NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

2 June 2011

 

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?

 

1??????? Addressing Council with regard to an item on the meeting agenda:

 

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.? The relevant agenda item will be brought forward at 5.30 pm in agenda order, and dealt with following preliminary business items on the agenda.? Public addresses are limited to five (5) minutes per person with a limit of two people speaking for and two speaking against an item.?

 

2??????? Public forum address regarding matters not on the meeting agenda:

 

Council allows not more than two (2) members of the public per meeting to address it on matters not listed in the agenda provided the request is received before publication of the agenda 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 Council?s website: www.nambucca.nsw.gov.au


 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

MACKSVILLE SCOTTS HEAD SURF LIFE SAVING CLUB

scotts head

 

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 - 19 May 2011

5??????? Notices of Motion

5.1???? Notice of Motion - LGSA Tourism Conference 9-11 March 2011 - Report

5.2???? Notice of Motion - Cr Moran - Indefinite Leave ?

6??????? PUBLIC FORUM

Coastal Monitoring System

i)??????? Prof. Mal Heron on behalf of James Cook University

DELEGATIONS

i)??????? Theresa Ryan - Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

ii)?????? Danelle Garrett - Macksville Aquatic Centre - YMCA - Possible Changes

 

7??????? ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE ??

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

9??????? General Manager Report

9.1???? Outstanding Actions and Reports

9.2???? Local Government Remuneration Tribunal - Increase in Councillor Remuneration for 2010/2011and Determination of Increase for 2011/2012

9.3???? Grant Application Status Report - 20 May 2011

9.4???? March 2011 Budget Review

9.5???? Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

10????? Director Environment and Planning Report

10.1?? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 6 May 2011

10.2?? DA's and CDC's Received and Determined under Delegated Authority to 23 May 2011

10.3?? Report on Registrations for the 20th NSW Coastal Conference at Tweed Heads on 8-11 November 2011

10.4?? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 19 April 2011

10.5?? Youth Week 2011 and Macksville Show Chill Out Space 2011

10.6?? Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 13 May 2011

10.7?? Nambucca River Users Group Request for Support for the Design of the new Nambucca River Bridge at Macksville.

10.8?? Consideration of subdivision of village zoned land to create four (4) lots

10.9?? Report on Legal and Debt Recovery Costs for period 1/07/10 to 18/5/11

10.10? Review and Refinement of the Northern Rivers Catchment Action Plan

10.11? Membership? - Cemeteries and Crematoria Association

11????? Director Engineering Services Report

11.1?? Professional Lifeguard Services Report for the Contract Period 2010/2011

11.2?? Nambucca Heads Sewerage Augmentation - Offer of Works In-Kind from NSW Water Solutions ????


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?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.1????? SF1595??????????? 020611???????? Notice of Motion - LGSA Tourism Conference 9-11 March 2011 - Report

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Anne Smyth, Councillor ????????

 

Summary:

 

I attended the 2011 LGSA Tourism Conference, held at the Engadine Community Centre, Sutherland Shire, from 9-11 March 2011, along with Ms Maita van Stockum, Council?s Visitor Information Officer.?

 

The importance of the financial and social benefits that tourism brings to local economies was a recurrent theme throughout the various presentations.? A number of speakers discussed these benefits in terms of ?the multiplying effect? that tourism brings to the economy - people come for a holiday and not only stay, but buy food, petrol, visit clubs and pubs, purchase clothing, etc., providing a financial return to others as well as the tourism operator. Increased visitation leads to new operators and more local jobs, providing economic and social benefits - growing tourism can assist in growing the local economy.? In New South Wales, tourism provides 162,500 jobs, half of which are in regional areas.? The individual presentations are available on the LGSA?s website:? www.lgsa.org.au

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the report on the Tourism Conference.

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

I attended the 2011 LGSA Tourism Conference, held at the Engadine Community Centre, Sutherland Shire, from 9-11 March 2011, along with Ms Maita van Stockum, Council?s Visitor Information Officer. The three-day conference included a variety of presentations, including speakers from Tourism NSW, University of Technology Sydney, Land & Property Management Authority, Google Australia, consultants, Councillors and staff from a number of local government areas, as well as several tourism operators.

 

I participated in the optional session ?Building Better Communities with Tourism Seminar? for Mayors, General Managers and Economic Development Managers on Wednesday 9 March, which began with a presentation by Cr Lorraine Kelly, Chair, Sutherland Shire Tourism Sub-committee. Her discussion related to structuring tourism within Councils for success - what has and has not worked for their Shire.? Sutherland Shire Council employs 1 full-time Tourism Manager and 1 part-time employee to assist the Manager and perceives tourism as business development and one of its many services provided to the community.? Sutherland?s strategy involves building trust with local industry and adapting and responding to needs and changes, with tourism being instrumental in creating additional employment opportunities. Cr Kelly spoke of the ?multiplying effect? that tourism brings to the economy - people come for a holiday and not only stay, but buy food, petrol, visit clubs and pubs, purchase clothing, etc, providing an economic benefit to others as well as the tourism operator.

 

John Bates, Group Manager Strategy and Insights, Tourism NSW, discussed Planning Issues for Tourism Destinations.? His presentation focussed on the economic and social benefits of tourism, particularly the ?Group Tour? market.? In New South Wales, tourism is a bigger industry than agriculture and IT.???

 

Dr Carmel Foley, Senior Lecturer, and Dr Katie Schlenker, Lecturer, Leisure Sport and Tourism, University of Technology Sydney Business School, gave an interesting presentation on the economic, social and intangible contributions made by Business Events.? In monetary terms, a person who visits a destination for a business event spends an average of $234/day, compared to $163/day spent by someone who visits for leisure. Within the tourism sector, Business Events are regarded as a ?high yield market?, where dollars are spent on food, travel, accommodation, leisure, entertainment, etc., and quite often these visitors will extend their stay after the event and may return in the future.?

 

Jenny-Lee Stefas, Tourism Manager, Sutherland Shire Council gave a presentation entitled ?Nurturing and Growing a Tourism Industry?.? Council works with the tourism industry by providing a monthly newsletter, educating operators by running workshops, as well as working in cooperation with local business and utilising the expertise of TAFE students in event organisation. She emphasised the importance of promoting a ?unique tourism destination? and engaging inbound tour operators to offer ?the whole package? by working together with other local businesses to make the tourism experience memorable ? ?tourism gives people an experience that is not their everyday experience?.

 

The final presentations for Wednesday?s program were from local tourism operators in Sutherland Shire - Christine Hack, Marketing Manager, Cronulla & National Park Ferry Cruises and Alex Arthur, Skipper and Cruise Captain;? Ian Wells, Royal Coast Walks (in Royal National Park);? and Yvonne Paton, Oyster Bay Bed and Breakfast.

 

Thursday?s program included a presentation by Rachel Botsman, author and consultant, who discussed Collaborative Consumption.? Her presentation focussed on the importance of the use of the internet to promote accommodation as well as tourism associated activities that add to the experience of visitation to a destination.?

 

A choice of three Topic Streams was offered on Thursday. I participated in Topic Stream 2 - Planning, Investment and Local Government. Of particular interest to me, as a member of our Council?s Access Committee, was the presentation by Associate Professor Simon Darcy, Deputy Head of School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism, Faculty of Business, UTS.? Professor Darcy is an Environmental Planner and gave an informative presentation in relation to Accessible Tourism and the need for planning to incorporate access for people of all abilities in the tourism sector. Around 20% of the domestic market has some level of disability (mobility, hearing, vision, cognitive, mental health, sensitivities and others). Accessible tourism encompasses ?those people who prefer accessible tourism experiences ? typically this would include people with a disability and less mobile seniors; and families with young children in prams?. He spoke about the need for collaboration between planners and tourism providers.?

 

Tony Griffin, Senior Lecturer in Tourism Management, School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism, UTS and Dr Deborah Edwards, discussed GPS tracking as a tourism planning tool.

 

Dr Rob Lang, CEO, Parramatta City Council gave a presentation relating to Positioning Precincts and Integrated Planning.? Discussion concerned sustainable growth and the need to diversify, including mixed-use and shop-top housing. He also spoke about developing precincts to promote tourism, e.g. Parramatta has ?Eat Street?, an Arts Precinct and a Foreshore Precinct.

 

Andrea Roberts, Community Development Manager, Broken Hill City Council, discussed the Council?s Destination Plan, which has been integrated into their Management Plan.?

 

Barry Baillie, CEO, Caravan and Camping Industry Association NSW and Karen Hembrow, Director North, Crown Lands Division, Land & Property Management Authority, gave a presentation on the ?Changing Face of Parks ? Caravan Parks to Holiday Parks?.? The Caravan, Motorhome, Camping and Holiday Park industry has been the fastest growing domestic tourism sector in NSW and Australia for the past 15 years and is still rising.? Visitor nights in NSW holiday parks have increased by 18.6% in the past five years. Statistics show that the NSW Mid North Coast receives 2.5 million visitor nights and is the second most popular caravan and camping destination in Australia, with the South Coast receiving 2.7 million and Northern Rivers receiving 1.7 million visitor nights.? Of the 900 Parks in NSW, 300 are located on Crown Land, with 150 of these being run by Councils/Trusts.

 

Lyndel Gray, Executive Director & General Manager, Tourism NSW, who gave the first presentation on Friday, cited the importance of tourism for the economy.? In NSW, tourism accounts for a daily expenditure of $63M. The tourism industry directly employs 162,500 people and 110,000 extra jobs are created indirectly as a result of tourist visitation. She also spoke about the importance of Flagship events and the financial assistance that can be given with promotion of local events.

 

Darren Keppie, Industry Manager, Government and Tourism, Google Australia Pty Ltd, gave a motivating presentation on the increasing use of computer technology and the utilization of social networking within the tourism industry.? He spoke at length on the escalating usage of mobile phones to access the internet - 84% of Australians use the internet and 29% use their mobile phones to do so, with Facebook being the most popular search. He stressed the importance of integrating with other media and the need to continually update and keep changing.

 

Andrew Sargant, Director Regional Tourism NSW, spoke on the need to promote experiences, not just destinations.? In the holiday segment, NSW has out-performed all other States over the last two years in the international market.? The importance of the use of more social media was discussed, including the need to continually update websites.

 

Elizabeth Fairweather, Senior Economic Development Officer, Clarence Valley Council, gave a presentation on the Clarence River Way Masterplan, entitled ?Building a Future upon our Greatest Asset ? the Clarence River?.? The Masterplan includes a proposal for developing a 300km canoe trail, which would be the longest in Australia, and will offer a Canoe and Kayak Guide, a Sailing and Cruising Guide, canoe and kayak launching points as well as primitive camping sites along the route.

 

A presentation by Waverley Council?s Lorna Bussell, Divisional Manager, Bondi and Beaches, provided information on their Destination Marketing Plan which was developed to increase visitation during the winter months.? Entitled ?Bondi Winter Magic?, the strategy was a successful collaborative project which encouraged more tourists to come to Bondi during June, July and August and included the introduction of an ice-skate rink at the foreshore (12,000 tickets sold over a ten-day period), a music festival, Whale Festival, the Bondi Bohemia Fair, a community skate board event and improvements to street and awning lighting. The results showed an increased number of visitors to Bondi, with many staying overnight. 78% of businesses rated the campaign a success and more than 30 businesses joined the Chamber of Commerce as a result.

 

Other speakers at the Conference included Derril Greenway, Director of Property, Sutherland Shire Council; Dr David Beirman, Senior Lecturer, School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism, University of Technology; Steve Baldwin, Warrumbungle Cluster; Sally Nolan, Wagga Wagga City Council; Cr Wincen Cuy, Broken Hill City Council; and Chris Warren, International Centre for Responsible Tourism, Kangaroo Valley.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

There has not been any consultation in the writing of this report.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

Tourism has the potential to offer sustainable holiday choices.? One of the speakers referred to the fact that some holiday-makers like to leave a positive ?legacy? when they visit a destination.? She gave the example of tourists who like to plant a tree (or have one planted on their behalf) to help offset their carbon footprint during their stay.?

 

Social

Many of the presentations at the Conference referred to the range of social benefits that tourism brings to a community.?

 

Economic

Numerous speakers reiterated that there are many economic benefits to be gained by increased tourism.?

 

Risk

Some possible risks to the tourism industry include natural disasters, economic issues, crime, epidemics and disease, as well as loss of visitors due to heightened competition from neighbouring regions, other States and overseas.?

 


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current budgets

The cost of my attendance at the Conference has come from my Councillor?s Expense Allowance, provided for in the current Budget.

 

Direct and Indirect impact on future budgets

Nil

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

The cost of my attendance at the Conference has come from my Councillor?s Expense Allowance, provided for in the current Budget.? No variance is required to working funds.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.2????? SF1595??????????? 020611???????? Notice of Motion - Cr Moran - Indefinite Leave

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Rhonda Hoban, Councillor ????????

 

Summary:

 

Cr Moran has indicated that he be granted indefinite leave.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Cr Michael Moran OAM be granted indefinite leave in accordance the Local Government Act.

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?????


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

General Manager

ITEM 9.1????? SF959????????????? 020611???????? 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 2009

1

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

Fibre optic cable has been laid and computer hardware (backup server) has been ordered.? Hardware has been installed being:

1. ESXi host server in the library. This server runs VMware ESX which is then capable of hosting our servers in a virtual environment if required.

2. Platespin Protect. Installed on the ESX host is a virtual server dedicated to handling replications from our physical servers. Each physical server has a Platespin agent installed to facilitate this replication.

3. Fibre link between admin office and library DR site.

 

Planning is underway to update and then test Council?s disaster recovery and business continuity plan.

AUGUST 2009

2

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.

Plan currently being reviewed.

Deferred to October 2010.

Not completed ? deferred to November 2010.

MANEX agreed to rehabilitate Bellwood between Pacific Hwy & Mumbler St with existing contributions.

To be included in Works Program for 2011/2012.

Enquiry to be made with D of P re progress of subdivision application.

 

DoP confirmed that subdivision application submitted, but not ready for public exhibition yet (8/3/11)

 

 

JANUARY 2010

3

SF839

21/01/10

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

 

GM

On-going.

 

 

 

 

MARCH 2010

4

SF820

20/05/10

Quarterly performance review be presented to Clrs for comment at the first Council meeting of the month; with comments to be received by the next business paper deadline; and with the Performance review + Councillors comments to be considered at the following GPC.? Also dot points be replaced with no?s & an electronic copy to be provided to those Councillors who want it.

 

GM

On-going.

 

 

JULY 2010

6

SF638

15/07/10

Council formulate a plan of management for land which is occupied by the Valla Beach Pre-School.

 

GM

Scheduled for October 2010.

Deferred to November 2010.

Pre School unable to secure an easement over adjoining land for maintenance of bushfire buffer.? Plan of Management to be prepared following resolution of Pre School extensions.

 

7

SF218

15/07/10

Council review investigations to extend sewer to the Lower Nambucca and investigate effluent disposal issues in Eungai.

 

GM/

DEP

Letter sent to owners in Lower Nambucca.? Briefing and discussion with property owners to be arranged.

DEP to investigate Eungai.

De Groot Benson contacted concerning a meeting date in February 2011.

Information sent through to consultant.? Meeting now not likely to late March 2011.

Consultant advised that meeting will need to be deferred to May 2011 due to unavailability.

 

Staff workloads have not permitted to proceed in May.? June now targeted.

 

SEPTEMBER 2010

8

SF1471, SF611

2/9/2010

Write to Minister for Local Govt requesting that the LG (manufactured Home Estates etc) Regulation 2005 be amended to require proposals to locate new dwellings in caravan parks to be notified to council prior to placement

DEP

Letter sent on 10/9/2010.

No response as at 26/10/2010.

Response received from Minister for Local Government 5 November 2010 advising that the matter has been referred to the Minister for Planning for consideration. See Trim document 27096/2010.

No response from Minister for Planning as at 22/2/11.

 

No response from Minister for Planning as at 28/3/11.

 

Two further letters sent 24/5/11.? Ministers for Local Govt & Minister for Planning.

9

SF741

16/09/10

Council pursue the potential of recovering the cost (of the enlarged sludge lagoon at the Nambucca Heads STP) from the Public Works Department.

 

GM

Contracts have been reviewed and a letter containing a claim has been sent to the PWD on 29 September 2010.? Response received from PWD on 11 October denying liability.? Meeting to be held on 28 October 2010.? Awaiting finalisation of a design for bank of sludge lagoon.

Council?s solicitor, Terry Perkins has been instructed to act on Council?s behalf in pursuing the claim.

 

GM met with PWD representatives on 2 March.? Verbal agreement has been reached on a $48,000 settlement being the foregone subsidy on the additional work.? PWD to put in writing to Council.?

 

Written offer from PWD received.? To be reported to Council.


OCTOBER 2010

10

SF1031

21/10/10

New policies be reported back to Council for determination.

 

GM

January 2011.

IPR current priority. Deferred to March 2011.

IPR and reformatting of Management Plan remain priorities.? Have had to defer again to April 2011. Now May 2011.? Still can?t get to them due work load.

 

NOVEMBER 2010

11

SF1471

04/11/10

That a Saleyard seminar be held for the community after Council has received the report from Council?s Property Officer and prior to making any final decision on the future of the Saleyards.

 

GM

Report scheduled for December 2010.

Report scheduled for January 2011.

Property Officer to write to CMA requesting funds for improving Saleyards effluent issue.

 

Awaiting response from CMA.

 

12

PRF54

18/11/10

Council approach LPMA re future management of Boultons Crossing (Gumma) Reserve

 

GM

Letter written to LPMA 26 November 2010.? Meeting with LPMA and Committee of Management arranged for 27/1/2011.

 

Meeting held on 27/1/2011.? Awaiting advice from LPMA on bringing more crown land into the reserve and grant opportunities.

GM to follow up with Committee of Management.

 

Report to Council on 16 June 2011

 

DECEMBER 2010

13

SF296

2/12/10

Signage at Ferry Street Macksville ? Council review after the Christmas break.

 

DEP

Report to Council in February 2011

Signs unable to be erected prior to Christmas.? Report deferred to April 2011.

 

Report further deferred to after April school holidays

Further delay due to signs have not been erected..

 

14

PRF53

16/12/10

Council write to Country Energy asking if electricity cables can be bundled in River Street to reduce pruning as a community service.

 

DES

Letter sent 9 February 2011.

 

Response received from Country Energy advising that the matter is being investigated.

15

SF1372

16/12/10

Council?s Strategic Planner prepare a Climate Change Adaptation Policy for future adoption by Council to ensure that actions contained in the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy are given consideration in future decision making, policy implementation, strategy development & Council staff.

 

DEP

Targeting April 2011.

 

Due to workloads this report has been deferred ? now likely to be May 2011.

 

Draft report has been circulated to Councillors and to come to June meeting.

16

SF844

16/12/10

That a Project Implementation Management Plan for the off-stream dam be developed to include provision for hollow bearing trees that are removed as part of the pre-clearing survey to be replaced by nesting boxes of similar dimension provided in suitable vegetation, with the catchment above the dam top water level.

 

DES

GHD commissioned.? Plan anticipated in March 2011.

