General Meeting

Agenda

of the

General Meeting

Held in the Council Chambers, 41 Glendon Street, Kingaroy

on Wednesday, 7 April 2010

Commencing at 9.00 am

Chief Executive Officer: Tony Hayward

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL AGENDA

Wednesday, 7 April 2010

ORDER OF BUSINESS:

1. LEAVE OF ABSENCE ...... 1 2. PRAYERS ...... 1 3. ADDRESS FROM PUBLIC GALLERY ...... 1 4. RECEIPT OF PETITIONS ...... 1 5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING ...... 1 5.1 South Burnett Regional Council Minutes ...... 1 6. MAYORAL MINUTES ...... 2 7. SUSTAINABILITY ...... 2 7.1.1 EH - 826795 - Mark R & Robyn L Ferling - Forwarding application for permission to keep three dogs at 30 Gladys Street, Kingaroy ...... 2 7.3.1 P&D -812638 - Martoo Consulting - Additional Representations to Council - IDAS Application for Preliminary Approval to Override the Planning Scheme and Reconfiguration of Lot - Lot 11 SP208985 - 24 Perkins Street Murgon ...... 4 8. LIFESTYLE AND CULTURE ...... 41 8.1.1 L&C - 844960 - Request for Council to consider budgeting membership of $1500 (ex GST) towards the continued activities of the Rural Getaway Promotions Group and provide a delegate to this Group ...... 41 8.1.2 L&C - 851885 - Gordonbrook Dam ...... 43 9. GOVERNANCE ...... 48 10. ENGINEERING SERVICES ...... 48 10.1.1 W&WW - 851536 - Application for Water Supply at Lot 2 Oberles Road Hivesville - Applicant: Robert Ridder & Jodie Pitman...... 48 10.1.2 W&WW - 851540 - Report on riparian access for Wivenhoe Pipeline ...... 50 11. CORPORATE SERVICES ...... 51 11.1.1 FS - 839415 - Sue McLay - Requesting that Council provide a reduction in water consumption charges for her mother's property situated at 64 Stephens Street West, Murgon ...... 51 11.1.2 FS - 844970 - Stephen J Oliphant - Requesting that Council reduce his water consumption charges for his property at 4 Regent Street, Kingaroy ...... 53 11.1.3 FS - 539966 - Paul Wuersching - Requesting Council waive his excess water bill charges received for his property at 14 Lister Court Kingaroy ...... 55 11.1.4 FS - 812146 - Simon Stretton - Requesting Council reduce his excess water bill received for his property at 15 Burnett Street, Kingaroy ...... 57 11.1.5 FS - 838533 - Terry Tumney - Requesting Council refund the difference between the total of his February 2009 and the total of his August 2009 water bill, due to Council's delay in advising him of a leak on his side of the water meter ...... 59 11.1.6 FS - 562118 - Ross Olsson - Requesting that Council reduce his parent's excess water bill for their property at 7 Candelo Close, Kingaroy ...... 61 11.1.7 FS - 845870 - Steven Watkinson, Solicitor on behalf of George & Nithya Ratnavale - Requesting a reduction in the February 2010 water bill due to an undetected leak at the property situated at 54 Brisbane Street Nanango ...... 63 11.1.8 FS - 839414 - Robert A Hunt - Requesting that Council provide a one off reduction in his water consumption charges for his property at 98 Basin Road, Hivesville ..... 65 11.1.9 FS -851512 - South Burnett Regional Council Monthly Financial Statements ...... 67 12. EXECUTIVE SERVICES ...... 71 12.1 ES - 849163 - Mayor & Deputy Mayor Attendance Authorisation for the Royalties for Regions Queensland Workshop ...... 71 12.2 ES - 851615 - Regional & Local Community Infrastructure Program (RLCIP) Round Two Approved Projects ...... 73 12.3 ES - 850233 - Quota Requirements for Divided Local Governments ...... 76 13. INFORMATION SECTION ...... 78 13.1 IS - 853280 - Reports for the Information of Council ...... 78 14. GENERAL SECTION ...... 79

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 1

1. Leave Of Absence

Nil.

2. Prayers

A representative of the Ministers Fraternal, Steven Nixon from the Kingaroy Church of Christ offered prayers for Council and for the conduct of the Council meeting.

3. Address From Public Gallery

Members of the Public who wish to raise matters from the Public Gallery are advised that this section of the Agenda will be considered at 9.00am on Wednesday 7 April 2010 .

4. Receipt Of Petitions

Nil.

5. Confirmation Of Minutes Of Previous Meeting

5.1 South Burnett Regional Council Minutes

Précis

Confirmation of Minutes of meeting of the South Burnett Regional Council held in the Council Chambers, Mackenzie Street Wondai.

Officer's Recommendation

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 17 March 2010 as recorded be confirmed

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 2

6. Mayoral Minutes

Nil.

CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS SECTIONS INCLUDING BUSINESS ARISING OUT OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS.

See Business Function Headings

7. Sustainability

7.1 Environmental Health 7.1.1 EH - 826795 - Mark R & Robyn L Ferling - Forwarding application for permission to keep three dogs at 30 Gladys Street, Kingaroy

Document Information

IR No 826795

Author Technical Officer – Environmental Health

Endorsed By Manager Environmental Health Director Sustainability

Date 9 March 2010

Précis

Forwarding application for permission to keep three dogs at 30 Gladys Street, Kingaroy

Summary

Under the Local Law Council can grant a temporary concession to keep a third dog.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council approve the application in accordance with the Local Law and advise the owners of the decision subject to the following conditions;

1. If South Burnett Regional Council is satisfied that the keeper has contravened a condition of this permit Council may, by written notice, cancel the permit and the number of dogs will be required to be reduced to two (2). 2. If any complaints are made against the keeping of any of the three (3) dogs on the property are justified, Council may cancel the permit and the number of dogs will be required to be reduced to two (2). 3. No more than three (3) dogs are to be kept on the property. 4. If and when one (1) of the dogs is transferred from the property or dies, it shall not be replaced. 5. The approval relates only to the dogs and property specified.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 3 Report

An inspection on 4 March 2010 revealed that there were two (2) registered dogs in an appropriate enclosure within a proper enclosure. The three (3) pens were large enough for each animal. The pens were in a clean and sanitary condition and adequate shelter was provided from the weather. The applicant uses all three (3) dogs for police work for the Queensland Stock Squad.

Five letters of permission were also received from the surrounding residents all advising that they had no problems with the dogs housed at 30 Gladys Street, Kingaroy and saw no problem with the applicant having a third dog at the property

Attachments

Five (5) letters of support for this application.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 4

7.2 Natural Resource Management

Nil.

7.3 Planning & Development 7.3.1 P&D -812638 - Martoo Consulting - Additional Representations to Council - IDAS Application for Preliminary Approval to Override the Planning Scheme and Reconfiguration of Lot - Lot 11 SP208985 - 24 Perkins Street Murgon

Document Information

IR No 812638

Author Acting Manager Planning & Development

Endorsed By Director of Sustainability

Date 31 March 2010

Précis

Additional Representations to Council – IDAS Application for Preliminary Approval to Override the Planning Scheme and Reconfiguration of a Lot – Lot 11 SP208985 – 24 Perkins Street Murgon – Applicant Martoo Consulting Owner: J &S Kinsella

Summary

Key Point Summary . Application for Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme (Industrial, Residential and Visitor Accommodation Uses), Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 lot into 24 lots) and Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 lot into 20 lots) . Application subject to Impact Assessment against the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme . Amended Acknowledgement Notice sent on 16 December 2008 due to the applicant significantly changing the development application . The Department of Main Roads (now Department of Transport and Main Roads) and the Environmental Protection Agency (now Department of Environment and Resource Management) are Concurrence Agencies for the proposed development . The Department of Infrastructure and Planning is an Advice Agency for the proposed development . Applicant has provided insufficient planning grounds for Council to support the proposed development and override the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme . Three (3) submissions received during the Public Notification Period . Recommendation for approval of the Visitor Accommodation Precinct (subject to conditions and future Development Permit applications) . Recommendation that the proposed Housing Precinct and Business Park Precinct be refused On the basis of recommending refusal for the residential component of the proposed development, refusal of the Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 into 24 lots) and Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 lot into 20 lots)

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 5 Officer's Recommendation

That Council: a) Apply the following conditions to approve Preliminary Approval for the Visitor Accommodation Precinct for any future Material Change of Use, Reconfiguration of a Lot or Operational Works application:

CONDITIONS

General GEN1. Development of the Visitor Accommodation Precinct is to proceed generally in accordance with the following proposal plans submitted to Council as a response to Council’s Information Request on 21 July 2009:

. Drawing No. D-00862-01-J dated 6 March 2008 and prepared by Martoo Consulting

GEN2. The following information is to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the issue of any future Development Permit for Material Change of Use or Reconfiguration of a Lot within the identified Visitor Information Precinct:

. A geotechnical assessment of the addressing the existing physical characteristics of the area, with particular reference to steep lands and the potential for stability issues resulting from future operational and building works; . A description of the extent of proposed reticulated water supply, sewerage networks (including pump stations and trunk mains), footpaths, cycleways and any detention/retention basins. . A land capability assessment by a suitably qualified and accredited Agronomist establishing the actual classification of the soils and geology in relation to State Planning Policy 1/92: Development and the Conservation of Agricultural Land and Planning Guidelines: The Identification of Good Quality Agricultural Land, 1993. . A drainage and stormwater management study prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer Queensland (RPEQ).

Use USE1. The Locality, Zone and Preferred Land Use Area that applies to the ‘Visitor Accommodation Precinct’ for the purposes of Table 1 of the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme are- Locality: Urban Zone: Residential

Advice ADV1. Section 3.5.21 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 provides the currency period in which this application will lapse if is not acted upon.

ADV2. All Reconfiguration of a Lot conditions, the subject of this approval, must be complied with prior to the Council sealing the Plan of Survey, unless satisfactory security is give to the Council to ensure compliance with the conditions.

ADV3. Operational work will be inspected upon practical completion and if satisfactory will be placed ‘on maintenance’ for a period of twelve months after which the works will be reinspected and taken ‘off maintenance’ if satisfactory.

ADV4. Telecommunications connections can be arranged by logging onto Telstra’s website (www.telstracommunity.com) and completing the ‘Intent to Develop’ form to register your development.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 6

ADV5. You are encouraged to discuss the development with Ergon Energy upon receipt of this approval to facilitate the timely supply of electricity to the development. Connection of electricity can take up to 8 months from the date of application to Ergon Energy.

ADV6. This development approval does not authorise any activity that may harm Aboriginal cultural heritage. Under the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 you have a duty of care in relation to such heritage. Section 23(1) provides that "A person who carries out an activity must take all reasonable and practicable measures to ensure the activity does not harm Aboriginal cultural heritage." Council does not warrant that the approved development avoids affecting Aboriginal cultural heritage. It may therefore be prudent for you to carry out searches, consultation, or a cultural heritage assessment to ascertain the presence or otherwise of Aboriginal cultural heritage. The Act and the associated duty of care guidelines explain your obligations in more detail and should be consulted before proceeding.

ADV7. Attached for your information is a copy of Section 4.1.27 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 as regards Rights of Appeal. With respect to Appeal Rights of Applicants, the following is drawn to your attention—

a) the applicant’s Appeal Period commences upon receipt of this advice and expires 20 business days thereafter. b) should the applicant notify the assessment manager (Council) in writing of acceptance of the conditions of approval and that it is not intended to make an appeal, the Applicant’s Appeal Period is at an end.

With a view to early completion of the appeal process, it is in your interest to advise Council of your acceptance of the approval and conditions or to lodge an Appeal at your earliest convenience – as pursuant to Section 3.5.19 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997 the approval does not take effect until the completion of the applicants’ Appeal Period.

b) refuse the (i) Material Change of Use (Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme – Industrial and Residential Uses) (ii) Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 24 residential lots) (iii) Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 lot into 20 residential lots) on 24 Perkins Street, Murgon and described as Lot 11 on SP208985 c) undertake a consequential amendment of the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme to include the Visitor Accommodation Precinct within the Residential Zone; and

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 7 Report

Proposal Plans

Source: Applicant

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 8

Source: Applicant

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 9

Source: Applicant

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 10

Source: Applicant

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 11

Author: Acting Manager Planning & Development IR: 812638 Applicant: Murgon Property Trust & Kinsella Property Trust C/- Martoo Consulting Owner: Jason T & Susan M Kinsella & DAT Properties (QLD) Pty Ltd Property Address: 24 Perkins Street, Murgon Real Property Description: Lot 11 on SP208985 Approvals Sought: Material Change of Use (Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme) Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 24 Lots) Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 into 24 Lots)

Proposal Description: Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme (Industrial, Residential and Visitor Accommodation Uses) Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 24 Lots) Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 20 Lots) Planning Scheme: Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme Planning Scheme Zone: Rural Zone Preferred Land Use Area: Not Applicable Area of Land: 42.98ha Existing Land Use: Agricultural Purposes Surrounding Land Uses: Residential (north and east) and Rural (west and south) Services: Formed Road (Bunya Highway, Caswell Street, Shelton Street, Tiernan Terrace, Herterick Street) Access: Bunya Highway, Caswell Street, Shelton Street, Tiernan Terrace, Herterick Street Topography: Undulating characterised by steepo Application Deemed Properly Made: 17 December 2007 Acknowledgement Notice Issued: 11 January 2008 Amended Acknowledgement Notice Issued: 16 December 2008 (Amended Application)

Information Request Issued: 17 January 2008 Information Response Received: 22 September 2008 Referrals Required/Received: Department of Main Roads (Concurrence), Environmental Protection Agency (Concurrence) and Department of Infrastructure and Planning (Advice) Application Process: Impact Assessment Public Notification: 6 March 2009 – 27 April 2009 Properly Made Submissions: Three (3) Public Notice Compliance: 5 May 2009

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 12 1.0. Introduction

The applicant has made an application to Council for a Material Change of Use (Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme – Industrial, Residential and Visitor Accommodation Uses), Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 24 Lots) and Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 20 Lots). The proposal is impact assessable against the requirements of the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme.

1.1. The Proposal

The proposed development can be separated into a Material Change of Use (Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme), Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 24 Lots) and Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 Lot into 20 Lots) components.

