NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

15 December 2011

 

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

 

Our Vision

Nambucca Valley ~ Living at its best.

 

Our? Mission Statement

 

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

 

Our Values in Delivery

?                Effective leadership

?                Strategic direction

?                Sustainability of infrastructure and assets

?                Community involvement and enhancement through partnerships with Council

?                Enhancement and protection of the environment

?                Maximising business and employment opportunities through promotion of economic development

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

?                Actively pursuing resource sharing opportunities

 

Council Meetings:? Overview and Proceedings

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Meeting Agenda

 

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


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

 

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

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

 

AMENDED AGENDA????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Page

 

1??????? APOLOGIES

2??????? PRAYER

3??????? DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

4??????? CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ? Ordinary Council Meeting - 1 December 2011

5??????? NOTICES OF MOTION

5.1???? Notice of Motion - Speed Limit on Wilson Road - Petition (SF1009) ?

6??????? PUBLIC FORUM/DELEGATIONS

????????? Mr Norman Mann ? representing White Albatross Residents Action Group

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

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

9??????? General Manager Report

9.1???? Outstanding Actions and Reports

9.2???? Proposed Water Park

9.3???? Discussion Paper - "Dual Roles: Councillors as Members of Parliament in NSW"

9.4???? Taylors Arm Hall Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual General Meeting - 16 November 2011

9.5???? Crosswinds Wetlands Nature Reserve Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual general Meeting - 22 September 2011

9.6???? RV Friendly Town - Macksville

9.7???? Draft Destination 2036 Action Plan

9.8???? Museum Advisor - 2011 Annual Report

9.9???? Determination of Rate Peg for 2012/2013

9.10?? The Impacts of Rally Australia 2011 on the Nambucca Shire

9.11?? September 2011 Budget Review

9.12?? Successful Grant Application - Healthy Communities Initiative?LATE

9.13?? Investment Report to 30 November 2011?LATE

 

10????? Director Environment and Planning Report

10.1?? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 2 December 2011

10.2?? Contract Regulatory Officer's Report November 2011

10.3?? DEP Applications and Statistical Reports July 2011-June 2012, 2007-2011 and Certificates Received 2007-2011

10.4?? Minutes of the Access Committee meetings held 25 October 2011 and 22 November 2011

10.5?? Land Filling Lower Nambucca

10.6?? DA2007/231 and DA2007/007 Modification to Remove the Requirement for a Visitors Car Parking Space ?

 

11????? Director Engineering Services Report

11.1?? Waste Management ? Carbon Tax

11.2?? NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee meeting 21 November 2011

11.3?? Hawks Road, Newee Creek - Extension of Maintenance

11.4?? State Emergency Service 2010/11 Annual Report

11.5?? Bowraville and Macksville Sewerage Infrastructure Condition Assessment and Inflow/Infiltration Investigation. ????

 

GENERAL PURPOSE COMMITTEE MEETING 14 DECEMBER 2011.


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS

 

 

Name of Meeting:

 

Meeting Date:

 

Item/Report Number:

 

Item/Report Title:

 

 

 

I

 

declare the following interest:

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

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

For the reason that

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed

 

Date

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

Council?s Facsimile Number ? (02) 6568 2201

 

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

 


Definitions

 

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

 

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

(Local Government Act, 1993 section 442 and 443)

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

???


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.1????? SF1595??????????? 151211???????? Notice of Motion - Speed Limit on Wilson Road - Petition (SF1009)

 

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

 

Summary:

 

A petition with 132 signatures has been presented to Council requesting that the speed limit on Wilson Road be reduced from 100 kph to 80 kph. A similar request was made at the Council meeting held at Bowraville earlier this year.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Petition for an 80 kph speed limit on Wilson Road be forwarded to the Traffic Committee for consideration.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

A petition with 132 signatures has been presented to Council requesting that the speed limit on Wilson Road be reduced from 100 kph to 80 kph. A similar request was made at the Council meeting held at Bowraville earlier this year.

 

The petition cites safety, traffic volumes, numerous obscured driveways, residential areas, school bus routes, lack of a road shoulder for cyclists, speeding, minimal Police, presence wildlife, domestic pets and the general condition of the road as reasons for reducing the speed limit.

 

Speed limits are determined by the RTA in consultation with the Traffic Committee so it is recommended that the petition is forwarded the Traffic Committee for consideration.

 

Attachments:

1View

33620/2011 - Petition

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Notice of Motion - Speed Limit on Wilson Road - Petition (SF1009)

 

??? ?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager

ITEM 9.1????? SF959????????????? 151211???????? Outstanding Actions and Reports

 

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

 

Summary:

 

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

 

 

Recommendation:

 

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

 

 

 

No

FILE

NO

COUNCIL

MEETING

SUMMARY OF MATTER

ACTION

BY

STATUS

JULY 2009

1

SF1272

16/07/09

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

 

RO/IT

Hardware has been installed being:

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

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

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

 

Initial testing has been done of virtual server in library.? Power points and wireless connection being provided in Senior Citizens Centre for a full test of disaster recovery.

 

AUGUST 2009

2

SF544

20/08/09

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

 

GM

September 2010.

Plan currently being reviewed.

Deferred to October 2010.

Not completed ? deferred to November 2010.

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

To be included in Works Program for 2011/2012.

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

 

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

 

Now to be determined by the JRPP.? Report to 17/11 meeting.

 

To be reported in January 2012.

 


 


JANUARY 2010

3

SF839

21/01/10

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

 

GM

On-going.

 

 

 

 

MARCH 2010

 

4

SF820

20/05/10

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

 

GM

On-going.

 

 

 

JULY 2010

 

5

SF638

15/07/10

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

 

GM

Scheduled for October 2010.

Deferred to November 2010.

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

 

 

6

SF218

15/07/10

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

 

GM/

DEP

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

DEP to investigate Eungai.

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

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

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

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

Now deferred to August.

Costing being prepared on a pressurised system so facts and figures will be discussed.

 

Further deferred.

 

 

DECEMBER 2010

 

7

SF844

16/12/10

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

 

DES

GHD commissioned.? Plan anticipated in March 2011.

 

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


 

FEBRUARY 2011

8

SF1508

3/2/11

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

 

DES

Report in February 2012.

MARCH 2011

9

DA2010/234

17/3/11

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

 

DEP

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

 

RTA has now engaged Consultants to prepare a new full and comprehensive flood study which will be provided to Council upon completion.? At this time Council will be able to proceed to complete a new Flood Plain Risk Management Plan incorporates a revised matrix.

 

MAY 2011

10

SF1595

19/5/2011

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

 

GM

Overview report to be presented in November 2011.? Awaiting auditors.? Auditor reported to meeting on 1 December.? Summary to be provided to January meeting.

 

11

SF1031

19/5/2011

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

 

GM

In progress ? report to October Council meeting.? Agenda for Oct GPC too large.?

 

Deferred to November.

 

Deferred to December 2011.

 

Deferred to January 2012.

 

JUNE 2011

12

SF841

2/06/2011

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

 

DEP

Letter sent 8 June 2011.

 

No response as at 6 December 2011.

JULY 2011

13

SF1031

21/7/2011

That the policies be organised and made functional under each Directorate and the regular review and updating of the policies be the responsibility of each Director.

 

GM

DEP

DES

Policies have been classified.? GM & Directors to review and update at least 25% of their policies annually.

14

SF1031

21/7/2011

That the policy for Climate Change Adaption be deferred to allow amendments to be made to the draft policy

 

DEP

Policy under revision and to be reported to future General Purpose Committee Meeting.


 

AUGUST 2011

15

SF15

4/8/2011

Four Councillors have conflict of Interest in Saleyards issues

GM

GM writes to the Minister of Local Government for seeking dispensation for Councillors.? Letter sent to DLG on 11 August 2011.? Telephone advice received w/e 7/10/11 advising the DLG had received the letter, the staff member was on leave, but it was being considered.? Follow up telephone call was made on 20/10/11.? Staff member still on leave.? Advised they would be back on 25/10/11 with a response to follow after that date.? No response as at 8 November 2011.? No response as at 22 November.? No response as at 4 December.? DLG contacted again on 6 December 2011.

 

16

SF84

18/8/2011

Council write to the Premier of NSW stating its dissatisfaction with the response received from the Minister for Policy and Emergency re huge disparity between the current RFS bid and the rate peg.

 

DES

Letters sent.

 

 

17

SF741

18/8/2011

Paveline truck - that a further report be prepared on the half year July 2011 to December 2011 for comparison with the results for the previous 6 month period.

 

DES

Report to January 2012.

SEPTEMBER 2011

18

SF21

1/09/2011

Council investigate an effluent management system for the Saleyards

 

GM

Preferred design to be determined by 30/6/2012.

19

SF21

1/09/2011

Council investigate funding an effluent management system at the Saleyards through its environmental levy.

 

GM

To be the subject of a further report.? Cannot be funded before 2012/2013.

20

SF1496

1/09/2011

That more information on the pilot program for the aquatic system monitoring be provided to a future GPC meeting.

 

DEP

Information being sought for presentation to future GPC meeting.

OCTOBER 2011

21

SF1595

6/10/2011

 

Councillors to be provided with major documents at least 3 weeks before the nominated GPC when they are to be first considered.

 

GM

In place for a six month trial

22

SF15

6/10/2011

 

An inspection of the Saleyards be arranged at the first available GPC meeting

 

GM

November GPC.? Deferred to December GPC.? GM to discuss with Property Officer.

