule 3 (Traffic generating development) – this clause does not apply as the type and scale of development is not identified in the Schedule.

SEPP (Primary Production and Rural Development) 2019

The sections of this policy that may be relevant to the assessment of this proposal are:

Clause 13A (Consent required for certain artificial waterbodies) – this clause does not apply as the site is not within an area of operations of an irrigations corporation and dams relied on for the proposal already exist with no plans to enlarge or alter.

Local Environmental Plan (LEP)

The applicable LEP is the Cootamundra LEP 2013 (CLEP). The relevant provisions of the LEP are:

1.2 Aims of Plan

The development is not inconsistent with the relevant aims of the LEP which include:

(a) to ensure that local amenity is maintained and enhanced,

(b) to protect viable agricultural areas from conflicting land uses.

The proposal contains measures to limit negative impacts in the area, the major potential impact being odour. The applicant has undertaken significant upgrades under the supervision and guidance of EPA staff to limit odour impacts. The proposal does not conflict with other viable agricultural land uses in the area.

1.4 Definitions

The proposal is defined as:

livestock processing industry means a building or place used for the commercial production of products derived from the slaughter of animals (including poultry) or the processing of skins or wool of animals and includes abattoirs, knackeries, tanneries, woolscours and rendering plants.

1.6 Consent authority

The consent authority for the purposes of the CLEP is Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council.

1.9A Suspension of covenants, agreements and instruments

There are no covenants, agreements, easements or restrictions on the site that affect this proposal.

2.1 Land use zones

This site is zoned RU1 Primary Production, livestock processing industry development is permissible with consent in this zone.

2.3 Zone objectives

Council must have regard to the objectives of the zone when determining applications. The proposed development, whilst not actively achieving every objective, is considered to be not inconsistent with the zone objectives:

· to encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base – outputs from this proposal, i.e. effluent, is shown by reports to be able managed in a manner that allow irrigation use on other land used by the abattoirs development. The upgrades and improvements to the plant will limit odour impact from the proposal;

· to encourage diversity in primary industry enterprises and systems appropriate for the area – the site has operated as an abattoir for some considerable time. This proposal provides an alternate feedstock to the rendering plant via a low temperature process to allow an economic return whilst major upgrades are undertaken to permit red meat processing to recommence;

· to minimise the fragmentation and alienation of resource lands – the proposal does not fragment resource lands. Surrounding land can be used for existing purposes, provided that appropriate odour control measures are implemented;

· to minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones – the predominant impact with the proposal is odour and has the potential to result in land use conflicts which has been demonstrated by the number of complaints received by Council and EPA during previous operations. Reports provided in support of the proposal indicate that the applicant is able, with significant upgrades and management control measures, to adequate contain odour from the low temperature process of fish onsite;

· to protect and conserve deposits of extractive materials and allow their extraction by limited development where appropriate – there is no extractive material or extraction proposed by this development;

· to protect and conserve native and other vegetation in order to preserve scenic amenity and to minimise land degradation – the proposal is to be undertaken within an existing building and does not involve the removal of any vegetation.

2.7 Demolition requires development consent

The proposal does not involve demolition work.

5.10 Heritage conservation

There are no items of environmental heritage identified on the site and the site is not within a heritage conservation area. A search of the Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) database shows that no Aboriginal sites have been recorded and no Aboriginal places have been declared within 50m of the site. Eight (8) Aboriginal sites have been recorded within 1km of the site. However, as no excavation or building work is being undertaken the proposal is not expected to reveal any unexpected fines during the operation of the proposal.

6.1 Earthworks

There are no earthworks proposed as part of this development, accordingly, this clause is not applicable.

6.2 Flood planning

This clause is not applicable as the site is not included on the flood mapping contained with CLEP.

6.3 Terrestrial biodiversity

A small portion in the northern part of the site is included on the Terrestrial Biodiversity Map, to which this clause applies as shown in figure 4 below.

Figure 4 – Terrestrial Biodiversity Map extract Source: CGRC Intramaps

Before determining a development application for development on land to which this clause applies, Council must consider, the following issues, which have been discussed previously, in relation to the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016:

(a) whether the development is likely to have—

(i) any adverse impact on the condition, ecological value and significance of the fauna and flora on the land, and

The proposal is to be undertaken within an existing building and no trees or vegetation is to be removed. Effluent studies indicate that the irrigated effluent will not adversely impact upon the vegetation of the irrigated area.