 

To be included within the contract documentation as a condition imposed on the contractor obligations and compliance with the EIS.

JANUARY 2011

17

SF84

20/1/11

Council seek further information from the LGSA re the property based levy (for emergency services)

 

GM

Letter sent 21/1/11

18

SF84

20/1/11

Council write to RFS Commissioner re undertaking that increases in RFS contributions would be subject to review by IPART.

 

GM

Letter sent 21/1/11

FEBRUARY 2011

19

SF1508

3/2/11

Council revert to in-house monitoring of energy consumption and greenhouse gas production and revisit the option of engaging consultants for benchmarking in 12 months time.

 

DES

Report in February 2012.

20

SF755

17/2/11

Council defer demolition of the old rugby league amenities at Coronation Park for a period of 3 months to allow the Trust to complete their proposal to restore parts of the building and to demonstrate their ability to fund the project.

 

DES

Report 15 June 2011 GPC.

 

 

21

SF1291

17/2/11

Paveline patching machine ? a further report be prepared of the year July 2010 to June 2011 for comparison with the same period in the previous year.

DES

Report to April 2011.

 

Report to August 2011.

22

SF775

17/2/11

Council liaise with the Saltwater Freshwater Festival Committee with a view to conducting the Festival in the Nambucca Valley in 2013.

 

GM

Letter sent to Committee on 21 February 2011.

23

SF787

17/2/11

Council write to the relevant Minister and Federal Government Department concerned with pest control seeking a more active approach to the control of the Indian Myna and requesting that it be officially declared as a pest.

 

DEP

Letters sent 3 March 2011.

Response from Minister Sartor received 15/3/11 advising that matter is being considered and a formal response will be sent in due course.? See Trim doc 6789/2011

New round of letters to be sent to the Relevant Minister and State Government.

 

Responses now received from Dept of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population & Communities 14 April Trim 10165/2011 attached.?

NPWS 21 April Trim 10784/2011 attached.? Robyn Parker MP 10 May Trim 12276/2011 attached. Tony Abbot MHR 20 May Trim 13587/2011 attached.

 

MARCH 2011

24

RF275

17/3/11

Council write to the Minister for Roads requesting an immediate decision on the total reconstruction of the Bowraville to Bellingen Road.

 

GM

Letter sent 22/3/2011

25

SF261

17/3/11

 

Council request the RTA to provide a breakdown of the $10m expenditure on safety improvements to the Pacific Highway between Urunga and Nambucca Heads.

 

GM

Letter sent 22/3/2011

26

SF788

17/3/11

Council write to CHCC requesting the audit report (on biomass solutions) as soon as it?s received and request a presentation on the 3 options with the opportunity to comment before CHCC determines their position.? Copy of letter to go to Bellingen SC.

 

GM

Letter sent 22/3/2011

27

DA2010/234

17/3/11

Council develop a policy as to the cumulative impacts of locating fill on the floodplain at Macksville and also review the matrix in the Floodplain Risk Management Plan

 

DEP

Brief to be prepared and new floodplain study to be undertaken during 2011.

APRIL 2011

28

 

7/4/2011

Council approach the Minister for Roads and the Local Member to request Taylors Arm Road, MR533 be reinstated as a Regional Road.

 

DES

Letter sent week ending 15 April 2011

Response received.

29

 

7/4/2011

Council commence the formal procedure to rename the Congarinni Bridge the, ?Howard ?Pud? Langford? bridge.

 

DES

Process commenced

30

 

7/4/2011

Council receive a report on options for addressing waste disposal for the residents of Burrapine.? One of the options to be considered is a waste transfer station.

 

DES

Report to be prepared by June 2011

31

SF29

7/4/2011

That a Committee be formed comprising the Mayor, library delegates, MCCS to investigate the possibility of forming a relationship with other local Council libraries and that the Committee report back to Council by Feb 2012.

 

DEP

MCCS to arrange an Inaugural Meeting.? Meeting has been arranged to discuss proposal with Coffs Harbour City Council on Monday 23 May 2011.

 

Meeting held ? report to come to Council for future direction.

32

SF29

7/4/2011

Council write to the Clarence Valley Council asking what they anticipate future contributions to the Clarence Regional Library will be when the Strategic Plan has been completed and the planned outcomes achieved.

 

GM

Letter sent 13 April 2011

33

SF358

7/4/2011

That the GM report on the options for the use of the funds in the S94 reserve for public recreation in the Macksville/Scotts Head catchment including foreshore redevelopment at River Street, Macksville.

 

GM

Report to Council in May 2011.? Section 94 officer has been on sick leave.

34

SF878

7/4/2011

That Council request a presentation from the Executive of the Mid North Weight of Loads Group at a GPC meeting.

 

DES

Request forwarded to Mid North Weight of Loads to present at a GPC

35

PRF53

21/4/2011

Foreshore redevelopment ? River Street, Macksville ? Option A stage 1 (with modifications) be placed on public exhibition for 28 days.

 

DES

Placed on public exhibition (closing 4.00 pm on 2 June 2011) with a further report to Council with summary of comments received.

36

SF84

21/4/2011

Council write to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services & complain about RFS cost increases and controls re use of fuel cards and phones.? Also why IPART don?t review cost increases and why there is a prepayment for the Volunteer & Statewide Support contribution.

 

DES

Letters sent week ending 29 April 2011.

37

SF84

21/4/2011

Council submit a motion to the Shires Association Conference that the Associations write to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services raising concerns about the cost of the RFS to local government; the annual increases in Council contributions; the method of advance payment and level of reporting to local government.? Further the Minister consider improvements to the process to reduce the financial impacts on local government.

 

DES

Motion forwarded to the Shires Association.

38

SF84

21/4/2011

Council write to the Minister for Local Government, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Local Member advising that increases in contributions to the RFS well exceed rate pegging and express Council?s concern about the lack of transparency in the increases sought.

 

GM

Letters sent weekend ending 29 April 2011.

39

SF84

21/4/2011

Council write to the head of the local district of the RFS and request copies of annual reports of expenditure in this district for the past 5 years.

 

DES

Letters sent weekend ending 29 April 2011.

MAY 2011

40

SF959

5/5/2011

Council write to RTA and ask that the new 90km/hr zone on the Pacific Highway be extended from Valla Beach to Nambucca Heads and that feeder roads have appropriate markings.

 

GM

Letter sent 9 May 2011.

41

SF1306

5/5/2011

Council write to the Hon. Andrew Stoner MP and ask why there needs to be new arrangements for bush fire certificates and why they can?t continue to be provided by the RFS.

 

DEP

Letter sent 9 May 2011.

42

SF395

5/5/2011

Council approach Comet Windmills regarding the type of pump they propose to install in Dawkins Park and whether it will be self priming and its susceptibility to sucking debris.

 

GM

Letter sent 9 May 2011.

43

SF1595

19/5/2011

Council forward concerns raised over the determination of DA 2010/234 Proposed Primary School to the Joint Regional Planning Panel Secretariat with a copy to the NSW Deputy Premier and Member for Oxley, the Hon. Andrew Stoner MP.

 

GM

Letter sent 26 May 2011

44

SF1595

19/5/2011

Council ask the Minister to make an urgent determination as to whether the issues raised in the letters of complaint and public representations regarding the JRPP?s determination of DA 2010/234 provide grounds for the Minister to exercise his responsibilities under Section 7(f) of the EPA Act.

 

GM

Letter sent 26 May 2011

45

SF1595

19/5/2011

Council investigate relocation of taxi rank from High Street, Bowraville to another suitable location in Bowraville with options regarding removal & reinstatement when required.

DES

Report prepared for Traffic Committee and letter prepared for Bowraville Chamber of Commerce.

46

SF1595

19/5/2011

The General Manager present an overview of the Annual Report to Councillors upon its completion.

 

GM

Overview report to be presented in November 2011

47

SF788

19/5/2011

Council consider refunding $4,451 in DA fees to Nambucca Valley Care subject to finalisation of 2011/12 budget.

 

GM

July 2011

48

SF909

19/5/2011

Manager Business Development prepare a digital economy strategy re identifying blackspots to be presented to the NBN Co for rollout consideration.

 

GM

September 2011

49

SF1031

19/5/2011

That a new policy covering donations to charities be prepared to cover all existing policies and to better ration the limited donations budget.

GM

July 2011

50

SF415

19/5/2011

Report on encroachment of Autumn Lodge onto Dawkins Park be deferred to GPC on 15 June 2011.

 

GM

June GPC

51

SF86

19/5/2011

Council write to the Minister expressing concern about the (SES) levy being unaffordable and referring to recent cost increases from the RFS.

 

DES

Letter sent 26 May 2011

52

DA2011/53

19/5/2011

Engineering Dept. provide a further report on the outcome of the GHD investigation (drainage catchment above Riverside Gardens) and whether there will still be an issue with the outlet under Riverside Drive once the detention basin has been cleared.

DES

 

53

DA2011/53

19/5/2011

Council again lobby the State and Federal Governments for financial assistance to address the issues on the former Pacific Highway which is now Riverside Drive.

 

GM

 

54

SF629

19/5/2011

Council amend its policy so that in future any request for the removal of trees deemed healthy by Council staff be accompanied by an Arborist?s report commissioned by Council at the applicant?s expense.

DES

Policy amended.

55

SF415

19/5/2011

Council write to Rob?s Hair Salon/Barber enquiring as to his willingness to manage a cigarette butt tray.

DES

Letter sent.

Attachments:

1View

10165/2011 - Item 24 - DSEWPC - Indian Myna Birds

 

2View

10784/2011 - Item 24 - NPWS - Indian Myna Birds

 

3View

11388/2011 - Item 24 - Andrew Stoner MP - Indian Myna Bird

 

4View

12276/2011 - Item 24 - Robyn Parker MP - Indian Myna Birds

 

5View

13587/2011 - Item 24 - Hon Tony Abbot MHR - Indian Myna Bird

 

?

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Outstanding Actions and Reports

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Outstanding Actions and Reports

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Outstanding Actions and Reports

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Outstanding Actions and Reports

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Outstanding Actions and Reports

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.2??????? SF270????????????? 020611???????? Local Government Remuneration Tribunal - Increase in Councillor Remuneration for 2010/2011and Determination of Increase for 2011/2012

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal has issued determinations to increase the fees for Councillors and Mayors by 3.0% for the 2010/2011 financial year and by 4.2% for the 2011/2012 financial year.? It is recommended that Council adjust its Councillor Annual Fee and the additional Mayoral Allowance in accordance with the determinations.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council adjust its Councillor Annual Fee and the additional Mayoral Allowance to the maximum permitted for a rural council for the 2010/2011 financial year being $9,570 for each Councillor and $20,890 for the additional Mayoral Allowance.

 

2??????? That the change in fees be backdated to 1 July 2010 in accordance with the determination by the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal.

 

3??????? That Council increase its Councillor Annual Fee and the additional Mayoral Allowance to the maximum permitted for a rural council for the 2011/12 financial year being $9,970 for each Councillor and $21,770 for the additional Mayoral Allowance.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are 3 options.? Council can adopt a fee for Councillors and the Mayor at the minimum or maximum levels.? The minimum annual fee for a Councillor in 2010/2011 is $7,250 and the minimum additional fee for the Mayor is $7,700.? Council can also choose not to adopt any fee in which case the fee which is applied is the minimum.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Pursuant to Section 241 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal determines in each category of Council, the maximum and minimum amount of fees to be paid to Mayors and Councillors of Councils, as well as chairpersons and members of County Councils.

 

The determinations mean the fees for Councillors can increase from $9,290 in 2009/2010 to $9,570 in 2010/2011 and to $9,970 in 2011/2012.? The additional allowance payable to the Mayor can increase from $20,280 in 2009/2010 to $20,890 in 2010/2011 and to $21,770 in 2011/2012.

 

Nambucca Shire Council along with 76 other Councils is classed as a Rural Council.? The applicable fees for councillors are shown in the following tables.? By way of comparison with Mid North Coast Councils, Coffs Harbour, Greater Taree, Great Lakes, Port Macquarie-Hastings and Kempsey councils are all Regional Rural councils.? Bellingen, Nambucca and Gloucester Councils are classed as Rural Councils.

 

Councillor Fees as at 1 July 2010

 

 

Councillor/Member Annual Fee $

Mayor/Chairperson Additional Fee* $

 

Minimum

Maximum

Minimum

Maximum

Rural

7,250

9,570

7,700

20,890

Regional Rural

7,250

15,970

15,430

34,860

Metropolitan

7,250

15,970

15,430

34,860

Metropolitan Centre

10,880

20,320

23,130

53,980

Metropolitan Major

14,500

23,950

30,840

69,780

Major City

14,500

23,950

30,840

69,780

Principal City

21,770

31,930

133,190

175,250

 

Councillor Fees as at 1 July 2011

 

 

Councillor/Member Annual Fee $

Mayor/Chairperson Additional Fee* $

 

Minimum

Maximum

Minimum

Maximum

Rural

7,550

9,970

8,020

21,770

Regional Rural

7,550

16,640

16,080

36,320

Metropolitan

7,550

16,640

16,080

36,320

Metropolitan Centre

11,340

21,170

24,100

56,250

Metropolitan Major

15,110

24,960

32,140

72,710

Major City

15,110

24,960

32,140

72,710

Principal City

22,680

33,270

138,780

182,610

 

* This fee must be paid in addition to the fee paid to the Mayor/Chairperson as a Councillor/Member (S.249(2)).

 

The LGSA indicate that a reasonable expectation of work load for councillors would be 21 hours per week? but as the experience of the Councillor increases this may reduce slightly.? Assuming some leave, to provide for say 1,000 hours of time in a year means an hourly rate for a Councillor of about $9 per hour.? And that doesn?t include consideration of election expenses and other out of pocket expenses such as telephone calls.? Accordingly it is recommended that Councillor Fees and the Mayor?s Fee be increased to the maximum allowable for a Rural Council.?

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

The determination of the Tribunal is not advised to Councils.? It was picked up from the Local Government Weekly.? The Tribunal secretariat has been requested to notify all Councils of their determination.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There is no impact on the environment.

 

Social

 

The NSW approach to local government is increasingly out of step with our neighbouring States.? It is possible that the current level of fees discourages younger people and/or people of more diverse backgrounds from seeking election to local government.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are no risk implications.


 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Provision has been made in the draft budget for the increase.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There will be no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.3????? SF1389??????????? 020611???????? Grant Application Status Report - 20 May 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Colleen Henry, Grants Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

At Council?s meeting on 7 December 2006 it was resolved that there be a quarterly return submitted to Council on grant programs.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the list of grant applications and their status to 20 May 2011 be received.

 

Successful grant applications:

Grant and date of approval

Funding Amount

Amount -Council

Description

Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program

November 2010

$165,000

None required

Macksville Park ? Storage Building $45,000

Macksville Pool ? Additional Lane $20,000

E J Biffin Fields ? carpark rehabilitation $68,000

Bowraville Public amenities ? upgrade $32,000

International Women?s Day, Office of Women?s Policy

December 2010

$1,000

 

 

None required

Women?s Way Forum to celebrate efforts of women in Nambucca Shire, on International Women?s Day 8 March 2011

Office of the Premier

Community Building Partnership Program

December 2010

$70,938

Matching funding

Amenities Anderson Park, Valla Beach - $34,000

Playground Anderson Park, Valla Beach - $15,000

2NVR Assistance for relocation - $10,000

History in Print Project (Microfilm Reader) $11938

Sport and Recreation Participation Program

December 2010

$9,888

None required

Staying Strong exercise program to be delivered as part of Safe and Savvy Seniors (SASS), at Macksville Senior Citizens? Centre

Federal government election commitment? (confirmed)

$120,000

None required

Relocation of 2NVR radio station to Tewinga Hall

Better Boating program

 

$40,750

 

$14,290

Matching funding

Matching funding

Public pump-out facility at Nambucca Heads jetty

 

Lions Park Boat Ramp widening Macksville

NSW Department Ageing, Disability and Home Care

$500

None required

A Celebration in Dance

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water etc

 

$1 million

None required

Detailed design for off river water storage

 

Additions since last report:

Grant and Date of Notice

Amount

Amount - Council

Description

Saluting Their Service, Department of Veterans Affairs (Grant Officer Assisted Community Group)

$4,000

NA

Rebuilding of Taylors Arm War Memorial

Total year to date

$1,426,366


Applications made but not yet determined:

 

Funding Body

Amount

Amount - Council

Project Name

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

No closing date

 

$10 million

TBC

Off-river water storage (subject to a number of conditions including detailed plans, relevant approvals, Council funding, confirmation of final project costs

Coastline Cycleway Grant 2010-2011

Closed November 2011

$50,000

$50,000

Completion of 350m section of cycleway between Nambucca Heads and Macksville

Department of Health and Ageing

Closed 18 February 2011

$703,607

NA

Healthy Communities Initiative

Indigenous Sport and Recreation Program

Closed 25 February 2011

$168,000

NA

Nambucca Valley Sports Facilitation Program (Ritchie Donovan)

Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs

Closed 25 March 2011

 

$14,000

 

$6,310

Matching dollar and in kind (from 2011/2012 budget)

1 Bowraville Folk Museum internal and external access upgrades

2 Nambucca Senior Citizens Centre external access upgrade

Department of Sport and Recreation Facilities Grant

Closes 15 April 2011

$960

NA (matching funds to come from NHTTC)

1 Table Tennis Tables for NH Table Tennis Club (NHTTC)

 

$406,870

$206,870 (2011/12 budget)

2 EJ Biffin Drainage Improvement

 

$19,042

NA (matching funds to be provided by group)

3 Bowraville Cricket Club Nets and Pitch

 

$62,194

$20,000 (2011/12 budget)

4 Unkya Reserve Playground equipment and toilets

 

Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government - Regional Development Australia Fund

Closes 13 May 2011

$1,615,000

None required

Community Transport Project ? Purchase of land and building for Nambucca Heads depot.

Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs Volunteer Grants

Closes 8 June 2011

$4998

None required.

EJ Biffin - Purchase of small items for volunteers

 

Unsuccessful applications in this period:

 

Grant and date of application close

amount

Amount - Council

Description

Cancer Council Alive and Well

Closed 18 February 2011

$4,000

$4,000

Trees and works associated with Macksville Foreshore and Bellwood Park

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.4????? SF1602??????????? 020611???????? March 2011 Budget Review

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Craig Doolan, Manager Financial Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

General Fund:??????????????? This review revises the net operating result for 2010/11 to a deficit of $380,900 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $1,389,669, a decline of $317,800 since the Original Budget.

?????????????????????????????????????

Council?s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working capital at year end) is acceptable at approximately $100,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policy.

 

 

Water Supplies:???????????? This review revises the net operating result for 2010/11 to a deficit of $103,400 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $1,575,537, a decline of $104,400 since the Original Budget.

 

Council?s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working capital at year end) is strong at approximately $958,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policy.

 

 

Sewerage Services:??????? This review revises the net operating result for 2010/11 to a deficit of $56,700 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $671,140, a decline of $32,100 since the Original Budget.

 

Council?s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working capital at year end) is adequate at approximately $94,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policy.