Table 1 below provides a summary of the areas associated with each precinct within respective stages of the proposed development, whilst Figure 1 identifies individual stages and precincts within the subject site:

Proposed Stages/Precincts and Land Area (m2 / ha) * Stage Lots Residential Industrial Visitor Accommodation 1 22,600m2 (2.260ha) 2 2,400m2 (0.240ha) 3 5,590m2 (0.559ha) 4 8,410m2 (0.841ha) 1 299,000m2 (29.90ha) 2 81,000m2 (8.1ha) 3 52,000m2 (5.2ha) Total Area 338,000m2 (33.8ha) 52,000m2 (5.2ha) 81,000m2 (8.1ha) based on Land Use

* The above information is based on Proposal Plan – Precinct Subdivision (Reference No. D-00862-01-J) prepared by Martoo Consulting dated 6 March 2009

Figure 1: Proposed Site Layout (Development Application for Material Change of Use and Reconfiguration of a Lot Reference No. D-00862-01-J dated 6 March 2009 and prepared by Martoo Consulting)

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 13 a) Stage 1

Stage 1 of the proposed development (refer to Figure 2 below) involves the creation of twenty (20) residential allotments accessed via Caswell Street and Shelton Street. This stage has an area of 2.26ha and would require the extension of Caswell Street and Shelton Streets plus the construction of a new internal road to service the residential lots. It is anticipated that the size of these allotments will mirror existing allotments within the residential area.

The adjoining residential area to the east of Stage 1 was developed and sold by the Murgon Shire Council to stimulate residential growth in Murgon and act as a catalyst for interested private developers. The proposed lots within Stage 1 vary in area between 800m2 and 987m2 with the internal road layout having no through roads and implying future residential development within proposed Lot 1, having an area of 29.9ha and being identified as a future housing precinct.

Figure 2: Proposed allotment and internal road layout for Stage 1 (Reconfiguration of a Lot for 20 Lots Reference No. D-00862-03-J dated 6 March 2009 and prepared by Martoo Consulting)

b) Stage 2

Stage 2 of the proposed development (refer to Figure 3) has an area of 2,400m2 and involves the creation of four (4) residential allotments which are to be located on the south- eastern side of Tiernan Terrace. Given that Tiernan Terrace presently exists no extension of the urban road network would be required. These proposed allotments are 600m2 in area and are substantially smaller than existing allotments on the opposite side of Tiernan Terrace which range in size from 800m2 to 3,200m2. The majority of allotments are approximately 800m2 in area. The proposed allotments to the east are opposite the residential development constructed by the former Murgon Shire Council to stimulate residential growth in Murgon.

c) Stage 3

Stage 3 of the proposed development (refer to Figure 3 below) has an area of 5,590m2 and involves the creation of eight (8) residential allotments which are to be located on the south-

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 14 eastern side of Tiernan Terrace. Given that Tiernan Terrace presently exists no extension of the urban road network would be required. These proposed allotments range from 600m2 to 845m2 in area and are generally smaller in area than those on the opposite side of Tiernan Terrace. The proposed allotments to the north-west are opposite the residential development constructed by the former Murgon Shire Council to stimulate residential growth in Murgon.

d) Stage 4

Stage 4 of the proposed development (refer to Figure 3 below) has an area of 8,410m2 and involves the creation of eight (8) residential allotments which are to be located on the southern side of Herterick Street. Given that Herterick Street presently exists no extension of the urban road network would be required. The proposed allotments range from 1000m2 to 1406m2 in area and are generally larger than those on the northern side of Herterick Street.

Figure 3: Proposed allotment layout for Stages 2, 3 & 4 (Reconfiguration of a Lot for 10 Lots Reference No. D-00862-05-J dated 6 March 2009 and prepared by Martoo Consulting)

e) Lot 1 – Housing Precinct

Proposed Lot 1 has an area of 29.9ha and is identified as a future housing precinct which extends from the northern part of the subject site to the southern boundary along the Bunya Highway. The applicant advises that the proposed assessment table within the Housing Precinct Code is similar to equivalent provisions in the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme thus resulting in similar outcomes to that of the existing land within the Residential Zone. Within the Housing Precinct Code the applicant proposes the following:

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 15 - A proposed Dwelling House is self-assessable - Annexed Unit, Bed & Breakfast, Caretakers Residence, Child Care Centre, Multiple Dwelling Units (two dwelling units) and Telecommunications Facility are code assessable

In addition, the Housing Precinct Code identifies a number of land uses (predominantly non-residential) which would be triggered as impact assessable due to their possible impact on the amenity and character of the residential area.

f) Lot 2 – Visitor Accommodation Precinct

Proposed Lot 2 has an area of 8.1ha and is identified as a Visitor Accommodation Precinct. This lot is located on the western side of the subject site and adjoins Lot 10 on SP280985. The precinct is proposed to accommodate a maximum equivalent population of 300 persons as follows:

- Motel Units (100 dwelling units) - Guest Cabins (50 cabins) - Bunkhouse (20 equivalent persons) - Conference/Dining Facilities - Managers Residence (1 Dwelling House)

The proposed land uses listed above are code assessable and consistent with the provisions of the Visitor Accommodation Precinct Code. With the exception of a park or local utility all other land uses are inconsistent.

g) Lot 3 – Business Park Precinct

Proposed Lot 3 has an area of 5.2ha and is identified as a Business Park Precinct (refer to Figure 4) with frontage to the Bunya Highway. The applicant suggests that uses within the precinct would not be traditional industrial uses but rather those that require greater visitation by customers and a higher level of public exposure characterised by industrial uses with a substantial showroom component. Furthermore the applicant attests that there is a deficiency in terms of industrial development within Murgon and a need for an area to specifically cater for these ‘higher order’ or secondary industrial uses.

The applicant has prepared a Business Park Precinct Code which lists the following land uses as being consistent with the Code and subject to code assessment:

- General Industry, Landscape Supplies, Light Industry, Produce Store, Service Station, Transport Station, Sales or Hire Premises, Small Scale Tourist Facility and Telecommunications Facility

With the exception of those land uses listed above, all other land uses are impact assessable under the Business Park Precinct Code.

The proposed Business Park Precinct is to be reconfigured into twelve (12) industrial allotments ranging in size from 2,851m2 to 4,222m2 will be serviced by a new cul-de-sac from the Bunya Highway. Within the proposed Business Park Precinct is a drainage reserve with an area of 5,000m2 spanning the entire Bunya Highway frontage to a depth of 10.0m.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 16

Figure 4: Proposed allotment layout for Business Park Precinct (Proposal Plan – Industrial Subdivision Reference No. D-00862-02-J dated 6 March 2009 and prepared by Martoo Consulting)

1.2. Site Description

The subject site is 42.98ha in area and has frontage to the Bunya Highway, Tiernan Terrace, Shelton Street, Caswell Street and Herterick Street with approximate frontages of 1.17km, 228m, 204m, 101m and 214m respectively. Figure 5 below identifies the subject site as being within the Rural Zone under the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme and shows the subject site and its proximity to the existing residential area and commercial business district of Murgon.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 17

Figure 5: Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme excerpt showing subject site (Caswell Street, Murgon)

The site slopes in a south-westerly direction and contains a very limited amount of remnant vegetation having previously been used for agricultural purposes. Regional ecosystem mapping provided by the Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) indicates that the subject site does not contain any ‘endangered’ or ‘of concern’ remnant vegetation. Furthermore advice from DERM (received 6 August 2008) indicates that the subject site is not on the Contaminated Land Register (CLR).

Figure 6: GIS Map showing subject site (Caswell Street, Murgon)

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 18

Figure 7: Aerial Photograph showing subject site (Caswell Street, Murgon)

Figure 8: Topographical Map showing subject site and areas of significant slope (Caswell Street, Murgon)

1.3. Surrounding Land Uses

Land to the north of the subject site is included within the Residential Zone with the majority of these allotments being utilised for low density residential purposes consistent with the intent of the zone. These existing residential allotments range in size from 800m2 to 1300m2.

Land to the south of the subject site is included within the Rural Zone and also fronts the Bunya Highway (with a secondary frontage to the Cherbourg Road). This land is currently used for agricultural purposes which are consistent with the intent of the zone.

Land to the east of the subject site is included within the Rural Zone. This allotment is located at the corner of the Bunya Highway and Perkins Street with an area of 6.18ha. A

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 19 Reconfiguration of a Lot (Boundary Realignment) application was approved by the former Murgon Shire Council on 20 June 2007 which created the aforementioned allotment. Currently this allotment is utilised for the purposes of a Dwelling House and associated Sheds.

Land to the west and north-west of the subject site is included within the Rural Zone. These allotments range in size from 16ha to 32ha with the property at 100 Burtons Road (Lot 304 on FY2549) being improved by an existing Piggery (Intensive Animal Husbandry). These allotments are utilised for agricultural and intensive animal husbandry purposes which are consistent with the intent of the zone.

1.3. Council Information Request

The former Murgon Shire Council requested that the applicant provide the following information to assist with Council’s assessment of the proposed development:

. A general planning report that clearly identifies which proposed parts of the Planning Scheme that the Preliminary Approval will override. In this regard, the proposed Tables of Development and Assessment Codes be provided as described in your letter dated 7 December 2007; . A geotechnical assessment addressing the existing physical characteristics of the site, with particular reference to steep lands and potential for stability issues relating from future operational and building works; . Clarification of the extent and nature of contamination and determine means to remove or manage impacts. Please note that one or more parcels of land associated with the rated amalgamated lots may exist on the Environmental Management Register; . A visual impact assessment addressing key elements of value in terms of townscape, streetscape and proximity to the entry of Murgon; . An economic impact assessment prepared by a suitably qualified person that considers existing residential, commercial and industrial land and the need or demand for additional such land; . A description of the extent of the proposed reticulated water supply, sewerage networks (including pump stations and trunk mains), footpaths, cycleways and any detention/retention basins; . A land capability assessment by a suitably qualified and accredited Agronomist establishing the actual classification of the soils and geology and an assessment of community benefit and need in regard to State Planning Policy No. 1/92: Development and the Conservation of Agricultural Land and Planning Guidelines: The Identification of Good Quality Agricultural Land, 1993; . A traffic and road impact assessment prepared by a Professional Registered Engineer (Qld); . A drainage and stormwater management study prepared by Professional Registered Engineer (Qld).

1.4. Response to Council Information Request

A response to the Information Request was received by Council on 25 September 2008 (refer to DataWorks document number 846450).

Within Council’s Information Request a number of key issues were raised including the preparation of a land capability assessment, economic impact assessment and geotechnical assessment.

The applicant’s response to each of the three (3) items outlined is listed below:

a) Land Capability Assessment The proposed development is not considered to reduce the productive capacity of the site or surrounding land uses due to the following:

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 20 . The site is not considered to comprise Class A GQAL due to the incidence of steep slopes and higher stone content; . The adjoining land to the north of the site is expected to comprise similar topographical and soil qualities to the subject site (i.e. does not comprise Class A GQAL); . The site is well separated from other productive land by the Bunya Highway; . There are existing urban uses within the immediate vicinity of the site, which already impact on the productive capacity of the land; and . The proposed development of the various precincts still allows for traditional grazing uses within the balance area.

b) Economic Impact Assessment

Within the covering letter the applicant states that “a brief assessment of alternative sites is provided within the proposal report prepared by Martoo Consulting” however examination of the report does not include identification or discussion on alternative sites.

In relation to the location of the development and its need to be located on the subject site, the following information was submitted by the applicant:

The proposed location is considered particularly desirable for the proposed use due to the following:

. The site benefits from direct access to the Bunya Highway, and is located south of the Murgon township which will minimise industrial traffic through town; . The site is located immediately adjacent to existing urban uses; . The site allows for logical separation of residential, commercial and industrial uses and their associated access routes; . The site is well separated from any sensitive uses such as schools or hospitals; and . Vacant land within Council’s reticulated service area is dedicated for Residential Use.

The proposed development is considered to comprise a highly beneficial development for the local community in terms of attracting increased population and economic growth to the region. The proposal is expected to result in a high quality urban development that will result in the provision of an appealing entrance statement to the town through landscaped buffers along Bunya Highway frontage in accordance with Planning Scheme requirements and as indicated on the proposal plans prepared by Contour Consulting Engineers.

c) Geotechnical Assessment

Within the covering letter the applicant states that “a slope analysis by Contour Consulting is provided on Plan No. 0438-P08 in Appendix B of the proposal report” however examination of the planning report by Martoo Consulting does not provide any additional information relating to topography, soil type and the probability of geotechnical constraints affecting development of the subject site.

1.5. Additional Information

Additional information was sought by Council in relation to the application on two (2) separate occasions (13 October 2009 and 15 December 2009.

Information supplied by the applicant on 13 October 2009 related to the following issues raised by Council Officers:

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 21 . Assessment of Good Quality Agricultural Land – the issue of a land capability/suitability study was raised by the previous Murgon Shire Council however no such study was undertaken by the applicant throughout the course of Council’s assessment. The decision not to undertake such a study was based on the former Murgon Shire Council’s decision to release residential land along Tiernan Terrance and Shelton Street and outline possible future residential expansion areas within the subject site. It is unknown whether Murgon Shire Council commissioned a residential needs analysis or land capability/suitability assessment prior to the development of these residential allotments or producing a map showing residential expansion of this area.

. Overriding need in terms of public benefit for the three proposed land use precincts – the issue of overriding need in terms of public benefit is also covered by the Department of Infrastructure and Planning and their Referral Agency responses received on 30 May 2008 and 18 February 2009 (revised application).

- Visitor Accommodation Precinct – the applicant ascertains that there is an inability for visitors to the area to find suitable accommodation in Murgon as the only Motel runs at approximately 97% capacity on a regular basis. Council acknowledge the deficiency within the current market (despite a current Material Change of Use approval for a Motel at 137 Lamb Street, Murgon) and the need for visitor accommodation due in part to the number of wineries around the Moffatdale area and commitment from Council and local industry groups to see local tourism numbers increase.

