NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

 

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

 

1??????? APOLOGIES

2???????

3??????? DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

4??????? General Purpose Committee - 14 September 2011

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

6??????? ??

7???????

8??????? General Manager Report

8.1???? Budget Review and Financial Reports - 30 June 2011

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

9.1???? Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement 2011-2017

9.2???? Environmental Levy Projects 2012 - 2017 and Beyond

9.3???? Valla Urban Growth Area - Planning Proposal

9.4???? DA 2008/139/03 Pre Cast Concrete Plant Modification - Increased Output - Abigroup (Australian Precast Solutions)

10????? Director Engineering Services Report

10.1?? Water and Sewerage - Strategic Business Plans and Development Servicing Plans

10.2?? Working Trial of Asphalt Zipper ???

?????????

Time

Description

Where

OS/CC

Item No

Page

8.00 ? 8.30

Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement

CC

9.1

10

8.30 ? 8.45

Water & Sewerage Strategic Business Plans & Developer Servicing Plans

CC

10.1

124

8.45 ? 9.15

Budget Review & Financial Reports ? 30 June 2011

CC

8.1

4

9.15 ? 9.45

Environmental Levy for 2012/2017 and Beyond

CC

9.2

50

9.45 - 10.00

Morning Tea

 

 

 

10.00 - 10.45

Valla Urban Growth Area - Planning Proposal

(Consultants making presentation)

CC

9.3

59

10.45 ? 11.30

DA 2008/139/03 Pre Cast Concrete Plant Modification - Increased Output - Abigroup

Onsite

9.4

89

12.00 ? 12.45

Working Trial of Asphalt Zipper (Demonstration)

Onsite

10.2

128

1.00

Lunch

CC

 

 

 

 

 


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).

 

??????? ?


General Purpose Committee??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 19 October 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 8.1????? SF1603??????????? 191011???????? Budget Review and Financial Reports - 30 June 2011

 

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

 

Summary:

 

General Fund:??????????????? The original 2010/11 budget forecast a deficit net change in working capital of $63,100. Items revoted from 2009/10 amounted to $1,114,100 and internal loans due of $631,340, leaving an adjusted deficit of $1,682,340.

The estimated 30 June 2011 net change in working capital for the year 2010/11 is a surplus of $193,743, which changes to a deficit of $1,784,997 after net revotes to 2011/12 of $1,394,800 and internal loans due of $583,940. Thus, a decline in working capital of $39,558 and an improvement of $23,542 on the original budget.

 

Water Supplies:???????????? The original 2010/11 budget forecast a surplus net change in working capital of $1,000. Items revoted from 2009/10 amounted to $0, leaving a surplus of $1,000.

The estimated 30 June 2011 net change in working capital for the year 2010/11 is a deficit of $257,757, which changes to a deficit of $282,357 after net revotes to 2011/12 of $24,600. Thus, a decline in working capital of $282,357 and a decline of $283,357 on the original budget.

 

Sewerage Services:??????? The original 2010/11 budget forecast a deficit net change in working capital of $24,600. Items revoted from 2009/10 amounted to $25,000, leaving an adjusted deficit of $59,600.

The estimated 30 June 2011 net change in working capital for the year 2010/11 is a surplus of $176,264, which changes to a surplus of $138,264 after revotes to 2011/12 of $38,000. Thus, an improvement in working capital of $197,864 and a surplus of $162,864 on the original budget.

 

Council is required to make declarations under Section 413(2)(C) of the Local Government Act, Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial reporting. Council?s financial reports must include a statement in approved form as set out in Sect. 215? of the Local Government (General) Regulation as to its opinion on the general purpose special purpose financial reports. The declarations are required under the Local Government Act and Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting and therefore needed in order for an audit to commence.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That the budget review results to 30 June, 2011 be adopted subject to a final report with the Annual Statements.

 

2??????? That the list of revotes be approved and included as subvotes for 2011/12.

 

3??????? That the Mayor, one other Councillor, the General Manager and Responsible Accounting Officer be authorised to sign the Statement on the General Purpose Financial Reports by Councillors and Management made pursuant to Section 413(2)(C) of the Local Government Act.

 

4??????? That the Mayor, one other Councillor, the General Manager and Responsible Accounting Officer be authorised to sign the Statement on the Special Purpose Financial Reports by Councillors and Management made pursuant to the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting.

 

 


OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option to form another opinion on the Financial Reports bearing in mind that audit will need to be deferred until Council agrees to make a statement on the Financial Reports in the approved form.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

As with other budget review reports this financial year, 30 June reporting has been delayed due to implementation issues associated with the conversion of Council?s corporate software. ?Through conversion issues and as the presentation of the June Review differs slightly to the other budget reviews, considerable delays have occurred.? Working with the new system has required additional time to, reformat data appropriate for the June Budget Review, correct allocation errors, and reconciling projects, subsidies, reserves and working funds.? The conversion process along with staff changes has also caused longer than normal reporting of year end information from responsible officers. ?Also, the lack of available time to comprehend and to utilise training to better comprehend the new system and its capabilities has hindered the ability to complete end of year processes and tasks more efficiently. ?Correspondingly the September 2011 Budget Review which is required to be reported under the new Integrated & Reporting format could also be delayed.

 

Council?s auditors are booked for the week ending 28 October. ?The audited financial statements are expected to be presented to Council on the 17 November meeting.

 

 

30 JUNE BUDGET REVIEW

 

This Budget Review is submitted with revised operating results and summary of Current Liquid Equity as at the 30 June, 2011.

 

A summary of Current Liquid Equity is shown on page 1 of the circularised budget review document. ?A list of revotes and explanations commence page 2 of the Budget Review document and a review of the estimated results for 2010/11 is discussed below and explanations from responsible officers for items impacting the budget result by 5% and $10,000 are shown from pages 10 to 21. From page 22 actual totals and the variances for each budget review heading are shown.

 

Council should also note commentary in the report of 16 June 2011 supplied by Manager Civil Works regarding forecast revotes to 2011/12.

 

It should be noted that the results shown are preliminary and are subject to further end of year annual statement procedures and audit. ?Changes to the estimated position as a result of the completion of the Annual Statements will be reported as part of the presentation of the audited Financial Statements.

 

General Activities

 

Current Liquid Equity

 

Current Liquid Equity (CLE) represents Council?s ?working funds? account or Council?s short term uncommitted cash balance. ?The greater the level of CLE the more ability Council has to manage day to day and short term contingencies. ?At the 30 June after taking into account non cash operational items such as depreciation and employees leave liability the remaining surplus or deficit either increases or decreases CLE respectively. ?During a budget year CLE will fluctuate depending on blowouts or savings in expenditure, unplanned inclusions to the budget, and new, greater or less than estimated sources of income.

 

At the 30 June 2011, the current liquid equity position for General net of depreciation and employees leave liability provision is estimated as a surplus of $3,709,752. ?Allowing for net revotes of $1,394,800 and internal loans due of $583,940, the adjusted estimated position is $1,731,012 (Surplus).

 

General?s net current liquid equity position at the 30 June 2010, was a surplus of $1,770,590, therefore the estimated position has declined by $39,558.

 

Current Liquid Equity is healthy and estimated to be $400,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policies.

 

Budget Review Result

 

The 2010/11 General Activities Budget was adopted with a $63,100 deficit.

 

Regarding the refurbishment of Congarinni North Bridge, Council resolved in August 2010 to include concrete girders on spans four to eight which required additional funds of $199,700. ?This item along with less significant inclusions to the budget relating to an adjustment to the 2009/10 Workers Compensation Premium, consultancy costs for the Scotts Head master Plan and building alterations at NEOC outweighed an expected increase in the Financial Assistance Grant of $171,000. Thus the forecast deficit at the September 2010 Budget Review expanded to $214,000.

 

A slight increase in the deficit of $15,600 was experienced at the December 2010 Budget Review as expected unrestricted returns on investments of $66,000 fell short of meeting additional capital works, being Higginbotham Rd, Pioneer St North and a contribution to the Men?s Shed of $43,000.

 

Although it was estimated that council would receive and additional $350,000 in unrestricted investment returns, a property insurance mutual dividend of $47,000, grant funding for Anderson Park and additional revenue for on site sewerage applications, the estimated deficit blew out to $380,900 at the March 2011 Budget Review. ?The main cause came from $240,600 required for unfunded works from storm damage experienced in January. ?There was also an estimated loss in expected bulk tipping fees revenue of $130,000, net variation of $76,000 for road and bridges maintenance and rehabilitation works, and the additional Saturday servicing of street cleaning in Nambucca Heads.

 

This Budget Review reigns in the deficit estimated at March to $39,559. ?Although Council resolved in conjunction with the adoption of the 2011/10 Budget on the 30 June, to utilise anticipated savings in the current budget of $111,600 a turn around in fortune of $341,341 has been experienced.

 

The improvement to the March Budget Review is attributable throughout the budget and attributable to a number of factors. ?The major surplus items relate to the following:

 

?????????????? Net Plant Replacement - $246,000

?????????????? Roads & Bridges Loan Repayments - $107,000

?????????????? Parks & Reserves Maintenance - $86,000

?????????????? Administration & Engineering Employee costs - $73,000

?????????????? Street Lights Electricity - $63,000

?????????????? Other Administration - $53,000

?????????????? Diesel Fuel Rebate - $46,000.

 

There are a number of other items that offset the above. In particular $158,000 in investment revenue not apportioned to restricted investment returns at the March review. ?An adjustment of $90,000 and $41,000 to Current Liquid Equity was required for a Community Infrastructure Grant and Stormwater Levy funds respectively that were not restricted at 30 June 2010. ?There was also $118,000 required in addition to the estimate for Waste Kerb Side Collection of which $46,000 impacted on working funds the Other Waste activity.

 

 


Water Supplies

 

Current Liquid Equity

 

The current liquid equity position for Water Supplies, net of depreciation is estimated as a surplus of $1,421,180. Allowing for net revotes of $24,600, the adjusted estimated position remains at $1,396,580 (Surplus).

 

Water Supplies? net current liquid equity position at the 30 June 2010, was a surplus of $1,678,937, therefore the estimated position has declined by $282,357.

 

Current Liquid Equity levels remain strong at approximately $750,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policy.

 

Budget Review Result

 

Council adopted a $1,000 surplus net change in working capital in the original budget.? Council gained a subsidy for its Metering and Leakage Control Project which accounted for the improved operating surplus of $37,800 at the September 2010 Budget Review.? Additional unrestricted investment income was the contributing factor in the further improvement of the surplus ($73,400) at the December 2010 Budget Review.? The March 2011 Budget Review saw a number of urgent works required, particularly $75,000 for the emergency realignment works to a trunk main to avoid a falling road embankment. There were other major works associated with mains as well as additional funding resulting from an audit of RF installations on reservoirs, telemetry and OHS issues. ?These items resulted in the forecast result reverting to a deficit of $103,400.

 

This June 2011 Budget Review forecasts a further expansion of the deficit to $282,657.? Despite savings of $49,000 in loan repayments via the securing of a favourable interest rate and the later than anticipated draw down of loans required for the current stages of the Water Storage Project, a 9% reduction in estimated water consumption by consumers restricted water sales equating to a $200,000 loss in revenue. Also an additional $52,000 for mains maintenance impacted on the result.

 

 

Sewerage Services

 

Current Liquid Equity

 

The current liquid equity position for Sewerage Services, net of depreciation is estimated as a surplus of $929,104. ?Allowing for net revotes of $38,000, the adjusted estimated position is $891,104 (Surplus).

 

Sewerage?s net current liquid equity position at the 30 June 2010, was a surplus of $727,840, therefore the estimated position has improved by $163,264.

 

Current Liquid Equity levels remains satisfactory at approximately $300,000 above the minium level as per Council?s policy.

 

Budget Review Result

 

Council adopted a $24,600 surplus net change in working capital in the original budget. A slight increase of to the deficit of $2,000 was experienced in the September 2010 Budget Review. ?As with Water Supplies additional unrestricted interest earnings accounted for an improvement of $36,100 in the estimated result for the December 2010 Budget Review. ?A turn around in the result was also experienced by Sewerage Services in the March 2011 Budget Review. ?Although further unrestricted investment earnings of $41,500 was forecast at the March 2011 Budget Review, urgent works relating to a control system failure at Macksville Treatment Works of $50,000 and unplanned maintenance works at Macksville and Scotts Head Treatment Works offset these earnings with the forecast result being a deficit of $56,700.

 

This June ?10 Budget Review sees a substantial improvement in the result of $219,964. ?Savings in filtration plant maintenance of $80,000, plant purchases of $61,000 and net additional revenue of $48,000 in sewerage charges were the major contributing factors. ?To a lesser extent savings were experienced in insurance premiums, superannuation contributions, mains maintenance and other infrastructure works. ?The two major adverse items were an additional $80,000 for pump station maintenance and $75,000 in additional loan repayments as a result of the increase in the interest free loan principal to that originally estimated.

 

 

2010/2011 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

 

The audit is scheduled to occur next week and it is expected will be completed to allow the audited Statements to be provided to the Department before the 31 October 2011 and presented to the Public prior to the end of November 2011.

 

A further report of the results for 2010/2011 will be presented to Council prior to presentation to the public.

 

In accordance with the requirements of Section 413(2)(C) of the Local Government Act and the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting, Council is required to prepare statements in the approved form as to its opinion on the general purpose and special purpose financial reports.

 

The General Purpose Reports Statement by Councillors and Management declares:

 

1????????? That the Financial Reports to be submitted to the Auditor have been drawn up in accordance with:

 

?????????????? The Local Government Act 1993 (as amended) and the Regulations made thereunder,

?????????????? The Australian Accounting Standards and professional pronouncements,

?????????????? The Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting,

?????????????? The Local Government Asset Accounting Manual.

 

2????????? That the Financial Reports also:

 

????????? Present fairly the Council?s financial position and operating result for the year, and

????????? Accord with Council?s accounting and other records.

 

3??????? That we are not aware of any matters that would render the reports false or misleading in any way.

 

????????? The Statement must be made by resolution of Council and be signed by the Mayor, at least one other Councillor, the Responsible Accounting Officer and the General Manager.? The Statement has to be completed and attached to the relevant annual financial reports to the audit process can continue.

 

????????? The Special Purpose Reports Statement must also be signed by the Mayor, at least one other Councillor, the Responsible Accounting Officer and the General Manager.