(ii) any adverse impact on the importance of the vegetation on the land to the habitat and survival of native fauna, and

The development will not impact the importance of the vegetation on-site, in terms of its functioning as habitat for native fauna, as no trees or native groundcover, is being removed.

(iii) any potential to fragment, disturb or diminish the biodiversity structure, function and composition of the land, and

The works on the site will not disturb or significantly fragment any stands of vegetation on the property, due to the activity being undertaken in an existing building.

(iv) any adverse impact on the habitat elements providing connectivity on the land, and

The development will not impact on any wildlife corridors or connectivity, with the activity remote from any significant vegetation.

(b) any appropriate measures proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate the impacts of the development.

There is no proposal, or need, to remove any trees or vegetation as part of this proposal.

In conclusion, it is determined that there will be no adverse impact on ecological communities, threatened species or any habitat, and that the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any adverse environmental impact, as there is no disturbance of, or to, local flora and fauna. See also discussion relating to the Biodiversity Conservation Act, 2016.

6.4 Groundwater vulnerability

This clause applies to land that is identified on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map. The entire site is identified on this map. Before determining an application to which the clause applies Council must consider:

(a) the likelihood of groundwater contamination from the development (including from any on-site storage or disposal of solid or liquid waste and chemicals);

Effluent reports submitted with the application indicate that the soil and subsequent cropping is able to adequately assimilate the nutrients contained in the effluent water so has not contaminated any groundwater. Fish oil, a by product of the process, is to be contained within tanks within an adequately bunded area.

(b) any adverse impacts the development may have on groundwater dependent ecosystems;

As nutrients and effluent is unlikely to reach the groundwater it is unlikely that the proposal will adversely impact any groundwater dependent ecosystems.

(c) the cumulative impact the development may have on groundwater (including impacts on nearby groundwater extraction for a potable water supply or stock water supply);

It is considered unlikely that the proposal will impact upon groundwater extraction used for potable water or stock water supply as effluent is unlikely to penetrate the level of the groundwater. The general terms of approval issued by EPA have indicated that testing is required to monitor soil conditions to allow early identification of potential contamination issues.

(d) any appropriate measures proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate the impacts of the development.

It is proposed to use effluent water to irrigate land associated with the existing abattoirs, studies submitted with the application indicate that with effective effluent management this practise is acceptable. Furthermore, the general terms of approval issued by EPA require monitoring to ensure that any potential groundwater contamination issues are identified early in order they may be ameliorated.

6.5 Riparian land and watercourses

This clause applies to land that is identified as a watercourse on the Watercourses Map, and to all land that is within 40 metres of the top of the bank of each watercourse on land identified as watercourse, on that map. The site is not mapped as being affected and is not within 40 metres of a mapped area, accordingly this clause is not applicable.

6.6 Salinity

This clause applies to land identified as dryland salinity on the Natural Resources Land Map. The site is not mapped as being affected, and accordingly this clause is not applicable.

6.7 Highly erodible soils

This clause applies to land identified as high soil erodibility on the Natural Resources Land Map. The site is not mapped as being affected, and accordingly this clause is not applicable.

6.8 Airspace operations

This clause applies to developments that penetrate the Limitation or Operations Surface of the Cootamundra Airport. This clause is not applicable as the proposal does not penetrate the Limitation or Operations Surface of the Cootamundra Airport as the building already exists.

6.9 Essential Services

This clause only applies to land that is zoned Zone RU4 Primary Production Small Lots, or Zone R5 Large Lot Residential. The site is within the RU1 Primary Production Zone therefore is not applicable.

4.15(1)(a)(ii) The provisions of any draft environmental planning instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs)

There are no draft SEPP’s which relate to this development.

Local Environmental Plan (LEP)

There are no draft LEPs which apply to this land.

4.15(1)(a)(iii) The provisions of any development control plan:

Cootamundra Development Control Plan (DCP)

This DCP applies to the land, but is largely not relevant to this development, and the provisions of the following chapters are discussed as follows.

· Chapter 1 General information - Section 1.7 (Notification of Development Applications), contains provisions that relate to the notification of applications; however, the provisions of the Community Participation Plan takes precedence over this section of the DCP (see comments above in Section 2.22).

· Chapter 2 Residential Development - does not apply to this type of development.