23

SF15

6/10/2011

 

Future of the Saleyards

GM

February 2012 GPC

24

SF1595

20/10/2011

Council review its Tree Maintenance and Removal Application Policy asap, to provide greater clarity with regard to application assessments

 

DES

January GPC

 

25

SF959

20/10/2011

Council write to Minister re lack of response concerning future management of Boultons Crossing (Gumma) Reserve with a cc to the Local Member.

 

GM

Letters sent 26/10/11

 

26

SF29

20/10/2011

The Library Working Group meet with the Manager Community & Cultural Services asap to arrange discussions with the State Library, meetings with Kempsey, Port Macquarie-Hastings and Coffs Harbour councils so that a recommendation can be made to Council in February 2012 on the future of the library service.

 

DEP

Report in February 2012

 

27

SF688

20/10/2011

Council consider and prioritise the unfunded items in the Environmental Levy in a future report to Council.

 

DEP

Report to follow IPR Exhibition.

 

28

 

 

SF15

3/11/2011

WorkCover Authority of NSW be invited to review the Macksville Saleyards and Saleyard Risk Assessment to provide advice on what is reasonably practicable to satisfy Council?s obligations under the Work Health and Safey Act 2011.

 

Also Council seek an opinion from the Office of Environment & Heritage on the work required to address environmental issues.

 

Councillors be advised of the time/date of an audit by both Departments so that they may be available to hear first hand of any problems.

 

GM

Letters sent 9 November 2011.? Response received from Office of Environment & Heritage ? circulated to Councillors.

29

 

SF938

3/11/2011

Council receive from the Property Officer a draft policy on future licensing for water reservoir space

 

GM

Report in December 2011

30

 

 

SF938

3/11/2011

Council receive a report on the proposed water theme park at Bellwood Park, including the design, process, flooding impacts and power source and total costs for construction and ongoing maintenance and running expenses.

 

GM

Report in December 2011

31

SF1595

17/11/2011

DES consider the unsealed section of South Arm Road or McHughs Creek Road as a site for expenditure of the $25,000 allocated for unsealed pavement management testing.

 

DES

To be considered in 2012.

32

3225/11

17/11/2011

Council receive a report on the outcomes of investigations into filling activities adjacent to the Nambucca River at Lower Nambucca, as per Cr Flack?s questions with notice.

 

DEP

Report in December 2011.

33

SF1460

17/11/2011

Structure of the Farmland (rate) Category be changed to incorporate the statutory minimum with ad valorem maintaining yield.? Council undertake a review of the farmland criteria to better reflect high intensity pursuits.

 

GM

Farmland criteria to be revised prior to the issuing of the 2012/13 rates.

 

 

34

SF826

17/11/2011

Council note trial of asphalt zipper and await a report on the outcome of the trial including advice as to all costs involved with using the machine.

 

DES

Report to March 2012 GPC.

DECEMBER 2011

35

SF358

1/12/2011

Council seek legal advice on what remedy may be available to Council for failure of the heating system at the hydrotherapy pool.

 

GM

Legal advice being sought.

 

36

SF1496

1/12/2011

Council write to Roads and Maritime Services to follow up on their promise in regard to installing 1 in 100 flood markers at Kings Point and Nursery Road (with and without the highway crossing).

 

DEP

 

Letter sent 6/12/2011

37

SF1496

1/12/2011

Council receive a report on consistent terminology for reporting forecast flood frequency, for example 1 in 1000 ARI floods.

DEP

To January Council meeting

 

38

SF84

1/12/2011

Council write to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services requesting a detailed itemised budget for the line item ?other support? and the line item ?insurances?.? Also that an explanation be provided as to why the RFS budgets are not provided to Council by no later than 28 February each year in accordance with the Service Level Agreement

.

DES

Letters Sent 6 December 2011

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.2????? SF286????????????? 151211???????? Proposed Water Park

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Wayne Lowe, Manager Business Development ????????

 

Summary:

 

In late September the Regional Tourism Organization (RTO) was informed by the Forum of Regional Tourism Operators (FORTO) that recommendations from FORTO were being considered and a tourism product development fund would be set up as a grant process to be accessed by councils and the local industry operators in the near future. This would be the first Government funded, direct product development funding for tourism. Two streams of funding were on offer, one stream for local industry and the other for councils.

 

Funding was only intended for the councils and businesses that were shovel ready, aimed at businesses and councils who had business project plans prepared and signed off.

 

The criteria for this grant process was general, however, the funding application for business as stream one required the business to demonstrate how the funding would grow, create and enhance local tourism product in the following tourism market segments: Infrastructure; Events; Technology; Regional Conferencing; Quality Assessment and Customer Service; International Tourism; Heritage Tourism; Nature Based Tourism; Aboriginal Tourism; Educational Tourism; and Industry Training.? With grant funding of up to $50,000 per application on offer this project created huge interest throughout the local industry.

 

To double tourism measured by overnight expenditure was the core criteria to be demonstrated by Council and the industry identified in the funding guidelines.? The funding was formally presented to the Tourism Managers and the industry on 28 September 2011.? Industry applications were required to be completed and signed off by the local Tourism Managers and submitted by the 21 October 2011.

 

Running in concert with the industry funding program Tourism Managers were tasked to find council projects that had been through community consultation, been signed off by council, had some matching funding and, were shovel ready that could be identified as destination product development.? The stream for 2 Council projects valued at $25,000 to $200,000 had a closing date of Friday 28 October 2011.? The Nambucca River Master Plan met the criteria.

 

After the application was received by NSW Destination Tourism, the Manager Business Development was informed on Tuesday 8 November 2011 that only $100,000 would be made available for the implementation of this project.? The response to the funding body was that this project could not be delivered under funded and if the full amount was not available then Council would not proceed with the project.? Because of the scaled down funding and the publicity concerning the application it is unlikely Council will receive a funding offer.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information be received.

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Council can accept the funding offer if successful.

2??????? Council can receive the funding offer and assess the viability of the project and return the funding if the project is not viable.

3??????? Council can reject the funding if offered.

 

 


DISCUSSION:

 

Council?s Tourism Manager had a huge task to promote and market the grants, help and prepare industry to position them to be investment ready and assist them to compete in a very competitive process to try to win the fund into our economy.

 

Council Grants Officer and the Manager Business Development (MBD) interviewed 9 local companies and assisted in the development of 9 applications from our Shire.? The applications ranged from $15,000 ? $50,000 all with some own funds as supporting financial contributions.

 

While the MBD/Tourism were assisting the local industry, the Grants Officer was looking for projects within Council that had the right fit for the application criteria knowing that we had limited time and were required to meet the criteria.? The Nambucca River Master Plan was the right fit for the funding criteria.

 

The Nambucca River Master Plan was signed off by Council, had funds allocated to it via the environmental levy, had been through community consultation and identified the development of a water park.? This application was an opportunity for Council to implement the water park as part of the Nambucca River Master Plan funded by the NSW Destination Tourism Development Funding.

 

The MBD then discussed the project with the Director of Environment and Planning asking if it was appropriate to seek the funding for the implementation of a specific part of the Nambucca River Master Plan as there was $200,000 on offer.? The concept idea was then presented to the General Manager indicating that we had looked extensively for a project within Council that met the funding guidelines, he also gave his permission to move on the funding as we had been given very limited time in the application process with the understanding that if the project was not viable the funding offer could be rejected.

 

The Tourism Industry was then consulted as they had placed an advertisement in the Guardian News seeking possible tourism projects for this funding.?? The MBD met with the Local Aboriginal Lands Council in Macksville and made arrangements to present the concept plan to the Aboriginal Community Advisory Committee as part of the consultation process.

 

The Nambucca River Master Plan also came with a project budget plan allocated from the Environmental Levy. I was informed that there was $50,000 unspent from last financial year and another $50,000 allocated to the master plan in this financial year and with a $200,000 application to support the further development of the Master plan. It was suggested in discussions that a consultant would be engaged to develop the design recommending an Aboriginal theme. The concept was to tell the local indigenous story and gain ownership from the Aboriginal community with the water park theme being of their choosing.

 

After submitting the industry applications we were left with two days to get the application in and we were told that once the projects were considered on there merits we would be notified of the outcome and then had a further 12 months to complete or decline, if the project could not be delivered.?

 

When consulting with the Director of Environment and Planning the first point was to gain some of the funding to conduct a design and costing including a feasibility study in which all of the constraints that would be identified.? Issues like water quality and treatment, filtration and pumping, power and ongoing running cost and maintenance so as to identify what the recurrent funds would be required to support this infrastructure before the implementation of the project.

 

The General Manager instructed the Grants Officer to place the water park in her report to Council as it was the only opportunity to present to Council in the short lead time available.? Unfortunately the project was listed in the wrong column in the table indicating it had been funded when in fact only an application had been made.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Director of Planning and Environment

Nambucca Heads Chamber of Commerce

Nambucca Valley Tourist Association

Aboriginal Community Development Officer

Aboriginal Community Advisory Committee

NSW Destination Tourism

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

With the water park concept being incorporated in the Nambucca River Master Plan staff considered that the environmental impacts would have been assessed in the plan development phase.

 

Social

Bellwood Park is a significant Aboriginal area with the Aboriginal community being a major stakeholder in any development within the Bellwood Park

 

Economic

A feasibility report on the economic impact to Council on recurrent cost made up part of the application budget.