 

The Statement declares:

 

1??????? That the Special Purpose Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with the Local ? Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial reporting and the:

 

?????????????? ?????? NSW Government Policy Statement ?Application of National Competition Policy to Local

?????????????????? Government?

?????????????? ?????? Department of Local Government guidelines ?Pricing & Costing for Council Businesses:? A

?????????????????? Guide to Competitive Neutrality?.

?????????????? ?????? The Department of Water and Energy Practice Management of Water Supply and Sewerage ???????? Guidelines.

 

2??????? These reports, to the best of our knowledge and belief:


 

?????????????? ?????? Present fairly the financial position and operating result for each of Council?s declared

?????????????????? Business Units for the year, and

?????????????? ?????? Accord with Council?s accounting and other records

 

3??????? That we are not aware of any matter that would render the reports false or misleading in any way.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

?????????????? Budget item responsible officers

?????????????? Local Government Act 1993

?????????????? Local Government (General) Regulation 2005

?????????????? Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Not applicable.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Refer to discussion.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


General Purpose Committee??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 19 October 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.1????? SF29??????????????? 191011???????? Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement 2011-2017

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Council would be well aware that its library services are delivered under a partnership and Service Agreement with Bellingen Shire and Clarence Valley (CVC) Councils, with the latter being the Executive Council.

 

The Agreement outlining delivery of services expires 1 November 2011 and Nambucca Shire Council is now in receipt of the Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement 2011-2017.

 

Over the past couple of years there have been numerous reports and much debate regarding library services, mostly focussed on the level of contribution to and the length of an agreement governing the Clarence Regional Library (CRL).

 

Council considered a draft agreement in February 2011 and ultimately resolved to accept the financial terms of the new Agreement (ie the rate peg plus 6% with a minimum of 8%) providing that the new Agreement expired 30 June 2013. The date brought the life of the Agreement into line with integrated planning and reporting which requires all Councils to review their strategic plans following an election ? in this case September 2012.

 

Council is advised that the Agreement sent for signature contains the 8% minimum level of financial contribution as agreed to by Council; but it expires 30 June 2017 not 2013 as Council had requested.

 

This report takes a closer look at the options for Council as per its resolutions on 17 February and 7 April 2011 and includes a hypothetical budget for a stand-alone library service.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council sign the new Agreement and undertake further investigation into how costs can be reduced via a different library model, ready for negotiation with new Councils following the 2012 election.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1.?????? Sign the new Agreement and accept its terms and conditions.

2.?????? Sign the new Agreement and give notice to terminate the arrangement at a future date, noting that twelve months notice in writing is required.

3.?????? Not sign the new Agreement and proceed to implement a different model of library service. This is not recommended given the time frames required.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

This report covers a number of aspects of library operations and therefore some background will assist the reader.

 

At its meeting on 17 February 2011 Council resolved:

 

That Council advise its Clarence Regional Library partner Councils that it will consider entering into a new Library Agreement which sets the contribution to the Clarence Regional Library at the Rate Peg plus 2%.? This would be the minimum with partner Councils having the opportunity to agree on a larger increase.

 

This followed a meeting of Mayors and General Managers from the 3 Councils where the general financial pressures on local government were discussed and where it was generally agreed that this would be an achievable goal in the current economic climate.

 

The Nambucca Shire Council delegates to the Library Committee, General Manager and Manager Community and Cultural Services have followed this up with other Committee members and Council General Managers and Mayors, however the outcome is that Bellingen and Clarence Valley Councils supported a greater level of contribution ie the rate peg plus 6% with a minimum of 8% (and have now signed the new Library Agreement).

 

At its 7 April 2011 meeting, Nambucca Shire Council then resolved to accept the higher contribution:

 

That Council accept the financial terms for a new agreement for the Clarence Regional Library as resolved by Clarence Valley Council on 15 March 2011 subject to the proposed new Agreement lapsing on 30 June 2013 (at the latest).

 

2013 was supported as it fitted with the Local Government Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework which requires a review of strategic plans following the 2012 local government election and was consistent with the first draft Agreement circulated by CVC.? This however was not acceptable to Bellingen or Clarence Valley Councils and they have agreed to conclude the Agreement in 2017 which will be following the 2016 local government elections and the subsequent review of strategic plans by the new Councils at that time.

 

In summary, Council has an existing Agreement which expires 1 November 2011 and a new Agreement which includes the higher financial contribution over a longer period of time than Council was prepared to commit to.

 

In theory, Council could just let the existing Agreement lapse, however that would result in Council having to operate a library service alone. ?Whilst it may be tempting to come to this conclusion, it is unlikely to be a viable option based on level of borrowings and the Nambucca?s share of the CRL book stock. (Borrowings in the Nambucca Shire are some 129,000 annually and the Nambucca?s share of the CRL current book stock is around 36,000.)? Notwithstanding those figures, setting up an independent library service by 1 November 2011 is not logistically possible given that Council would have to:

 

1.?????? Recruit and appoint staff to undertake the technical services currently provided by CRL HQ staff

2.?????? Purchase (and install) a new on-line cataloguing system as well as subscriptions, databases etc

3.?????? Develop and adopt library policies and fees/charges

4.?????? Set up a library website and internet access

5.?????? Negotiate a share of the CRL assets/liabilities.

 

Council will recall the Director Environment and Planning?s report of 17 November 2010 which addressed some of this in detail and from which Council concluded that it needed to stay with CRL. ?At the same time though, there was a view that it would be a worthwhile exercise to see if we could do things differently and more economically. ?This underpinned Council?s decisions in February and April 2011 to look into other library service models.

 

At its meeting on 17 February 2011 Council resolved:

 

That Council investigate the opportunity for a relationship with other local libraries including Coffs Harbour.

 

Then on 7 April, Council resolved:

 

That a Committee be formed comprising of the Mayor, Library Delegates and Manager Community and Cultural Services to investigate the possibility of forming a relationship with other local Council Libraries and that the Committee report back to Council by February 2012.

 

So far, there has been a meeting with library staff at Coffs Harbour City Council on 23 May 2011 to discuss a possible arrangement for sharing book stock.? Although the meeting was amicable, unfortunately it was unlikely to result in any new arrangements which would resolve Council?s concern over the requirements of new CRL Agreement, as Coffs Council staff could see no real benefit to them from sharing a collection. There may be some opportunity in the future however, as CHCC is undertaking a review of service delivery levels and the Mayor and General Manager made the comment at a meeting attended by Nambucca Shire Councillors that they may entertain a discussion on shared arrangements following the review.

 

In pursuing an arrangement with Coffs Harbour, Council is advised that both Coffs and Clarence library systems rate poorly against some of the State Benchmarks.? It might also be worth noting that Coffs Harbour?s population is much larger than Nambucca Shire?s and so the capacity to lower expenditure levels using economies of scale is significantly less.? The CRL Executive Officer presented a report to the Committee (6 May 2011) which shows comparisons with Coffs Harbour Council library services should Councillors be interested.

 

Bellingen Council has already signed the new Agreement with Clarence Regional Library and therefore it is unlikely (at least in the short to medium term) that they would enter into a discussion regarding a different way of delivering library services.? This was confirmed by Library Committee delegates from Bellingen and Clarence Valley Councils, when at its meeting on 5 August 2011 the Committee decided that even though an amendment to Section 12 of the Library Act in June 2011 now allows for more flexibility in the way library services can be managed/operated, they would not consider any changes to the current model. NSC delegates argued strongly in favour of taking the opportunity to ensure that we are using the best and most cost effective approach given the sticking point over the continued increases in contributions.

 

Kempsey and Port Macquarie Councils have a long-standing co-operative arrangement whereby they share a collection/Library Management System and maintain their autonomy.? Even if both Councils agreed to expand their geographical spread to include the Nambucca Shire ? and this appears unlikely, the Library Systems are different (Libero versus Spydus) and NSC would still be faced with tackling the key requirements of a stand-alone library eg qualified library staff.

 

More broadly, all libraries in NSW are linked under Reciprocal Borrowing arrangements:? Visitors and non-residents who are current members of their local public library (home) may join another library (host) as a reciprocal borrower.? This type of membership is free, however a current membership card from their home library is required, and staff are required to contact the home library to check that the membership is still valid.? Any items loaned by a reciprocal member needs to be returned to one of the host library?s branches.

 

In terms of actual finances, Council?s 2011-2012 Budget already includes a 10% increase and further, given that there was formal support by Council for an increase in library funding in keeping with the financial terms of the new Agreement, Council could sign and comply with the requirements of the new agreement to 30 June 2013.? This would allow further consideration of our options/alternatives for delivering library services in accordance with Council?s decisions over the past 12 months or so.

 

A Council decision, also from 7 April 2011 is pertinent here:

 

That 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.

 

Council?s General Manager?s letter of 13 April 2011 posed this question which was discussed at the CRL committee meeting held 6 May 2011.? Although nothing has been received which specifically answer the question, the 6 May minutes record the following:

 

?Discussion ensured (sic) over Nambucca Council?s question regarding the Strategic Plan. It was confirmed that the Strategic Plan would be reviewed with each new Committee and changes would be made as necessary. It is the aim of the Regional Library Service to achieve the state-wide performance averages regarding the collection before considering changes to the level of contribution from member Councils. Any changes to the Agreement will be a matter of recommendation by the Committee and adoption by the Executive Council. The Regional Library will always need a Strategic Plan to determine the direction of the service.?

 

In researching this report, it has become apparent that many councils are reviewing how they deliver library services.? For example, in the Southern Tablelands, it is likely that Yass Valley, Upper Lachlan and Goulburn Mulwaree Councils will move from a regional library arrangement to a co-operative fee for service model. Greater Taree and Great Lakes are partnering in various programs and have jointly received funding the establishment of a RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification) system.? In the Northern Rivers, there are changes underway following Lismore City Council?s decision regarding the Richmond Tweed Regional Library; it has disbanded the library committee and directly managing the library system for the other LGA?s.? It had previously been operating under a de-facto county council model which Lismore claimed was not legal.? A number of Councils are not happy with this arrangement and debate continues, particularly given the amendment to the Library Act which makes it possible for councils to pool their resources and jointly manage a library network.

 

Basically there are 2 types of library models

 

?Stand-alone? libraries are more common in metropolitan areas where LGAs have larger populations to support financing this model.? It provides independence for Councils to operate library services with flexibility to meet the needs of their community in accordance with their financial capacity.? On the other hand however, there are challenges associated with this approach including the reduced economies of scale and reduced collection choice.? The latter would be a particular challenge for NSC should it decide to go it alone.

 

Recent changes to the Library Act - Section 12(2), allow for more flexibility in service delivery so that a variety of arrangements may be made between local authorities for different elements of their library services.? Prior to the amendment, councils entering into such arrangements needed to adopt an ?executive model? that involved one Council accepting responsibility for management/provision of the library (or aspects of the service) on behalf of other council/s and the other council/s delegating their library management to the executive council.

 

Whilst Section 12 had generally operated well, it was considered more restrictive that the Local Government Act 1993 given that councils are able to operate other types of service under alternative arrangements in a more co-operative way under that Act.

 

Note: Councils wishing to operate regional library services (ie across more than one council area) using alternative arrangements to an executive model require the approval of the Minister for Arts with agreement from the Minister for Local Government to ensure consistency with the Library Act and State policies for local government.

 

This kind of co-operative arrangement would suit councils which are wishing to enter into an agreement to jointly undertake components of library services, but maintain their own autonomy.? The main areas of potential collaboration appear to be technical services and a library management system so that library members have access to a larger collection.? There is little or no investment in joint marketing, program delivery/development, regional branding, a regional physical headquarters and other expenses associated with a regional library.

 

CRL has been labelled a ?hybrid? model as CVC has delegated responsibility from Bellingen and Nambucca in some areas and at the same time the individual Councils provide/fund some aspects themselves.

 

Library Expenditure Levels for Different Models

 

The following table lists country libraries with a similar LGA population to that of Nambucca and will provide some indication of how costs vary.? However, service levels such as collections per capita, circulation, membership levels and access to technology should also be considered for true comparisons.

 


 

Library

Population

Model

Expenditure 2009/10

Expenditure per capita 2009/10

Griffith

25,703

Regional

$817,132

$31.79

Richmond Valley

22,934

Regional

$605,755

$26.41

Nambucca

19,186

Regional

$657,616

$34.28

Inverell

16,703

Stand alone

$907,0049

$54.30

Kiama

20,641

Stand alone

$1,087,557

$52.69

Lithgow

20,980

Stand alone

$1,387,124

$66.12

Parkes

15,502

Stand alone

$714.181

$47.45

Singleton

23,822

Stand alone

$1,598,500

$67.10

Data source: Table 1 Public Library Statistics 2009/10

 

 

OPTIONS FOR NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

The Status Quo

 

Should Nambucca Shire decide to sign the Agreement and proceed with the status quo, the following table shows the minimum level of contributions for the life of the Agreement.? This is based on the agreed 10% increase for 2011-2012 and then a level as per the Agreement ie the rate peg plus 6% with a minimum of 8% and assumes a static population.? The actual contribution required will be provided by CVC when the population figures are released by the ABS, generally March each year. (Clause 10 of the Agreement) an estimated contribution range will be provided by CVC to assist with Council?s budget preparations.? Of course, the Rate Peg is the other variable.

 

 

 

YEAR

 

PER CAPITA RATE

 

POPULATION

 

 

TOTAL

CONTRIBUTION

INCREASE

 

Annually on previous year

 

Accumulated increase above current $194,795

2010/2011

$9.23

19,186

$177,086.78

 

 

2011/2012

$10.15

19,186

$194,795.46

$17,708.68

 

2012/2013

$11.17

19,186

$214,275.00

$19,479.55

$37,188.22

2013/2014

$12.06

19,186

$231,417.00

$17,142.00

$54,330.22

2014/2015

$13.03

19,186

$249,930.36

$18,513.36

$72,843.58

2015/2016

$14.07

19,186

$269,924.79

$19,994.43

$92,838.01

2016/2017

$15.19

19,186

$291,518.78

$21,593.98

$114,432.00

 

 

 

 

 

$371,632.04

 

The financial implications of staying with CRL and signing the Agreement are clear.? However, at this point, Council may consider this a worthwhile investment due to the popularity and use of library services, the positive outcomes they consistently strive for, and the feasibility of implementing alternative arrangements.? Further, annual increases of between $17,000 and $22,000 for a stake in a library service the size of CRL may be considered a good investment.? The Director Environment and Planning?s report to Council 17 November 2010 provides a deeper analysis of the implications of staying with CRL and therefore striving to implement its Strategic Plan and also notes that the levels of increase proposed would well exceed that of any other Council service.