· Chapter 3 Business & Industrial Development - does not apply to this zone.

· Chapter 4 Subdivision – does not apply to this type of development.

· Chapter 5 Car parking and vehicle access – not applicable as no impact on parking.

· Chapter 6 Environmental Management – not applicable as land is not bushfire prone, flood prone or potentially contaminated.

· Chapter 7 Heritage – not applicable as the site does not contain a heritage item and is not in the HCA.

4.15(1)(a)(iiia) Any planning agreement or draft planning agreement:

The developer has not entered into a planning agreement, nor has offered to enter into a draft planning agreement.

4.15(1)(a)(iv) Matters prescribed by the Regulations:

The following matters as prescribed by Regulations have been considered:

Clause 92 (Additional matters for consideration):

· the application does not involve the demolition of a building,

· the application is not for the carrying out of development on land that is subject to a subdivision order made under Schedule 7 to the Act,

· the development is not located within the local government area of Coonamble, City of Dubbo, Gilgandra or Warrumbungle (to which the Dark Sky Planning Guideline applies),

· the application does not pertain to a manor house or multi dwelling housing (terraces),

· the development is not for the erection of a building for residential purposes on land in Penrith City Centre.

Clause 93 (Fire safety and other considerations)

· the development is not for a change of building use for an existing building.

Clause 94 (Consent authority may require buildings to be upgraded)

· the development does not involve the rebuilding, enlargement or extension of an existing building.

Clause 94A (Fire safety and other considerations - temporary structures)

· the development is not for a temporary structure.

Clause 288 (Special provision relating to Sydney Opera House)

· the development does not relate to the Sydney Opera House.

4.15(1)(b) The likely impacts of that development

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.

Likely Impact of Development

The major impact associated with this proposal are related to air quality as a result of the odour generated and experienced during the period when rendering of fish has been occurring on site. Although the revised statement of environmental effects includes an Odour Impact Assessment, it includes modelling and sampling undertaken when fugitive emissions were observed off site. The additional information provided has reviewed the current Odour Control System and assessed its capacity to adequately mitigate the potential odour from the process.

As indicated above in the assessment of the validity of the application under Part 3, Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000, the site has been operating as an abattoir for in excess of 40 years. The change in feedstock for the rendering plant is not included in existing approvals and an application is required for this change. This change of feedstock is the subject of this application and assessment. Council is satisfied that the overall environmental impact of the change of feedstock is not significantly greater than the existing approved development, rather some of the environmental impacts such as noise, wastewater and visual impacts are likely to be lesser than that of the approved development.

Context and Setting

The site is located within a rural area approximately 4km north of the main street of Cootamundra. The abattoir and buildings on site have existed in some form since mid-1970s. There are no proposed building works that are likely to impact on the visual amenity. The proposal for the use of fish as feedstock for the rendering plant is suitable given the location of the site in a rural setting. Nonetheless the impact of odour, even in a rural setting, cannot be ignored. Odour impact is the largest single factor associated with this proposal. The applicant has provided a statement of environmental effects that is supported by an Odour Management System Review Assessment (OMRA), which indicates that the facility has the ability to meet compliance with its licence conditions.

Access, Transport and Traffic

Mackerel caught on the south coast of NSW is the raw feedstock material for the fish rendering process. It is proposed that three trucks per day would deliver raw product to site. The material is loaded in a chilled state into truck and dog type transport vehicles which are double skinned to assist with temperature control. The material is transported to the Cootamundra site during the night to arrive early in the cool of the morning, this is particularly important during summertime.

The supporting documentation indicates that the average hourly throughput capacity of the rendering process is 4 tonnes per hour and the proposal will operate 24 hours per day (however this is unclear as another section of the document suggests that operations on site will commence at 4am), six days per week with an estimated through put of 29,952 tonnes per year. The documentation indicates that there are likely to be three outbound trucks of product per week. Furthermore, there is anticipated to be one goods delivery truck visiting site per day. Staff numbers are estimated to be 15 including office, operational and engineering staff with an approximate 9 staff on site during 7am-2pm.

