YVC_logo_test_transparent

Minutes of the

Ordinary Meeting of Council

Wednesday 25 September 2019

4.00 pm

Council Chambers
209 Comur Street, Yass

Table of Contents

1. Prayer. 2

2. Apologies. 2

3. Declaration of Interest/Disclosures. 2

4. Confirmation of Minutes. 3

5. Mayoral Minute. 3

6. Director of Planning Reports. 3

6.1 Planning Proposal - 2402 Sutton Road, Sutton. 3

6.2 Aboriginal Land Claims - Requests for Information. 4

6.3 Development Application No DA180157 - Primitive Campground, Gundaroo Park, 70 Cork Street, Gundaroo 4

7. Director of Engineering Reports. 5

7.1 Tender No YVC.PG.04.2019 - Walker Park Level 2 Sports Lighting Upgrade. 5

7.2 Tender No YVC.BS.05.2019 - Provision of Caravan Park Management Services. 5

8. Director of Finance & Corporate Reports. 6

8.1 Investment and Borrowings Report. 6

9. General Manager Reports. 6

9.1 Community Engagement Strategy. 6

9.2 Liberty Theatre, Comur Street, Yass - Offer to Purchase. 6

9.3 8 & 10 Crago Street, Yass - Offer to Purchase. 7

10. Notice of Motion. 8

10.1 Kerbside Bulky Goods and Revolve Centre. 8

11. Questions with Notice. 8

11.1 Questions With Notice - Cr Geoff Frost. 8

12. Minutes and Recommendations of Council Committees. 9

12.1 Minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Held on 3 September 2019. 9

12.2 Minutes of the Bango Wind Farm Community Consultative Committee held on 27 August 2019. 9

13. Confidential Matters. 10

13.1 Tender No YVC.PG.04.2019 - Walker Park Level 2 Sports Lighting Upgrade. 10

13.2 Tender No YVC.BS.05.2019 - Provision of Caravan Park Management Services. 11

Open Forum

Presentations to Council – Items on the Meeting Agenda

· Item 9.3 8 & 10 Crago Street, Yass – Offer to Purchase

Jeff Brown

· Item 10.1 – Kerbside Bulky Goods and Revolve Centre

Sophie Peer

Al Phemister

Council Meeting - The Mayor declared the meeting open at 4.22 pm.

Present

Councillors Rowena Abbey, Mayor, in the chair, Cecil Burgess, Geoff Frost, Nathan Furry, Allison Harker, Jasmin Jones, Michael McManus, Mike Reid and Kim Turner.

Also present were the Acting General Manager – Chris Berry, Director of Engineering – Stan Robb, Director of Finance & Corporate – Mark Eady and Corporate Planning & Executive Support Officer – Shirree Garland.

Acknowledgement of Country

1. Prayer

2. Apologies

Nil

3. Declaration of Interest/Disclosures

Councillor Turner declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 9.2 Liberty Theatre, Comur Street Yass – Offer to Purchase and stated that he did not believe his interest would preclude him from voting.

Reason: Councillor Turner declared an interest as he has been a long term member of the Yass Repertory Society (tenant of the Liberty Theatre) and his wife is the Coordinator of “Friends of the Liberty”.

Councillor Jones declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 9.2 Liberty Theatre, Comur Street Yass – Offer to Purchase and stated that she did not believe her interest would preclude her from voting.

Reason: Councillor Jones declared an interest for transparency as she met with the vendors prior to the offer of sale, received emails and phone calls regarding the site from the vendors.

Councillor Furry declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 9.2 Liberty Theatre, Comur Street Yass – Offer to Purchase and stated that he did not believe his interest would preclude him from voting.

Reason: Councillor Furry declared an interest as he is a member of Yass Repertory.

Councillor Burgess declared a significant, pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 12.2 Bango Wind Farm Community Consultative Committee Minutes and stated that he did believe his interest would preclude him from voting.

Reason: Councillor Burgess declared an interest as he is the owner of property adjacent to wind farm and has signed an agreement whereby he may receive monetary gains.

Councillor Abbey declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 9.2 Liberty Theatre, Comur Street Yass – Offer to Purchase and stated that she did not believe her interest would preclude her from voting.

Reason: Councillor Abbey declared an interest as a possible perception that she has a perceived conflict of interest.

4. Confirmation of Minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 August 2019 covered by page numbers 1-18 inclusive and resolution numbers 170-203 inclusive, copies of which had been circulated to all Councillors, be taken as read and confirmed.

(Furry/Reid) 204

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

5. Mayoral Minute

Nil

6. Director of Planning Reports

6.1 Planning Proposal - 2402 Sutton Road, Sutton

SUMMARY

Presenting a report on a draft Planning Proposal seeking an amendment to the Yass Valley LEP 2013 by amending the land use zoning and minimum lot size of land at 2402 Sutton Road, Sutton.

RESOLVED that the Planning Proposal - 2402 Sutton Road, Sutton (PP-2019-02) be endorsed and forwarded to the Minister for Planning to request a Gateway Determination pursuant to s3.34 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

(Burgess/Reid) 205

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

6.2 Aboriginal Land Claims - Requests for Information

SUMMARY

Under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 Crown Land not lawfully used or occupied or required for an essential public purpose or for residential land, is returned to Aboriginal people as compensation for past dispossession of their land.

As an organisation which may hold an interest in the land claimed, Council receives requests for information from the Department of Industry (Crown Lands & Water) both when these claims are lodged and when they are investigated.

An approved process is needed to ensure all relevant and available information is provided to the Department regarding parcels of land with significance to the local community. A procedure has been developed and is suitable for endorsement.

RESOLVED that:

1. The procedure for processing Aboriginal Land Claim information requests be adopted with an adjustment for each request to be circulated to Councillors for comment.

2. Council request a 30 day response time for information requests from the State Government.

(Turner/Furry) 206

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

6.3 Development Application No DA180157 - Primitive Campground, Gundaroo Park, 70 Cork Street, Gundaroo

SUMMARY

Presenting the assessment of Development Application No. DA180157 for formalising the use of Gundaroo Park for the purposes of a primitive campground. The proposal is referred to Council as the application has attracted six submissions, four objecting or raising issues of concern and two providing full support.

RESOLVED that conditional Development Consent be issued for Development Application No. DA180157 for a primitive campground at Gundaroo Park, 70 Cork Street, Gundaroo.

(Burgess/McManus) 207

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, N Furry, A Harker and M McManus

AGAINST: Councillors G Frost, J Jones, M Reid and K Turner

FORESHADOWED MOTION

That conditional Development Consent be issued for Development Application No DA180157 for a primitive campground at Gundaroo Park, 70 Cork Street, Gundaroo and including requirements for:

· Campground Areas 1 and 2 being restricted to use by campervans and RVs only to assist with protecting the amenity of adjoining residents

· No excessive noise (loud music, noisy generators) restriction from:

o 9pm and 8am on Sunday to Thursday

o 11pm and 8am on Friday and Saturday

(Jones/

7. Director of Engineering Reports

7.1 Tender No YVC.PG.04.2019 - Walker Park Level 2 Sports Lighting Upgrade

SUMMARY

Providing advice on the submission of tenders for the design and installation of LED lighting on Level two at the Walker Park Sporting Complex, Yass.

RESOLVED that this item of the Director Engineering Report be classified as confidential in accordance with section 10A(2)(di) of the Local Government Act 1993, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to information that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied the information.

(Turner/Furry) 208

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

7.2 Tender No YVC.BS.05.2019 - Provision of Caravan Park Management Services

SUMMARY

Providing advice on the submission of tenders for a contract for the provision of Management Services for the Yass Caravan Park.

RESOLVED that this item of the Director Engineering reports is classified CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with Section 10A(2)(dii) of the Local Government Act 1993, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

(Turner/Furry) 209

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

8. Director of Finance & Corporate Reports

8.1 Investment and Borrowings Report

SUMMARY

In accordance with Cluse 212 Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, this report provides a summary of Council’s investments as at 31 August 2019. In accordance with paragraph (1)(b), it can be certified that the investments listed have been made in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

RESOLVED that the Investment Report as at 31 August 2019 be received and it be noted that the summary has been prepared in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

(Burgess/Reid) 210

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

9. General Manager Reports

9.1 Community Engagement Strategy

SUMMARY

In July 2019, Council determined to place a draft Community Engagement Strategy on Public Exhibition. Seven submissions have been received. The draft Strategy has been revised in response to issues raised and is recommended for adoption.

RESOLVED that the revised Community Engagement Strategy be adopted.

(Furry/Jones) 211

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Councillors G Frost and M McManus

9.2 Liberty Theatre, Comur Street, Yass - Offer to Purchase

SUMMARY

Presenting a report on a proposal by the owners of the Liberty Theatre to sell the building to Council for $500,000. A fresh First Pass Assessment has been prepared in accordance with the outcomes from a Probity Review. It is recommended that the offer be declined at this stage.

RESOLVED that :

1. The offer by the owners of the Liberty Theatre, Comur Street, Yass be declined.

2. Consultation on future community facilities for Yass Valley be canvassed as part of the next Community Strategic Plan process or other strategic reviews of Council facilities.

(Jones/Turner) 212

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

9.3 8 & 10 Crago Street, Yass - Offer to Purchase

SUMMARY

Presenting a report on a proposal by the owners of 8 and 10 Crago Street, Yass to sell the properties to Council. A First Pass Assessment has been prepared in accordance with the decision making flowchart endorsed by Council in August 2019.

MOTION

That:

1. The offer by the owners of 8 and 10 Crago Street, Yass be declined at this stage.

2. A further review of the relevant policies be undertaken and a further report be provided to the November 2019 Council meeting.

(Furry/Reid)

PROCEDURAL MOTION

That the item be deferred to the November 2019 Council meeting to seek any further information from previous plans for the Council precinct and develop a business case for the possible purchase of the property.

(McManus) 213

FOR: Nil

AGAINST: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

MOTION LOST

AMENDMENT

RESOLVED that:

1. The offer by the owners of 8 and 10 Crago Street, Yass be declined.

2. Consultation on future community facilities for Yass Valley be canvassed as part of the next Community Strategic Plan process or other strategic reviews of Council facilities.

(Jones/Turner) 214

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, G Frost, J Jones, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Councillors C Burgess, N Furry, A Harker and M McManus

AMENDMENT BECOMES THE MOTION

RESOLVED that :

1. The offer by the owners of 8 and 10 Crago Street, Yass be declined.

2. Consultation on future community facilities for Yass Valley be canvassed as part of the next Community Strategic Plan process or other strategic reviews of Council facilities.

(Jones/Turner) 215

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, G Frost, J Jones, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Councillors C Burgess, N Furry, A Harker and M McManus

10. Notice of Motion

10.1 Kerbside Bulky Goods and Revolve Centre

Councillor Jasmin Jones has given notice that at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 25 September 2019, she will move the following motion.

RESOLVED that :

1. A report be provided to the November 2019 Council on the cost-benefits of reinstating a kerbside bulky goods registered collection to coincide with next year’s garage sale trail date.

2. An additional report investigating the cost benefits of reopening the revolve centre with options for staffing such as insured and trained volunteers under staff management. The investigation to explore operational options such as a commercial/in town location already in Council ownership or cost neutral access and/or outsource materials to another seller.

3. An additional report investigating green waste be undertaken and provided to the March 2020 Council meeting.

(Jones/Frost) 216

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

11. Questions with Notice

11.1 Questions With Notice - Cr Geoff Frost

SUMMARY

Responses provided to Questions on Notice from Cr Frost.

MOTION

That the information be noted.

(Frost/Turner)

PROCEDURAL MOTION

RESOLVED that the Motion be put.

(Furry) 217

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Councillor G Frost

RESOLVED that the information be noted.

(Frost/Turner) 218

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

12. Minutes and Recommendations of Council Committees

12.1 Minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Held on 3 September 2019

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee meeting held on 3 September 2019 be noted

(Harker/Furry) 219

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Councillor G Frost

At 06:25 pm Councillor Burgess left the Chambers.

12.2 Minutes of the Bango Wind Farm Community Consultative Committee held on 27 August 2019

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Bango Wind Farm Community Consultative Committee meeting held on 27 August 2019 be noted.

(Frost/Furry) 220

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

At 06:26 pm Councillor Burgess returned to the Chambers.

13. Confidential Matters

RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 10A of the Local Government Act, 1993 the following items on the agenda be classified as CONFIDENTIAL and considered in the Closed Meeting of Council in accordance with Section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act for the reasons as specified:

13.1 Tender No YVC.PG.04.2019 - Walker Park Level 2 Sports Lighting Upgrade

Item 13.1 is confidential in accordance with section s10(A)(2)(di) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it and discussion of the matter in an open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

13.2 Tender No YVC.BS.05.2019 - Provision of Caravan Park Management Services

Item 13.2 is confidential in accordance with section s10(A)(2)(di) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it and discussion of the matter in an open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

(Furry/Jones) 221

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

Closed Council commenced at 6.27 pm.