 

 

The circularised budget review document includes, as variances, amounts required to match unexpected income/expenditure items plus resolved inclusions to the budget. Items varying $5,000 or more are briefly discussed commencing page 2 in ledger account order and referenced to the page no. in budget review document. Significant variations influencing the result are discussed further in this report.? Also circularised is the Capital Works Expenditure Report 2010/2011.

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That the budget review for the quarter ended 31 March, 2011 be received.

 

2??????? That the recommended increases and decreases in votes be included as subsequent votes for the financial year 2010/2011.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Not Applicable.

 

 


DISCUSSION:

 

As mentioned previously, delays to financial reporting have occurred due to implementation issues associated with the conversion of Council?s corporate software.

 

GENERAL ACTIVITIES

 

The summary of current liquid equity is on page 1 of the Budget Review document. The estimated current liquid equity surplus is $1,389,669 inclusive of internal loans.

 

The original 2010/11 budget forecast a net operating deficit of $63,100. Items revoted from 2009/10 amounted to $1,114,100. The balance of internal loans borrowed from current liquid equity was $631,340.

 

The September review revised the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $214,000 a decline of $150,900.

 

The December review revised the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $229,600 a decline of $15,600 on the September review and a decline of $166,500 on the original budget.

 

This March review revises the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $380,900 a decline of $151,300 on the December review and a decline of $317,800 on the original budget.

 

It is discouraging to note a further decrease in the forecasted working capital result for the year despite the estimated increase in Council?s unrestricted investment revenue of $350,000, a property insurance mutual dividend of $47,000, grant funding of $35,000 for Anderson Park and additional revenue for on site sewerage applications of $25,000.

 

In addition to Council?s resolution 17 March to expend $40,000 to restore the retaining wall at Main Beach Nambucca Heads and the $20,000 for repairs to the Valla Footbridge in order to defer its replacement, Council has been hit with $240,600 storm damage works associated with the storms in mid January. Further funding of $81,500 is also required for other road maintenance works although a saving of $38,000 in rural roads rehabilitation works will partly offset this figure. In bridges girder failures have accounted for an additional $32,900 and Morans & Buchanans bridges will require an additional $34,200 in total to complete. On top of this it is estimated that, due to a decrease in material disposed, $130,000 in bulk tipping fees for landfill account customers will not be realised by the end of the financial year and that $36,000 will be required for the additional Saturday servicing of street cleaning in Nambucca Heads. It should also be noted that in addition to the variances shown in this budget review, Director Environment & Planning estimates that a further $11,000 will be overspent on legal costs as per the associated report in this business paper.

 

With regard to the January storm damage variation, Director Engineering Services advises:

 

Council experienced two separate storm events in January 2011 that incurred an unbudgeted expenditure of:

Rural Roads??????? $223,049.00 and

Urban Areas??????? $? 17,592.00

 

The first severe wind and rain storm occurred on 19 January 2011 and caused major tree damage. The areas affected were Talarm, Congarinni North, Macksville and Nambucca Heads. The damage was reported to Council on 3 February 2011( the estimated clean up costs at the time were based on inspections by Council Supervisors and tree lopping/chipping contractors) being

 

Rural Roads????? $ 91,000 and

Urban Areas????? $ 20,000

 

The degree of damage and clean up was more extensive than anticipated and the cost of the first storm was approx. $180,000 Rural Roads????????????????? $ 160,000 and Urban Areas????????? $ 20,000

 

Subsequent to first storm event another storm event occurred on 1 March 2011 This storm caused extensive damage at Eungai, Missabotti, Bowraville and Upper Warrell Creek.

 

Due to the overlap in the storms and the associated clean up it is difficult to separate the actual costs for each event as they were charged against one individual job number.? The total cost incurred to date for the two storms is;

 

Rural Roads??????? $223,049.00

Urban Areas??????? $? 17,592.00

 

As previously reported to Council, the lower threshold for declaration of a Natural Disaster is $240,000 (unlike flood damage which has a different threshold). This is per event, therefore neither of these storm events have qualified for disaster funding. Due the extent of tree debris Council used tub grinding and chipped the trees and branches and wood chips from all the storm affected areas has been stockpiled along the roadsides. (Disposal of this material is still required.)

 

In spite of the above, Council?s working funds balance remains acceptable but is hovering at approximately $100,000 above its minimum level as per council?s policy. This budget review is a reflection of the value of having strong working funds by accommodating the significant budget fluctuations as shown above.

 

As mentioned in the past, it is important that Council remains steadfast and diligent with regard to its original budget, windfalls such as those mentioned above cannot be relied upon to restore working funds after the occurrence of unforeseen events such as the January storm event.

 

 

WATER SUPPLIES

 

The original 2010/11 budget forecast a net operating surplus of $1,000. Net revotes from 2009/10 amount to $0.

 

The September review revised the result for 2010/11 to an operating surplus of $37,800, an improvement of $36,800.

 

The December review revised the result for 2010/11 to a net operating surplus of $73,400, an improvement of $35,600 on the September review and an improvement of $72,400 on the original budget.

 

This March review revises the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $103,400, a decline of $176,800 on the December review and a decline of $104,400 on the original budget.

 

Apart from works offset by other funding, the decline in the forecasted result for water supplies came from an under estimate of water mains capital works and the emergency realignment works to a trunk main to avoid a falling road embankment totalling $75,000; major repair works to trunk mains of $25,000; and $22,000 required due to audit of radio frequency installations on reservoirs, additional maintenance works associated with telemetry infrastructure problems and additional works to rectify OHS issues identified in safety audits.

 

 

SEWERAGE SERVICES

 

The original 2010/11 budget forecast a net operating deficit of $24,600. Items revoted from 2009/10 amounted to $25,000.

 

The September review revised the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $26,600, a decline of $2,000.

 

The December review revised the result for 2010/11 to a net operating surplus of $11,500, an improvement of $38,100 on the September review and an improvement of $36,100 on the original budget.

 

This March review revises the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $56,700, a decline of $68,200 on the December review and a decline of $32,100 on the original budget.

 

Sewerage Services is also expected to receive an additional $41,500 in unrestricted investment revenue, but this has been offset by the need for $50,000 relating to a control system failure at Macksville Treatment Works and $25,000 for unplanned maintenance works at Macksville and Scotts Head Treatment Works.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

?????????????? General Manager

?????????????? Directors

?????????????? Responsible Officers

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Not applicable.

 

Social

 

Not applicable.

 

Economic

 

Not applicable.

 

Risk

 

Not applicable.

 


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Refer to discussion.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Refer to discussion.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT - Budget Review March 2011

 

2View

?- CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT - Expenditure Report on Capital Works

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

March 2011 Budget Review

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

March 2011 Budget Review

 

 

 

CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT - Budget Review March 2011

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

March 2011 Budget Review

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 2

 

 

 

March 2011 Budget Review

 

 

 

CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT - Expenditure Report on Capital Works

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.5????? T047/2010??????? 020611???????? Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Steven Williams, Property Officer; Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council resolved at its ordinary meeting of 7 April 2011 to not accept any tenders submitted for the operation and management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre (MMAC) nor invite fresh tenders.

 

Council elected to enter into direct negotiation with the incumbent contractor Leah Shai Pty Ltd (Cummings) and the YMCA.

 

The panel have reviewed the revised proposal from both parties and applied the tender selection criteria. The submissions were assessed in accordance with criteria provided in the specification.

 

YMCA has submitted the lowest priced proposal being a cost to Council which is $71,409 per annum less than the Leah Shai Pty Ltd proposal.

 

The company with the best score through the evaluation process is the YMCA.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council contract the YMCA for a period of five (5) years commencing 1 July 2011 for the operation and management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1.?????? Council can accept the Leah Shai Pty Ltd proposal

 

It is open for Council to determine Leah Shai Pty Ltd as the preferred contractor.? Provision will need to be made for the additional expenditure in the 2011/12 budget and for the subsequent years of the contract.? The draft budget is already in deficit and with a poor March quarter result further expenditure cuts will need to be identified to provide a balanced budget.? However this can be achieved if Council prefers the Leah Shai Pty Ltd proposal.

 

2.?????? Council can reject both submissions and retender the MMAC contract

 

This tender was first advertised on 5 January 2011.? The tender assessment was reported to Council?s meeting on 7 April 2011.? Council resolved to not accept any of the tenders and instead enter into direct negotiations with Leah-Shai Pty Ltd and YMCA.? This decision was made on the basis that inviting fresh tenders will incur additional costs to Council which were not justifiable in the circumstances.

 

It is not recommended that Council contemplate re-tendering.? The process is expensive both in terms of advertising costs in a Sydney daily newspaper (about $800 per advertisement) as well as staff time.? Also with the pool season opening in early October 2011 there is insufficient time to retender and provide a contractor with a reasonable period to engage and train staff as well as source equipment.? In all likelihood Council would need to negotiate for an extension of the current contract or operate the centre with day labour on a temporary basis.? Either option will likely incur additional expense and other transitional problems.

 

The other issue with re-tendering is whether the interest of potential contractors can be sustained.? The development and lodgement of tenders is an expensive exercise for the private sector and having done it once, there may be less interest in undertaking the process a second time.? This may potentially reduce the number of prospective contractors and result in a less competitive outcome.

 

At the end of a second tender process the Council would still have to determine the preferred contractor.

 

3.?????? Continued negotiations with the two potential contractors

 

The existing contractor has indicated his willingness to continue negotiations in relation to his proposal.? This is not recommended for a number of reasons.

 

Firstly, Council has certain obligations concerning the expenditure of public funds arising from the Local Government Act and Guidelines issued by oversight bodies such as the Division of Local Government, the NSW Ombudsman and the Independent Commission Against Corruption.? A core responsibility concerns fairness.? The prospective contractors have already had the opportunity to review their tenders in the negotiation process.? A further opportunity to review the tenders now that the overall cost differential has been presented in public would amount to a dutch auction.? This is the antithesis of tendering and procurement guidelines and fairness.

 

Secondly, both potential contractors signed a negotiation and communication protocol in relation to the direct negotiations.? The endorsed copies of the protocol (less confidential information) are attached.? Clause 4.0 of the protocol provides that each contractor acknowledge that all requested information, clarification and substantiation in support of their proposal and arising from the negotiation process is to be received by Council on or before close of business Tuesday 03 May 2011.? ?No further negotiation will be conducted after this date.?

 

Thirdly, what would be the justification for limiting the negotiations to the two potential contractors the subject of this report and not others which were received?

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At Council?s meeting on 19 May it was resolved that the matter of the contract for the operation and management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre be deferred to the next Council meeting scheduled for 2 June 2011 so as to provide clarification of a legal issue raised in closed meeting.

 

There was a large gallery in attendance at the meeting on 19 May concerned about this contract and there was some contention from the gallery about its consideration in closed meeting.

 

In the determination of this contract, which is the outcome of negotiations with two potential contractors, Council?s overwhelming responsibility is to the assessment of the proposals in accordance with the criteria and weighting indicated in the table contained within this report.? This is consistent with the Division of Local Government?s Tendering Guidelines and also the NSW Ombudsman?s Good Conduct and Administrative Practice Guidelines.? The reputation of this Council and any public sector authority is built on seven primary pillars being:

 

???? competence

???? courtesy and respect for individuals

???? efficiency

???? ethical behaviour

???? fairness

???? openness and accountability, and

???? responsibility

 

The selection of the preferred contractor is not a political exercise where weighting is given to the potential contractor with the most or the loudest supporters.? This is unfair to the contractors and the community as it ignores the criteria and weightings which have been previously determined to select the contractor who will provide the community with the best value for money.? It is also unfair to Councillors, who being pressed by lobbyists as to the reason for a decision, are unable to disclose the commercial information which has been provided to Council in confidence.

 

Equally Council should consider the perspective of the associates and employees of the existing contractor who demand a right to be heard and to hear the deliberations of the Council.? At the very least the decision about the contract creates uncertainty for their future livelihood or activity and it is reasonable that Council?s decision making process be made as open as possible for these people.

 

Some of the concerns in relation to lobbying and public participation in the decision making process would be ameliorated by consideration of the contract in open rather than closed Council.? There is more scrutiny and accountability for all participants in an open meeting.? Contractors are also available to respond to any question or remark.? The members of the public who have asked to be heard and to listen to the deliberations can also be accommodated.? All of this should provide for a fairer hearing.

 

So as to allow the fullest possible disclosure and discussion of the tender information, approval was sought from both potential contractors to the disclosure of their amended proposals.? As approval for the disclosure of information was forthcoming from only one potential contractor, this report to open Council is constrained in the detail which can be provided.

 

The proposed contract is for the operation and management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre for the period July 2011 to June 2016.

 

Main objective of Tender

 

The objective of the contract is two fold:

 

Firstly, Council seeks an operator who can demonstrate that they have the ability and expertise to operate the Aquatic Centre in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements and in a cost effective and efficient manner.

 

Secondly, in acknowledging that the operation of the Aquatic Centre is an expensive enterprise for the whole community, Council seeks a contractor who will implement an activities program that maximises community use of the Aquatic Centre.

 

Contractors were required to submit tenders with a business plan detailing, inter alia:

 

i???????? The promotion of the facility to maximize patronage to all user groups within the Shire;

 

ii??????? The development and implementation of programs and activities that would maximize patronage and promote a culture of health, well-being, fitness and water safety within the community;

 

iii?????? Emphasis on providing a friendly and welcoming complex with exceptional customer service standards;

 

iv??????? Emphasis on providing surveillance safety and support service staff pursuant to Guidelines for Safe Pool Operation Water Safety Guidelines;

 

v??????? A plan to maintain and operate a clean, tidy and safe aquatic complex for the betterment of staff, patrons and the Shire generally.

 

Assessment criteria and weightings were applied to provide the following outcomes:

 

 

 

 

Panel Assessment

 

Criteria

Weighting

YMCA

LEAH - SHAI

1

Tender Price

45%

40.0%

31.4%

2

Contractors demonstrated capacity to effect the operation and management of the facility in accordance with the tender specifications and the tender submission

25%

25.0%

20.8%

3

Program & Activity Schedule and Associated Promotion and Advertising

10%

8.8%

9.2%

4

Financial Activity and Reporting schedules

10%

9.8%

5.4%

5

Local Operator and Staffing

10%

6.0%

10.0%

TOTAL

100%

89.6%

76.8%

 

 

Leah-Shai Pty Ltd

 

At the request of Council, Leah-Shai Pty Ltd reviewed the tender proposal and subsequently deleted proposed capital works from the annual required management fee.

 

Leah-Shai Pty Ltd noted that the increase in expenses, particularly wage costs, was a direct reflection of the staffing requirements in the Request for Tender (?RFT?). On review Leah-Shai Pty Ltd was able to reduce staffing costs based on their interpretation of the minimum staffing requirements pursuant to the Guidelines for Safe pool Operations (?GSPO?) published by the Royal Life Saving Society of Australia. The revised staffing structure is, in the opinion of staff, consistent with the current operation and in accord with the GSPO guidelines.

 

Leah Shai Pty Ltd also identified further expenses not accounted for in the original tender.

 

The net result is a proposal by Leah Shai Pty Ltd to operate the centre largely in accordance with the terms in the RFT for an annual management fee which is $71,409 per annum more than the YMCA proposal.

 

Leah-Shai Pty Ltd has demonstrated a capacity to operate and manage the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre.

 

Programs: Leah-Shai Pty Ltd presented an activity program regime largely in accord with the core program requirements in the tender documents and with the current operation.

 

Reporting: Leah-Shai Pty Ltd has undertaken in their submission to report to Council in the format and frequency detailed in the tender specifications. It appears that data collection will be manual.

 

Experience: Leah-Shai Pty Ltd has demonstrated sound knowledge of the plant and equipment at the pool. Leah-Shai Pty Ltd has also demonstrated a commitment to, and sound understanding of, high water quality.

 

On the strength of the Leah-Shai Pty Ltd tender Council will continue to receive the level of service experienced over the last two years albeit with a significantly higher price tag.

 

Numerous letters of support from current pool users have been sent to Council and, it is understood directly to Councillors. The letters highlight the respective authors? satisfaction with the current operators Mark and Gail Cummings and request that Council continue with the incumbent Contractor rather than engaging operators from out of the district. It should be noted that the local contractor preference policy has been applied to the evaluation panel?s assessment of the proposal.

 

 

YMCA of Sydney (YMCA)

 

YMCA submitted the least expensive proposal being a cost to Council of $71,409 (inclusive of GST) per annum less than the Leah-Shai proposal.

 

The tender was not included in the initial evaluation report as it was deemed non-conforming for failure to submit a business plan specific to the MMAC. Had a venue specific business plan been submitted with details presented in the tender it would have been ranked as the best submission.

 

The panel were of the view that the substantially lower contract price warranted further investigation given that the difference between this tender and the incumbent equates to $71,409 per annum.? On the basis of information provided by the YMCA the panel is now satisfied that the proposed business model is feasible.? YMCA has also provided the attached letter in relation to their consideration of the tender and their capacity to deliver the contract.

 

During the negotiation process, YMCA were afforded the same opportunity as Leah-Shai Pty Ltd to review the financial aspects of their proposal.? They elected to make no change.

 

Programs: The YMCA envisage an increased program schedule with emphasis on cross promotion. YMCA report that their emphasis on programming is to ?reflect the needs of the community, increase participation and improve the overall health and wellness of the community? (YMCA business plan 2011/2012).

 

Staffing: The YMCA advise that they have a policy of employing local people and more particularly that they seek as a starting point to employ the incumbent staff at the centre.? They will advertise for a suitable Centre Manager.

 

Reporting: YMCA undertake to submit monthly financial reports, quarterly reviews and annual performance and financial reports. The content of the proposed reports satisfy the contract brief. YMCA proposes to install the Links Modular Solution POS system to record daily sales, sales of memberships and class bookings for programs such as learn to swim.

 

Experience:????????? YMCA report that they manage over 300 facilities across Australia and thereby have an unrivalled depth of experienced personnel to operate Aquatic Centres.

 

Having regard to the significant price difference and the depth of resources available to YMCA to support the delivery of a proactive program and community engagement business plan the evaluation panel assess the YMCA proposal as superior and therefore recommend that Council engage the YMCA for the management of the MMAC for the period 2011-2016.

 

 

Legal Advice

 

At Council?s meeting on 19 May it was resolved that clarification be provided in relation to a legal issue concerning whether or not an option exists to extend the current contract.

 

The current operator wrote to Council in July 2010 advising as follows:

 

?My management contract with Council for this centre includes a clause on the contract period, Clause 1.2.1.? This states that while the contract is initially for two years it is possible to extend the contract by four years.

 

I would like to express my interest in an extension of the contract period as provided for in this clause.? I believe that an extension to the contract period would benefit both parties to the contract and also the general community served by the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre.?

 

The reference in the letter is to clause 1.2.1 of the tender for the current contract which provides as follows:

 

?1.2??? CONTRACT COMMENCEMENT AND TERM

 

It is proposed that operation under the proposed contract commence 1 July 2009

 

1.2.1???? Contract Period

 

The term of the proposed operation and management contract shall be two (2) years plus a possible extension of four (4) years from the date of its commencement.