 

Risk

That Council not take up the grant funding if the water park required large ongoing recurrent funding and return the funds to destination NSW tourism.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

This project will have direct impact on current and future budgets and would require council approval after an assessment report provided on the value of implementing this project.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

No funding to be sources from working funds.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.3????? T020/2011??????? 151211???????? Discussion Paper - "Dual Roles: Councillors as Members of Parliament in NSW"

 

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

 

 

Summary:

 

Following the March 2011 State elections, there were 29 councillors from 24 councils in NSW who were also elected to the NSW parliament.? Of those 29 councillors, 11 were Mayors and 2 were Deputy Mayors.

 

The Premier, the Hon. Barry O?Farrell MP, has requested that the Minister for Local Government, the Hon. Don Page MP, investigate the issue.? The Division of Local Government has put together a Discussion Paper outlining the advantages and disadvantages of councillors as members of parliament in NSW.

 

Whilst the potential for a conflict of interest/duty with the role of councillor/MP?s in NSW has always existed, one reason for its perpetuation is that successive NSW Governments have determined that the role of a NSW councillor is more voluntary/part time than professional/full time.? Another reason for its perpetuation is that local government has been a traditional ?spring board? for candidates with aspirations in State and Federal politics.

 

Nonetheless there are obvious conflicts in having a role in two levels of government.? It is not fair that a Councillor/MP is perceived to achieve enhanced access to Ministers compared to a Council which does not have the benefit of a Councillor as an elected State MP.? This is particularly the case if the Councillor/MP is part of the Government.

 

As local government moves to assert its right for constitutional recognition, it is important that the governance issues relating to elected officials operating at two levels of government be resolved.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Division of Local Government be advised that in this Council?s opinion, mayors and councillors who are also members of parliament should not be entitled to stand for local government elections.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can support the status quo which allows mayors and councillors to be members of parliament.

 

Council could also choose not to have a position on the matter.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Division of Local Government has released a Discussion Paper on Councillors as Members of Parliament.? The Discussion Paper is circularised to Councillors only.? It can be found on the ?Publications? page of the Division?s website at www.dlg.nsw.gov.au.

?

The Division is seeking the views of stakeholders and other interested persons to inform advice to Government.? The closing date for submissions is 31 January 2012.

 

The Discussion Paper indicates that following the March 2011 State elections, there were 29 councillors from 24 councils in NSW who were also elected to the NSW Parliament.? Of those 29 councillors, 11 were Mayors and 2 were Deputy Mayors.

 

According to the Discussion Paper the concurrent performance of both roles as a councillor and as a Member of State and/or Federal Parliament is prohibited in Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia.

 

There are obvious potential conflicts in allowing dual roles which are summarised in the Discussion Paper and include:

 

1.?? It?s a conflict of duties/interest

For example, when a council wants to express a view about a State issue, the councillor is also a Member of Parliament.

 

2.?? It?s not easy to know who to complain to

The best example is where a ratepayer goes to their local Member to complain about the council when the local Member is also a councillor.

 

3.?? It?s not practical for one person

This argument is that it?s not practical for a person to effectively perform both roles, and give equal time and effort.? As a result, ratepayers and taxpayers should not have to pay for councillors and Members of Parliament who are not fully concentrating on their responsibilities.

 

This is considered a weaker argument as various NSW Governments have steadfastly refused to acknowledge, in financial terms, the time and commitment made by councillors.? It can?t be argued that a Councillor from Nambucca Shire Council paid $9,970 per annum should be expected to give equal time and effort to that of a State MP on a base salary of $136,140 per annum.? The Councillor obviously requires a secondary source of income whereas the State MP does not.

 

4.?? It?s not equitable

Councillors who are not Members of Parliament are not able to raise issues directly in Parliament or with Ministers with whom they do not have regular contact.

 

5.?? It blurs responsibilities

Whilst there are policies and processes in place to prevent the blurring of responsibilities, the argument is that there is potential for perceptions about inappropriate use of one position for the purposes of another.? It is argued that staff employed by a council to assist councillors with the performance of their duties may be perceived as carrying out some duties for the councillor

 

The Discussion Paper lists the arguments for allowing Councillors to be Members of Parliament as:

 

A.??? It?s democracy in action

Voters and councillors should be trusted to decide whether it is right for a councillor to stand for office in another tier of government.? If the community is dissatisfied, then they may express that view when voting at the next election.

 

B.??? It?s ensuring the best person for the job

The skills, knowledge and experience gained by councillors assist them to perform their role as a Member of Parliament.? This includes skills and experience gained from representing the interests of constituents, and a broader understanding of issues that are important to a local community as local government is the tier of government closest to the people.

 

C.??? It increases local advocacy

Councillors are able to be a more effective advocate for their communities at the state level due to be being able to raise issues directly in Parliament and with Ministers with whom they are likely to have regular contact.

 

D.??? It?s efficient

Given that the issues dealt with may be similar, the work day of a councillor with a dual role is more efficient and effective.? Performing a dual role can minimise duplication.

 

E.??? It?s common for Members of Parliament to have other roles

Many MP?s have roles in addition to being a member.? For instance there is no general restriction on MP?s engaging in other employment, such as legally qualified Members continuing to practice their profession, Members owning and operating family farms, undertaking paid employment, or engaging in various charitable activities.? Members of Parliament also hold other official positions, including as Ministers of the Crown.

 

Assessment

 

The concurrent performance of both roles as a councillor and as a Member of State and/or Federal Parliament is prohibited in Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, and South Australia.? There is no prohibition in Tasmania, the Northern Territory or in New Zealand.

 

Whilst the potential for a conflict of interest/duty with the role of councillor/MP?s in NSW has always existed, one reason for its perpetuation is that successive NSW Governments have determined that the role of a NSW councillor is more voluntary/part time than professional/full time.? Another reason for its perpetuation is that local government has been a traditional ?spring board? for candidates with aspirations in State and Federal politics.? At the State level, there are currently 29 councillors from 24 councils in NSW who were also elected to the NSW Parliament.? Traditionally the dual roles continue until at the least the following election but often they continue indefinitely (subject to electoral success).

 

It has been queried in the media why, with the great need for reform in NSW local government, such attention is being given to this issue.? The issue has no significance for the big problems of financial sustainability; efficient and effective service delivery; or appropriate local government structures.

 

It is understood from media reports that the position of the NSW Local Government and Shires Associations (LGSA) is that the matter should be left to the individual councillors and not be the subject of any legislative prohibition.? A telephone conversation with the policy section of the LGSA has confirmed the LGSA?s position is likely to be that it should be left up to the community (voters) to decide whether it is right for a councillor to stand for office in another tier of government, ie the status quo.

 

Nonetheless there are obvious conflicts in having a role in two levels of government.? It is not fair that a Councillor/MP is perceived to achieve enhanced access to Ministers compared to a Council which does not have the benefit of a Councillor as an elected State MP.? This is particularly the case if the Councillor/MP is part of the Government.

 

As local government moves to assert its right for constitutional recognition, it is important that the governance issues relating to elected officials operating at two levels of government be resolved.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Local Government and Shires? Associations.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are no risk implications for Council.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no impact on budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised document

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Discussion Paper - "Dual Roles: Councillors as Members of Parliament in NSW"

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Discussion Paper - "Dual Roles: Councillors as Members of Parliament in NSW"

 

 

 

Circularised document

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.4????? SF336????????????? 151211???????? Taylors Arm Hall Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual General Meeting - 16 November 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Monika Schuhmacher, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

The report acknowledges the Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of the Taylors Arm Hall Committee of Management and the new Committee.? Copies of the Minutes of this meeting and the Financial Statement are attached.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council endorse the Minutes of the Committee of Management for the Taylors Arm Hall Annual General Meeting held on 16 November 2011 and thank the Committee for their continued good work in the past twelve months.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no real options.? Council needs voluntary Committees of Management to manage recreation and community facilities across the Nambucca Valley.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Annual General Meeting of the Taylors Arm Hall Committee of Management was held on Wednesday 16 November 2011.

 

The Committee of Management for 2011/2012 comprises:

 

????????? President ?????????????????????? Syd Scott

????????? Vice President???????????????? M Spear

????????? Secretary??????????????????????? Dawn Smythe

????????? Treasurer???????????????????????? J Gooch

????????? Executive Committee?????? K Keogh

????????? Committee ???????????????????? B Sharkey

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There was no consultation.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 


Economic

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

This report poses no risk to Council.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no financial implications.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no implications for working funds.

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View

33861/2011 - Minutes of AGM 16 November 2011

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Taylors Arm Hall Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual General Meeting - 16 November 2011

 





Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.5????? SF329????????????? 151211???????? Crosswinds Wetlands Nature Reserve Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual general Meeting - 22 September 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Monika Schuhmacher, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

The report acknowledges the Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of the Crosswinds Wetlands Nature reserve Committee of Management and the new Committee.? Copies of the Minutes of this meeting and the Financial Statement are attached.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council endorse the Minutes of the Committee of Management for the Crosswinds Wetlands Nature Reserve?s Annual General Meeting held on 22 September 2011 and thank the Committee for continued good work in the past twelve months.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no real options.? Council needs voluntary Committees of Management to manage recreation and community facilities across the Nambucca Valley.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Annual General Meeting of the Crosswinds Wetlands Nature Reserve Committee of Management was held on Thursday 22 September 2011.