13.1 Tender No YVC.PG.04.2019 - Walker Park Level 2 Sports Lighting Upgrade

SUMMARY

This report provides advice on the submission of tenders for the design and installation of LED lighting on Level two at the Walker Park Sporting Complex, Yass.

RESOLVED that the lump sum tender of $126,950 (ex GST) be accepted from Jaydub Electrical Services for the design and installation of LED lighting on level two at the Walker Park Sporting Complex, Yass.

(Furry/Reid) 222

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

13.2 Tender No YVC.BS.05.2019 - Provision of Caravan Park Management Services

SUMMARY

This report provides advice on the submission of tenders for a four year contract with two, three year extensions for the provision of management services for the Yass Caravan Park.

RESOLVED that :

1. The tender submission from Belgravia Pro Pty Ltd for $240,240 per year (inclusive of GST) be accepted subject to annual CPI increases on the anniversary of the contract, indexed under (all groups) for Sydney published by the ABS.

2. A four year contract be entered into with Belgravia Pro Pty Ltd from 1 December 2019 to 30 November 2023 for the management of the Yass Caravan Park, subject to a further two, three year extensions based on satisfactory performance as determined by Council.

3. The General Manager be authorised to sign documents associated with the contract.

(Frost/Reid) 223

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

RESOLVED that the meeting move into Open Council.

(Furry/McManus) 224

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

Open Council resumed at 6.28 pm.

RESOLVED that the recommendations in Closed Council be adopted.

(Turner/Jones) 225

FOR: Councillors R Abbey, C Burgess, G Frost, N Furry, A Harker, J Jones, M McManus, M Reid and K Turner

AGAINST: Nil

The meeting closed at 6.29 pm.

…………………………………..
Rowena Abbey
Mayor

6.2 Parkwood Planning Proposal

SUMMARY

To advise of the outcomes of agency and community consultation and the proposed revisions to the Planning Proposal to create a site specific Parkwood LEP and remove the land from the Yass Valley LEP 2013 Land Application Map.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The Planning Proposal for a site specific Parkwood LEP be endorsed as exhibited and varied as per the table in section 11 of this report.

2. The varied Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Minister for Planning to request the Parkwood LEP be made.

3. The varied Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Minister for Planning to request the subject land be removed from the Yass Valley LEP 2013 Land Application Map.

4. The Letter of Comfort from the ACT Government be noted.

5. Delegation be provided to the General Manager to sign the Parkwood Urban Release Area Governance Framework with the ACT and NSW.

6. The Parkwood Planning Proposal Memorandum of Understanding with Riverview Developments Pty Ltd and Reid and Stevens Pty Ltd be signed and executed by the Mayor and General Manager.

7. The Parkwood Planning Proposal Conservation Corridor Dedication Heads of Agreements with Fleming & Moore and Shaw & Armitage be signed and executed by the Mayor and General Manager.

Financial IMPLICATIONS

Resources for planning proposal assessment are provided for in the Operational Plan.

POlicy & Legislation

· Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979

· Local Government Act 1993

· Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016

· Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

· South East and Tablelands Regional Plan

· Yass Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013

· Yass Valley Settlement Strategy 2017

REPORT

1. Planning Proposal

The Parkwood Planning Proposal involves the rezoning land bounded by the Murrumbidgee River, Ginninderra Creek and the NSW/ACT border from ‘RU1 Primary Production’ and ‘E3 Environmental Management’ to a combination of ‘R1 General Residential’, ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’, ‘E3 Environmental Management’ and ‘SP1 Special Activities’.

The purpose of the rezoning is to facilitate the development of a new suburb linked into the ACT.

In addition to the rezoning a ‘Satisfactory Provisions’ clause and ‘Development Control Plan’ clause are proposed to ensure urban subdivision and development does not occur until arrangements for service delivery have been negotiated with all relevant providers.

The Planning Proposal document and supporting studies can be accessed via the NSW LEP’s Online System.

2. Background

The Parkwood Planning Proposal was originally submitted in July 2014, with the first Gateway Determination issued in April 2015 containing a number of conditions including the requirement for a forum with all relevant government service providers and a subsequent cross border report – both of which were completed.

Further additional ecological, bushfire and heritage assessments were also undertaken and the planning proposal was revised and considered by Council at its October 2017 meeting. It was resolved to send the revised proposal to the Department and further investigation be undertaken into local government service delivery.

3. Revised Gateway Determination

The Department of Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE) issued a revised Gateway Determination in August 2018 with some additional conditions and updated agency list for referral.

It also required the preparation of a Strategic Bushfire Study prior to community consultation.

A condition was included in the Gateway requiring a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to be agreed by the ACT and NSW Governments and Yass Valley Council to establish appropriate governance arrangements and servicing model for the provision of government services and infrastructure to the Parkwood urban release area prior to the finalisation of the LEP.

Council staff had preliminary discussions with DPIE, the NSW Cross Border Commissioner and Department of Premier and Cabinet in November 2018 in relation to the MoU. At that time the difficulties in executing a development specific MoU were discussed, and the preferred option was incorporating Parkwood under the updated MoU for regional collaboration between the NSW and ACT governments which is understood to be imminent.

A Governance Framework has since been drafted which will sit under the updated 2019 MOU to be agreed to by Yass Valley, ACT and NSW. This process is being progressed independently of the Planning Proposal assessment, and will establish a steering committee to progress agreement on the preferred governance mechanisms and service delivery models.

3.1 Agency Forum

The Gateway Determination required another forum to be held with agencies to outline the revised proposal and cross border servicing report. The forum was held on 12 March 2019 and all agencies within the revised gateway were invited. Representatives from 23 NSW and ACT agencies were present, in addition to Council and DPIE staff and the Proponent’s consultancy team.

The outcome of the forum was some minor adjustments to the service delivery and infrastructure options.

Unfortunately, some key NSW agencies declined to attend or be briefed – the most notable being NSW Treasury who is key to the funding and delivery of future services and infrastructure in NSW.

The whole of government response from the ACT following this forum stated the Territory is are committed to ensuring it is an integrated and well serviced community, regardless of where the border lies. Moving the border would be the simplest solution to achieve this as it would eliminate many cross border complexities regarding standards and the logistics of service delivery. The Territory will continue to keep working with NSW and Yass Valley to determine the best and most cost effective way to deliver services in Ginninderry.

Discussions relating to service delivery and infrastructure will continue in parallel with the planning process.

3.2 Strategic Bushfire Study

Comment was sought from NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) on the planning proposal prior to community consultation as required by the Minister’s Direction Planning for Bushfire Protection. Their response required additional information and the preparation of a Strategic Bushfire Study prior to community consultation.

The requirement for a Strategic Study is a recent requirement from RFS (under the proposed Planning for Bushfire Protection 2018) and following a number of meetings and revisions, the decision was made to progress the planning proposal with the requirement for the study to be prepared prior to community consultation which was done. The RFS advised that the document sufficiently addressed the matters required in the Gateway.

4. Agency Consultation

It is noted that a significant proportion of the NSW Agencies – despite most being briefed, did not provide a written response to the Planning Proposal. This may be due to a number of reasons, however the long lead time to development and the uncertainty of the situation/environment in the future makes it difficult to provide input.

The agencies referral responses are discussed in detail in Attachment A, and are summarised below. Copies of the responses can be viewed at https://www.yassvalley.nsw.gov.au/our-services/planning-and-building/lep-amendments/

The ACT Government are supportive of the proposal but have a preference of the NSW/ACT border to be moved to remove the need for cross border service agreements.

Agencies such as ICON Water, NSW Police, NSW Ambulance, Transport for NSW, NSW Fire & Rescue, raised issues relating to service delivery and the need for ongoing discussion and the development of agreements. The Service Delivery Report recognises that arrangements are possible however these do not need to be finalised until when development is actually planned to commence in NSW.

NSW Crown Land seeks involvement with planning for the proposed conservation corridor and advise of the need for approvals for access and management in the waterways.

NSW Education identified the need for school facilities and the dedication of land. A MoU, as a precursor to a Voluntary Planning Agreement for a school site along with inclusion in the proposed Satisfactory Arrangements and Development Control Plan clause will address this matter.

Department of Primary Industries (Agriculture) have requested a 1,000m buffer separation between the existing poultry farm and future housing. This can be incorporated into the proposed LEP although the expiry of the current lease is likely to occur before development occurs in this locality.

The Office of Environment & Heritage (OEH) accept the basis upon which the conservation corridor has been defined and recommend Biodiversity Certification be pursued. They have also suggested the standard Heritage LEP clause include the implementation of Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan recommendations. They also requested additional flooding information, and clarification of the mechanism to secure the ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ area.

5. Environmental Protection & Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Approval

Approval was sought for the entire Ginninderry development within NSW and ACT under s146B EPBC Act 1999. The approval is valid until 2067 and contains a number of conditions in relation to the NSW (Parkwood) portion of the site i.e.

· Must be in accordance with the program details in the Urban Development at West Belconnen Report April 2017

· The Conservation Corridor is established as per the program

· The NSW portion of the corridor must be secured for conservation in perpetuity through a legally binding mechanism within 2 years of approval

· Preparation of a Conservation Corridor Management Plan and Construction Environmental Management Plan

· Undertake a further survey for Pink Tailed Worm Lizard and Natural Temperate Grassland

· Establish a cat containment policy across the entire site

The approval also includes works within the corridor:

· Drilling of a sewer tunnel underneath the Pink Tailed Worm Lizard and Box Gum Woodland Habitat

· Recreation and tourist facilities

· Bushfire and maintenance management

It should also be noted that this approval was sought when an ‘E3 Environmental Management’ zone was proposed over the NSW portion of the conservation corridor. The ‘E3 Environmental Management’ zone has since been superseded by a proposed ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ zone which would afford a greater level of protection and which now covers a larger area. Most of these conditions have either been satisfied or mechanisms are in place to do so. The condition relating to cat containment requires some legislative change in NSW.

6. Community Consultation

The Planning Proposal documents and supporting studies were made available for community consultation from 25 March until 17 May 2019 at Yass Library, Council’s Administration Building, Kippax Library and Hall Post Office. The 3D model was located at the Yass Library for the duration of the period.

The electronic version of the documents were able to be viewed through a link on Council’s website to the LEP Online Tracking website. An advertisement was placed in the Yass Tribune and Canberra Times, and a media release issued. The consultation period was notified through the Council Page and e-newsletter.

At the conclusion of the consultation period, a total of 54 submissions and 12 postcards were received.

A further petition was lodged with 140 signatures on behalf of the Ginninderra Falls Association.

Copies of the submissions can be viewed (here) on Council’s Website:

https://www.yassvalley.nsw.gov.au/assets/2019/Planning/Community-Responses-May-2019.pdf

A Planning Forum was held on the 29th July 2019 in the Council chambers with nine presentations made to the Councillors including two on behalf of the proponent. In particular, presentations were made on behalf of The Ginninderra Falls Association, Friends of Grasslands, Ginninderra Landcare as well as ecologists focussing on Rosenberg’s Monitor.

7. Petition

A petition was presented by the Ginninderra Falls Association to Council with 140 signatures, collected at the Yass, Murrumbateman and Hall markets. It is understood a similar petition was provided to the ACT Government.

The Petition raises the following points:

· Murrumbidgee and Ginninderra Gorges – aesthetic value, traditional roles in aboriginal life, sanctuary for native plant and animal species; contribute to dynamic bushfire propagation (not adequately covered by Bushfire Standards).

· Proposed buffer zones around urban areas will not adequately protect ecology, history or residents.

· Requests Council not approve rezoning before further independent research establishes effective buffers to better protect biodiversity, aboriginal heritage and future residents from bushfire.

As the full suite of Planning Proposal documents were not made available at the markets, signatories to this petition may have had an incomplete understanding of the project. Details of the proposal included on the petition only mentioned the proposed R1 Residential zone, and there is no mention of the proposed ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ and ‘E3 Environmental Management’ zoned land, nor the proposed Conservation Corridor and proposed management.

The Petition was tabled at the Council meeting in June 2019.

8. Issues Raised by Community

The issues raised by the community during consultation and the planning responses are included in Attachment B. A summary of the issues is as follows:

· Rights of adjoining landowners

· Need for independent review and research

· Format of planning documentation

· Existing use rights for the quarry

· Dedication of land in the proposed E2 Environmental Conservation zone

· Transmission lines and the use of the easements

· Shape, width and area of the conservation corridor

· Biodiversity values (particularly Rosenberg’s Monitor, Pink Tailed Worm Lizard, Natural Temperate Grassland)

· Conservation Trust and management arrangements

· Preference for a National Park

· Bushfire risks and overlap of Ginninderra Falls Precinct with Asset Protection Zone

· Proximity of housing and special activities area to the Ginninderra Falls

· Retention of the existing Environmental zoning

· Aboriginal cultural heritage

· Lack of reference to Aboriginal land, water rights and Native Title

· Urban/conservation interface

· Need for holistic approach to development north of the ACT

· Proposed lots within the conservation corridor and adjacent to the Falls

· Cat containment

· Land ownership and staging

· Land within the ACT

· Matters relating to the ACT planning process

In the main the submitted Planning Proposal and supporting documents adequately address the relevant issues. For others, variations to the Planning Proposal will adequately address the concerns.