Accordingly, in addition to passenger vehicles there is likely to be 44 heavy vehicle movements per week (in and out movements are counted separately) or 22 heavy vehicles visiting the site per week. This equates to approximately 3.6 heavy vehicles visiting the site per day over a six day operating week. Due to the location of the facility on a major connector road, comments were sought from Transport for NSW (formerly RMS). That agency’s comments indicate that as the traffic numbers are likely to be less than that of an operational abattoirs and the presence of existing turning lanes, no additional road upgrades were required. The Authority did state that no objection was raised provided that a condition was imposed that the rendering of fish is denied whilst the abattoirs is in operation.

Similarly, the site has separated sealed entrance and egress points from Stockinbingal Road, ample on-site parking and turning areas for passenger, delivery and heavy vehicles. Accordingly, there is no requirement for any upgrades to access points, car parking or turning areas to occur as a result of this proposal.

Public Domain

The impact of this proposal on the public domain is likely to be odour from the rendering of the fish. It has been noted that the EPA recorded 58 complaints from multiple complainants between 15 February and 4 June, 2020. It is acknowledged that this was before the current upgrades were undertaken including the change to LTR processing.

Utilities

The proposed use of fish as feedstock for the rendering plant will not generate the need for additional utility installation at the site.

Heritage

There is no likely impact on Aboriginal or European heritage, as a result of the development (see assessment above in Section 5.10 of the LEP). Given the disturbed nature and continuous use of the site over the years for an abattoir it is unlikely that the proposal will have an impact on artefacts or relics. Similarly, no soil disturbance is proposed as part of this proposal, once again this is likely to limit the impact on historic or heritage items if such exist on site.

Soil

The proposal involves the irrigation of effluent water to land. The submitted documentation is accompanied by a wastewater effluent report that indicates the total effluent water resulting from this proposal is likely to be 24% of that when the site was fully operational as an abattoir. Due to the decrease wastewater output, the modelling contained within the report indicates that water available for irrigation is significantly less than that of an operational abattoir and that the majority of the water for irrigation would be stormwater runoff captured in the dams. The report also indicates that the effluent system is able to adequately treat the wastewater to a point where it is suitable for irrigation to land. The report does note that the irrigation may, in the long-term, result in the depletion of nitrogen and some accumulation of phosphorous in the irrigated soil. The EPA general terms of approval and licence contains conditions that require monitoring of soil conditions of the irrigated area.

Water

The wastewater report accompanying the application provides calculations for water use and capture during high rainfall events. This report demonstrates that the existing effluent and stormwater capture system has capacity to cater for the volume of wastewater generated by the proposal. However, the report also indicates that seepage from the treatment and storage ponds is likely. Nonetheless, the general terms of approval from the EPA and the conditions of the Environment Protection Licence (EPL) have requirements for piezometer monitoring to ensure that impacts can be identified and mitigated to reduce the impact.

It is noted that the use of fish as feedstock for the rendering plant will result in oil and grease of a different composition to that of abattoirs by product rendering. The report indicates that fish oil and grease has ‘shorter organic chains, is more volatile and more susceptible to a higher rate of oxidation than land based animals’. This has the potential to generate odour if allowed to pass into the aerobic treatment ponds.

The composition of wastewater from fish is different to that of land based animals and the report provides an assessment of the pathogen levels. The report concludes that pathogens in wastewater are likely to be less for the use of fish as feedstock when compared with red meat processing. This is due in part to fish being rendered whole rather than with internal material removed, as in red meat processing, and the fish material being cold rather than at body temperature as is the case in red meat processing.

Other Land Resources

The site is not mapped as being bushfire prone nor is the site subject to subsidence or acid sulphate soils. Similarly, the site is not mapped as being subject to flooding, dryland salinity or highly erodible soils. The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an impact on these factors of the site.

Microclimate

The applicant has provided information in support of the application including the OMRA undertaken by The Odour Unit (TOU) in September, 2020. Additional assessment and modelling of the wastewater, the impacts of LTR, images of the works completed and clarification of changed work processes to reduce the risk of fugitive emissions have also been provided which indicate that with appropriate management odour is able to be controlled on site.

The additional information confirms the Odour Control System and Wastewater Management System have the capacity and capability to mitigate odour impacts offsite. Nonetheless management of the system is critical to ensuring the functionality of the plant and equipment as there are several identified risks which are required to be well managed, monitored and maintained.