 

The Committee of Management for 2011/2012 comprises:

 

????????? Chairperson???????????????????? Bob Young

????????? Vice Chairperson???????????? Frank Stennett

????????? Secretary/Treasurer????????? Tony Brooks

????????? Tree Warden????????? Toby Miles

????????? Publicity Officer?????????????? Tony Brooks

????????? Water Spokesman?????????? Nick Schenken

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There was no consultation.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

This report poses no risk to Council.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no financial implications.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no implications for working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

28366/2010 - Minutes of AGM held 23 September 2010

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Crosswinds Wetlands Nature Reserve Committee of Management - Minutes of Annual general Meeting - 22 September 2011

 



Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.6????? SF1573??????????? 151211???????? RV Friendly Town - Macksville

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Monika Schuhmacher, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

After much negotiating with the Campervan and Motorhome Club of Australia (CMCA) Macksville has finally been declared, officially, as an RV Friendly Town.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note that Macksville is now officially declared as an RV Friendly Town.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no options.? This report is for information only

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council received a report at its meeting on 1 April 2010 regarding the request for use of the Macksville Showground by motor homes and the installation of a sewage dump point.

 

A former local resident who was also an enthusiastic member of the CMCA, was seeking Council?s support for the use of the Macksville Showground by self contained vehicles that may wish to overnight or make short term stays.? He also proposed that a sewage dump point be provided at the Showground which would allow self contained vehicles to empty their grey and black water and take on potable water.? The expectation was that the camping fee for self contained vehicles would be minimal, sufficient to cover out of pocket expenses in relation to the removal of solid waste, the provision of water and maintenance of the dump point.

 

In terms of using the Macksville Showground for overnight or short term stays by RVs, it was a matter for the Showground Committee of Management which is responsible for maintaining the Showground and managing its day to day operations.? They would have to manage this camping and the collection of any camping fees.? There would be additional costs, eg insurance, solid waste disposal, and water which would need to be considered in setting a camping fee.? They were not supportive.

 

Council at its meeting on 3 June 2010 resolved it was unable to agree to his proposal that self contained vehicles be allowed to camp at the Showground because both the Council and the Committee of Management lack the resources to manage such a facility, and further, there would likely be conflict with existing approved uses.

 

Subsequently, it was decided that Council would approach the CMCA and lodge an application to have Macksville recognised as an RV Friendly Town.

 

This was finally endorsed and on 22 November 2011 Council received a Letter of Understanding from the CMCA (attached).

 

Council has received two signs which will be erected at either end to the entrance of Macksville advising motorists that Australia just got a little friendlier.

 


CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

CMCA

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There is no additional impact on the environment.

 

Social

 

The declaration of becoming an RV Friendly Town may bring more tourists to the Shire.

 

Economic

 

The declaration of becoming an RV Friendly Town may bring more tourists to the Shire which will impact positively on the local economy.

 

Risk

 

There is no risk associated with Macksville becoming an RV Friendly Town.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Council paid $260 for two RV Friendly Town signs and will also have to pay for their erection.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is variance to funding.

 

Attachments:

1View

33390/2011 - Executed Letter of Understanding for RV Friendly Town Scheme - Macksville

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

RV Friendly Town - Macksville

 





Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.7????? SF42??????????????? 151211???????? Draft Destination 2036 Action Plan

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The Division of Local Government and the Implementation Steering Committee has released a draft Destination 2036 Action Plan for the future of local government in NSW.

 

The report lists 5 areas of strategic direction for the future of local government with 16 separate initiatives.

 

The draft Action Plan is open for consultation until Wednesday 15 February 2012, although councils and other stakeholders are encouraged to provide their comments sooner, if possible.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council make a submission in response to the draft Destination 2036 Action Plan covering the following points:

 

What do you like about the draft Action Plan?

?????? Pleased with the attention being provided to financial sustainability and strong relationships

?????? A review of current rating provisions is welcomed

?????? A review of ?red tape? in the Local Government Act is strongly supported

 

In what ways could the Action Plan be improved?

?????? A clearer, most consistent statement as to the purpose of the document.? It is variously described as a ?blueprint for the changes we all know must occur? and the ?opening dialogue in a conversation that the sector will be having throughout 2012 and beyond?.? There is a big difference between the two and its purpose can?t be both.

?????? Some of the proposed strategic directions seem to be incorporated without critical review (eg resource sharing) and some initiatives (eg taking advantage of the NBN) will happen without administrative or legislative intervention.

?????? It is queried whether there is a good reason to undertake yet another study to update the financial sustainability of local government.

 

Are there other key activities you believe should be included under any of the initiatives?

?????? No

 

Do you have any suggestions regarding the proposed process for advancing the Action Plan?

?????? No

 

Are you aware of any activities (eg research) currently underway that could directly contribute to the achievement of any of the initiatives or key activities

?????? No

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The content of a submission in response to the draft Destination 2036 Action Plan is a matter for Council.

 

Council could also choose not to make a submission.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has been advised that the draft Destination 2036 Action Plan has been released for stakeholder consultation.? A copy of the draft Action Plan is a circularised document to Councillors.? For others interested in the document it can be downloaded from the Destination 2036 webpage or can found on the Division of Local Government (DLG) webpage which is www.dlg.nsw.gov.au.?

 

The draft Action Plan is open for consultation until Wednesday 15 February 2012, although councils and other stakeholders are encouraged to provide their comments sooner, if possible.

 

The draft action plan is described in the Foreword to the document as, ?a blueprint for the changes we all know must occur?.? In terms of this purpose the Division of Local Government and Implementation Steering Committee is seeking feedback from Council on the following:

 

1. What do you like about the draft Action Plan?

2. In what ways could the Action Plan be improved?

3. Are there other key activities you believe should be included under any of the initiatives?

4. Do you have any suggestions regarding the proposed process for advancing the Action Plan?

5. Are you aware of any activities (eg research) currently underway that could directly contribute to the achievement of any of the initiatives or key activities?

 

Notwithstanding its description as a ?blueprint? the DLG also notes that in the most part, the draft plan does not seek to answer or implement the actions that were suggested at Dubbo.? Rather,

 

?it provides a pathway and a process for their more detailed consideration.? It represents the opening dialogue in a conversation that the sector, its stakeholders and our communities will be having throughout 2012 and beyond? (from Circular No. 11-40).

 

The mixed metaphors and messages about the purpose of the document make it more difficult to assess its value.? If it is intended as a ?blueprint? it certainly lacks considerable detail.? It more readily meets the purpose of an ?opening dialogue?, but that negates the clear direction (and leadership) provided by a ?blueprint?.

 

The draft Action Plan is based on a number of readily agreed strategic directions for NSW Local Government.? Without commenting on the apparent priority of their listed order these are:

 

Efficient and Effective Service Delivery

Quality Governance

Financial Sustainability

Appropriate Structures

Strong Relationships

 

Efficient and Effective Service Delivery

 

This strategic direction proposes four initiatives being:

 

1.?? Facilitate greater resource sharing and cooperation between councils

2.?? Establish local government as an employer of choice

3.?? Encourage and facilitate innovation

4.?? Enable a range of operating frameworks to be utilised to achieve efficient service delivery.

 

The discussion in relation to each of the strategic directions, including efficient and effective service delivery, does not critically review the proposed directions but rather accepts them as the basis for future change.? For example, Initiative 1 proposes a significant strengthening of Regional Organisations of Councils (ROCS) notwithstanding that many have been in existence for decades and their functions have developed according to the requirements of the participating councils.? It is not explained why ROCS will deliver significantly more opportunities than has occurred in the past.? The only reference made is to:

 

?opportunities to examine and develop State wide models for shared services capturing the benefits of large scale procurements (eg, electricity) and technology (eg library operating systems), which could result in significant savings and improved service delivery outcomes for communities?.

 

This Council already participates in regional procurement for energy and other services and has participated in a regional library.

 

The promotion of local government as an, ?employer of choice?, proposes there be a program for sharing specialist professional, technical and other staff between councils in rural areas, on a regional basis and between urban and rural councils.? It is also proposed to develop a program for partnering and mentoring between large/small and urban/rural councils.? All of these initiatives are supported although there is no information to indicate why such strategies would be more successful than the initiatives which have already been undertaken.

 

The section on encouraging and facilitating innovation is supported however it includes as activities statements which are self evident and which in any case could be expected to be taken up by councils without delay or complaint, for example;

 

?3b? Ensure councils take advantage of the National Digital Economy Strategy and the National Broadband Network to improve capacity and service delivery?.

 

Quality Governance

 

Of all of the listed strategic directions, governance has arguably received more legislative attention than the other areas.? This continues with the current review of councillors having dual roles as Members of Parliament.

 

This strategic direction proposes three initiatives being:

 

5.?? Incorporate into the proposed Local Government Act the recommendations and findings from relevant Destination 2036 actions

6.?? Ensure the legislation provides flexibility and reduces red tape

7.?? Ensure strong and effective local governance

 

A review of ?red tape? in the Local Government Act is strongly supported.? Arguably an on-going review of the Act to reduce ?red tape? should have been in place since its adoption in 1993 and certainly over the past ten years.? More minor on-going legislative change picking on key areas of weakness could have achieved most of the likely gains earlier and quicker than the full review of the Act which is now contemplated.

 

In general, given the part time nature of a councillor?s role in NSW councils there is a limit as to what can be achieved in governance.? For example key activity 7c provides:

 

7c??? Develop strategies designed to increase the diversity and skill range of candidates and elected councillors

 

The weakness of the NSW model in particularly attracting younger people to serve as Councillors is well known.? It is difficult to see how this will change without some fundamental structural change.