 


A Stand Alone Library Service

 

The NSW State Library sets standards under ?Living Learning Libraries? by which councils and libraries can assess their service delivery.? They are evidence-based indicators based on actual expenditure and service delivery levels for libraries across NSW and Baseline, Enhanced and Exemplary levels are used.? Whilst the standards are not mandatory or the determining factor in whether or not councils receive the NSW government?s Library Subsidy (NSC = $61,000), they are an indication to the State government of how well library services are meeting the community?s needs and whether Council is fulfilling its obligations.? They have been used in this report as an assessment tool to provide an indication to Council of how its library services would perform should it decide to separate from CRL and establish its own stand-alone service.

 

Note: the 2009 Australian Bureau of Statistics estimated resident population (19,186) has been used.

 

A hypothetical budget (attached) has also been prepared to allow Council to compare its current 2011-2012 Budget (Column 1), with expenditure by Clarence Valley Council on the Regional Library for 2010-2011 (Column 2), and then a scenario should Nambucca Shire Council choose to establish an independent library service (Column 3).

 

Note: Unfortunately the end of year results for the CRL for 2010-2011 were not available at the time of preparing this report, nor was a 2011-2012 budget available, however, they are due to be presented to the Library Committee at its 4 November 2011 meeting.

 

GENERAL LIBRARY STANDARDS

 

Policies

 

NSC libraries currently operate under the following CVC policies: Collection Development, Internet and Circulation Policy, Fines Amnesty and Fee Waiving, Fees and Charges.? If Nambucca was to establish its own service it would need to adopt its own policies for these areas and set fees/charges. NSC Human Resources Policies already apply to staff and volunteer matters.

 

Library Expenditure per Capita

 

The Baseline expenditure for Library expenditure (includes operating expenditure and library materials except capital items) is $44.74 per capita. Based on the current budget Nambucca Shire Council?s operating expenses will be $638,700 or $33.29 per capita in 2011-2012 and the hypothetical budget created to demonstrate the feasibility of a stand-alone library model has been based on the current total expenditure.

 

Borrowers (registered library members) as percentage of population

 

Library membership in the Shire in 2010-2011 was 8,879: Macksville 3,271 and Nambucca Heads 5,608.? This represents 46% of the population and exactly meets the State Library?s Baseline.

 

Library Opening Hours

 

Currently, the NSC libraries are open 74.5 hours per week:

Nambucca Heads: 9.30 am to 5.30 pm (Monday to Friday) and 9.30 am-12 noon Saturday = 42.5 hours.

Macksville: 9.30 am to 5.30 pm (Tuesday to Friday) = 32 hours.

This meets the benchmarks for populations <10,000 (30 hours per week) and for 10,000-20,000 (42 hours per week).

 

Visits to Library Per Capita

 

These are visits in person and therefore excludes ?virtual? visits (via the website). During 2010-2011 there were 31,460 visits to Macksville Library (605 per week) and 79,455 to Nambucca Heads (1,528). This is 18 visits per capita more than 3 times the State Library Baseline of 5.

 

The conclusion in regard to General Library Standards is that NSC would meet most of them should it go stand-alone, with the exception of Library Expenditure; however given that expenditure across the State varies from $298.39 for Lane Cove (the next nearest is Bourke at $113.59) to $22.62 for Coffs Harbour in 2009-2010 this is probably not crucial but it should be noted that low expenditure per capita means less capacity to deliver a reasonable standard library service.

 

STAFFING AND VOLUNTEERS

 

Staff Members

 

The SL Baseline is 1 EFT (Effective Full Time Equivalent) staff member per 3,000 people and therefore the minimum target would be 6.4 staff to cater for the Nambucca Shire?s population. Currently there are 5 staff employed part-time which equates to 3 EFT.? This does not include the Manager Community and Cultural Services.

 

Qualified Staff

 

?Qualified staff members? means paid members who are eligible for professional membership of the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA): for Librarians a Bachelor, Graduate Diploma or Masters qualifications, and for Library Technicians a Diploma in Library/Information Services are identified as the acceptable levels of qualification.

 

The SL minimum is 1 EFT for every 7,500 people or part thereof. The target would therefore be 2.5.

 

Currently, NSC does not employ any qualified library staff ie. their employment does not require library qualifications.? This is in part because traditionally, CVC has employed qualified librarians to provide that expertise on behalf of the three Councils. Should NSC decide to operate its own library services it would need to employ additional staff to undertake tasks currently done by CVC staff at CRL eg cataloguing, stock repair, purchasing, reporting, and technical services.? At least 1 qualified librarian would need to be employed.

 

Council is asked to specifically note that the current staff have a variety of respected and valuable qualifications and some are undertaking studies in Library and Information Services.? They are also highly experienced in library services.? The comments above relate to the requirement for qualifications as a condition of their employment.? That said, there may be an opportunity to assist current library staff to upgrade their qualifications to meet SL and ALIA standards.

 

The hypothetical budget includes 2 additional staff, one of which is a qualified librarian. Whilst this wouldn?t meet the Baseline benchmarks for number of staff and number of qualified staff, it could be manageable.

 

In regard to volunteers, there would be no impact on the budget or library operations as NSC already has all responsibility for its 27 library volunteers.? Whilst there are no benchmarks regarding volunteering, Nambucca Shire Council would continue to support the involvement of volunteers in Council libraries.? The Shire is fortunate to have a large retiree population who are highly skilled and very happy to bring their skills into the libraries.? Volunteers do not replace staff, however they do enhance the library experience for members by assisting with shelving, book repairs and maintenance, story telling etc. We would expect to continue this level of involvement by volunteers regardless of the future library service model.

 

The conclusion in regard to Staff Standards is that NSC would be obliged to increase the number of library staff and include at least one qualified librarian.? The alternative to this is much greater than not meeting a benchmark; library services could not function.

 

COLLECTION STANDARDS

 

These standards include benchmarks on:

 

1.?????? Expenditure on library materials per capita

2.?????? Items per capita

3.?????? Acquisitions per capita per annum

4.?????? Age of Collection

5.?????? Turnover of Stock (stock use)

6.?????? Circulation per Capita

 

Assessment of how NSC meets these standards is difficult as the management of the collection is shared however, they are useful to indicate how NSC would fare if it decided to operate an independent service.? Even a brief look at this area (which is after all the core) of library services provides a clear picture of the challenges NSC would face if it were to break away from CRL.

 

1.?????? Baseline for expenditure on library materials is $4.23 per capita. NSC would need to spend $81,156 to meet this.? The hypothetical budget only allows for $51,800 for book stock and periodicals after other income and expenditure is taken into account, possibly slightly more with accurate counting of purchases of local history items, toys, DVDs currently funded from elsewhere such as sundries.

 

2.?????? NSC would need to provide/hold 46,046 items in its collection to meet the Baseline of 2.4 items per capita. On 31 August 2011, a total of 37,063 catalogued items were held in Macksville and Nambucca Heads, slightly more than a 23% share (ie 36,230) based on the Shire?s population proportion of the three LGAs.? Also there are an estimated 2,700 uncatalogued items at Nambucca Heads and 3,070 at Macksville.

 

3.?????? Acquisitions per capita would need to be around 4,800 to reach the Baseline of 0.25 items per capita.? The hypothetical budget estimates this to be around 1,200 at an average cost of $38 per item. In 2009-2010 CRL acquired 12,883 (10,337 items purchased and 2,546 donated) and discarded (weeded) 13,424.? This rigorous weeding was an effort to closer meet the SL baseline benchmarks regarding age of the collection: 47% less than 5 years old and 73% less than 10 years old.? However it can mean that some books are taken off the shelf and placed in storage simply due to age.

 

4.?????? The 10% increases from partner Council in recent years has resulted in some improvements in the age of the CRL collection ? 40% purchased less than 5 years ago and 68% less than 10 years in 2009-2010.? One can only imagine the complicated and possibly protracted negotiations for a share of the CRL collection, however it could be assumed that it would be close to SL benchmarks.

 

5.?????? The SL Baseline for Turnover of Stock is 3.7. As a rough guide, assuming stock levels of 37,063 (Point 2 above) and circulation of 129,053 (Point 6 below), stock usage is close to target at 3.5.

 

6.?????? ?Circulation? is the total number of loans. In the 2010-2011 financial year, Nambucca Heads issued 83,149 items and Macksville 45,904.? A total of 129,053 or 6.7 items per capita.? The Baseline is 6.5.? It is unlikely that on its own Nambucca Shire could continue to operate at this level or even meet the baseline given that its share of the CRL collection would be around 36,000.

 

The key issue for NSC in regard to the library collection is obviously having access to the larger CRL collection, either by members requesting an item/s from another branch (ie placing a reserve) or via regular stock rotation between branches to provide for fresh in-library browsing material.? The following points may provide a more in depth understanding:

 

1.?????? Of the 129,053 items noted above, 11,017 (9%) were issued after being reserved.

2.?????? The number of reserves doesn?t necessarily indicate reliance on the CRL system. Reserves don?t always arrive from elsewhere in the CRL system as some popular titles which are housed at a branch are also reserved by members due to the item?s popularity eg newly-released fiction.

3.?????? Use of the on-line catalogue is being promoted whereby people reserve an item via a membership login thereby reducing staff time required for casual enquiries about the catalogue and to promote independent access.

4.?????? Rotations. Nothing published more than 8 years ago (ie before 2004) can be exchanged.

5.?????? Floating collection. Generally, items in the collection are not assigned to a home branch therefore an item stays at the branch where it is returned until it is rotated (except for non-fiction and reference) or requested elsewhere.

6.?????? Popular items are borrowed/issued many times in a year and often are being reserved. One item could be borrowed 17 times in a year if it was kept for the maximum borrowing period of 3 weeks.

7.?????? Subscriptions for magazines are paid for from pooled funds but local papers are paid for by Council.

8.?????? The collection also includes items not obvious when visiting the libraries eg. e-books, downloadable books, micro-film, micro-fiche and databases. Not all of these are counted in the collection.

 

The conclusion regarding Collection Standards is that to attempt a stand-alone service would result in a significant decrease in the quality of service.? This may not be evident in the short-term but is inevitable based on the potential to acquire new materials and offer the scope of the collection currently on offer.

 

LIBRARY BUILDINGS

 

Currently all costs associated with housing Nambucca Heads and Macksville library services are met by Nambucca Shire Council and would be under the new Library Agreement.? This includes all maintenance, upkeep, utilities, furniture and fittings, fire safety requirements, security and the like. It is expected that there would be little change in this area if NSC was to operate its own library services.

 

The CRL partner councils also contribute to the operational costs of a physical regional Headquarters. There would be some ramifications in this area for a stand-alone service as activities currently undertaken at HQ would be done locally and therefore NSC would need to allocate appropriate space.? There are no easy solutions to this, particularly for Nambucca Heads which could do with more space under current operating arrangements.? Library staff estimate that an additional floor space of between 30 and 50 square metres would be needed for activities which are currently done at HQ eg displays from book sellers, book processing (covering, repairs, cataloguing, inter-library loans), increased shelf space for the stack collection.

 

Council?s Manager Community and Cultural Services and Technical Officer (Assets) are assessing the basement room at Nambucca Heads Library to establish a cost to bring it up to standard as a usable work or storage space for library activities.? The room is some 36 square metres but has a number of issues which would need to be addressed including damp, lighting, ventilation and access.? The hypothetical library budget does not include this project, however. a small allocation has been included in the Council?s 2011-2012 budget for minor improvements.? Even if/when this area becomes usable, the physical access would necessitate alternative arrangements for some activities which are currently conducted at HQ eg. book sellers using Macksville Library on Mondays or using the Small Hall at the Entertainment Centre to display items for purchase.

 

PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

 

The SL guidelines are less detailed in this area, reflecting the way local libraries need to respond to their own community?s needs.? The benchmark is children?s story time more than once a week and 1 library program for adults/seniors/culturally diverse community per week.

 

Currently the level which suits our community are 2 story time sessions per month at Nambucca Heads and 1 at Macksville, a monthly book group at both libraries.? There are also a number of short term or annual programs eg a 6-week Gumbaynggirr language and culture course at Nambucca Heads during October/November 2011, Simultaneous Storytime, Library Lovers in February.

 

Programs and services are funded from both individual council budgets and pooled (CRL) funds. NSC pays its own line access for the internet and telephone bills including a share of that for HQ; but the actual internet service is paid from pooled funds.? Subscriptions for magazines are paid for by CRL but local newspapers are at a cost to Council. More and more, craft and display materials are now being provided by the Councils rather than CRL.

 

Recently this has been the focus of much debate at the CRL Committee level. For example, at its meeting on 5 August 2011, the Committee was presented with a report which proposed expenditure of approximately $30,000 on National Year of Reading. This included items such as proposed tear-drop flags advertising ?Clarence Regional Library? and its website.? The cost of these alone is $8,600 and even though they are to be funded from savings during 2010-2011 due to staff vacancies (some $113,000), NSC delegates argued that whilst promoting reading is important, the money could be better spent on the collection which is after all the key reason for the continued increases in contributions.? Further, it is suggested that advertising the CRL in the Nambucca Shire does little to promote improved literacy or visits to libraries as Nambucca Shire residents do not readily relate to ?Clarence Valley?.? The value of the CRL?s push for regional branding and its cost to the partner councils could do with some further analysis as to its cost/benefit; as could the push to standardise many areas of library operations.

 

Another key issue is the time taken by CRL staff to develop shared programs, report them to the Committee and roll them out whether or not they are actually wanted or feasible at the local level.? Also for National Year of Reading, the Committee has endorsed a photography competition called ?Caught Reading?, however its success will depend largely on promotion by staff at the local level ? at a Council?s expense.? The CRL is endeavouring to make this a success and is offering significant prizes (funded from pooled cost savings), however there is a strong argument in favour of those savings going towards the collection.

 

On the positive side however, having a network of 10 branches does have advantages for funding applications and sharing program development eg the CRL Local Studies Strategy which attracted a $72,000 State Library grant in 2010; and also the Library Development Grant of $90,000 for Junior Non-fiction in 2009.? Having said that though, NSC also applies for and has received its own funding for library programs eg History In Print (new microfilm reader, microfilm storage etc); Library Links (Area Assistance Scheme Grant). This will continue.

