Councillor Vanessa Keenan Wagga Wagga City Council
Councillor Rod Kendall Wagga Wagga City Council
Donna Argus Community Member
Caroline Angel Commercial Operations Sector Manager
Keith Seghers Subdivision Coordinator
Shaula Siregar Engineer - Water & Waste Assets
Darryl Wood Project Manger
Josh Lang Communications & Engagement Officer
Stacey Post Project Communications Officer
Sam Robins Town Planner
Tony Phelps Environmental Management Team Leader
Mark Gardiner Manager Environment & City Compliance
Crystal Golden Senior Strategic Planner
Tristan Kell Manager City Strategy
Harj Singh Manager City Development
Shannon Postma Manager Project Operations
Scott Gray Manager Executive Support
Steve Gray WMA Water
Erin Askew WMA Water
Maree Ingram Administration Coordinator (Minute Taker)
Andrew Irvine Community Member
Steve Manwaring Office of Environment and Heritage
The meeting of the Floodplain Risk Management Advisory Committee commenced at 2pm.
Acknowledgement Of Country
I would like to Acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of this Land, on which this meeting takes place and to pay my respects to Elders past and present.
Confirmation of Minutes
That the Minutes of the proceedings of the Floodplain Risk Management Advisory Committee held on 6 December 2016 be confirmed as a true and accurate record.
Declarations Of InteresT
There were no Declarations of Interest received.
Reports from Staff
That the Committee receive and note report
Project 1753 – Wagga Wagga Major Overland Flow Flood (MOFF) Risk Management Study and Plan
Council Staff are currently working on a proposal with WMAwater.
Project 1793 - Main City and North Wagga Levee Upgrade – Construction Stage 1
Tender documents for stage 1 have been uploaded with 40 downloads to date. Registrations have been received for a compulsory site meeting on 15 March 2017
Project 2000 – Wagga Wagga Revised Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan
Update on the progress of the project was provided to the Committee by Steve Gray from WMAwater. To date Stage 1 of the Wagga Wagga Revised FRMS & P has been completed. The majority of analysis for Stage 2 has been undertaken and now WMAwater are finalising reporting which will lead to a draft report for public exhibition following input from OEH and Council. The draft plan will be available on line and a hard copy to be placed in the library. Community consultation will be undertaken by way of shopping centre pop up shops with a Town hall meeting planned at the end of the consultation process. There will be mail outs to neighbourhood groups/progress associations and items in Council News and on social media. The community will be encouraged to book time with the consultants so that can be taken through a presentation on the review. A media plan is currently being developed that aims to be positive and clear in its message to the community.
Ø Cr Kendall suggested the need to clarify the definition of development within the report to eliminate confusion in respect to restrictions to buildings and fill as opposed to sports grounds and farming enterprises
Ø D Argus - Does the Hydraulic Category map incorporate the Main City Levee upgrade
§ Steve Gray - it does
Ø Cr Kendall – Need to have a discussion in in the DCP as to what is and isn’t allowed in the Floodplain
§ Steve Gray – Possibly place a caveat that doesn’t support different kinds of development
Ø Cr Kendall – Also include planting of vegetation guidelines
§ Steve Gray – The detail of impediments will be come down to Council through the DCP
Ø D Argus – There is a need for greater community awareness/education in respect to DCP controls as generally the community are not aware of the impediments until they lodge a DA including vegetation control.
Ø Cr Kendall – Given that vegetation planting is currently exempt from the DA process, there is a need to consider a risk management strategy for it.
Ø Cr Argus – Would I need to lodge a DA to build my own levee?
§ S Robins – yes
Ø Steve Gray – Need to be careful when suggesting no development in the floodplain as there are some activities that are permissible. Consideration should be given to development possibilities .
Ø Cr Kendall – Best to tell the public what they can do not what they can’t do, have a positive approach.
§ S Robins – It is very difficult to sit in middle ground, telling people what they ‘can’ do is as problematic as telling people what they can’t do. This information needs to be carefully reviewed by planners before its communicated to the public
Ø D Argus – There is a need to take a bit of a risk, need good community consultation.
Ø S Robins – Developers sometimes only read the one document you given them, if that says ‘they can build a shed’ then they will assume there is no further assessment and it’s a guaranteed approval
Ø Cr Kendall – There is already an item in the Floodplain document that relates to zones.
§ C Golden – Zones don’t relate to the Floodplain
Ø D Argus – There is a strong argument to broaden community awareness around planning and the Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan review provides a good opportunity to do this.
§ Steve Gray – It would be better to state what you can positively do, rather than be draconian in regard to development on the floodplain
Ø H Singh – some appropriate development may be approved if it addresses certain controls
Ø Cr Keenan – Is there anyway to capture the cumulative impact of minor developments on the floodplain as eventually they could add up to a number of developments that potentially may have a major effect. Has this been looked at?
§ Steve Grey – There have been a number of scenarios developed as to the cumulative impact and some assumptions have been made. Some sort of more control as to what happens on the northern floodplain as it impedes flow of water.
Ø Cr Keenan - Any recommendation for a quota of minor developments for staff?
§ Steve Grey – There are controls in the DCP that achieve the objection of less flow obstruction with the intent to not block flow.
Ø S Robins – The state government have already determined a number of developments that can go ahead with no involvement from Council. Staff only get to see these once a DA has been lodged.
Ø Cr Kendall – There is need to have controls on how sheds etc are built with a dedicated chapter in the DCP.
§ S Robins – There is already a separate chapter but it needs more effective controls.
Ø Cr Kendall – This should be considered in the LEP
Ø D Argus – Have provided history of three approvals given by Council for the construction of sheds in the floodplain. Council allowed this because the land was zoned appropriately, however the approval did not include the fill.
Ø Cr Kendall – There needs to be a whole of community ownership
Ø D Argus – Inequity for development creates contention in the community.
Ø Cr Keenan – It reduces the authority of Planning instruments if they are not used/policed correctly.
Ø D Argus – A lack of resources within Council to police developments does not help.
Ø D Argus – Would like to see a mail out to residents included as a form of notification to the community for the upcoming community consultation meetings as some residents do not read the newspaper or may not be on social media.
QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE
QWN-1 COMMITTEE CONSTITUTION
Requires updating to reflect recent changes to position titles within Council . Amended constitution to be distributed to Committee members for review and comment.
QWN-2 GENERAL MANAGER Letter of Acknowledmgement
Community member Donna Argus requested that future thank you letters to community members at the end of their term, be more specific as it did not indicate that they had to reapply for a position on the committee.
This matter was noted and will be passed on to Council’s Governance section for information.
The Floodplain Risk Management Advisory Committee rose at 3.20pm.