 

Financial Sustainability

 

It is pleasing to see this issue listed as a strategic direction because it did not have a high profile in the official statements at the Dubbo conference.

 

The listed initiatives are to:

 

8.?? Review the revenue system to ensure greater flexibility and self reliance

9.?? Develop strategies that maximise opportunities to secure funding from other levels of Government

10.? Establish a range of funding models to enable the long term maintenance, replacement and creation of different classes of assets.

 

The Action Plan document contends the then NSW Government provided a comprehensive response to the recommendations of the Allan Inquiry which was commissioned by the LGSA.? This included a review of rate pegging by IPART and the new Integrated Planning and Reporting (IPR) requirements.? It is proposed that a review by commissioned to update the key elements of the Allan Inquiry, to determine the extent to which recent policy changes have impacted financial sustainability.

 

Councils will attest to the fact that in terms of financial sustainability very little has changed since the Allan Inquiry.? Following the IPR process it is certainly the case in this Council and others that measurement of the infrastructure backlog and depreciation is continuing to improve but there has been no substantive change to the underlying fiscal problems.? Undertaking yet another study will not change that.

 

It is pleasing to read that it is proposed to review the current rating provisions in the Local Government Act.? This was another issue which did not feature in discussions at Dubbo but the feedback from the community in relation to this Council?s proposed special rate variation indicates there is little understanding of local government rating and little acceptance of its ad valorem component.? It may also be an opportunity for the Division of Local Government to consider greater transparency for emergency services funding with a property based tax for the RFS and other emergency services.

 

The Action Plan suggests there is a role for the LGMA to coordinate and assist smaller rural and regional councils to develop skills in applying for, and acquitting, grant funding.? Providing better resources for grant funding and acquittal occurred in this Council about 5 years ago.? Smaller councils would achieve even more if grant providers, particularly the Federal Government, were cognisant of our limited capacity to provide matching funding.? The most recent round (2) of the Regional Development Australia Fund being a case in point.

 

Appropriate Structures

 

This strategic direction lists the following initiatives:

 

11.? Develop a number of different structural models for Local Government

12.? Encourage and facilitate voluntary amalgamations and boundary alterations

 

Initiative no. 11 follows on from discussions at Dubbo about alternative models for the structural reform of local government.? This recognised agreement that one size does not fit all and a number of different models need to be developed to accommodate the different types of councils and their communities.

 

Some of the models suggested at Dubbo were:

 

?????? A model with greater and more formalised regional service delivery and resource sharing

?????? A model for small to medium councils with shared administrations but independent elected bodies

?????? A two tier model with roles and responsibilities separated between local and regional councils

?????? A model for larger councils with a corporate board structure and/or corporatized service delivery

 

The DLG propose to have completed research on alternative models by February 2012.? They then propose to develop, with volunteer councils, a variety of models for the structure of councils in NSW.

 

It will be interesting to see how the trials of these models progress.

 

Strong Relationships

 

The following initiatives are listed:

 

13.? More clearly define the functions, roles and responsibilities of Local and State Government

14.? Align State and Local Government planning frameworks

15.? Negotiate a new Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA)

16.? Recognise Local Government as a legitimate and important sphere of government

 

This section has some sensible statements including that Councils should have the flexibility to provide services and facilities that best meet the needs of their particular community.? Further that there needs to be some flexibility to adjust to society?s changing needs and demands.?

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been no consultation in the preparation of this report.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The Action Plan has no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The Action Plan does not have any social implications.

 

Economic

 

The Action Plan does not have any economic implications.

 

Risk

 

Besides the longer term possibility of structural reform with amalgamations or different forms of resource sharing, the Action Plan does not pose any short term risks.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no budgetary implications.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no implications for working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised document (Trim 34224/2011)

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Draft Destination 2036 Action Plan

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Draft Destination 2036 Action Plan

 

 

 

Circularised document (Trim 34224/2011)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.8????? SF1077??????????? 151211???????? Museum Advisor - 2011 Annual Report

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Council?s Museum Advisor, Ms Joan Kelly has submitted an annual report for her activities in 2011.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information concerning the annual report from Council?s Museum Advisor be received.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no options.? The report is for information.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council?s Museum Advisor, Ms Joan Kelly has submitted an annual report for her activities in 2011.? This is a requirement of the funding agreement with Museums and Galleries NSW.

 

A copy of the annual report is a confidential circularised document to Councillors.

 

The Museum Advisor program has completed its third year.? The program is a financial partnership between Nambucca Shire Council and Museums and Galleries NSW.? The program offers 20 days of professional museum assistance per year to local government through matching funding, usually 10 two day visits over 12 months (February ? November).

 

One of the major achievements for 2011 was the publication of a regional museum brochure.? The Valley?s four museums worked collectively to produce the brochure with the assistance of funding from State and Regional Development (Industry and Investment).? The brochure was launched in July and is an important marketing tool, particularly for people who make enquiries at the Visitor Information Centre.

 

The Museum Advisor has also contributed to our museums receiving other grants.? The Headland Museum obtained a grant for photographic archival material and Mary Boulton Pioneer Cottage and Museum has received a grant for a significance assessment.? The significance assessment will be undertaken by another Museum Advisor, Libby Newel who has moved to Dorrigo.

 

The project based, hands-on nature of the activities undertaken in 2011 has increased attendance numbers and engagement with the Museum Advisor Program in two of the four museums.

 

The next year of the program will concentrate on ensuring that e-catalogues are in place and that appropriate storage is developed across non-object collection areas, eg photographs and textiles.

 

It is hoped that familiarity with their collections through the Museum Advisor projects will encourage each group to develop their own projects, including redeveloping exhibitions and extend this to associated public programs.? Work to this end will continue during 2012.

 

At Council?s meeting on 3 November 2011 it was resolved to continue the grant funding agreement for the Museum Advisor Program for the 2011/2012 financial year being the fourth year of the program, but advise the local museums, Museum and Galleries NSW and Ms Joan Kelly that this is likely to be the final year of the program.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Museum Advisor.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The four museums in the Nambucca Valley contain important historic and cultural artefacts.? Their importance will increase over time.? The dedicated work of the volunteers at each museum is preserving this important history at little cost to the community.

 

Economic

 

There are no significant economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are no significant risks.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Museum and Galleries NSW provide Council with $9,000 towards the Museum Advisor?s costs ($6,000 for fees and $3,000 for travel) and Council contributes $6,000.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Confidential Circularised Document (Trim 34462/2011)

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Museum Advisor - 2011 Annual Report

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Museum Advisor - 2011 Annual Report

 

 

 

Confidential Circularised Document (Trim 34462/2011)

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.9????? SF690????????????? 151211???????? Determination of Rate Peg for 2012/2013

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Council has been advised that the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) has determined that Councils? general income may be increased by 3.6% for the 2012/2013 rating year.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the advice from IPART of the determination of the rate peg for 2012/2013 at 3.6% be received.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no options.? The report is for information.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has been advised that the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) has determined that Councils? general income may be increased by 3.6% for the 2012/2013 rating year.

 

IPART made the rate peg determination using the following approach:

 

?????? They took the increase in the Local Government Cost Index in the year to the September quarter 2011 of 3.4%

 

?????? They deducted a productivity factor of 0.2%

 

?????? They added a carbon price advance of 0.4%, for this year only

 

The actual impact of the carbon price will be reflected in the Local Government Cost Index from the September 2012 quarter.? IPART propose to reverse the effects of the carbon price advance from the rate pegs over 2013/2014 and 2014/2015.? They propose to remove 0.1% in 2013/2014 and 0.3% in 2014/2015 to ensure that the impact of the carbon price is not double-counted in the rate peg decisions.

 

Council will be aware that its proposed special rate variation for 2012/2013 made a provision for the rate peg of 3.0%.

 

The determination of the rate peg at 3.6% effectively means that after excluding the expected inflation in Council?s cost base, the real value to Council of the special variation is a 1.4% increase over the rate revenue received in 2011/2012.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There was consultation with IPART as to the expected rate peg when the special variation was discussed with them in August 2011.? At the time 3.0% was considered a reasonable assumption for the purposes of Council?s special rate variation.? Obviously a large factor in the difference is a provision for the carbon tax which was not law when the matter was first discussed.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no direct implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no direct social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no direct economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks.? The report is for information.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The impact on future budgets will be dependent upon IPART?s determination of Council?s special rate variation.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.10??? SF1560??????????? 151211???????? The Impacts of Rally Australia 2011 on the Nambucca Shire

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Council has now received a report on the impacts of the World Rally Championship which was held in the Nambucca Valley on Saturday 10 September 2011.

 

The results of the research indicate the economic impact of the event was neutral with some businesses being affected positively and others negatively, while a large proportion of respondents reported no financial impact.

 

In contrast the social impacts of the event were generally considered as very positive by survey respondents, particularly in providing opportunities for community members to have fun with their friends and family, to experience new activities and meet new people.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That the information concerning the costs and benefits of the World Rally Championship for the Nambucca Valley be received.

 

2??????? That Council formally thank its Manager Business Development for his pivotal role in organising the community activities which occurred around the World Rally and which contributed to its social success.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no options.? The report is for information.

