NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

15 April 2010

 

Council has adopted the following Vision and Mission Statements to describe its philosophy and to provide a focus for the principal activities detailed in its Management Plan.

 

Our Vision

 

Nambucca Valley ~ Living at its best.

 

Our? Mission Statement

 

?The Nambucca Valley will value and protect its natural environment, maintain its assets and infrastructure and develop opportunities for its people.?

 

Our Values in Delivery

 

?                Effective leadership

?                Strategic direction

?                Sustainability of infrastructure and assets

?                Community involvement and enhancement through partnerships with Council

?                Enhancement and protection of the environment

?                Maximising business and employment opportunities through promotion of economic development

?                Addressing social and cultural needs of the community through partnerships and provision of facilities and services

?                Actively pursuing resource sharing opportunities

 

Council Meetings:? Overview and Proceedings

 

Council meetings are held on the first and third Thursday of each month commencing at 5.30 pm.? Council meetings are held in the Council Chamber at Council's Administration Centre?44 Princess Street, Macksville.

 

How can a Member of the Public Speak at a Council Meeting?

 

Members of the public are welcome to attend meetings and address the Council.? Registration to speak may be made by telephone or in person before 2.00 pm on a meeting day.? These items will be brought forward at 5.30 pm in agenda order, and dealt with before other items.? Public addresses are limited to five (5) minutes per person with a limit of two people speaking for and two speaking against an item.?

 

Council allows not more than two (2) members of the public per meeting to address it on matters not listed in the business paper provided the request is received before publication of the business paper and the subject of the address is disclosed and recorded on the agenda.

 

Speakers should address issues and refrain from making personal attacks or derogatory remarks.? You must treat others with respect at all times.

 

Meeting Agenda

 

These are available from the Council's Administration Building, the Regional Libraries in Macksville and Nambucca Heads as well as outlets in all towns and villages of the Shire and Council?s website: www.nambucca.nsw.gov.au

 

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

 

Acknowledgement of Country????????? ? (Mayor)

 

I would like to Acknowledge the Gumbaynggirr people who are the Traditional Custodians of this Land.? I would also like to pay respect to the elders both past and present and extend that respect to any Aboriginal People present.

 

AGENDA?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Page

 

1??????? APOLOGIES

2??????? PRAYER

3??????? DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

4??????? CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ? Ordinary Council Meeting - 1 April 2010

5??????? DELEGATIONS?Motion to hear Delegations

6??????? ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE ??

7??????? QUESTIONS FOR CLOSED MEETING WHERE DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED

8??????? General Manager Report

8.1???? Outstanding Actions and Reports

8.2???? Further Investigation of an On-Stream Water Storage - Recommended Brief and Budget

8.3???? Termination of Gordon Park Australia Day Carnival

8.4???? Country Hall Renewal Fund - Grant Offers of $50,000 for Argents Hill Hall and $25,000 for Burrapine Hall

9??????? Director Environment and Planning Report

9.1???? DEP Applications and Statistical Reports July 2009-June 2010, 2002-2010 and Certificates Received 2004-2010

9.2???? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 5 April 2010

9.3???? DA's and CDC's Received and Determined under Delegated Authority 23 March-1 April 2010

9.4???? Report on Access Committee meeting including AGM held 23 March 2010

9.5???? POEO Monitoring Administration - Tewinga

9.6???? Report on proposed off-leash area - Stuart Island, Nambucca Heads

9.7???? Report on Census Population of Macksville Urban Area

9.8???? Report on Minutes of Clarence Regional Library Committee of Management meeting held 26 March 2010

10????? Director Engineering Services Report

10.1?? Backflow Prevention Policy

10.2?? Flood Damage - February, March/April, May and October/November 2009 ?

11????? General Purpose Committee 14 April 2010

12????? GENERAL MANAGER?S PERFORMANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE 15 APRIL 2010

 

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS

 

 

Name of Meeting:

 

Meeting Date:

 

Item/Report Number:

 

Item/Report Title:

 

 

 

I

 

declare the following interest:

????????? (name)

 

 

 

 

Pecuniary ? must leave chamber, take no part in discussion and voting.

 

 

 

Non Pecuniary ? Significant Conflict ? Recommended that Councillor/Member leaves chamber, takes no part in discussion or voting.

 

 

Non-Pecuniary ? Less Significant Conflict ? Councillor/Member may choose to remain in Chamber and participate in discussion and voting.

 

For the reason that

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed

 

Date

 

 

 

 

 

Council?s Email Address ? council@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

 

Council?s Facsimile Number ? (02) 6568 2201

 

(Instructions and definitions are provided on the next page).

 


Definitions

 

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

 

Pecuniary ? An interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person or another person with whom the person is associated.

(Local Government Act, 1993 section 442 and 443)

 

A Councillor or other member of a Council Committee who is present at a meeting and has a pecuniary interest in any matter which is being considered must disclose the nature of that interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.

 

The Council or other member must not take part in the consideration or discussion on the matter and must not vote on any question relating to that matter. (Section 451).

 

 

Non-pecuniary ? A private or personal interest the council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Act (for example; a friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a financial nature).

 

If you have declared a non-pecuniary conflict of interest you have a broad range of options for managing the conflict.? The option you choose will depend on an assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of your interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with.? You must deal with a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in at least one of these ways.

 

?        It may be appropriate that no action is taken where the potential for conflict is minimal.? However, council officials should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict does not exist.

?        Limit involvement if practical (for example, participate in discussion but not in decision making or visa-versa).? Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.

?        Remove the source of the conflict (for example, relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the conflict or reallocating the conflicting duties to another officer).

?        Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the provisions in section 451(2) of the Act apply (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest).

 

??????? ?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

General Manager's Report

ITEM 8.1????? SF959????????????? 150410???????? Outstanding Actions and Reports

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

The following table is a report on all outstanding resolutions and questions from Councillors (except development consents, development control plans & local environmental plans). Matters which are simply noted or received, together with resolutions adopting rates, fees and charges are not listed as outstanding actions. Where matters have been actioned they are indicated with strikethrough and then removed from the report to the following meeting. Please note that the status comments have been made one week before the Council meeting.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the list of outstanding actions and reports be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

No

FILE

NO

COUNCIL

MEETING

SUMMARY OF MATTER

ACTION

BY

STATUS

JULY 2008

1

Item 9.9

03/07/08

Council make representation to Minister for Lands seeking agreed compensation for subdivision of Reserve 91694

 

GM

Letter sent 15/07/08.

Follow up letter sent 14/11/2008.

Minister for Lands has advised by letter dated 8/1/09 that land will be made available to Council as per the agreement following finalisation of an Aboriginal Land Claim.

 

Follow up letter sent 9 April

 

Follow up letter sent 10 February 2010

 

Plan lodged with Department of Lands.? Compulsory acquisition can start once plan is registered.

2

Item 11.4

03/07/08

That a new plan of management be prepared for Farringdon Playing Fields

DES

Preparation of Plan of Management commenced.

Nambucca River Masterplan has identified possible users.

 

Low priority.

 

 


OCTOBER 2008

3

RF256

 

16/10/08

Notice of Motion - Riverbank Erosion - Riverside Drive Nambucca Heads ? report re geotechnical engineers re stability of Riverside Drive

 

 

DES

 

Catchment Assessment:

Final report assessed.? Maintenance recommendation included in works program.? There are a number of existing stormwater inlet pits within the study area which require maintenance.? These pits are blocked with vegetation and debris both within the pit and in the grate and lintel, grates are broken, and lintels are broken, reducing the inlet capacity of each pit.? Maintenance and repair of these pits will at least ensure each pit is functioning to its capacity.

 

Phase 2 analysis of pipeline from Bismark to Nambucca Streets authorised.

 


 

FEBRUARY 2009

 

4

SF241

5/02/09

That a new plan of management for the reserve within Kingsworth Estate be prepared by DES.?

 

To include pedestrian and vehicular access arrangements and management of environmental values.

 

DES

October 2009

Preparation of Plan of Management commenced.

Requests for information sent to Nambucca Heads Local Aboriginal Land Council and DECC.

The Lands Council has advised they will charge for an archaeological assessment.

In respect to the Kingsworth Lake Reserve the potential for Aboriginal objects to be found near this area is HIGH and inspections should be carried out as a walk over site survey should any activity be planned for this area.

 

 

MAY 2009

 

5

SF1213

07/05/09

Allocation for retaining wall at Little Beach be deferred for consideration at the September Quarterly Review

 

DES

GM

November 2009

Follow-up letter sent.

No reply at 17 July 2009

No reply at 10 August 2009.

No reply at 21 August 2009.

No reply at 7 Sept 2009.

No reply expected until Scotts Head Master Plan completed.

 

 

6

SF1213

07/05/09

Council review the cycleway plan so as to ensure its funding requirements are realistic.

 

DES

December 2009

 

The revision of the Plan will need to be deferred so that staff can give priority to the construction of the cycleway south of Nambucca Heads.? May 2010 GPC

 

 

7

SF1213

07/05/09

Council receive a report on the funding and use of the reserves for the Council Chambers Upkeep, Self Insurance and Tourist Centre Upkeep.

 

GM

September 2009.? Delayed to October 2009.

Delayed till November 2009.

Obtaining information on cost/benefit of increasing self insurance reserve and reducing the schedule of insured buildings.

Report in December 2009.

GM attending to more urgent issues.? Will try to complete for 21 January meeting.? Proposals put to Council?s insurer and auditor re self insurance of plant and equipment.? To be reported to budget workshop.

 

 

8

SF452

21/05/09

Council seek from the Minister for the Environment acceptance that the sampling data for the old landfill indicate down stream impacts are minimal and re-installation of the leachate interception trench is not justifiable.

 

DES

Local DECC office advised by letter of Council?s intention.

Formal proposal for Minister being prepared.

Positive progress being made with DECC rep.

Information provided on sampling to DECC.

For determination. Under consideration by Regional and State offices.

Meeting held 12 March 2010.

Written response expected by 16/4/10

 

9

SF452

21/05/09

Council consider the provision of additional monitoring bores at the landfill with a report on the cost for installation and monitoring.

 

DES

Report to July 2009.

Proceeding to provide 3 addition monitoring bores at the Cost of $3,000.

Defer until need determined.

Water quality meets standards downstream.

On-hold.? See above.

Meeting held 12 March 2010.

Written response expected by 16/4/10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JULY 2009

 

10

SF283

16/7/09

Option for a rebated access ramp in lieu of removal of podium in Council Chambers be put to the Access Committee.

 

DES

Matter presented to Access Committee 28 July 2009.

Matter deferred for consideration at next Access meeting.

Matter further deferred for consideration by Committee.

Matter discussed and will come back to Council with recommendation.

Access Committee minutes to come to Council.

Concept design to be provided to Council.

 

 

11

SF1272

16/07/09

Council consider as a first priority the provision of a data link and adequate server for backup in the quarterly review.? That Council consider suitable remote office space to house disaster recovery equipment at the quarterly review.

 

GM

Report to meeting on 19/11/09.

Deferred to December 2009.

Quotes being sought for fibre optic link to the Library.? Will report when quotes are in.

Indefinitely delayed due to workload, illness and completion of Civica (Authority) implementation.

Provision made in Budget for 2010/11

 

 

12

SF1272

16/07/09

Council consider the need and cost of a consultant to identify and recommend improvements to existing records management practices in the 2010/11 budget.

 

GM

To be reported on in March 2010.

Indefinitely delayed due to workload, illness and completion of Civica (Authority) implementation.

 

No provision made in 2010/11 budget.

 

 

AUGUST 2009

 

13

QWN 262

20/08/09

Taylors Arm Road ? dangerous road sinkage

 

DES

Dip filled.? To be further assessed for Briffen fencing.

(Not suitable).

Guardrail design and costing in progress.

Expected cost $30,000 to install.

 

14

5.2

Notice of Motion

20/08/09

Council receive a bimonthly report that individually lists all required flood restoration work and the current status of each job.

 

DES

19 November 2009

15 April 2010

15

5.5

Notice of Motion

 

20/08/09

Council review its Street Tree Guidelines policy

 

DES

December 2009.

Delayed to allow community members to have input. Now for 21 January 2010 report.? Extension of time provided to community groups (Community Gardeners at Nambucca Heads) to lodge submissions.

To be issued to Councillors prior to report to Council on 18 February 2010

Report to GPC 14 April 2010

 

16

SF544

20/08/09

Council adopt the draft Bellwood Local Roads and Traffic Infrastructure Developer Contribution Plan and review within 12 months.