One such risk is that negative pressure needs to be maintained in the building to ensure that the Odour Control System works as proposed, i.e. to capture all air within the building and direct it to the biofilter. This odour control system is reliant on several factors including optimal fan settings on the main biofilter fan and exhaust fan from the meal storage area as recommended by The Odour Unit (TOU), fresh air ingress into the building and ongoing inspection and maintenance of the building to check seals at gaps and protrusions.

The TOU Assessment concludes that the roller doors on the western side of the rendering building must be open 150mm from the ground to ensure adequate airflow into the building, but states any ‘larger opening may result in the loss of capability for achieving negative pressure and may result to fugitive emissions from the building’. Vigilant management practices are required to ensure that such a low air exchange rate (four times per hour) does not impact staff comfort so that there is a risk that staff may open a door to access fresh air.

Maintaining and monitoring the biofilter is also critical to the successful operation of the Odour Control System. In particular, the reports acknowledge that the current steam-injection humidification system for the airflow to the biofilter is inadequately providing the necessary moisture content for sustainable performance. TOU has recommended a minimum spray irrigation program, utilising a spray irrigation system on the biofilter, to maintain optimum bed moisture and ensure sustainable biofilter bed operation.

Monitoring the wastewater system for optimal functionality including maintenance of crust on the anaerobic pond, pH, and monitoring discharge of oils and grease levels to the aerobic pond is also required. Inadequate monitoring and maintenance of the wastewater system has the potential to generate significant odour impact including offsite impacts.

The TOU report states ‘It should be noted that the airflow measurements reflected in the OMRA were collected from locations that are non-ideal. Moreover, all physical measurements collected in the OMRA will need to be verified during normal operation and as part of the Odour Control System condition and performance assessment within six weeks of the recommencement of operations at the Cootamundra Facility’. Further assessment of the system will provide an opportunity to optimise the Odour Control System under normal operating conditions.

Flora and Fauna

No vegetation is proposed to be removed or altered as a result of this proposal. The site is not known to contain habitat for any threatened or endangered faunal species. The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an impact on flora and fauna on the site or in the immediate vicinity.

The irrigation of effluent to the site has the potential to impact upon biodiversity depending upon the type of vegetation existing on site. The applicant has indicated that irrigation of effluent water has occurred in the past and is likely to continue. The effluent report indicates that nitrogen loss and an accumulation of phosphorous is likely in the long-term as a result of effluent irrigation. Monitoring of soil conditions is required by the EPL. Nonetheless the impact on biodiversity can be reduced by limiting the area of irrigation to that which is not mapped as terrestrial biodiversity.

Waste

The applicant has indicated that there is no solid waste produced as a result of this proposal that will not be dealt with onsite or through existing services. The applicant has submitted a Waste Management Plan which outlines the processes and disposal options for any product that is not suitable for rendering. The applicant has indicated that mass waste product disposal is unlikely, even in hot weather, as temperature control is imperative to the processing of the material to ensure a high quality end product. In this regard the applicant has provided that the catch is chilled on the boat prior to being brought ashore and discharged immediately into transport trucks. The trucks are double skinned and the thermal mass of the catch ensure that heating does not occur even when waiting for unloading during extreme weather conditions. However, the loads are to be temperature monitored to ensure that the catch does not heat above 15^oC. Where necessary loads will be placed in bins and put into refrigerated cool rooms on site.

The end product will be bagged into bulk bags covered in barrier plastic for distribution and will stored in the meal storage area until loaded for transport. The end products of the process will be fish meal and/or fish oil. The volume of these outputs is dependent on the oil content of the raw material feedstock. Fish oil is pumped into the former tallow tank and shipped off site either in bulk tankers or in pods depending upon customer requirements. The applicant acknowledges that following changes to the rendering plant the tallow tanks now require additional bunding to contain any spillage.

Energy

An energy assessment is required by Section J of the Building Code of Australia where construction is proposed. This proposal does not include any construction, accordingly energy consumption is therefore not a consideration for this proposal.

Noise and Vibration

Noise generation from the proposed use of fish as a feedstock for the rendering plant will be significantly less than that from the facility operating as a red meat abattoirs due to the absence of large live animals on site. Compressor and staff noise are likely to be contained onsite due to the site layout and buildings acting as sound barriers. Vehicle noise is likely to be equivalent to that of an operational abattoir in terms of noise volume. Hours of vehicle noise and numbers of vehicle may differ from that of an operational red meat abattoirs, however it is unlikely that the impact will be any greater than when the abattoir is operating.