- Business Park Precinct – the applicant acknowledges that there are some vacant industrial lots within Murgon around the Gayndah Road area however this area is considered to be better suited to General Industry type uses along the lines of those which are already established in the area (Murgon Meatworks and Murgon Leather). The concept of a business park is to attract industrial uses with a significant showroom component which rely on having exposure on higher order roads and a higher standard of finish and landscaping than traditional industrial areas.

- Housing Subdivision Precinct – as previously mentioned the former Murgon Shire Council developed and sold allotments along Tiernan Terrace and Shelton Street with preliminary plans to create a number of additional residential allotments within the subject site. It should be noted that between 2005 and 2007, Murgon Shire Council sought support from property developers however none were forthcoming.

A closing statement from the applicant on this matter states “there was clearly an intention for housing development to extend into the subject site at some time in the future in the general location proposed in this development application.”

Contrary to the above information regarding the former Murgon Shire Council it should be noted that due to dire financial circumstances alternate streams of income were required to be established, lessening the credibility of the assertion that the housing development would have extended within the subject site and it was “more a matter of timing and sequencing of essential services”.

. Development Assessment Matters – the applicant provided a list of other issues which were raised by Council and subsequently more detailed advice provided for Council’s benefit at a later stage. These issues include but were not limited to:

- A detailed assessment of rural vistas when entering the town of Murgon along the Bunya Highway from the east

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 22 - Council was concerned that the subject site was too steep for any type of development and “an inspection would confirm that this is not better quality agricultural land”

- There would appear to be clear community benefit in providing additional residential allotments where the quality of housing would be equal to that of the adjoining estate developed by the former Murgon Shire Council

- It is preferable for the motel and business park precincts within the proposed development to share a common access from the Bunya Highway rather than “pushing traffic through residential or highly pedestrianised areas”. In summary the combination of uses are appropriately positioned within individual precincts.

- The proposed business park does not intend to replicate the commercial centre of Murgon or encourage those general industry type uses to relocate from the existing industrial area.

- The former Murgon Shire Council in 2007 suggested the provision of a 630 metre buffer between the existing Piggery to the east of the subject site and any proposed residential development within the subject site.

Further information supplied by the applicant on 15 December 2009 related to the following aspects in order to assist Council’s assessment of the current development application (DataWorks Document Number 812638) however this most critical part has been reproduced in full below:

5. Certain matters raised by the respective Council since lodgement

. The existing Murgon Planning Scheme indicates that there is good quality agricultural land within the parts of the subject site. The mapping and associated ground truthing in this planning scheme appears to be broadscale mapping and not to a standard to be relied upon for detailed development assessment. After discussions with the former Murgon Shire Council a decision was made not to commission a land capability/suitability study for agricultural uses but rather rely on alternative provisions in State Planning Policy 1/92 which state that such a development application is to establish that “there is an overriding need for the development in terms of public benefit and no other site is suitable for the particular purpose”. Before lodging the current development application a PowerPoint presentation was made to Councilors and certain staff of the former Murgon Shire Council which identified your then potential development proposals over the site. During the bus tour of the site following this presentation, certain Councilors commented on how poor the soil was on that ridge where the accommodation precinct was being planned.

. That Council report considered by the former Murgon Shire Council in late March 2007 states that the subject site was suitable for partly housing partly rural residential and partly a motel use with the remainder held for rural uses to provide a buffer of 630m from the Morrison piggery. Consequently as decision by the applicants not to commission a land capability/suitability study for agricultural uses over the site but to demonstrate an overriding need in terms of public benefit as discussed with the former Murgon Council and as indicated in this and other submissions to Council. It is unfortunate that these Councilors, staff and consultants that participated in the site inspect and witnessed the presentation may not be directly involved in the current assessment of the above development application.

. The concept of preserving any valuable rural vista through the site on the eastern approach to Murgon is appreciated. A detailed visual assessment of this particular vista and other rural vistas on the eastern approach to Murgon, while being

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 23 somewhat subjective, may suggest that this particular vista through this site may not be as significant as other surrounding rural vistas. Given that the site abuts the town it is difficult to appreciate that the town of Murgon will not grow in this direction over time as intended by the former Murgon Council because of the particular rural vista through the subject site.

. The housing, visitor accommodation and most of the business park is proposed on land that Council considered at one stage was too steep for development. A site inspection would confirm that this steeper land is not better quality agricultural land. It is suggested that the benefit to local economy of the visitor accommodation precinct alone where a coach load of visitors can find overnight accommodation in Murgon would be contribute more to the local economy that the use of 15.5 hectares of steeper and somewhat stony grazing land.

. There would appear to be clear community benefit is providing more housing sites that have the potential to provide the quality of family homes constructed on the adjoining housing development.

. The motel and business park precincts as proposed rely on a combined access of an existing State controlled road. It is often preferable that such uses are located on major roads rather than pushing traffic through residential or highly pedestrianised areas. The proposal of the combined access was appreciated by the State Department of Transport and Main Roads which did not object to your development application. It is not uncommon for visitor accommodation to be located in close proximity to such business uses. The proposed housing precinct is considered to be appropriate positioned with respect to the visitor accommodation and industrial uses.

. The proposed business park does not intend to replicate the commercial centre of Murgon or to encourage those general industrial type uses better suited to the existing industrial area/s. There is a need for Council to better appreciate what a business park is especially in a town like Murgon. Uses such as showrooms, certain service industries, display yards and associated workshops (eg. Machinery sales and service) and combined light industrial uses with associated retail and/or office uses (e.g. graphic art/sign designed and manufacturer) are commonly not found in commercial centres or heavy industrial areas.

. Is it considered that the applicants have gone to considerable lengths to research the provisions of essential community services. The current South Burnett Regional Council could not locate critical infrastructure records complied by the former Murgon Shire Council. This resulted in the applicants having to interview Council field staff and contact previous Council staff. It is noted that the South Burnett Council even suggested that the applicants contact Council’s previous engineering consultants to obtain copies of certain Council records that could not be located. The applicants commissioned highly experienced consulting engineers to provide those infrastructure reports as requested by Council’s engineering staff. Whilt is it acknowledged that the proposal is outside the existing service area for water and sewerage, Council’s engineering staff had advised that they would support the proposal on the compilation of such reports.

. The former Murgon Shire Council in 2007 suggested the provision of a 630 metre wide buffer from the Morrison piggery (i.e. 1549 SPU) on Lot 304 on FY2549 to any odour sensitive (e.g. residential) type development on the subject site. A Council staff report in late March 2007 confirmed the then Murgon Shire Council’s basis for this calculated buffer. The proposed housing and visitor accommodation precincts and the proposed business park all maintain a buffer in excess of that required by the former Murgon Shire Council from the piggery buildings. It is difficult to appreciate that South Burnett Regional Council has not adopted a position on this

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 24 matter that is consistent with the advice obtained from the former Murgon Shire Council when compiling the above development application.

2.0. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Desired Environmental Outcomes

The Desired Environmental Outcomes within the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme are applicable to the assessment of the Preliminary Approval to Override the Planning Scheme with respect to future land uses (associated with separate and subsequent applications) which do not correlate with the current Zoning of the subject site.

Each Desired Environmental Outcome within the Planning Scheme is stated below with a corresponding response in relation to the proposed development.

(a) Protects the environmental values of the Shire’s natural features, significant native vegetation, land resources, geological attributes, natural resources and non-renewable resources from any adverse affects from disturbance, pollution of degradation.

The proposed development by virtue of its nature, size and location will detrimentally affect available land resources within the Murgon area and the viability of surrounding agricultural uses to the south and east of the subject site. The subject site is identified as containing Class A Good Quality Agricultural Land within the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme. Given the proximity to existing residential areas and the size of the allotment (42.98ha) there are a number of constraints which limit the propensity of the land to be used effectively for agricultural activities consistent with the Rural Zone. Notwithstanding the previous comment, the subject site could be utilised by uses associated with the Rural Zone which would not adversely impact on existing agricultural land uses to the south and east of the subject site.

In relation to geological attributes, the subject site has several sections where the slope of the land is in excess of 15% and in certain areas exceeding 25%. The combination of the slope and nature of the proposed uses will require significant earthworks to be done to construct roads capable of carrying non-residential traffic (eg. Coaches and Articulated Vehicles) and significant earthworks and retaining walls to be constructed and carried out on individual allotments to create a suitably level building pad and sufficient site area for the intended land use.

(b) Minimises adverse affects upon the water quality and quantum of surface and ground waters suitable for servicing needs in the region.

The proposed development as per (a) above slopes significantly in sections (in excess of 25%) and a 5,000m2 allotment has been included within the Business Park Precinct for the management of stormwater. Given the slope of the subject site and area to be utilised for stormwater management the issues are the protection of the Bunya Highway from stormwater and the impact on adjoining agricultural land to the south during peak rainfall events.

(c) Minimises risks to the safety and wellbeing of people, property and the natural environment (as resulting from impacts from natural, technological and development related hazards) to an acceptable level.

As per (a) and (b) above, the development of the subject site for non-agricultural purposes would increase risks to the safety and well being of people, existing residential areas and larger surrounding allotments currently within the Rural Zone and being utilised for agricultural purposes.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 25 It should be noted that Council’s Information Request requested a “geotechnical assessment addressing the existing physical characteristics of the site, with particular reference to steep lands and potential for stability issues relating from future operational and building works” however no report was provided with the applicant’s response.

(d) Protects the economic values of extractive and mineral resources, good quality agricultural land, water and land resources and timber resources, so facilitating their availability for sustainable use to satisfy the need for these resources in the region.

The subject site is classified as Class A Good Quality Agricultural Land and falls completely within the Rural Zone. The subject site is surrounded by existing residential development to the east and the Bunya Highway to the south which minimally restricts the ability of the site to be used for purposes associated with its inclusion within the Rural Zone. The subject site also provides a link to other agricultural uses on surrounding properties with this consistency being lost if the site is to be developed as per the applicant’s proposal.

A submission put forward by the applicant indicated that the subject site was too steep and stoney to be used for agricultural purposes however this would also rule out its use for any sort of future development. Furthermore, the applicant ascertains that the former Murgon Shire Council did not require a land capability/suitability study against the provisions of SPP 1/92 but rather relied on alternate provisions within the SPP to establish overriding community and public need (refer to Section 1.5 for additional information supplied by the applicant).

It should be noted that Paragraph 3.3 of State Planning Policy referred to by the applicant provides details in its full context of an intrinsic link between overriding need and the protection of suitable land for agricultural production. Paragraph 3.3 within the aforementioned Policy has been reproduced in its entirety below:

“Nevertheless, development without regard to the need for land conservation and the continuing importance of agriculture would be unacceptable. The best and most versatile farming land has a special importance and should not be built on unless there is an overriding need for the development in terms of public benefit and no other site is suitable for the particular purpose. This land is a valuable resource that should in general, be protected from irreversible development. In such cases, additional weight needs to be given to the agricultural factor.”

(e) Provides a benefit to, and fulfils an economic demand from, the community and makes good any detriment to the residents of the area in which it is located as a result of:

(i) existing or planned services; or

(ii) people being put in jeopardy by the development due to physical or financial causes

The proposed development contains a mixture of residential and non-residential land uses however adequate land in other areas of Murgon are already included within the Industrial and Residential Zones and in the absence of any demographic or land uses data from the applicant, would not provide a positive benefit to the

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 26 community and point future urban development in a direction which is not envisaged under the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme. The visitor accommodation component can be justified due to the increasing propensity of wineries within the Moffatdale area to hold festivals in order to encourage long stay accommodation. There is currently one Motel and one Bed & Breakfast in Murgon, with the Motel running at approximately 97% capacity.

In relation to the additional residential allotments within the proposed development, the applicant provided information from local Real Estate Agents which depict demand for new land and a current shortage of residential allotments. This apparent demand according to Real Estate Agents does not relate to any demographic data or recent residential estate approvals by Council. It is solely in the interests of financial gain by Agents as opposed to substantiating community need or sound planning grounds.

(f) Minimises conflicts between activities, traffic and infrastructure elements, and maintains the existing and planned character and amenity of the area in which the development is located.

The proposed development does not incorporate a road hierarchy however does propose a link with the existing street network (Shelton Street and Caswell Street).

A proposed vegetated buffer will reduce amenity issues within the subject site, particularly in relation to future housing development in accordance with advice from the former Murgon Shire Council.

The location of the proposed Business Park Precinct in isolation from other industrial zoned land and activities is anticipated to create conflict with future stages of residential development within the subject site. Furthermore, the applicant ascertains that the business precinct will encourage uses not commonly found in commercial centres or heavy industry areas however examples referred to include uses which are already existing within Industrial Zoned areas of Murgon (e.g. machinery sales and service, display yards and associated workshops).

(g) Ensures that demand on community and emergency services are met to a level which is commensurate with standards for environmental health and public wellbeing.

The location of the development in close proximity to existing low density residential development is unlikely to burden the resources of emergency services including Ambulance, Queensland Fire and Rescue and the Queensland Police Service, however emergency access may be restricted due to the proposed street network.

(h) Occurs where services and facilities required in respect of the development are existing, planned or provided by the developer, ensuring efficient, cost effective, orderly, equitable and environmentally sound use or provision of physical infrastructure, so acceptable standards for environmental health and public wellbeing are maintained.

The proposed development intends to override the existing provisions within the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme and therefore the impact on existing infrastructure and provision of future infrastructure needs to be considered. The proposed development is able to be serviced via Council’s reticulated sewer and water systems however the provisions of such services would not be within Council’s current plans given that the site is within the Rural Zone. Furthermore, Council needs to ensure that the provision of the aforementioned services (including parkland) is done in an efficient and timely manner without unnecessary financial burden to existing ratepayers.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 27 (i) Contributes positively towards the efficient, orderly and integrated use and expansion of the Shire’s movement systems, for safe, non-discriminatory and convenient access and movement within and around the Shire.

The proposed development incorporates an extension of the existing road network (Shelton Street and Caswell Street) however no details have been provided in relation to road hierarchies and the vehicular and pedestrian interaction between each precinct.