 

GM

September 2010.

OCTOBER 2009

 

17

SF1269

01/10/09

Council review the tank rebate scheme asap to encourage greater uptake and promote to the community.

 

DEP

Report to GPC in January 2010.

Deferred to GPC in February 2010.

Draft policy circulated for Councillor comment at March 2010 GPC.

Deferred to April 2010 GPC

 

18

SF1075

15/10/09

Council review staffing requirements & costs for CCP milestones as well as the savings made in 12 months time.

 

DES

October 2010

NOVEMBER 2009

 

19

SF1269

5/11/09

Council write to the Premier and Lands Department and to the Minister for Local Government requesting that caravan parks on crown land pay general rates.

 

GM

Letters sent 11 November 2009.? Rate notice issued for Scotts Head Caravan Park to Trust Manager.

Follow up letter sent 12 January 2010.

Minister has now responded advising that the Scotts Head Caravan Park, being located on part of Reserve 65963 for Public Recreation and Resting place, complies with the criteria outlined in Section 556 of the Local Government Act 1993 and qualifies for exemption from the general rate.

A copy of the Minister?s letter has been circulated to Councillors.

Notwithstanding the Minister?s response, legal advice is to be sought.

Legal advice has been obtained confirming requirement to pay general rates.? Advice has been referred to Minister for his consideration and comment.

 

20

SF1269

5/11/09

Council check with the ABS regarding the population of the Macksville Urban Area.

 

DEP

Enquiry to be made with ABS.

Collector Maps received but ABS yet to identify which collector areas of part of collector one define the Macksville urban area.

Report to come to Council in March 2010.

Deferred to April 2010 GPC.? Now listed for Council on 15 April 2010.

 

21

SF1102

5/11/09

Council conduct a Value Management Workshop to examine financial components of the IWCM; rate modelling; forecast developer contributions and residential bills.

 

GM

Being discussed with Dept. of Commerce.? Suggested early February 2010 following completion of exhibition period for EIS.

Value Management workshop on dam to be held 10 February 20010 workshop on IWCM to be held in March 2010.

GM to chase up IWCM workshop date.

Workshop scheduled for 12 May 2010.

 

22

SF1269

19/11/09

Council write to Dept of Lands requesting consent procedures in case of emergency riverbank restoration work.

 

DES

Letter sent to Land & Property Management Authority asking consideration in emergencies.

 

Follow up letter drafted.

23

SF624

19/11/09

Invite NRCMA to GPC

re MOU/blueprint.

 

GM

Invitation issued 24/11/09

Follow up letter on 8 February 2010.

 

24

PRF53

19/11/09

River Street Foreshore landscaping and development plan

 

DES

Placed on public exhibition for 28 days from 25 March 2010.

DECEMBER 2009

 

25

SF674

17/12/09

That the Mayors and General Managers from Bellingen, Coffs Harbour and Nambucca Shire Councils form a delegation to the Minister as a matter of priority so as to make representations on the disposal of mixed waste (biomass).

 

That Coffs Harbour City Council and Bellingen Shire Council be requested to consider the creation of a separate entity for management of the solid waste services of the three Councils.

 

GM

Letter sent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Letter sent

 

Follow up letter sent to Andrew Stoner 10 February 2010.

Granted consent to use bio mass as a cover material. Follow up email to CHCC re progress with draft regulation and any budget impacts.

Budget provision has been made for $20 per tonne processing cost in 2010/11.

 

 

JANUARY 2010

 

26

SF839

21/01/10

General Manager and Directors be reminded to report on potential revotes at quarterly reviews.

 

GM

On-going.

 

 

 

 

27

SF839

21/01/10

General Manager uphold resolution of 18/12/2008 that as a matter of policy Council be forwarded draft Plans of Management by way of memo at least three weeks before a GPC meeting so those comments can be considered after collation and prior to the next GPC meeting.? This also applies to draft policies.

 

GM

On-going

 

FEBRUARY 2010

 

28

SF1471

18/02/10

That Council write to the Minister for LG seeking permission not to have a Bi-Election for a casual vacancy

 

GM

Letter written 24 February 2010

 

29

SF1471

18/02/10

Council canvass option on reducing Councillor numbers in the next customer survey

 

GM

Provision for Customer Survey to be made in 2010/2011 budget

 

30

SF1471

18/02/10

Council investigate the number of sites remaining in the Macksville Cemetery (Catholic and others)

 

DEP

Report to GPC March 2010.

Deferred to GPC April 2010.? Initial investigations identified that at least 40-50 burial sites available in Macksville Cemetery and many plots with a view are available in the Nambucca Heads cemetery.

Deferred to May 2010.

 

 

31

SF741

18/02/10

That a further report be prepared on the operation of the Paveline Machine from July 2009 to June 2010

 

DES

Report in July 2010

 

MARCH 2010

 

32

SF90

04/03/10

That Mr Barry Duffus receive a written response to his questions regarding the cost to erect and remove the sign on Valla Road, stating ?Heavy fines may apply for using exhaust brakes?.

 

DES

Response letter being drafted.

 

 

33

SF430

18/03/10

Council look at funding from the Environmental Levy to clear camphor laurels and that.

 

Council apply for urgent funding from NPWS Conservation grants.

 

Send copies of residents? petitions to Ministers and invite them to meet with Council and residents onsite.

 

DEP

In progress.

Funding application submitted and letter sent to the Minister.

 

34

SF127

18/03/10

Employment of a 3 day per week two year fixed term Natural Resource Project Officer to be considered in 2010 Budget subject to the Environmental Levy continuing

 

DEP

To be considered at Special GPC on 1 April 2010.

Deleted from Draft Budget for 2010/11

 

 

SF1354

18/03/10

That Council write to the RFS to query why program costs were underestimated for the current year.

 

DES

Draft budget figures provided to RFP for explanation.

 

APRIL 2010

 

35

SF1446

1/04/10

That while the draft budget is on exhibition, a report be brought to Council regarding the saleyards, including revenue, expenditure and its future generally, based on the safety workshop held on 31 March 2010.

 

GM

Report planned for Council?s meeting on 6 May 2010.

 

36

SF1446

1/04/10

GM and Manager Community & Cultural Services meet with their counterparts at Bellingen and Clarence Valley Councils, whilst the Management Plan is on exhibition, and put Council?s position regarding the 10% contribution and report back to Council.

 

GM

Report planned for Council?s meeting on 6 May 2010.

 

37

SF1471

1/04/10

Council receive a report which includes a recommended brief and budget to undertake further investigation of an on-stream dam.

 

GM

Report to Council?s meeting on 15 April 2010.

 

38

SF1471

1/04/10

There be a report to next Water Supply Steering Committee on risk of delays to completion of pre-construction tender phase of the off river storage and costs of same.

 

GM

Water Supply Steering Committee meeting to be convened ASAP.

 

39

SF1471

1/04/10

Councillors to be advised regarding time and date of special meetings or workshops.

 

GM

On-going

 

40

SF382

1/04/10

Prior to further negotiations, that Council receive a report on the implications of not relocating the semi permanents to the Adin Street oval.

DES

Advice being sought from Department of Lands.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

General Manager's Report

ITEM 8.2????? SF182????????????? 150410???????? Further Investigation of an On-Stream Water Storage - Recommended Brief and Budget

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

In July 2007, the NSW Department of Commerce reported on the potential of four on-stream dam sites.? Cost estimates were then supplied for the 2 best ranked sites, however these estimates did not include costs for pipe delivery to Bowraville nor for property acquisition or flood inundation/environmental impact works.

 

Council at its meeting on 1 April 2010 resolved to receive a report which includes a recommended brief and budget to undertake further investigation of on-stream dam options.

 

It is proposed that the report sought by Council at its meeting on 1 April 2010 be limited to a more detailed assessment of the 2 preferred sites at Leagues Creek and Gravelly Creek, including the preferred manner and cost of delivery of water to the Nambucca water supply system; the area of private property which would need to be acquired and also any crown land; and finally a consideration of any generic or observed risks at the 2 preferred sites.

 

Whilst it is very difficult to establish a budget for this work, it is again proposed that it be mainly a desk top analysis supported by site inspections.? It is proposed to fix an upper budget limit of $20,000.? With planning for the off-stream storage at an advanced stage it is proposed that the work be completed within 3 months.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council adopt the brief and upper limit budget for the further investigation of an on stream water storage.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The content of the brief and the proposed budget are entirely at Council?s discretion.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council at its meeting on 1 April 2010 resolved to receive a report which includes a recommended brief and budget to undertake further investigation of:

 

a??????? the geological suitability of constructing an on-stream dam at sites examined by Councillors on Upper Buckrabendinni Creek, the confluence of Gravelly Creek and the Nambucca River or such other sites as Council considers appropriate.

 

b??????? the cost of such construction

 

c??????? the means by which water stored in such a dam may be delivered to the borefields at Bowraville and the cost of any such delivery system.

 

In July 2007, the NSW Department of Commerce reported on the potential of four on stream dam sites.? Cost estimates were then supplied for the 2 best ranked sites, however these estimates did not include costs for pipe delivery to Bowraville nor for property acquisition or flood inundation/environmental impact works.? A copy of the report prepared by the Department of Commerce is circularised.

 

The four potential sites were considered:? They were also ranked based on the general adequacy of the site for cost effective dam construction based on topographical and geological assessments.? The ranking from most preferred to least preferred site is shown below:

 

 

1.?????? League Creek

 

The site is located on the Nambucca River, immediately downstream of its confluence with League Creek.? Access from Bowraville is approximately 35km via North Arm Road/Gaddess Ridge Road.? The report comments as follows:

 

?Minimal stripping, steep abutments, suitable for zoned earth fill or RCC type dam.?

 

 

2.?????? Gravelly Creek

 

It would be located on the Nambucca River, immediately downstream of its confluence with Gravelly Creek.? Access from Bowraville is approximately 19km via North Arm Road.? The report comments as follows:

 

?Low wall height for required storage, suitable for zoned earth fill type dam.?

 

 

3.?????? Tillabudgery Creek

 

The site is located on the Nambucca River, in the area known as Tillabudgery.? Access from Bowraville is approximately 31km via North Arm Road.? The report comments as follows:

 

?Significant stripping, flatter abutments, suitable for zoned earth fill type dam.

 

 

4.?????? Buckra Bindinni Creek

 

The site is located on the Bucra Bindinni Creek, a major tributary of the Nambucca River.? Access to the site from Bowraville is approximately 21km via North Arm Road and Upper Buckra Bindinni Creek Road.? The report comments as follows:

 

?Excessive stripping expected, general geology not favourable to economical dam construction?.

 

 

It is proposed that the report sought by Council at its meeting on 1 April 2010 be limited to a more detailed assessment of the 2 preferred sites at Leagues Creek and Gravelly Creek, including the preferred manner and cost of delivery of water to the Nambucca water supply system; the area of private property which would need to be acquired and also any crown land; and finally a consideration of any generic or observed risks at the 2 preferred sites.

 

Whilst it is very difficult to establish a budget for this work, it is again proposed that it be mainly a desk top analysis supported by site inspections.? It is proposed to fix an upper budget limit of $20,000.? A copy of the proposed brief is circularised.? An important consideration with the brief is the timing of the report.? With planning for the off-stream storage at an advanced stage it is proposed that the work be completed within 3 months.

 


CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Manager Water and Sewerage and also the Director Engineering Services.

 

Contact has been made with the staff from the Department of Commerce who prepared the June 2007 report.? It is proposed to engage the Department to undertake the further work as they are familiar with the on-stream dam options and have considerable expertise in building both on and off-stream dams.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The proposed brief includes consideration of environmental risks.

 

Social

 

The proposed brief includes consideration of social impacts, primarily the compulsory acquisition of privately owned land.

 

Economic

 

The proposed brief will not be considering economic impacts.

 

Risk

 

There are significant risks in constructing any large water storage.? The purpose of the brief is to provide more information to assess the comparative risks and costs of an on-stream versus an off stream water storage.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The work is unplanned and therefore will need to be incorporated in the March quarterly budget review.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The investigation will need to be funded from water working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised documents

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Further Investigation of an On-Stream Water Storage - Recommended Brief and Budget

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Further Investigation of an On-Stream Water Storage - Recommended Brief and Budget

 

 

 

Circularised document

 

??Pages

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

General Manager's Report

ITEM 8.3????? SF260????????????? 150410???????? Termination of Gordon Park Australia Day Carnival

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

For many years, the Nambucca Heads Lions Club has conducted an Australia Day carnival at Gordon Park in Nambucca Heads.? The carnival includes market stalls; free rides and jumping castle; a raft race; surfboard paddle race; crab race and other novelty events as well as a BBQ.? There is also a flag raising and address by the Mayor and Australia Day Ambassador.