 

The issue with the suggestion of a ?possible extension? was identified before the current contract, containing the tender particulars, was entered into.? Prior to Council determining the current contract at its meeting on 4 June 2009, Council?s Property Officer sought acknowledgement from all potential contractors that their tenders had been submitted on the basis of a two year contract.

 

The current operator duly provided confirmation (attached) that the tender had been submitted on the basis of a two year contract.? At Council?s meeting on 4 June it was subsequently resolved to enter into a contract term of two years commencing 1 July 2009 and concluding 30 June 2011.

 

When the same issue was raised by the current operator in July 2010, advice was sought from Council?s solicitor.? The response from Council?s solicitor is attached.? The advice is that the words, ?plus a possible extension of four (4) years? in paragraph 1.2.1 of the Tender document does not create an option.? Also Section 55 of the Local Government Act obliges Council to go to tender for contracts with a value of more than $100,000.

 

A copy of the current contract is circularised for the information of Councillors.

 

 

Entry Fees

 

There has been concern expressed about what entry fees may be charged at the Aquatic Centre under contract operation.? The contract provision for the setting of fees and charges is as follows:

 

7.1???? Setting of Fees and Charging

 

7.1.1???? The schedule of Fees and Charges for general admission for the first 12 months following the commencement date are those fees and charges specified in Schedule 12 as submitted by the MMAC management as part of its tender.

 

7.1.2???? In January each year thereafter, the MMAC management will submit to Council a schedule of fees and charges for general admission for Council approval.? Any annual movement in the submitted schedule of fees and charges is to be in accordance with CPI.

 

7.1.3???? Commercial programs and activities will be charged at the MMAC management?s discretion.? Council is to be advised of proposed fees and any changes to existing fees.

 

7.1.4???? The schedule of fees and charges shall be the maximum that may be charged by the MMAC management for the following 12 months commencing on July 1st for each year of the contract.

 

7.1.5???? The MMAC Management may at its sole discretion, charge less than the maximum fee per service.

 

Whilst it would have been beneficial to present these proposed fees in open Council, without the agreement of both potential contractors this is not possible.? A comparison of fees proposed by the potential contractors is contained in the confidential attachment.?

 

 

Further Referee Checking

 

There has been some criticism that the referee checking of YMCA only included Councils and not swimming clubs or patrons of centres operated by the YMCA.

 

Council?s Property Officer has undertaken further referee checking focussed on swimming clubs.? File notes of these referee checks are attached.

 

In general the referee checking is positive although it was reported that Narooma Swimming Club and Moruya Swimming Club were dissatisfied with YMCA?s management of the facilities.? The Property Officer has been unable to speak to the Presidents of each Club however the Regional Manager for YMCA confirmed that there had been disagreement on such issues as lane allocation and the frequency of squad training.? The Regional Manager believes the issues have been resolved but this has not been confirmed with the respective Clubs.

 

The most consistent feedback has been that the YMCA has management systems in place to resolve disputes which arise from time to time.? It is Council?s experience with the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre that there are disputes from time to time but they do not necessarily reflect on the management of the centre.

 

Notwithstanding, it is also apparent from the feedback that the quality of the appointed manager has a strong bearing on the operation of the aquatic centre and the relationship with the swimming club and the community more broadly.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

?????????????? Evaluation Panel comprising Mr Phillip Gall (Manager Health and Building -NSC), Mr Robert Malone (Manager Buildings and Services ? Bellingen Shire Council) and Mr Steven Williams (Property Officer - NSC)

?????????????? Manager Business Development

?????????????? Leah?Shai Pty Ltd

?????????????? YMCA Sydney

?????????????? Referee checks - Mr Paul Alberton (Playford City Council, SA) with regard to YMCA contract performance at Playford Aquatic Centre, Ms Charlene Willard, Port Stephens Council with regard YMCA contract performance at Lakeside Leisure Centre, Ross Lawler, Contract Manager Cooma Monaro Memorial Swimming Pool (attached)

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The recommendation does not give rise to any environmental issues.

 

Social

 

The incumbent contractor has a long history with the MMAC. It is foreseeable therefore that any change in management will in the short term result in some resistance from community groups familiar with the incumbent?s style of management and the programs offered. Referee checks with Councils who have experienced similar transitions indicate that the YMCA has managed this transition process well.

 

Economic

 

Referee checks with Councils who have engaged YMCA indicate that implementation of the YMCA business model has resulted in a substantial increase in their Aquatic Centre patronage. In all reported instances operating performance has improved under YMCA management.

 

Risk

 

The Tendering Guidelines framework to appropriately manage the process and the inherent risks has been applied.

 

There is also a risk in changing from an incumbent contactor to a new contractor. Council is aware of the standard and consistency of service provided by the incumbent contractor. The difference in tendered price, however, warrants careful consideration of the YMCA proposal.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

It is not possible to indicate this impact in open Council without disclosing the prices submitted by the two potential contractors.

 

In 2010/2011, the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre operated with a contractor subsidy from Council of $265,400.? Including depreciation, overheads and loan repayments the Aquatic Centre will operate with a net cost to Council of $712,800.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

At this stage there is no impact on working funds as it is anticipated that the budget for 2011/12 will be amended prior to adoption to make provision for the contractor saving/cost.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Confidential Attachment - Comparison of Proposed Fees

 

2View

14044/2011 - Letter from YMCA Sydney

 

3View

14197/2011 - Leah-Shai protocol agreement

 

4View

14198/2011 - YMCA protocol agreement

 

5View

11823/2009 - Confirmation of terms - M & G Cummings

 

6View

18853/2010 - Legal Advice re contract

 

7View

12287/2011 - Playford City Council

 

8View

12284/2011 - Cooma-Monaro Shire Council

 

9View

12271/2011 - Port Stephens City Council

 

10View

14202/2011 - Tilligerry Swim Club interview

 

11View

14204/2011 - Cooma Swim Club interview

 

12View

14205/2011 - Raymond Terrace Swim Club interview

 

13View

14228/2011 - YMCA South Coast area manager concerning swimming clubs

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

 

 

Confidential Attachment - Comparison of Proposed Fees

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 








Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 







Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

From:T.J Perkins Solicitor[SMTP:tpe75517@bigpond.net.au]

To:Steven Williams[EX:/O=NSC/OU=NSCDOMAIN/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=STEVENW]

Received-Date:20100803

Received-Time:11:44:04 PM

Sent-Date:20100803

Sent-Time:11:48:39 PM

Subject:Re: Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

Good morning  Steven

 

 

 

Thank you for your email of 2 August 2010.

 

 

 

I refer to the conditions of the Contract and in particular:-

 

 

 

(a)                the definition of Contract term on page 5;

 

(b)               paragraph 2.2.2 on page 9; and

 

(c)                item 4 of the annexure on page 29.

 

 

 

It is clear that the Contract terms is for a period of two years only.

 

 

 

The words ?plus a possible extension of four (4) years from the date of its commencement? in paragraph 1.2.1 of the Tender document does not create an option.

 

Council is obliged by legislation to put any further term to tender and this should be done.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Terry Perkins

 

Solicitor

 

-------------------------------Safe Stamp-----------------------------------

Your Anti-virus Service scanned this email. It is safe from known viruses.

For more information regarding this service, please contact your service provider.


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

 

 

 

FILE NOTE

 

 

DATE

10/05/2010

TIME

9.30 am

 

ATTENDANCE

 

person contacted:

Paul Alberton? - Playford City Council

phone contact no#:

0417 016 131

 

Referee interview

File note:

 

1?????? Are you familiar with the nature and objectives of the contract ?

 

Ans???? The contract is similar to that used by PCC. The YMCA is responsible for all pool operations including maintenance

 

2????????? What experience and skills does the contractor have that will benefit the centre

Ans???? YMCA is particularly good at driving membership. They are currently operating at maximum membership potential.

 

3????????? The Council is keen to increase programs at the Centre. How do you think the contractor will fulfil this expectations???

Ans???? As per previous answer.

 

4????????? Council seeks accurate reporting of patron level, income and activities. How do you think the contractor will meet this expectation?

Ans???? PCC receive a monthly and annual report from YMCA. They are always on time. A formal meeting is held to review the report with staff from both organisations.

??????????? PCC community services meet with YMCA as part of a community benefits group to identify other areas which YMCA can contribute to the community through pool operations.

 

5????????? Council seeks a contractor who will ultimately work towards minimising the overall costs of the pool to the community. How do you think the contractor will achieve this?

Ans???? PCC have had no issues with cost overruns and notes that their plant and equipment (whilst almost brand new) is maintained in a good and serviceable condition.

 

6????????? The contractor will be required to liaise with numerous community groups some of which? will have a conflicting agenda to the pool operator. How will the contractor approach deal with community groups

Ans???? see point 4 ? community benefits group. YMCA contribute positively to this group. ? engagement with community is great?

 

7????????? The contractor is required to comply with, systemise and implement rigid OH& S management practices. How will the contractor approach this aspect of operation?

Ans???? Periodic audits? reveal no issues with YMCA OH & S systems.

 

 

8????????? How would you describe the contractors

??????????? Attention to detail ? excellent

??????????? Customer service ? excellent.

??????????? Conflict Resolution ? not a matter considered yet

??????????? Attitude to council ?.excellent

??????????? Commitment to the shire generally - excellent

 

9????????? What aspects of the contract do you feel will challenge the contractor in this role?

Ans???? Think s YMCA has all the necessary expertise to run a pool the size of MMAC.

 

10??????? any other comments ?

???????????

ANS??? YMCA has turned the PCC facility from a loss to a small profit in just over twelve months. These profits are returned to the community.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

 

 

 

FILE NOTE

 

 

DATE

05/05/2010

TIME

3.00 pm

 

ATTENDANCE

 

person contacted:

Ross Lawler

Contract Compliance Officer ? Cooma-Monaro Shire Council

phone contact no#:

When he returned my call

 

Referee interview

File note:

 

1?????? Are you familiar with the nature and objectives of the contract ?

 

Ans???? Cooma has engaged YMCA on a 3 X 3 management contract wherein the YMCA manage all aspects of the pool operation.

 

2????????? What experience and skills does the contractor have that will benefit the centre

Ans???? Comments that YMCA has a depth of experience from their broader management ranks.

 

3????????? The Council is keen to increase programs at the Centre. How do you think the contractor will fulfil this expectations???

Ans???? Cooma has experienced a substantial increase in Learn to Swim participants. The YMCA has introduced new programs and has put particular emphasis on squad coaching. This has been well received, particularly by the swimming club.

 

4????????? Council seeks accurate reporting of patron level, income and activities. How do you think the contractor will meet this expectation?

Ans???? Basic reporting under the contract is received each month. No issues from Cooma Council perspective

 

5????????? Council seeks a contractor who will ultimately work towards minimising the overall costs of the pool to the community. How do you think the contractor will achieve this?

Ans???? Ross reported that the YMCA operated more efficiently than the previous contractor and that the condition of plant and equipment was good for its age.

 

6????????? The contractor will be required to liaise with numerous community groups some of which? will have a conflicting agenda to the pool operator. How will the contractor approach /deal with community groups

Ans???? Cooma Council expected and YMCA experienced some resistance from user groups when YMCA first started. Ross explained that the incumbent contractor had been a long standing contractor and that the community needed to adjust to the different style of doing things. YMCA have managed this process well although it took 12 months for them to settle in. Ross said they had to work hard at it but the results speak for themselves.

 

7????????? The contractor is required to comply with, systemise and implement rigid OH& S management practices. How will the contractor approach this aspect of operation?

Ans???? Cooma Shire Council relies on the internal YMCA OH & S systems and conduct periodic audits. They have not found any substantial issues with the YMCA systems.

 

 

8????????? How would you describe the contractors

??????????? Attention to detail ? excellent

??????????? Customer service ? excellent.

??????????? Conflict Resolution ? reasonable, persistent and patient

??????????? Attitude to Council ? good

??????????? Commitment to the shire generally - reasonable.

 

9????????? What aspects of the contract do you feel will challenge the contractor in this role?

Ans???? Only issue that comes to mind for Ross is the delay in getting senior staff from YMCA to attend the site. He noted an instance where it took three days to get a qualified and experienced staff member to address water issues.. Otherwise he has not encountered problems.

 

10??????? any other comments ?

Ans???? He has found YMCA to be easy to deal with and the community has responded well to the policy of employing locals.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

 

 

 

FILE NOTE

 

 

DATE

05/05/2010

TIME

1.40 pm

 

ATTENDANCE

 

person contacted:

Charlene Willard (Port Stephens Council)

Contract Compliance Officer

phone contact no#:

4980-0210

 

Referee interview

File note:

 

1?????? Are you familiar with the nature and objectives of the contract ?

 

Ans???? contract sounds similar to that employed by PSC. They essentially pay a contract management fee to YMCA to manage the entire operation. They also employ a separate contractor to complete routine and periodic maintenance on plant and equipment.

 

2????????? What experience and skills does the contractor have that will benefit the centre

Ans???? From Charlenes experience the YMCA have proven to be expert at increasing patronage to the centre. She quoted the increase in Raymond Terraces pool learn to swim from 400 to over 1500 in the space of 12 months.

 

3????????? The Council is keen to increase programs at the Centre. How do you think the contractor will fulfil this expectations???

Ans???? As per previous answer. YMCA have also introduced buddy systems to attract? elderly people to the pool as well as many programs for disabled

 

4????????? Council seeks accurate reporting of patron level, income and activities. How do you think the contractor will meet this expectation?

Ans???? PSC receive a monthly, quarterly and annual report from YMCA. They are always on time. A formal meeting is held to review the report with staff from both organisations.

 

5????????? Council seeks a contractor who will ultimately work towards minimising the overall costs of the pool to the community. How do you think the contractor will achieve this?

Ans???? Because YMCA is required to meet expense she sees that they are always looking to bring operating costs down where possible

 

6????????? The contractor will be required to liaise with numerous community groups some of which? will have a conflicting agenda to the pool operator. How will the contractor approach deal with community groups

Ans???? PSC pools were previously managed by a long standing contractor (25 years) as a consequence there was considerable resistance to the change in management. YMCA have demonstrated that they are willing to engage the community to get their message across. They now have broad acceptance of their management and patronage is increasing every month.

 

7????????? The contractor is required to comply with, systemise and implement rigid OH& S management practices. How will the contractor approach this aspect of operation?

Ans???? PSC require YMCA to use their in house system. They have to date met all requirements and passed all quarterly audits. She noted that the audits address different OH & S issues each time and that the YMCA is not aware of the focus of the audit until the day. The YMCA also self audits using the RSLSA an annual basis.

 

8????????? How would you describe the contractors

??????????? Attention to detail ? excellent

??????????? Customer service ? excellent. She commented that they receive regular customer satisfaction surveys which almost always indicate high customer satisfaction with programs, the facilities and the services provided by YMCA

??????????? Conflict Resolution ?

??????????? Attitude to Council ?.

??????????? Commitment to the shire generally - ?

 

9????????? What aspects of the contract do you feel will challenge the contractor in this role?

Ans???? difficult to answer as she has only been managing the contract for 10 months. She believes they are more than competent to deliver the full range of services required.

 

10??????? any other comments ?

???????????

????????? Nil


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

FILE NOTE

 

DATE

26/05/2011

TIME

 

Author :?? Stevenw

ATTENDANCE

 

venue:

 

Telephone contact

President Tilligerry Swimming club

NOTE contact name and number available but omitted for privacy reasons

 

File note:

 

T/a to query club relationship with YMCA

 

 

1????????? What is history of club with pool manager?

James has been President for the last two years but has been involved off and on with the club for a long time.

He reports that the pool has had numerous managers over the years as Council has changed the objectives and operation of the pool over the years.

The Y has been managing for just over 12 months.

 

2????????? Are the management systems utilised by YMCA designed to assist and foster growth at the club or is co-operation with the club dependant on the personal style of the manager.

James commented that the Y has appointed a manager who clearly has industry experience and is, in his opinion, committed to not only the swimming pool but also the local community.

He believes that the mng system is geared towards integrating the whole community into pool operations. He commented that the Y?s efforts were making the pool the community centre for Tilligerry ( something they otherwise do not have)?

He noted that the LTS feeds into their squad and that the squad coach? (appointed by Y) has involved himself positively in club.

 

3????????? Did the YMCA increase cost to the club when they too over?

He recalls that the cost of LTS went up marginally but otherwise cannot recall any significant variance in fees.

He commented that the Y allows almost unrestricted access to the pool for club activities including out of core operating hours.

He added that the Y also introduced community assistance programs which were designed to ensure that nobody was precluded from using the pool due to financial pressures.

 

4????????? Overall does he think the Y mng has a positive impact on the club

James commented that the club has grown from 4 -5 active members 18 months ago to 45 plus active members. He attributes this to the positive impact the Y has had on the centre.

He expects that the club will continue to grow? under the Y pool mng.

He commented again on the positive impact of the Y?s efforts to integrate community with the pool operation.

Overall he said that the clubs experience with the Y is nothing but positive.


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

FILE NOTE

 

 

DATE

26/05/2011

TIME

10.45

Author :?? Stevenw

ATTENDANCE

 

venue:

 

Telephone contact

Member of Cooma Swim club

NOTE: contact name and number available but omitted for privacy reasons

 

File note:

 

T/a to query club relationship with YMCA

 

NOTE the current president of the club is also the pool manager employed by YMCA. For this reason another club member has been interviewed

 

1????????? What is history of club with pool manager?

This years season was a short season because of renovation being conducted at the pool. The season commenced in January.

 

Y have been managing the pool. For just over twelve months.

 

The Y mng is better than the previous operator whom everybody thought was ?terrible?. She cannot comment too much on y as they have not had a lot to do with them yet.

She commented that they have not had the problems that Narooma experienced but that she thinks those problems have now been satisfactorily resolved

 

 

2????????? Are the management systems utilised by YMCA designed to assist and foster growth at the club or is co-operation with the club dependant on the personal style of the manager.

The current manager is the club president. Betty cannot comment on the mng systems as she is not familiar with them.

 

3????????? Did the YMCA increase cost to the club when they took over?

The price did not increase when the Y took over. They are concerned however that the price may creep up over the years. Betty was not aware of the contract provision or whether the council had a say in the pricing structure.

 

Under the Y?s management thy are now required to hire the pool and lanes for swim club time trial sand carnivals. Previously they did not have to pay Council for this and on occasion were allowed to keep the gate takings as a fund raiser.

 

Betty aid that she thinks the current arrangements are better and the hire fee is not too onerous.

 

4????????? Overall does she think the Y mng has a positive impact on the club.

Betty does not think that the Y has had any impact on the club. She said they pretty much run their own show and do not liaise with the pool mng all that much.? She said that if pricing stays affordable they are happy with the current arrangements.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

FILE NOTE

 

 

DATE

26/05/2011

TIME

4.15

Author :?? Stevenw

ATTENDANCE

Former president ( immediate) to Raymond Terrace swim Club

venue:

 

Telephone contact

 

NOTE contact name and number available but omitted for privacy

 

File note:

 

T/a to query club relationship with YMCA

 

1????????? What is history of club with pool manager?