(j) Contributes positively towards maintaining a strong, productive economy built on

(i) protecting the competitive advantages of the primary industry sectors;

(ii) diversifying primary and secondary industry sectors;

(iii) supporting the infrastructure sectors and information technology;

(iv) diversifying tourism products on the basis of sustainable use of the natural, historic, indigenous, water and rural based attributes supported by a range of services and facilities appropriate to the natural and rural setting, and which meet the needs of visitors to the region; and

(v) protecting the local employment and skills development sectors

(k) Protects and consolidates the commercial and community services provided through business and commercial centres identified in the planning scheme so that the centres;

(i) support the rural, resource and tourism sectors; and

(ii) satisfy the community’s needs for goods, services and facilities reasonably expected to cater for rural, rural residential and urban localities.

The proposed development does not strengthen or diversify primary or secondary industry sectors however will support the tourism sector. It is considered that the partial use of the subject site for tourism purposes will not restrict the remainder of the site to be utilised for agricultural purposes, provided adequate buffering is established.

(l) Protects the built and street environments.

It is asserted by the applicant that due to the extension of a residential area which contains good quality housing that the residential component will mirror this. The layout of the culs-de-sac does not positively contribute towards the built and street environments and no details have been provided about urban design and streetscape provisions to enhance the residential area.

Further to the above, proposal plans indicated no buffer between the proposed residential and industrial area which would lead to a decrease in residential amenity.

(m) Protects the indigenous and non-indigenous cultural heritage values of the places, features and landscapes that reflect the community’s history and identify.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 28 The subject site does not include any cultural or non-indigenous sites or areas and does not detrimentally affect places, features and landscapes which reflect the identity or history of the Murgon area.

(n) Provides reasonable access to appropriate and affordable housing to meet the differing needs of residents within the Shire.

The proposed development incorporates a range of lot sizes but provisions in relation to future Material Change of Use applications are largely inconsistent with the current Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme and would not positively contribute to increasing the range of residential housing options or housing affordability within the Murgon area.

(o) Facilitates equity of access to a range of community, recreational and open space facilities and services which effectively maintain social standards.

On the basis of the proposal plans submitted to Council, no provision has been made for recreational, community or open space uses to contribute towards maintaining and enhancing social standards.

(p) Protects the scenic values of the diverse rural and natural landscapes within the Shire, particularly relative to those seen from major transport corridors and vantage points.

The proposed development is unlikely to detrimentally impact upon significant viewsheds and vantage points, scenic values or rural and natural landscapes.

2.2 Overall Outcomes

The subject site is located within the Rural Zone pursuant to the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme. The proposed development is not consistent with the purpose of the Rural Locality Code and does not provide the substantial planning grounds required to override the current Planning Scheme.

2.3. Local and/or State Planning Policies

State Planning Policy 1/92 Development and the Conservation of Good Quality Agricultural Land applies to the proposed development as the subject land is designated as Class A Good Quality Agricultural Land.

It should be noted that Paragraph 3.3 of State Planning Policy referred to by the applicant provides details in its full context of an intrinsic link between overriding need, the protection of suitable land for agricultural production and additional weight for agricultural capabilities in terms of Council’s assessment. Paragraph 3.3 within the aforementioned Policy has been reproduced in its entirety below:

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 29 should in general, be protected from irreversible development. In such cases, additional weight needs to be given to the agricultural factor.”

It should be noted that Council’s Information Request outlined the need for a land capability/suitability study and assessment against the provisions of SPP 1/92 with regard to Good Quality Agricultural Land, however no such assessment was undertaken by the applicant. On this basis, the proposed development contravenes the intent of the State Planning Policy to conserve and protect agricultural land from inappropriate development. The only component of the development suitable to be recommended for approval is the Visitor Accommodation Precinct which (dependant on scale and type of development controlled by future Material Change of Use applications) will not detrimentally affect the viability of the balance area to be used for agricultural purposes consistent with the Rural Zone.

3.0. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan

The Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan provides a planning framework for sustainable growth across the region which supports the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme. At this current point in time (from 18 December 2009) the Regional Plan has been given statutory weight and effect by the Department of Infrastructure and Planning however given that the start of the IDAS Decision Making Period commenced prior to the Regional Plan becoming a statutory document, it is assessed as a guideline for the purposes of Council’s assessment.

The proposed development does not comply with the following key objective relating to settlement patterns throughout the region:

“To ensure that urban development within the region is directed towards areas that can be serviced efficiently and equitably, without degradation of environmental values, or restriction of the operation of future development of important economic activities.”

Adding further weight to Council’s assessment of the proposed development are comments provided by the Department of Infrastructure and Planning (DIP). For further information please refer to Section 4.2 of the planning report.

3.2. Appropriateness of the Proposal

The proposed development is located on a property wholly within the Rural Zone which surrounds properties utilised for rural activities to the east, north-east and south. The proposed development and correspondence submitted by the applicant has limited scope in addressing industrial and residential need, geotechnical constraints of the subject site, land capability/suitability for agricultural purposes and no demographic data or assessment of higher order provisions within the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme to justify overriding the Scheme for community need or public benefit.

Assessment by Council Officers has identified a number of alternative sites and areas for industrial and residential development anticipated by Council (due to currently being within Industrial and Residential Zones) and infrastructure and services are required to be extended however will occur in a more timely and efficient manner than servicing the subject site. For further details in relation to an Industrial and Residential Land Use study undertaken by Council Officers please refer to Section 3.3 of the planning report.

3.3. Industrial and Residential Land Use Study

As a result of additional information submitted by the applicant on 13 October 2009 and 15 December 2009, Council Officers undertook an Industrial and Residential Land Use Study

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 30 focusing on large tracts of land which is currently within the Industry Zone and Residential Zone as per the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme.

a) Residential Land Use

The residential study area comprised of 774,134m2 of land surrounding the Murgon Hospital, Murgon State High School and along Boat Mountain Road north of Murgon.

Land Use Land Area (m2 / ha) Percentage Queensland Government 207,126m2 (20.71ha) 27% South Burnett Regional 24,937m2 (2.49ha) 3% Council Vacant 471,695m2 (47.16ha) 61% Existing Residential 33,286m2 (3.32ha) 4% Other 37,090m2 (3.70ha) 5% TOTAL 774,134m2 (77.41ha) 100%

The above table indicates that 47.16ha of the study area is vacant and included within the Residential Zone under the Murgon Planning Scheme. The above figures indicate that there is adequate supply of residential land for the life of the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme. Furthermore, information supplied by the Population and Information Forecasting Unit (PIFU) within the Department of Infrastructure and Planning have projected the annual rate of population change will taper to 0.8% by 2026.

b) The industrial study area comprised of land within the Industry Zone on the southern side of the Bunya Highway on the western side of Murgon.

There are other tracts of land within the Industry Zone on the northern side of the Bunya Highway in close proximity to the Murgon Meatworks and Murgon Leather in Gesslers Road. This land has not been considered within the study area due to the applicant’s preference for adequate separation from existing general or heavy industry activities and for land with main road exposure.

Land Use Land Area (m2 / ha) Percentage South Burnett Regional 1,370m2 (0.13ha) 1% Council Vacant 418,415m2 (41.84ha) 87% Existing Residential 14,447m2 (1.44ha) 3% Existing Industrial 40,103m2 (4.0ha) 8% Other 5,254m2 (0.52ha) 1% TOTAL 479,589m2 (47.95ha) 100%

The above table indicates that 41.84ha of the study area is vacant and included within the Industry Zone under the Murgon Planning Scheme. The above figures indicate that there is adequate supply of industrial land for the life of the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme.

3.4. Impact on Amenity

The proposed Business Park Precinct will detrimentally impact on the amenity of the surrounding area due to separation from other similar industrial activities within the existing Industrial Zone. This separation will increase vehicular traffic through town and impact on the amenity of existing residential areas and viability of adjoining properties within the Rural Zone.

The proposed Housing Precinct will detrimentally impact on the amenity of the existing residential area due to an increase in vehicular traffic and conversely impact on the ability of land within the Rural Zone to be effectively and wholly utilised as per the intent of the

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 31 Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme. It should be noted that the latest proposal plans do not indicated any buffer between the three (3) proposed Precinct within the subject site or from adjoining properties included within the Rural Zone.

3.5. Site Access and Traffic

Two (2) access points are proposed from the existing road network. One (1) access point is via an extension of Shelton Street and one (1) access point is via any extension of Caswell Street in a southerly direction. The aforementioned access points relate to Stage 1 of the proposed development.

The proposed Business Park Precinct relies on a single access point from the Bunya Highway with a cul-de-sac negating access from the industrial component of the proposed development into both the Housing Precinct and Visitor Accommodation Precinct. At this stage no details are available of road networks within the Visitor Accommodation Precinct however it could be assumed that vehicular access would be from Herterick Street rather than the Bunya Highway.

3.6. Flooding

The subject site is not subject to periodic or permanent inundation however the issue of stormwater management was raised within Council’s Information Request. It is reasonable for Council to determine at this stage whether the development will contribute to an existing stormwater problem or create a new stormwater problem given the scale of the proposed development and nature of surrounding land uses particularly land within the Rural Zone to the south of the subject site.

Despite this issue being highlighted within Council’s Information Request the applicant has suggested that a detailed report in relation to the proposed detention basin and stormwater management can be included as a condition in any approval issued by Council.

3.7. Site Contamination

The subject land is not listed on the Environmental Management Register (EMR) which is administered by the Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM). A letter received by Council on 6 August 2008 from the Environmental Protection Agency (now DERM) indicates that the site is not identified as having been used for any activities causing contamination and that the EPA no longer has a role as a Concurrence Agency for the subject application.

3.8. Utilities and Services

The subject site has access to electricity, telecommunications and new internal roads are required linking Shelton Street and Caswell Street to the proposed development. Reticulated sewer and water services are available within the existing residential area to the north-west of the subject site and Council’s Engineering Department have provided advice that an extension of these services is considered possible.

With regard to the provision of reticulated sewer and water services, the proposed development is considered to be out of sequence resulting in inefficiencies in service provision due to being outside identified areas with Council’s mapping associated with Planning Scheme Policy No. 7. Furthermore issues of inefficient infrastructure provision relate to the current inclusion of the subject site within the Rural Zone and no provision under the current Planning Scheme for expansion of non-rural uses onto the subject site.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 32 4.0. CONSULTATION

4.1. Internal

(a) SBRC Department of Engineering

Council’s Engineering Department have provided information in relation to gradients and infrastructure provision to adequately service the proposed development.

4.2. External

Council’s Acknowledgement Notices identifies three (3) Referral Agencies for the subject application.

The Department of Main Roads (now Department of Transport and Main Roads) were both identified as Concurrence Agencies for the application. In addition, the Department of Infrastructure and Planning was identified as an Advice Agency for the application.

Early in the application process, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was identified as a Concurrence Agency due to the site being on the Contaminated Land Register (CLR) however correspondence from the EPA advised that there were no contamination issues on the subject site and therefore no requirements with respect of the subject application.

(a) Department of Main Roads

Correspondence received from the Department of Main Roads dated 18 April 2008 requests a traffic impact assessment report from the applicant looking at a ten (10) year growth horizon from 2008 taking into consideration intersection upgrade requirements, two (2) access points from the Bunya Highway and anticipated vehicle movement numbers and patterns in relation to the overall development of the residential and visitor accommodation precincts within the proposed development and projected impact on the Bunya Highway.

On 29 October 2008 the applicant provided a response in the form of a traffic impact assessment prepared by DM Hayes Traffic Engineering Consultant and preliminary road design plans prepared by Contour Consulting Engineers to both the Department of Main Roads and Council.

(b) Department of Infrastructure and Planning

The Department of Infrastructure and Planning have provided two (2) responses as an Advice Agency due to the applicant amending the application. Advice received from the Department of Infrastructure and Planning on 30 May 2008 included the following recommendation for Council:

“The Assessment Manager is recommended to refuse the development application on grounds the proposal:

. Is contrary to the regional settlement pattern, principles and policies of the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan 2007-2026; . Is contrary to the orderly, efficient and consolidated urban growth and infrastructure provision in the former Murgon Shire Council and the Wide Bay Burnett Region; . May compromise the achievement of the DEO’s of the Murgon Shire Planning Scheme; . Appears to the contrary the Rural Locality Code of the Murgon Shire Planning Scheme; . Is premature and not supported by demonstrating planning need; . May adversely impact on the rural economy, landscape, character, community and environmental values of the locality and the region;

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 33 . Has not been adequately justified by sufficient grounds despite its conflict with the Planning Scheme; and . Is not workable from an IDAS perspective and does not conform with Section 3.1.6 of the IPA.”

Advice received from the Department of Infrastructure and Planning on 18 February 2009 included the following recommendation for Council:

“Given the information provided, the application is not considered to comply with the Planning Scheme for the former Murgon Shire Council.

In particular, the proposal has not adequately demonstrated:

. Compliance with the Rural Locality Code of the Murgon Shire Planning Scheme; . Achievement of the DEOs listed in the Planning Scheme; . The lack of vacant residential and industrial zoned land currently available to justify the need to override the Planning Scheme; . Consideration of the cost to provide additional services outside the current urban infrastructure area; and . Consideration towards the principles and policies of the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan 2007-2026.”

5.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

The proposed development was publically notified between 6 March 2009 and 27 April 2009 with the Notice of Compliance being received by Council on 15 May 2009. All public notification requirements were undertaken in accordance with Section 3.4.4 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997.

Three (3) submissions against the proposed development were received during the public notification period.

In addition, the Department of Infrastructure and Planning (DIP) provided a response as an advice agency and stated the contents of the response are also to be considered by Council as a properly made submission in accordance with relevant provisions of the Integrated Planning Act 1997.