Vibration from compressors and vehicle movement is likely to be commensurate with that of an operational red meat abattoir.

Natural Hazards

The site is not subject to any natural hazards of flooding, bushfire, subsidence, slip or movement. The site has been operating as an abattoir for many years.

Technological Hazards

There are no known risks to people, property or the biophysical environment from industrial and technological hazards, land contamination and remediation or building fire risk. All chemicals, cleaning and disinfectant agents, pesticides, herbicides and the like are to be kept in a safe and secure location.

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

The site is fences and access is controlled by gates. It is unlikely that the proposal will create any additional security or crime risk in the locality. Fishmeal without stabilising additives is considered to be a dangerous goods for the purposes of transportation. The applicant is required to have a management plan in place to manage this risk.

Social Impact in the Locality

The social impacts associated with this proposal are in relation to the ability of property owners and the public to go about their activities free from impacts from the proposal, primarily odour impacts. The complaints and submissions received by Council and EPA centre around the nauseating odour and the resultant impact on the quality of life including inability to leave windows open, hang washing on the line or go about normal activities. Such impacts, have in the past, been experienced within the main business district of Cootamundra.

The reports submitted in support of the current application indicate that, following recent upgrades to the Odour Control System, with good management odour can be controlled in accordance with the EPL. It is acknowledged that the odour profile of fish rendering is different to that of an abattoirs, however the impact of odour on the quality of life needs to be managed onsite by the operators.

Economic Impact in the Locality

The proposal will not have the same economic impact in the local area as a fully operational abattoir due to the lessened employment opportunities. However, the provision of some employment opportunities in the local area are a result of the proposal. It is unclear however if this impact is negated by the negative image of the town as a result of odour penetrating into the main street area in the past.

Nonetheless, the proposal to use fish as a feedstock for the rendering plant is a short term one with the applicant indicating that it is the intention to return to red meat processing when conditions are suitable and substantial upgrades have been undertaken at the plant to ensure that best practice and efficiency is achieved.

Site Design and Internal Design

There are few changes to the site layout and internal design of the operation as a result of this proposal. The change of the process from High to Low Temperature Rendering has necessitated the installation of some additional and upgraded equipment within the rendering building and slight changes to the process layout. The recent upgrades completed on the building involved removal of vents, recladding in some areas and installation of rapid roller doors on the meal storage area. A new small biofilter to capture odour from the ‘press pit’ was installed in November, 2019.

The changes completed on site relate to odour control and operational activities. In this regard it is proposed that the rendering plant doors are to remain in the ‘closed position’ except when loading of raw feedstock occurs. As part of the upgrades and new process time the doors are open will be a maximum of 30 minutes per day (five minutes six times per day). The ‘closed position’ will require that the two roller doors on the western section of the rendering building remain open approximately 150mm from the ground doors to ensure adequate fresh air ingress into the building. Any larger opening may result in the loss of capability for achieving negative pressure and may result to fugitive emissions from the building.

Construction Matters

No construction is proposed as part of this proposal.

Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts include such things as different impacts occurring so close in time, or so close in location, that the impacts overlap and cause a greater impact. Cumulative impacts can also take the form of repetitive, often minor impacts eroding environmental conditions, or different types of impacts interacting to produce another impact. Cumulatively, the environmental impacts associated with the development have been considered in the report, as the impacts on soils, groundwater and odour. These impacts, with appropriate management, can be managed so as not to create a cumulative impact in the locality.

Site Suitability (Section 4.15(1)(c)

Does the Proposal Fit in the Locality

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 use fish as a feedstock for the rendering plant whilst the red meat abattoir is not operating. The use of fish as a feedstock 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. 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. Upgrades to the equipment and improved management techniques demonstrate that the odour is able to be controlled and therefore the impact is likely to be limited. 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 the end product back to ocean based aquaculture is a practice that is both economically and environmentally sustainable in the long term.

Are the Site Attributes Conducive to the Development

The site is not subject to natural hazards including flooding, bushfire, subsidence, slip or mass movement. The soil characteristics are appropriate for the development, and there are no critical habitats, or threatened species, populations, ecological communities or habitats on the site. The development will not prejudice future agricultural production and there are no known mineral or extractive resources on the site. This issue of odour generation has been discussed previously.