The pool is approx 12 years old and has been under three different managers. The first two managers were not pro active and left he RTSC to themselves. Nothing positive or negative to say.

The YMCA are the current operators. Initially they had a fairly tough time and thought that the YMCA manger was not doing anything to assist the club in any way.

Two representative of the club contacted YMCA head office and received a curt, if not rude response from the CEO.

Soon after however a management team attended the pool, reviewed the operation and installed a new manager.

Since then the relationship has been very positive.

 

2????????? Are the management systems utilised by YMCA designed to assist and foster growth at the club or is co-operation with the club dependant on the personal style of the manager.

Kurt is of the view the YMCA? mng systems? overcome personality issues. He said he cannot criticise the current manager and thinks that the relationship with the club is as strong as it is b/c of the current manager. That said he cannot deny that the mng system is geared towards promoting swimming e.g the Y feeds LTS students directly to the club squad program.

 

3????????? Did the YMCA increase cost to the club when they too over,

No. The only charge to club members is pool entry. Otherwise they get to use the club house and utilises for free. The Y allows them to conduct funds raisers at the pool and often ensures that staff are available to help. They have also made donation to the club to assist with refurbishment of the club house.

 

4????????? Overall does he think the Y mng has a positive impact on the club

Yes. He? can only speak for the RTSC but is aware of the Kurri Kurri operation and has heard that the Kurri club is very happy with the Y mng.


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Contract for the Operation and Management of the Macksville Memorial Aquatic Centre

 

 

FILE NOTE

 

 

DATE

26/05/2011

TIME

12.30

Author :?? Stevenw

ATTENDANCE

 

person contacted:

Neil Hummerston ? area Manager YMCA South Coast

phone contact no#:

 

 

 

File note:

 

Telephone conversation with Neil Hummers ton to enquire about the relationship between the YMCA and the Moruya and Narooma Swimming clubs.

 

Neal said that he had had experienced problems with both clubs involving lane allocation, use of club equipment and frequency of squad programmes.

 

He said that by and large the relationship with both clubs is positive and the YMCA continue to support the club activities with gestures such as allowing the club to use the YMCA company car to transport to swimming events etc.

 

He said that the issues surrounding the squad program at Moruya arose because of a lack of participants at the squad. YMCA chose to discontinue morning squad when the participation dropped to two or three swimmers. The arrangement now is that the morning squad continues but if the numbers drop below 5 the club make sup the difference. The coach is a YMCA employed coach.

 

He said the issue with lane allocation only arises on very hot and busy days where the pool is heavily patronised.

 

Likewise the issue with the use of club equipment such as BBQ ha not been completely resolved.

 

Neil is of the opinion that the issues that have arisen have been satisfactorily resolved as best they can and that the relationship between the YMCA and the clubs is positive, with the exception of a few personalities.

 

Attempts to contact the presidents of the Narooma and Moruya clubs were not successful? and therefore the YMCA?s comments cannot be validated.

 

It appears from comments made by the Cooma club member and a Batemans Bay clubs member that the issues have not been resolved the clubs satisfaction.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Environment and Planning

ITEM 10.1??? SF1589??????????? 020611???????? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 6 May 2011

 

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) (none are in excess of 12 months old).

 

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:

 

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

 

 

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS WHERE SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ARE NOT YET DETERMINED

 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2011/010

01/02/2011

2 Lot Subdivision

Lot 11 DP 805157, 21 Dudley Street, Macksville

? Flooding issues ? not suitable for housing

? Area should be zoned for public recreation

? Noise issues

? Drainage problems

 

Awaiting advice from the applicant to withdraw application now that DA 2010/234 has been refused byJRPP.

 

2011/011

01/02/2011

13 Lot Large Lot Residential Subdivision plus new road

Lot 1 DP 1087301, Wirrimbi Road, Newee Creek

? Entrance to property compromised

? Traffic concerns

? Co-ax cable underneath subdivision

? Protection of natural waterways and erosion and siltation

? Area floodprone

? Fire hazard concerns with bushland

Concerns will be addressed when assessing the application

Additional information received from applicant and referred to DECCW (Office of Water) 23/05/2011.

 

 


 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2011/031

01/03/2011

4 Lot Rural and Large Lot Residential Subdivision

Lot 2 DP 828150, Upper Warrell Creek Road, Macksville

? Proposed residence too close to cattle yards

? Possible future conflicts with rural use of property

 

Additional information received 28/4/2011.

Currently being assessed.

 

2011/053

18/03/2011

16 Unit Residential Dwellings & Associated Landscaping, Driveway and Communal Areas

Lot 1 DP 1108420, 17-23 Piggott Street, Nambucca Heads

? Use of open space area

? Loss of views

? Traffic issues

? Water run-off and drainage

? State of the road surface

? No footpaths

 

Additional information received 18/4/11.

Second referral provided to Engineering Department to address drainage issues.

Further additional information required from applicant.

 

2007/007/02

14/04/2011

Modification of Driveway for multi-housing units

Lot 1 DP 758749, 7 Bemago Street, Nambucca Heads

? Requesting centre markers of road be moved

? Speed humps to be installed

? Double lines for road safety

 

Amended plans to be submitted by the applicant for improvement works proposed within the existing road reserve.

7 Day letter to be sent if information not received by 25/5/2011

 

2011/065

21/04/2011

Staged Development of Existing Club Involving Demolition of Part-Existing External Construction

Lot 1 DP 864792, Short Street Nambucca Heads 2448

? Noise issues

 

Further information requested from applicant on 5/05/11.

Adjoining owner notification until 6/06/2011

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.2??? SF1589??????????? 020611???????? DA's and CDC's Received and Determined under Delegated Authority to 23 May 2011

 

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.

 

 

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED TO 23 MAY 2011

 

DA Number

Application Date

Applicant/Owner

Development

Address

Estimated Value

2011/076

10/05/2011

C J & A Woods

Relocation of Office

Lot 7057 DP 1113355, 10 Pioneer Street, Nambucca Heads

10,000

2011/077

11/05/2011

Yarra Steel/ Mr K Rosentreter

Carport

Lot 40 DP 248782, 15 Curlew Street, Nambucca Heads

6,000

2011/078

11/05/2011

Mr A Buckley

Shed

Lot 30 DP 816018, 4 Kimberley Grove

20,000

2011/079

11/05/2011

Cavalier Homes North Coast/ Mr R & Mr G Pawsey

Dual Occupancy and Subdivision

Lot 3 DP 1138902, 18 Jellico Street, Macksville

318,000

2011/080

12/05/2011

Mrs L Scott

Commercial Kitchen

Lot 178 DP 755564, 385 Williams Hill Road, Yarranbella

1,000

2011/081

13/05/2011

Hill Lockart Architects/ Nambucca Valley Care

Aged Care Facility - Additions & Alterations, Car Parking & New Maintenance Shed

Lot 1 DP 1108420, 17-23 Piggott Street, Nambucca Heads

1,200,000

2011/082

16/05/2011

Mr A Ford

Dwelling Additions

Lot 34 DP 245574, 6 Bismark Street, Nambucca Heads

90,000

2011/083

16/05/2011

Mr E Frankel/ Mr T S & Mrs G A Harris

Change of Use and Advertising Signage

Lots 31 & 32 Section B DP 8319, 26 Matilda Street, Macksville

5,000

2011/084

17/05/2011

Mr K Preston

Enclose Carport

Lot 27 DP 563283, 23 Conen Street, Bowraville

8,000

2011/085

17/05/2011

Blue Ribbon Quality Group
M & R Lewis

Dwelling-House

Lot 542 DP 1041313, 42a Pacific Highway, Nambucca Heads

351,000

2011/086

18/05/2011

Ms S Guthridge/ Mr Wheelwright

Dwelling-House - Staged

Lots 62 & 76 DP 755548, Kelly's Road, Girralong

250,000

COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED TO 23 MAY 2011

 

None were received

 

 

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS/COMPLYING DEVELOPMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO 23 MAY 2011

 

CONSENT/ DA

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

DEVELOPMENT DETERMINED

EST VALUE $

2011/062

Lot 27 DP 723080, 135 Helliwells Road, Missabotti

Rural Shed

23,900

2010/246/01

Lot 191 DP 1147974. 325 Upper Warrell Creek Road, Congarinni

2 Lot Rural Subdivision Modification

0

2011/057

Lot 8 Section B DP 6045, 14 Cooper Street, Macksville

Additions - Commercial

24,000

2011/039

Lot 20 DP 611988, 7 Myall Street, Nambucca Heads

Additions ? Residential

8,875

2011/048

Lot 64 DP 1099538, 47 Seaforth Drive, Valla Beach

Dwelling-House

230,677

2011/033

Lot 3 Section 1 DP 245317, 11 Gregory Street, Valla Beach

Additions ? Residential

49,800

2011/022

Lot 3 DP 1054541, 24 Hallidise Street, Nambucca Heads

Carport, Deck and Stairs

30,000

2011/049

Lot 21 DP 865257, 69 Logans Road, Valla

Dwelling-House & Swimming Pool

610,000

2011/026

Lot 60 DP 755537, 231 Talarm Road, Talarm

Dwelling-House

396,000

2011/009

Lot 21 DP 1004209, 2 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads

Bridge Club Auditorium

258,765

2011/055

Lot 11 DP 808007 & Lot 21 DP 1064874, Upper Warrell Creek Road, Macksville

Earthworks

0

2011/076

Lot 7057 DP 1113355, 10 Pioneer Street, Nambucca Heads

Relocate Office

10,000

2011/067

Lot 1 DP 216998, 29 Bowra Street, Nambucca Heads

Footpath Cafe

0

2011/061

Lot 6 Section 2 DP 2037, 29 Wallace Street, Macksville

Change of use to Delicatessan/Caf? (food and drink premises)

5,000

2011/043

Lot 1 DP 711060, 15 River Street, Macksville

Demolition of existing timber walls to beer garden, relocation of playground, new walls and roof

45,000

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.3??? SF995????????????? 020611???????? Report on Registrations for the 20th NSW Coastal Conference at Tweed Heads on 8-11 November 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning ????????

 

Summary:

 

Registrations are now open for the 20th NSW Coastal Conference to be held in Tweed Heads over 8-11 November 2011.

 

Early registrations up to 16 September 2011 are $700 per delegate which provides for a $125 discount per registration.

 

Whilst the conference this year is quite close, it is not intended to send any staff to the conference. However, should any Councillor wish to attend the costs would come from their training allowance.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Councillors note that the 20th NSW Coastal Conference will be held in Tweed Heads from 8-11 November 2011.

 

2????????? That Council endorse any Councillor wishing to attend and those Councillors advise the Executive Assistant Environment and Planning, to ensure early registration is completed to take advantage of the discounts on offer.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Attendance has been left as optional for individual Councillors

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Registrations are now open for the 20th NSW Coastal Conference to be held in Tweed Heads over 8-11 November 2011. Opportunity exists for Council to make a $125 saving on each registration if the registrations are made before 16 September 2011.

 

Registrations made after 16 September are $825.

 

Due to staff workloads and budgetary constraints, it is not intended to send any staff to this years conference even though it is on the North Coast. Individual Councillors may wish to attend with the costs coming from their individual training/expense allowance.

 

The Conference program will soon be available for viewing on their website www.coastalconference.com and a broad range of topics are planned to touch on the relevant issues which Council is currently working through or dealing with.

 

A registration is available in hard copy from Executive Assistant Barbara Parkins or online at www.coastalconference.com

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nil

 


 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Topics and discussions at the Coastal Conference take into account a whole range of Environmental matters and issues.

 

Social

 

Topics and discussions at the Coastal Conference take into account a whole range of Social matters and issues.

 

 

Economic

 

Topics and discussions at the Coastal Conference take into account a whole range of Economic matters and issues.

 

 

Risk

 

Topics and discussions at the Coastal Conference take into account a whole range of Environmental, Social, Economic, Insurance and Liability matters and issues.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Funds would come from the individual Councillors allowances.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Each Councillor?s annual allowance is provided for in the budget, which includes any carryovers from previous years.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.6??? SF1496??????????? 020611???????? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 19 April 2011

 

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 19 April 2011.

 

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

 

That the Access Committee be given the opportunity to view the planned work in the Bellwood Road area, as identified in the 2011/12 works program, and comment on any access issues prior to commencement of the work.

 

That Nambucca Shire Council review the restricted parking sign and times at the Bowra Street taxi rank, near the pedestrian crossing, with a view to making it available only for taxi set-downs during business hours.

That the Access Committee review the ?Application for an Event on Council Land? form in regards to requirements for Accessible Parking.

 

That a letter be sent to the Roads and Traffic Authority requesting the re-instatement of the ticketed queuing system at Nambucca Heads registry.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That the Access Committee be given the opportunity to view the planned work in the Bellwood Road area, as identified in the 2011/2012 works program, and comment on any access issues prior to commencement of the work.

 

2??????? That Nambucca Shire Council review the restricted parking sign and times at the Bowra Street taxi rank, near the pedestrian crossing, with a view to making it available only for taxi set-downs during business hours.

 

3??????? That the Access Committee review the ?Application for an Event on Council Land? form in regards to requirements for Accessible Parking.

 

4??????? That a letter be sent to the Roads and Traffic Authority requesting the re-instatement of the ticketed queuing system at Nambucca Heads registry.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1????????? Endorse the minutes

 

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

 

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

 

 


DISCUSSION:

 

RTA Office ? Nambucca Heads

 

The take-a-number queuing system has been removed and now it?s a case of join the queue and stand and wait. For some people it is not possible to stand for lengthy periods ? which could be as long as a half hour. The Access Committee views this change as a reduction in access for older people and people with disabilities and is requesting the reinstatement of the ticketed queue so that people have the option of standing or sitting whilst they wait their turn.

 

It is also worth noting that the RTA office also serves as a government access point for various services such as Fishing Licences and therefore is accessed by a broad cross-section of the community not just drivers.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Additional information is contained in the minutes.

 

Environment

 

Nothing specific identified.

 

Social

 

No social impacts identified.

 

Economic

 

Nil

 

Risk

 

Identification of hazards underpins good risk management.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nothing identified.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nil

 

Attachments:

1View

10491/2011 - Minutes - Access Committee - 19 April 2011

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 19 April 2011

 

PRESENT

 

Ms Margaret Hutchinson (Acting Chairperson)

Miss Fiona Holmes

Cr A Smyth

Mrs Shirley Holmes

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Mr Tony Bennett (Nambucca Valley Phoenix)

Mr Keith Davis

Mr Les Small

Ms Coral Hutchinson

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Mr Peter Shales

Ms Alba Sky

Cr E South

Mr Matt Sullivan

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1/11 RESOLVED:?? (Smyth/Secomb)

 

That the Minutes of the Meeting held 22 March 20011, be confirmed.

 

 

 

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

 

ITEM 5.1????? SF1614????????????? 190411????? Report on Business Arising from previous meeting held 22 March 2011

Business arising from previous minutes:

 

1????????? Discussion was held regarding the gutter crossings at Bellwood Road in Nambucca Heads. The Nambucca Shire Council has listed a new roundabout on the junction of Mumbler Street and Bellwood Road for its 2011/2012 budget.

 

2??????? Peter Shales has spoken to the Manager of the Bananacoast Credit Union in Nambucca Heads regarding the access barrier. The Manager reported that there had been several other complaints about the access and BCU is looking into improvements for the area.

 

2/11 RESOLVED:?? (Smyth/Secomb)

 

That the Access Committee be given the opportunity to view the planned work in the Bellwood Road area, as identified in the 2011/2012 works program, and comment on any access issues prior to the commencement of work.

 

 

 

 


 

ITEM 5.2????? SF1614????????????? 190411????? Report on correspondence to the Access Committee meeting of 19 April 2011

 

The item of correspondence were noted without formal action.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3????? SF1614????????????? 190411????? Report on General Business and Matters of Interest

Discussion was held regarding the uneven footpath and loose slabs of concrete on the footpath opposite the Bent Street Service Station. To be reported to Council?s counter staff as a Customer Service Request.

 

The need for a taxi drop-off site in Nambucca Heads was discussed, particularly for people who require a kerb ramp instead of stepping up onto a kerb.

 

There was discussion regarding accessible parking at Coronation Park and the showground.

 

Coral Hutchinson had several copies of the updated Scooter Survival Guide to distribute.

 

Draft notes from the Nambucca Shire Planning for the Future Forum: Focus on Seniors and Access was distributed. Feedback and corrections to Coral Hutchinson 6 May 2011.

 

Tony Bennett advised that he has a segment on Radio 2NVR on Tuesdays from 11:00 am ? 1:00 pm.? He discusses issues related to Disability. Tony requested he be emailed any information that people wish to be included in the program (manager@nvp.org.au).

 

3/11 resolved: ? (HolmesS/Secomb)

 

That Nambucca Shire Council review the restricted parking sign and times at the Bowra Street taxi rank, near the pedestrian crossing, with a view to making it available only for taxi set-downs during business hours.

 

4/11 Resolved:?? (HolmesS/Secomb)

 

That the Access Committee review the ?Application for an Event on Council Land? form in regards to requirements for Accessible Parking.

 

5/11 Resolved:?? (HolmesS/Smyth)

 

That the reports on the Dis-Ability Expo, the submission for funding of three projects from the Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan and progress on the plan for redevelopment of the Macksville foreshore be noted.

 

6/11 Resolved:?? (HolmesS/Smyth)

 

That a letter be sent to the Roads and Traffic Authority requesting the re-instatement of the ticketed queuing system at Nambucca Heads registry.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.4????? SF1614????????????? 190411????? Report on Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) Standards 2010 (Premises Standards)

7/11 RESOLVED:?? (Smyth/Hutchinson)

 

That the Committee note the introduction of the Commonwealth Disability (Access to Premises ? Buildings) Standards (the Premises Standards) which will commence on 1 May 2011.

 

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on 24 May commencing at 2.00 pm.

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Mayor then closed the meeting the time being 3.28 pm.

 

 

 

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

(CHAIRPERSON)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.5??? SF281????????????? 020611???????? Youth Week 2011 and Macksville Show Chill Out Space 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Vicki Fernance, Youth Development Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

This report is to advise Council of the success of Youth Week 2011 and the Chill Out Space at the Macksville Show 2011.

 

Youth Week 2011 was a great success with approximately 150 young people taking part in the events that Council organised. These were the Art/Literature/Photography Competition and Exhibition at Macksville Library, Local Grown (music night) and Youth Forum.

 

The Art/Literature/Photography Competition attracted 26 entries which were displayed at Macksville Library for two weeks. Approximately 60 young people attended the Local Grown event at Macksville Basketball Stadium and 33 young people attended the Youth Forum at Council Chambers.

 

Council?s Youth Development Officer also attended the Youthfest event held at Nambucca Heads Skate Park on Sunday 11 April where approximately 300 people attended.

 

Bus transport was provided to Local Grown with funding supplied by NSW Motor Accident?s Authority.

 

The NSW Youth Week Young Peoples? Advisory Committee (YPAC) invited up to five young representatives and workers in each local government area, to join them on Friday 1 April to launch NSW Youth Week 2011 in Sydney. Two young people were sent to represent Nambucca Shire, Tahnee Milgate (Young Citizen of the Year) and Renae Stoker who are in their first year at Southern Cross University Coffs Harbour.