The table below summarises the issued raised within the submissions-

SUBMITTER ISSUE COUNCIL COMMENTS There is absolutely no intention by the Council’s intention is to ensure that if a applicant to carry out the proposed development application is approved development. that all relevant timeframes under the Integrated Planning Act 1997 and conditions within the Decision Notice are adhered to by the developer. The intention of the applicant to complete or carry out the development is not a town planning matter which can be addressed by Council in the assessment of the subject application. The applicant is currently advertising the It is the right of the applicant to subject site for sale stating that “The Murgon advertise the subject site for sale and Shire Council is supportive of the the opinions expressed within the development of this site and encourages advertisement are those of the commercial activity.” applicant. This is not a matter which can be addressed under Council’s Planning Scheme or the Integrated

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 34 Planning Act 1997. The subject site has significant slope in parts Slope within the housing precinct has within the housing and business park been calculated between 10% and in precincts resulting in a high proportion of lots excess of 25% contrary to the remaining vacant potentially becoming provisions of the Urban Locality Code overgrown. within the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme which seeks to minimise risk to people and property in areas having slopes in excess of 15%. In relation to overgrown allotments this is the responsibility of Council however is not a matter which can be addressed under Council’s Planning Scheme or the Integrated Planning Act 1997. There is ample undeveloped land within both The issue of need should be the Industrial and Residential Zones in addressed by the applicant as part of Murgon currently with some sections an application to ‘override’ the Planning remaining undeveloped or developed and Scheme and should demonstrate via unsold. These unsold allotments can be demographic and economic data that considered a glut within the local real estate there is a community and/or public market. need for the development despite being outside the scope of the Planning Scheme. Issues were raised in Council’s Information Request with respect to overriding need however the applicant chose to supply a limited response to Council. For further details relating to the issue of need refer to Sections 2.1 and 3.3 of the assessment report. The proposed development is ill conceived An application to override the Planning and ill timed. Scheme will naturally fall outside the scope of the Planning Scheme and Council in the assessment of the proposed development needs to ensure the effective and efficient delivery of appropriately zone land and capacity for associated infrastructure services. For further details relating to the issue of need refer to Sections 2.1 and 3.3 of the assessment report. The proposed development is not consistent The proposed development is not with the Murgon Shire IPA Planning consistent with the Murgon Shire IPA Scheme. Planning Scheme and the applicant has applied for a Preliminary Approval to ‘override’ the Scheme. Such an application must consider the current capacity for development within the Planning Scheme plus provide sufficient evidence to address the issue of overriding community/public need for the proposed development despite conflict with the Planning Scheme. Issues were raised in Council’s Information Request with respect to overriding need however the applicant chose to supply a limited response to Council. For further details relating to the issue of need refer to Sections 2.1

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 35 and 3.3 of the assessment report. The lowers parts of the subject site adjacent The subject site is low lying where the to the Bunya Highway are poorly drained proposed Business Park Precinct is with drainage costs and maintenance costs located within the subject site. Council worn by ratepayers of the Council. in its assessment of the proposed development is required to assess stormwater drainage and impacts on both the arterial road network (Bunya Highway – issue also raised by the Department of Main Roads) and adjoining properties. In relation to the visitor accommodation Existing Council approvals are not able precinct another site within the Murgon area to be assessed under the provisions of has a valid Material Change of Use (MCU) the Murgon Shire IPA Planning approval for a Motel. Scheme in relation to the current application and its visitor accommodation component. The proposed business park precinct has a The applicant proposes to connect the large drainage reserve which may become development to Council’s reticulated an effluent treatment field directly beside the sewer and water infrastructure and the Bunya Highway. 5,000m2 drainage reserve within the business park precinct is intended to manage overland stormwater flow from the allotments not effluent disposal. The proposed non-residential components of The issue of crime from the perspective the proposed development will struggle to of attracting new businesses cannot be attract new business due to the perception of addressed through the Murgon Shire Murgon as an area with a historically high IPA Planning Scheme however the crime rate. design of individual structures can be managed in an attempt to reduce crime. The proposed development will affect the The issue of amenity can be addressed residential amenity and views of existing through the Murgon Shire IPA Planning allotments to the east and north of the Scheme however the protection of subject site. existing views from residential areas cannot be managed. The proposed development is in close The current proposal seeks to increase proximity to an existing Intensive Animal the number of residential allotments Husbandry use (Piggery) located at 100 adjoining the existing residential area to Burtons Road. the east and north of the subject site however the proposed housing precinct would result in residential development within 500m of the existing Piggery at 100 Burtons Road (based on most current plans). Notwithstanding the existing rural use of 100 Burtons Road the close proximity of residential development would reduce the propensity of the land to be used for purposes associated with the Rural Zone under the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme. The proposed development will detrimentally The affect in value of residential affect the value of residential properties in properties in the surrounding area close proximity to the subject site. cannot be dealt with under the provisions of the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme or the Integrated Planning Act 1997. There is an existing relationship between Elected Representatives of Council

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 36 Council’s Mayor (Councillor David Carter) have an unwavering obligation under and a co-applicant which would be deemed the Local Government Act 1993 and to be a conflict of interest. the Councillors Code of Conduct to declare any personal or material interests with an applicant. This matter is outside the scope of the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme and Integrated Planning Act 1997 and cannot be considered in Council’s assessment of the proposed development.

The applicant provided a response to Council on a number of issues raised by the three (3) submitters on 15 May 2009. The full response has been provided below. (a) One applicant being a nephew of the Mayor (Councillor David Carter)

This is not a relevant development assessment consideration even if it were true as it is more a procedural matter. However it is NOT true as there is NO relationship between Jason or Sue Kinsella and Council’s Mayor whatsoever. It is disappointing that a submitter would include such an inaccurate statement with such confidence and tends to undermine the credibility of the whole submission. It is hoped that the Mayor and applicants’ good reputation and public standing is not damaged in any way by such an inaccurate and dangerous comment.

(b) Proximity to existing Piggery

The residential precinct and the accommodation area within the visitor accommodation precinct in the proposal is a distance of about 1 kilometer from the piggery. The existing residential area with the town of Murgon is also a minimum of about 1 kilometer from this piggery. Table S4.2 in the Murgon Planning Scheme as referenced by one submitted relates to the distance required for new piggeries (i.e. intensive animal husbandry uses) from certain existing surrounding features. This table refers to a minimum separation of 1 kilometer from residence on surrounding land where there is more than 50 animals. In any regard the residential component of this application is a similar distance to the piggery as existing houses within Murgon.

There is often a historical background when an existing piggery is located in close proximity to an urban area. Council’s often use their planning schemes to limit the expansion of existing lawful uses where such uses are no longer appropriate on certain sites. Perhaps this is a reason for Council not including this piggery it is relevant planning scheme overlay map relating to buffer area management to intensive animal husbandry (i.e. Map SMOA 2D(i)) and as such the special assessment provisions for Special Management Overlays in Part 3 Division 3 do not directly apply.

The applicants engaged Contour Consulting Engineers to provide preliminary advice to support the current development application. These consulting engineers have extensive experience in stormwater management on a range of sites and projects throughout Australia and overseas. This engineering advice, among other things, the use of a detention basin to detain water in a manner so that there is no increase in the stormwater flow leaving the site to what currently exists. The engineers also propose initiatives to control stormwater quality. It is also relevant that each site within the business park precinct will be subject to the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act and some activities on certain lots may require environmental licensing with site based environmental management plans so that such activities do not result in environmental harm to surrounding premises or the environment.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 37 It is normal that detailed reports and designed for stormwater management to be supplied to Council as part of subsequent development applications for operational works. These detailed designs and reports will have to be subsequently assessed and approved by Council before the development of relevant stages can commence. The applicant understands that Council will include conditions in relation to stormwater drainage in the development approval for the current development application that will be directly relevant to the subsequent development application for operational works.

(d) Increased traffic in Perkins Street

The proposed residential precinct within development will result in an increase in traffic in Perkins Street. This is not considered an issue given the number of lots being proposed and the design characteristics of the street and its convenient access to other streets of a higher order in the road hierarchy with the town of Murgon. The applicants consider that Perkins Street is capable of accommodation any additional traffic generated by the proposal.

(e) Address of application

The subject site fronts a number of roads and therefore a clear and definitive address should ideally be used. The address referenced in the lodged application was that used in various government records for the subject site. The address used in public notification was that provided by Council when giving notice to the applicant to undertake public notification.

Note also that the same section of public roads can have several names due to which government agency is being consulted and these names can change over time. The reference to Lamb Street on the proposal plan was obtained from a registered cadastral plan provided by the State (i.e. RP160737).

(f) Extra costs on ratepayers for construction and maintenance

This is often a misconception by submitters, and understandably so, as it can complex concept for the general public to properly grasp. The developers expect to be required to fund those works that are directly relevant to the proposal and reasonably required under law. In very general terms these will include those specific works that are internal and external to the site that are required to service the development. The applicant has already offered to enter into an infrastructure agreement so that there matters can be better particularized in relation to reticulated water supply and sewerage. These works can benefit other lots within Murgon and therefore result in community benefit.

With respect to one submitter there is a belief that Council will be required to maintain the site after 5 years in certain circumstances. It is understood that there will be no requirement for Council to maintain private land and Council has certain legislative powers to ensure proper maintenance at no costs to the ratepayer. This submitter also fails to appreciate that landowners pay Council rates on vacant land regardless of whether buildings are erected on the land or it is otherwise used.

(g) Impact of development on local real estate prices

This ground of objection relates to the concern that the development will result in an oversupply of residential and industrial lots and in so doing force land values down within the town of Murgon.

The residential precinct has number of features which should be appreciated in this regard. These features include the following:-

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 38 . The adjoining land was surveyed with allowance for new road openings and truncations at road corners which suggests that subdivision in a form similar to that proposed was envisaged when the adjoining land was developed; . The former Murgon Shire Council in fact had prepared a lot design for the residential development of part of the site; . It commonly takes several years from when residential land is development to when it is possible to erect dwellings on each lot and therefore lead times need to be considered; . There is a deliberate move by the State to severely limit the ability to subdivide rural land and create additional rural residential lots and thereby increase settlement in rural villages, towns and other urban areas; . Local residents suggest that there are a range of reasons why certain lots in and around the town of Murgon remain vacant; and . The quality of existing nearby residential development is high for a number of reasons and the creation of additional lots in this particular location should be encouraged.

The business park precinct can be supported by a variety of reasons including those references in our previous submissions to Council. The applicants’ responses to this matters as raised by a submitter include the following:

. For historical reasons it was often common for industrial uses to be scattered throughout urban and even residential areas however this is no longer encouraged resulting in industrial precincts being developed slightly away from urban areas and commonly on established access corridors; . There is benefit in a business park precinct being created on the eastern approach to the town of Murgon to balance the industrial area established on the western approach; . The applicants have structure the code to prefer those uses to this business park that will present well from the main road and potentially be good neighbours to other premises within the business park; . The scarcity of industrial land is becoming a major issue for both attracting new business to the South East Queensland Region and parts of Wide Bay region as well as allowing room for existing businesses within a particular urban area to expand. As such it is suggested that local government should be encourage industrial land development if they are serious in attracting new businesses to their communities or allowing existing businesses within their communities to expand; . Like vacant residential lots, in takes several years for vacant industrial lots to be offered for sale from when such lots were first proposed. It is suggested that employment opportunities may be lost for a community if a new business that wants to come to an area can not immediately acquire suitable premises, or likewise sometimes when an existing business needs to expand but becomes frustrated when suitable sites will take several years to become available.

(h) Impacting on views, lifestyle and amenity of adjoining residential lots

It is difficult to appreciate how a few neighbouring residential lots will lose their residential amenity because more residential lots of similar design and density are being created on adjoining land. In this regard there are a number of considerations which include the following:

. The residential development being proposed will result in residential lots with identical land use entitlements and similar lot density and density that exists on adjoining residential land and therefore resulting settlement patterns should be no different that those on which the submitters reside themselves; . A prudent observer would have appreciate from the lot boundaries of the adjoining residential lots that there was always the opportunity for adjoining rural land to be developed for residential purposes at some time in the future;

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 39 . The road network servicing the residential precinct is considered capable of servicing the development; . The applicant is prepared to accept reasonable and relevant conditions of approval that require all residential lots created within the precinct to have the same standard of services and infrastructure that currently exists for the neighbouring residential lots; . It is acknowledged that certain neighbouring residential lots may lose some existing rural views and that may have been the main stimulus for this particular ground of objection (and possibly others) however the following are relevant in relation to this consideration: - the development will not unduly impact on the ability for existing neighbouring residential lots to obtain residential privacy and to access sunlight and more generally breezes and air which should be a major consideration in this situation; - some residential lots on the interface of an urban area with rural land will commonly lose such views as that urban area expands and this has occurred in urban areas around the world for centuries; - because of the above and other related considerations, it is a very well established town planning principle that an existing premises does not have a right to maintain a particular view and as such that maintenance of views from a private premises is not a related consideration in development assessment.

(i) The final proposal

As frequently occurs, the development application as originally lodged with Murgon Shire Council underwent a significant review upon receiving feedback from government agencies particularly the South Burnett Regional Council. Understandably there appears to be some confusion where the submitters reference aspects of the original proposal which are no longer being proposed. Council should assess and condition the most recent proposal plans.

(j) Stalled projects and eyesore

Most communities have projects that have stalled due to a variety of reasons and it would be reasonable to assume that none of these projects were started with a belief that the project would be stalled. With respect to one submitter, it is unfair to equate the stalling of a high rise residential tower at Caloundra with the subject development proposal. The stalling of some project is a result in part of that project not being staged appropriately. In this application the project is to be staged and each of these stages can be commenced and undertaken independently. One matter that should be appreciated it that the current State development assessment regime has resulted in lengthy delays in getting approvals for all aspects of development. Therefore considerable time passes from when the land use application for a proposal commences its preparation to when the construction is fully completed. Many projects therefore need to get land use approval years before construction finishes and the proposed use/s can actually commence.

There are no current intentions of the applicants to stall any stage once construction of that stage is commenced.

6.0 CONCLUSION

The proposed development in both its conceptual and ultimate form is generally inconsistent with the Desired Environment Outcomes and Overall Outcomes of the Rural Locality Code within the Murgon Shire Planning Scheme and does not provide sufficient justification of overriding community need to warrant recommendation for approval.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 40 With the exception of the Visitor Accommodation Precinct which has an identified need, acknowledged role in the growth of the area and ability under certain circumstances to be located within the Rural Zone, the proposed residential and industrial land uses could be located within their respective zones as per the Murgon Shire Planning Scheme without being premature or detrimentally impacting on the accurate and timely provisions of infrastructure and community services.

Preliminary investigation of the subject site by Council Officers indicated steep slopes in excess of 25% in parts and the identification of Class A Good Quality Agricultural Land. In relation to topography of the subject site the applicant ascertains that the site is not suitable for agricultural land uses due to geotechnical constraints and the prevalence of steep rocky outcrops however does not substantiate these statements by preparing for Council a geotechnical assessment or land capability/suitability assessment based on State Planning Policy 1/92.