Several issues raised are outside the scope of the Planning Proposal to address and these have been set aside.

9. MoU/Letter of Comfort

A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been drafted between Riverview Developments, Reid and Stevens and Council, and the respective lawyers. A Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) would be the usual vehicle to agree to infrastructure delivery and funding within a development, however the length of time and planning required before development commences in NSW means a VPA is not appropriate in this instance at this point of time.

The draft MoU outlines the intention of the Proponent and Council to enter into future VPA’s and making a Contributions Plan and Development Servicing Plan. These will incorporate:

· Infrastructure, community facilities and open space

· Dedication of the Conservation Corridor land on land owned by Reid and Stevens

· Establishment of the Conservation Management Trust

· Reimbursement of costs incurred by the developer to ensure proportionate contribution by all landowners

· Dedication of land for Council purposes if required (e.g. administration building, depot or waste management facilities)

· Dedication of land for a school

A copy of the draft MOU is attached as a Separate Enclosure.

ACT entered into a Joint Venture with Riverview Developments in 2016 for this cross border development straddling the NSW-ACT border. While not a party to the proposed MoU, the ACT has provided a letter of comfort (refer Attachment C) indicating support for the Heads of Agreements proposed for future dedication of the conservation corridor, negotiating and entering into planning agreements, and the provision of public infrastructure. It also supports the agreement which allows the Joint Venture the first right of refusal to acquire the existing dwelling within the conservation corridor (see below).

10. Conservation Corridor & Agreements

Conservation Corridor Dedication Heads of Agreements have been drafted between the landowners Fleming and Moore, Shaw and Armitage (attached as a Separate Enclosures) and Council in relation to dedication of the ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ land to Council upon the registration of the first urban subdivision plan.

The agreement with Fleming and Moore also allows the Joint Venture first offer on the residual lot containing the existing house, and that upon acquisition it be dedicated to Council.

The landowner of the lot adjacent to the Falls has not entered into a Heads of Agreement to dedicate the land to Council. As such, an additional Satisfactory Arrangement Clause is proposed to be added to ensure the conservation of the ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ land in perpetuity, whereby if the land is not dedicated, separate biodiversity certification will be required before any Development Consent is granted. While this locks in the conservation requirements of the ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ land, it does not allow for the generation of income through a levy for its’ management.

11. Recommended variations

It must be noted that the suggested wording of the clauses proposed in the Parkwood LEP is subject to the review and consideration of DPIE – particularly during the legal drafting of the instrument. As such, the commentary within the Planning Proposal and the suggested clause wording has been drafted to capture the intent of the proposed instrument.

In regard to the Planning Proposal at this stage in the planning process Council can:

· Reject the proposal

· Vary the proposal

· Adopt the proposal as exhibited

The concerns raised in submissions have been discussed in detail above and none warrant the rejection of the proposal. From the consideration of community and public authority submissions, it is recommended that the Planning Proposal be adopted subject to the following variations:

Clause/Map/Schedule	Required Amendment	Rationale
Heritage Conservation Clause	Add requirement to standard Heritage Conservation Clause When consent not required: If development is consistent with an approved heritage management document. (Box 1)	OEH referral response, due to identified Aboriginal Cultural Values and the recommendation to prepare an Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan.
Heritage Map	Add a heritage map to give effect to the heritage conservation clause which: includes all the land within the E2 zone given the significant Aboriginal Cultural values within the corridor rather than identification of specific locations.	OEH referral response, due to identified Aboriginal Cultural Values. Standard instrument heritage conservation clause wording makes reference to a map (Planning Proposal flagged that a decision would be made as part of the assessment whether a map and clause was included).
Local Clauses Map	To amend the Local Clauses Map to: increase the buffer between residential development and the existing egg farm to 1,000m. (Figure 22)	DPI (Agriculture) response requesting increased separation between residential development and a poultry farm as outlined in Living and Working in Rural Areas’ Handbook (DPI).
Development Control Plan Clause	Add requirement to Development Control Plan Clause to include: bushfire requirements, including the recommendations outlined in a Strategic Bush Fire Assessment Report endorsed by Council. (Box 7)	RFS referral response re: mechanism to ensure implementation of recommendations within the Strategic Bushfire Assessment (Eco Logical February 2019) within subsequent planning phases.
Development Control Plan Clause	Add requirement to Development Control Plan Clause to include a provision to give effect that: should the quarry located on Lot 61 DP801234 be operating at the time approval is sought for residential uses on adjoining Lot 62 DP 801234, or Lot 4 or Lot 5 DP 771051 the impacts of the quarry on the residential uses, and the impacts of the residential uses on the quarry must be considered. (Box 7)	Submission by owners of quarry located within the subject site.
Development Control Plan Clause	Add requirement to Development Control Plan Clause to include a provision to give effect that: an area is to be set aside for any waste or resource facility, municipal services depot or public administration building required by Council. (Box 7)	Requested by Council staff to reflect the Additional Permitted Uses and land that may be required in future by Council.
Development Control Plan Clause	Add requirement to Development Control Plan Clause to include a provision to give effect that: an area is to be set aside for a public school as per the school planning site requirements of the NSW Department of Education. (Box 7)	NSW Department of Education referral response.
Development Control Plan Clause	Add requirement to Development Control Plan Clause to include a provision to give effect that: the impacts, integration and access to the adjacent Crown Waterways – Murrumbidgee River and Ginninderra Creek must be considered. (Box 7)	DPI (Lands & Water) referral response.
Development Control Plan Clause	Add requirement to Development Control Plan Clause: flooding requirements including recommendations outlined in a Parkwood Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan endorsed by Council. (Box 7)	OEH referral response requiring additional flood risk management information for the site.
Additional Permitted Uses Schedule Part Lot 5, DP771051 Part Lot 1, DP1184677 Part Lot 2, DP1184677 Part Lot 3, DP1184677	Amend the proposed Additional Permitted Use Schedule to: clarify that subdivision of the land would only be for the existing dwelling house (i.e. no new dwellings) and the lot area would be between 3 and 5 hectares, with frontage to the Murrumbidgee River. (Box 12)	OEH referral response and public submissions relating to improving connectivity of the conservation corridor until such time as this existing dwelling is acquired to be included within the Conservation Corridor.
Additional Permitted Uses Schedule Lot 62, DP801234	Amend the proposed Additional Permitted Use Schedule to specify: the subdivision of this land must include all land zoned E3 – Environmental Management within the lot created of Lot 62, DP801234. (Box 14)	OEH referral response. To clarify that a lot containing the existing Ginninderry Homestead development can be created which must include all land within the ‘E3 Environmental Management’ zone on that lot. This will reduce fragmentation and improve management outcomes for this land which is not proposed to be managed as part of the Conservation Corridor.
Conservation Corridor Definition/ Clause	To include a definition within the LEP to specify: that any reference to the Conservation Corridor relates to the E2 zoned land only. (Figure 22/ Box 4)	Response to public submissions and clarification by OEH.
Conservation/ Urban Edge Interface Clause	Amend Conservation/Urban Edge Interface Clause e) to include: and the recommendations outlined in a Strategic Bush Fire Assessment Report endorsed by Council. (Box 4)	RFS referral response re: mechanism to ensure implementation of recommendations within the Strategic Bushfire Assessment (Eco Logical February 2019) within subsequent planning phases.
Conservation/ Urban Edge Interface Clause	Amend Conservation/Urban Edge Interface Clause h) to include: corridor fencing and edge road treatments have been provided for within the interface area. (Box 4)	Response to public submissions concerned about the impact on Rosenberg’s Monitor. The current proposed wording of h) refers to habitat values only, not specifically addressing impacts of urban development.
Urban release areas Clause (Conservation Corridor)	Add an additional urban release area clause specifying: Development consent must not be granted in an urban release area unless satisfactory arrangements have been made to secure the conservation of the E2 zoned land. This may include: The dedication of the Parkwood land zoned E2– Environmental Conservation to the Council; or The biodiversity certification (or similar equivalent agreement) of the Parkwood land zoned E2– Environmental Conservation to ensure conservation in perpetuity of the land; or Both	To specify that development consent will not be issued until satisfactory arrangements have been made to secure the ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ land. To define what would constitute satisfactory arrangements to satisfy this clause.
Urban release areas Clause (State and Territory public infrastructure)	Include a definition for designated State and Territory public infrastructure including: (a) State, Territory and regional roads, (b) bus interchanges and bus lanes, (c) land required for regional open space, (d) land required for social infrastructure and facilities (such as land for schools, hospitals, emergency services and justice purposes). (Box 5)	To clarify what satisfactory arrangements are required for State and Territory infrastructure or facilities.
Urban release areas Clause (Local public infrastructure)	Rename the proposed ‘Public utility infrastructure’ clause to ‘Local public infrastructure’ and include a definition to include: a) trunk water, b) trunk stormwater, c) trunk sewerage, d) trunk electricity, e) trunk roads, g) land for waste or resource management facilities, h) community facilities, i) public open space and local parks, j) land for municipal services depots, k) land for public administration building. (Box 6)	To clarify what satisfactory / adequate arrangements are required for local public infrastructure.
Biodiversity Map	Biodiversity Map to include additional suitable and low mapping of Pink Tailed Worm Lizard habitat (Capital Ecology 2019) outside the ‘E2 Environmental Conservation’ zone on the Biodiversity Map.	OEH referral response.

Strategic Direction

Key Pillar 1. Our Environment

CSP Strategy EN4 - Maintain a balance between growth, development and environmental protection through sensible planning

Delivery Program Action EN4.1 - Ensure Council's statutory planning instruments are up to date and reflective of the community needs

Operational Plan Activity EN4.1.1 – Undertake ongoing strategic land use planning and reviews of existing instruments

ATTACHMENTS: a. Agency Responses ⇩

b. Community Issues ⇩

c. ACT SLA Letter of Comfort ⇩

d. MoU Riverview & Reid and Stevens (Under Separate Cover) ⇨

e. Heads of Agreement Fleming and Moore (Under Separate Cover) ⇨

f. Heads of Agreement Shaw and Armitage (Under Separate Cover) ⇨

6.3 DA190160 - Residential Subdivision - 7 Gundaroo Terrace, Gundaroo

Attachment d Draft Conditions

DA190160 – Draft Conditions – 7 Gundaroo Terrace

PART A - GENERAL CONDITIONS

(1) Consent is granted generally in accordance with the plans and details submitted to Council with the Development Application. The plans of subdivision has been stamped and attached to this consent. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the stamped plan or as modified by these conditions.

(2) This approval relates only to the development referred to in the development application and specifically does not amount to an approval or acceptance by the Council of any works or buildings already erected on the land, whether or not those works or buildings are the subject of a prior development or building approval.

(3) All engineering design and construction work shall be undertaken in accordance with the following, current at the time of the Engineering Construction Certificate being issued:

· Council's Road Standards Policy RD-POL-09

· Council’s Design and Construction Specification – AUS-SPEC #1

· Australian Standards and

· AustRoads

(4) Public access to the site and construction works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted, when construction work is not in progress or the site is unoccupied.

(5) The capacity and effectiveness of runoff and erosion control measures shall be maintained at all times to the satisfaction of Council as shall any techniques to suppress dust and the tracking of sediment onto existing sealed roads;

(6) Should any Aboriginal sites, objects or suspected human remains be unearthed during works associated with the subdivision, all work must cease and the NSW Office of Environment & Heritage (OEH) is to be contacted immediately. No works is to recommence at the location unless authorised by OEH in writing.

PART B - PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION WORKS COMMENCING

(1) Subdivision work shall not be commenced until the person having the benefit of this Development Consent provides at least two (2) days’ notice to Council of their intention to commence subdivision work.

(2) Appropriate soil erosion and sediment control measures shall be installed;

(3) Any contractor undertaking works in an existing road reserve shall also submit the following details:

· A current public liability certificate with a minimum cover of $20 million

· Current Plant / vehicle insurances

· A certified traffic control plan for the proposed works

Note: Any work associated with a classified road requires RMS concurrence and no work within the road reserve is to be undertaken until received. RMS concurrence may take 10 working days from Council receiving the above information.

(4) A sign shall be displayed in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out.

The sign must list the following details:

· The name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority

· The name or the Principal Contractor and an after-hours telephone number and

· That unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited.

The sign must be maintained while the subdivision work is being carried out and removed upon completion.

PART C – INSPECTIONS

To arrange an inspection with Council please use the on-line booking system:

yassvalley.nsw.gov.au > Our Services > Planning and Building > Certification and Inspections > Inspections

If Council undertakes the inspection, the fee per inspection will be levied in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges, relevant at the time of payment.