 

The conclusion is that if Nambucca Shire Council stays with CRL this is possibly one area which could be explored to make cost savings for example by councils being given the flexibility to offer their own range of programs and CRL staff not devoting time to developing standardised programs.? On the other hand, should Council go its own way, there would not be a dramatic impact on programs offered and Council would have complete autonomy to continue to offer a own range of programs or events or to enter into partnerships with other different councils.

 

LIBRARY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND IT

 

NSC currently meets all the Library Standards for Information Technology. Refer to the following table.

 

STATE LIBRARY STANDARDS

NSC STATUS

COMMENT

1 PC for public access to the Internet per 3,000 residents or part thereof.

NSC benchmark = 7 PCs

 

 

10

State Library provided a grant of 6 new PCs in 2009. The NEC Broadband for Seniors program provided 2 PCs for a Seniors Internet Kiosk at Nambucca Heads in 2010 ? also available general public internet access.

Libraries serving populations of less than 20,000, at least 5 PCs with Internet access.

 

10

6 at Nambucca Heads

4 at Macksville

Additional public access PCs provided with current software, printing facilities, scanners and associated equipment

Yes

One PC at each library is connected to a flat-bed scanner. All PCs have access to a central printer/scanner/photocopier.

Public and staff PCs less than 3 years old

Yes

The oldest machine was purchased in 2008. Council?s annual budget provides for replacement of 1 PC at each library annually.

Application software less than 3 years old

Yes

 

At least one printer accessible from each public workstation

Yes

Each library has 1 Lanier MP 1600 ? a combined copier/scanner/printer.

Wireless Internet provision and power outlets so that patrons can use their own personal computers in the library

Yes

Service is provided via the CRL internet services.

 

The current Library Agreement requires that Councils provide ?All IT hardware, software and services relating to all computers based in branch libraries other than the provision of an on-line catalogue.? This clause is also included in the new Agreement. Therefore the major change under a stand-alone arrangement would be to establish and manage the on-line catalogue, provide internet services and subscriptions to e-resources.

 

A recent quote from Civica Pty Limited for a Spydus managed service for Nambucca Shire?s two libraries (same as currently provided by CRL) comes in at $28,000 per year on a 5-year contract (total $140,000), subject to adjustment from 1 October 2011. Note This recent quote differs significantly from what the CRL provided the Director Environment and Planning that was reported to Council in 2010 ie an estimate of $200,000 to establish a separate Library Management System.

 

In addition, there are a range of IT services and issues to be addressed:

 

Internet Connectivity:

Up to 24M/1M Business Grade ADSL2 Service at $231 including GST per library per month. NSW.net provide a 50% subsidy per library. This link is used for access to the hosted Spydus Library Management System, staff and public internet access and the wireless management system (wireless hotspot).

 

Connectivity Equipment:

1.?????? D-Link Modem - $129 (once off cost) - fully funded by NSW.net

2.?????? SonicWALL NSA2400 firewall appliance - $3,060 (once off cost) - fully funded by NSW.net.

3.?????? SonicWall Global Management System Licensing (monitoring), a web-based application that can configure and manage Internet security appliances from a central location - $720 (once off cost) - fully funded by NSW.net

4.?????? HiTec Support for Hardware Maintenance (SonicWALL and D-Link Modem) - $1,450 per annum per library - fully funded by Library after the 12 month warranty expires.

 

Wireless Management System:

1.?????? Wireless Access Point = $490 per library (once off cost) - fully funded by NSW.net.

2.?????? Hotspot Controller = $150 per library (once off cost) - fully funded by NSW.net.

 

Technical Support:

2nd Level Technical Phone Support through Hitech Support - free of charge to NSW.net connectivity clients.

 

Should Nambucca Shire libraries separate from Clarence Regional Library, NSW.net would continue to fund the above.

 

In terms of eResources, library members have access to 16 databases. The NSW.net Statewide online databases would continue to be available free of charge however the 6 databases currently available to Nambucca Shire Library members via the CRL would cost around $9,000, indicative costs follow:

 

1.?? Computer Learning Online - $695

2.?? Oxford Music Online - $1326

3.?? Encyclopaedia Britannica - $1362

4.?? Tumblebooks - $1000 (approx)

5.?? Oxford Art Online - $1133

6.?? Clipper DL eAudio collection - $3750

 

These services are currently available via a designated Clarence Regional Library website - www.crl.nsw.gov.au. The current Council website would require a significant expansion to accommodate library related services information and the inclusion of online digital collections and JavaScript based search box widgets. Also a Library website is more than a catalogue, it will also include information on new books, book reviews and the like. The library would require access to the Council website content management system and a library staff member trained in its use.

 

In summary, for NSC to offer a stand-alone service, there would need to be an increased involvement by Council?s IT staff to support these services (even though a number can be externally contracted) and a significant expansion to Council?s website.

 

A co-operative

 

A detailed analysis of the feasibility of this approach could only be undertaken with some possible scenarios eg Coffs Harbour considering sharing a collection; or CRL changing some of the ways it operates. Changes to the NSW Library Act (noted elsewhere in this report) allow for more flexible arrangements between councils and presents an opportunity to assess how library services are delivered, regardless of any Council decision as a result of this report.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Director Environment and Planning

Manager Finance

Library Officers

IT staff

Clarence Regional Library

State Library officers

 

Ms Leanne Perry of the State Library advises:

 

??the State Library advises it would be logistically impossible to organise withdrawal and set up as a standalone in under a 12 month period. There are a number of considerations Nambucca would need to think about if they were to withdraw from CRL:

??????? Nambucca is currently reliant on Clarence Regional Library for their library system, this means that within that library system there a membership data, collections records and the public catalogue. To either change library systems or extract library membership records from within one library's system and move them to another takes a significant amount of time and can be a complex procedure. Library members would also require reasonable notification of changes to membership rights and borrowing privileges across the region and new cards would need to be issued to all Nambucca members. If an alternative library system vendor was selected = to provide the system for Nambucca, it is likely that all existing members would need to be re registered within that system.

??????? Nambucca is also currently reliant on CRL for the procurement and cataloguing of library collections. The process for segmenting and allocating the proportion of the collection across the different library services can be complex. Nambucca Shire Libraries would also need to develop clear policies and procedures around future collection development, procurement and cataloguing.

??????? Collection management and library system management require significant resources and Nambucca would need to consider current staffing levels and the capacity of staff to undertake additional work in this area as well as the mix of skills.

??????? NSW.net database remote access for the public is based on membership card barcode. Setting up new access for your patrons would need you to have a library system and website already established. Potentially Nambucca residents would lose access to this service while the set up is occurring.?

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There no are environmental sustainability issues.

 

Social

 

The positive social outcomes which emanate from library services are far reaching ? for people from all sectors of the community, all ages and all literacy and education levels. Libraries have a well-established social standing in the community as a welcoming community meeting place where people feel safe and relaxed. The top five reported* outcomes from using the library include: enhanced quality of life, enhances enjoyment from hobbies, ability to obtain information not available elsewhere, facilitation of lifelong learning, and support for children?s education.

 

Economic

 

Three measures need to be considered ? economic value, economic benefit and economic activity. An actual assessment of these can be found in ?Enriching Communities: the Value of Public Libraries in NSW? Library Council of NSW 2008*. In summary, for every dollar expended on public libraries, $2.82 of real economic activity and $4.24 of economic benefit was generated.

 

Risk

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

As Council has agreed to support the increase included in the Library Agreement (the rate peg plus 6% with a minimum of 8%) an additional $15,000 (minimum) will need to be found from general funds in its 2012-2013 budget. This would take the Council?s allocation to Clarence Regional Library to around $150,000, plus the subsidy from the State government (currently $61,000) which it passes straight on to the CRL.

 

In terms of potential sources of income for library services, these are limited. Libraries currently receive funding from the following sources:

 

?????? Direct contribution by Council

?????? NSW State Government ? per capita, local priority and library development grants

?????? One-off external grants eg for projects such as the Local History In Print project

?????? Fund raising and donations

?????? Fee for Service where permitted by the Library Act

 

Charging a fee for library services is largely governed by the Library Act 1939 and the receipt of the State Government subsidy for library services is subject to the provision of the following services at no charge*:

 

?????? Library membership for ratepayers and/or Shire residents;

?????? Access to any library materials and any information forming part of the information service (eg internet access) for use on library premises;

?????? Loan of any items classified as being of literary, informative or educational value; or being fiction;

?????? Delivery to a member of the library, any library material or information (entitled to be borrowed free of charge) that they are unable to access by attending in person due to ill health or disability; and

?????? Access to basic reference services including assistance in locating information and sources of information.

 

* A ?charge? in this context means any charge whether directly or indirectly to a person; but excludes a prescribed fee for late returns or for loss or damage to library material. It appears that most of the obvious areas to charge a fee for service are already subject to a cost.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required at this point as the 2011-2012 budget already includes a 10% per capita increase in contribution to Clarence Regional Library.

 

Attachments:

1View

18481/2011 - Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement 2011 - 2017

 

2View

?- Circularised Document - NSC Library Budget 2011-2012 - estimates for alternative model - A3 version (Trim reference 27653/2011)

 

??


General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement 2011-2017

 



























General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement 2011-2017

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 2

 

 

 

Clarence Regional Library Service Agreement 2011-2017

 

 

 

Circularised Document - NSC Library Budget 2011-2012 - estimates for alternative model - A3 version (Trim reference 27653/2011)

 

??Pages

 


General Purpose Committee??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 19 October 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.2????? SF688????????????? 191011???????? Environmental Levy Projects 2012 - 2017 and beyond

 

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

 

Summary:

 

At the 6 October 2011 Ordinary Council meeting when Council was considering the report on the Macksville Saleyards, Council resolved as follows:

 

That a report come to Council on a revised program for an environmental levy for 2012/13 and beyond which includes using rural and rural residential components of the environmental levy to address environmental issues at the Saleyards so that it may advertised for public comment and be incorporated in Council?s application for a special rate variation.

 

Circularised is a colour copy identifying the breakup of the rating classification and income raised through the Environmental Levy for the current 2011/2012 year.

 

The rural rating classifications are Farmland (8.16% - $26,929.09); and Residential Rural (6.88% - $22,715.14).

 

The classification of Residential-Village/Estate is a mixture of small lot rural land, rural residential land and Villages. As Council is aware Town Planning zone are very different to rating classifications which makes it difficult to identify the exact income from "Agricultural or Rural" land and Rural Residential Land used for agricultural pursuits as opposed to residential living. In an attempt to identify a reasonable assessment of Rural and Rural Residential the following has been applied.

 

Of the 3,480ha of land in the shire zoned R5 Large Lot Residential (Rural residential zone under Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010), 1,378ha or 40% are lots less than 5ha in area, which are unlikely to be used primarily to produce stock for sale at the saleyards and likely used as residential use.

 

On this assumption 60% or $46,521.33 of the total $77,535.55 income from Residential-Village/Estate could be argued as coming from a rural ratepayer who may very well use the services of the saleyards. Therefore, the summation of the Farmland, Residential Rural and 60% Residential-Village/Estate classifications results in approximately $96,000 arising from rural ratepayers in the current 2011/2012 budget.

 

This figure has been used as the basis for this report and increased at approximately 3% for the 3 year period 2012-2015.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council endorse the break up used to identify the Rural and Rural Residential component of the Environmental Levy for the purposes of this report.

 

That Council endorse the draft 2012-2017 Environmental Levy Program for inclusion in the draft Integrated Planning and Reporting documents for exhibition purposes.

 

That at the conclusion of the exhibition process a further report be presented to Council on any submissions received and any amendments proposed for the draft 2012-2017 Environmental Levy program.

 

That the draft 2012-2017 Environmental Levy include all worthy, but unfunded programs or projects to demonstrate to the community, IPART and the Department of Local Government that the number, range and variety of projects put forward by the community and Council far exceed the income generated further justifying why the Environmental Levy needs to remain as a continuing Levy.

 

That Council utilise the currently unallocated $28,880 identified in the June 2011 budget review from the current Environmental Levy to progress with an investigation and design for an acceptable effluent/stormwater management system for the Macksville Saleyards

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The opportunity exists for Council to change the makeup of the funded and unfunded projects in the draft Environmental Levy prior to endorsing for inclusion in the IPR for exhibition

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At the 6 October 2011 Ordinary Meeting considerable discussion took place on possibilities to fund the required works for upgrading the Macksville Saleyards.

 

One of the resolutions sought a report on the possibilities of applying a proportion of the Environmental Levy for the Environmental Upgrades required at the saleyards.

 

Under Council?s rating structure there are several categories which identify Rural classifications. Rural Residential classification includes a range of properties that include Villages, small lot Rural Residential lots and rural lots less then 40ha but greater than 5ha.

 

For the preparation of this report it has been assumed that the total income generated from the Farmland and Residential Rural categories along with 60% of the Residential-Village/Estate categories, as being capable of production of stock to arrive at an income figure for consideration. That figure being a total of $96,000 in the current 2011/2012 budget.

 

The draft 2012/2013 Environmental Levy program commences with an allocation of $98,000 increasing by $3,000 or approximately 3% each year for the subsequent 2 years (2013-2015) resulting in a total of $303,000 being allocated over 3 years.

 

The draft Environmental Levy program has maintained projects which are considered ongoing with implementation of several of the studies and management plans that Council has endorsed and are being implemented. Many of the projects that remain unfunded came from the last public invitation for projects to be considered in the 2010 ? 2012 (current) endorsed program, from subsequent submissions made or through the recent Community Engagement forums. As noted the value of these unfunded projects are considerable and remain identified as unfunded.

 

When Council called for public submissions (September 2009) of projects the following criteria was used in the advertisement:

 

Council will apply simple qualifying criteria to each proposed Projects/Programs that can demonstrate clear environmental and or sustainable outcomes, maximisation of environmental levy contributions, partnerships, matching grant funding opportunities and the continuation of previous/current projects.

 

It is considered that the identified projects in the draft 2012-2017 Environmental Levy program do meet the above criteria. The draft funded programs have been placed in a priority order whilst, the unfunded programs have not. Should Council determine that the funded projects are to be altered or changed with their deletion of swapping with one of the unfunded projects, then Council will need to identify and resolve how it wishes to proceed with the program for exhibition.