 

Council again had a Chill Out Space at the Macksville Show this year with over 100 young people coming to the space throughout the night. Free activities, such as beading, sandart and painting, were held at the space for young people.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the success of Youth Week 2011, which included Local Grown, Youth Forum and the Art/Literature/Photography Exhibition, and the Macksville Show Chill Out Space 2011.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? That Council endorse the recommendations.

 

2??????? That Council endorse the recommendations with amendments.

 

3??????? That Council not endorse the recommendations

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Youth Week 2011

 

Overall Youth Week was a success.

 

The Youth Forum, held as part of the Community Engagement Strategy, was held on Monday 4 April with 33 young people attending. Michelle Ackerman, Community Development Officer, YP Space Kempsey, facilitated the Forum.

 

The three priorities strongly identified were: access to health care, improvement of local infrastructure (particularly roads and transport options), and supportive creative arts processes.

 

The Art/Literature/Photography exhibition was open during Youth Week (and the week after) to give community members a chance to look at the entries and vote in the People?s Choice Award, which was won by Merryn Hirst for her art entry, My Own Two Halves.

 

Local Grown was held at Macksville Basketball Stadium although numbers were down on last year?s event. Five acts registered for the event with two pulling out a couple of days before.? Approximately 60 young people attended, with two bands playing different genres of music ? heavy metal, alternative and two young girls singing solo. The young people in the audience were very supportive of all the acts and cheered each of them equally. MC for the night was Dylan Hoskins, a Year 12 student learning Event Management at Nambucca Heads High School. Refreshments were provided by the Missabotti Youth Group at a small cost to the participants.

 

Two security guards were in attendance and also the Police were notified. There were no incidents and the young people who attended were very well behaved.

 

The bus was supplied, for Local Grown, at no cost to Council, with funding from the Motor Accident?s Authority (MAA). This funding is applied for based on the program organised for Youth Week.

 

Youthfest (organised by Nambucca Valley Youth Services Centre Incorporated) on Sunday 10 April, at Nambucca Heads Skate Park was well attended. Council?s Youth Development Officer participated on the day and subsidised Circus Skills Workshops over a period of 3 hours which were very popular with young people. The Youth Development Officer also had a stall at the event which was busy throughout the day providing information to young people and parents.

 

As part of the launch of NSW Youth Week 2011, the Youth Week Young Peoples? Advisory Committee (YPAC) invited up to five young representatives and workers in each local government area, to join them on Friday 1 April to launch NSW Youth Week 2011 at the Powerhouse Museum in Darling Harbour. Each LGA was subsidised $500 to do this. Two young people were sent, Tahnee Milgate (Young Citizen of the Year) and Renae Stoker to represent Nambucca Shire.? Tahnee and Renae reported that they met lots of interesting people and talked about the difference between rural and city living with other young people and youth workers. The girls said that it was a great night and thanked Council for giving them the opportunity to attend the launch.

 

Youth Week 2011 events were well advertised, with articles in the Hibiscus Happynings and Guardian News. Information was also circulated through radio announcements and school newsletters.? Flyers, brochures and hand outs were distributed throughout the Shire and the Youth Development Officer also spoke at school assemblies. Other organisations also promoted the events.

 

Feedback from participants and parents who attended events during Youth Week was good even though numbers were down for Local Grown and entries in the Art/Photography/Literature competition were low. The Youth Development Officer is looking at revamping the program for next year?s Youth Week and moving away from these events.

 

Macksville Show Chill Out Space

 

Even though the Chill Out Space was almost knee deep in mud, approximately 100 young people came to the tent during the hours of operation, with some staying for most of the time of opening, doing activities and just generally talking to the workers in attendance.

 

Information and prizes were given to young people who visited during the night. There were quite a few parents who also came and got information from the workers and from the tables.

 

 


CONSULTATION:

 

Manager Community and Cultural Services

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There is no impact to the environment

 

Social

 

Youth Week is an opportunity to highlight young people?s valuable contribution to the community.

 

Economic

 

No economic impact

 

Risk

 

There are no risks as a result of this report

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

No impact (Youth Week and MAA funding is applied for separately and does not effect Youth Services budget)

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

None. The activities were conducted within the budget.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.6??? SF1496??????????? 020611???????? Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 13 May 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning ????????

 

Summary:

 

Attached for Council?s endorsement is a copy of the Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on Friday, 13 May 2011.

 

There are three recommendations from the Committee which require an action of Council.

 

That the committee recommend that Council place the Draft Lower Nambucca Flood Study Review on public exhibition for a period of at least 30 days.

 

That at the conclusion of the Exhibition period the consultants consider the submissions made and provide a report to the committee on any amendment to the Draft so the final draft may be adopted.

 

That Council consider running a flood model in the future, with the complete removal of the V-Wall parallel with the car park and road (but not including the removal of the sea wall).

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That the Minutes from the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on Friday, 13 May 2011 be endorsed.

 

2????????? That that Council place the Draft Lower Nambucca Flood Study Review on public exhibition for a period of at least 30 days.

 

3????????? That at the conclusion of the Exhibition period the consultants consider the submissions made and provide a report to the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee on any amendment to the Draft so the final draft may be adopted.

 

4????????? That Council consider running a flood model in the future, with the complete removal of the V-Wall parallel with the car park and road (but not including the removal of the sea wall).

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Endorse the minutes

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

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

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

A number of matters were discussed at the Nambucca River Estuary and Coastline Management Committee meeting held on Friday, 13 May 2011. Each of the matters was presented through detailed reports.

 

A presentation was given by the Consultants SKM (Greg Rogencamp) on the Lower Nambucca Flood Study with the Committee making the recommendations outlined above.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental issues with this report.

 

The matters presented to the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee for consideration and discussion provided an assessment on the environmental impacts.

 

Social

 

There are no social issues with this report.

 

The reports presented to the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee provided an assessment on the social impacts.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic issues with this report.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There were no recommendations which would impact on any budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No variation required.

 

Attachments:

1View

11464/2011 - Minutes - Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuaries and Coastline Management Committee - 13 May 2011

 

2View

?- CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT (Councillors only):? Nambucca Heads Flood Study

 

?

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 13 May 2011

 

PRESENT

 

John Ainsworth (Chairperson)

Peter McNally (Nambucca Valley River Users Group)

James Hallam (NSW Farmers)

Louise Robinson (Nambucca LALC)

Janet Court (Councillor)

Fay Lawson (Flood Affected Landowner)

Joy van Son (Environmental Group)

Theresa Spens-Black (Oyster Growers)

 

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Greg Meyers (Director Environment & Planning)

Emma Shaw (Minute Secretary)

Jacqui Ashby (Environmental Compliance Officer)

Greg Rogencamp (SKM)

John Schmidt (DECC)

Stephen Channells (Department of Lands)

Darryl Lang (SES)

?nna Sedlak (NSW Maritime)

Kevin Gibson (DECCW)

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Marcus Riches, Department of Primary Industries

Tim Ryan (Landcare)

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1/11 RESOLVED:?? (Hallam/van Son)

 

Note: Joy Van Son identified a correction in the reports from committee members under Tim Ryan, it should read have received $33,000 to put in a rock ramp near borefields.

 

That the Committee note with the correction above, the Minutes of the Meeting held 18 February 2011 will be presented to Council at its meeting of 19 May 2011.

 

 

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

ITEM 5.1????? SF1496????????????? 130511????? Report on Outstanding Items 13 May 2011

2/11 RESOLVED:?? (Court/Robinson)

 

That the list of outstanding actions be noted and received by the Committee.

 

 

 

 


 

ITEM 5.2????? SF1496????????????? 130511????? Update on Lower Nambucca Flood Study

3/11 RESOLVED:?? (Court/Lawson)

 

1????????? That the committee recommend that Council place the Draft Lower Nambucca Flood Study Review on public exhibition for a period of at least 30 days.

 

2????????? That at the conclusion of the Exhibition period the consultants consider the submissions made and provide a report to the committee on any amendment to the Draft so the final draft may be adopted.

 

4/11 Resolved:?? (Court/Lawson)

 

That Council consider running a flood model in the future, with the complete removal of the V-Wall parallel with the car park and road (but not including the removal of the sea wall).

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3????? SF1184????????????? 130511????? Progress on the preparation of the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan and Public Information Sessions

5/11 RESOLVED:?? (Court/Robinson)

 

That the Committee note the public information sessions and progress with the preparation of the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.4????? SF1496????????????? 130511????? Reports from Committee Members and Attendees as required

Recommendation:

 

That the verbal reports as given, be noted.

 

MEMBER

ORGANISATION

CONTENT OF REPORTS

ACTION/RESPONSE

Fay Lawson

Affected Landowner

Is BOM putting in a Doplar weather Radar station at Coffs Harbour?

Greg Meyers advised that a BOM Officer indicated that this was the case. However, it may not be a benefit to Nambucca Shire depending upon its location. Kevin Gibson indicated that Nambucca doesn?t have a major issue? and Greg Meyers also confirmed that the BOM Officer identified other areas in the State as a greater priority in front of Nambucca Shire.

Kevin Gibson to provide some detail on gauge location (to be circulated at next meeting).

James Hallam

NSW Farmers

Considered that the Radar or additional rain gauges in the upper catchment would be helpful as the last few floods has seen heavy rain come from the Bellingen direction.

WMA Water are currently contracted? reviewing the collection of information.

Joy Van Son

NVCA

Requests that a status report come to the committee as there is little to report to her constituency as very little is being reported through the committee.

Would like to see more involvement from the Committee on actions and activities.

Raised the matter that the Rivercare Officer has completed a three year project on the Nambucca River and that this is not being reported to the Committee.

Greg Meyers identified that this is a resourcing matter but will endeavour to bring a status report to the next meeting.

It was confirmed that once the committee recommend a study/report to Council and is adopted, it is then up to the relevant Officer to implement the actions as provided for in the budgets.

Jacqui Ashby advised that Damon Telfor was previously advised of the Committee meetings. But with the new committee structure this has not been done.

Stephen Channels

Dept of Lands

Advised that the Department of Lands has been consumed into a larger Department of Trade Investment, Regional Infrastructure & Services

 

Therese Spens-Black

Oyster Growers

Expressed appreciation on Council's prompt notification of a potential Oil Spill and Sewage Spill.

Advised that it is an automatic 3 week river harvest closure following such notification.

The Oyster Growers are developing an EMS (environmental management system) for their own operations which will become a public document (looking at environmental impacts that they make & how to manage the impact and funding available).

Advised that a report will be presented to the next committee meeting on the data from the Watt Creek and Gumma Gumma Creek water monitoring program.

Peter McNally

NVRUG

Requested that when such Oil and Sewage spills occur could they too be advised.

Advised that NVRUG have sent a letter to the RTA asking that they construct the proposed new bridge at Macksville so that the pylons are not in the middle channel, 62m between pylons and tall enough to enable sailing boats to pass under at high tide.

Greg Meyers advised that Council has a notification Policy in place to notify the Oyster Growers of such spills but not all other river users.

?

Janet Court.

Councillor

Enquired as to what river water monitoring we have in place.

Advised that there are 2 data loggers installed, 1 in Gumma Gumma Creek and 1 in Watt Creek.

Kevin Gibson

DECCW

Advised that he is now in the Department of Environment and Heritage.

Kevin gave an explanation of Flood Studies and the various components of the study.

 

Louise Robinson

NHLALC

Advised that Gumma Peninsular and the 3 Islands are in the final process of being declared an Indigenous Protected Area (IPA), which will allow for the aboriginal people to look after their own land.

 

 

???

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Friday 12 August 2011 commencing at 8.30 am.

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Mayor then closed the meeting the time being 11.50 am.

 

 

 

????????????

Cr John Ainsworth

(CHAIRPERSON)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 13 May 2011

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 2

 

 

 

Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 13 May 2011

 

 

 

CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT (Councillors only):? Nambucca Heads Flood Study

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.7??? SF841????????????? 020611???????? Nambucca River Users Group Request for Support for the Design of the new Nambucca River Bridge at Macksville.

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council is in receipt of a request from the Nambucca Valley River Users Group to support their request to the RTA to ensure the design of the proposed new Nambucca River Bridge at Macksville does not impact upon the current use of the Nambucca River near Macksville.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council write to the RTA requesting that they design the new Nambucca River Bridge at Macksville to provide 62m between the main channel piers and ensure the bridge is tall enough to allow yachts to pass under the bridge at maximum high tide.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council could choose not to support the request from the Nambucca Valley River Users Group.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Nambucca Valley River Users Group who are a group representative of the various river users in the Nambucca Valley including, sailors, fishermen, water skiers and recreational river users.

 

Up until recently there has been a common accepted practice for water skiers to pass under both the North Coast Railway bridge and the Pacific Highway traffic bridge provided only one boat at a time and the water skiers is directly behind the boat even though the pylons/piers are less then the specified distance for water skiers. This accepted practice is not longer available with several boats being pulled up boat by water officials and warned and infringements have been issued.

 

With the Pacific Highway bypass of Macksville gaining momentum the NVRUG have written to the RTA directly and also to Council seeking support for their request that the RTA design the new bridge so that the pylons/piers straddle the main river channel with a clearance of at least 62m to enable boats with skiers in tow, to pass between the pylons maintaining the prescribed 30m clearance.

 

In addition they have requested that the bridge be of sufficient height to enable yachts to pass under the bridge at maximum high tide. At the least the same clearance as that currently afforded by the traffic bridge.

 

The impacts on river users would be significant as the Nambucca River would be divided into 4 distinct sections for boats with skiers/tubes with the three bridges impacting upon their use or contributing to increased congestion with boats between the bridges.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nambucca Valley River Users Group

 


SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The concentration of boat usage between the three bridges may very well increase impacts on riverbanks, and other marine vegetation

 

Social

 

The NVRUG are very concerned with the potential social impacts if the bridge is not designed as identified.

 

Economic

 

The Nambucca River at Macksville provides a wonderful location for river users which provides support to local businesses.

 

Risk

 

There are no identified risks for Council. The risks relate more to the opportunity lost if a further obstacle is placed within the main channel of the river further restricting river usage.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

No budget impacts.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No funds required.

 

Attachments:

1View

12990/2011 - Request for Council to lobby the RTA in relation to proposed bridge over the Nambucca River at Macksville

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Nambucca River Users Group Request for Support for the Design of the new Nambucca River Bridge at Macksville.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.8??? DA2011/025????? 020611???????? Consideration of subdivision of village zoned land to create four (4) lots

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Arthur Tsembis, Manager Planning and Assessment ????????

 

Summary:

:???????????????????????????????????? Town Planning Consultants & Drafting Services

 

Proposal:?????????????????????? DA 2011/025 ? Subdivision to create four (4) residential (village) lots and relocate an existing dwelling onto proposed Lot 2.

 

Property:??????????????????????? Lots 21 DP 1095283, Mill Lane, Warrell Creek.

 

Zoning:????????????????????????? RU5 Village and RU1 Primary Production under Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010

 

There are several dwellings located on Lot 21. These dwellings were previously used as 'workers cottages' in conjunction with a former sawmill operation on Lot 22. The dwellings have been allowed to remain and occupied under the existing use provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP& Act) 1979.

 

Whilst the 'workers cottages' have remained in the same ownership on one allotment, they have been separately rated for many years as they were separately let and the Local Government Act allows for individual rating.

 

Part of the subject land comprising the 'workers cottages' is now zoned RU5 Village under Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010. This provides an opportunity to subdivide that part of the land zoned RU5 to allow each dwelling to be located on separate lots having a minimum area of 1,000m2.

 

Having regard to the history of the existing dwellings being separately rated it is considered appropriate that the normal Section 94 contributions for the proposed subdivision should not apply. It is also considered that the application to vary the requirement for 'direct frontage to a dedicated public road' under the NDCP 2010 is justified and therefore acceptable in the particular circumstances.

 

NOTE: This matter requires a ?Planning Decision? referred to in Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requiring the General Manager to record the names of each Councillor supporting and opposing the decision.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council determine DA 2011/025 for a four (4) lot residential (village) subdivision by granting development consent, subject to conditions attached to this report.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

In accordance with Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP&A Act) 1979 Council can determine the development application by:

 

a????????? granting consent to the application, either unconditionally or subject to conditions, or

b????????? refusing consent to the application.

 

Council also has the option to add, amend or delete any draft conditions of the development consent.

 


BACKGROUND:

 

The applicant has submitted a Statement of Environmental Effect (SEE) which includes a brief history relating to the existing cottages on the subject land. Specific relevant extracts from the SEE are attached for Council's information.

 

Development Application (DA) 2002/151 for a two lot subdivision by way of boundary adjustment was approved by Council at its meeting on 21 February 2002. Council when dealing with this application also resolved to accept the then owner's legal advice that "each of the dwelling houses on your land has the benefit of Section 109 of the Act and you are at liberty to continue to use each of these dwellings as a dwelling house."

 

DA 2005/360 for another boundary adjustment to create proposed Lots 21 and 22 was approved in accordance with development consent dated 12 September 2005. This plan was registered on 10/05/2006 and Lot 21 incorporates all the 'workers cottages'.

 

Part of the subject land comprising the existing 'workers cottages' is now zoned RU5 Village under Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Internal referrals

 

Council?s Manager Technical Services (MTS) and the Manager Health & Building (MH&B) have provided comments and appropriate conditions to be included in any development consent granted by Council.

 

The MH&B has recommended that appropriate conditions should be included to address current problems associated with on-site management systems, potable water supply, stormwater drainage issues, and relocation of one of the dwellings.

 

The MTS has recommended appropriate conditions to upgrade the existing right of way (ROW) and the provision of suitable access arrangements for service vehicles, including garbage trucks.

 

Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA)

 

The RTA advised Council by letter dated 24 March 2011 that the proposal does not affect the upgrade of the Pacific Highway and therefore it does not object to the proposed subdivision. However, the RTA also provided the following advice:

 

?????????????? Consideration should be given to the impact of road traffic noise from the Pacific Highway on the residents.

?????????????? The existing side road (Mill Lane) and approaches to the highway are unsealed. It would be desirable to at least seal 50m of Mill Lane back from the highway to improve safety and fouling of the highway's pavement.

 

No new dwellings are proposed and therefore it is considered that it would be unreasonable to expect the existing dwellings to be upgraded to incorporate noise attenuation measures. Similarly, it is not considered that that part of Mill Lane which does not have frontage to the proposed lots should be upgraded.

 

 

SUBMISSIONS:

 

Adjoining residents were notified of the proposed development. Mr Harris, who owns the former sawmill site (now known as Lot 22) lodged a submission claiming that he was not notified. However, this was not the case as the letter was sent to the mailing address for Lot 22.

 

Notwithstanding, Mr Harris advised that he would be prepared to allow part of his adjoining land, including the existing right-of-carriageway, to be upgrade and dedicated as a public road. However, any such agreement was be subject to conditions. A copy of the submission is attached to this report for Council's information.