 

The Nambucca Heads Lions Club has now advised that due to increasing difficulties in organising and conducting the Australia Day Carnival, they are unable to continue to host the event.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

The Nambucca Heads Lions Club be thanked for their endeavours in conducting the Australia Day carnival at Gordon Park.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council does not have the resources to organise such events and must rely on the work of service clubs and volunteers.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

For many years, the Nambucca Heads Lions Club has conducted an Australia Day carnival at Gordon Park in Nambucca Heads.? The carnival includes market stalls; free rides and jumping castle; a raft race; surfboard paddle race; crab race and other novelty events as well as a BBQ.? There is also a flag raising and address by the Mayor and Australia Day Ambassador.

 

The Nambucca Heads Lions Club has advised Council that;

 

?due to increasing difficulties in organising and conducting the Australia Day Carnival with its associated fund-raising, liaison with local businesses and water events we regretfully relinquish this major project to enable other groups and individuals to replace this community feature event and we communicate this as soon as possible to the community and Council.?

 

From discussion with members of the Nambucca Heads Lions Club it seems that the organisational effort required for the event has been increasing with new safety and access requirements being imposed by both Council and NSW Maritime.? Examples include the enclosure of stages on trucks to prevent falls; the provision of traffic control; the provision of a portaloo which can be accessed by a disabled person and from NSW Maritime a new licence to obtain exclusive use of the waterway which required a $164.00 fee.

 

The Nambucca Heads Lions Club also incurs significant expenses in undertaking the event arising out of the hire of a public address system; the hire of amusement devices and the provision of prizes for water events.? The expenses are such that in 2009 there was a profit of only $200 which they supplemented from their own funds to provide a donation to a local charity.? However the Lions Club do not conduct the event as a fund raiser with the focus being on an alcohol free family event to celebrate Australia Day and our community.

 

It is unfortunate that this well organised and popular event has been terminated.? The Nambucca Heads Lions Club should be thanked for their efforts over the years in conducting the event.

 

There are a number of other popular local events which are struggling to survive with the burden of dwindling volunteers, increasing expenses, increased regulation and an increased awareness of risk, particularly in relation to alcohol fuelled anti-social behaviour and underage drinking.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Lions Club of Nambucca Heads.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

A well organised and popular, family oriented event will be lost from the Valley?s social calendar.

 

Economic

 

There are no significant economic implications.

 

Risk

 

This is the dilemma for events where increasing accountability and legal liability is imposing costs and organisational requirements which exceed the resources available to volunteers and service clubs.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no impact on Council?s budget.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

General Manager's Report

ITEM 8.4????? SF360????????????? 150410???????? Country Hall Renewal Fund - Grant Offers of $50,000 for Argents Hill Hall and $25,000 for Burrapine Hall

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council has been advised that it has been successful with grant applications for the Argents Hill Hall and the Burrapine Hall under the State Government?s Country Hall Renewal Fund.? The grant applications were co-ordinated by Council?s Grants Officer.? The Country Hall Renewal Fund provides funds of up to $50,000 per community.? Funding for projects is to be matched on a 2 for 1 basis such that for every $2 provided by the State Government, the community must contribute $1 either in-kind or as a financial contribution.? In both cases the respective Committees of Management are proposing in kind contributions of mainly labour.

 

The $50,000 grant offer for Argents Hill Hall proposes to replace all 105 concrete piers with steel and brace; supply and replace rotten and ant eaten weatherboards; fix the sagging ceiling and place a strengthening beam in the roof; replace damaged timber on the western wall; removal and replacement of the asbestos lining plus an electrical and emergency exit upgrade.? A provision of $1,045 has been made for the purchase of paint but it is proposed that the painting be undertaken by voluntary labour as part of the in-kind contribution.

 

The grant offer for Argents Hill Hall, whilst being the maximum allowable under the grant program, will still fall well short of the funds required to adequately restore the building.? The $50,000 is also reliant on a voluntary contribution of 61 days of labour to the project which needs to be organised in addition to the paid contractors.? Besides the funding being inadequate Council does not have the staff resources to undertake a project management role for the expenditure of the funds, the organisation of the volunteers and the acquittal of the grant.

 

The $25,000 grant offer for the Burrapine Hall is for the restumping of the hall; the removal of timber and rubbish from underneath the hall; the provision of a protective coating to preserve the exterior timber; removal of a children?s playhouse due to irreparable damage; and covering the existing floorboards in the kitchen with masonite and laying vinyl over the top.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? Council only accept the $50,000 grant offer for the Argents Hill Hall on the condition that the Department of Lands agree to transfer trusteeship from Council to a trust managed by either an incorporated association or a community Trust Board and having an incorporated association or community Trust Board willing to accept that responsibility.

 

2??????? If agreement cannot be reached in relation to recommendation 1 within 2 months, that Council seek the redirection of the $50,000 grant funds to Talarm Hall and Taylors Arm Hall in accordance with their funding applications.

 

3??????? That Council formally accept the $25,000 grant offer for the Burrapine Hall.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can accept the grant offers for both the Argents Hill Hall and the Burrapine Hall.? However it is considered that the risks associated with the grant offer for Argents Hill Hall are such that it would be imprudent to proceed.

 

Another option is that Council resolve now to demolish the Argents Hill Hall and seek redirection of the grant funds to Talarm Hall and Taylors Arm Hall.? The demolition of the hall has been recommended twice before but has not been supported.? The transfer of responsibility is the next preferred alternative.


 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has been advised that it has been successful with grant applications for the Argents Hill Hall and the Burrapine Hall under the State Government?s Country Hall Renewal Fund.? The grant applications were co-ordinated by Council?s Grants Officer.? The Country Hall Renewal Fund provides funds of up to $50,000 per community.? Funding for projects is to be matched on a 2 for 1 basis such that for every $2 provided by the State Government, the community must contribute $1 either in-kind or as a financial contribution.? In both cases the respective Committees of Management are proposing in kind contributions of mainly labour.

 

A copy of the grant applications are circularised.

 

The $50,000 grant offer for Argents Hill Hall proposes to replace all 105 concrete piers with steel and brace; supply and replace rotten and ant eaten weatherboards; fix the sagging ceiling and place a strengthening beam in the roof; replace damaged timber on the western wall; removal and replacement of the asbestos lining plus an electrical and emergency exit upgrade.? A provision of $1,045 has been made for the purchase of paint but it is proposed that the painting be undertaken by voluntary labour as part of the in-kind contribution.

 

The $25,000 grant offer for the Burrapine Hall is for the restumping of the hall; the removal of timber and rubbish from underneath the hall; the provision of a protective coating to preserve the exterior timber; removal of a children?s playhouse due to irreparable damage; and covering the existing floorboards in the kitchen with masonite and laying vinyl over the top.

 

Argents Hill Hall

 

The Argents Hill hall is located on North Arm Road, approximately 13 km west of Bowraville.? The hall is located on crown land with Council being the trust manager and it has in turn delegated authority for the operation of the Hall to a Committee of Management under Section 355 of the Local Government Act.? The condition of the hall has been the subject of many reports to Council over many years.? On 2 October 2003, Council resolved:

 

????????? ?That the Committees of Management for Warrell Creek Hall, Argents Hill Hall, Burrapine Hall and Missabotti Community Centre all be advised of the work required to be carried out immediately and essential as a place of public entertainment, in order to keep the various premises open as Halls/places of public entertainment, pointing out that Council is looking to the Committees to undertake these works as Council cannot justify the expenditure involved, given the poor usage record in each case and further pointing out that if these essential works are not attended to then Council will have no alternative other than to close the respective Halls down?.

 

There was a major report on all halls by the Director Corporate Services to Council?s meeting on 21 June 2007.? In relation to the Argents Hill hall he reported as follows:

 

????????? Future of the Hall

 

????????? The land and building are worthless having no residential building entitlement.

 

????????? The sale and relocation of the building may be possible, however the condition of the building and OH&S issues would need to be assessed.

 

????????? The use of the Hall has fluctuated over the years and greatly depends on the enthusiasm of one or ???????? two members of the community.? There have been years when the Hall was only used once a year ????? and some years never used.? The current committee is encouraging use of the Hall however the ?????? involvement of the community is cyclical.? The Hall is not a licenced POPE.

 

????????? The Hall has not been utilized to the extent that the closure of the Hall will have a significant impact ?????? on the community of Argents Hill.? The Hall is 13 kilometres from Bowraville.

 

He recommended that Council close the hall and call tenders for its purchase and removal however Council resolved:

 

????????? ?To defer closures of any Halls for twelve months to allow the Committees of Management to consider their long term financial sustainability?.

 

On 8 July 2008, the Argents Hill hall was inspected and major deficiencies were identified.? These were:

 

?????????????? Ceiling and wall linings contained chrysotile asbestos and are not encapsulated over the kitchen door, on the wall at the western end of the hall, at the ceiling lining joints where they have sagged and exposed the raw edges, in the room behind the stage where there is no lining on the back of the wall leaving the back of the asbestos sheets exposed.

 

?????????????? An old 5 gang light switch made from bakelite has two broken switches which has exposed the terminals.? It was not able to be determined whether they were alive or not but the wires were still fastened in the terminals.? The President of the Hall Committee of Management was spoken to on the day and he advised that he would barricade the switches immediately.

 

?????????????? The ceiling lining in the centre of the Hall has come away from the roof timbers approximately 200 mm with the real possibility for this lining to collapse.

 

?????????????? The double power point in the kitchen is loose on the wall.

 

?????????????? There are many electrical concerns and an electrical audit would be needed.

 

?????????????? The hall is still being hired out for functions and does not have a POPE license and the emergency lighting is non compliant.

 

?????????????? Two (2) piers under the stage are missing leaving two bearers unsupported.? It is possible that with a live load on the stage it could collapse.

 

?????????????? The rear section of the building has sunk considerably which is pulling the building apart.? Internal doors now do not shut.

 

?????????????? A considerable amount of rot has occurred in many of the timber elements of the building including bearers, joists, timber cladding windows, doors, door jambs, wall studs, facia boards, barge boards, architraves and other mouldings.

 

As a consequence the building was closed and at Council?s meeting on 17 July 2008 it was recommended that a plan and costings be prepared to provide a smaller replacement building with a view to applying for a grant and that Council proceed to demolish the existing hall.? However Council resolved to defer the decision to demolish the hall for six months and that plans and costings be prepared for the purposes of comparing a replacement building versus restoring the existing hall.

 

The cost of repairing the existing hall ?v- a replacement hall was reported to Council?s meeting on 16 October 2008.? A schedule with indicative costs for repairing the existing hall was provided, noting that given the nature, age and condition of the building it is impossible to provide an accurate costing as the condition of much of the building?s structural elements will only be revealed when the cladding is removed.? The schedule of indicative costs for repairing the existing hall totalled $129,200 compared to $85,000 for replacing the building with a 9m x 12m shed equipped with a kitchen and amenities.

 

At the meeting on 16 October 2008, Council staff recommended that there be an offer of $40,000 towards the cost of repairing the hall conditional upon the Department of Lands agreeing to transfer trusteeship from Council to a trust managed by either an incorporated association or a community trust board and with the community being willing to accept that responsibility.? However Council resolved to arrange on onsite meeting with the Department of Lands and write to the Department advising that the Committee and Council are applying for grants and whether they can assist with funding.

 

At Council?s meeting on 18 December 2008 it was reported that the Department of Lands had declined Council?s invitation to participate in an on-site meeting.? Council also resolved that the Committee of Management be invited to apply for grant funding to undertake repairs to the Hall under the Public Reserves Management Fund.

 

The $50,000 grant offer for Argents Hill Hall, whilst being the maximum allowable under the grant program, will still fall well short of the funds required to adequately restore the building.? The $50,000 is also reliant on a voluntary contribution of 61 days of labour to the project which needs to be organised in addition to the paid contractors.? Besides the funding being inadequate Council does not have the staff resources to undertake a project management role for the expenditure of the funds, the organisation of the volunteers and the acquittal of the grant.

 

The Department of Lands has suggested that if the funds are not going to be used for Argents Hill Hall then Council could request the funds be allocated to the other submitted but unsuccessful applications.? These were for:

 

Taylors Arm Hall - $21,608 - for a new kitchen; install new windows and architraves; rebuild stage stairs; replace damaged verandah flooring, provide new flooring in kitchen.