It is therefore recommended that the Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme (Preliminary Approval Overriding the Planning Scheme – Visitor Accommodation Precinct) be approved with the Housing Precinct and Business Park Precinct being refused by Council.

In relation to the Development Permit for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 lot into 24 lots) and Preliminary Approval for Reconfiguration of a Lot (1 lot into 20 lots) these elements of the application are associated with the proposed Housing Precinct and should be refused on the basis that existing land within the Residential Zone is available under the Murgon Shire IPA Planning Scheme and the applicant has failed to display overriding community need for the proposed development, provided no rationale for the development in relation to demographic data and population projections and remained reliant on discussions with Council as to future uses which did not translate into policy direction for the current Planning Scheme, engage any form of community consultation or require any background demographic or economic needs analyses.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 41

8. Lifestyle and Culture

8.1 Tourism, Arts & Culture 8.1.1 L&C - 844960 - Request for Council to consider budgeting membership of $1500 (ex GST) towards the continued activities of the Rural Getaway Promotions Group and provide a delegate to this Group

Document Information

IR No 844960

Author Manager Tourism Arts & Culture

Endorsed By Director of Lifestyle and Culture

Date 29 March 2010

Précis

Request for Council to consider budgeting membership of $1500 (ex GST) towards the continued activities of the Rural Getaway Promotions Group and provide a delegate to this Group.

Summary

‘The Rural Getaway Tourist Route’ is a touring route which stretches from Warialda in New South Wales to Rockhampton in Queensland. This route takes in Durong travelling through towns such as Dalby, Chinchilla, and Mundubbera.

The Rural Getaway Promotions Group (RGPG) has been providing marketing and promotion activity for the towns and Shires along the Rural Getaway Tourist Route for over 5 years and relies on the Councils along the route for its membership base and financial assistance to continue operations. Council has been monitoring the progress of the Group since 2008. The Group has requested Council consider budgeting membership of $1500 (ex GST) towards the continued activities of the RGPG and provide a delegate to this Group which meets at Millmerran on a regular basis.

The Rural Getaway Tourist Route is recognised by Tourism Queensland however is not listed as one of the top 5 routes for Queensland, one of which is Australia’s Country Way.

Australia’s Country Way stretches from Sydney (the major source market from NSW) to Rockhampton taking in the South Burnett region from Yarraman to Goomeri. Council currently supports Australia’s Country Way through membership and delegate position.

In line with the 2010-2011 budget formulation process, a review of all membership and participation levels will be undertaken.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council continues to monitor progress and initiatives by the Rural Getaway Promotions Group.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 42

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 43

8.1.2 L&C - 851885 - Gordonbrook Dam

Document Information

IR No 851885

Author Manager Water & Wastewater Director Lifestyle & Culture

Endorsed By Director Lifestyle & Culture

Date 17 March 2010

Précis

Considering the options of whether to reopen Gordonbrook Dam to allow some boating activities, being limited to boats with electric motors (max 6 knots), canoes or kayaks.

Summary

Council has received numerous requests to reopen Gordonbrook Dam to recreational fishing and limited boating activities. The dam is currently opened to fishing off the banks but no boating is allowed. The former Kingaroy Council had done a lot of work to assess the risks associated with the levels of Cyanobacteria (commonly referred to as blue green algae) in the dam. These levels are significantly higher than other dams. Legal advice has been received that Council will need to manage the risk associated with these high levels of algae, including closing the facility when the levels reach levels of concern. In reality, the dam will be closed for a considerable period of time, depending on the weather and dam levels each year. This closure would normally be during the warmer periods of the year.

Officer's Recommendation

That: • Council reopen Gordonbrook Dam to limited boating (electric motors only), kayaks and canoes on a trial basis, • This trial opening be for a period of 12 months subject to the levels of Cyanobacteria remaining less than 100,000 total cell count, • Council list for consideration an initial amount of $30,000 in the 2010/11 budget to install appropriate signage, barrier fencing and buoys and to undertake an education and awareness program with the community, • Officers from Lifestyle and Culture and Water and Sewerage conduct a further risk assessment in September 2010 with a report being provided to Council in October 2010 on activities and issues experienced at the Dam to enable Council to review the trial opening, and • That a procedure be developed for opeing and closing the dam including educating and informing the public when the levels of Cyanobacteria reach appropriate trigger levels.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 44 Report

Current Situation 1. Gordonbrook Dam is the main water source for the township of Kingaroy. It has been closed for recreational boating since prior to 2004. This decision was made for two main reasons – the levels of Cyanobacteria (commonly referred to as blue green algae) and the issue of boats causing damage to the water intake area. 2. Council advertised in the South Burnett Times in 2008, that people could fish off the banks of Gordonbrook Dam. No further public advertisements have been placed cancelling this notice. People currently fish from the banks (despite any algae present) and it has been reported that a few boats have also been seen on the dam. 3. The current levels of Cyanobacteria are about 14,000 cells per ml. It is anticipated that this may increase slightly to around 30,000, but will continue to be low throughout winter. 4. Council has a gate across the boat ramp but the lock continues to be cut. Whilst the dam is officially closed to water based activities, Council does not currently have any compliance staff that monitor and enforce the “no boat” rule. 5. There is a concern that when boats are on the dam, they can get too close to the water intake area and cause damage to Council assets. There is also a concern that this can provide additional pressures on the contractors who currently manage Council’s water treatment plant located at the dam. 6. There have been numerous requests from members of the public, the DPI and the Fish Stocking Associations to allow recreational boating and fishing on the dam (boats with electric motors only, canoes and kayaks) 7. Other Dams 1. Council currently operates camping and recreation facilities at both Boondooma Dam and Bjelke-Petersen Dam. Significant investments have been made in developing these dams to allow both boating and camping activities. 2. There is no intention to duplicate the full services at Gordonbrook. However, if we do reopen Gordonbrook there is certainly a duplication of dam facilities and services in the region, with Council having to fund the maintenance and upgrade at all three dams. 3. One of the reasons some residents want Gordonbrook Dam reopened is ease of access in terms of travel time. Residents currently have free access to both Boondooma Dam and Bjelke-Petersen Dam as stocked impoundments. Travel time to these dams vary but from Kingaroy, it would take approximately 40 minutes to travel to Bjelke-Petersen Dam and 60minutes to Boondooma Dam. Given distances other communities have to travel to access this type of recreational facility, this time is not unreasonable. 4. If reopened for limited boating, Gordonbrook Dam would only be used during the day. There would be no overnight camping allowed.

Cyanobacteria 1. The following is an extract from a risk assessment report undertaken by Jardine Lloyd Thompson Pty Ltd (JLT) in 2004: “The problems facing Council are quite extensive and complicated by the uncertainty of the science associated with Cyanobacteria. Cyanobacteria, commonly called blue green algae, are present naturally in the environment, but on occasion form algal blooms which can have the following effects: • The water can be discoloured • Form scums • Produced unpleasant tastes and odours • Affect shellfish and fish populations • Reduce water quality • Otherwise create a nuisance Some of the species reportedly can produce toxins with potentially serious health effects for both animals and humans, including: • Liver, kidney and thymus damage • Interference with the function of the nervous system • Gastroenteritis

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 45 • Skin and eye irritation. Not all species produce all toxins, but the species present in the Gordonbrook Dam have been associated with identified harmful liver toxins and neurotoxins. Ongoing research into this problem is being carried out worldwide. The Gordonbrook Dam experiences some of the highest known levels of some of the toxins.” 1. The levels of Cyanobacterial blooms recorded by Council’s water testing staff are attached. As can been seen, the levels vary dramatically. Based on the Algae Management Protocols (copy attached), levels higher than 100,000 pose short term adverse health outcomes such as skin irritations or gastrointestinal illness following contact or accidental ingestion or severe acute poisoning is possible in worst ingestion cases. 2. The Engineering section will provide additional information and verbal explanation on the monitoring levels and requirements of DERM at the meeting.

Previous Investigations 1. In 2004, the former Kingaroy Shire Council commissioned Jardine Lloyd Thompson Pty Ltd (JLT) to undertake a Risk Assessment of the legal liability risks associated with allowing recreational fishing of Gordonbrook Dam. JLT involved representatives from Council, DPI Fisheries, Central Public Health Unit – Wide Bay and members of the Gordonbrook Dam Stocking Group in the risk assessment. A copy of this risk assessment is attached. 2. The risk assessment did not make recommendations as to whether to open the dam or not, but provided some guidance on the need to continually review the risk assessment to determine if any controls in place (whether the dam was open or not) were still adequate. 3. The former Kingaroy Shire Council also received advice from King and Co on the 18th March 1999 relating to opening the dam. A copy of that advice is also attached. Essentially, the advice is that Council would need to continue to close the dam during algae outbreaks. The erection of warning signs would not be sufficient to discharge Council from liability. This closure would normally be during the warmer periods of the year and could be up to six months.

Boondooma Fish Stocking Association 1. Cr Dalton and the Director of Lifestyle and Culture met with the Stocking Association in November 2009 in response to a letter received from them concerning reopening the dam for recreational boating and fishing. This stocking group would take over the funding from the former Gordonbrook Fish Stocking Group which no longer functions. A copy of those minutes is attached. 2. Their major concern was that a decision needed to be made soon, as funding under the “Stock Impoundment Program” (SIP) would not be made available if the dam continued to be closed and the association was not currently stocking the dam. They believed that if Gordonbrook Dam was taken off the SIP, it would be unlikely that it would be returned to the program at a later date. 3. The group was provided with information on the current situation and legal implications, particularly concerning the algae levels. The various readings were discussed with the group and the implications of having to close the dam explained to them. 4. They felt that they would consider taking over the stocking of the dam if the trigger to close the dam was 100,000 total cell count. They felt that it would be unviable to stock the dam and encourage fishing competitions if the trigger was 20,000. 5. If there is a fishing competition scheduled and the level of algae is above 100,000, there may be options to continue the competition under strict guidelines (eg: catch and release only). A risk assessment would need to be undertaken at the time to determine if this could be an option.

Conclusion Whether Gordonbrook dam is reopened to recreational boating or not Council will need to undertake substantial work at the dam to ensure that Council is discharging its duty of care in relation to the levels of Cyanobacteria blooms. This will include a community education program, more appropriate signage and better gates and locking mechanisms for keeping boats off the dam.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 46 If the dam is to remain closed, for Council to meet its duty of care, an investment of up to $30,000 is needed.If the dam is to be opened to limited boating (kayaks, canoes and electric motors), an investment of up to $50,000 will be needed.

Budget & Financial Aspects

If dam stays closed - $25,000 to $30,000 • To install updated and appropriate signage at the dam - $7,000. • The old wood BBQ’s need replacing with gas BBQ’s - $6,000 ($3,000 x 2) • The internal road needs significant work to fix washouts. An estimate has been requested from engineering services. • General cleanup of facilities required (e.g. repainting of toilets and benches) - $4,000 • Better fencing and barriers to keep boats from water $8,000 • Some of this expenditure could be spread out over the next few financial years. However, the signage and fencing would be a priority.

If dam is reopened - $45,000 to $50,000

• All of above expenditure, plus • Assistance for the stocking of fish at the dam. An estimate of $2,000 would be required. • Additional signage - $8,000 (this signage would need to be interchangeable and be installed over the top of the other signage detailed above when the status of the dam changes) • Council would need to ensure the community is continually updated on the level of algae in the dam. This could take the form of updates on our website, in the community newsletters and weekly on the Council sponsored fishing update on CROWFM. We could also provide regular media releases to the local paper and other media outlets. Cost for advertising for each year would be approximately $1,500. • Staff currently clean the toilets once per week and mow the area very three to four weeks. If reopened, the recommendation would be that this level of service be continued for the first 12 months to gauge the response from the public. To increase the servicing of the toilets to every Friday and Monday would cost an additional $300 per week ($7,800 per year). It is anticipated that the current servicing levels for mowing could remain the same. • Increased usage at the dam could also prompt requests for more improved services, eg: upgrade to toilet blocks, BBQ’s etc. These requests would need to be considered in future years in light of other priorities but could be substantial. • A buoy (or two) needs to be installed at an appropriate location to indicate that boating is not allowed past this point. Buoys, with moulded wording and foam filled will cost $685 each. (No fishing past this point can be moulded onto the buoys) Installation (concrete and chain) would cost approximated $400 each. - $1085 each

Funding of this cost The above costs are not currently included in any budget and would therefore be additional items. The signage, fencing and buoys would be capital or one off items with maintenance on these items being included in future years operational budgets.

Given Council’s current financial situation, it may be that some items could be funded from the Kingaroy Water funds with the remainder either being funded from general revenue or alternatively from a levy on all ratepayers. A levy of $1 would provide approximately $17,500 to help fund the costs associated with Gordonbrook Dam reopening.

Attachments

1. Risk Assessment – Gordonbrook Dam 2. Legal Advice – King and Company 3. Minutes from meeting with Boondooma Dam Fish Stocking Association 4. Blue Green Algae Management Protocols

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 47

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 48

8.2 Community Services

Nil.

9. Governance

9.1 Governance & Corporate Performance

Nil.

9.2 Human Resources

Nil.

10. Engineering Services

10.1 Water & Waste Water 10.1.1 W&WW - 851536 - Application for Water Supply at Lot 2 Oberles Road Hivesville - Applicant: Robert Ridder & Jodie Pitman

Document Information

IR No 851536

Author Manager Water and Wastewater

Endorsed By Interim Director Engineering Services

Date 25 March 2010

Précis

Application for Water Supply at Lot 2 Oberles Road Hivesville

Summary

Robert Ridder and Jodie Pitman have applied for connection to a block at Lot 2 Oberles Road Hivesville to run 20 head of cattle which would equate to approx 200KL per annum.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council approve the re-connection of non potable water at Lot 2 Oberles Road Hivesville with a restricted draw down of 10 litres per minute, subject to standard conditions and charges.

Council requires completion of the following:

• Provision of onsite storage in excess of 3 days peak supply • Payment of head-works charges currently $933.08 per EP estimated at $3,195. • Payment of Water connection charge currently $814

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 49

Provision of connection from Council meter to customers property boundary either by Council under private works quotation or private contractor.