 

Council could consider its participation in future World Rally or Rally Australia events.? However there is no proposal on the table for a future event and a determination as to the level of Council?s involvement, if any, would be better left until then.? At that time Council?s consideration would obviously be informed by the reported outcomes of the 2011 Rally.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has now received the results of research by Dr Arianne Reis and Dr Grant Cairncross on the impacts of the World Rally Championship ? Rally Australia 2011.

 

A copy of their report has been circularised to Councillors.

 

The results of the research indicate the economic impact of the event was neutral with some businesses being affected positively and others negatively, while a large proportion of respondents reported no financial impact.

 

According to the research, based on aggregated data the net gain for the Nambucca Shire, strictly measured by profits and losses directly indicated by businesses, was $22,660.? Although this total is positive, because of its quantum and the small sample size of the survey it does not allow a confident statement that the economic benefit to the shire was positive.

 

In contrast the social impacts of the event were generally considered as very positive by survey respondents, particularly in providing opportunities for community members to have fun with their friends and family, to experience new activities and meet new people.? Another important positive point was the perceived enhanced image of the community.

 

The festive atmosphere caused by the event, together with the opportunity to enjoy a day out with friends and family seems to be considered highlights of Rally Australia 2011 for the Nambucca Shire community.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

The research included a community survey.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The environmental implications of the environment were considered by Rally Australia prior to the event being staged.

 

Social

 

The research comments on the social implications of the event.

 

Economic

 

The research comments on the economic implications of the event.

 

Risk

 

There are no particular risks in considering the outcome of the event.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Council committed $5,500 to costs associated with hosting the World Rally event.

 

The actual costs incurred by Council in undertaking activities related to the event were:

 

$6,040 for traffic control and crowd fencing

$2,280 for town services (street cleaning and waste removal)

$1,500 as a contribution to a High Street live broadcast by Radio 2MC (also funded by Nambucca Valley Tourism and the Bowraville Chamber of Commerce ? total cost $4,500)

$1,000 for the evaluation of the event

 

Therefore the cost of Council?s involvement in the event was approximately $11,000 not including the considerable time committed to organising the event by Council?s Manager Business Development.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.? The funding for the research came from the economic development budget.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised Document - Impacts of Rally australia 2011 (Trim 34493/2011)

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

The Impacts of Rally Australia 2011 on the Nambucca Shire

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

The Impacts of Rally Australia 2011 on the Nambucca Shire

 

 

 

Circularised Document - Impacts of Rally australia 2011 (Trim 34493/2011)

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.11??? SF1604??????????? 151211???????? September 2011 Budget Review

 

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

 

Summary:

 

General Fund:??????????????? This review revises the net operating result for 2011/12 to a deficit of $192,300 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $1,818,906, a decline of $144,200 since the Original Budget.

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

Council?s estimated Current Liquid Equity position (available working capital at year end) is healthy at approximately $580,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policy.

 

Water Supplies:???????????? This review revises the net operating result for 2011/12 to a surplus of $28,400 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $1,467,225, a decline of $1,400 since the Original Budget.

 

Council?s estimated Current Liquid Equity position (available working capital at year end) is solid at approximately $740,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policy.

 

Sewerage Services:??????? This review revises the net operating result for 2011/12 to a surplus of $15,900 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $898,786, being no change to the Original Budget.

 

Council?s estimated Current Liquid Equity position (available working capital at year end) is healthy at approximately $300,000 above the minimum level as per Council?s policy.

 

The circularised budget review document includes, as variances, amounts required to match unexpected income/expenditure items plus resolved inclusions to the budget. Items varying $5,000 or more are briefly discussed commencing page 2 and referenced to the page no. in the budget review document. Significant variations influencing the result are discussed further in this report. As part of the move to the Department of Local Government?s Integrated Planning & Reporting (IPR) changes have been made to the quarterly budget review reporting requirements in accordance with clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation. On page 4 of the document is a summary Council?s Cash and Investments (cash reserves). Restricted reserves and unrestricted cash are presented with the movements of these reserves for the 2011/12 year as at the 30 September 2011. Also on page 4 is a statement of the YTD expenditure associated with consultancies and legal expenses. It should be noted that these expenses are incorporated in the budget. A further requirement is a statement of all contracts greater than $50,000 entered into during the quarter. As this is the first time inclusion of this statement, the entire contracts register as per Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 is presented on pages 5-10 of the budget review document.

 

Circularised also for Council?s information is the Capital Works report.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That the budget review for the quarter ended 30 September, 2011 be received.

 

2??????? That the recommended increases and decreases in votes be included as subsequent votes for the financial year 2011/2012.

 

3??????? That a fence be erected on the boundary of the Macksville Cemetery and Hodge Street and that additional funding of $6,500 be included in the 2011/12 budget.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Not Applicable

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

As discussed at the in the 30th June 2011 Budget Review report, delays to financial reporting are continuing due to implementation issues associated with the conversion of Council?s corporate software and the move to the new IPR reporting requirements. Many of the disparity issues between the old and new software systems have been dealt with. Further, the latest upgrade to the Authority system (version 6.4) will permit budget figures to placed on Work Orders (project style ledger accounts) which should allow a more timely recognition of variances and a smoother budget reconciliation process. An improvement in future reporting timeframes is therefore expected.

 

GENERAL ACTIVITIES.

 

The summary of current liquid equity is on page 1 of the Budget Review document. The estimated current liquid equity surplus is $1,818,906 inclusive of internal loans.

 

The original 2011/12 budget forecast a net operating deficit of $48,100. Items revoted from 2010/11 amounted to $1,009,300. The balance of internal loans borrowed from current liquid equity was $583,340.

 

In addition to Council?s resolution to include the one off contract variation of $142,000 for the Coffs Coast Waste Services Processing and Resource Recovery Operations of which $113,600 was met by the Domestic Waste Surplus Reserve, this budget review sees additional expenditure variations relating to the costs of the recent voluntary redundancies totalling $69,300 and a reduction in the estimated Financial Assistance Grant of $42,300. Rate assessment growth of $35,000 primarily relating to the Pearl Estate was able to partly offset the forecasted additional expenditure.?

 

It should be noted that Council?s Manager Health and Building has advised that in order to deter vandalism at the Macksville Cemetery, a fence is required at the Hodge Street boundary of the cemetery to discourage people taking the short cut through the cemetery to residential areas to the south east. The project cost is estimated at $6,500 and included for Council?s consideration.

 

WATER SUPPLIES.

 

Water Supplies estimated current liquid equity surplus is $1,467,225.

 

The original 2011/12 budget forecast a net operating surplus of $29,800. Net revotes from 2010/11 amount to $24,600.

 

There are no major variations to report at this budget review.

 

SEWERAGE SERVICES.

 

The original 2011/12 budget forecast a net operating surplus of $15,900. Items revoted from 2010/11 amounted to $38,000.

 

Other than an additional $20,000 in Council Works for the Nambucca Augmentation project funded from the Augmentation reserve, there were no major variations to report.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Directors

Responsible Officers

Accountant

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Not applicable.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Refer to discussion.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised document - Summary of Current Liquid Equity

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

September 2011 Budget Review

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

September 2011 Budget Review

 

 

 

Circularised document - Summary of Current Liquid Equity

 

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.1??? SF1589??????????? 151211???????? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 2 December 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Teresa Boorer, Administrative Support Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That the list of outstanding development applications (in excess of 12 months old) be noted and received for information by Council

 

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

 

 

 

 

TABLE 1: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IN EXCESS OF 12 MONTHS OLD

 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

COMMENTS ON APPLICATION

2010/221

03/09/2010

Additions to existing pre-school

 

Part Lot 8 DP 821952, Valla Beach Road, Valla Beach

 

This application was placed on hold pending further discussions regarding a Bushfire Hazard easement over the adjoining land. Whilst the applicants were requested to withdraw the application, they requested that the matter remain live as external funding is tied to this proposal and progress has been made with the adjoining landowners regarding the easement with a finalisation considered imminent.

 

 

 


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

 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2011/103

24/06/2011

Bed & Breakfast Accommodation

Lot 873 DP 601418, 95 Helliwells Road, Missabotti

? Horticulture business operated with use of machinery and bird scaring devices ? potential noise impacts to B&B

Site inspection to take place 2/8/11.

Requires a BASIX Certificate

Soil Assessment report unsatisfactory.

30 day letter issued to applicant to provide new soil assessment report or withdraw application.

Applicant withdrawing component of proposal ? still awaiting amended plans.

2011/139

23/08/11

Crematorium, Chapel and Associated Facilities

Lot 51 DP 613620, Foxs Road, Nambucca Heads

? Crematorium will create ?black spot? on highway as turning lane into Foxs Road won?t be long enough for funeral traffic and traffic coming out of Foxs Road will find it difficult to judge gap in traffic.

This issue was also raised when the land was rezoned under the previous LEP via Amendment 57, gazetted on 8 December 2006. The DA has been referred to the RTA for their comments, as it was with the LEP Amendment. The RTA advised, at that time, that safety and efficiency matters can be addressed at the development application stage, provided they are included as specific conditions in any future development consent. No response has been received as yet from the RTA.

Have tried to chase up the RTA, however still awaiting response.

No response from applicant (7/11/11) re high likelihood of Aboriginal artefacts being found, as per advice from Nambucca Heads LALC.

Awaiting RTA and Health & Building?s comments

2011/165

4/10/11

Rural Dwelling-House

Lot 2 DP 1130291, Taylors Arm Road, Upper Taylors Arm

? Concerns with the position of the road

Requires a modification as outside approved dwelling envelope.