(1) A compliance certificate shall be obtained from Council’s Engineering Department at the following stages of construction:

(a) Completion of boundary fencing.

(b) Completion of property access. This inspection is for access dimensions and to ensure there are no ‘trip-fall’ hazards. Compliance with change in longitudinal grade will only be undertaken where it can be confirmed via WAE drawings

(2) An inspection is to be undertaken by Council’s Planning Division upon completion of the bunding around the bore on Lot 1.

PART D - PRIOR TO ISSUE OF SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

(1) In accordance with section 7.12 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Yass Valley Development Contributions Plan 2018, a monetary contribution must be paid to Council if the proposed cost of carrying out the development exceeds $100,000.

The contribution rate is determined in accordance with the table below:

Proposed cost of carrying out the development	Contribution Rate
Up to and including $100,000	Nil
More than $100,000 and up to and including $200,000	0.5% of that cost
More than $200,000	1% of that cost

(2) Easements shall be created on the final linen plan of subdivision centred on any existing or new power lines/cables passing through private property and shall be in accordance with the service providers requirements.

(3) The property vehicular accesses from the road to the property boundary must be constructed in accordance with Council’s Road Standards Policy RD-POL-09.

(4) Stock proof fencing must be provided to all boundaries of the proposed lots.

The minimum acceptable standard for new fencing work for village lots is as follows:

· A fence height of no less than 1200 mm.

· Strainers – spacing 100 metres to 200 metres depending on terrain.

· Steel Star Pickets at 4 metre centres.

· Two 1.57 mm high tensile barbed wires (or plain wires) on top.

· Three 2.8 mm high tensile carry wires.

· “Wire Netting” - must be set no higher than 50 mm above the surface of the ground.

· Netting floodgates as required.

· All gates must be set back a minimum of 15 metres from the edge of road formation

The existing boundary fence where dilapidated, must be repaired to the above standard.

Existing fence in good order but of varying standards may be permitted if such standard is deemed by Council as ‘stock proof’.

Where the boundary fence does not coincide with the property boundary for proposed subdivision, the applicant must provide a note on the linen plan that fence may not be constructed on the boundary of particular lot.

(5) In accordance with the Provision of Electricity Supply and Telecommunications Service for Subdivisions Policy DA-POL-17, evidence must be submitted to Council demonstrating that a satisfactory standard of electricity supply is available to each lot within the subdivision.

(6) In accordance with the Provision of Electricity Supply and Telecommunications Service for Subdivisions Policy DA-POL-17, evidence must be submitted to Council demonstrating that a satisfactory standard of telecommunications service is available to each lot within the subdivision.

(7) The applicant must confirm by survey that the formation and associated batters and drainage structures of Cork Street and Rosamel Street along the frontage of the subject property, are within the road reserve.

Where the existing road is within the subject land, the applicant must ensure that the legal and physical attributes coincide by adjustment of the road reserve. The applicants request for a Subdivision Certificate must include specific reference to the review and whether or not adjustment of the road reserve is necessary.

(8) A restriction to user under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 must be placed on Lot 1 and Lot 2 prohibiting any development that requires Development Consent unless it complies with the Gundaroo Floodplain Risk Management Plan 2016 (as amended or superseded).

The name of the Authority having the power to release vary, or modify this restriction must be Yass Valley Council.

(9) A restriction to user under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 must be placed on Lot 2 which requires the effluent disposal system to include a NSW Health accredited advanced secondary treatment system with nutrient reduction.

The name of the Authority having the power to release vary, or modify this restriction must be Yass Valley Council.

(10) A restriction to user under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 must be placed on Lot 1 and Lot 2 which limits the number of dwelling houses that may be erected on each lot to one (1) only.

The name of the Authority having the power to release vary, or modify this restriction must be Yass Valley Council.

(11) Prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate the bore located on Lot 1 is required to be bunded in accordance with the Land Capability Assessment (Version 2) prepared by Franklin Consulting Australia Pty Ltd dated 8 December 2018.

(12) The developer shall restore, replace or reconstruct any damage caused to road pavements, surfaces, roadside drainage or underground facilities as a result of the construction of the development;

(13) A Subdivision Certificate Application (Form 206) must be submitted to Council.

The application is to be accompanied by the following:

(a) A plan of subdivision (linen plan) acceptable for registration by the NSW Land and Property Information Office.

(b) An Administration Sheet which incorporates a subdivision certificate acceptable for registration by the NSW Land and Property Information Office.

(c) Where easements, rights of carriageway or restrictions on the use of land are proposed or required to be created under Section 88 of the Conveyancing Act 1919, a copy of the relevant instrument.

(d) The relevant documents required by the NSW Land and Property Information Office for the registration of a Community scheme or a Strata scheme, if applicable.

(e) The applicant shall create, where applicable, 20 metre wide easements over the final plan of subdivision in favour of Essential Energy, centred on all existing power lines which cross the subdivision.

(f) A copy of relevant development consent or complying development certificate.

(g) A copy of any relevant construction certificate.

(h) A copy of any relevant compliance certificates, letters from authorities and receipts for payment of any fees/contributions.

(i) A copy of detailed subdivision engineering plans, where relevant.

(j) Evidence that the applicant has complied with all conditions of consent that it is required to comply with before a subdivision certificate can be issued.

(k) For subdivision involving subdivision work, evidence that the work has been completed, or:

· agreement has been reached with the relevant consent authority as to payment of the cost of work and as to the time for carrying out the work, or

· agreement has been reached with the relevant consent authority as to security to be given to the consent authority with respect to the completion of the work.

(l) The relevant fee payment at the date of issue of this consent.

(14) The subdivision certificate will not be issued until all conditions of this consent have been complied with in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

ADVISORY NOTES ACCOMPANYING DEVELOPMENT CONSENT DA190160

(1) This consent has been granted under clause 4.1 and clause 4.6 of the Yass Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013.

(2) This approval is for subdivision only. Further development consent is required for any proposed dwelling house or other permissible use, as prescribed in the relevant Environmental Planning Instruments of Council.

(3) All fees and charges associated with this consent must be adjusted annually from the date of this consent in accordance with seasonal movements in the CPI for the Canberra region.

(4) Any additional Council inspection, beyond the scope of any Compliance Certificate package and needed to verify the compliance of any work, must be charged at the individual inspection rate nominated in Council’s Fees and Charges.

(5) The applicant must ensure all sub-contractors are licensed by the NSW Department of Fair Trading.

(6) The Work Health and Safety Act 2011, the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 and various Australian Standards provide a comprehensive set of risk control measures and procedures for development sites which cover all types of risk. This legislation is administered by WorkCover New South Wales which has produced a variety of guidelines and other supporting documents for the information of developers.

All persons undertaking work in connection with this consent should ensure that all required risk control measures and procedures are complied with.

(7) All Development Applications relating to the lots created by this subdivision will be assessed under the provisions of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017. If the development triggers the Biodiversity Offsets Scheme, the Development Application must be accompanied by a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR).

(8) The property access must be constructed to the following minimum specifications from the road pavement to the property boundary:

(a) All property accesses must be constructed to “Rural Property Access –with Indented Access” (see Appendix B) standard in accordance with Austroads Guide to Road Design – Part 4: Intersections and Crossings General, and be sealed from the edge of the road to the gate.

(b) Driveways are to be constructed with a minimum thickness of 100 mm. approved compacted gravel. Where the driveway accesses onto a sealed road pavement, then the entrance will also be provided with a two coat bitumen seal or 100mm thick concrete (25 MPA with SL72 mesh), or similar all weather pavement.

(c) Gate to be set back 15 metres from the edge of pavement on local roads and 20m from edge of pavement on Regional roads.

(d) Reinforced concrete pipes (minimum of 300 mm diameter) and headwalls are to be installed in the table drain in accordance with AS 3725. Pipe and headwall structures are to be set back a minimum of 2m from the edge of the road formation and be provided with permanent erosion protection upstream and downstream of the culvert. Pipes are to be designed for a minimum of a 1 in 5 year storm event or determined as follows:

Table 2.0. – Minimum Culvert Sizes

Catchment

Size

Less than

0.5Ha

Less than

1Ha

Less than

2Ha

Less than

3Ha

3+Ha

Pipe Size

300mm

375mm

450mm

600mm

AR&R 1 in 5

year storm event

(e) Where a pipe culvert would be unsuitable, due to topography and pipe cover requirements, a reinforced concrete dish drain may be constructed in the table drain with the approval of the Director of Engineering. Minimum requirements for the construction of a dish drain are as follows:

· minimum 150mm thick

· 1.5m wide

· dish drain to be constructed full width of the driveway, minimum 5 metres in length

· 25MPa concrete with SL72 mesh and

· Permanent erosion protection upstream and downstream of the dish drain

6.5 Draft Local Strategic Weeds Plan

Attachment c Revised Local Strategic Weeds Plan

Yass Valley

Local Strategic Weeds Plan

See the source image

Record of Versions

Date Published	Reason for Amendments	Resolution	Author/Document Owner
16/7/19	Original draft for review		Mark Livermore

Uncontrolled document when printed. Please refer to intranet for controlled document

With thanks to Brett Jones from Snowy Monaro Regional Council for his considerable assistance with the material included in this document.

Contents

1. 1. Introduction 5

2. 1.1. Yass Valley 5

3. 1.2. Implementation of the Biosecurity Act 2015 5

4. 1.2.1. General Biosecurity Duty 7

5. 1.2.2. Prohibited Matter 7

6. 1.2.3. Mandatory measures 11

7. 2 South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017-2022 12

8. 3 Priority weeds within Yass Valley 13

9. 3.1 The Economic Impact of Weeds 13

10. 3.2 Prevention 14

11. 3.3 Elimination 14

12. 3.4 Containment and Asset Protection 14

13.3.5 Mapping 14

14.3.6 Education 16

15.3.7 Weeds Focus Group 16

16.3.8 Impacts of Control 16

17. 4 Plan review 17

18. 5 Appendices 18

19. APPENDIX 1 Serrated Tussock 19

20. APPENDIX 2 Blackberry 21

21. APPENDIX 3 African Lovegrass 23

22. APPENDIX 4 Chilean Needle Grass 25

23. APPENDIX 5 Gorse 27

24. APPENDIX 6 Coolatai Grass 29

25. APPENDIX 7 Sweet Briar 31

26. APPENDIX 8 Bathurst Burrs 33

27. APPENDIX 9 Scotch/English Broom 35

28. APPENDIX 10 Fireweed 37

29. APPENDIX 11 St Johns Wort 39

Tables

Table 1: Prohibited Matter (Weeds) to which specific restrictions are legislated 8

Table 2: Schedule 3 Weeds to which mandatory measures apply

Figures

Figure 1 Yass Valley Council Geographical area 6

Figure 2 Generalised Invasion Curve 13

Figure 3 High Risk Pathways in the Yass Valley 15

1. Introduction

1.1. Yass Valley

Yass Valley is a thriving community made up of eight diverse towns and villages of Binalong, Bookham, Bowning, Gundaroo, Murrumbateman, Sutton, Wee Jasper and Yass along with hthe surrounding rural areas.

Yass Valley is located in the Southern Tablelands of NSW, a regional area boasting a proud Aboriginal, strong colonial and innovative agricultural history. Yass Valley is located 280km southwest of the Sydney CBD, 600km northeast of the Melbourne CBD and 60km north of the Canberra CBD.

Yass Valley was traditionally inhabited by the Ngunnawal and Wiradjuri Tribes. The Yass area was first seen by Europeans in 1821, on an expedition led by Hamilton Hume, and by 1830 European settlement had begun.

Yass Valley is an area of 4,000km² and adjoins five other NSW local government areas and the Australian Capital Territory.

The topography of the region is extremely diverse ranging from the dramatic and beautiful hills, valleys and waterways of the Wee Jasper area, to the huge expanse of Burrinjuck Dam, the rolling hills of Binalong and the vast plains of Yass and Murrumbateman that are home to some of the finest wool and wine country in Australia.

The region is reliant on agricultural production, which is based largely on sheep and cattle grazing enterprises. It is also a major ‘cold climate’ wine producer.

Weed invasion, and in particular invasion by perennial grass weeds like Serrated Tussock, African Lovegrass and Chilean Needle Grass, have the potential to reduce, and in some cases, eliminate native and introduced pastures, and native vegetation communities. For this reason, these weeds are identified as one of the greatest threats to the biodiversity of the Yass Valley region.

1.2. Implementation of the Biosecurity Act 2015

On 1 July 2017, the NSW Biosecurity Act 2015 became the primary legislation dealing with weed management in NSW. The Act supersedes the Noxious Weeds Act 1993 and operates on a risk management framework, providing flexibility in the development and implementation of weed management programs at a local level based on the level of risk that a weed poses to the local economy, environment and/or community.