 

Prior to receipt of the submission from Mr Harris, the applicant was verbally advised that Mr Harris intended to lodge a submission which may allow the right-of-carriageway to be upgraded and dedicated as a public road. A copy of the applicant's letter dated 27 April 2011 is attached to this report for Council's information.

 

 

PROPOSAL:

 

The proposal is for a four (4) lot subdivision to incorporate four (4) existing dwellings (including relocating one) to allow each dwelling to be located on separate lots. Proposed Lots 1, 2 and 3 have areas of 1,000m2 and are within the RU5 zone. Proposed Lot 4 has an area of 3,888m2 and will have a split zone, with the existing dwelling located within the RU5 zone and the residue portion of the lot comprising a rural zone (RU1 Primary Production).

 

The proposal is somewhat unique in that the existing 'workers cottages' that were previously associated with a discontinued sawmill have been allowed to continue to be used as separate dwellings under the existing use provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP& Act) 1979. These 'workers cottages' have remained on one allotment however; they have been separately rated for many years as permitted under the Local Government Act. Part of Lot 21 has been zoned RU5 Village. This now provides the opportunity to subdivide that part of the land (zoned RU5), providing each lot has a minimum area of 1,000m2 in accordance with Clause 4.1 of NLEP 2010.

 

There is a burnt out dilapidated cottage located on proposed Lot 4. This dwelling does not form part of the application. A second dwelling on proposed Lot 4 is not permissible. As such, a condition of any approval granted will include a requirement to demolish or remove this structure.

 

The SEE states:

 

'?..the proposal does not represent any real "development" of the land; it only provides separate areas of land for each existing dwelling presently established.'

 

In support of this claim the applicant has provided a legal opinion on the subdivision (see Annexure D). The legal advice also makes reference to whether the proposed subdivision should be a community title subdivision rather than a "traditional" Torrens title subdivision. It should be noted that in preliminary discussions with the applicant it was suggested that if necessary it may be appropriate for a community title subdivision to facilitate a common on-site effluent disposal area.

 

Council is advised that it is considered the legal opinion is generally correct in that the proposed subdivision 'will have no material adverse environmental planning impact compared to the current situation'. In this regard it is considered appropriate that the normal Section 94 contributions should not apply, and the application to vary the requirement for 'direct frontage to a dedicated public road' under the DCP may be acceptable. However, once the land is subdivide and sold there is likely to be an expectation from individual land owners for the provision of services and facilities in keeping with the normal standards for this type of urban development; particularly relating to a sealed road frontage and provision of an adequate garbage service. As such, it is considered appropriate for Council to require the existing ROW and Mill Lane, for that part of the road having frontage to the proposed lots, to be upgraded to a bitumen sealed road standard and adequate provision made for a garbage vehicle to access each of the dwellings on the proposed new lots.

 


MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION ? SECTION 79C(1) EP&A ACT

 

In its assessment of a development application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters:

 

(a)??????? the provisions of

 

(i)???????? any environmental planning instruments

 

Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 1995

 

The subject land is zoned RU5 Village under Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010. The proposed subdivision is permissible with consent and is consistent with the objectives of the RU5 zone.

 

The proposed subdivision complies with the minimum lot size of 1,000m2 in accordance with the Lot Size Map under Clause 4.1(3) of NLEP 2010.

 

State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPP)

 

There are no relevant SEPPs that apply to the proposed development.

 

(ii)??????? any draft environmental planning instrument

 

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land.

 

(iii)?????? any development control plan (DCP)

 

Nambucca Development Control Plan (NDCP) 2010 applies to the subject land.

 

NDCP 2010: Part A3.0 ? Notification and Public Participation

 

The proposed development was notified and advertised in accordance with Clause A3.2.3 under NDCP 2010 (Schedule 1 ? Subdivision, where three or more additional lots will be created). As a result of such action one submission was received, a copy of which is attached to this report.

 

NDCP 2010: Part B ? Subdivision

 

Except for Clause B3.3.2, the proposed subdivision complies with the relevant provisions of Part B of NDCP 2010.

 

Clause B3.3.2 states:

 

'All lots must have direct frontage to a dedicated public road and access must be provided to an all-weather standard.'

 

Proposed Lots 3 & 4 do not comply with this requirement as they will only have frontage to an existing ROW. However, given that the dwellings exist and already have access via this ROW, it is considered that the application for a variation of this development standard is justified in the particular circumstances.

 

NDCP 2010: Part D ? Sediment and Erosion Control

 

Appropriate conditions will be included in any development consent granted to ensure compliance with the requirements of Part D of NDCP 2010.


(iiia)?? any planning agreement

 

There is no planning agreement that applies to the land or the proposed development.

 

(iv)?????? any matters prescribed by the regulations

 

There are no matters prescribed by the regulations that affect the subject land.

 

b????????? the likely impacts of the development

 

The proposed subdivision of the land is in keeping with the context and setting of the existing village precinct. Any further development of the proposed lots will require submission of separate development applications.

 

c????????? the suitability of the site for the development

 

Appropriate conditions relating to; upgrade of the access, on-site disposal, and stormwater drainage, can be included in any development consent granted to ensure the physical constraints of the site can be overcome to make the land suitable for the existing dwellings to remain on the proposed subdivision.

 

d????????? any submissions made in accordance with the Act or the regulations

 

The proposed development was advertised and notified from 3 March 2011 to 25 March 2011. As a result of such action one submission was received, details of which have been addressed elsewhere in this report.

 

e????????? the public interest

 

The public interest has been addressed by applying an appropriate level of development assessment in accordance with all relevant legislative requirements, policies and plans.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed subdivision of the land, subject to appropriate conditions to mitigate any likely impacts.

 

Social

 

The subdivision of the land will maintain existing affordable housing in the locality.

 

Economic

 

The subdivision will rationalise the existing rating system that applies to each of the dwellings on separate lots.

 

Risk

 

There are no apparent risks associated with the proposed subdivision.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nil.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Providing the applicant is required to upgrade the existing ROW and road frontage along Mill Lane as part of the subdivision approval, then there should be no impact on working funds. However, if Council decides to not apply these requirements, there may be future demands for Mill Lane and the right-of-carriageway to be upgraded to a public road standard for an urban development.

 

 

PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF CONSENT

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS CONSENT

 

Development is to be in accordance with approved plans

 

1??????? The development is to be implemented generally in accordance with the plans and supporting documents set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

 

Plan/Supporting Document

Prepared by

Dated

Statement of Environmental Effects

Town Planning Consultants & Drafting Services Pty Ltd

Received 22/02/2011

Plan of Proposed Subdivision (Annexure B)

Town Planning Consultants & Drafting Services Pty Ltd

Received 22/02/2011

 

In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this development consent and the plans/ supporting documents referred to above, the conditions of this development consent prevail.

 

Demolish or remove existing structure

 

2??????? The applicant shall lodge a development application to demolish or remove the existing burnt out dilapidated cottage located on proposed Lot 4. The application must be lodged and approved by Council prior to release of the subdivision certificate.

 

Note: Council may consider an application to covert the structure into a garage or shed, providing it is not used or adapted for use as a second dwelling.

 

Water supply to existing dwellings

 

3??????? The current bore water supply from the eastern side of the Pacific Highway shall be disconnected.

 

All dwellings are to be fitted with roof guttering to collect roof water and directed to appropriately sized rainwater tanks for each allotment. Minimum size storage tanks are to be:

 

????????? 2 bedroom cottage ? 15,000 litre capacity

????????? 3 bedroom cottage ? 22,500 litre capacity

 

Storm water overflow from rain water tanks are to be directed away from on-site effluent drainage disposal areas to an approved off site drainage system.

 

Sediment and erosion measures required

 

4??????? The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate the measures to be employed to control erosion and loss of sediment from the site. Control over discharge of stormwater and containment of run-off and pollutants leaving the site/premises must be undertaken through the installation of erosion control devices such as catch drains, energy dissipaters, level spreaders and sediment control devices such as hay bale barriers, filter fences, filter dams, and sedimentation basins. The sediment and erosion control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction Vol 1, 4th Edition prepared by Landcom. Particular attention is to be given to the provision of the following sediment and erosion control measures:

 

a??????? Temporary driveway from the edge of road to the building site

b??????? Temporary downpipes immediately that the roof has been erected

c??????? Silt fence or sediment barrier

 

The sediment and erosion control plan is to be prepared by a qualified practising Civil Engineer. The Civil Engineer is to be a corporate member of the Institution of Engineers Australia or is to be eligible to become a corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field.

 

The plans must be in compliance with Council's current Council's Adopted Engineering Standard. Such plans and specifications must be approved as part of the Construction Certificate.

 

????????? All sediment and erosion control measures must be maintained at all times until the site has been stabilised by permanent vegetation cover or hard surface.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SPECIFICALLY RELATE TO RELOCATION OF THE DWELLING ONTO PROPOSED LOT 2

 

Compliance with Building Code of Australia and insurance requirements under Home Building Act 1989

 

5??????? a??????? All building work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia as in force on the date the application for the relevant construction certificate or complying development certificate was made.

b??????? In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that such a contract of insurance is in force before any building work authorised to be carried out by the consent commences.

 

This condition does not apply:

 

a??????? to the extent to which an exemption is in force under clause 187 or 188, subject to the terms of any condition or requirement referred to in clause 187 (6) or 188 (4), or

b??????? to the erection of a temporary building.

 

 

Notification of Home Building Act 1989 requirements

 

6??????? Residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989 must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the following information:

 

a??????? in the case of work for which a principal contractor is required to be appointed:

i???????? the name and licence number of the principal contractor, and

ii??????? the name of the insurer by which the work is insured under Part 6 of that Act,

b??????? in the case of work to be done by an owner-builder:

i???????? the name of the owner-builder, and

ii??????? if the owner-builder is required to hold an owner-builder permit under that Act, the number of the owner-builder permit.

 

If arrangements for doing the residential building work are changed while the work is in progress so that the information notified above becomes out of date, further work must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the updated information.

 

On-site sewage management facility Section 68 approval required

 

7??????? An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for on-site effluent disposal must be obtained from Council. The application must comply with the specific requirements for flood prone land under Council's On-site Sewerage Management Plan, July 2009. The application for Section 68 approval must be accompanied by a report prepared by a suitably qualified professional with demonstrated experience in effluent disposal matters, which addresses the site specific design of sewage management in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Local Government Act, and Approvals Regulation and Guidelines approved by the Director General.

 

Plumbing Standards and requirements

 

8??????? All Plumbing, Water Supply and Sewerage Works are to be installed and operated in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the NSW Code of Practice for Plumbing and Drainage and AS/NZS 3500 Parts 0-5, the approved plans (any notations on those plans) and the approved specifications.

 

The plumber must obtain a Plumbing Permit at least two (2) working days prior to commencing work in accordance with the Local Government Act and the NSW Code of Practice for Plumbing and Drainage. The proponent must ensure the plumber has obtained a Plumbing Permit prior to commencing work on the site.

 

Residential building work

 

9??????? Building work that involves residential building work (within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989) must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority:

 

a??????? in the case of work to be done by a licensee under that Act:

i???????? has been informed in writing of the licensee?s name and contractor licence number, and

ii??????? is satisfied that the licensee has complied with the requirements of Part 6 of that Act, or

b??????? in the case of work to be done by any other person:

i???????? has been informed in writing of the licensee?s name and contractor licence number, and

ii??????? has been informed in writing of the person?s name and owner-builder permit number, or

iii?????? has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land, that states that the reasonable market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work is less than the amount prescribed for the purposes of the definition of owner-builder work in Section 29 of that Act, and is given appropriate information and declarations under paragraphs (a) and (b) whenever arrangements for the doing of the work are changed in such a manner as to render out of date any information or declaration previously given under either of those paragraphs.

 

Note:? The amount referred to in paragraph (b) (iii) is prescribed by regulations under the Home Building Act 1989. As at the date on which this Regulation was Gazetted that amount was $5,000. As those regulations are amended from time to time, so that amount may vary.

 

A certificate purporting to be issued by an approved insurer under Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989 that states that a person is the holder of an insurance policy issued for the purposes of that Part is, for the purposes of this clause, sufficient evidence that the person has complied with the requirements of that Part.

 

Toilet facilities

 

10????? Toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. Each toilet provided must be a toilet connected to an accredited sewage management system approved by the Council.

 

Site construction sign required

 

11????? A sign or signs must be erected before the commencement of the work in a prominent position at the frontage to the site:

 

a??????? showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

b??????? showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

c??????? stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

 

The sign is to be maintained while the work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed. No sign is to have an area in excess of one (1) m2.

 

Construction times

 

12????? Construction works must not unreasonably interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood. In particular construction noise, when audible on adjoining residential premises, can only occur:

 

a??????? Monday to Friday, from 7.00 am to 6.00 pm.

b??????? Saturday, from 8.00 am to 1.00 pm.

 

No construction work is to take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

 

Builders rubbish to be contained on site

 

12????? All builders rubbish is to be contained on the site in a ?Builders Skips? or an enclosure. Building materials are to be delivered directly onto the property. Footpaths, road reserves and public reserves are to be maintained clear of rubbish, building materials and all other items.

 

Survey of building floor height required

 

14????? Upon relocation of the house, a survey certificate prepared by a registered surveyor is to be submitted to the Principal Certifier to ensure the floor level of the building will be at or above 6.3 metres AHD.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE FOR SUBDIVISION WORKS

 

On-site sewage management facility Section 68 approval required

 

15????? An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 shall be submitted to Council to modify the current On-site Sewage Management Systems where existing effluent disposal areas for individual dwellings are not located entirely within each of the proposed lots. Applications must be accompanied by site assessment reports and suitable designed pressurised sub-surface irrigation system for each dwelling. The report is to be prepared by a suitably qualified professional with demonstrated experience in effluent disposal matters, which addresses the site specific design of sewage management in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Local Government Act, and Approvals Regulation and Guidelines approved by the Director General.

 

Stormwater drainage approval

 

16????? Stormwater drainage is to be designed to direct all water to a Council approved drainage system to prevent discharge runoff onto adjoining land. The drainage system is to be designed for 1 in 20 year storm event. This system must be designed in accordance with AS/NZS 3500.3:2003 - Plumbing and drainage, Part 3: Stormwater drainage. All piped drainage lines over adjoining land are to be located within drainage easements. All costs are the responsibility of the proponent.

 

An approval is to be obtained under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 to carry out stormwater drainage work.

 

Engineering plans and specifications are to be submitted in triplicate and must include details in accordance with Appendix C of AS/NZS 3500.3:2003 - Plumbing and drainage, Part 3: Stormwater drainage.

 

The plans must be in compliance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standard.

 

Engineering Construction Plans

 

17????? Three (3) copies of engineering construction plans and specifications must accompany the construction certificate application. Such plans are to provide for the works in the following table in accordance with Council?s current Design and Construction Manuals and Specifications.

 

Required work

Specification of work

Access and Road Construction

The ROW having frontage to proposed Lots 2, 3 & 4 shall be upgraded to a 3m wide bitumen seal carriageway on a 9m wide formation.

Mill Lane having frontage to proposed Lots 1 and 2 shall be upgraded and tapered to a 5.5m wide bitumen seal carriageway up to the eastern boundary of proposed Lot 1.

Details of drainage shall be included for Council's approval with the road construction plans.

Turning area

A bitumen seal 3 point turning area shall be provided at the western end of the ROW and extend into proposed Lot 4 to enable service vehicles, including garbage trucks, to enter and leave in a forward direction.

Driveways

Sealed driveways for each lot shall be constructed from the edge of the bitumen sealed carriageway to within 3m of the property boundary.

Inter-allotment Drainage

Inter-allotment drainage to an approved drainage system for each of the proposed new allotments where it is not possible to provide a gravity connection of roofwater to the table drain.

 

Long Service Levy to be paid

 

18????? A Long Service Levy must be paid to the Long Service Payments Corporation. This amount payable is currently based on 0.35% of the cost of the work. This is a State Government Levy and is subject to change.

These payments may be made at Council?s Administration Office. Cheques are to be made payable Council.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF SUBDIVISION WORKS

 

Acid sulfate soil assessment

 

19????? Works involving excavations beyond 1 metre below natural ground surface must not commence until an acid sulfate soil assessment has been undertaken, the assessment submitted to Council for approval and Council has approved any measures needed for the management of those soils. This assessment must be in accordance with the Acid Sulfate Soil Manual (NSW ASSMAC 1998).

 


Toilet facilities

 

20????? Toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. Each toilet provided must be a toilet connected to an accredited sewage management system approved by the Council.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH DURING CONSTRUCTION OF SUBDIVISION WORKS

 

Construction times

 

21????? Construction works must not unreasonably interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood. In particular construction noise, when audible on residential premises, can only occur:

 

a??????? Monday to Friday, 7.00 am to 6.00 pm.

b??????? Saturday, 8.00 am to 1.00 pm.

c??????? No construction work to take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

 

Consent required for works within the road reserve

 

22????? Consent from Council must be obtained for all works within the road reserve pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. Three (3) copies of engineering construction plans must accompany the application for consent for works within the road reserve. Such plans are to be in accordance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standard.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

 

Plan of Subdivision

 

23????? An application for a Subdivision Certificate must be made on the approved form. The Subdivision Certificate fees, in accordance with Council's adopted schedule of fees and charges, must accompany such application. Seven (7) copies of the plan of subdivision are to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate. The location of all buildings and/or other permanent improvements including fences and internal access driveways/roads must be indicated on 1 of the copies.

 

Plan of Subdivision and Section 88B Instrument requirements

 

24????? A Section 88B Instrument and 1 copy are to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate. The final plan of subdivision and accompanying Section 88B Instrument are to provide for the items listed in the following table:

 

Item for inclusion in Plan of Subdivision and/or Section 88B Instrument

Details of Item

Inter-allotment Drainage Easements

The creation of easements for drainage of water, with a minimum width of 1.5 metres, over all inter-allotment drainage pipelines and structures located within the proposed allotments.

Easement for service vehicles

The creation of a right of carriageway benefiting Nambucca Shire Council over the existing ROW and turning area within proposed Lot 4.

 


Completion of All Works

 

25????? All roads, drainage and civil works, required by this development consent and associated Construction Certificate, are to be completed.

 

Works-As-Executed Plans

 

26????? Works-as-executed plans, certified by a suitably qualified engineer or a registered surveyor, are to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate. Where the design is carried out utilising computer aided design CAD, all cad computer files are required to be provided on CD (Compact Disc) with the final drawings. The CAD files must include all lot and road boundaries, lot numbers and easements. The data is to be supplied in accordance with the requirements of Council?s GIS Officer.

In the case where development involves filling of flood prone land, an additional copy of the works-as-executed plan relating to earthworks and final plan of subdivision must be submitted detailing the 1% flooding contour.

 

Electricity Supply Certificate

 

27????? Written evidence from an electricity supply authority is to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate stating that satisfactory arrangements have been made for the provision of electricity supply to the proposed lots.

 

Telephone Supply Certificate

 

28????? Written evidence from Telstra is to be submitted with the application for a subdivision certificate stating that satisfactory arrangements have been made for the provision of underground telephone supply to the proposed lots.