 

It being stressed that the whole program, funded and unfunded should be exhibited and retained with any subsequent inclusions in the Integrated Planning and Reporting document as some programs or projects may need to be brought up into the funded areas should Council be successful with external funding which brings about a saving.

 

The inclusion of the part time Natural Resource Officer is to assist the Director with project managing the many projects that are funded under the levy. It is proposed that 50% of the funding for the position come from the levy whilst the remaining 50% come from an overhead allocation to the external grants and funds.

 

As Council will see in the June Budget Review a total of $368,000 from the Environmental Levy is being revoted due to a number of projects not progressing due to workloads of the Director or as a result of limited resources to progress other aspects which have held up progress.

 

In the budget review to 30 June 2011 an amount of $28,880 has been identified through a number of minor savings in different projects and also the minor "rate creep" realised from what was originally budgeted and to that actually levied.

 

It is considered that these funds could be redirected to assist Council in the investigation and design for an environmentally acceptable and achievable effluent/stormwater management system for the Macksville Saleyards. As such a recommendation to this effect is included in this report.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The previous criteria applied for projects to be funded under the Environmental levy provide opportunity for improved environmental management and outcomes.

 

Social

 

Considerable community benefit has been achieved with many of the projects under the Levy include water quality monitoring, riverbank restoration, flood studies and the improvements at the Ferry Street boat ramp and foreshore.

 

Economic

 

The use of Environmental Levy to gain matching funding has provided Council and the community with increased outcomes that would not have been achieved except for the levy.

 

Risk

 

The greatest risk to Council and the community is the non continuation of the Environmental levy which will result in a number of projects and programs coming to an end or reliance of general fund to match funding.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The Environmental Levy has been used as stand alone income stream to assist Council with implementing a range of programs and projects as well as gaining much needed external grant funds. Some projects however are ongoing but would only continue if funding is allocated should the Levy cease.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No variation sought or required with this report.

 

Attachments:

1View

28372/2011 - Revised 2012-2014 Environmental Levy Programs

 

2View

?- CIRCULARISED DOCUMENTS - (COUNCILLORS ONLY) Environmental Levy Income Graph

 

??


General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

Environmental Levy Projects 2012 - 2017 and beyond

 

2012/2013 ? Draft Environmental Levy Programs

DESCRIPTION

BUDGET

Continuing Programs/Projects

Est $338,000 Total

Environmental Compliance Officer (Salaries and on costs)

 

$78,000

Implementation of Environmental Improvements at Macksville Showground

$98,000*

Indian Minor Birds Eradication Program

 

$2,000*

Implementation of Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan - including continuation of River bank restoration work

$30,000*

Implementation of works from the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan

$40,000*

Water Monitoring and River Health Program ? Nambucca River and Estuaries (Includes Oyster water quality sampling)

$25,000*

Environmental Weed Eradication

 

$15,000

Implementation of Environmental Management/Improvements identified in the Nambucca River Foreshore Master Plan

$30,000*

Natural Resource Officer Part Time 3 days/week (project management)

(plus $20,000 recovered from grant funds overhead allocation)

$20,000*

 

$338,000

Unfunded Optional New Programs/Projects

 

River Street Macksville Foreshore Improvements Stage 2

 

$50,000

Rebates for Fencing off Riparian Areas (Policy to be developed)

 

$10,000*

Implementation of actions from Deep Creek Flood Study

 

$50,000*

Easement/Property Acquisition Seaview St Catchment (Could also be funded from a Stormwater Catchment Levy)

$50,000*

Stabilisation of land identified as Unstable Land in Council's Slope Stability Hazard Identification and Land Slip Reports

$50,000*

Education and Ecotourism ? Sustainability Program

 

$20,000*

Audit and Implement sustainability for Council controlled buildings Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Ground Truthing and Review of Vegetation Mapping

 

$50,000*

Community Grants

 

$10,000

Bellwood Causeway Duplication

 

$87,500*

Beach Watch Program Nambucca & Scotts Head

 

$15,000*

Water Reclamation Projects

 

$50,000*

Wetland Retention system for Scotts Head ? Aiden Street Reserve

 

$50,000*

Shire Wide Koala Plan of Management Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Development of the Stuart Island "Harbour"

 

$100,000*

Shire wide Biodiversity Management Plan

$50,000

 

 

$742,500

* Possible $ for $ funding


2013/2014 ? Draft Environmental Levy Programs

DESCRIPTION

BUDGET

Continuing Programs/Projects

Est $349,000 Total

Environmental Compliance Officer (Salaries and on costs)

 

$82,000

Implementation of Environmental Improvements at Macksville Showground

$101,000*

Indian Minor Birds Eradication Program

 

$2,000*

Implementation of Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan - including continuation of River bank restoration work

$25,000*

Implementation of works from the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan

$50,000*

Water Monitoring and River Health Program ? Nambucca River and Estuaries (Includes Oyster water quality sampling)

$25,000*

Implementation of Environmental Management/Improvements identified in the Nambucca River Foreshore Master Plan

$25,000*

Rebates for Fencing off Riparian Areas (Policy to be developed)

 

$14,000*

Environmental Weed Eradication

 

$5,000*

Natural Resource Officer Part Time 3 days/week (project management)

(plus $20,000 recovered from grant funds overhead allocation)

$20,000*

 

$349,000

Unfunded Optional New Programs/Projects

 

River Street Macksville Foreshore Improvements Stage 2

 

$50,000

Education and Ecotourism ? Sustainability Program

 

$10,000*

Implementation of actions from Deep Creek Flood Study

 

$50,000*

Easement/Property Acquisition Seaview St Catchment (Could also be funded from a Stormwater Catchment Levy)

$50,000*

Stabilisation of land identified as Unstable Land in Council's Slope Stability Hazard Identification and Land Slip Reports

$50,000*

Education and Ecotourism ? Sustainability Program

 

$20,000*

Audit and Implement sustainability for Council controlled buildings Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Ground Truthing and Review of Vegetation Mapping

 

$50,000

Community Grants

 

$10,000

Bellwood Causeway Duplication

 

$87,500*

Beach Watch Program Nambucca & Scotts Head

 

$15,000*

Water Reclamation Projects

 

$50,000*

Wetland Retention system for Scotts Head ? Aiden Street Reserve

 

$50,000*

Shire Wide Koala Plan of Management Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Development of the Stuart Island "Harbour"

 

$100,000*

Shire wide Biodiversity Management Plan

$50,000

 

 

$742,500

* Possible $ for $ funding


2014/2015 ? Draft Environmental Levy Programs

DESCRIPTION

BUDGET

Continuing Programs/Projects

Est $361,000 Total

Environmental Compliance Officer (Salaries and on costs)

 

$86,000

Implementation of Environmental Improvements at Macksville Showground

$104,000*

Indian Minor Birds Eradication Program

 

$3,000*

Implementation of Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan - including continuation of River bank restoration work

$20,000*

Implementation of works from the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan

$26,000*

Water Monitoring and River Health Program ? Nambucca River and Estuaries (Includes Oyster water quality sampling)

$20,000*

Implementation of actions from Deep Creek Flood Study

 

$10,000*

Implementation of Environmental Management/Improvements identified in the Nambucca River Foreshore Master Plan

$20,000*

Stabilisation of land identified as Unstable Land in Council's Slope Stability Hazard Identification and Land Slip Reports

$40,000*

Rebates for Fencing off Riparian Areas (Policy to be developed)

 

$12,000*

Natural Resource Officer Part Time 3 days/week (project management)

(plus $20,000 recovered from grant funds overhead allocation)

$20,000*

 

$361,000

Unfunded Optional New Programs/Projects

 

River Street Macksville Foreshore Improvements Stage 2

 

$50,000

Education and Ecotourism ? Sustainability Program

 

$10,000

Easement/Property Acquisition Seaview St Catchment (Could also be funded from a Stormwater Catchment Levy)

$50,000*

Education and Ecotourism ? Sustainability Program

 

$20,000*

Audit and Implement sustainability for Council controlled buildings Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Ground Truthing and Review of Vegetation Mapping

 

$50,000

Community Grants

 

$10,000

Bellwood Causeway Duplication

 

$87,500*

Beach Watch Program Nambucca & Scotts Head

 

$15,000*

Water Reclamation Projects

 

$50,000*

Wetland Retention system for Scotts Head ? Aiden Street Reserve

 

$50,000*

Shire Wide Koala Plan of Management Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Development of the Stuart Island "Harbour"

 

$100,000*

Shire wide Biodiversity Management Plan

$50,000

 

 

$642,500

* Possible $ for $ funding


2015/2016 ? Draft Environmental Levy Programs

DESCRIPTION

BUDGET

Continuing Programs/Projects

Est $375,000 Total

Environmental Compliance Officer (Salaries and on costs)

 

$89,000

Indian Minor Birds Eradication Program

 

$3,000*

Implementation of Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan - including continuation of River bank restoration work

$25,000*

Implementation of works from the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan

$46,000*

Water Monitoring and River Health Program ? Nambucca River and Estuaries (Includes Oyster water quality sampling)

$25,000*

Implementation of actions from Deep Creek Flood Study

 

$20,000*

Stabilisation of land identified as Unstable Land in Council's Slope Stability Hazard Identification and Land Slip Reports

$80,000*

Implementation of Environmental Management/Improvements identified in the Nambucca River Foreshore Master Plan

$20,000*

Rebates for Fencing off Riparian Areas (Policy to be developed)

 

$15,000*

Natural Resource Officer Part Time 3 days/week (project management)

(plus $22,000 recovered from grant funds overhead allocation)

$22,000*

Ground Truthing and Review of Vegetation Mapping

 

$30,000*

 

$375,000

Unfunded Optional New Programs/Projects

 

River Street Macksville Foreshore Improvements Stage 2

 

$50,000

Easement/Property Acquisition Seaview St Catchment (Could also be funded from a Stormwater Catchment Levy)

$50,000*

Audit and Implement sustainability for Council controlled buildings Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Community Grants

 

$10,000

Bellwood Causeway Duplication

 

$90,000*

Beach Watch Program Nambucca & Scotts Head

 

$15,000*

Water Reclamation Projects

 

$50,000*

Wetland Retention system for Scotts Head ? Aiden Street Reserve

 

$50,000*

Shire Wide Koala Plan of Management Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Development of the Stuart Island "Harbour"

 

$100,000*

Shire wide Biodiversity Management Plan

$50,000

 

 

$565,000

* Possible $ for $ funding


2016/2017 ? Draft Environmental Levy Programs

DESCRIPTION

BUDGET

Continuing Programs/Projects

Est $390,000 Total

Environmental Compliance Officer (Salaries and on costs)

 

$94,000

Indian Minor Birds Eradication Program

 

$2,000*

Implementation of Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan - including continuation of River bank restoration work

$20,000*

Implementation of works from the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan

$35,000*

Stabilisation of land identified as Unstable Land in Council's Slope Stability Hazard Identification and Land Slip Reports

$50,000*

Water Monitoring and River Health Program ? Nambucca River and Estuaries (Includes Oyster water quality sampling)

$20,000*

Implementation of Environmental Management/Improvements identified in the Nambucca River Foreshore Master Plan

$20,000*

Rebates for Fencing off Riparian Areas (Policy to be developed)

 

$20,000*

Environmental Weed Eradication

 

$15,000*

Natural Resource Officer Part Time 3 days/week (project management)

(plus $22,000 recovered from grant funds overhead allocation)

$22,000*

Bellwood Causeway Duplication

 

$92,000

 

$390,000

Unfunded Optional New Programs/Projects

 

River Street Macksville Foreshore Improvements Stage 2

 

$50,000

Easement/Property Acquisition Seaview St Catchment (Could also be funded from a Stormwater Catchment Levy)

$50,000*

Audit and Implement sustainability for Council controlled buildings Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Community Grants

 

$10,000

Beach Watch Program Nambucca & Scotts Head

 

$15,000*

Water Reclamation Projects

 

$50,000*

Wetland Retention system for Scotts Head ? Aiden Street Reserve

 

$50,000*

Shire Wide Koala Plan of Management Stage 1

 

$50,000*

Development of the Stuart Island "Harbour"

 

$100,000*

Shire wide Biodiversity Management Plan

$50,000

 

 

$475,000

* Possible $ for $ funding


General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

Environmental Levy Projects 2012 - 2017 and beyond

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 2

 

 

 

Environmental Levy Projects 2012 - 2017 and beyond

 

 

 

CIRCULARISED DOCUMENTS - (COUNCILLORS ONLY) Environmental Levy Income Graph

 

??Pages

 


General Purpose Committee??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 19 October 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.3????? SF1082??????????? 191011???????? Valla Urban Growth Area - Planning Proposal

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning; Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner ????????

 

Summary:

 

This report was presented to Council at its 14 September 2011 General Purpose Committee meeting when Council resolved to defer the matter until the next General Purpose Committee meeting to enable Councillors to read through the circularised documents and reports.

 

The report is resubmitted for determination. Consultants on behalf of the major landowners will be in attendance to provide Councillors with a short presentation and to answer any questions that may arise.

 

This report and the justification documents were sent off to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure to ascertain if they are satisfied that it may proceed to exhibition once Council resolves to do so. A formal response has now been received (attached) which requires some minor matters to be addresses and are included in this report.

 

Council at its meeting on 15 November 2007 resolved to prepare a Draft Local Environmental Plan (DLEP 67) for the rezoning of part of the Valla Urban Growth Area (VUGA).

 

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of the progress of the VUGA, the results of studies undertaken and make recommendations on how the release area should proceed.

 

This Planning Proposal (Stage 1) will, when completed over the next 20 30 years or so will create a new Town for the Nambucca Valley.? The total area in the whole VUGA is approximately 570ha, with the Stage 1 investigation area being 317ha.? Following the investigations Stage 1 proposes to provide approximately 50ha of employment lands which has the potential to create some 250,000m2 of floor space for a range of industrial, warehousing, retail, and commercial uses which could provide some 750-1250 additional jobs for the Nambucca Valley.

 

To supplement these employment opportunities, some 800 residential lots will be created resulting in a population of approximately 1900 residents.? As such a range of new open space areas and sport fields, potentially a new educational facility and the provision other state services.

 

The location of the Valla Urban Growth Area at the proposed new Nambucca Heads ? Pacific Highway interchange will, in time, provide an ideal business and residential location with excellent access to the main Sydney/Brisbane highway and when the new Pacific Highway is completed is likely to be only 20-30 minutes from the Regional Centre of Coffs Harbour.