The primary objective of the new Act is to provide a framework for the prevention, elimination and minimisation of a wide range of biosecurity risks, including pest animals, diseases, contaminants and weeds. In relation to the management of weeds, the Act aims to prevent the introduction of new weeds into or within the State, to eradicate new incursions quickly and efficiently and to minimise the impact of widespread established weeds.

This plan identifies the priority weeds with which Council maintains an active management and compliance program. It also specifies the extent to which land managers within the Yass Valley Region must manage these priority weeds in the absence of State legislated requirements.

Figure 1 Yass Valley Geographical Area

1.2.1. General Biosecurity Duty

To ensure that the risk posed by all weeds is prevented, eliminated or minimised, the Act requires land managers to manage all weeds in accordance with their ‘General Biosecurity Duty’.

General Biosecurity Duty is referred to in Section 22 of the Act as ‘Any person who deals with biosecurity matter or a carrier and who knows, or ought reasonably to know, the biosecurity risk posed or likely to be posed by the biosecurity matter, carrier or dealing has a biosecurity duty to ensure that, so far as reasonably practicable, the biosecurity risk is prevented, eliminated or minimised’.

Although the general biosecurity duty applies broadly, there are a number of elements that must be satisfied. These are well defined by Department of Primary Industries at (https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/biosecurity/biosecurity-legislation/general-biosecurity-duty) as:

· Dealing with – the general biosecurity duty only applies to a person who 'deals with' biosecurity matter or a carrier of biosecurity matter. 'Deal with' includes a wide range of activities, which are listed in section 12 of the Act. Some examples of dealing with biosecurity matter are; to keep, possess, grow, breed, move, supply or manufacture biosecurity matter.

· Knowledge – a person must know, or ought reasonably to know, that there is or is likely to be a biosecurity risk arising from the biosecurity matter, carrier or 'dealing'. This will be a question of fact and will depend on the circumstances of each situation.

· People who know or ought reasonably to know will generally include people who deal with biosecurity matter or carriers on a regular basis as part of a commercial or recreational activity, and people who work professionally (i.e. 'deal') with a particular type of biosecurity matter or carrier. For these people their general knowledge and expertise would in most cases be sufficient to indicate they know the risks.

· 'Reasonably practicable' – what is reasonably practicable for the prevention, elimination or minimisation of a biosecurity risk will depend on what was reasonably able to be done at a particular time, taking into account and weighing up all relevant matters. Relevant matters include, the nature and potential impact of the biosecurity risk, the person's level of knowledge of the risk and related actions that could be taken to prevent, eliminate or minimise the risk, and the cost, availability and suitability of these actions. It is not likely to be reasonably practicable if the cost is greatly disproportionate to the risk.

· Preventing, eliminating or minimising the biosecurity risk – the risk must be prevented or eliminated if reasonably practicable, otherwise it must be minimised so far as is reasonably practicable.

The general biosecurity duty can apply to more than one person in relation to the same biosecurity risk, for example an owner and a manager may both be responsible for managing a particular biosecurity risk on a property.

1.2.2. Prohibited Matter

Schedule 2 of the Act identifies weeds which are legislated as Prohibited Matter throughout NSW. These weeds are subject to specific restrictions relating to the possession, purchase, sale, movement and other dealings as identified in the Act. A person who becomes aware of the presence of a prohibited weed, or suspects that a prohibited event has occurred, is occurring or is about to occur must immediately notify Council. Prohibited Matter (Weeds) are detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 Prohibited Matter (Weeds) to which specific restrictions are legislated

Scientific Name	Common Name
Andropogon gayanus	Gamba grass
Annona glabra	Pond apple
Asparagus declinatus	Bridal veil creeper
Bassia scoparia (excluding subsp. trichophylla)	Kochia
Centaurea stoebe subsp. micranthos	Spotted knapweed
Centaurea x moncktonii	Black knapweed
Chromolaena odorata	Siam weed
Clidemia hirta	Koster's curse
Cryptostegia grandiflora	Rubber vine
Eichhornia azurea	Anchored water hyacinth
Hieracium spp (all species)	Hawkweed
Hydrocotyle ranunculoides	Hydrocotyl/Water pennywort
Lagarosiphon major	Lagarosiphon
Limnobium spp. (all species)	Frogbit/Spongeplant
Limnocharis flava	Yellow burrhead
Miconia spp. (all species)	Miconia
Mikania micrantha	Mikania vine
Mimosa pigra	Mimosa
Myriophyllum spicatum	Eurasian water milfoil
Nassella tenuissima (syn. Stipa tenuissima)	Mexican feather grass
Orobanche spp. (all species except the native O. cernua var. australiana and O. minor)	Broomrape
Parthenium hysterophorus	Parthenium weed
Stratiotes aloides	Water soldier
Striga spp. (except the native S. parviflora)	Witchweed
Trapa spp. (all species)	Water caltrop
Vachellia karroo (syn. Acacia karroo)	Karoo acacia
Vachellia nilotica (syn. Acacia nilotica)	Prickly acacia

1.2.3. Mandatory measures

Schedule 3 Biosecurity Regulation 2017 identifies a number of weeds with which mandatory measures apply. The mandatory measures applying to these weeds are detailed in Clause 33 of the Regulation as ‘a person must not import into the State or sell’ any listed plant.

Table 2 Schedule 3 Weeds to which mandatory measures apply

Scientific Name	Common Name
Alternanthera philoxeroides	Alligator weed
Anredera cordifolia	Madeira vine
Asparagus aethiopicus, A. africanus, A. asparagoides Western Cape form, A. declinatus, A. plumosus, A. scandens* (except A. officinalis, A. racemosus)	Asparagus weeds
Asparagus asparagoides	Bridal creeper
Cabomba caroliniana	Cabomba
Chrysanthemoides monilifera	Bitou bush/Boneseed
Dolichandra unguis-cati	Cat’s claw creeper
Eichhornia crassipes	Water hyacinth
Genista monspessulana, G. linifolia, Cytisus scoparius	Brooms
Hymenachne amplexicaulis	Hymenachne
Jatropha gossypiifolia	Bellyache bush
Lantana camara	Lantana
Lycium ferocissimum	African boxthorn
Nassella neesiana	Chilean needle grass
Nassella trichotoma	Serrated tussock
Opuntia spp., Cylindropuntia spp., Austrocylindropuntia spp. (except O. ficus-indica)	Opuntioid cacti
Parkinsonia aculeata	Parkinsonia
Prosopis spp.	Mesquite
Rubus fruticosus agg.	Blackberry except the varietals Chester Thornless, Dirksen Thornless, Loch Ness, Silvan, Black Satin, Murrindindi, Smooth Stem, Thornfree and Chehalem
Sagittaria platyphylla	Sagittaria
Salix spp. except S. babylonica, S. X calodendron and S. X reichardtiji	Willows except weeping willows, pussy willow and sterile pussy willow
Salvinia molesta	Salvinia
Senecio madagascariensis	Fireweed
Solanum elaeagnifolium	Silverleaf nightshade
Tamarix aphylla	Athel pine
Ulex europaeus	Gorse

2 South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017-2022

The South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017-2022 was developed by the South East Regional Weed Committee in 2017 on behalf of the South East Local Land Services Board. This is a Regional Plan and its intent is to outline strategic actions to guide collaborative weed management, resource allocation and investment in the whole South East Region. The Regional Plan identifies a number of weed priorities within the South East. An objective and repeatable weed risk assessment was carried out at a State and Regional level. These Priority Weeds include weeds that impact:

· Animal and plant industries

· Biodiversity and the natural environment

· Urban and peri-urban environments

· Human health, lifestyle, cultural values, recreation and social amenity

· Infrastructure and service industries, including energy, transport and water supplies,

The Plan recommends strategic responses to prevent, eliminate or minimise the biosecurity risk associated with each weed.

The Yass Valley Local Strategic Weeds Plan adopts the principles and priorities identified within the Regional Plan and further prioritises actions based on local risk, impact and feasibility of control.

3 Priority weeds within Yass Valley

With the immense diversity in landscape, climate, soil type and land use throughout the Yass Valley Region it is inevitable that weed intensity levels vary widely. With this diversity comes significant variation in the capacity of land managers to reach a common standard in weed control. The Yass Valley Local Weed Action Plan recognises that a ‘one size fits all’ approach to weed management may not achieve efficient resource allocation or satisfactory weed control outcomes in some situations. For this reason, the plan applies risk based methodology to impose weed control requirements on land managers based on the level of risk posed by a weed and the prevalence of the weed at paddock, property and/or landscape scale.

The plan recognises that while a myriad of introduced weeds are present within the region; finite resources restrict works programs to a limited number of particularly high priority weeds. These weeds are ones that have an identified impact on the local economy, environment and/or community.

The generalised weed invasion curve is the foundation of State, Regional and Local plans and strategies. It informs resource allocation and ensures that weed control programs are achievable and cost effective to the community. The invasion curve promotes the preferential allocation of resources at the early stages of invasion where the likelihood of prevention or eradication is greatest. It does not take away from investment into managing established weeds, as these weeds often have significant and long term impacts on community values. The invasion curve prioritises resource allocation into managing established weeds in a strategic manner to protect those community values.

Figure 2. Generalised Invasion Curve

Many weed species considered to be widespread throughout NSW have a very limited distribution within areas of the Yass Valley Region. The objective of this plan is to prioritise resource allocation towards eradicating isolated infestations where possible, and to reducing the impact of the weed where it is not.

Council works with all neighbouring Councils and the ACT and NSW Governments, to implement a strategic approach to the management of priority weds on public and private land

3.1 The Economic Impact of Weeds

Over 1,650 introduced plant species have become established in NSW. At least 300 of these weeds have had significant environmental impacts, including bitou bush, lantana, blackberry and privet. In many cases weeds form monocultures which displace native species.

Throughout agricultural areas, weeds can out-compete crops and pasture species, resulting in lower economic returns and the need for expensive and ongoing control measures. It is estimated that the cost of weed impacts and weed management to the NSW agriculture sector is around $1.8 billion per annum (NSW Invasive Species Plan 2018-2021).

3.2 Prevention

The Biosecurity Act 2015 promotes a principle of shared responsibility. It imposes an obligation on land managers to prevent the introduction of weeds onto land under their management. Land managers, defined by the Act as ‘dealers’ must take all reasonable precautions to prevent the introduction of weeds into the region and onto their land through the introduction of fodder, livestock, vehicles and other weed carriers.

This includes public land managers as the Act is ‘tenure neutral’ – that is, managers of public land such as Local and State Government are subject to the same actions and penalties as private land managers.

3.3 Elimination

This plan imposes strict conditions on all land managers to eliminate isolated infestations of priority weeds at paddock, property and landscape scale. In discharging their duty, land managers or ‘dealers’ must fully and continuously suppress and destroy isolated infestations where it is reasonably practicable to do so in accordance with s16 Biosecurity Act 2015.

3.4 Containment and Asset Protection

Many weeds have become naturalised in areas of the Yass Valley, though have not reached their maximum potential. These weeds continue to impact on the Region’s social, economic and environmental health and must be managed with a strong and effective program. This plan aims to contain the spread of priority weeds and to reduce their incidence in affected areas where it is reasonably practicable to do so.

Where infestations are well established and widespread the growth of plants must be controlled in a manner that continuously inhibits the ability of the plants to spread. Plants may spread by sexual (e.g. seeding events) or asexual means (e.g. lateral spread by underground rhizomes) or by a combination of both. Control measures must be implemented which address the specific mechanism(s) of spread for the target plant.

This plan recognises the high cost of control of some established weeds and enables land managers to submit a staged control plan to Council for approval. A staged control plan must provide detailed objectives and suitable timeframes to be approved by Council.

Some localised areas of the Yass Valley contain infestations of priority weeds whereby the weed is the dominant species and to which a reduction in incidence is unlikely in a localised situation with current technologies. In such areas buffers and containment strategies may be imposed by Council to protect priority assets.

Control requirements for priority weeds within the Yass Valley are detailed within Appendices 1-12.

Council has a control program in place for priority weed management of Council owned land.

3.5 Mapping

Assessments have been carried out in the past at a regional level to identify High Risk Pathways for weed introduction and spread in the Yass Valley as part of the broader South East Region. These high risk pathways are identified as key priorities in the South East Regional Weed Management Plan.

High Risk Pathways in the Yass Valley LGA are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: High Risk Pathways in the Yass Valley

3.6 Education

Education is a key component in the management of Priority Weeds in the Yass Valley. This is identified as a responsibility of Local Control Authorities under the Biosecurity Act 2015. Education and extension activities reinforce the concept of the General Biosecurity Duty and establish a cooperative approach to local and regional weed management.

Education is carried out in a number of ways including:

· Community meetings

· Field days (including those in partnership with other groups such as Landcare, NSW Farmers and South East Local Land Services)

· Extension work through inspections, providing a face to face service to local landholders

· Media items, including Council’s social media platforms

3.7 Weeds Focus Group

Council is committed to establishing a Focus Group for Priority Weed Management. This will assist Council biosecurity and operations staff in setting the annual priorities for weed management in the Yass Valley.