 

 

NOTES:

 

Construction Certificate required

This development consent is issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and does not relate to structural aspects or specifications of the building under the Building Code of Australia. All buildings and alterations require the issue of a Construction Certificate prior to works commencing. Application forms are available from the customer services counter or Council?s website.

 

Occupation Certificate required

The building (on proposed Lot 2) must not be occupied until the Principal Certifying Authority has issued an Occupation Certificate.

 

Principal Certifying Authority

Work must not commence until the applicant has:

a??????? obtained a Construction Certificate from Council or private certifier,

b??????? appointed a Principal Certifying Authority (if the Council is not the PCA),

c??????? given the Council at least two days notice of the their intention to commence the erection of the building. Notice must be given by using the prescribed ?Form 7?, and

d??????? notified the Principal Certifying Authority of the Compliance with Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

It is an offence under the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 to act in a manner causing, or likely to cause, harm to the environment. Anyone allowing material to enter a waterway or leaving material where it can be washed off-site may be subject to a penalty infringement notice (?on-the-spot fine?) or prosecution.

 


Responsibilities under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

Should operations uncover evidence of Aboriginal heritage of the area, or the presence of any threatened, endangered or vulnerable flora and fauna, all work is to cease immediately and the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the Local Aboriginal Land Council are to be contacted. No work is to recommence until the National Parks and Wildlife Service permits such works to continue.

 

Penalties apply for failure to comply with development consents

Failure to comply with conditions of this development consent may lead to an on the spot fine (generally $600) being issued pursuant to Section 127A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 or prosecution pursuant to Section 125 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

Attachments:

1View

13710/2011 - SEE Information

 

2View

11118/2011 - Further information regarding access, road design, on-site waste disposal and water supply

 

3View

13358/2011 - Copy of Submission - A Harris

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Consideration of subdivision of village zoned land to create four (4) lots

 


























Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Consideration of subdivision of village zoned land to create four (4) lots

 




Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Consideration of subdivision of village zoned land to create four (4) lots

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.9??? SF128????????????? 020611???????? Report on Legal and Debt Recovery Costs for period 1/07/10 to 18/5/11

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council resolved at a previous meeting when dealing with a Notice of Motion, that it receive a report in conjunction with the quarterly reviews on all legal costs incurred by Council.

 

Legal costs are incurred over all of Council's operations and are outlined in this report.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council note the current expenditure in relation to legal and debt collection fees.

 

2????????? That Council note that the two Town Planning legal fees budgets are currently overspent and a further $10,000 and $1,000 respectively will need to be budgeted to these accounts to enable finalisation of the Nambucca Skate Park matter and for incidental legal matters.

 

3????????? That Council note the best estimate of costs associated with the Land and Environment Court Challenge for DA 2004/136 East West Road Valla.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no real options available for Council

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Unfortunately, the March quarterly budget review does not reflect the over expenditures outlined below in several of the Legal fees budget due to matters not arising til after the 30 March 2011. They are therefore addressed separately in this report which should be considered in conjunction with the March quarterly budget review.

 

In accordance with Council's resolution the following Table outlines the Legal and Debt Recovery costs incurred by Council for the period 1 July 2010 to 18 May 2011. It should be noted that the following costs do not include staff time or incidentals such as postage and stationary, as these are costed against the relevant areas.

Ledger No

Description

Responsible Department

Total (YTD) + Comm

Total Budget

 

 

 

 

 

03100.0365

Other Administration/Corporate Services/Administration/Council

Corporate Services

15788.32

20000.00

03120.0365

Finance/Corporate Services/Administration/Council

Corporate Services

0.00

3500.00

03230.0365

Parks & Reserves Operations/Sporting Grounds, Parks

Engineering Services

0.00

0.00

03410.0365

Domestic Waste Contract Services/Domestic Waste/Housing

Engineering Services

28251.21

40000.00

03420.0365

Other Waste Contract Services/Other Waste/Housing & Community

Engineering Services

2409.71

10000.00

03910.0365

Economic Development/Economic Development Promotion/Economic

Corporate Services

0.00

1100.00

04010.0365

Town Planning Professional Services/Town Planning/Environment

Environment and Planning

54112.98

50000.00

04060.0365

Environmental Operations/Environmental Protection/Environment

Environment and Planning

1957.00

1200.00

04160.0365

Saleyards Contracts/Saleyards/Economic Affairs/Council

Corporate Services

0.00

0.00

04180.0365

Commercial Property Operations/Other Business

Corporate Services

4652.10

0.00

23000.0365

Water Reservoirs & Pumping Stations Operations/Water Supplies

Engineering Services

1402.86

2000.00

33000.0365

Sewerage Services Mains Operations/Sewerage Services

Engineering Services

4913.72

4500.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

113487.90

132300.00

 

In addition the Notice of Motion previously considered, sought advice as to the costs associated with the Land and Environment Court challenge for DA 2004/136 East West Road Valla.

 

This matter is now finalised and the following estimates have been prepared.

 

DATE

AMOUNT

VOUCHER

DESCRIPTION

LEGAL EXPENSES

11/06/2009

$??????? 10,729.33

35477

Professional fees and disbursements

9/07/2009

$??????? 12,340.30

35805

Professional fees and disbursements

13/08/2009

$???????? 5,405.18

36237

Professional fees and disbursements

10/09/2009

$??????? 16,122.81

36547

Professional fees and disbursements

15/10/2009

$???????? 1,272.84

36941

Professional fees and disbursements

12/11/2009

$???????? 8,611.02

37279

Professional fees and disbursements

15/04/2010

$???????? 4,657.79

38912

Professional fees and disbursements

10/06/2010

$??????? 35,847.35

39572

Barrister

8/07/2010

$???????? 1,119.14

40001

Professional fees and disbursements

30/07/2010

$???????? 2,750.00

1023810

Professional fees and disbursements

31/08/2010

$???????? 1,405.46

1028929

Professional fees and disbursements

 

?$????? 100,261.22

 

 

STAFF COSTS

 

?$???????? 4,000.00

 

Collective estimate of 61 staff hours


 

INCIDENTALS; PHOTOCOPYING,COURIERS,FLIGHTS, ACCOMMODATION, MEALS ETC)

 

?$???????? 3,050.00

 

 

COSTS FOR COURT ORDER 60%OF APPLICANTS COSTS

26/08/2010

?$??????? 36,792.95

IR12717

60% of applicants (NVCA) costs as ordered by the court

TOTAL (Best Estimate)  

?$144,104.17

 

 

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Manager Finance

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental impacts associated with this report.

 

Social

 

There are no social impacts associated with this report.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic impacts associated with this report.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks associated with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Estimates and allowances are made each year for legal fees and debt recovery costs. The allocations are best estimates and may vary slightly or significantly depending upon circumstances.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The budget allocations are from the three funds, General, Water and Sewerage which cover the respective responsible areas. Variations to the allocations may have a positive or negative impact upon respective fund.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.10? SF624????????????? 020611???????? Review and Refinement of the Northern Rivers Catchment Action Plan

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning ????????

 

Summary:

 

The Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority have written to Council advising that they are about to embark on a review and refinement process to ensure the Catchment Action Plan (CAP) is the "communities CAP".

 

Part of the process is the establishment of a CAP Stakeholder Reference Group and have sought a local government staff representative from each of the three Roc's across the Northern Rivers CMA area.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council identify and advise the Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority of any specific issues and interests groups they wish to be addressed and consulted with through the review and refinement of the Northern Rivers Catchment Action Plan.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council could choose not to take any action in the review and refinement of the Northern Rivers Catchment Action Plan.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority have written to Council advising that they are about to embark on a five year review and refinement process to ensure the Catchment Action Plan (CAP) is the "communities CAP", letter attached.

 

Part of the process is the establishment of a CAP Stakeholder Reference Group and have sought a local government staff representative from each of the three Roc's across the Northern Rivers CMA area.

 

The CMA have acknowledged Council's concerns with the initial process with the development of the Catchment Blueprint and have indicated that propose to structure the review process in an attempt to address these concerns as the extract from the letter outlines below.

 

It would be beneficial to structure an appropriate program with Council or interest groups to address any outstanding issues as part of this discussion paper process and I seek Council's comments in relation to this proposal.

 

It is therefore important that the issues that Council has are identified and relayed to the NRCMA to ensure that they address the issues and the appropriate interest groups are engaged in the process.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental impacts associated with this report

 

Social

 

There are no social impacts associated with this report

 

Economic

 

There are no economic impacts associated with this report

 

Risk

 

There are no risks associated with this report

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

No impact

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No impact

 

Attachments:

1View

12949/2011 - Information regarding the Review and Refinement of the Northern Rivers Catchment Action Plan

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Review and Refinement of the Northern Rivers Catchment Action Plan

 




Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.11? SF46??????????????? 020611???????? Membership? - Cemeteries and Crematoria Association

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning ????????

 

Summary:

 

When considering the 2010/11 budget Council removed the allocation to be become a member of the Cemeteries and Crematoria Association of NSW requesting a report be prepared for consideration in May 2011.

 

As the draft 2011/12 budget was very tough no allocation was made for membership and as such a note was added to the outstanding reports item in the business paper stating "No further action. No benefit identified for the membership".

 

Council however, requested that a report be prepared as previously requested.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council not pursue membership of the Cemeteries and Crematoria Association of NSW.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council could choose to become a member which would have a minor budget impact as no funds have been allocated.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Cemeteries and Crematoria Association was established in 1965, as a trade association working on behalf of, and speaking for, those industries in NSW, and continues to represent the interests of Cemeteries and Crematoria in the state.

 

Membership fees to the Association vary depending upon the number of burials and/or cremations per year. There are currently approximately 80 member organisations across NSW.

 

Nambucca Shire would sit in Category A for calculation of membership fees and the 2010/11 fee would have been $250 (base rate) plus $245 (Cat A) plus GST = $545.

 

Membership entitles access to the CCA website where they have a specific Member blog/forum section, access to the secretariat, network connections with other cemetery managers, undertakers etc and also access to industry standards and guidelines.

 

Whilst the information and services available through the CCA would be of some benefit, Nambucca Shire Council is only a Cemetery Manager controlling interments and reservations along with the placement of ashes and plaques in the columbarium walls. Nambucca Shire does not provide the grave digging service as this is managed by the respective undertakers.

 

The recent reports on Council's Cemeteries and the identified actions will improve Council's management and minimise risk and exposure. Therefore, the benefits to Council for the annual membership fee of $545 is not considered justified at this stage.

 

Should circumstances and directions change for Council, and Council becomes a full Cemetery Manager including grave digging, then Council may wish to revisit membership to the Cemeteries and Crematoria Association of NSW at that time.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Cemeteries and Crematoria Association

Kempsey Shire Council

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental impacts with this report.

 

Social

 

There are no social impacts with this report.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic impacts with this report.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nil impact as no funds have been allocated. If Membership is sought then there will be an initial budget impact and annual membership fees.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Funds would come from General Fund.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.1??? SF61??????????????? 020611???????? Professional Lifeguard Services Report for the Contract Period 2010/2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Paul Gallagher, Director Engineering Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

The 2010/2011 contract report from Australian Lifeguard Service has been received by Council for the patrol areas of Nambucca Heads, Scotts Head and South Valla Beach .? A copy of the report is attached for Council?s information.

 

Under the provisions of Council?s 2010/11 Management Plan, the report is to be submitted to Council by 31 March annually, this has not been possible as he report was not received by Council until the 12 May 2011 and will be reflected in the June Quarterly Performance review.

 

The report provides statistical information on each beach patrol area relating to the following functions:

 

??????????????? Beach usage and rescue statistics

??????????????? First aid and preventative actions

??????????????? Ordinance control; and

??????????????? Public relations

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council receive and note the season report for 2010/2011 by Australian Lifeguard Service.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Note the report.

 

Consider extending life guard service through other holiday periods of Spring and Easter Autumn school holidays.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Nambucca Shire Council uses the Australian Lifeguard Service to provide lifeguard services for Valla Beach, Nambucca Heads and Scotts Head beaches over the Christmas Holidays. Specifically this organisation patrols the beaches between 9.30 am and 3.30 pm during the following periods:

 

Valla Beach???????????????????? 18 December 2010 to 27 January 2011

Nambucca Heads??????????? 20 December 2010 to 27 January 2011

Scotts Head ?????????????????? 20 December 2010 to 27 January 2011

 

Nambucca Heads and Scotts Head Surf Life Saving Clubs also provide valuable volunteer hours in addition to the contracted services.

 

Australian Lifeguard Service are required to provide a contract report at the end of the season and a copy of the 2010/2011 document is attached.? The report provides statistical information on each beach patrol area relating to the following functions:

 

??????????????? Beach usage and rescue statistics

??????????????? First aid and preventative actions

??????????????? Ordinance control and

??????????????? Public relations

 

The unfavourable weather conditions experienced in the Nambucca Valley resulted in infrequent beach attendance during the December/January period with the attendance numbers at beaches being significantly lower when compared to the previous year:

 

2009/2010??? 30,977

2010/2011??? 23,931

 

The busiest beach was Scotts Head.

 

Scotts Head??????????????????????? 14,987

Valla Beach???????????????????????? ? 5,582

Nambucca Heads??????????????? ? 2,482

??????????????????????????????????????? ? 23,931

 

During the contracted service there were 20 significant rescues (defined as Lifeguards rendering assistance to swimmers who find themselves in a difficult situation, but not immanent danger).

 

The report concludes with the following recommendations:

 

1??????? That Council consider providing Lifeguard Services in the Easter School Holiday period and extending the hours to 9.00 am to 5.30 pm.

 

????????? This has been previously considered by Council at which time it was resolved to remain with the 5 weeks commencing just before Christmas to the end of January between the hours of 9.30 am to 3.30 pm.

 

2??????? That the contractual equipment requirements be reviewed in order to have an automated external defibrillator supplied at all patrolled beaches.

 

????????? The Director Engineering Services will liaise with Australian Lifeguard Service before the next season to ascertain the cost variation.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nil.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

No change to the environment.

 

Social

 

The service provides a public safety and education program as well as performing life saving and rescues.

 

Economic

 

The provision of safe beaches is important to holiday visitors.

 

Risk

 

The peak holiday period is December to January during the School holidays and life saving needs to be in place for that period as a minimum.

 

There is a risk of confusion when adjoining Local Government areas have different arrangements.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The cost for Lifeguard services is provided in the 2010/2011 budget and the draft 2011/2012 budget.? The annual costs for the service has been progressively increasing over the term of the contract (as per the conditions of Contract).

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Normal arrangements included in the budget.

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View

13065/2011 - Australian Lifeguard Service 2010/2011 Season Report

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Professional Lifeguard Services Report for the Contract Period 2010/2011

 



































Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 2 June 2011

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.2??? SF1310??????????? 020611???????? Nambucca Heads Sewerage Augmentation - Offer of Works In-Kind from NSW Water Solutions

 

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

 

Summary:

 

As part of the works to complete the augmentation of the Nambucca Heads Sewerage Treatment Plant Council requested and accepted a variation to increase the size of one of the sludge lagoons.

 

Council was of the opinion that the larger sludge lagoon could reasonably have been included in the original design and that the result of this omission was both an increased construction cost and the loss of subsidy for the variation work.? This total cost disadvantage to Council was estimated to be in the order of $100,000.

 

Council subsequently wrote to NSW Water Solutions seeking compensation for the $100,000. Since that time the General Manger has been in negotiation with North Coast Region of NSW Public Works and has received a formal offer for NSW Water Solutions to complete $50,000 of work in-kind as compensation.? A copy of the correspondence is attached for Council?s information.

 

In lieu of the works proposed by NSW Water Solutions it is recommended that the offer for in-kind work be undertaken as performance testing of both the Macksville and Scotts Head Sewage Treatment Plants as outlined within the discussion portion of this report.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council accept the offer of works in-kind by NSW Water Solutions to the amount of $50,000 excluding GST.

 

2??????? That Council specify that the works in-kind by NSW Water Solutions be undertaken as a performance review of both the Macksville and Scotts Head Sewerage Treatment Plants.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Not accept the offer of works in-kind and seek some other form of compensation.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

A report was presented at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 16 September 2010 recommending that Council accept a variation to enlarge one of the sludge lagoons under construction as part of the Nambucca Heads Sewerage Augmentation.

 

Changes to the bulk earthworks on site had meant that the space was available to enlarge the lagoon and it was considered that the only opportunity to complete the work would be as a variation to the current contract.? Any attempt to enlarge the lagoon in the future would be cost prohibitive.

 

Council also considered that it was not unreasonable for the enlarged lagoon to have been included in the original design and that there was a case for pursuing some of the additional cost from the designers ? NSW Water Solutions. Council incurred additional costs to extend the sludge lagoon as a result of both the premium price for works undertaken as a variation and the fact that variation works were not eligible for subsidy.? Council therefore resolved to approve the variation and to pursue the potential for recovering costs from the NSW Water Solutions.

 

The General Manager subsequently wrote to NSW Water Solutions outlining the case for compensation to be paid and detailing the amount of compensation that was considered appropriate.? The calculated amount was in the order 0f $100,000.? The General Manager has since been in negotiation with officers from the North Coast Region of NSW Public Works regarding this matter and a formal offer of compensation in the form of $50,000 work in-kind has been made to Council.

 

Many of the items proposed for the works in-kind are not considered to provide Council with a tangible benefit or real value for money.? Council has previously considered engaging Water Solutions to complete performance reviews of both the Macksville and Scotts Head Sewerage Treatment Plants and it is recommended that this work would be more suitable.

 

The objectives of the performance reviews include the following:

 

?????????????? To assess the current capacity and performance of the sewage treatment plant as a whole under peak sewage load (holiday loading);

?????????????? To assess the current capability and performance of critical process units of the STP, where possible;

?????????????? To establish the optimum/maximum hydraulic and biological capacity of the existing plant without major augmentation; and

?????????????? To monitor and establish the actual raw sewage characteristics and EP load under peak sewage load (biological and hydraulic holiday loading.

 

This will provide Council with a clear picture as to how these treatment plants are performing and provide an indication as to whether any upgrades are required and the likely timing of augmentation works to cater for population growth.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

?????????????? General Manger

?????????????? Director Engineering Services

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Social

 

The proposed works in-kind will provide no direct social benefit.

 

Environment

 

The proposed works in-kind will provide Council with useful information on the performance of two of its existing treatment and will provide an insight into the timing of future upgrade works to ensure that effluent discharges from these plant continue to meet environment standards.

 

 

Economic

 

The offer of works in-kind will partially offset the increased costs incurred by Council for enlarging the sludge lagoons at the Nambucca Heads STP.

 

Risk

 

There is no risk associated with accepting the offer for works in-kind.

 

 


FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The works in-kind will be works that Council would otherwise have completed at its own cost therefore there will be a saving for Council although it will not be self evident in the budget.

 

 

Source of funds and any variance to working funds

 

There is no requirement to fund the proposed works in-kind.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

13387/2011 - Proposal for Agreement for Work In-Kind by NSW Water Solutions

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 2 June 2011

Nambucca Heads Sewerage Augmentation - Offer of Works In-Kind from NSW Water Solutions

 


? ?