 

The new "Greenfield" residential areas will provide for well planned, walkable neighbourhoods with excellent views especially from the higher elevated sections.

 

The continued progress and investment for the investigations has been based upon the support afforded by council and also its decision to proceed with the Integrated Water Cycle Management Plan which includes the off stream water storage dam.? Private investment in the studies thus far has exceeded $1 million and with Council's $50,000 and the Department of Planning's $50,000 and Department of State and Regional Development's $20,000, considerable funds have been expended to reach this stage with considerably more yet to be invested in the development of the plans required under Part 6 of the Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010, prior to any development commencing.

 

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:

 

1?????????? That Council note that the Planning Proposal was referred to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure under Section 57(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for review and that the matters identified in the Departments response dated 23 September 2011 have now been addressed, enabling Council to proceed to publicly exhibit the Planning Proposal for a period of 28 days as outlined in the Gateway Approval from the Department of Planning dated 17 August 2010.? Exhibition period proposed to be from Friday 28 October 2011 to Friday 25 November 2011.

 

2?????????? That a public meeting be held during the exhibition period with specific invitations being issued to all residents who live within or adjoin the identified boundary of the Valla Urban Growth Area.

 

3?????????? That a further report, responding to all submissions received during the advertised exhibition period be prepared and presented to Council for consideration at its 14 December 2011 General Purpose Committee meeting.

 

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Whilst, Council could resolve not to proceed with the proposed LEP amendment, it is not supported as the studies have identified that there are no major impediments that would prohibit the actual development of the VUGA.? In addition, considerable private and public funds have been invested in the process in accordance with Council's decision of November 2007, to proceed with the Draft LEP amendment.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Background

 

The Valla Urban Growth Area (VUGA) (formerly Boggy Creek Release Area) has been identified within Council growth strategies since the mid 1990?s.

 

Council on the 15 November 2007 resolved to prepare a draft Local Environmental Plan (LEP) for part of the VUGA (draft Nambucca LEP 1995 Amendment No 67).

 

The Department of Planning (DoP) advised Council by letter dated 23 January 2008 that Council was required to prepare a Local Environmental Study (LES).? The DoP advised that the LES is required to address certain matters and Council should consult with relevant agencies.? Through the requirements of the DoP and the consultation process with the various government agencies, a number of studies were required to be completed as part of the rezoning process.

 

To initiate the rezoning process for Stage 1, two major landowners engaged a number of consultants to complete several studies relating to their respective properties.? To supplement these investigations Council also engaged a number of consultants to progress investigations in the broader area to ensure that the final boundaries of the Stage 1 area would fit in with the overall development of the whole VUGA as shown in Figure 1 below.

 


Figure 1

 

On 17 December 2008 the General Purpose Committee conducted a site inspection of the VUGA and the consultants acting on behalf of the two major landholders provided Councillors with a concept plan for the entire study area.

 

Whilst the two main landholders who initiated the rezoning process represent the major component of the Stage 1 area, it was considered that additional landholdings need to be considered over the entire study area to ensure a co-ordinated and systematic rezoning occurs.? To this effect the majority of landowners in the VUGA gave permission for Council's consultants to enter upon their land to undertake specialist investigations.

 

This holistic approach to the LEP amendment has the following advantages:

 

?????????????? It provides superior information base on which to support decision making and preparation of a Master Plan that takes into consideration the broader landscape outside of stage 1.

?????????????? More land may be available for various purposes such as offsets for development type and/or biodiversity purposes.

?????????????? Should studies determine that the boundaries of stage 1 need to be refined Council does not have to provide separate resolutions to incorporate these areas into the LEP amendment rather, it is determined through the specialist investigations.

?????????????? Reduced risk associated with unexpected issues arising during later stages of the growth area.

?????????????? Council may be able to encourage more landholders to commit to the process.

 

The specialist investigations have now been completed and based on the results of these studies a draft LEP amendment has been prepared.? The following is a list of specialist investigations that were undertaken. Further details on the results of these studies are provided later in this report:


 

Commissioned by Council

Commissioned by Landholders

Ecological Survey Report

Phase 1 Contamination Assessment

Ecological Conservation Report

Geotechnical and Acid Sulphate Soils Assessment

Ecological Vegetation and Habitat Management Report

Ecological Investigation

Acoustic Report

European and Aboriginal Heritage Investigation

European and Aboriginal Heritage Assessment

Community Needs Assessment

Bushfire Hazard Assessment

Traffic Assessment

Local Growth Management Strategy Employment Lands

Planning Proposal Preparation

Deep Creek Flood Study (presently being prepared)

Various concept Masterplanning

 

Now that these studies have been completed and the Planning Proposal has been prepared, Council can now forward the whole report and LES to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure and proceed to the community consultation and exhibition phase for the proposed rezoning of Stage 1 of the VUGA.? The following outlines the procedural steps that Council must follow:

 

?????????????? Resolve to proceed to exhibition and forward a copy of the report and LES to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure

?????????????? Exhibit the Planning Proposal for a period of at least 28 days

?????????????? Hold a meeting for all interested and affected landholders and the general public during the exhibition period

?????????????? Consider all submissions received during the exhibition period

?????????????? Make any amendments arising from the exhibition and submissions

?????????????? Prepare a report for Council's consideration which addresses all submissions received and any amendments arising from the submissions.

 

A check point arises here depending on the decision of Council to either proceed or not to proceed with the Planning Proposal.

 

Should Council resolve to proceed then the following steps are required before any actual on-ground development may proceed:

 

?????????????? Finalise the land zone map and Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and refer the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure requesting that the Plan be made

?????????????? Once the Plan is made then the rezoned area is included in the Growth Area Maps of Council's LEP which triggers Part 6 of the LEP which requires a range of further things to be done such as:

 

Preparation of the Staging Plan, Development Control Plan, Section 94 Plan, refined zone boundaries, Building Height Maps, Floor Ratio Maps and a range of LEP amendments and all readvertised together.

 

Specialist Investigations

 

This report only provides a brief overview of the process and investigations undertaken as part of the rezoning. An electronic copy of the Planning Proposal prepared by Charles Hill Planning has been provided to Councillors with hard copies being available for viewing at the Council Office.? The Planning Proposal is the detailed report required to address the LEP amendment and contains discussions on all relevant aspects of the LEP amendment and it also contains each of the specialist investigations as appendices.

 

Ecological Investigations

 

Land holders engaged Conacher Environmental Group to investigate the ecological attributes of Lots 1 DP 253772 and Lots 9 DP 755560.? These investigations involved reporting on targeted flora and fauna surveys for threatened species and endangered ecological communities as listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

 

To supplement these investigations, Council, after considering appropriate quotations also engaged Conacher Environmental Group to undertake investigations on other land parcels located in the broader investigation area as well as examine the Conservation and Management of the sites ecological attributes.?

 

The ecological reporting has been completed in three (3) parts.

 

Part 1 Flora and Fauna Survey Report

Part 2 Biodiversity Conservation Report

Part 3 Vegetation and Habitat Management Report

 

The results of the flora and fauna assessment identified the following threatened species and communities being recorded on or within the study area:

 

?????????????? Wompoo Fruit Dove

?????????????? Glossy Black Cockatoo

?????????????? Little Lorikeet

?????????????? Powerful Owl

?????????????? Koala

?????????????? Grey Headed Flying-Fox

?????????????? Eastern False Pipistrelle

?????????????? Little Bentwing Bat

?????????????? Southern Myotis

?????????????? Lowland Rainforest in the NSW North Coast and Sydney Basin Bioregion

?????????????? River-flat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains of the North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions

?????????????? Subtropical Coastal Floodplain Forest of the NSW North Coast Bioregion; and

?????????????? Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Flood Plains of the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions.

 

In addition to this a State Environmental Planning Policy 44 - Koala Habitat (SEPP 44) Assessment was completed in accordance with the requirements of the DoP.? This assessment did not consider the area to be core Koala Habitat; therefore a Koala Plan of Management has not been prepared. It is noted, that although requested by the DoP, a SEPP 44 assessment is not a legislative requirement for a Planning Proposal.

 

An assessment was also undertaken under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The assessment determined that referral of this proposal to the relevant federal authority for further assessment was not required.

 

Based on these findings and other key habitat identified within the growth area the consultants recommended a number of areas be protected and/or rehabilitated through the biodiversity conservation report.? These areas were then recommended to be included into particular zones, predominately the E3 Environment Conservation zone in Figure 4.1 of the Coacher Environmental Group report and reproduced below in Figure 2 which illustrates the extent of land recommended for conservation as part of this assessment.? As can be seen by this figure the majority of existing habitat is proposed to be retained for conservation purposes and other land with ecological significance is proposed to be protected and rehabilitated as the development proceeds.? It is noted that although the ecological reports examine the entire growth area, environmental protection zones are only intended to be placed on areas considered within the Stage 1 area.? Areas south of Boggy Creek in the vicinity of the highway interchange are yet to be zoned.? This may occur in future staging of the development of the VUGA if other land in this area is rezoned for alternative uses.

 

As additional stages are progressed, appropriate environmental zones will be applied to these lands, and if necessary additional investigations will be undertaken.

 

The final stage of the ecological reporting provides options for the management of the E3 zones and is titled, ?Conservation Areas Management Strategy?, which addresses the following matters within the proposed environmental zones:

 

- Vegetation Retention and Bushland Management

- Bushfire Management and Asset Protection Zones

- Provision and Establishment of Habitat Linkages and Habitat Areas

- Provision of Environmental Buffers

- Erosion and Sediment Control

- Stormwater Quality and Management

- Cultural Heritage Values and Management

- Community Education and Vigilance

- Prohibited Use Identification and Management

- Native Fauna Habitat and Pest Species Management

- Access Signage and Fencing

- Monitoring and Reporting.

 

Given that detailed Master Planning is to be completed undertaken in conjunction with the development of the Development Control Plan for the area, the ?Conservation Areas Management Strategy? report is considered to provide the basis for additional management reporting to accompany specific precincts within the Master Plan.

 


Figure 2

 

Acoustic Investigations

 

Council engaged SLR Heggies to undertake acoustic investigations over the whole of the growth area.? The key focus of the acoustic investigations was to ensure that any future residential development does not conflict with future employment lands or future highway upgrades.

 

The investigations used acoustic models aligned to the topography and future urban development of the VUGA to produce graphic representations of areas suitable for the following activities:

 

?????????????? Industrial areas including manufacturing, warehousing and other light industries

?????????????? Commercial areas

?????????????? Recreation (passive and active)

?????????????? Residential Areas.

 

Modelling for current and future highway noise did not identify any significant issues for areas identified as potential employment land or residential land.

 

Modelling that was undertaken to determine the impact of the employment lands on the potential residential land found that significant buffers were required between the proposed employment lands and residential.? It is noted that the original model used, was based on employment lands predominately occupied by or for industrial uses.

 

Based on these results a more refined model was produced incorporating more specific land uses identified in the concept designs for the area including a commercial area with other less intrusive uses such as warehouses/distribution and larger business areas.? These areas were located on the fringe of the residential areas to minimise noise conflicts on adjoining residential areas.

 

The acoustic modelling also examined recommendations for passive and active recreation areas. Due to the location of the employment lands the acoustic reporting found that recreation areas were not appropriate in the majority of the employment lands area.? However, the reporting also acknowledges that these results may not be practical in all instances because an important aspect of urban design is to incorporate passive and active open space to provide healthy spaces for the community and active work and recreation areas.

 

The results of the acoustic modelling were incorporated into a recommended land use plan being Figure 10 from the SLR Heggies Acoustic Report and reproduced in Figure 3 below:


Figure 3

 

 

Heritage

 

The two major landholders engaged Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologists to investigate the European and Aboriginal heritage attributes of Lots 1 DP 253772 and Lots 9 DP 755560.? These investigations involved reporting on targeted archaeological surveys for aboriginal relics/items/deposits or potential aboriginal sites of significance

 

To supplement these investigations, Council, engaged Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologists to undertake investigations on other land parcels located on the broader investigation area.?

 

The results of these investigations found no major impediments to the proposed growth area in terms of European heritage, but recommended that there should be a photo style archival record for the area prepared in accordance with NSW Heritage standards prior to the development commencing.? This recommendation will be an inclusion in the DCP to be produced before any work can commence.

 

In relation to aboriginal sensitivity, two (2) areas were recorded though the investigations undertaken on Lot 1 DP 253772 and Lots 9 DP 75556.? It was recommended a buffer of 20m be placed around the former Cow Creek Aboriginal Reserve Area.? This recommendation will be an inclusion in the DCP to be produced before any work can commence.

 

The surveys prepared over the broader growth area found two (2) potential aboriginal archaeological deposits and eight (8) potential aboriginal sites.

 

The consultant has recommended further investigations into all recorded sites be undertaken during the preparation of the detailed DCP.? It is anticipated that these surveys may result in further zoning amendments after the DCP is complete. Some other areas where access to the allotments was not available at the time of the survey will also need to be re-examined in detail during the preparation of the DCP and or future stages of the development of VUGA.

 

Figure 4, 5 & 6 below shows the areas of significance located through the surveys.

 

Figure 4

 

 


Figure 5

 

Figure 6

 

Bushfire

 

After considering appropriate quotations, Council engaged Mid Coast Building and Environmental to undertake a Bushfire Hazard Assessment into the suitability of the land for rezoning and provide recommendations for consideration during the detail design of the growth areas prepared as part of the DCP.

 

The results of the Assessment found no major issues which would prevent the area from being considered for future urban growth, however, it has provided a number of recommendations which will be important during the preparation of the DCP for the area.

 

The recommended asset protection zones produced in the Bushfire Hazard Assessments are provided below in Figure 7.

 

Figure 7

 

Traffic

 

The landholders engaged Better Transport Futures to examine the traffic requirements of the VUGA.? The primary matter for consideration of this investigation was the staging of any future development in relation to the upgrading of the Pacific Highway and the provision of the highway interchange at the southern entrance to the VUGA.

 

The consultant was requested to examine the capacity of the existing intersections of Valla Road, Cow Creek Road and Boggy Creek Road should development be proposed prior to the upgrading of the Pacific Highway.? Based on preliminary analysis, the consultants recommend that theses intersections would require upgrading but could accommodate up to 400 residential lots off Valla Road.? Council subsequently required the consultant to review this as Council's key objective of the VUGA is the release of employment lands initially with some complimentary residential land release.