The Focus Group will consist of representatives from stakeholder groups in the community and will provide a pathway for stakeholders to provide input into decision making in relation to weed management activities and overall strategy.

3.8 Impacts of Control on Adjoining Land

Anyone conducting spraying for weed control must be considerate of the adjoining agricultural land uses. Spray drift can have a detrimental effect on adjoining agricultural uses leading to crop and plant damage. Inadequate management of spray drift may result in a fine or requirement to pay compensation.

In Yass Valley activities such as vineyard operations and organic agricultural operations are particularly sensitive.

In these circumstances neighbours should be contacted that spraying is proposed and to suspend spraying if weather conditions are unsuitable.

The Department of Primary Industries has a range of online resources in relation to noxious and environmental weed control including the Weed Control Handbook (https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/biosecurity/weeds/weed-control/management-guides/noxious-enviro-weed-control )

Caution also needs to be exercised when spraying near areas of biodiversity value particularly threatened or endangered vegetation.

Many residents undertake routine maintenance work within road reserves (e.g. mowing nature strips/verge areas). There are no objections to residents undertaking weed control in road verge areas provided reasonable safety precautions are taken.

Residents undertaking weed control in a Council reserve, like the Friends of Yass Gorge, should have an arrangement in place with Council to do so.

4 Plan review

A program of regular reviews will allow the Plan to be adapted and improved as implementation proceeds. Reviews will include the consideration of the priority weeds list at a local level, and will allow removal or addition of species based on local knowledge.

A mid-term review of the Plan will occur in 2022 (Year Two) and a full review in 2024 (Year Four) in line with review of the Regional Plan.

The review of this policy will take account of relevant legislation and State Government policies, best practice guidelines and Council plans and priorities.

5 Appendices

APPENDIX 1 Serrated Tussock

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Serrated Tussock

(Nassella trichotoma)

Introduction

Serrated Tussock is a Weed of National Significance. It is regarded as one of the worst weeds in Australia because of its invasiveness, potential for spread, and economic, environmental and social impacts. Serrated tussock has little to no grazing value because of its high fibre and low protein content. Infestations result in a significant loss in livestock production. Dense infestations may completely dominate pasture; making large areas incapable of supporting livestock. Serrated tussock poses a high risk to the Yass Valley Region’s $78m agricultural industry and unique environment (2010/11 Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) - Value of Agricultural Commodities Produce 2010-2011).

Serrated Tussock is identified as a key threatening process of the endangered ecological community; Natural Temperate Grasslands of the Southern Tablelands (NSW and ACT) because of its ability to dominate native plant communities and displace native plants.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a land manager must implement to ensure that his/her General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Serrated Tussock.

Legal status

The management of invasive weeds in NSW is governed by the Biosecurity Act 2015. The Local Control Authority (Yass Valley Council) is responsible for ensuring the prevention, elimination, minimisation and management of the biosecurity risk posed or likely to be posed by invasive weeds. It is also responsible for the development, implementation, coordination and review of invasive weed control programs within its area of jurisdiction. Mandatory Measure (Part 2, Division 8, Clause 33, Biosecurity Regulation 2017): A person must not import into the State or sell Serrated Tussock.Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Serrated Tussock must comply with their General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Any person who deals with biosecurity matter or a carrier and who knows, or ought reasonably to know, the biosecurity risk posed or likely to be posed by the biosecurity matter, carrier or dealing has a biosecurity duty to ensure that, so far as is reasonably practicable, the biosecurity risk is prevented, eliminated or minimised.

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Serrated Tussock on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Council has a duty as Local Control Authority to inspect all land in connection with its weed control functions. In achieving this it must ensure the management of the biosecurity risk posed or likely to be posed by weeds within its area of jurisdiction.

Surveillance:

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Serrated Tussock infestations on a 6 year cycle. Frequency of inspection increases where isolated infestations occur and in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting:

Council provides an inspection report to the land owner/occupier following inspection. The report shall indicate the level of infestation, its spatial distribution on the property and the level of weed control required by the owner/occupier. Infestation data is reported to the NSW Biosecurity Information System.

Enforcement:

Council will enforce the control of Serrated Tussock where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a Penalty Infringement Notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

All property managers have a responsibility to prevent, eliminate or minimise adverse effects on the economy, the environment and the community that arise from weeds. Where full control is feasible Council will enforce that requirement. Where widespread and established invasive species have become ‘naturalised’ in our environment and full control is not deemed feasible by Council it will promote a strategy of minimisation and containment.

Serrated Tussock is a State priority weed subject to mandatory requirements. A person must not import into the State or sell parts of the plant.

Serrated Tussock is a Regional priority weed. The South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022 specifies that Serrated Tussock must be managed in accordance with a published Local Weed Action Plan.

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Action: The growth of the plant must be controlled in a manner that continuously inhibits the ability of the plant to reproduce and spread. Infestations may be managed in accordance with a staged control plan approved by Council.

In situations where Council deems this requirement not reasonably practicable in accordance with section 16 Biosecurity Act 2015, buffers and containment strategies may be introduced to protect priority assets.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant are not traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 2 Blackberry

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Blackberry

(Rubus fruticosus agg)

Introduction

Blackberry grows vigorously and can infest large areas quickly. First introduced into Australia in the 1930’s, it has become naturalised in Australia and infests over 8.8 million hectares from south eastern Queensland to southern Tasmania and across to south western Australia.

As most animals find Blackberry unpalatable it reduces available grazing land and can restrict livestock access to water if growing around waterholes. It can also reduce productivity of land by shading pastures and crops and competing for soil moisture and nutrients.

In 2006 Blackberry was estimated to result in a loss of production and cost of control in excess of $70 million in Australia.

Blackberry is defined in this plan as Rubus fruticosus agg. (except the varietals Chester Thornless, Dirksen Thornless, Loch Ness, Silvan, Black Satin, Murrindindi, Smooth Stem, Thornfree and Chehalem).

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Blackberry.

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Blackberry must comply with their General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Blackberry on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Blackberry infestations on a 6 year cycle. Frequency of inspection increases where isolated infestations occur and in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Blackberry where breaches are identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

Blackberry is identified in the South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022. The plan specifies that Blackberry must be managed in accordance with a published Local Weed Action Plan.

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant must not be traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 3 African Lovegrass

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for African Lovegrass

(Eragrostis curvula)

Introduction

African Lovegrass (Eragrotis curvula) is regarded as one of the most devastating weeds within the Yass Valley region due to its invasiveness, potential for spread, fire risk and economic, environmental and social impacts. African lovegrass has little grazing value due to its low nutritional value and palatability. This results in stock and other wildlife avoiding it unless there is nothing else to eat. Therefore it rapidly replaces more palatable grasses, especially during drought. It also invades native vegetation including grassland, woodland and open forest. African Lovegrass poses a high risk to the Yass Valley region’s $78m agricultural industry and unique environment (2010/11 Australian Bureau of statistics (ABS) – Value of Agricultural Commodities Produce 2010-2011).

African lovegrass is identified as a key threatening process of the endangered ecological community; Natural Temperate Grasslands of the Southern Tablelands (NSW and ACT) because of its ability to dominate native plant communities and displace native plants.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a land manager must implement to ensure that his/her General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to African Lovegrass.

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with African Lovegrass must comply with their General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of African Lovegrass on the Yass Valley Region’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of African Lovegrass infestations on a 6 year cycle. Frequency of inspection increases where isolated infestations occur and in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Council provides an inspection report to the landowner/occupier following inspection. The report shall indicate the level of infestation, its spatial distribution on the property and the level of weed control required by the owner/occupier. Infestation data is reported to the NSW Biosecurity Information System.

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of African lovegrass where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

African Lovegrass is identified in the South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022. The plan specifies that African Lovegrass must be managed in accordance with a published Local Weed Action Plan.

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant must not be traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 4 Chilean Needle Grass

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Chilean Needle Grass

(Nassella neesiana)

Introduction

Chilean needle grass is closely related to serrated tussock (Nassella trichotoma). It invades both introduced and native grasslands of south-eastern Australia. It is relatively unpalatable and reduces productivity by displacing more desirable pasture species. Heavy infestations can decrease productivity by as much as 50% during summer. The sharp seedhead of Chilean Needle Grass causes injury to stock and downgrades wool, skins and hides.

Chilean Needle Grass germinates in autumn and spring and at other times of the year given adequate moisture and temperature. Seed heads emerge during late spring and when mature have a very distinctive purplish colour. The individual seeds are very sharp at the apex. By late February, most of the seed has been shed from the plant and can be found on the ground. Generally seeds are spread by attachment to animals or machinery.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that his/her General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Chilean Needle Grass

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Chilean Needle Grass must comply with their General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Chilean Needle Grass on the Yass Valley Region’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Chilean needle grass infestations. Land upon which Chilean Needle Grass has been identified is inspected biennially. Frequency of inspection increases in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Chilean Needle Grass where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a Penalty Infringement Notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

Chilean needle grass is identified in the South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022. The plan specifies that Chilean Needle Grass must be managed in accordance with a published Local Weed Control Plan.

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant must not be traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 5 Gorse

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Gorse

(Ulex Europaeus)

Introduction

Gorse is a dense, spiny shrub to 4m high with hairy ribbed stems. Seedlings are not spiny and have leaves composed of three leaflets, but these are replaced by grooved spines up to 30 mm long on mature plants. The seed of the plant is generally spread by birds and on the coats of native and introduced animals. Gorse thrives in poor growing areas and in drought conditions. It is sometimes found on very rocky soils, where many species cannot thrive.

Because of its prickly nature and ability to form dense stands, Gorse makes movement within infested paddocks difficult and reduces carrying capacity in agricultural situations. It provides cover for feral animals such as rabbits and foxes. It also invades forested areas, replacing native understorey plants and it burns rapidly, creating a fire hazard.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Gorse.

Legal status

Mandatory Measure (Part 2, Division 8, Clause 33, Biosecurity Regulation 2017): A person must not import into the state or sell Gorse.

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Gorse must comply with their General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Grose on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Gorse infestations. Land upon which Gorse has been identified is inspected annually. Frequency of inspection increases in cases of non-compliance.

Reporting

Council will provide an inspection report to the land owner/occupier following inspection. The report shall indicate the level of infestation, its spatial distribution on the property and control requirements. Infestation data is reported to the NSW Biosecurity Information System.

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Gorse where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

All property managers have a responsibility to prevent, eliminate or minimise any adverse effects on the economy, the environment or the community that arise from weeds. Where full control is feasible Council will enforce that requirement. Where widespread and established invasive species have become ‘naturalised’ in our environment and full control is not deemed feasible by Council it will promote a strategy of minimisation and containment.

Gorse is a State priority weed subject to mandatory requirements. A person must not import into the State or sell parts of the plant.

Gorse is a Regional priority weed. The South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022 specifies that the Yass Valley is situated within a Regional Exclusion Zone. Within this zone, the control objective is to eradicate Gorse from the land, or if that is not practicable then as much of the plant as is practicable is destroyed and the spread of remaining plant is suppressed.

Gorse has a very limited distribution within the Yass Valley. The control objective is to eradicate Gorse infestations.

All infestations

Objective: Eradication

Action: Eliminate infestations

Minimise and contain (if full control is not deemed feasible)

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant are not traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 6 Coolatai Grass

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Coolatai Grass

(Hyparrhenia hirta)

Introduction

Coolatai Grass is an invasive drought, fire and herbicide tolerant tussock forming perennial grass. It has become a major invasive species in northern New South Wales and Southern Queensland, dominating pastures over a range of soil types and conditions. More recently infestations have emerged in southern NSW and the ACT.

Coolatai Grass is a competitive, perennial grass capable of invading undisturbed natural ecosystems and is a major threat to natural biodiversity in stock routes, nature reserves, roadsides and National Parks. Livestock do poorly on Coolatai Grass dominated pastures in the absence of a high input management regime.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Coolatai Grass.

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Coolatai Grass must comply with his or her General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Coolatai Grass on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Coolatai Grass infestations. Land upon which Gorse has been identified is inspected biannually. Frequency of inspection increases in cases of non-compliance. Coolatai Grass is a newly emerged weed within the Yass Valley and is extremely limited in its current distribution.

Reporting

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Coolatai Grass where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

Coolatai Grass is identified in the South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022. The plan specifies that Yass Valley Council is situated within the exclusion zone for this weed. Coolatai Grass is to be eradicated from the land, or if that is not practicable then as much of the plant as is practicable is destroyed and the spread of any remaining plant is suppressed.

Coolatai Grass has a very limited distribution within the Yass Valley. The control objective is to eradicate all infestations.