 

2011/167

19/10/2011

New Dwelling

Lot 3 DP 864681, 21 Eggleton Street, Hyland Park

 

? Concerns with driveway position in regard to headlights at night ? suggestion re fencing

Currently being assessed

 

2010/114/02

2/11/2011

Home Industry ? alter hours of operation

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

? Submission in support of proposed alteration to operating hours ? good for the fledgling business

Currently being assessed

2006/142/04

18/10/2011

14 Lot Residential Subdivision

Lot 142, DP 809036, 2 Grandview Drive, North Macksville

 

? Submission as objection to proposed modification ? 1 Possilbe effluent disposal area positioning; 2 Dirt road issue of pollution; 3 previous condition not taken into account in modification application

Currently being assessed

Advertising closed on 2 December 2011

 

2011/175

1/11/2011

Part demolition for proposed residential renovation and additions

Lot? 30, DP 547182, 5 Leonard Street, Nambucca Heads

? Submission in objection to proposed development ? 1 roofline & issues of light; 2 views impaired; 3 feeling of enclosure; 4 living in a tunnel; 5 property value decreased as a result of the development

Currently being assessed

Additional information requested

2011/181

11/11/2011

Duplex side by side, single storey

Lot 32, DP 1044587, 100 Ocean View Drive, Valla Beach

? Submission concerned in regard to privacy ? suggesting fast growing native screening plants and water run-off concerns.

Currently being assessed

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.2??? SF1148??????????? 151211???????? Contract Regulatory Officer's Report November 2011

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The following is the Contract Regulatory Officer?s Report for November 2011.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the report from the Contract Regulatory Officer for November 2011 be received and noted by Council.

 

 

 

 

Cats

Dogs

COUNCIL?S SEIZURE ACTIVITY

 

 

Seized (doesn?t include those animals dumped or surrendered)

2

9

Returned to Owner

0

1

Transferred to - Council's Facility from Seizure Activities

2

8

ANIMALS IN AND ARRIVING AT COUNCIL'S FACILITY

 

 

Animals In Council's Facility - (Start of Month)

2

1

Abandoned or Stray

2

1

Surrendered

0

0

Total Incoming Animals

4

9

ANIMALS LEAVING COUNCIL'S FACILITY

 

 

Released to Owners

0

1

Sold

0

0

Released to Organisations for Rehoming

0

0

Died at Council's Facility(other than euthanased)

0

0

Stolen from Council's Facility

0

1

Escaped from Council's Facility

0

0

Other

0

0

EUTHANASED

 

 

Restricted Dogs

 

0

Dangerous Dogs

 

0

Owner?s Request

0

0

Due to Illness, Disease or Injury

0

0

Feral/infant animal

0

0

Unsuitable for rehoming

0

0

Unable to be rehomed

5

2

Total Euthanased

5

2

Total Outgoing Animals

5

3

TOTAL IN COUNCIL'S FACILITY - (END OF MONTH)

1

6

 

 

 

Kilometres travelled

2806

 

 

CSR?s (Customer Service Requests) Actioned ? Not including Merit

40

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Environment and Planning

ITEM 10.3??? SF1589??????????? 151211???????? DEP Applications and Statistical Reports July 2011-June 2012, 2007-2011 and Certificates Received 2007-2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Emma Shaw, Administration Support Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

Environment and Planning Department Development Application statistics for the financial year 2011-2012 compared with 2010-2011 and Certificate Applications received and determined are provided in the body of the report.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council note development application statistics and processing times for July 2011-June 2012 compared with July 2010-June 2011.

 

2????????? That Council note Occupational Certificate released for the years 2007 to 2011.

 

3????????? That Council note the statistical information for Applications and Certificates received by Council for 2007-2011.

 

 

Development Application Statistics

 

The figures show a -25.58% decrease in the number of DA?s received to November 2011 with construction costs decreasing by -116.77% compared to the same period in 2010/2011. The total number of DA?s/CD?s approved for the month of October was 19 plus 5 modifications.

 

DA?S AND COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT

 

Construction Costs

No Applications Received

Applications Approved (DA & CD)

July 2010-Nov 2010

$20,400,068

108

95

July 2011-Nov 2011

$9,410,714

86

88

 

 

FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

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

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

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


 

TURNAROUND TIMES FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS 2011

Month

Mean Time

Median

#Average age of DA?s (Days)

Average

Highest

Lowest

January

52.83

40

64.92

133

28

February

42.94

34

63.64

190

10

March

46.41

33

50.05

127

14

April

31.25

33

55.37

308

2

May

43.38**

42

181.12

2761**

8

June

35.88

27

59

167

22

July

28.87

20

40.60

144

11

August

35.5

32

44.25

66

4

September

21.5

28

49.9

314

8

October

20.9

25

36.52

205

5

November

38.22

29.5

64.94

169

5

December

 

 

 

 

 

 

**? DA 2004/136 (East-West Road Subdivision) has not been included in the Mean or Median Times

#Average age of DA?s

 

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

 


COMPLYING DEVELOPMENTS RECEIVED

 

YEAR

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Total

2007 Private Cert

5

3

4

1

2

4

4

3

5

4

6

1

42

2007 Council

0

3

3

1

3

4

7

0

1

2

6

3

33

2008 Private Cert

0

3

1

4

6

2

6

4

2

2

6

6

44

2008 Council

2

2

2

3

2

5

2

2

2

7

1

3

33

2009 Private Cert

3

7

6

4

3

2

11

3

2

7

4

7

59

2009 Council

1

3

2

2

3

2

2

2

5

5

3

2

32

2010 Private Cert

3

6

6

3

4

0

12

1

2

1

1

0

39

2010 Council

3

6

2

1

2

1

9

3

1

2

2

0

32

2011 Private Cert

1

0

3

7

4

4

3

1

7

6

3

 

39

2011 Council

2

2

0

1

0

1

1

0

2

0

2

 

11

 

CONVEYANCING CERTIFICATES ISSUED

YTD (Jan-Nov)

Drainage Diagrams

Section 149 Certs

Outstanding Notices

2007

259

692

202

2008

244

625

155

2009

229

702

158

2010

204

608

127

2011

281

590

109

 

OCCUPATION CERTIFICATES RELEASED

YEAR

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

TOTAL

Average/
Month

Private
2007

1

0

0

3

7

5

3

2

3

2

9

5

40

3.33

Council
2007

6

20

14

7

22

13

12

10

14

13

8

12

151

12.58

Private
2008

4

0

4

2

4

5

5

8

7

11

4

7

61

5.08

Council
2008

12

16

9

9

29

12

19

25

16

20

17

13

197

16.41

Private
2009

1

4

5

3

2

3

10

4

7

7

9

6

61

5.08

Council
2009

21

11

19

14

14

15

10

17

13

20

16

12

182

15.16

Private
2010

4

4

12

2

7

2

4

5

7

1

3

4

55

4.58

Council
2010

10

14

9

12

11

7

11

7

6

3

2

7

99

8.25

Private
2011

9

6

11

0

5

12

3

10

9

7

4

 

76

6.9

Council
2011

6

22

15

5

10

11

12

15

6

9

8

 

119

10.81

Attachments:

1View

34313/2011 - November DA Stats for business paper

 

?

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

DEP Applications and Statistical Reports July 2011-June 2012, 2007-2011 and Certificates Received 2007-2011

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Environment and Planning

ITEM 10.4??? SF1614??????????? 151211???????? Minutes of the Access Committee meetings held 25 October 2011 and 22 November 2011

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Attached for Council?s attention are the minutes of the Access Committee for meetings held 25 October 2011 and 22 November 2011.? The minutes contain 3 recommendations for Council?s endorsement and they are as follows:

 

1??????? To refer the 100 km/h speed limit sign on Links Road, near the? Pacific Hwy intersection to Council?s Traffic Committee.

 

2??????? That Mrs Holmes approach and mention the access issue to the Golf Club and that a letter is also written from the Access Committee to the Golf Club raising the access issue.

 

3??????? That the constitution adopted by the Access Committee is submitted to the General Manager for review and submitted to Council for endorsement, and attachment of the Common Seal if necessary.

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That the location of the 100 km/h speed limit sign on Link Road, near the Pacific Hwy northern intersection to Nambucca Heads be reviewed by Council?s Traffic Committee.

 

2??????? That a letter be written on behalf of the Access Committee to the Nambucca Heads Golf Club raising the access issues at its entrance.

 

3??????? That the constitution adopted by the Access Committee be endorsed by Council and that the Common Seal be attached if necessary.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Endorse the minutes and their recommendations

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

3??????? Endorse the minutes with revised recommendations

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Speed Limit sign on Link Road

 

The Committee recognises that this isn?t an access issue as such but it does appear to pose some risks for people who use the northern access to the Pacific Highway, particularly those unfamiliar with the area.? The location of the 100km sign implies the open road, however the T-intersection with the highway is only a short distance around the corner.?

 

Access issue at Nambucca Heads Golf Club

 

The minutes briefly record the issue at one of the Golf Club accesses.? Mrs Holmes will raise this matter with the Golf Club when she attends Probus meetings there and a short letter from Council on behalf of the Access Committee advocating for improved access is suggested.

 


Access Committee constitution

 

All Council Committee has been asked to review their operations and policy statements following the annual confirmation of Councillor delegates to Committees.?