 

The Consultant reviewed their report and concluded that the existing Boggy Creek Road intersection will require some upgrade works to accommodate a proportionate amount of Employment Lands Traffic in the initial construction and release stage.? Discussions have been held with representatives from the RTA ? Pacific Highway upgrade division and they have indicated that depending upon the timing of the works, the level of upgrade may not be at the maximum but at a level to provide adequate safety for the interim period and may be incorporated into the proposed heavy vehicle rest area in this location.

 

Should the Highway Upgrade commence prior to development then the major entrance into the Valla Urban Growth Area will be via the Nambucca Heads interchange which is positioned at the south eastern extent of the growth area.

 

The consultant concludes that there are no major traffic issues that would prevent the VUGA from progressing further. In addition to this, the consultant recommends that prior to development a road hierarchy plan should be prepared.? Council will require this plan to be prepared as part of the DCP investigations.

 

However a basic concept road hierarchy plan for Stage 1 was provided in the traffic assessment. It is reproduced in Figure 8 below.

 


Figure 8

 

Contamination

 

The landholders engaged Coffey Geotechnics to undertake a preliminary investigation to potential contamination on Lot 19 DP 755560, Lot 1 DP 823624 and Lot 1 DP 253772 Valla, as the land is identified in Council?s contaminated lands register as having a former gold mine on the site.

 

The report found a number of Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC) which were identified in Figure 4 of the Coffey Geotechnics report and is reproduced below as Figure 9 below:

 

?????????????? Potential natural mineralisation

?????????????? Former banana plantations

?????????????? Abandoned Arsenic Mine and

?????????????? Former Horticulture and Small Crops.

 

The consultants also recommend that further Phase 2 investigations be undertaken into these areas should they be identified for future development. It is proposed that these additional investigations will be undertaken as part of the DCP preparation.

 


Figure 9

 

 

Preliminary Geotechnical and Acid Sulphate Soil Investigation

 

The landholders engaged Coffey Geotechnics to undertake a Preliminary Geotechnical and Acid Sulphate Soil Investigation on Lot 19 DP 755560, Lot 1 DP 823624 and Lot 1 DP 253772 Valla.

 

The results of the report indicate that the land is unlikely to contain actual Acid Sulphate Soils or potential Acid Sulphate Soils, and as such recommend that an Acid Sulphate Soils - Plan of Management is not required.

 

The consultants also recommend that the site will be suitable for future development subject to the following additional investigations:

 

?????????????? A test pit and borehole investigation to asses subsurface conditions

?????????????? Further investigations into and locate the old mine workings

?????????????? A more detailed investigation in Acid Sulphate Soils on any low lying areas required to be disturbed as part of future works

?????????????? Further investigation into pavement design and site classification prior to development.

 

It is anticipated that these additional investigations will be undertaken as part of the DCP process, as well as for future development applications or construction certificate phases of future development.

 

Flooding

 

Council in association with the Department of Environment and Heritage has engaged WMA Water to prepare the Deep Creek Flood Study which will encompass the catchment of the VUGA.? Although this study was commenced some time ago the flood study is yet to be completed, the primary reason for this has been the availability of LiDAR.

 

In July 2011 Council received LiDAR for the area and the flood study has recommenced with an anticipated completion by December 2011.

 

It is noted that the results of the flood study can be incorporated into the final design of the growth area prior to finalising this LEP amendment or alternatively through the DCP process.? Should Council not be in a position to incorporate the results of the flood study into this planning proposal prior to it being finalised then Council will initiate a planning proposal to refine the zoning of land prior to the DCP being operational.

 

Community Needs Assessment

 

The landholders engaged Richard Cardew (Cardew Consulting) to prepare a Community Needs Assessment for the VUGA.? This report broadly looks at the potential demographics of the VUGA and Nambucca Shire in general in order to determine what community facilities and other requirements the community may require or provide within the Growth Area.

 

The conclusions of this report are broad, and will be taken into account during the preparation of the DCP as necessary.?

 

Servicing

 

Council engaged de Groot & Benson Pty Ltd to investigate servicing for water and sewer in the VUGA [Attached].

 

In terms of water servicing it has been recommended that a water reservoir be provided within the VUGA. The maximum level the reservoir could be located at would be 70mAHD; therefore the maximum serviceable level in the area would be restricted to 50mAHD near the reservoir and 40mAHD at the extremities of the Growth area.? Should design of the system incorporate a pumping station then the supply area could be increased.

 

de Groot & Benson Pty Ltd recommend the preferred treatment of sewerage for the VUGA occur at the Nambucca STP, which is presently being augmented to accommodate a population of 15000 persons.? The design of the current augmentation is such that it can later be upgraded to accommodate 20000 persons. These design figures take into account projected growth provided in the VUGA.

 

Recommended Land Use Zones

 

Based on the results of the investigations contained in this report and the report prepared by Charles Hill Planning, Council has prepared a draft landuse planning map for Stage 1.? The planning zones have been corrected from the consultants? maps and figures using the latest available aerial photos and LiDAR and are identified in Figures 10 & 11 below.

 

The draft map provides the following:

 

?????????????? B2 Local Centre (10ha) ? (this zone is likely to include some mixed use)

?????????????? B7 Business Park (9ha)

?????????????? IN2 General Industrial (52ha)

?????????????? R1 General Residential (65ha) @ 12 Lots per Hectare (780 Lots)

?????????????? E4 Environmental Living (17ha)

?????????????? E3 Environmental Management (74ha).

 

With the above zones it is anticipated that Stage 1 will accommodate up to approximately 1900 people and has the potential to provide some 250,000m2 of industrial, warehousing, commercial and retail floor space, which could result in some 750?1250 new jobs.

 

Notes in relation to the proposed Zones

 

?????????????? The B2 Local Centre Zone is likely to be refined to include mixed use

?????????????? Approximately 8ha of the IN2 General Industrial Zones will be occupied by the Pacific Highway Upgrade

?????????????? The E4 Environmental Living Zone has been used above the 50m contour approximately. This is to reduce development densities in the areas closest to the remnant vegetation in more visual locations of the site that may have alternative servicing requirements to supply water

?????????????? As part of the preparation of the DCP and contributions plan for the area Council will need to give consideration to open space requirements which have not been included as part of this planning proposal. As an estimate of open space for residential land in the growth area, Councils DCP 2010 requires 70sqm of open space to be dedicated for each new residential lot. Should 780 lots be achieved in the residential zone then an estimated 5.4ha of open space would be required. It is noted that this figure does not include estimates of open space requirements for environmental living or local centre/ mixed use zones.

?????????????? Land in the vicinity of the proposed Highway Interchange will be retained as a rural zone at this stage. Further modifications to these zones may occur as the Highway Upgrade progresses and the interchange is completed.

?????????????? Minor adjustments to the zone boundaries may occur to take into account the availability of LiDAR. For example Council has used LiDAR to indicate the location of water courses and riparian areas (zoned E3 Environmental Management). Further processing of the LiDAR may result in minor adjustments to the boundaries.

 


The following draft Objectives and Land Uses have been developed for the E4 Environmental Living zone as required by the DoPI letter of 23 September 2011.

 

A lot size map has also been prepared and is shown as Figure 12.

 

Draft Proposed E4 Environmental Living Zone

Zone E4   Environmental Living

1   Objectives of zone

?To provide for low-impact residential development in areas with special ecological, scientific or aesthetic values.

?To ensure that residential development does not have an adverse effect on those values.

2   Permitted without consent

Home occupations

3   Permitted with consent

Bed and Breakfast Accommodation; Building Identification Sign; Business identification sign; Community Facility; Dwelling houses; Environmental Facility; Environmental protection works; Home-based childcare; Home Business; Home industry; Information and Education facility; Kiosk; Recreation Area; Roads

 

4   Prohibited

Industries; Service Stations; Warehouse or distribution centres; Any other development not specified in item 2 or 3

 

 


Figure 10

Figure 11


 

Figure 12 Lot Size Map

 

 

 

Development Control Plan and Contributions Plan

 

Should Council resolve to proceed with the Planning Proposal and the Draft LEP amendment, it will be identified as an Urban Release Area and prior to any development occurring on the land, the matters identified in section 6 of the Nambucca LEP 2010 will be required to be addressed.

 

The Nambucca LEP 2010 Section 6 requires, among other things, the following matters to be addressed:

 

6.2???? Development control plan

 

(1)????? The objective of this clause is to ensure that development on land in an urban release area occurs in a logical and cost-effective manner, in accordance with a staging plan and only after a development control plan that includes specific controls has been prepared for the land.

(2)????? Development consent must not be granted for development on land in an urban release area unless a development control plan that provides for the matters specified in subclause (3) has been prepared for the land.

(3)????? The development control plan must provide for all of the following:

????????? (a)????? a staging plan for the timely and efficient release of urban land making provision for necessary infrastructure and sequencing,

????????? (b)????? an overall transport movement hierarchy showing the major circulation routes and connections to achieve a simple and safe movement system for private vehicles, public transport, pedestrians and cyclists,

????????? (c)????? an overall landscaping strategy for the protection and enhancement of riparian areas and remnant vegetation, including visually prominent locations, and detailed landscaping requirements for both the public and private domain,

????????? (d)????? a network of passive and active recreational areas,

????????? (e)????? stormwater and water quality management controls,

????????? (f)?????? amelioration of natural and environmental hazards, including bushfire, flooding and site contamination and, in relation to natural hazards, the safe occupation of, and the evacuation from, any land so affected,

????????? (g)????? detailed urban design controls for significant development sites,

????????? (h)????? measures to encourage higher density living around transport, open space and service nodes,

????????? (i)?????? measures to accommodate and control appropriate neighbourhood commercial and retail uses,

????????? (j)?????? suitably located public facilities and services, including provision for appropriate traffic management facilities and parking.

 

Addressing these matters will assist Council in refining the uses within the growth area zones and result in an additional Planning Proposal to adjust the land use zones where necessary. Specifically the following additional LEP amendments will be required once the DCP detail has been prepared:

 

?????????????? Refining the land use zones

?????????????? Adding Floor Space Ratio Maps

?????????????? Adding Height of Building Maps

?????????????? Adding Lot Size Maps.

 

A Section 94 Contributions Plan will also be prepared to accompany the DCP. The refined Land Use Zones, DCP and Contributions Plan will be exhibited together once prepared.

 

The proposed rezoning in its current form will provide some certainty to the future development of land and assist land owners, developers and council to move forward with detailed Master Planning.

 

Response to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure letter dated 23 September 2011.

 

The following outlines for the proposed new E4 Environmental Living Zone Objectives and Land Use Tables which are generally accord with the Template LEP requirements.

 

The proposed Lot sizes have been mapped for the R1, B2, B7, E3 and E4 zones which accord with the Nambucca Local Environmental Plan and the land capability of the proposed E4 zone land.

 

The Urban Release Area map has been amended and will be included in the material placed on exhibition confirming that the Stage 1 release is an Urban Release Area controlled by Part 6 of the Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Section 62 consultation was undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Consultants engaged by the two main landholders

Landholders within the entire Valla Urban Growth Area

Consultants engaged by Council

Government Agencies and Service providers

Department of Planning and Infrastructure

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The studies undertaken by both the landholder consultants and Council's consultants have undertaken a comprehensive review of the Environmental, Social and Economic impacts and benefits of the proposed rezoning for the Valla Urban Growth Area and the broader Nambucca Local Government Area

 

Social

 

The studies undertaken by both the landholder consultants and Council's consultants have undertaken a comprehensive review of the Environmental, Social and Economic impacts and benefits of the proposed rezoning for the Valla Urban Growth Area and the broader Nambucca Local Government Area

 

Economic

 

The studies undertaken by both the landholder consultants and Council's consultants have undertaken a comprehensive review of the Environmental, Social and Economic impacts and benefits of the proposed rezoning for the Valla Urban Growth Area and the broader Nambucca Local Government Area

 

Risk

 

Council has continued to support the Valla Urban Growth Area as its main area to accommodate and provide for additional employment and residential land within the shire.? Should Council withdraw its support now there would be limited locations and resources available to pursue Employment Lands in alternative sites.? This may have a detrimental result on the supply of medium and short term employment lands within the shire.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

To assist in finalising the specialist investigations of the study area $50,000 was made available for this project from General Fund through the Strategic Planning budget.? Other funding has come from the state government Planning Reform Fund Round 6 and the Department of State and Regional Development.

 

Notwithstanding the above, it is proposed that any Council funds dedicated to the project will be reclaimed by way of a Section 94 Contributions Plan at the development stage.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The funds for Council's contributions have come from General Fund, and external grants from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure and the Department of State and Regional Development

 

Attachments:

1View

?- CIRCULARISED DOCUMENTS (Councillors Only) - Colour A3 copies of all figures in report

 

2View

25966/2008 - Preliminary Service Advice - de Groot & Benson Pty Ltd

 

3View

26885/2011 - Response from Planning & Infrastructure NSW - 23 September 2011 -requesting additional advice

 

??


General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

Valla Urban Growth Area - Planning Proposal

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Valla Urban Growth Area - Planning Proposal

 

 

 

CIRCULARISED DOCUMENTS (Councillors Only) - Colour A3 copies of all figures in report

 

??Pages

 


General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

Valla Urban Growth Area - Planning Proposal

 





General Purpose Committee - 19 October 2011

Valla Urban Growth Area - Planning Proposal

 


General Purpose Committee??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 19 October 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.4????? DA2008/139????? 191011???????? DA 2008/139/03 Pre cast concrete plant Modification - Increased Output - Abigroup (Australian Precast Solutions)

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Applicant:????????????????????? Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd

 

Proposal:?????????????????????? Pre Cast Concrete Plant

 

Property:??????????????????????? Lot 16 DP 1140719, 2 Centra Park Street, Macksville

 

Zoning:?????????????????????????? Zone IN1 General Industrial (NLEP 2010)

????????????????????????????????????? (Formerly Zone 4(a) General Industrial NLEP 1995)

 

Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd have submitted a Section 96(2) Modification for their Pre Cast Concrete Plan in the Macksville Industrial Estate.

 

The modification seek to amend condition 3 to allow for an increased output from the approved maximum of 25,000 tonnes of concrete products per annum to a maximum of 60,000 tonnes per annum for a period of 9 months.