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Minimise and contain (if full control is not deemed feasible)

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant must not be traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 7 Sweet Briar

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Sweet Briar

(Rosa rubiginosa)

Introduction

Sweet Briar can reduce the carrying capacity of land, harbour rabbits, restrict vehicle access and restrict stock movements, especially where it occurs in clumps or patches.

Sweet Briar is spread mainly by birds or animals eating the fruit and distributing the viable seeds. Fruit and seeds can also be spread by run-off in steep country along creeks and streams. Seeds can remain viable in the soil for up to 4 years. Root pieces and disturbed crowns of Sweet Briar can also produce new growth or suckers.

Sweet Briar is an erect perennial shrub, commonly growing 1.5 to 2m high but can be up to 3m high.

Sweet Briar typically invades unimproved grasslands and disturbed bushland. It can grow in most soil types.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Sweet Briar.

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Sweet Briar must comply with his or her General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Sweet Briar on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Sweet Briar infestations on a 6 year cycle. Frequency of inspection increases where isolated infestations occur and in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Sweet Briar where breaches are identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant must not be traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 8 Bathurst Burrs

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Bathurst Burr

(Xanthium spinosum)

Introduction

Bathurst Burr was included in the list of 71 weed species that were nominated by State & Territory Governments for assessment as Weeds of National Significance (WONS). Following an assessment process, Bathurst Burr was not included as one of the species that make up the list of WONS, however it remains a weed of potential natural significance.

Bathurst Burr is a significant weed of crops and also regularly invades pastures, roadsides, watercourses and waste areas.

Bathurst Burrs are an important cause of vegetable contamination of wool and thus reducing its overall economic value. Seedlings are poisonous to livestock, especially pigs and horses.

Some people may develop dermatis after contact with the plant. (Parsons & Cuthburton 1992)

Bathurst Burr also invades lowland grassland and grassy woodland, riparian vegetation, fresh water wetland and rock out crop vegetation.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Bathurst Burr.

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Bathurst Burr must comply with their General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Bathurst Burr on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Bathurst Burr infestations on a 6 year cycle. Frequency of inspection increases where isolated infestations occur and in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Bathurst Burr where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant must not be traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 9 Scotch/English Broom

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Scotch Broom

(Cytisus scoparius)

Introduction

Scotch/English Broom is a very competitive, evergreen shrub. It forms a dense thicket which can restrict access and create harbour for feral animals such as rabbits, foxes and feral pigs. It is a potential fire hazard; increasing fire frequency and intensity.

Scotch/English Broom is toxic to humans if ingested and will cause discomfort and irritation, but is not life-threatening. The seeds and leaves are poisonous and can cause high blood pressure and nausea if ingested.

Scotch/English Broom often invades river banks, roadsides and other disturbed areas. It will also invade pastures and native vegetation.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Scotch/English Broom

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Scotch/English Broom must comply with his or her General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Scotch/English Broom on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Scotch/English Broom infestations on a 6 year cycle. Frequency of inspection increases where isolated infestations occur or in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Scotch/English Broom where breaches are identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

Scotch/English Broom is identified in the South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022. The plan specifies that Scotch/English Broom must be managed in accordance with a published Local Weed Action Plan.

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Action: The growth of the plant must be controlled in a manner that continuously inhibits the ability of the plant to spread. Infestations may be managed in accordance with a staged control plan approved by Council.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant are not traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 10 Fireweed

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for Fireweed

(Senecio Madagascariensis)

Introduction

Fireweed is an annual herb to about 30cm high, usually with 13-petalled flowers and bright green, slightly fleshly leaves which may be toothed, lobed or smooth-edged. Fireweed contains pyrrolizidine alkaloids. All parts of the plant and all stages of growth are toxic to livestock. Hay, silage or grain that is contaminated with fireweed plants or their seeds can also be toxic.

Fireweed is very invasive and capable of growing and seeding year round under favourable climatic conditions. Young seedlings are frost sensitive; however mature plants are known to survive for short periods in dense snow cover. Seedlings grow very quickly, with flowering commencing within 6-10 weeks after germination.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to Fireweed

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with Fireweed must comply with his or her General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of Fireweed on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of Fireweed infestations. Land upon which Fireweed has been identified is inspected biennially. Frequency of inspection increases in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of Fireweed where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

Fireweed is a Regional priority weed. The South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022 specifies that the Yass Valley is situated within a regional exclusion zone. Within this zone, the control objective is to eradicate Fireweed from the land, or if that is not practicable then as much of the plant as is practicable is destroyed and the spread of remaining plant is suppressed.

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Minimise and contain (if full control is not deemed feasible).

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant must not be traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

APPENDIX 11 St Johns Wort

Yass Valley Local Strategic Weed Plan for St Johns Wort

(Hypericum perforatum)

Introduction

St Johns Wort is a hardy, perennial plant which can rapidly invade and dominate native and introduced pastures, roadsides, open woodlands and conservation areas. Its aggressive nature and ability to reproduce by seeding and by lateral growth from underground rhizomes enables it to spread rapidly.

St Johns Wort plants contain a poisonous substance, hypericin, which is toxic to livestock. Hypericin causes photosensitisation, with bare skin or white haired areas becoming reddened, itchy and blistered. Irritation can be intense and accompanied by restlessness, loss of condition, convulsions, blindness and eventually death.

Purpose of this plan

To specify the control measures that a landholder must implement to ensure that their General Biosecurity Duty is discharged in relation to St Johns Wort.

Legal status

Any person dealing (eg the owner or occupier of land) with St Johns Wort must comply with his or her General Biosecurity Duty.

Biosecurity Act 2015 – General Biosecurity Duty

Control Objective

The primary objective of this plan is to reduce the negative impact of St Johns Wort on the Yass Valley’s economic, environmental and social sustainability.

Council requirements

Surveillance

Council inspects private and public lands for the presence of St Johns Wort infestations on a 6 year cycle. Frequency of inspection increases where isolated infestations occur and in cases of non-compliance; the frequency of which is determined by the level of risk posed by the infestation(s).

Reporting

Council provides an inspection report to the land owner/occupier following inspection. The report shall indicate the level of infestation, its spatial distribution on the property and the level of control required by the owner/occupier. Infestation data is reported to the NSW Biosecurity Information System.

Enforcement

Council will enforce the control of St Johns Wort where non-compliance is identified. Enforcement measures may include the issue of a penalty infringement notice, entering the land and controlling infestations at the owner/occupier’s expense, or the issue of a court attendance notice. Penalties for non-compliance with the Biosecurity Act 2015 are significant.

Landowner/occupier requirements

St Johns Wort is identified within the South East Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017 – 2022. The plan specifies that St Johns Wort is subject to a Local Weed Control program. Council’s Local Weed Action Plan imposes the following requirements:

Isolated infestations

Objective: Prevent establishment

Action: Eliminate infestations

Established infestations

Objective: Containment. Reduce incidence in affected areas.

Other restrictions

Land managers must mitigate the risk of introducing this weed to their land.

The plant or parts of the plant are not traded, carried, grown or released into the environment.

Ordinary Council Meeting 23 October 2019

9.3 Community Services Review

SUMMARY

To present a report on the review of the Community Services activities currently provided by Council. Three options for the delivery of community services are examined and it is recommended that Council relinquish its involvement and negotiate the transfer of the services to other local organisations.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. Council relinquishes its involvement in community services by 31 March 2020.

2. Council not continue with the provision of NDIS services beyond its current accreditation period.

3. Negotiations be undertake with alternate service providers to establish a preferred organisation(s) for the transfer of Council services.

Financial IMPLICATIONS

Provision is included in the 2019/20 Operational Plan to deliver community services. The budget is based on expenditure matching the income from grant funding.

POlicy & Legislation

Funding agreements

REPORT

Council became involved in the delivery of community services as grant funding became available and due to the lack of local organisations to deliver the services.

Council’s Community Services Section delivers the following services:

Service	Comments	Staff Numbers	Client Numbers
Community Transport – 2582 Bus	Monday – 9am to 1pm	Monday – 2 staff – one driver, one to assist clients with their shopping	Average of 6-8 clients on Mondays
	Friday – 8.30am to 4.00pm (Friday bus picks ups and drops home Friday Club participants from Murrumbateman and Yass and also any other trip requests from other clients)	Friday – 1 staff – driver Both casual staff 1 admin staff to organise schedules and enter information on vehicle tablets	Average of 10 -12 clients on Fridays
Community Transport – Volunteer drivers CHSP and CTP Transport	Volunteers drive clients to and from medical appointments in Canberra, Queanbeyan and Goulburn. Also transport clients from surrounding villages to Yass for medical appointments.	17 volunteers registered with HLSS 1 admin staff to organise schedules and enter information on vehicle tablets	HLSS has approx. 267 active transport clients. In the past 12 months to 31 July 2019, HLSS has provided 3,390 one way trips to 143 clients These include: CHSP and CTP clients

Service (cont)	Comments (cont)	Staff Numbers (cont)	Client Numbers (cont)
Non-Emergency Health Related Transport	Negotiated as volunteer drivers are available	17 volunteers registered with HLSS 1 admin staff to organise schedules and enter information on vehicle tablets	HLSS has provided 168 one way trips for 9 NEHRT clients in the past 12 months to 31 July 2019
My Aged Care: · Home maintenance	· Service provided by contractors · Client pays third of the costs Currently, this service is not being provided – new contractors will need to be sourced. · Service provided by contractors	Coordinator processes MAC referrals Admin – conducts assessments and organises service provision	No home maintenance service have been provided in the last 12 months due to lack of contractor availability.
· Home modification	· Client pays third of the costs · Service provided by contractors		Home modification services have been provided to 1 client in the last 12 months
· Respite	· Negotiated	Respite - Community Care Worker would provide one on one care – hours negotiated	In home respite services have been provided to one client in the last 12 months
Social support (individuals)	Negotiated	2 office staff – as above 1 community care worker	Individual Social Support services have been provided to 2 clients in the last 12 months
Friday Club (Group based support)	Held weekly – 4 hours	2 office staff as above 4 community care workers work over different weeks. 2 staff work directly with the Group	180hrs of Group Social Support services have been provided to 20 clients over the last 12 months.
NDIS: · Friendship Group · Individual support	· Held weekly · Negotiated	2 office staff – assessments and scheduling 2 community care workers 7 community care workers Client services – Monday to Sunday, hours are negotiated.	HLSS currently provides services for 14 NDIS participants.

When originally becoming involved in community services, grant funding covered the operational expenses associated with their delivery. Council took on the services as there were few, if any, local providers. These services were cost neutral to Council’s overall operations and budgets were presented to Council on this basis.

However in real terms the grant funding has progressively declined. Current funds do not keep pace with wage increases, fuel costs and running expenses and asset replacement (in the case of community transport).

Declining funding, increases in operating expenses and poor accounting for overheads means there is a level of cross subsidy with other Council activities.

Traditionally these services are provided with a block grant where the agency is the fund holder. This arrangement has provided certainty for planning and organisational service delivery.

With the introduction of the NDIS there has been a change in funding away from block grants to funding the individual. This allows individuals to determine what is best for their needs and which organisations are best placed to meet these needs. The change to a more competitive market place has resulted in greater uncertainty for Council’s annual ongoing funding levels.

Community Services utilises Council’s Corporate Services such as payroll, HR, IT Support, finance support, building rental and maintenance. The current budget makes a $7,000 per annum contribution to these support services or overheads. However this contribution has not been reviewed for several years and the basis for its calculation is unknown. The current estimate of overheads is approximately $166,000.

Since Council decided to provide community services there has been a rise in alternative accredited specialist providers (e.g. Anglicare, Valmar). These organisations have the economies of scale to maintain services as the funding environments changes. In addition with a single focus on community services these organisations are not managing these activities with other competing interests.

The last audited positon (2017/18) for each of the community services provided by Council is summarised in the following table:

	Program	Income	Expenditure	Difference
Department of Health Programs (CHSP)
W7143	Social Support (Individual)	$52,823	$48,142	$4,680
W7144	Social Support (Group)	$25,806	$35,832	-$10,026
W7145	Respite	$55,705	$46,759	$8,946
W7147	Home Modification	$20,263	$25,782	-$5,519
W7148	Home Maintenance	$12,116	$13,583	-$1,466
W7150	Access Point	$27,852	$23,322	$4,530
	Sub Total	$194,565	$193,420	$1,145
Transport for NSW Programs
W7162	CHSP Transport	$132,806	$132,515	$291
W7164	CTP	$36,628	$45,983	-$9,355
W7167	NEHRT	$12,319	$16,642	-$4,323
	Sub Total	$181,753	$195,140	-$13,387
National Disability Insurance Scheme
W7555	NDIS	$115,142	$187,619	-$72,477
	Sub Total	$115,142	$187,619	-$72,477
	TOTAL	$491,460	$576,179	-$84,719

While there are some services making a small surplus the overall position is that expenditure exceeds income by approximately $85,000. Adding a more accurate estimate of overheads (i.e. $166,000) increases the shortfall to $243,719. This means that the share of the organisational overheads are not being recouped through grant funding and rest of the organisation is subsidising community services. The current approach is therefore not financially sustainable.