 

Nambucca Entertainment Centre - $12,754.13 ? for painting and signage.? As this work has now been done Council would not be able to claim the funding.

 

Talarm Hall - $23,246.50 ? for repairs to stage door and stairs; new doors; remove and replace broken fibro; repair barge cap; relocation of water tank; replacement of kitchen bench; cupboards and drawers; repairs to amenities; new storage shed.

 

Council is aware that it has insufficient funding to adequately maintain its existing building stock.? It cannot fund the additional capital investment required to bring the Argents Hill Hall up to a satisfactory standard and even if it could, in terms of the life cycle of the building, it will be unable to provide adequate on-going funding for repair and maintenance.

 

The only options available to Council are to either demolish the building and seek the redirection of the grant funds to the other halls nominated above or as recommended to Council?s meeting on 16 October 2008, to accept the grant funding for Argents Hill Hall only on the condition that the Committee of Management become an Incorporated Association and agree to accept trusteeship for the hall and the Department of Lands agree to transfer trusteeship from Council to the Committee of Management.

 

Burrapine Hall

 

The Burrapine Hall is located about 50km west of Macksville and is used for quarterly meetings and market days; for private functions; a monthly social club; a monthly book club and various fund raising activities including an annual Christmas party.? There have been on-going improvements to the hall, the most recent being the installation of a disabled toilet to enable the issue of a POPE licence.? It is proposed that the work be completed over a 4 month period.

 

It is recommended that Council formally accept the grant offer of $25,000.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Grants Officer.? A copy of the report has been forwarded to the Committee of Management.

 


SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The retention of Council?s halls always attracts community attention.? Council has to balance the expectation of the various communities that their halls will be maintained against its available finance and asset management principles such as life cycle cost, usage and alternatives.

 

Economic

 

There are no significant economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are financial risks to Council if the grant funding is insufficient to upgrade the Argents Hill hall to a satisfactory standard which will permit its continued use.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The recommendation has no impact on current and future budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The recommendation has no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised Documents

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Country Hall Renewal Fund - Grant Offers of $50,000 for Argents Hill Hall and $25,000 for Burrapine Hall

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Country Hall Renewal Fund - Grant Offers of $50,000 for Argents Hill Hall and $25,000 for Burrapine Hall

 

 

 

Circularised Documents

 

??Pages

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.1????? SF1261??????????? 150410???????? DEP Applications and Statistical Reports July 2009-June 2010, 2002-2010 and Certificates Received 2004-2010

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Barbara Parkins, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

Environment and Planning Department Development Application statistics for the financial year 2009-2010 compared with 2008-2009 and Certificate Applications received and determined, are provided in the body of the report.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council note development application statistics and processing times for July 2009-June 2010 compared with July 2008-June 2009.

 

2????????? That Council note Occupational Certificate released for the years 2004 to 2010.

 

3????????? That Council note the statistical information for Applications and Certificates received by Council for 2004-2010.

 

4????????? That Council note the statistical breakdown of development applications thus far for the current year beginning 1 January 2010.

 

 

Development Application Statistics

 

The figures show a -9.32% decrease in the number of DA?s received to March 2010 with construction costs decreasing by -199.65% compared to the same period in 2008/2009 (there were some very large developments during this comparison period). The total number of DA?s/CD?s approved for the month of March was 19 plus 2 modification.

 

DA?S AND COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT

 

Construction Costs

No Applications Received

Applications Approved (DA & CD)

July 2008-March 2009

$42,477,649

176

159

July 2009-March 2010

$14,175,865

161

162

 

 

FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The above comparisons will be considered in the next quarterly budget review to identify what impact the development application numbers will have on our projected income.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

An average income is estimated at the start of each budget year and is reviewed at each quarterly review.


 

TURNAROUND TIMES FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS 2010

Month

Mean Time

Median

#Average age of DA?s (Days)

Average

Highest

Lowest

January

64.63

38

89.75

287

38

February

30.29

22

38.92

75

6

March

38.88

27

56.56

203

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#Average age of DA?s

 

The average age of all DA?s for the month is derived from the total number of days from when the applications were lodged with Council until determined. This average is provided for information as many applications required additional information by Council and/or other Government Agencies to enable them to be processed (ie Stop Clock applied).

 

 


COMPLYING DEVELOPMENTS RECEIVED

 

YEAR

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Total

2007 Private Cert

5

3

4

1

2

4

4

3

5

4

6

1

42

2007 Council

0

3

3

1

3

4

7

0

1

2

6

3

33

2008 Private Cert

0

3

1

4

6

2

6

4

2

2

6

6

44

2008 Council

2

2

2

3

2

5

2

2

2

7

1

3

33

2009 Private Cert

3

7

6

4

3

2

11

3

2

7

4

7

59

2009 Council

1

3

2

2

3

2

2

2

5

5

3

2

32

2010 Private Cert

3

6

6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15

2010 Council

3

6

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11

 

CONVEYANCING CERTIFICATES ISSUED

 

YTD (March)

Drainage Diagrams

Section 149 Certs

Outstanding Notices

2004

87

258

74

2005

93

199

46

2006

75

179

56

2007

70

215

51

2008

81

187

59

2009

57

196

49

2010

44

177

40

 

OCCUPATION CERTIFICATES RELEASED

 

YEAR

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

TOTAL

Average/
Month

2004

11

15

17

20

18

20

20

17

16

23

26

30

233

19.41

2005

10

28

29

18

26

12

14

28

26

24

19

18

252

21.00

2006

26

26

12

20

27

24

20

18

25

23

10

15

246

20.50

Private
2007

1

0

0

3

7

5

3

2

3

2

9

5

40

3.33

Council
2007

6

20

14

7

22

13

12

10

14

13

8

12

151

12.58

Private
2008

4

0

4

2

4

5

5

8

7

11

4

7

61

5.08

Council
2008

12

16

9

9

29

12

19

25

16

20

17

13

197

16.41

Private
2009

1

4

5

3

2

3

10

4

7

7

9

6

61

5.08

Council
2009

21

11

19

14

14

15

10

17

13

20

16

12

182

15.16

Private
2010

4

4

12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20

6.67

Council
2010

10

14

9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

33

11



Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.2????? SF1261??????????? 150410???????? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 5 April 2010

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Barbara Parkins, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

In accordance with Council resolution from 15 May 2008 meeting, the development applications listed below are in excess of 12 months old (Table 1).

 

Table 2 are development applications which have been received but not yet determined due to submissions received. In accordance with Minute 848/08 from Council meeting of 18 December 2008, should any Councillor wish to ?call in? an application a Notice of Motion is required specifying the reasons why it is to be ?called in?.

 

If an application is not called in and staff consider the matters raised by the submissions have been adequately addressed then the application will be processed under delegated authority. Where refusal is recommended the application may be reported to Council for determination.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That the list of outstanding development applications (at least 12 months old) and applications received, be noted and received for information by Council.

 

2????????? That the applications where submissions have been received be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

TABLE 1: ????? UNRESOLVED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IN EXCESS OF 12 MONTHS OLD

 

TOTAL APPLICATIONS OUTSTANDING 12 MONTHS OR MORE:? 0

 

TABLE 2:?????? DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS WHERE SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ARE NOT YET DETERMINED

 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2010/004

06/07/09

13 Lot Residential Subdivision

Lot 95 DP 1099538, Seaforth Drive, Valla Beach

? Farming and horticulture activities on adjoining land ? spraying carried out which may cause noise issues at night

? Prospective purchasers to be informed of this

Land proposed to be subdivided is zoned Residential 2(a). Buffer distances comply with Council?s DCP 16.

Awaiting approval of Masterplan from DoP. If Masterplan not approved application will be withdrawn.
11/2/10 14 day letter sent to applicant requesting update on application for waiver of Masterplan and requesting withdrawal of DA if no progress forthcoming.
Applicant has advised Council that application for waiver of Masterplan has been prepared and submitted to the Department of Planning on 15/3/10 ? still awaiting response.

 


 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2010/087

12/01/10

Addition to Deck

Lot 6, Section D, DP 17707, 25 Matthew Street, Scotts Head

? Obtrusive nature of structure and impact on privacy

? Impact on northern view ? request alternative design

The submissions are being considered and addressed in the assessment of the application.

2010/128

18/03/10

Shed and On-site Sewage Management System

Lot 104 DP 1117507, Pickett Hill Close, Valla

? Concerns with use as a dwelling

? Reflection from zincalume roofing

? Insufficient details of water tank

? Roof to face away from property

Site inspection to be undertaken and issues to be assessed in the assessment of the application.

2010/114

26/02/10

Change of Use - wine tasting

Lot 1522 DP 593173, 536 Welsh's Creek Road, Yarranbella

? Objection to sale of liquor so close to dwelling

? Increase in traffic and dust issues on narrow dirt road

? Loss of privacy as driveway looks onto living area

? Amenity with lights of vehicles

? Noise and security issues

? Potential anti-social behaviour

? Devaluation of property, especially if the development is expanded

Site inspection to be scheduled to discuss issues raised.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.3????? SF1261??????????? 150410???????? DA's and CDC's Received and Determined under Delegated Authority 23 March-1 April 2010

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Barbara Parkins, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

For Council?s information, below are listed Development Applications and Complying Development Applications received by Council and applications determined under Delegated Authority.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the Development Applications/Complying Development Applications received and determined under delegated authority.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS/COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED
23 MARCH-1 APRIL 2010

DA Number

Application Date

Development

Address

2010/133

26/03/2010

Dwelling-House

Lot 21 DP 565094, 4387 Pacific Highway, Warrell Creek

2010/134

30/03/10

Conversion of shed to Rural Residential Dwelling

Lot 3 DP 1091172, 728 Scotts Head Road, Way Way

2010/135

30/03/10

Rural Residential Dwelling-House

Lot 34 DP 711098, 44 Alfred Close, Nambucca Heads

2010/136

31/03/2010

2 Lot Residential Subdivision

Lot 1 DP 880468, 114 Ocean View Drive, Valla Beach

 

 

 

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO 23 MARCH-1 APRIL 2010

 

CONSENT/ DA

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

DEVELOPMENT DETERMINED

EST VALUE $

2010/049

Lot 3 DP 32372, 35 East Street, Macksville

Patio Cover

8,730

2010/131

Lot 3 DP 841964, 13 Rogers Drive, Valla Beach

Enclosed Carport

5,800

2010/063

Lot 1 DP 334892, 84 High Street, Bowraville

Legalise Existing Deck

4,000

2010/116

Lot 6 DP 1072289, 22 Henrys Lane, Warrell Creek

Shed

22,348

2010/627

Lot 3 DP 841964, 13 Rogers Drive, Valla Beach

Dwelling Additions

16,573

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.4????? SF1487??????????? 150410???????? Report on Access Committee meeting including AGM held 23 March 2010

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Coral Hutchinson, Manager Community and Cultural Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

Attached for Council?s consideration are the minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 23 March 2010. The meeting included the Annual General Meeting and election of office bearers.

 

The minutes contain one recommendation which pertains to the formation of the Committee. It is as follows:

 

That Council endorse the office bearers and members of the Access Committee listed as follows:

Peter Shales (Chairperson), Shirley Holmes (Deputy Chair), Donna Primmer (Secretary) and Committee members Fiona Holmes, Margaret Hutchinson, Alba Sky, Mathew Sullivan, Les Small, Keith Davis and Dorothy Secomb; with Council?s delegates being Councillors Smyth and South.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council endorse the office bearers and members of the Access Committee listed as follows:

?????????? Peter Shales (Chairperson), Shirley Holmes (Deputy Chair), Donna Primmer (Secretary) and Committee members Fiona Holmes, Margaret Hutchinson, Alba Sky, Mathew Sullivan, Les Small, Keith Davis and Dorothy Secomb; with Council?s delegates being Councillors Smyth and South.

 

2????????? That Council note the remainder of the Minutes of the Access Committee Meeting held 23 March 2010.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1????????? Endorse the minutes and the recommendations.

 

2????????? Not endorse the minutes.