Submissions (Section 4.15(1)(d)):

The application was notified and one (1) submission was received, by way of objection. The most significant issue raised in the submissions was that of odour. The issue of diminishing property values and lifestyle impacts were also raised. However these are directly related to odour impacting on lifestyle and everyday activities.

The issue of odour has been discussed elsewhere in this report as has the commencement of the operation previously without the benefit of development consent. 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.

Public Interest (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 occurred onsite throughout periods in 2019 and 2020 with and without the benefit of a development consent. During this time the applicant has worked with the EPA to identify and mitigate odour impacts on the community which have been the source of the majority of complaints. Furthermore, the applicant has complied with the Prevention Notice issued by the EPA. The applicant has undertaken significant upgrades including the installation of equipment to change the process to LTR. The upgrade and supporting information indicate that the operation can successfully operate on site and the odour can be controlled. Discussions with the EPA have revealed that confidence is reasonably high that compliance with EPL requirements can be achieved.

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 it is considered that the conditions recommended are adequate to mitigate the potential impacts of the proposal and provide Council with an avenue to pursue compliance if warranted.

Other Matters

Section 7.11 and 7.12 Contributions Policies

Section 7.12(2) of the EPA Act, states that “a consent authority cannot impose as a condition of the same development consent a condition under this section as well as a condition under section 7.11”. Accordingly, Council can only require payment of either a 7.11 or 7.12 contributions.

Section 7.11 Contributions Plans

The only Section 7.11 plan in force is the “Development Generating Heavy Vehicle Usage of Local Road”, which only applies in Gundagai, and therefore is not applicable to the development.

Section 7.12 Contributions Plans

The Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Section 7.12 Fixed Development Consent Levy Contributions Plan 2018 applies to this development, and condition will be imposed in this regard.

Disclosure of political donations and gifts

The applicant and notification process did not result in any disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts.

Conclusion

In the assessment of a development application, Council must consider a number of issues related to that application, and essentially weigh up the positive and negative impacts of the proposal. In doing so, Council does not necessarily have to be assured that there are no impacts at all, but must be confident that those that do exist, are acceptable. In fact, there is no rule that says that if a development proposal meets with a negative reaction on any particular factor, that consent must be denied; there have been various court cases that support this premise.

In this instance there is potential for certain negative impacts associated with a development of this nature size. These most obvious relate to odour, effluent management and soil quality.

It is believed that this report demonstrates that the potential impacts associated with the proposal can be adequately dealt with, and that there are few grounds upon which to refuse the application. Council has considered all matters under the relevant legislation, and it considers that the proposed development is appropriate having regard to those matters, and that any impacts can be managed through appropriate conditions.

Schedule 1, Division 4, Clause 20 - Reasons for the Decision

This section of the Act requires the public notification of certain decisions, the date of the decision, the reasons for the decision and how community views were taken into account in making the decision. The reasons for the decision (as recommended to Council) and how community views were taken into account, as it relates to this application are:

· the proposed development is not inconsistent with the objectives of the zone,

· the proposed development is permitted in the zone,

· assessment of the development against the relevant guidelines demonstrates that the proposed development will not cause significant adverse impacts on the surrounding natural environment, built environment and infrastructure, community facilities, or local character and amenity,

· the proposed development does not compromise the relevant Environmental Planning Instruments,

· Council considers that the proposed development is appropriate having regard to the relevant matters and can be managed through appropriate conditions,

· neighbour notification was carried out as per the CPP, and each of the issues raised has been addressed within the report, and shown to be acceptable, subject to compliance with the EPL and the conditions of consent.