 

Council previously dealt with a request from Abigroup (Australian Precast Solutions) in regard to the possibility of Council accepting a proposal of this nature. This was presented to Council by the General Manager at its 3 March 2011 Ordinary meeting when Council resolved as follows:

 

That Australian Precast Solutions be advised:

 

1??????? Council will consider an additional application to modify their development consent to permit an increase in output of up to 60,000 tonnes per annum for a period of 9 months.

 

2??????? Their additional modification application will need to respond to the factors requiring consideration in Clause 36 of Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations as well as the other requirements of the Act.

 

3??????? Any approval for increased output would not take effect until occupation certificates have been issued for the stage 1 and stage 2 sheds.

 

Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act refers to modifications of Development Consent which are not of a minor nature or modifications which have minimal environmental impact.

 

The proposed modification would ordinarily fall under Designated Development due to the level of production proposed. However, Part 2 of Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, provides the test to assist the consent authority to determine if a proposed modification would be such that the application would become a designated development. In particular Clauses 35 & 36 of Schedule 3.

 

The modification was exhibited from 21 September until 12 October 2011. At the time of printing this report (12 noon 12 October 2011) no written submissions had been received. One verbal discussion was held but related to an operational matter regarding delivery vehicles. Should any submission be received a addendum report will be prepared and circulated to Councillors for consideration.

 

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 thank Management of Abigroup and Australian Precast Solutions for the tour of the Macksville Pre Cast Concrete Plant.

 

That Council note the compliance table in this report for current compliance with the consent conditions for DA 2008/139/02 and that subject to the proponent demonstrating completion or progress where completion is not yet possible on those matters identified as outstanding, the Director Environment and Planning issue the Occupation Certificates or Building Certificates as appropriate for occupation of the modified Stage 1 and Stage 2 sheds as approved.

 

That Council confirm that after applying the criteria identified in Clauses 35 & 36 of Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation the proposed increase in production from 25,000 tonnes per annum to 60,000 tonnes per annum for a limited period of 9 months is not likely to significantly increase the environmental impacts of the total development (that is the development together with the proposed increase in production for a period of 9 months) compared with the existing approved development.

 

That Council confirm that with the benefit of the application of Clauses 35 & 36 of Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation the development with the proposed modification will remain substantially the same development and that Council intends to proceed to determine the proposed modification under section Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

That in accordance with Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, modified development consent for DA 2008/139/02 be modified subject to the conditions attached to this report.

 

Those persons who made submission to the modification application be notified of Council?s decision.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has several options:

Council could determine that the proposed increased production for a period of 9 months will have a significant environmental impact requiring the withdrawal of the modification application and lodgement of a full Designated Development Application and a full Environmental Impact Statement.

 

Council could determine that with the increased output the development will not be substantially the same development thus requiring the withdrawal of the modification application and lodgement of a full Designated Development Application and a full Environmental Impact Statement.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Introduction:

 

Council would be aware that Australian Precast Solutions (APS) a subsidiary of Abigroup, submitted a Modification to the approved concrete precast yard at the Macksville Industrial Estate regarding the design of the Stage 1 Shed and also the Stage 2 Shed which required considerable noise mitigation works to be carried out to address the ongoing issues with noise generation.

 

Council subsequently conditionally approved those modifications at its 5 May 2011 Ordinary meeting. Several conditions are performance related conditions and will continue to apply. At the onsite meeting with the applicants and concerned residents, Council indicated that prior to the issue of the relevant occupation certificate for the modified buildings a compliance report will be considered by Council.

 

The modifications to the Stage 1 Shed and the completion of the new Stage 2 Shed are nearing completion and Abigroup has sought Council's final approval to occupy and commence production in the completed buidlings.

 

The following compliance table addresses the conditions of consent and it is expected that by the time Council meets onsite on Wednesday 19 October 2011, all outstanding matters will have been addressed.

 

DA 2008/139/02?? ABIGROUP? -? AUSTRALIAN PRE-CAST SOLUTIONS

PRE CAST CONCRETE PLANT MACKSVILLE

CONDITION

COMMENTS/OUTCOME

GENERAL CONDITIONS

3??????? The development shall be carried out generally in accordance with the application and the documents lodged with Council on 24 December 2007 and plan Nos 607119-D-102 Rev 1, 607119-D-103 Rev 2, 607119-D-104 Rev 1, the revised water consumption figures dated 6 March 2008, as amended by the Modification Application submitted 19 November 2010, Renzo Tonin & Associates ? Macksville Precast Facility ? Noise Mitigation of Stage 1 & 2 Operations dated 14 April 2011, plans Nos 7702001-RDA-01, 7702001-RDA-02, 7702001-RDA-03, 7702001-RDA-04, 7702001-RDA-05, 7702001-RDA-06, & 7702001-RDA-07 all dated 14/4/2011, stamped and returned with this consent, or modified by any of the following conditions of consent requiring submission of amended plans for Council approval.

 

On going compliance to bring the stage 1 & 2 sheds up to the approved standards as outlined in this condition and accompanying reports.

 

All Compliance matters generally achieved or are ongoing performance related conditions.

 

Occupation Certificates and Building Certificate to be issued.

3a????? Operational hours for this Pre-cast Concrete plant are as identified in the original Statement of Environmental Effects which are 7.00 am?6.00 pm Monday?Saturday. No work shall take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

 

Ongoing monitoring. General Compliance maintained. Some minor variations approved by Council such as Sunday works being undertaken to install new roof insulation to Stage 1 Shed to comply with Workcover requirements and no impact on pre cast operations.

 

General Compliance achieved.


 

4??????? Building works in accordance with this development consent, must not be commenced on-site until a Construction Certificate has been issued by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Construction Certificates issued for the new gantry footings and new steel fabrication shed. Some confusion with CC and Stage 2 Shed commenced prior to CC being issued. Legislation does not allow for retrospective CC to be issued once structure commenced. New Stage 2 Shed to be dealt with under the Building Certificate process.

 

Not totally complied with but dealt with under Building Certificate Process

5??????? The building is not to be occupied until all conditions of Council?s consent have been complied with to the satisfaction of Council and an Occupation Certificate has been obtained.

 

Structures now at this stage. Stage 2 Shed will not be occupied until the Building Certificate is Issued, which is now imminent.

 

Stage 1 shed occupied with no Occupation Certificate but dealt with under Building Certificate Process.

Stage 2 shed will not be occupied until Building Certificate issued.

New Fabrication shed will have Occupation Certificate issued

Relocated crib room to be dealt with under Building Certificate.

All ready to be issued

 

Prescribed Conditions

6??????? The work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

Ongoing compliance checks and certification.

 

Compliance to be achieved.

PRIOR TO RELEASE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

Section 138 Approvals

 

7??????? A separate application and consent under The Roads Act 1993 is required for any proposed construction work taking place within a Public Road Reserve (this includes construction involving machinery working on the development from an adjacent Public Road Reserve). This consent is to be obtained ?prior to issue of the construction certificate.

 

????????? A copy of the form enclosed with the Development Application Determination is to be completed and returned to Council along with the application and inspection fee of $91.

 

 

 

A Section 138 issued originally for development. No in road works under the modification.

 

Complied with.


 

Section 68 Approvals

 

8??????? Approvals under section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for the following activities to be applied for by the applicant and issued by Council:

 

????????? a??????? Install a temporary structure on land ? Part A.

 

????????? b??????? Install, alter, disconnect or remove a water meter connected to a service pipe ? Part B.

 

????????? c??????? Carry out stormwater drainage work ? Part B.

 

d??????? Connect a private drain or sewer with a public drain or sewer under the control of Council or with a drain or sewer which connects with such a public drain or sewer ? Part B.

 

????????? e??????? Dispose of waste into a sewer of the Council (trade waste) ? Part C.

 

 

 

Structures and buildings covered by Section 68 dealt with.

 

Water, Sewer and Stormwater requiring Section 68 approvals attended to.

 

Compliance achieved

9??????? Any approved vehicle wash bay to service the proposed development must be approved and all water used in the car wash bay must drain to Council?s sewer following treatment in an oil plate separator or other system as approved by Council. Full details of the proposal must be submitted to Council for approval prior to the Construction Certificate being issued.

 

No vehicle wash bay proposed at this time.

Concrete wash down bay being constructed but does not include any discharge to Council's mains all onsite reuse and recycling.

 

Compliance at this stage

 

10????? The aboveground fuel and LPG tank(s) must meet the requirements of the Work Cover Authority and comply with the relevant Australian Standards. Full details of how these requirements are met, must be included on the Construction Certificate application and plans.

 

 

Workcover authority issued.

 

Compliance achieved. Copy of approval provided and on file.

Erosion and Sediment Control

 

11????? Effective erosion and sediment control measures must be installed within the boundaries of the site prior to and during construction and be maintained until the site has been efficiently rehabilitated, turfed or landscaped.

 

????????? Should Council be the Principal Certifying Authority, details as to the method of complying with the above must be submitted prior to the release of the Construction Certificate. These measures may consist of sediment fences, hay bales and/or sandbags. Care should be taken in locating material stockpiles ie sand, soil, etc, and the number of vehicular movements should be restricted during inclement weather.

 

 

 

Site is constructed to manage all erosion and sediment controls on site.

 

General compliance achieved initially. Ongoing improvements to maintain structures and mitigation measures.


 

TO BE COMPLIED WITH DURING CONSTRUCTION

12????? All erosion and sediment control measures/works, other pollution control and rehabilitation measures undertaken on the site shall conform to or exceed the specifications and standards contained in the current versions of:

 

????????? Managing Urban Stormwater, Soil and Construction Guidelines (Landcom 2004)

????????? Nambucca Shire Council Code of Practice for Erosion and Sediment Control Works

 

General compliance achieved and maintained

Disabled Access

 

13????? Provision must be made for access to the commercial floor space for people with disabilities in accordance with AS1428.1 2001 "Design for Access and Mobility Part 1: General Requirements for Access - Buildings".

 

 

 

Disabled access to Office building and disabled amenities provided. Operations covered by Occupational Health and safety regulations and only accessible sections of the facility is required to comply.

 

General Compliance achieved

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

Developer Contributions

 

14????? The applicant shall pay to Council, prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the following contributions for water and sewerage augmentation works, at the current rate of payment. The contribution rates are those that apply at the date of issue of this consent. Rates are adjusted annually on 1 July. Contributions will only be accepted at the rate applying at the date of payment. Council's? Corporate Services Department should be contacted prior to payment to confirm the required development rate. Should water consumption exceed 4,000 kL per annum then Council reserves the right to adjust its Section 64 contributions accordingly:

 

a??????? Council's water supply system and sewerage treatment works, pump stations and rising mains, a contribution of $72,793. (Water Contribution = $53,708 and Sewerage contribution = $19,085).

 

 

 

Payment was received.

 

Complied with


Engineering

 

15????? The provision by the applicant, at his expense, of the following works and services in accordance with Council?s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications and its Water and Sewerage Construction Specifications prior to release of the occupation certificate.

 

a??????? Installation of a meter cock, water meter and backflow prevention device to each lot by Council at a cost of $120 each. (Cost is adjusted annually on 1 July. Cost will only be accepted at the rate applying at the date of payment.);

 

b??????? Sewer junction installation by Council to the development site at the developer?s cost;

 

c??????? Water service installation by Council to the development site at the developer?s cost;

 

d??????? Construction of Council's standard heavy duty industrial crossing to suit the access to the site with a minimum width of 6m. The crossover shall be constructed of concrete a minimum 200mm thick and reinforced with SL82 mesh.

 

e??????? All stormwater run-off from the development to be collected within the property and discharged to an existing drainage system approved by Council in accordance with the requirements of Council?s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications.

 

????????? Runoff detention/retention and sediment interception measures shall be installed and maintained to reduce flow velocities and to prevent sand, aggregate, road base, spoil, or other sediment from entering any downstream watercourses or water bodies.

 

????????? Details to be provided, together with supporting calculations for the sizing of ponds, outlets and overflow structures.

 

????????? Details to be provided in relation to the potential for water storage from roof runoff including location of tanks, storage capacity and reuse.

 

f???????? Stormwater runoff from the gravel sealed car park shall be collected and treated in a oil and grit trap prior to discharge to council?s stormwater system unless developer can demonstrate that an appropriate alternative treatment will be adopted.

 

g??????? Submission of certified engineering plans detailing work and services specified by this consent, for approval by Council prior to release of the Construction Certificate.

 

h??????? Supervision and inspection fees for engineering works associated with the development in accordance with Council?s Fees and Charges;

 

 

General compliance achieved for all identified components of this condition.

Title Restrictions

 

16????? Pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 easements shall be created to achieve the following purposes:

 

a??????? All requisite sewerage easements;

 

b??????? All requisite drainage easements;

 

c??????? Provide a 5m wide right-of-carriageway access to drainage reserve for maintenance purposes.

 

 

 

Compliance as required

Car Parking/Vehicles

 

17???????? Provision of a minimum 60 vehicle spaces on-site sealed, marked and drained in accordance with Council?s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications and Council?s Off-Street Parking Code?.

 

 

Carparking provided. Currently being improved.

 

Compliance achieved

 

18???????? All internal roadways must be constructed to an all-weather gravel or bitumen surface in accordance with Council?s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications.

 

Compliance achieved

 

Liquid Trade Waste

 

19???????? Proponent to submit relevant detail of trade waste generation and proposed pre-treatment of Trade waste (where required) via Council?s approved form (Application for Approval to Discharge Trade Waste to Sewer).

 

 

Provided only the staff amenities building discharges to Council's sewer no Trade Waste Approvals are required.

 

Compliance at this stage as no other approvals required

20???????? Discharge of trade waste to Council?s sewer will not be permitted until formal approval for the discharge has been received from Council.

Compliance at this stage as no other approvals required

Landscaping

 

21???????? Storage areas fronting the public road shall be suitable screened from view with landscaping.

 

 

Landscaping has commenced and will continue along the street frontage as the final site works are completed and materials relocated.

 

Working towards full compliance

21a??? The select screen planting along the eastern boundary shall be completed prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

 

The planting of screening vegetation atop a constructed earthen mound currently underway and should be completed by 19 October 2011.

 

Working towards full compliance

TO BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES

Storage/Wastes Disposal

 

22???????? Provision of adequate storage facilities for industrial and domestic wastes to the requirements of the Principal