 

3????????? Endorse the minutes with amendments.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

There is no particular discussion required as this report relates to the formation of the Committee for the ensuing 12 months.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nothing required

 

 


SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Nothing identified

 

Social

 

Nil

 

Economic

 

Nil

 

Risk

 

Nothing identified

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nil

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nil

 

Attachments:

1View

6547/2010 - Minutes - Access Committee Meeting - 23 March 2010

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Report on Access Committee meeting including AGM held 23 March 2010

 

PRESENT

 

Mr Peter Shales (Chairperson)

Ms Fiona Holmes

Cr E South

Mrs Shirley Holmes

Cr A Smyth

Ms Donna Primmer

Mr Keith Davis

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Mr Les Small

Ms Alba Sky

 

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Ms Coral Hutchinson

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

 

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

14/10 RESOLVED: (Primmer/Sky)

That the Committee note the adoption and endorsement of the recommendations of the Minutes of the Meeting held 25 February 2010, by Council at its meeting of 18 March 2010.

 

 

 

?

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

ITEM 5.1????? SF1487????????????? 230310????? Annual General Meeting - Election of Office Bearers and Confirmation of Committee

15/10 RESOLVED: (Shales/Davis)

 

That Council endorse the office bearers and members of the Access Committee listed as follows:

Peter Shales (Chairperson), Shirley Holmes (Deputy Chair), Donna Primmer (Secretary) and Committee members Fiona Holmes, Margaret Hutchinson, Alba Sky, Mathew Sullivan, Les Small, Keith Davis and Dorothy Secomb; with Council?s delegates being Councillors Smyth and South.

 

 

 

 


 

ITEM 5.2????? SF1487????????????? 230310????? Business Arising from the Previous Meeting held 23 February 2010

16/10 RESOLVED: (Davis/Holmes)

 

That the Committee note the adoption and endorsement of the recommendations of the Minutes of the Meeting held 23 February 2010, by Council at its meeting of 18 March 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3????? SF1487????????????? 230310????? Report on Correspondence to the Access Committee meeting on 23 March 2010

17/10 RESOLVED: (Davis/Secomb)

 

That the correspondence be noted and that 2 or 3 members attend the Coffs Coast Regional Disability Committee where possible to maintain communication on local Nambucca Shire issues.

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.4????? SF1487????????????? 230310????? Report from Access Committee members on local issues and areas of concern

 

Issues discussed included:

‐?????????? Disability parking in Bowraville

‐?????????? Post boxes at the Nambucca Heads Post Office are too high and not wheelchair accessible

‐?????????? Access to bins in Bowraville

 

There was no specific resolution for this item.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.5????? SF1487????????????? 230310????? Report on Harmonisation of Disability Parking Permit Schemes in Australia

18/10 RESOLVED: (Smyth/Holmes)

 

That the report on Harmonisation of Disability Parking Permit Schemes in Australia be noted and that the Committee monitor its introduction.

 

 

 

Councillor Mathew Sullivan left the meeting before the commencement of this item, the time being 3.00 pm


 

ITEM 5.6????? SF1487????????????? 230310????? Report on the Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP)

19/10 RESOLVED: (Holmes/Davis)

 

That the Committee discuss the Pedestrian Access Mobility Plan and then put in place a plan for its assessment.

 

 

???

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, 17 April 2010 commencing at 2.00 pm

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Mayor then closed the meeting the time being 3.55 pm.

 

 

 

??????????..

PETER SHALES

(CHAIRPERSON)

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.5????? SF1484??????????? 150410???????? POEO Monitoring Administration - Tewinga

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Jacqui Ashby, Environmental Compliance Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

Complaints have been received alleging odour and potential water pollution issues originating from 266 Irvine?s Road, Tewinga - Free Range Pig Farm. In order to accurately follow up on these complaints, Council will need to obtain baseline levels of both ambient odour and water quality in the surrounding area before actual point source sampling for pollution can be conducted.

 

Specific equipment and procedures are required to establish whether the odour is in fact offensive and a detailed sampling program is required to establish base line water quality data before progressing with the regular odour and water pollution allegations. Quotes have been obtained for both baseline odour and water quality sampling to identify the costs that Council needs to incur. As Council will note, the cost of obtaining an odour assessment is quite significant.

 

The justification of expenditure is difficult as it is an emotive one due to odours having differing impacts on different people. Should the results identify that the odour does not exceed the identified guidelines then it may be argued as being a waste of ratepayer funds or the results may be challenged, due to number of animals, climatic conditions etc. If the results come back identifying that the odour does in fact exceed the guidelines and is "offensive" Council will then need to take appropriate actions which may in fact be at odds with its right to farm policy and statements.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council note the quotations received in regard to water sampling and specific odour sampling.

 

2????????? That Council note that staff will continue to monitor the odour complaints before making any decision to proceed with the engagement of a specialist consult to determine whether the odours exceed guidelines.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1????????? Council engage a specialist consultant to undertake odour sampling and assessment to determine whether the odours exceed the identified guidelines.

2????????? Not to accept the need for environmental monitoring of the premise

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has received complaints regarding odour and potential water pollution issues originating from the Free Range Pig Farm at 266 Irvine?s Road, Tewinga. These complaints include monthly logs of odour, weather conditions and actions that adjoining landowners have taken to reduce the odour impact specifically.

 

Whilst Council will proceed to collect the first round of water samples and have them analysed (once we have a dry period), the ongoing sampling regime will be curtailed to align with significant rain events. The cost for sampling will be $119.30/sample plus report costs of $25/batch of samples analysed.

 

The odour sampling however requires specific equipment and procedures collect the odour to establish whether the odour is in fact offensive. Quotes have been obtained to collect and establish baseline odour data.

 

An odour assessment is conducted by collecting samples from a source and analysing them to determine the number of odour units. If the sample is above a certain level of odour units, the smell is deemed offensive and regulations under the Protection of the environment Operations Act 1997 apply which may lead to Orders being served on the farm owners, penalty notices being issued or court proceedings instigated.

 

Three quotes have been received for services to assess the odour issue. These quotes range from $10,648 - $30,000 as outlined in the confidential circularised document attached.

 

One of the consultants included an option for odour characteristics identification that pinpoints the source or the compound that the odour comes from. This is used to identify the odour so that steps can be taken to reduce or alleviate the source. This is over and above Council responsibilities. Should the testing identify that the odour is offensive pursuant to the Protection of the environment Operations Act 1997, the owner of the piggery will need to identify the source of the offending odours to assist with management practises at the piggery to overcome the issues.

 

For the water sampling regime it is proposed that sampling will consist of:

 

o???? Collection of one round of dry weather samples

(Dry weather is defined as <2mm of rain in 24 hrs and <10mm of rain in 72 hrs)

o???? Collection of two rounds of wet weather samples

 

Samples are collected and analysed in a NATA facility, for the following:

 

Faecal Coliforms, Nitrate / Phosphorus, TDS, BOD and? TSS? ????

TOTAL COST per sample: ????? $119.30

Report/Admin Fee per batch? ? $? 25.00

 

Dry weather round of testing approx 15 samples will come to $1,814.50

Two wet weather round of testing of approx 40 samples will come to $4,822.00

Total cost of lab analysis ???? $6,636.50

 

After the baseline levels have been determined then if subsequent samples are deemed to be above ambient levels and ANZECC guidelines and Council is able to specifically identify the source of the pollution then, processes and actions are available to Council under the Local Government Act and Protection of the Environment Operations Act.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Director of Environment & Planning

Manager Health & Building Services

Department of Environment Climate Change & Water

External Consultants

Coffs Harbour City Council Laboratory

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Where pollution of the environment is evident, actions can be taken to stop further degradation and clean up measures can be instigated. Testing will be required to determine if the odour levels are exceeding recommended guideline standards under the Clean Air Regulations. This will then enable staff to determine any compliance issues associated with complaints being received about odour levels from the piggery.

 

The water monitoring will provide background levels of any contaminates within the existing drainage system and the two proposed wet weather samples will allow for any increase in possible contaminants to be detected, however the challenge is then to determine the source of increased contaminants.

 

Social

 

The local community will benefit from the baseline odour testing to determine whether it is in fact deemed offensive in regard to air quality guidelines.

 

Economic

 

This particular issue may have an economic impact on the piggery operator and/or adjoining rural residential? properties.

 

Risk

 

Council must ensure that it has baseline factual data to deal with the numerous complaints otherwise it risks alienating adjoining landowners or unjustly accusing the piggery operator of environmental breaches.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There will be a direct impact on the current budget if Council adopts the recommendation for odour sampling and assessments. Environmental monitoring/testing is expensive but needs to be undertaken at a professional level to be admissible in court if necessary.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No funds have been allocated and will require an additional vote from Council.

 

The costs associated with the Water Sampling will be charged to Job number 1773.100 Water Quality River Health monitoring and will not require? any supplementary allocation.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- CIRCULARISED DOCUMENTS COUNCILLORS ONLY - IN CONFIDENCE - Quotes for Sampling

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

POEO Monitoring Administration - Tewinga

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

POEO Monitoring Administration - Tewinga

 

 

 

CIRCULARISED DOCUMENTS COUNCILLORS ONLY - IN CONFIDENCE - Quotes for Sampling

 

??Pages

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.6????? SF226????????????? 150410???????? Report on proposed off-leash area - Stuart Island, Nambucca Heads

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Phillip Gall, Manager Health and Building ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council considered the option to formalise the use of the northern end of Stuart Island as an additional off leash area at Nambucca Heads in a report on 15 October 2009.

 

The matter was deferred pending further consultation with the Golf Club, Department of Lands and the Nambucca Heads Local Aboriginal Land Council.

 

Responses have been received from two of the groups consulted being the Nambucca Heads Local Aboriginal Land Council and the Department of Lands.

 

Drafting of this report has been delayed following the Departments reference to the Draft Nambucca River Masterplan which was endorsed by Council on? 4 March 2010.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That the northern end of Stuart Island be designated as an off leash area for companion animals.

 

2????????? That Council proceed with the installation of a doggy do bin at the site.

 

3????????? That signage be erected to indicate the area as an off leash area.

 

4????????? That Council?s decision be notified to the submission writer to the Strategic Companion Animal Management Plan and those consulted in relation to the proposal.

 

5????????? That Schedule 1 of Council?s Strategic Companion Animals Management Plan and brochure be amended to reflect changes to the off leash area in Nambucca Heads.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1????????? Not proceed with the establishment of an off leash area on Stuart Island due to concerns raised by the Local Aboriginal Community.

 

2????????? Proceed with formalising the Stuart Island area as an off leash area for dogs.

 

3????????? Find an alternate site for an additional off leash area at Nambucca Heads.

 

4????????? Not proceed with providing a second off leash area at Nambucca Heads.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The northern end of Stuart Island whilst not identified as an off leash area has been used by local residents for that purpose for at least the past 5-6 years.

 

The area being considered in this report has been identified in the Nambucca River Master Plan as a future area to be upgraded for passive recreation, with improved access and parking, possible amenities & infrastructure and encourage revegetation on and around the island. There where no submissions received in relation to the future development of the area following the exhibition of the draft Nambucca River Master Plan.

The proposal to formalise the existing use of this area will not cause any additional impact on the land and will provide additional facility to remove dog faeces through the installation of a doggy do bin at the site.

If at a later date the area was to be upgraded for passive recreational use then the actual area to be used as an off leash area would need to be more clearly defined.

 

The Nambucca Heads Local Aboriginal Lands Council has raised three concerns and suggested an alternative to the Stuart Island site being McMorrine Park at Corner Woodbell Street & Riverside Drive. This area was originally considered when looking at alternative sites but considered to be unsuitable due to costs to fence the area and it being a natural drainage line directly into the Nambucca River.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Community as part of the public exhibition of the draft Strategic Companion Animals Management Plan

Nambucca Heads Local Aboriginal Land Council, see attached response

Nambucca Heads Golf Club, no response

Department of Lands, see attached response

Nambucca Heads Lions Club, no response

Council?s Regulatory Officer

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The area has been unofficially used by dog owners in the area to exercise their animals and there are no facilities available at the site to dispose of dog faeces. By formalising the use of the area and providing a doggy do bin it will assist in reducing the environmental impacts in relation to the removal of dog faeces in the area.

 

Social

 

The social benefits to dog owners in the western part of Nambucca Heads is that the area is within walking distance to residential areas west of the Pacific Highway and is more user friendly for aged person who find it difficult to access, and walk on the beach off leash area north of Main Beach.

 

Economic

 

Not applicable

 

Risk

 

As with the installation of any facility of this nature there is always the potential risk for non compliance by pet owners and this would have to be dealt with by increased patrols and notices where offenders are detected.

 

 


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The additional funds required to install and maintain the doggy do bins for Scotts Head and Stuart Island where voted as part of the resolution to the report back on the 15 October 2009.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No alternate sources of funding.