It should be noted that to continue providing NDIS services re-accreditation is due by the end of October 2019. The cost of this re-accreditation has not been included in the current budget.

Following two Councillor Workshops additional information was sought on:

· The services provided by other organisations and the capacity to take on additional services if Council withdrew

· The responsibilities for Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) clients in Yass Valley

Council hear from the Valmar CEO on their services and interest in taking on services/clients but only if Council decided to withdraw.

DVA clients are not currently catered for by Council services as they are presently making their own arrangements directly with the Department. There is little demand from these clients for Council provided community transport as they have access to subsidised taxi services. Valmar did not finalise their application to deliver DVA funded Packages for Support due to increased demand for other Home Care Packages and due to little demand. Valmar has indicated a willingness to recommence their application, if necessary, to provide DVA packages.

It is clear that there are alternative providers of community services in Yass Valley and the capacity to take on services and clients if Council withdrew from the business.

Funding for Council’s community services is provided by the Commonwealth Department of Social Services, Transport for NSW and NSW Department of Health. Each of these funding providers have been approached to understand the process should Council determine to strategically withdraw.

Each funding organisation prefers Council to seek out alternative providers and negotiate the transfer of clients, records, assets and funding etc. Contact details have been provided.

While there is no notice period the preference is for as much advanced notice as possible as the process can take up to six months. Also as funding arrangements finish at 30 June 2020 and to ensure a smooth transition it is preferred that the transfer of providers occurs by April 2020 so there is no hiatus at the end of the financial year. If Council withdrew from service delivery then the end of the third quarter would be consistent with this timeframe. There are no penalties for withdrawing from community services.

Broadly there are three options for community services i.e.

1. Continue to subsidise

· Continue the current level of service with the shortfall continuing to be subsidised by the organisation

2. Reduce the range of services

· Withdraw from the services that are not ‘cost neutral’ and focus on the activities Council delivers efficiently

3. Strategic withdrawal

· Withdraw from community services on the basis that there are now many more service providers active in the Yass Valley community that are better placed and focused on service delivery

Continuing with subsidising community services means that resources are being redirected from other services (e.g. infrastructure). This would be $159,000 for the 2019/20 financial year plus any shortfall between income and expenditure. This is inconsistent with the reason Council become involved in community services where grant funding covered the expenses associated with service delivery and had a cost neutral effect on the organisation.

Any withdrawal from community service delivery has some reputational issues for the organisation. A key to this would be working with clients and staff to assist with the transition to other services provides now operating in Yass Valley. This is no different to the approach applied when Council withdrew from the provision of family day care.

Organisations with a single focus on community services are more efficient and effective in service delivery than Council with its diverse portfolio of services and inability to concentrate its efforts. In addition the overheads of these organisations are leaner as they are not burdened by the same level of governance that is unique to Local Councils. Taking into consideration the ongoing challenges facing Council in the delivery of community services it is recommended that Council relinquish its involvement and negotiate the transfer of the services to other local organisations.

Strategic Direction

Key Pillar 3. Our Community

CSP Strategy CO1 - Facilitate and encourage equitable access to community infrastructure and services, such as health care, education and transport

Delivery Program Action CO1.2 - Advocate to the State Government and relevant agencies to ensure that transport, health and educational services are delivered equitably to all residents

Operational Plan Activity CO1.2.2 - Collaborate with State and Regional bodies regarding equitable access to community transport

ATTACHMENTS: Nil

Date Received	-	21 August 2019
Land	-	7 Gundaroo Terrace, Gundaroo
Area	-	4,082m²
Zoning	-	RU5 Village

ISSUE	COMMENTS	OPTIONS / COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Naming of Plan	· Misleading as an ‘Action Plan’ rather than a ‘Strategic Plan’	· Name of plan amended
Administration of Plan	· Page numbering, naming, including mapping of priority weeds, refer to rural land as well as towns and villages, too much jargon	· Adjustments made throughout the document
Implementation of activities	· No timeline for implementation	· Aligns with Regional WAP 2020-25 (current plan expires June 2020)
Measurement of outcomes	· No measurement as to success or otherwise of the Plan being implemented	· Tied to funding agreements from Department of Primary Industries (DPI)
High Risk Pathways	· Insufficient pathways included in Plan – to include power line clearways, campgrounds, rail lines, stock yards, water courses · Monitoring of known infestations – to be annual	· High risk pathways currently being considered by Regional Group and outcomes will feed into next review and version of the plan · Resourcing to increase the level of inspections being considered by Regional Group
Council Resourcing	· Need for additional Council staff for inspections · One weeds officer not sufficient	· Council currently ties the level of inspectorial resources to the level of funding from State Government
Spraying of Council managed land (including roadside reserves)	· Need for regular roadside spraying · Need to state Council spraying program in Plan · Need to show budget Council has for spraying · Need for remedial work on Council worksites · Need to include biosecurity measures in daily work programs – e.g. mowing of road verges dispersing seeds	· Council’s management of its land is undertaken separately to the inspection services · Previously under the County Council model ‘profits’ from private works undertaken is likely to have contributed to the roadside spraying programs · The management of roadside weed spraying is currently part of Council’s roads budget however for increased transparency it would be better if this was accounted for separately in the Operational Plan rather than the Action Plan
Development Applications	· Need for Council to inspect Development Applications prior to sign off	· System already in place

ISSUE (cont)	COMMENTS (cont)	OPTIONS / COUNCIL CONSIDERATION (cont)
Public Land and roads	· Need to ensure roadways (not administered by Council) and other similar public areas are regularly sprayed · Guidance on private control on public land · Work with ACT Government, adjoining Councils and landholders adjoining the LGA · Commitment from Council to public land - timeframes	· There is an obligation on all land managers (public and private) to manage weeds on land under their control. The inspection programs cover both public and private lands · Many residents undertake routine maintenance work within road reserves (e.g. mowing nature strips/verge areas). There are no objections to residents undertaking weed control in road verge areas provided reasonable safety precautions are taken · Residents undertaking weed control in a Council reserve should have an arrangement in place with Council (e.g. Friends of Yass Gorge) · Council staff current work with the Regional Weeds Committee, neighbouring Councils and both the ACT and NSW Governments and their agencies · New legislation does not provide any time frames for public land however it will be the same as private property in accordance with the priority programs
Timing of inspections	· Need for shorter timeframe (6 years in Regional WAP – 12 years with current resources · Recommend of 2 year reinspection rate · Need to reinspect problem areas on a more regular basis	· Council currently ties the number and frequency of inspections to the level of funding · Reinspections are currently part of the program
Review of Action Plan	· Need for yearly review · Amend dates for review · Possibility to add ‘new’ weeds	· Major review will be around the DPI funding · Annual reviews are undertaken as part of Operational Plan (including any new weeds)
Administration – naming	· Structure of plan and appendices	· Adjustments to the format made

ISSUE (cont)	COMMENTS (cont)	OPTIONS / COUNCIL CONSIDERATION (cont)
Herbicide Usage	· Need for addressing of desirable species and operators · Need for consideration of other industries (vineyards)	· Amendment of plan to include section on awareness of other agricultural industries. Other issues are dealt with by the EPA and WorkCover – Council is not the regulatory authority · Council will consider notification to adjoining properties when undertaking roadside spraying
Education of stakeholders	· Need for additional extension work · Need for targeting group specific education · Clearer definition of ‘established infestations’ · Roadside signs for priority weed areas	· Level of resourcing limited by the level of State Government funding · Education/information currently targeted at Murrumbateman Field Days, SELEX, Landcare groups and one-on-one during inspections currently being undertaken · Roadside signs being installed for priority weeds and will continue
Weeds Focus Group	· Support for the group · Need for group to have authority for decision making · Comment on make-up of representatives · Needs to be an advisory committee with authority	· Officer support is provided to the group · Committees/Focus Groups have an advisory role. Decision making on policy and level of resourcing is a responsibility of Council while General Manager is responsible for day to day operations · Membership will be a combination of organisations and individuals with skills
Additional information – individual species	· Need for further information on species	· Can be obtained through DPI and other open source documents
Allocation of responsibilities	· Need for names of those responsible for aspects of the Plan	· The allocation of staff resources to services and activities is a matter for the General Manager · Councils inspector is well known in the community and is routinely the point of contact on weed issues
Lacks sense of urgency	· Need for priority action	· Aim of plan is to identify the priorities for the focus of resources
Notification – non compliance	· Procedure for reporting non-compliant neighbours	· In place through the Customer Service Requests system
ISSUE (cont)	COMMENTS (cont)	OPTIONS / COUNCIL CONSIDERATION (cont)
Weeds Listed in plan	· Various comments regarding the list and need for additional species to be included · Dissatisfaction with ranking of weeds · Clarity of what priority weeds are · Actions to be taken when seen on neighbouring properties or public land	· The weed list in plan is aligned with the legislation and the Regional Weeds Strategic Plan
Enforcement	· Need to specify penalties and promote outcomes	· Penalties are specified by the legislation · Successful prosecutions will be publicised
Holistic control	· Not just chemical · Banning of glyphosate	· Not specified in Plan so that any alternatives can be considered
Mapping – Priority Weeds	· Map of all known infestations of priority weeds and reporting against control progress · Collection of data on priority weeds	· Partially being captured by Biosecurity Information System · Ongoing data collection process
Notification of landholders	· Need to have mentioned of notification to landholders by Council and others prior to spraying	· General practice – general notification – Pesticides Act · All involved in spraying are responsible for undertaking the required notifications in accordance with the relevant legislation

	Rates and Charges Levied (includes interest)	Paid 1 July to 30 September	Balance Outstanding	% Paid 1 July to 30 September
Arrears to 30/6/2019	$1,289,675.96	$518,506.46	$771,169.50	40.20
Current Years Rates, Charges and Interest billed since 1/7/19	$17,712,656.44	$5,459,704.82	$12,252,951.62	30.82
TOTALS	$19,002,332.40	$5,978,211.28	$13,024,121.12	31.46

Year	No of Assessments	Amount	Details
2004/2005	1	$201.52	Proposed Private Cemetery in Middle of Crown Land – Never Developed – No Burials (1)
2005/2006	1	$309.09	As Above
2006/2007	1	$342.02	As Above
2007/2008	1	$437.26	As Above
2008/2009	5	$2,791.12	As Above / Private Cemetery (2) / Pt Bendenine Rd (1) / Pt Riverbank Park (1) / Vacant Block Kangiara Village (1)
2009/2010	5	$3,497.44	As Above
2010/2011	5	$3,408.90	As Above
2011/2012	5	$3,923.27	As Above
2012/2013	5	$4,277.60	As Above
2013/2014	6	$5,072.12	As Above / 1 Property Subject of Ongoing Debt Recovery Action
2014/2015	10	$14,132.73	As Above / 2 Additional Properties Subject of Ongoing Debt Recovery action – Owner Declared Bankrupt / 2 Additional Properties With Payment Arrangement
2015/2016	12	$16,009.71	As Above / 2 Additional Properties With Payment Arrangements
2016/2017	21	$28,918.27	As Above / 6 Additional Properties With Payment Arrangements / 3 Additional Properties Subject of Ongoing Debt Recovery Action
2017/2018	77	$106,424.82	As Above / All Additional Properties With Either Payment Arrangements or Subject of Ongoing Debt Recovery Action
2018/2019	733	$581,423.63	As Above
	TOTAL	$771,169.50

	Rates and Charges Levied (includes interest)	Paid 1 July to 30 September	Balance Outstanding	% Paid 1 July to 30 September
1/7/16 – 30/9/16	$14,176,792.14	$4,962,405.06	$9,214,387.08	35.00%
1/7/17 – 30/9/17	$15,287,346.07	$5,211,915.04	$10,075,431.03	34.09%
1/7/18 – 30/9/18	$16,519,537.55	$5,300,458.09	$11,219,079.46	32.09%
1/7/19 – 30/9/19	$17,712,656.44	$5,459,704.82	$12,252,951.62	30.82%

S&P Rating (or equivalent)	Exposure	Maximum % Invested per Policy
A1+/AAA	Nil	100%
A1/AA	71.63%	100%
A2/A	Nil	60%
A3/BBB	6.60%	30%
N/A	21.77%	Note 1

Institution	S&P Rating (or equiv)	Exposure	Max Exposure per Policy
NAB	A1/AA	40.11%	50%
IMB	A3	6.60%	30%
CBA	A1/AA	31.52%	50%
TCorp	N/A	21.77%	Note 1 above

Subsidy	Water	Sewer	Waste	TOTAL
100%	$47,000	$91,000	$8,800	$143,800
50%	$23.500	$45,500	$4,400	$73,400
25%	$11,750	$22,750	$2,200	$36,700
10%	$4,700	$9,100	$880	$14,680