Report

Council has received an application for water supply connection at Lot 2 Oberles Road. The block is situated behind the sports ground. The applicants have indicated that 20 head of cattle will be run on the block (approx 200KL). A flow rate of 10 litres per minute would be sufficient to supply this demand. There is sufficient capacity to supply this low flow supply in this area of the network.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 50

10.1.2 W&WW - 851540 - Report on riparian access for Wivenhoe Pipeline

Document Information

IR No 851540

Author Manager Water and Wastewater

Endorsed By Interim Director Engineering Services

Date 25 March 2010

Précis

Report on riparian access for Wivenhoe Pipeline.

Summary

Council has approached Water-Secure over the process for supplying water to riparian owners. Feedback has been that Council will be responsible for the recycled water management plans and assessing the end use for supply and control.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council write to riparian landholders informing them that Council is unable to act as a retailer for recycled water from the Tarong Recycled Water Pipeline and advise the land holders that they should contact the owner of the pipeline.

Report

Riparian owners previously accessed raw water from the Wivenhoe Pipeline. This access was removed during the change to recycled water in the pipeline. Council previously read the meters and billed customers on Tarong Energy’s behalf. These riparian owners have now approached Council requesting access to recycled water from the Wivenhoe Pipeline.

In order to assist previous Riparian Owners, Council has written to Watersecure to determine the conditions of supply relating to this recycled water including costs etc. Tarong Energy has committed to providing free transport along the main for this riparian supply in the interests of maintaining relations with landholders.

As the previous agreement with Tarong Energy has expired, Council no longer has any responsibility towards the previous Riparian Owners for supply of water and administration of agreements with Tarong Energy. To take on this role to supply these riparian landholders with recycled water and be responsible for the formation and maintenance of Recycled Water Supply Agreements would involve considerable use of Council resources in relation to plan development, monitoring and testing of water.

Council would also take on an increased risk profile as it has been made clear that any supply of recycled water would require Council to indemnify the suppliers of the bulk water. In view of this, it is not considered appropriate for Council to continue to be involved in the supply of water by Tarong Energy to riparian users.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 51

10.2 Operations

Nil.

11. Corporate Services

11.1 Financial Services 11.1.1 FS - 839415 - Sue McLay - Requesting that Council provide a reduction in water consumption charges for her mother's property situated at 64 Stephens Street West, Murgon

Document Information

IR No 839415

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 26 March 2010

Précis

Requesting Council reduce water consumption charges for property at 64 Stephens Street West, Murgon

Summary

A request has been received from Sue McLay to reduce her mother’s last two (2) water usage bills due to undetected water leaks located on the property.

It is recommended that due to the leak being repaired immediately after it was noticed, Council agree to provide a rate reduction of $176.13.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and refund $176.13, being an amount equivalent to 50% of the sum of, Mrs McLay’s water bills from August 2009 & February 2010, less her normal averaged water usage.

Report

Sue McLay has written a letter to Council advising that her mother has resided at this property since 1974. She states that her father passed away in June 2009, and due to her age, her mother is unable to conduct inspections at the property.

When the August 2009 rate notice was received, Sue McLay states that Ackinclose Plumbing was called to repair water leaks. They stated at that time that all leaks had been repaired. Upon receipt of the February 2010 rate notice, the same plumbers were called to the property again. Repairs were again carried out to leaking pipes.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 52 Mr & Mrs McLay have owned this property since 1974.Their consumption over the past 5 years has varied, ranging between 20 and 150 kilolitres. As this problem occurred and was repaired during the current reading period, we are not in a position to verify that his water consumption has returned to normal levels. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below.

Since amalgamation, there has not been a consistent or documented approach to handling these types of requests. However, after some discussion between elected councillors and council staff, a remission of 50% was considered appropriate.

Water Usage History

Meter No. R02003103 64 Stephens Street West, Murgon Date Reading Usage 30-06-2005 692 130 31-12-2005 770 78 30-06-2006 923 153 31-12-2006 1017 94 30-06-2007 1049 32 31-12-2007 1072 23 18-04-2008 1018 9 Meter No. R07026052 Date Reading Usage 18-04-2008 0 0 30-06-2008 9 9 31-12-2008 42 33 30-06-2009 219 177 16-12-2009 581 362 Average 62 KL $77.50

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bill in dispute $656.05

50% of Bill $ 328.03 Normal Usage = 62 @ $1.25 $ 77.50 Normal Usage = 62 @ $1.20 $ 74.40 $ 176.13 Amount of Council Remission $176.13

Amount to be paid by Mrs McLay $479.92

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 53

11.1.2 FS - 844970 - Stephen J Oliphant - Requesting that Council reduce his water consumption charges for his property at 4 Regent Street, Kingaroy

Document Information

IR No 844970

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 26 March 2010

Précis

Requesting Council reduce his water consumption charges for his property at 4 Regent Street, Kingaroy

Summary

A request has been received from Mr Stephen Oliphant to reduce the last two (2) water usage bills for his property due to a faulty stopcock/valve connected to his property.

It is recommended that Due to the faulty state of the stopcock/valve that Council agree to the request and provide a rate remission of $19.80.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and write off $19.80 being an amount equivalent to the of sum of, Mr & Mrs Oliphant’s water bills from February 2010, less their normal averaged water usage.

Report

Mr Oliphant has written a letter to Council requesting a reduction in the February 2010 water usage charges of $68.40 respectively. He states that on 25 September 2009, he reported a problem with the tap/stopcock. He also states that he did not receive a reply to his report, but did notice tool marks so assumed the problem had been fixed. A check of Council records has revealed that Council officers replaced the washer in the tap/stockcock on 5 October 2009.

Mr Oliphant claims that he has been supplementing his town water by pumping rain water from another tank prior to September 2009. Mr Oliphant states that while pumping, it did not take long to fill the tank to the float level. Upon investigation, he found that although the tap/stopcock had been turned off to stop the town water supply, the water meter was still registering and the water continued to flow until the float level at the tank was reached.

The Oliphant’s have owned this property since 1993. Their consumption has been very low for the past two (2) years, but doubled for the past two (2) reading periods. Their water usage ranges between 20 and 40 kilolitres.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 54 As this problem occurred and was repaired during the current reading period, we are not in a position to verify that his water consumption has returned to normal levels. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below.

Meter No. 02W417559 4 Regent Street, Kingaroy Date Reading Usage 04-01-2007 815 64 27-06-2007 827 12 14-01-2008 827 0 30-06-2008 847 20 31-12-2008 866 19 30-06-2009 907 41 16-12-2009 945 38 Average 27 KL $48.60

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bills in dispute $68.40

Normal Usage = 27 @ $1.70 $45.90

Amount of Council Remission $ 92.20

Amount to be paid by the Oliphants’ $19.80

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 55

11.1.3 FS - 539966 - Paul Wuersching - Requesting Council waive his excess water bill charges received for his property at 14 Lister Court Kingaroy

Document Information

IR No 539966

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 26 March 2010

Précis

Requesting Council waive his excess water bill charges received for his property at 14 Lister Court Kingaroy

Summary

A request has been received from Mr Paul Wuersching to waive the large water usage bill for his property due to a burst water pipe that occurred while he was away on holidays.

It is recommended that due to the leak being repaired immediately after it was noticed, Council agree to provide a rate reduction of $127.50.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and write off $127.50 being an an amount equivalent to 50% of sum of, Mr Wuersching’s water bill from August 2009, less his normal averaged water usage.

Report

Mr Wuersching has written a letter to Council advising that he feels his water bill of $350.20 from August 2009 is due to a water pipe that broke on his property while he was away on leave. He also states that the break coincides with Council replacing his old water meter and installing a new meter. The stopcock was switched off and arrangements where made to repair the leaking pipe as soon it was noticed.

Mr Wuersching has written this letter in response to Council’s rates staff contacting him by telephone on 5 August 2009. This was to advise him of the high water meter reading recorded during the scheduled half yearly water meter readings.

Mr Wuersching has owned this property since June 2006. His consumption is very consistent, and ranges between 26 and 32 kilolitres. In the six (6) months following the repair of the leak, Mr Wuersching’s water consumption has returned to his normal level – in this case 24 kilolitres. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below. He has requested that Council waive all water usage charges, except for his usual consumption.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 56 Since amalgamation, there has not been a consistent or documented approach to handling these types of requests. However, after some discussion between elected councillors and council staff, a remission of 50% was considered appropriate.

Water Usage History

Meter No. M591401 14 Lister Court, Kingaroy Date Reading Usage 16-06-2006 2610 15-12-2006 2640 30 15-06-2007 2667 27 19-12-2007 2699 32 30-06-2008 2725 26 31-12-2008 2751 26 16-01-2009 2757 6 Meter No.08W047434 16-01-2009 0 30-06-2009 200 200 11-12-2009 224 24 Average 28 KL $47.60

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bill in dispute $350.20

50% of Bill $175.10 Normal Usage = 28 @ $1.70 $ 47.60 $127.50 Amount of Council Remission $127.50

Amount to be paid by Mr Wuersching $222.70

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 57

11.1.4 FS - 812146 - Simon Stretton - Requesting Council reduce his excess water bill received for his property at 15 Burnett Street, Kingaroy

Document Information

IR No 812146

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 29 March 2010

Précis

Requesting Council reduce his larger than normal water bill received for his property at 15 Burnett Street Kingaroy

Summary

A request has been received from Mr Simon Stretton to reduce the large water usage bill for his property due to an undetected burst water pipe that occurred on his rental property.

It is recommended that due to the leak being repaired immediately after it was noticed, Council agree to provide a rate reduction of $229.50.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and write off $229.50 being an amount equivalent to 50% of the sum of, Mr Stretton’s water bill from February 2010, less his normal averaged water usage.

Report

Mr Stretton has advised that his water bill of $621.00 from February 2010 is due to a water pipe that broke on his property. He states that he has elderly tenants residing at the premises.

Council officers contacted Mr Stretton on 16 December 2009, to advise of a very high water meter reading. Mr Stretton attended the premises the next day. Although no water was being used by the tenants, the meter was registering a usage of 1 litre per minute.

Kingaroy Plumbing Works were called and located a split pipe under the house at the rear.

Mr Stretton has owned this property since September 2007. His (tenants) consumption is very consistent, and ranges between 20 and 60 kilolitres. As the leak occurred and was repaired during the current reading period, we are not in a position to verify that his water consumption has returned to normal levels. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below.

Mr Stretton has requested that Council waive all water usage charges, except for his usual consumption.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 58 Since amalgamation, there has not been a consistent or documented approach to handling these types of requests. However, after some discussion between elected councillors and council staff, a remission of 50% was considered appropriate.

Water Usage History

Meter No. 03W530282 15 Burnett Street, Kingaroy Date Reading Usage 22-06-2007 728 08-01-2008 780 52 30-06-2008 845 65 31-12-2008 894 49 30-06-2009 906 12 14-12-2009 1251 345 Average 45 KL $81.00

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bill in dispute $621.00

50% of Bill $310.50 Normal Usage = 45 @ $1.80 $ 81.00 $229.50 Amount of Council Remission $229.50

Amount to be paid by Mr Stretton $391.50

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 59

11.1.5 FS - 838533 - Terry Tumney - Requesting Council refund the difference between the total of his February 2009 and the total of his August 2009 water bill, due to Council's delay in advising him of a leak on his side of the water meter

Document Information

IR No 838533

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 26 March 2010

Précis

Requesting Council for a refund of excessive water usage charges on the February 2010 rate notice for his property at 15 Fairview Drive, Nanango.

Summary

A request has been received from Mr Terry Tumney to reduce the $198.36 water usage bill for his property due to a seven (7) day delay in Council staff advising him that a bad leak on his side of the water meter was his responsibility to repair.

It is recommended that due to the time taken to advise Mr Tumney the leak was his responsibility. that Council agree to the request.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and refund $148.77, being the sum of Mr Tumney's water bill from February 2010, less his normal averaged water usage.

Report

Mr Tumney has written a letter to Council advising that he went into the Nanango office on Monday 7 September 2009 and reported a water leak at the water meter. He was advised that a Council plumber would attend to the problem. As Mr Tumney was not at home on that day, he states that he did not know if anyone came out to his property or not.

Over the following days, the leak became worse. Mr Tumney states that he attended the Nanango office again on the 10th September 2009. He was again told that someone would be out straight away. Again, Mr Tumney states that no plumber was forthcoming.

By Monday morning 14 September, the leak is now a major problem, flooding a couple of yards. Mr Tumney states that at 9.00am on that day, he spoke with Andrew Grant. Mr Tumney states that he was advised that a Council plumber did attend to his meter on the first Monday, but found that the leak was on Mr Tumney’s side of the water meter.

Mr Tumney then states that the leak was repaired immediately. He was provided a copy of an invoice from South Burnett Plumbing Supplies showing the costs of repairs etc for his address on that same day.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 60

Mr Tumney is disgruntled with the fact that after the prompt reply to his initial report of the water leak, he did not receive a prompt reply from Council advising that responsibility for repairing the lead, rested with him. If he had known, he would have had the leak repaired before it became a major problem.

Mr Tumney is now claiming for a refund of excessive water usage charges – the difference between his current bill $198.36 and his previous bill $43.89. It is possible (even very likely) that between 100 kl and 200 kl was wasted in the seven (7) day period of the leak.

Mr Tumney has owned this property since November 2008. His consumption does fluctuate, and ranges between 35 and 90 kilolitres. As the leak occurred and was repaired during the current reading period, we are not in a position to verify that his water consumption has returned to normal levels. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below.

Water Usage History

Meter No. 02W428506 15 Fairway Drive, Nanango Date Reading Usage 30-06-2008 1239 7 31-12-2008 1239 0 30-06-2009 1296 57 11-12-2009 1524 228 Average 57 KL $49.59

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bill in dispute $198.36

Normal Usage = 57 @ $0.87 $ 49.59 $ 49.59 Amount of Council Remission $ 148.77

Amount to be paid by the Mr Tumney $49.59

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 61

11.1.6 FS - 562118 - Ross Olsson - Requesting that Council reduce his parent's excess water bill for their property at 7 Candelo Close, Kingaroy

Document Information

IR No 562118

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 26 March 2010

Précis

Requesting Council reduce his parent’s excess water bill for their property at 7 Candelo Close, Kingaroy

Summary

A request has been received from Mr Ross Olsson, on behalf of Stuart & Agnes Olsson to reduce the large $2,057.00 water usage bill for their property due to an undetected leak.