Attachments:

1View

7700/2010 - Plan 6 Stuart Island Park - Nambucca River Masterplan

 

2View

30184/2009 - Response to Stuart Island Off Leash Area - NH LALC

 

3View

31081/2009 - Response to Stuart Island Off Leash Area -? Land and Property Management Authority

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Report on proposed off-leash area - Stuart Island, Nambucca Heads

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Report on proposed off-leash area - Stuart Island, Nambucca Heads

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Report on proposed off-leash area - Stuart Island, Nambucca Heads

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.7????? SF1269??????????? 150410???????? Report on Census Population of Macksville Urban Area

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner ????????

 

Summary:

 

On the 19 November 2009 Council resolved that staff check with the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) regarding the boundaries for determining the population of the Macksville Urban Area.

 

Staff have examined this issues and the processes are outlined in this report.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council note the report and the current census collector districts used to determine population breakdowns for the Macksville area and the shire generally.

 

2????????? That a further report with recommendation on proposed boundaries for collector areas for the Shire come back to Council before end of October 2010 for consideration.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Council could choose to make alternative recommendations in regard to census collection boundaries now.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

In an attempt to clarify the boundaries used by the ABS to determine the population of the Macksville Urban area contact was made with the ABS who advised that they collect demographic information based on the Australian Standard Geographical areas classifications.

 

There are approximately 3 different classifications for Macksville being:

 

?????????????? Postal Area 2447 (total population 6184);

?????????????? Macksville urban Centre/ Locality (total population 2658);

?????????????? Macksville State Suburb (total population 2155).

 

Each of these areas cover a different extent (see circularised maps 1, 2 & 3). A person or LGA that uses this data would need to determine which of these areas would be most suitable for their particular purpose.

 

However, Council may use a combination of collector districts to encompass the area for which they would like to determine a population such as the population to be displayed on town entrance signs. For example the current Macksville Town Entrance signs display a population of 7,000 being the post code area of 2447 which is defined through circularised map 1.

 

Applying the boundaries from the resolution of 5 November 2009 being the Macksville Urban Area taking into account Wedgewood Drive, parts of Wallace Street, Reid Street, the new development of Grant Crescent, Rowe Drive, Crispin Cove, Preston Drive, Graham Close, George Close, Glenmore Crescent, Grandview Drive, Nursery Road, parts of River Street and Gumma, the estimated population would be 3226 which includes the Gumma rural/rural residential area but not other similar areas such as Congarinni, Warrell Creek (see circularised map 5).

 

Should Council wish the ABS to amend collector district boundaries to better reflect the Macksville Urban Area boundaries or any other Urban Area Boundaries it is suggested that Council staff formally request the collector districts be amended in consultation with Council and this should well before the 2011 census??


However, the changes will create anomalies in population figures between the two census periods.

 

It is proposed that once the NLEP and consolidated DCP program is completed, time will permit a critical review of all urban areas and a further report with urban area boundary maps to be presented for endorsement and forwarding to the ABS for Census and collector district boundary adjustments.

 

Map 6 which is circularised, identifies the current Census collector districts for the whole of Nambucca Shire.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Australian Bureau of Statistics

Director Environment and Planning

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Nil

 

Social

 

It is important to ensure that Population figures accurately reflect the urban areas.

 

Economic

 

There are economic benefits for accurate population figures for urban areas and specific catchment areas.

 

Risk

 

Inaccurate urban area population figures provides some risk for strategic business planning and strategic planning for Council.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nil

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nil

 

Attachments:

1View

?- CIRULARISED DOCUMENT - Maps and Statistical Information for Macksville Area

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Report on Census Population of Macksville Urban Area

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Report on Census Population of Macksville Urban Area

 

 

 

CIRULARISED DOCUMENT - Maps and Statistical Information for Macksville Area

 

??Pages

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.8????? SF30??????????????? 150410???????? Report on Minutes of Clarence Regional Library Committee of Management meeting held 26 March 2010

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Coral Hutchinson, Manager Community and Cultural Services; Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

 

Summary:

 

Attached are the minutes of the Clarence Regional Library Committee of Management meeting held at Bellingen Shire Council Library on Friday 26 March 2010. In attendance from Nambucca Shire Council were its delegates, Councillors Moran and Smyth, together with the author of this report as an advisor to the Committee.

 

Whilst this report appears to be essentially the presentation of Committee minutes, there are two important key components: the level of resources necessary to provide efficient and effective library services, and the model under which these services will be delivered.

 

The minutes contain the following recommendations from the Committee for Council?s attention:

 

6.1 ????? Review of Service Model

 

1????????? The Modified Hybrid Model and associated Core Conditions be adopted by the Clarence Regional Library Committee as the easiest to implement and most cost effective option for future delivery of library services.

2????????? This new arrangement be affected as soon as practicable.

3????????? Clarence Regional Library Committee members promote this proposal with their relevant Councils adoption and consideration in future budgeting processes.

4????????? Clarence Regional Library Committee members endorse a 10% per capita contribution increase per annum to fund the ongoing:

??????????? Collection Enhancement

??????????? Staff Training

??????????? Online resources

??????????? Surveys

??????????? Technical upgrades

??????????? and the implementation of RFID pending on a successful Library Development Grant application.

 

Note: The ?Core Conditions? referred to in recommendation 1 (above) are those listed under recommendation 4 (below).

 

There are a number of other recommendations or resolutions by the Committee which are either intended for the Executive Council (Clarence Valley) or don?t require action by Nambucca Shire Council.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council confirm its commitment to involvement in library services under a Modified Hybrid Model with its associated Core Conditions as the easiest to implement and most cost effective option for future delivery of library services.

 

2????????? This new arrangement be affected as soon as practicable.

 

3????????? Clarence Regional Library Committee members promote this proposal with their relevant Councils adoption and consideration in future budgeting processes.

 

4????????? That Council agree to the Clarence Regional Library Committee members endorsement of a 10% per capita contribution increase to fund the ongoing:

??????????? Collection Enhancement

??????????? Staff Training

??????????? Online resources

??????????? Surveys

??????????? Technical upgrades

??????????? and the implementation of RFID subject to a successful Library Development Grant application.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are a range of options available to Council regarding noting, endorsing or not endorsing the minutes of this Committee. Notwithstanding that budget deliberations will bring about a set of financial decisions, Council will need to eventually make a decision regarding the desired model of service delivery.

 

Directors Note: The Draft budget presented to Council at its 1 April 2010 Special General Purpose Committee meeting did not include the recommended 10% per capita budget allocation but a 4% per capita budget allocation.

 

Should Council not include a 10% per capita increase in the 2010/2011 budget as recommended by the CRLC then the CRL Executive Officer be formally advised as a matter of urgency and request that this be listed on the next CRLC meeting

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Library Model

 

Council may recall that the CRLC has been undertaking a review of the model by which the member Councils (Nambucca, Bellingen and Clarence Valley) deliver library services.

 

The CRL has been in operation for more than 20 years and the review was intended to ensure that library services were being delivered to maximise efficiency and effectiveness. The three broad models for delivering library services are:

 

Standalone:

where each LGA operates and funds its own services independently;

Regional Library:

one larger LGA provides, manages and controls library services on behalf of one or more smaller LGAs, excepting facility management; and

Cooperative:

where one LGA provides agreed library services for one or more other LGAs, whilst each retains its independence in all other library matters.

 

The current CRL model has been described as a ?hybrid?- not a true regional library but with some of the characteristics; and more than a co-operative in its delivery of services.

 

The CRL Committee of Management has come to the conclusion that the current model of operation is one that can continue to work, providing a level of agreement and commitment is reached between the member Councils which will support the continued development of library services. The CRL has been actively working towards improvements in library service standards and its achievements have been recognised by the State Library in its recent announcement of grants for junior non-fiction ($90,000) and history collection development ($72,417). The State Library has been quite clear that access to State government funding is dependent upon continued improvement and commitment.

 

The Committee is recommending that Councils endorse this continued way of operating, and provide a budget allocation which include an increase of 10% in its per capita allocation to the Clarence Regional Library. Further, the CRLC is proposing that this arrangement will include the following:

 

1????????? Annual increase in per capita contribution: aim for 10%, minimum 8%.

2????????? Ongoing commitment to enhance the shared Library Management System (Spydus), including system upgrades and additional enhancements as they are developed eg: Library Thing.

3????????? Annual weeding program: aim 12,000 items, minimum 8%.

4????????? Commitment to commencement of adoption of an RFID system by the 2012-13 (as per the agreed Strategic Plan) financial year which would require as a minimum, a financial contribution towards the tags on library items.

5????????? User and Non-user Survey every four years with each new committee.

6????????? Stocktake ? every 3 years without RFID and every year with RFID.

7????????? Four training days per annum for all staff members.

8????????? Ongoing development of online information resources, including databases and downloadable books.

9????????? Maintain floating collection.

10???????? Commitment to the employment of professional librarians and paraprofessional library technicians where possible.

 

The current library agreement expires in November 2011.

 

Library Budget

 

The CRCL is recommending that Councils continue their commitment of improvements to library services by again contributing an additional 10% per capita amount which equates to $17,486 for Nambucca Shire Council for 2010-11.

 

When presented with this request following the CRLC meeting held 13 November 2009, Council was reluctant due to the possible impost of the cost of a RFID system (Radio Frequency Identification System) for Nambucca Heads Library. It has now been made clear that the system would only proceed (in 2012-13) if a grant became available to finance the set-up and Council agreed to the annual cost (around $16,000 in today?s terms). In addition, changes in technology have reduced the installation costs to about half the 2009 estimates, and further reductions would be likely over the next 2 to 3 years before its possible introduction. Early reports from stocktaking are showing that the investment in RFID may in fact result in a positive return with reduced losses in items being stolen and in streamlining stocktaking procedures.

 

In the Executive Officer?s Report to the 26 March meeting, the Committee was presented with a range of scenarios, including one which was eventually supported (recommendation 4 in Summary of this report) which will provide for continued improvement in the collection over the next 10 years and cover a range of other costs all from a 10% increase in the per capita allocation.

 

In previous years, any increases in Council allocations have been largely channelled towards library items (books, talking books etc) in order to make gains in the age and range of the collection. (Council may recall that the CRL collection was below state guidelines in almost all areas eg age, items per capita. It remains the only library in NSW without a collection of DVDs.)

 

By using the increases in Council allocations to cover a range of items (upgrades to catalogue software, purchasing databases, staff training etc), the libraries can achieve all the key items needed to provide a range of core services from the 10%. It is recognised that it will take a little longer to see marked improvements in the library collections, however the CRLC have determined that this is worthwhile compromise.

 

Management of Volunteers

 

The minutes contain 3 recommendations regarding management of volunteers in Council libraries. The intention of the Committee?s actions is that volunteers are engaged in library activities in an appropriate manner and with the required risk management procedures in place.

 

No specific Council action is proposed in regard to Nambucca Shire Council library volunteers as there are clear processes in place, however day-to-day practices will be reviewed with ALIA and the new CRL guidelines in mind. People wishing to volunteer at Council libraries need to make application, complete a Prohibited Employment Declaration and undergo an appropriate induction. They are also given copies of relevant policies and information to assist them in their role. A Kit for Volunteers contains all relevant documents and volunteer?s details are recorded in a central register at Council.

 

Nambucca Shire Council has an endorsed Volunteer Policy and it is not proposed to introduce a separate policy for library volunteers.

 

There were also recommendations regarding Internet and Circulation Policies under 7.2 Review of Policies. These are referred to the Executive Council (Clarence Valley) for its endorsement and require no formal action by Nambucca Shire Council.

 

Stop Press ? Library Budget

 

At Council?s meeting on 1 April it was resolved that the General Manager and Manager Community and Cultural Services meet with their counterparts at Bellingen and Clarence Valley Councils, while the management plan is on exhibition, and put Council?s position regarding the 10% contribution and report back to Council.

 

The General Manager has now discussed the Clarence Regional Library budget with the General Managers of both Bellingen and Clarence Regional Councils. Both Councils have endorsed the Clarence Regional Library Strategic Plan and Action Plan, a key component of which is to improve the size and age of the print collection with annual increases in per capita contributions of 10%. It is acknowledged that significant external funding will need to be sourced in order for other key priorities, such as the introduction of an automated library stock system (RFID), to be implemented.