· Stockinbingal	· Wallendbeen
· Muttama	· Nangus
· Gocup	· Adjungbilly

APP. NO.	PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT	PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
DA.2020.152	Demolish Dwelling	Lot 7 Sec G DP2203 Congou St Cootamundra
DA.2020.142	Dwelling Alterations & Additions - New Awning	Lot 21 DP1093742 Matilda Ave Cootamundra
DA.2020.139	New Dwelling/Extensions	Lot 64 DP23475 Wall Ave Cootamundra
DA.2020.129	New Carport	Lot 13 Sec A DP4840 Gundagai Rd Cootamundra
DA.2020.128	New Shed	Lot B DP319665 Morris St Cootamundra
DA.2020.127	New Shed	Lot 3 DP26262 Francis St Cootamundra
CDC.2020.16	New Inground Swimming Pool	Lot C DP331211 Temora St Cootamundra
DA.2020.125	New Carport	Lot 56 DP707561 Allumba Pl Cootamundra
DA.2020.124	New Shed	Lot 1 DP403817 Berthong Rd Cootamundra
DA.2020.122	Dwelling Alterations/Additions	Lot B DP312228 Warren St Cootamundra
DA.2020.121	New Dwelling/Extensions	Lot B DP164904 Punch St Gundagai
DA.2020.113	New Carport	Lot 1 DP35621 Bullecourt St Cootamundra
DA.2020.112	New Shed	Lot 4 DP1083214 Old Cootamundra Rd Cootamundra
DA.2020.110	Install Pump Track	Lot 7009 DP1021379 Wallendoon St Cootamundra
DA.2020.109	Install Rock Climbing Wall	Plt 1 Sec 60 DP758287 Murray St Cootamundra
DA.2020.104	Funeral home (office and meeting rooms only) and signage - convert existing dwelling into funeral home	Lot 19 DP1064710 Kitchener St Gundagai
DA.2020.102	New Dwelling & New Rear Shed	Lot 315 DP751421 Charlotte St Gundagai
DA.2020.96	New Retaining Wall	Lot 1 DP89977 Homer St Gundagai
DA.2020.92	Demolish Existing Toilet Block & Construct New Toilet Block	Lot D DP396068 Bourke St Cootamundra
DA.2020.62	New Shed	Lot 10 DP111918 Charlotte St Gundagai
VALUE OF WORK REPORTED TO THIS MEETING:			$1,513,378.00
VALUE OF WORK REPORTED YEAR TO DATE:			$4,575,907.00
THIS TIME LAST YEAR:
VALUE OF WORK –September 2019:			$2,355,890.00
VALUE OF WORK – YTD 2019:			$5,138,838.00

REPORTING OFFICER	Marianne McInerney, Personal Assistant to the General Manager
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phillip McMurray, 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 29 September 2020

DOCUMENT NUMBER	337391
AUTHORISING OFFICER	Phillip McMurray, General Manager
REPORTING OFFICER	Marianne McInerney, Personal Assistant to the General Manager
ATTACHMENTS	Nil

Designated Person	Position	Return Type	Return received
Phillip McMurray	General Manager	Annual	29 September 2020
Kay Whitehead	Deputy General Manager	New	23 September 2020
Mark Ellis	Manager Civil Works	Annual	15 September 2020
Miriam Crane	Manager Community and Culture	Annual	22 September 2020
Glen McAtear	Manager Regulatory Services	Annual	8 September 2020
Tim Swan	Manager Finance and Customer Service	Annual	23 September 2020
Sharon Langman	Manager Development, Building and Compliance	Annual	8 September 2020
Linda Wiles	Coordinator Business	New	23 September 2020
Matt Stubbs	Manager Technical Services	Annual	9 September 2020
Ganesh Ganeshamoorthy	Manager Assets	Annual	29 September 2020
Wayne Bennett	Manager Waste, Facilities and Recreation Services	Annual	23 September 2020
Andrew Brock	Manager Facilities	Annual	7 September 2020
Nicole Godber	Ranger/ Regulatory Officer	Annual	9 September 2020
Bruce Webb	Ranger/ Regulatory Officer	New	15 September 2020
Nathan Campbell	Ranger	Annual	15 September 2020
Andrew Wiegold	Ranger	Annual	15 September 2020
Luke Izzard	Environmental Health and Building Surveyor	Annual	23 September 2020
Robert Briant	Building Surveyor	New	15 September 2020
Laura Schweiger	Town Planner (PPT)	Annual	8 September 2020
Catherine Smith	Procurement Officer	Annual	8 September 2020
Sally Atkinson	Environmental Health Officer	Annual	28 September 2020
Councillors
Abb McAlister	Mayor	Annual	25 September 2020
Doug Phillips	Councillor	Annual	24 September 2020
Dennis Palmer	Deputy Mayor	Annual	9 September 2020
Craig Stewart	Councillor	Annual	8 September 2020
Charlie Sheahan	Councillor	Annual	25 September 2020
Gil Kelly	Councillor	Annual	29 September 2020
David Graham	Councillor	Annual	29 September 2020
Penny Nicholson	Councillor	Annual	9 September 2020
Leigh Bowden	Councillor	Annual	18 September 2020