It is recommended that due to the leak being repaired immediately after it was noticed, Council agree to provide a rate reduction of $980.90.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and refund $980.90, being amount equivalent to 50% of sum of, Mr & Mrs Olsson’s water bill from August 2009, less their normal averaged water usage.

Report

Mr Olsson has written a letter to Council requesting a reduction in the August 2009 water usage charges of $2,057.00. He states that the first he knew about the high water usage was due to the water meter reader advising of a high water meter reading.

As a result of the high reading, Mr Olsson states that an extensive search was conducted by both himself and a licensed plumber. No leak, or any evidence of a leak was located. However, the water line running from the meter to the dwelling was replaced.

The Olsson’s have owned this property for a number of years. Their consumption is very consistent, and ranges between 20 and 50 kilolitres. In the six (6) months following the repair of the leak, the Olsson’s water consumption has returned to it's normal level in this case 23 kilolitres. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below. He has requested that Council waive all water usage charges, except for their usual consumption.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 62 Water Usage History

Meter No. 00W294324 7 Candelo Close, Kingaroy Date Reading Usage 09-06-2005 286 37 16-12-2005 313 27 16-06-2006 333 20 15-12-2006 353 20 15-06-2007 372 19 19-12-2007 397 25 30-06-2008 425 28 31-12-2008 476 51 30-06-2009 1686 1210 11-12-2009 1709 23 Average 28 KL $47.60

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bill in dispute $2,057.00

50% of Bill $1,028.50 Normal Usage = 28 @ $1.70 $ 47.60 $ 980.90 Amount of Council Remission $ 980.90

Amount to be paid by the Olssons’ $1,076.10

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 63

11.1.7 FS - 845870 - Steven Watkinson, Solicitor on behalf of George & Nithya Ratnavale - Requesting a reduction in the February 2010 water bill due to an undetected leak at the property situated at 54 Brisbane Street Nanango

Document Information

IR No 845870

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 26 March 2010

Précis

Requesting that Council consider a reduction in the excess water bill received in August 2009 for the property at 54 Brisbane Street, Nanango.

Summary

A request has been received from Steven Watkinson, Solicitor requesting that Council reduce the large $2,418.25 water usage bill for his clients, property due to an undetected leak that was only located after Council staff notified them of a very high water meter reading.

It is recommended that due to the leak being repaired immediately after it was noticed, Council agree to provide a rate reduction of $1151.71

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and write off $1151.71, being an amount equivalent to 50% of the sum of, Mr & Mrs Ratnavale’s water bill from February 2010, less their normal averaged water usage.

Report

Steven Watkinson, Solicitor, has written a letter to Council on behalf of his clients, Mr & Mrs Ratnavale, the owners of the property, advising that the first they knew about the very high water usage, was a letter received from Council staff advising that they had an elevated water usage at the property.

However, prior to this, on 13 January 2010, Wilson’s Plumbing from Nanango were called to the property by the rental property managers, Raine & Horne Real Estate. They advised Wilson’s Plumbing that there appeared to be a major leak on the property, in an area behind the laundry block. The call from the property managers came as a result of a mowing contractor getting his ride-on mower bogged in the wet ground.

Steven Watkinson has stated that he believes his clients are entitled to a reduction for the following reasons:

• They do not reside on the property; • The leak affected area cannot be seen from the flats;

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 64 • The leak affected area is not where the residents would commonly walk or need to walk; • The leak was repaired as soon as the leak was detected

The Solicitor has requested that the large bill be reduced and recalculated based on historic consumption.

The Ratnavale’s have owned this rental property since December 2003. The consumption for the past two (2) years has been very consistent, after a short period of higher readings. Their quarterly usage ranges between 20 and 220 kilolitres. As the leak occurred and was repaired during the current reading period, we are not in a position to verify that his water consumption has returned to normal levels. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below.

Water Usage History

Meter No. MN02073 54 Brisbane Street, Nanango Date Reading Usage 31-12-2006 5379 173 31-03-2007 5605 226 30-06-2007 5632 27 30-09-2007 5641 9 31-12-2007 5680 39 31-03-2008 5710 30 30-06-2008 5745 35 31-12-2008 5788 43 30-06-2009 5866 78 11-12-2009 7367 1501 Average 66 KL $57.42

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bill in dispute $2,418.25

50% of Bill $1,209.13 Normal Usage = 66 @ $0.87 $ 57.42 $1,151.71 Amount of Council Remission $1,151.71

Amount to be paid by Mr & Mrs Ratnavale $1,266.54

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 65

11.1.8 FS - 839414 - Robert A Hunt - Requesting that Council provide a one off reduction in his water consumption charges for his property at 98 Basin Road, Hivesville

Document Information

IR No 839414

Author Rates Team Leader

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 26 March 2010

Précis

Requesting Council reduce his water consumption charges for his property at 98 Basin Road, Hivesville

Summary

A request has been received from Mr Robert Hunt to reduce his most recent water usage bill for his property due to an undetected water leak (burst water pipe) located on his property.

It is recommended that due to the leak being repaired immediately after it was noticed, Council agree to provide a rate reduction of $291.00.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council agree to reduce the water charges and write off $291.00 an amount equivalent to 50% of the sum of, Mr Hunt’s water bill from February 2010, less their normal averaged water usage.

Report

Mr Hunt has written a letter to Council advising that his large water bill of $644.40 from February 2010 is due to a water pipe that burst on his property in an area which he doesn’t often traverse. His property has an area of almost 13.5 hectares.

Mr Hunt states that he always tries to minimise his water usage, and his highest reading to date, before the current period that includes the leak, has been 44 kilolitres for a six month period. This claim is supported by his reading history.

Mr Hunt has owned this property since March 2008. His consumption has been minimal, and has varied slightly, ranging between 10 and 40 kilolitres. As the usage has been rising, perhaps the leak had been developing for some time.

As this problem occurred and was repaired during the current reading period, we are not in a position to verify that his water consumption has returned to normal levels. Details of water meter readings and water usage are shown in the table below.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 66 Since amalgamation, there has not been a consistent or documented approach to handling these types of requests. However, after some discussion between elected councillors and council staff, a remission of 50% was considered appropriate.

Water Usage History

Meter No. M1851 98 Basin Road, Abbeywood Date Reading Usage 17-12-2007 1201 18-03-2008 1209 8 23-06-2008 1228 19 31-12-2008 1258 30 30-06-2009 1302 44 16-12-2009 1839 537 Average 26 KL $31.20

Calculation of Remission

Sum of Water Bill in dispute $644.40

50% of Bill $ 322.20 Normal Usage = 26 @ $1.20 $ 31.20 $ 291.00 Amount of Council Remission $291.00

Amount to be paid by Mr Hunt $353.40

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 67

11.1.9 FS -851512 - South Burnett Regional Council Monthly Financial Statements

Document Information

IR No 851512

Author Manager Financial Services

Endorsed By Director Corporate Services

Date 29 March 2010

Précis

Report on the Financial Position of South Burnett Regional Council as at 28 February 2010.

Summary

The following information provides a snapshot of Council’s Financial Position as at 28 February 2010.

Officer's Recommendation

That the Monthly Financial Report as at 28 February 2010 be received.

Report

Financial Report of the South Burnett Regional Council as at 28 February 2010.

Cash at Bank $ 24,591,188 Working Cash $ 10,187,886 Reserves $ 14,403,302

CURRENT POSITION

Current Assets February January Cash and Cash Equivalents $ 24,591,188 $ 21,169,079 Trade and Other Receivables $ 15,564,985 $ 18,231,041 Inventories $ 824,097 $ 894,339 Loans to Community Organisations $ 8,629 $ 13,057 Provision for Bad Debt -$380,000 -$380,000 Other Financial Assets $ 204,614 $ 221,004 $ 40,903,513 $ 40,148,520

Current Liabilities Trade and other Payables $ 1,559,869 $ 3,279,215 Borrowings (Payable within 12 months) $ 1,615,542 $ 1,615,542 Provisions $ 2,051,056 $ 2,241,037 Other $ 245,797 $ 329,420 $ 5,472,264 $ 7,465,214

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 68

Attachments

1. South Burnett Regional Council February Financial Statements

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 69

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 70

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 71

11.2 Corporate Support & Information Services

Nil.

12. Executive Services

12.1 ES - 849163 - Mayor & Deputy Mayor Attendance Authorisation for the Royalties for Regions Queensland Workshop

Document Information

IR No 849163

Author Mayor’s Personal Assistant

Endorsed By Chief Executive Officer

Date 30 March 2010

Précis

Mayor & Deputy Mayor Attendance Authorisation for the Royalties for Regions Queensland Workshop

Summary

The Royalties for Regions meeting is to discuss the proposal to distribute a share of the royalties collected by the state government back to the regions from which the royalties are collected. These royalties are collected by the state government as a result of the extraction of minerals and resources principally by mining companies. Currently these royalties collected by the state government just form part of the overall revenue collected by the state. These funds are tied to specific expenditure.

In Western Australia the system delivers 25% of the royalties collected being returned for projects in the regions from which the royalties are collected. The push by Mayors around the state is for a similar system to be implemented in Queensland and therefore return a specified proportion of the royalties collected back to the region from which the royalties are collected.

It is a requirement under the Reimbursement of Expenses and the Provision of Facilities for Councillors Policy that the Mayor and Councillors obtain authorisation to be reimbursed for attendance and travel to meetings.

The Royalties for Regions Queensland Workshop, hosted by Western Downs Regional Council, will be held on Thursday, 20 May 2010 in Brisbane.

Officer's Recommendation

That the Mayor and Deputy Mayor be authorised to attend the Royalties for Regions Queensland Workshop, hosted by Western Downs Regional Council, on Thursday, 20 May 2010 in Brisbane.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 72

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 73

12.2 ES - 851615 - Regional & Local Community Infrastructure Program (RLCIP) Round Two Approved Projects

Document Information

IR No 851615

Author Executive Assistant

Endorsed By Acting Chief Executive Officer

Date 29 March 2010

Précis

Regional & Local Community Infrastructure Program (RLCIP) Round Two Approval Process

Summary

The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government advised Council late last week that the list of projects submitted under the RLCIP2 $100m was approved.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council note the confirmed projects

Report

Council was granted $547,000 from the Federal Government under the RLCIP2 $100M. This money was to be allocated to infrastructure projects under the funding guidelines. In late 2009 Council submitted a list of projects for approval by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government.

In late January 2010 Council received advice from the department that four (4) of the projects submitted required clarification. Further discussions with the department confirmed that these projects were ineligible under the funding guidelines. A report was forwarded to the February Council Meeting outlining this situation. The outcome was to increase the project scope for standpipes, softfall and shade covers and installation of fitness equipment in the South Burnett Region.

The department has now advised Council that the projects forwarded have been assessed for compliance with the program guidelines and that the following projects have been approved.

Please note the approved projects are the projects with an amount in the Approved column.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 74

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 75

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 76

12.3 ES - 850233 - Quota Requirements for Divided Local Governments

Document Information

IR No 850233

Author Chief Executive Officer

Date 25 March 2010

Précis

Quota requirements for divided local governments

Summary

Update on quota requirements for divided local governments – legislative requirements under the current and the new Local Government Act.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council note the information supplied regarding the review of voters in each of the divisions in the South Burnett Regional Council area to ensure compliance with the quota tolerances.

Report

Under the Local Government Act, 1993 division two – quota requirements for local governments the process is outlined to ensure that divided local governments quota comply with the tolerances allowed in the legislation. Under the 1993 Act each Council that has divisions was required to review the quotas by 1 March in the year before the next scheduled quadrennial election. Under the 2009 Act which will take effect on 1 July 2010, the local government with divisions is required to undertake a similar review no later than 2 years before the year of the next quadrennial election.

There is a slight quandary in that currently we are operating under the 1993 Act and the 2009 Act does not become effective until 1 July 2010. In conjunction with Electoral Commission Queensland we have undertaken a review to check the current status of each of the divisions.

The following table outlines the status of the divisions prior to the 2008 elections and as at 26 February 2010. You will note from the table that whilst there is 263 additional voters there has also been slight movement in a number of voters per division. Whilst none of the divisions are close to being outside the tolerances, divisions one, four and six will need to be monitored.

Div % from % from SBRC Voters Reps Ave Enr Low High In/Out No. Quota Tol 26 Feb 2010 1 3235 1 3426 3083 3769 ok -5.6 ok 2 3387 1 3426 3083 3769 ok -1.1 ok 3 3326 1 3426 3083 3769 ok -2.9 ok 4 3681 1 3426 3083 3769 ok 7.4 ok 5 3297 1 3426 3083 3769 ok -3.8 ok 6 3630 1 3426 3083 3769 ok 6.0 ok (10%) Total 20556 6 3426 3083 3769

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 77

Div % from % from SBRC Voters Reps Ave Enr Low High In/Out No. Quota Tol 26 Feb 2008 1 3181 1 3382 3044 3720 ok -5.9 ok 2 3252 1 3382 3044 3720 ok -3.8 ok 3 3307 1 3382 3044 3720 ok -2.2 ok 4 3604 1 3382 3044 3720 ok 6.6 ok 5 3381 1 3382 3044 3720 ok 0.0 ok 6 3568 1 3382 3044 3720 ok 5.5 ok (10%) Total 20293 6 3382 3044 3720

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 78

13. Information Section

13.1 IS - 853280 - Reports for the Information of Council

Document Information

IR No 853280

Author Administration Section

Date 30 March 2010

Précis

Reports received for the Information of Council

Summary

Corporate Services Statistical Report Workplace Health and Safety Report Delegated Authority Report List of Correspondence pending completion of assessment

Officer's Recommendation

That the following reports be received

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 79

14. General Section

Nil.

SOUTH BURNETT REGIONAL COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING – AGENDA / MINUTES - 7 April 2010 PAGE 80