 

This Council signed the Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement in November 2006 which provides that Bellingen Shire Council and Nambucca Shire Council (the Delegating Councils) delegate certain of their powers and duties relating to the provision, control and management of libraries, library services and information services to Clarence Valley Council. Section 5.2 of the agreement provides that;

 

?The Delegating Councils shall make a payment each year to the Clarence Valley Council for the Regional Library. The amount payable shall be determined in the annual budget for the Regional Library and for each Delegating Council shall be calculated on a per capita basis plus the subsidy receivable from the State Government. Clarence Valley Council shall also contribute toward the budget on a per capita basis plus the subsidy receivable from the State Government?.

 

The agreement simply does not provide that a lower per capita contribution can be paid by one Council than the contribution paid by the other two. From an operating point of view, it would be impractical to provide a different or lower level of service for one Council than the other two.

 

If Nambucca Shire Council decides to contribute less than its partner Councils it is almost inevitable that such action will undermine the Regional Library Agreement with this Council presumably being asked to leave. If this were to occur Council should be aware that it will face greater costs ? a finding reached by the Clarence Regional Library Committee of Management in last year?s review of the model of service delivery.

 

Unlike the process which occurred this year, for the budget for 2011/2012 it is proposed that the General Manager discuss with the General Managers of the other two Councils their proposed contributions prior to the draft budget being finalised. Whilst the Library Strategic Plan proposes funding exceeding both the CPI and rate pegging, the reality is that the competing claims for Councils? finances have to be reviewed annually.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Director Environment and Planning

General Manager?s of Clarence Valley and Bellingen Councils

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental sustainability issues identified.

 

Social

 

Improved social and educational outcomes underpin delivery of library services.

 

Economic

 

Nothing identified.

 

Risk

 

Council runs the risk of undermining the improvements recently gained in delivery of library services should it not support continued investment.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

An increase in the per capital contribution to Clarence Regional Library will mean a total allocation of $175,859 in 2010-11 and approximately $195,000 in 2011-12. Calculations are based on the Estimated Resident Population provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (19,053 in June 2009).

 

Directors Note: The Draft budget presented to Council at its 1 April 2010 Special General Purpose Committee meeting did not include the recommended 10% per capita budget allocation but a 4% per capita budget allocation.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required from working funds.

 

TRIM ATTACHMENT 7722/2010 ? is in draft as at 2.20pm 31/3, awaiting clarification on a couple of matters by Clarence Regional Library re Cr Moran?s involvement at mtg.

 

Attachments:

1View

7722/2010 - Minutes of Clarence Regional Library Committee of Management meeting held 26 March 2010 at Bellingen Shire Council

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Report on Minutes of Clarence Regional Library Committee of Management meeting held 26 March 2010

 

 
MINUTES of the meeting of the CLARENCE REGIONAL LIBRARY ADVISORY COMMITTEE, 26 March 2010 at Bellingen Branch Library, Hyde Street, Bellingen

 

 

 

PRESENT

 

Bellingen Shire Council

Cr Kerry Childs

Sharon Uthmann (Bellingen Shire Librarian)

 

Nambucca Shire Council

Cr Anne Smyth

Cr Michael Moran

 

Clarence Valley Council

Cr Karen Toms

Cr Margaret McKenna

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Sally Walters (Regional Librarian)

Coral Hutchinson (NSC Manager Community and Cultural Services)

Anne D?Arcy (CVC Executive Officer)

 

1??????? APOLOGIES

 

Peter Wilson

 

2??????? DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 

Cr Moran noted his concern about the Bellingen Branch Librarian holding a voting position on the Committee.? Cr Child outlined that the Bellingen Shire Council had nominated the Bellingen Branch Librarian as its second delegate to the committee.

 

31CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ? Meeting held 13 November 2009

 

RESOLVED

 

Moran/Smythe

 

That the minutes of the Clarence Regional Library meeting held on 13 November 2009 be accepted.

 

4??????? BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES ? Meeting held 13 November 2009

 

Nil

 

5?????? CORRESPONDENCE

 

Nil

 


6??????? EXECUTIVE OFFICER?S REPORT NO 01/10

 

6.1???? Review of Service Model

 

REPORT SUMMARY

 

This report presented the results of analysis into the estimated contributions of CRL members over the next 10 years when the proposed Core Conditions of a modified version of the current Hybrid Regional Library Model are costed, compared with the current contributions.

 

OFFICER?S RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Modified Hybrid Model and associated conditions be adopted as soon as possible by the Clarence Regional Library Committee as the easiest to implement and most cost effective option investigated in the review of the service model options for the Clarence Regional Library.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

 

1??????? The Modified Hybrid Model and associated Core Conditions be adopted by the Clarence Regional Library Committee as the easiest to implement and most cost effective option for future delivery of library services.

2?????? This new arrangement be affected as soon as practicable.

3?????? Clarence Regional Library Committee members promote this proposal with their relevant Councils adoption and consideration in future budgeting processes.

4?????? Clarence Regional Library Committee members endorse a 10% per capita contribution increase per annum to fund the ongoing:

????? Collection Enhancement

????? Staff Training

????? Online resources

????? Surveys

????? Technical upgrades

????? and the implementation of RFID pending on a successful Library Development Grant application.

 

RESOLVED

 

Smythe/Toms

 

Cr Moran noted he was against the recommendations.

 

 

7 ?????? EGIONAL LIBRARY REPORT

 

7.1 ??? ibrary Volunteer Guidelines 01/10

 

REPORT SUMMARY

 

This report provided guidelines for Library Volunteers for member councils of the Clarence Regional Library to incorporate into any future council volunteer policy.

 

OFFICER?S RECOMMENDATIONS

 

1.?? That the Clarence Regional Library Committee endorse the ALIA Statement on Voluntary Work in Library and Information Services (2009)

2.?? That the Clarence Regional Library draft volunteer guidelines are endorsed.

3.?? That the guidelines be used to support member Council?s generic volunteer policies.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Officer?s recommendations be adopted.

 

RESOLVED

 

Moran/Toms

 

 

7.2 ??? Review of Policies 01/10

 

REPORT SUMMARY

 

This report outlined the proposed amendments and additional information required to update the Internet and Circulation Policies of the Clarence Regional Library.

 

OFFICER?S RECOMMENDATION

 

That the changes to the Internet and Circulation Policies be endorsed by the committee.

That the revised policy be recommended to the Executive Council for adoption and implementation.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Officer?s recommendations be adopted.

 

RESOLVED

 

Moran/Toms

 

 

7.3 ??? Collection Development Survey January 2010

 

REPORT SUMMARY

 

This report provided a summary of the results of the User Collection Development Survey conducted by the Library.

 

OFFICER?S RECOMMENDATIONS

 

That the information be noted.

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Officer?s recommendations be adopted.

 

RESOLVED

 

Moran/Mc Kenna

 

8 ?????? ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

 

1.????? The Regional Librarian demonstrated to the Committee the Clarence Regional Library?s online newsletter sign on via the Regional Library?s website.? Delegates were encouraged to subscribe to the online newsletter as a means of keeping up to date with Library activities and promotions.

2.????? The Regional Librarian presented each of the delegates with a copy of the Bookends Scenarios : Alternative futures for the Public Library Network in NSW 2030 and also The Little Book of Public Libraries for information

 

 

9??????? ADDITIONAL MATTERS

 

The Bellingen Shire delegates raised the issue of inadequate funding from the State Government for library services.? The Regional Librarian noted that the prescribed $1.85 per capita in subsidy is outlined in the Library Regulation 2005 which is currently being reviewed.? It was noted that this matter is an agenda item for the Public Libraries NSW ? Country full zone meeting scheduled for May 6 2010 in Tenterfield.? The Regional Librarian encouraged delegates to attend this meeting and raise their concerns to the Executive of the Association.?

 

10????? NEXT MEETINGS

 

3 May ? Macksville (Nambucca Shire Council)

6 August ? Grafton

5 November ? Bellingen

 

The meeting concluded at 2:00pm

 

THIS CONCLUDED THE BUSINESS

 

 

Anne D?Arcy

Executive Officer

Clarence Regional Library

 

Prepared by:??????? Sally Walters

Section:????? Regional Library

??


Ordinary Council Meeting

15 April 2010

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 10.1??? SF1415??????????? 150410???????? Backflow Prevention Policy

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Richard Spain, Manager Water and Sewerage ????????

 

Summary:

 

At their meeting on 20 January 2010 Council resolved to place a draft Backflow Prevention Policy on public exhibition for the required 28 day period.

 

Accordingly the draft policy was placed on public exhibition from 5 February 2010 to 5 March 2010 with the cut off time for receipt of submissions set for 19 March 2010.? No submissions were received.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council Adopt the Backflow Prevention Policy.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

No alternative option is offered as the implementation of a Backflow Prevention Policy is considered necessary for Council to meet it obligation to operate a safe and reliable water supply system.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

All plumbing works must be carried out in accordance with AS/NZS 3500.1 and the NSW Plumbing Code of Practice and both of these documents stipulate that backflow prevention devices shall be fitted to all properties connected to a reticulated water supply.

 

Council, as the local water authority, is responsible for ensuring compliance with the plumbing standards in order to mitigate any risk to the water quality supplied to consumers.? The introduction of a Backflow Prevention Policy is proposed to detail the way in which Council will manage and administer compliance with the plumbing codes and best practice management guidelines.? It provides a clear outline of the responsibilities of both property owners and plumbers in relation to complying with the relevant standards.

 

Copies of the policy have been previously provided to Council and two previous reports have been written detailing the reasons why such a policy is considered to be required.

 

The Water Directorate revised their guidelines in January 2010 and this has been compared to the proposed policy.? No changes are required.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

?????????????? Sydney Water

?????????????? Department of Environment Climate Change & Water

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The implementation of the policy will have no environmental impact.

 


Social

 

The implementation of the policy will better protect public health by reducing the risk of illness caused by drinking from a water supply that may be contaminated by pollutants generated within a property serviced by the same supply.

 

Economic

 

The implementation of the policy will impose costs on the following:

 

?????????????? Existing properties that have non complying installations as the owner will have to cover the installation or upgrade costs

 

?????????????? Properties requiring testable devices as the owner will incur an annual cost to have the installation tested and certified by a licenced plumber.

 

Risk

 

The implementation of the policy will assist Council in managing the risk of contamination of the water supply from pollutants that may be generated within a property service by the reticulated water supply.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no direct or indirect impact on current and future budgets.? Fees for the administration of the policy have been included in Council?s 2010/11 Management Plan.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

2551/2009 - Draft Policy - Backflow Prevention Containment

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Backflow Prevention Policy

 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DRAFT

BACKFLOW PREVENTION CONTAINMENT POLICY

 

 

FEBRUARY 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Council acknowledges the assistance of Sydney Water in the preparation of this document

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Backflow Prevention Policy

 

 

I N D E X

 

1????? Policy statement 1

2????? Scope. 1

3????? Objectives. 2

4????? Legislative context 2

5????? Definitions. 3

6????? Installation requirements. 4

7????? Operating principles. 6

8????? Compliance and reporting requirements. 6


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Backflow Prevention Policy

 

1??? Policy statement

Nambucca Shire Council, being the local Water Authority recognises that the potential exists for its potable water supply to be contaminated by hazards that it may be exposed to.

 

Council accepts that it has a duty of care to:

 

????? maintain the integrity and safety of the water supply,

????? protect public health

????? reduce the risk of contamination of the water supply through any potential hazard including backflow and cross connection.

????? contain real or potential hazards from the activities of consumers within the boundaries of the consumers premises.

 

This policy permits Council to implement procedures to:

 

????? identify existing and potential hazards

????? compile a register of backflow prevention devices and a record of their ongoing inspection and maintenance

????? enforce landowners to install and maintain appropriate backflow prevention devices as required.

????? recoup costs incurred in ensuring that properties are compliant with the relevant codes and practices in relation to backflow prevention and cross connection

 

Accordingly all water services connected to Nambucca Shire Council?s water supplies must meet the requirements of the NSW Code of Practice for plumbing and drainage and Australian/New Zealand Standard for plumbing and drainage Part 1: Water services (AS/NZS 3500.1) so as to protect Nambucca Shire Council?s water supplies.

 

All customers with a connection to the water supply must install a backflow prevention containment device appropriate to the property?s hazard rating.? Property owners that have a high or medium hazard rated property must install a testable backflow prevention containment device at the property boundary for containment protection, appropriate to the property?s hazard rating. They must have the backflow prevention containment device tested annually.

 

In addition all new properties identified as having a low hazard rating must install a non-testable device, as a minimum. Where the water service is greater than 25mm, the owner must pay for the installation.

2??? Scope

The Backflow Prevention Containment Policy applies to all new and existing properties connected to Nambucca Shire Council?s water supply.? There are no local policy exemptions from the requirement to install and maintain backflow prevention devices.

 


3??? Objectives

The objectives of the policy are:

??? to protect the quality of Nambucca Shire Council?s potable water supply by minimising the risk of backflow contamination from connections to the supply system.

??? to specify when testable backflow prevention containment devices are required to protect the water supply from contamination from high or medium hazards flowing back through the property water service, metered standpipes, separate fire service or hydrants.

??? to set out Nambucca Shire Council?s requirements to install and test backflow prevention containment devices on properties rated as high and medium hazards.

??? to set out Nambucca Shire Council?s requirements to install non-testable backflow prevention containment devices on properties rated as a low hazard.

??? to identify backflow prevention containment requirements for customers with multiple water supplies including both drinking water and non-drinking water supplies.

??? to manage the procedure for new service connections, applications and plumbing permits to enable compliance by plumbers and landowners.

??? to ensure compliance and annual testing of backflow prevention devices in accordance with relevant plumbing codes and standards.

4??? Legislative context

The policy is based on the requirement for the Nambucca Shire Council to Comply with the Department of Water and Energy Best Practice Management Guidelines for Water Supply and Sewerage, the NSW Code of Practice for Plumbing and Drainage and Australian/New Zealand Standard 3500.1 (AS/NZS 3500.1).

 

Council?s authority to enforce the policy is derived through the NSW Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (Water Service) Regulations 1999 and Local Government (Approvals) Regulations 1999.

 


5??? Definitions

TERM

DEFINITION

Accredited backflow prevention plumber

A licensed plumber who has completed a TAFE NSW backflow prevention course

AS/NZS 2845

Australian/New Zealand Standard for water supply - Backflow prevention devices ? materials, design and performance requirements

AS/NZS 3500.1

Australian/New Zealand Standard for plumbing and drainage Part 1: Water services

Backflow prevention containment device (AS/NZS 3500.1)

A device to prevent the reverse flow of water from a potentially polluted source, into the drinking water supply system

Containment protection

The installation of a backflow prevention containment device on the water service(s) at the property boundary, to prevent backflow from within the property entering the main water supply

Cross connection

Any connection or arrangements between the drinking water supply system, connected to the water main or any fixture that may enable non-drinking water or other contamination to enter the drinking water supply system

Customer

The property owner

Decentralised waste water treatment system

A system that provides a privately owned non-drinking water supply

Double check valve (AS/NZS 3500.1)

A device to prevent backflow caused by backpressure, which has two independently operating force loaded non-return valves and incorporates specific test points for in-service testing

High hazard rating (AS/NZS 3500.1)

Any condition, device, or practice, which in connection with the water supply system, has the potential to cause death

Medium hazard rating (AS/NZS 3500.1)

Any condition, device, or practice, which in connection with the water supply system, could endanger health

Low hazard rating (AS/NZS 3500.1)

Any condition, device, or practice, which in connection with the water supply system, is a nuisance but does not endanger health or cause injury

Individual protection

Installing a backflow prevention device at the point where the water pipes connect to a fixture or appliance

Licensed plumber

A plumber with a license issued by the NSW Office of Fair Trading

Mixed development

A property with both commercial and residential classifications on-site

New properties

Any new or existing property, undergoing construction or redevelopment that must submit a development application

Reduced pressure zone device (AS/NZS 3500.1)

A device to prevent backflow caused by back siphonage or backpressure in a water reticulation system that incorporates two independently operating force loaded non-return valves. These automatically drain to waste whenever the pressure in the system (between the upstream and downstream non-return valves) drops to less than 14 kPa below the pressure at the inlet to the upstream non-return valve

Registered air gap (AS/NZS 3500.1)

Air gap for a water supply system is specifically defined as the unobstructed vertical distance through the free atmosphere between the lowest opening of a water service pipe (or fixed outlet) supplying water to a fixture or receptacle and the highest possible water level of that fixture or receptacle

Registered break tank (AS/NZS 3500.1)

A tank system specifically designed for backflow prevention registered by, or on behalf of a regulatory authority, for inspection and maintenance

Water supplies

Drinking and/or recycled water

Zone protection

Installing a backflow prevention device at the connection point of specified sections of a plumbing system within a building or facility


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 April 2010

Backflow Prevention Policy

 

 

6??? Installation requirements

????? A backflow prevention containment device must be installed on all properties as defined in AS/NZS 3500.1.

????? All backflow prevention containment devices must be installed following the requirements of AS/NZS 3500.1 and The NSW Code of Practice Plumbing and Drainage.

????? A testable backflow prevention containment device must be installed on the water service of properties identified as a medium or high hazard.

????? Where hazards are unknown for a commercial, industrial or mixed development, the hazard rating will default to high, requiring the owner to install a testable backflow prevention device.

????? Owners of properties identified as low hazard must install a non-testable backflow prevention containment device. For properties served by a water meter larger than 25 mm, a non testable dual check valve must be installed at the owner?s expense.

 

Note: Nambucca Shire Council proactively addresses potential low hazard properties by installing either a 20 or 25 mm water meter that incorporates an integrated dual check valve as part of its Water ????? Meter Renewals Program and for new connections and residents with this type of water service ?? are not required to take any action.

 

????? The type of backflow prevention containment device installed is based on the on-site process hazard rating and or the type of water supply present.

????? Where multiple processes occur on a site, the hazard rating will be based on the process with the highest rating, eg if two medium risk and one high risk processes occur on-site the rating for the site will be high.

????? Properties that have both drinking and non-drinking water supplies must have an appropriate level of backflow prevention containment installed. Drinking and non-drinking services must not be interconnected. The device installed must be the same on both the drinking and non-drinking services. These properties include mixed developments and areas serviced by a decentralised wastewater treatment system.

????? Owners of properties with high hazard ratings must install a registered break tank, reduced pressure zone device or registered air gap.

????? Owners of properties with a medium hazard rating must install a testable double check valve assembly as a minimum.

????? Metered standpipes connected to Nambucca Shire Council?s water supplies must have a testable double check valve incorporated to the design of the standpipe.

????? Owners of properties with separate hydrant and sprinkler fire services must install a testable double check detector assembly. The device must be installed close to where the water service crosses the property boundary, upstream of any booster assembly on, or off-take from, the fire service.

????? Owners of properties with window or wall drencher sprinkler systems must install a low hazard non-testable device.

????? All property owners required to fit a backflow prevention containment device to the water supply must do so on the outlet side of the master water meter(s) supplying the property.? In cases where there is no master water meter(s), the containment device shall be installed on the water supply where it enters the property boundary. No connection may bypass the backflow prevention containment device

7??? Operating principles

Council

??? Nambucca Shire Council will maintain a register of installed testable containment devices and annual test reports. They will audit a sample of installations to ensure ongoing compliance with AS/NZS 3500.1.

??? If Nambucca Shire Council issues a notice that a backflow prevention containment device does not comply with AS/NZS 3500.1 the property owner must repair, maintain, test, replace or install the backflow prevention containment device (as specified in the notice), within the timeframe given.

??? Nambucca Shire Council as an authority identified in the NSW Code of Practice for Plumbing and Drainage reserves the right to take action against the licensed plumber for any installation that does not meet AS/NZS 3500.1.

 

Property Owner

??? The property owner is responsible for their property complying with the Backflow Prevention Containment Policy.

??? The property owner must ensure all backflow prevention containment devices installed comply with the Backflow Prevention Containment Policy. This includes, but is not limited to, installation, maintenance and annual testing.

??? If the property owner fails to install, repair, maintain, replace or test a backflow prevention containment device (as required by a notice issued by Nambucca Shire Council), Nambucca Shire Council may disconnect a non residential property, or restrict a residential property or mixed development from the water supply system until the property owner has complied with the notice. This is to prevent the property contaminating the water supply.

??? If the process at the property has changed and the hazard rating is reduced, the property owner must have an accredited backflow prevention plumber certify the change in hazard rating and inform Nambucca Shire Council. Nambucca Shire Council may conduct a site audit to verify the new hazard rating.

8??? Compliance and reporting requirements

Council

????? Council shall determine the hazard rating of the property to which the backflow prevention device is to be fitted.

????? Existing, non-certified backflow prevention installations will be audited by Council for compliance with the current requirements of AS/NZS 3500.1 and The NSW Code of Practice Plumbing and Drainage Plumbing. Audits will be completed with the property owner were possible and written notice of any works required for compliance will be forwarded to the property owner.

Plumber

????? A licensed plumber shall submit a Section 68 application to Council for the installation, removal or modification of any backflow prevention device and pay all fees and charges applicable. Council approval shall be obtained prior to commencing work.

????? A licensed plumber must install all backflow prevention containment devices. Only a licensed plumber with backflow prevention accreditation may commission, and test these devices.

????? A licensed plumber must install and certify registered break tanks, and registered air gaps.

????? A licensed plumber must submit the Certificate of Compliance for the containment device installation for medium and high hazard rated properties. They must submit the Inspection Test and Maintenance Report to Nambucca Shire Council within two days of completing the work.

????? For low hazard properties, Nambucca Shire Council does not require the plumber to register the Certificate of Compliance.

 

Property Owner

????? Where existing, non-certified backflow prevention devices are audited by Council it is the property owner?s responsibility to ensure that all works required for the installation to be compliant are completed within 2 months of Council providing written notice of the required works.

????? The property owner is responsible for installing, maintaining and the annual testing (where applicable) of backflow prevention containment devices within their property in accordance with AS/NZS 3500.1.

Note: ?? The property owner is also responsible for providing zone and individual backflow protection from hazards within their property as specified in AS/NZS 3500.1.

????? The property owner is responsible for ensuring that a licensed plumber completes all works and that the plumber submits all Test and maintenance Reports to Council within the two days of completing the work

?


Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 10.2??? SF1360??????????? 150410???????? Flood Damage - February, March/April, May and October/November 2009

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Bruce Redman, Director Engineering Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

A report will be made every two months showing the progress being made to complete the permanent restoration works approved by the Roads and Traffic Authority.

 

The report will be a table of jobs and the status of restoration.

 

An updated report is circularised.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council note the progress of works to complete the permanent restoration of damage from the February, March/April, May and October/November 2009 floods as at 31 March 2010.

 

2??????? That Council note the proposed briefing in relation to the Bowraville to Bellingen Road to be conducted at Bellingen Shire Council at a time and date to be fixed.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Nil

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The report presented to Council on 17 September 2009 was in relation to 3 declared Natural Disasters.? There ended up being 5 declared events with further floods at the end of October and the beginning of November 2009.

 

The Roads and Traffic Authority are progressively approving projects.? This has required the preparation of surveys, designs and estimates for each claim.

 

Progress on the currently approved works is shown on the circularised schedules.? The major works are:

 

1??????? Sheet O Bark???????? Completed.

 

2??????? Designs completed for Valla Road ? slips.? Awaiting RTA approval.

 

3??????? Design in progress for Sullivans Road for riverbank protection.

 

4??????? Council?s Engineering Designer preparing concept designs for landslips within the Bellingen Shire Council?s area.

 

5??????? Preparation for seals on Browns Crossing Road, Helliwells Road and Missabotti Road.

 

6??????? Consultants GHD have now completed a preliminary investigation and assessment of the landslide damage on the Bowraville to Bellingen Road.? They are currently finalising a supplementary report which provides illustrated options and costings.? It is proposed that when this report is submitted that a briefing be convened at Bellingen Shire Council involving representatives of the RTA, Mayors and Deputy Mayors of each Council, relevant Council staff as well as the Consultants GHD.?

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Manager Civil Works

Overseer

 

A copy of this report has been forwarded to Bellingen Shire Council for their information.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The sites were damaged by the floods.? Restoration works includes grass seeding and some vegetation planting.

 

Social

 

Access to properties has been restored.

 

Economic

 

Damaged sections of road which are accessed by heavy vehicles including log and cattle trucks have impacted on associated businesses.? Bus routes are also affected.? New load limits on bridges impact on transport routes.

 

Risk

 

Council is using a mix of day labour staff and contractors to undertake the work.? Similarly, both Council design staff and private surveyors are involved in preliminary works to reduce the risk of time being unacceptable.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Council's commitment under Natural Disaster Funding is $29,000.? The remaining costs are met 100% by the NSW Treasury through the RTA.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The NSW Treasury.

 

Funding will be subject to ongoing approval of the claims.? Extra grants will be included at each budget review.? The impact on budgets will occur over two to three years.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised Document - Spreadsheet of Schedules

 

?

??