 

A discussion at the October meeting, revealed that the current constitution, policy statement and terms of reference are lengthy and out of date.? The Committee requested the Council staff to the revise the Constitution and present one document to the Committee for consideration.? A new Constitution is attached for Council?s endorsement.? There are no major changes proposed to the role of the committee and the content largely reflects the old documents, however it has been updated to a more readable useful format and to include consideration of issues for seniors as access for this age group is becoming a priority.

 

Should the document need additional governance clauses to maintain consistency with other Council committees these can be added prior to the document being signed off.? The document may also need the Common Seal.?

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nil consultation.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no issues identified.?

 

Social

 

Nothing specific identified.

 

Economic

 

Nothing specific identified.]

 

Risk

 

Nothing identified.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nil.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required.

 

Attachments:

1View

29196/2011 - Minutes - Access Committee - 25 October 2011

 

2View

31515/2011 - DRAFT Constitution Access Committee 2011

 

3View

32109/2011 - Minutes - Access Committee - 22 November 2011

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Minutes of the Access Committee meetings held 25 October 2011 and 22 November 2011

 

PRESENT

 

Cr E South (Chairperson)

Mr Les Small

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Ms Alba Sky

Mrs Shirley Holmes

Mr Matt Sullivan

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Ms Naj Hadzic

Cr A Smyth

Mr Keith Davis

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Ms Fiona Holmes

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

RESOLVED:? (Sky/Sullivan)

 

That the Committee note the adoption and endorsement of the recommendations of the Minutes of the Meeting held 27 September 2011, by Council.

 

 

 

?

ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE ? Nil

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

ITEM 5.1????? SF1614???????????? 251011?????? Report on Business Arising from previous meeting held 27 September 2011

Recommendation:

 

That the matters arising form the previous minutes be noted.

 

RESOLVED: (Smyth/Secomb)

Congratulations to the Community and Cultural Services Manager, Coral Hutchinson, Project Officer Naj Hadzic, and the Community Services team, Access Committee and all involved in holding such a great Safe and Savvy Seniors Information Day.? The day was very well organised and attended, had a great atmosphere and was very well supported by local organisations.

 

The Committee noted the following without formal recommendation:

 

Matters Still in Process ? Keeping track of matters awaiting a response/comment back to the Committee from Council staff:

 

1??????? After-hours Taxi Rank, Bowra Street

2??????? Wallace Street Pedestrian Crossing ? lighting

3??????? Council Website ? font enlargement

4??????? Toilet Doors ? opening in/out

5??????? Wallace Street refuge

 

 

 

ITEM 5.2????? SF1614??????? 251011???????? Report on Correspondence to the Access Committee Meeting of 25 October 2011

RESOLVED: (Davis/Sky)

 

That the items of correspondence and related actions be noted.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3????? SF1614??????? 251011???????? Report on General Business and Matters of Interest

 

The Committee noted the following without formal recommendation:

 

1??????? Information was provided to the Committee about Council?s Customer? reporting ?Merit? System, and a snapshot provided of the number and types of requests which came to Council during 2010-2011.

 

2??????? Additional Information regarding the state governments Stronger Together initiative was provided to Committee members and copies of the Stronger Together ? A new direction for disability services in NSW 2006-2016 publication distributed.

 

3??????? Information on the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

 

RESOLVED: (Holmes S/Smyth)

 

To refer the 100 km/h speed limit sign on Links Road, near the? Pacific Hwy intersection to Council?s Traffic Committee.

 

RESOLVED: (Smyth/Davis)

 

The Access Committee Policy Statement and Terms of Reference were discussed and a review initiated.? The Committee identified the need for a number of changes including the use of less cumbersome wording.? Given the discussion, the Policy Statement and Terms of Reference will be further revised by staff who will take into account the comments from Committee members to date.? The revised version will be brought back to the next Access Committee meeting.

 

 

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on 22 November 2011 commencing at 2:00 pm.

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting the time being 4:05 pm.

 

COUNCILLOR ELAINE SOUTH

(CHAIRPERSON)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Minutes of the Access Committee meetings held 25 October 2011 and 22 November 2011

 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

ACCESS COMMITTEE

DRAFT CONSTITUTION

 

 

1.????? Name

Pursuant to Section 377 of the Local Government Act, 1993 and subject to the provisions thereof NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL hereby appoints and constitutes a Committee called the Access Committee.

 

2. ???? Section 377 Delegation

The Committee pursuant to section 377 of the Local Government Act (1993) has ??? the following delegated functions but does not have the power to direct staff.

 

a)?? review, develop, endorse and forward submissions reflective of Council's adopted policy on matters falling within the jurisdiction of the Committee.

b)?? discuss and develop policy matters relating to the Committee's jurisdiction and reflective of Council's strategic direction and forward recommendations to Council for consideration and adoption.

c)?? convene workshops on matters relevant to the Committee's jurisdiction and make recommendations to Council arising from such workshops.

d)?? receive delegations and presentations on behalf of Council relating to those matters within the jurisdiction of the Committee.

 

3.????? Preamble

Nambucca Shire Council aims to ensure that all people have equal opportunity to access services and resources, that their rights are recognised, and that they are consulted in appropriate and meaningful ways and otherwise have the opportunity to participate in decision making that affects their lives.

 

Social justice is about all people receiving a fair go at the opportunities of life. It is about recognising that our society is made up of many different communities and working to promote cohesion and inclusiveness over the singling out of particular groups of people.

 

The Council is committed to valuing and protecting its natural environment, maintaining its assets and infrastructure and developing opportunities for its people.? The Council is committed to social justice principles that is based on interrelated principles of equity, rights, access and participation, to ensure that:

 

a)?? there is equity in the distribution of resources;

b)?? rights are recognised and promoted;

c)?? people have fairer access to the economic resources and services essential to? meet their basic needs and to improve their quality of life; and

d)?? people have better opportunities for genuine participation and consultation about decisions affecting their lives.

 

4. ???? Role and Objectives

To support the development and implementation of strategies which aim to ensure that the local government area becomes and is maintained as an accessible community to all people, regardless of their abilities/disabilities.

 

The Access Committee is an advisory Committee of the Council and does not have executive power or authority to implement actions.

 

Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee has the following objectives:

a)To promote equity of access for all people with disabilities in all areas of? life including recreation and leisure, employment, transport and physical environment.

b)To provide a forum for the discussion of access issues, including access issues for people with disabilities and the aged.

c)To support access assessment for people with disabilities in all public facilities and other relevant areas.

d)To act as an advisory Committee and make recommendations to Council and/or other bodies that ensures access for people with disabilities is adequately considered in all relevant planning development applications and/or other relevant areas.

e)To consult with organisations and representatives from disability groups to ensure community input on matters affecting people with disabilities.

f)To improve public awareness of disability and access issues by disseminating information about disabilities and publicising the activities of the Access Committee.

g)To support a process that documents access problems and brings them to the attention of appropriate authorities and/or develop projects/suggestions to improve any problems.

h)To support and explore avenues of obtaining funds to finance access related projects.

i)To develop policies and comment on access and disability issues.

j)To encourage interest and community participation in the Access Committee.

5.????? Membership

Membership is to include:

? Councillors

? community representatives

 

Note: Staff members participating on the Committee do not have any voting entitlements.

 

6.????? Annual General Meeting

 

An Annual General Meeting of members shall be held annually, during the month of March.? Membership of the Access Committee will be recorded and positions of Chairperson, Deputy Chair and Secretary elected.? The Access Committee membership will be submitted to Council for endorsement.

 

7.????? Election of Chairperson and other Positions

The position of Chairperson, Deputy Chair and Secretary are to be elected from members comprising the Committee.

 

8.????? Quorum

A quorum to constitute at least half plus one the number of members.

 

9. ???? Confidentiality

Members of the Committee will, in those circumstances where confidential matters are subject to deliberation, maintain confidentiality.

 

10. ?? Voting

Each member of the Committee (with the exception of staff members) is to have one vote, with the Chairperson to have a casting vote in addition to a deliberative vote.

 

11.??? Majority Decision

A requirement that a majority decision of the Committee comprises a majority of elected members present and voting on any item subject to the requirements of a quorum being met at the meeting.

 

12. ?? Convening Meetings

At least quarterly meetings will be held.

 

13. ?? Agenda Preparation and Reporting

a)?? An agenda for each meeting and report of meetings (Minutes) are to be circulated to Committee members at least 7 days prior to the meeting being held.

b)?? Committee members may request items for inclusion in future agendas, through the Chair.

c)?? The Committee shall keep proper minutes of all its meetings.

d)?? A report of the Committee meetings (Minutes) will be presented to Council.

 

14. ?? Meeting Practice

The meetings be conducted in accordance with Council?s Code of Meeting Practice.

 

15.??? Miscellaneous

 

15.1 Insurance: All group members are covered by the public liability policy of Council. This insurance does not preclude the Access Committee from due diligence and all Council policies must be adhered to.

 

15.2 Code of Conduct: All group members to abide by Council?s adopted Code of Conduct at all times.

 

15.3 Pecuniary Interest: Pecuniary Interest may be defined as an interest that a person has in a matter, as a group member or employee of a company or other body, 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.? Such other person includes the spouse or de-facto partner or relative of the group member.

 

Section 446 of the Local Government Act states that: ?a member of a Council Committee, other than a Committee that is wholly advisory, must disclose pecuniary interests..?

 

Even though the Local Government Act provides an exemption to disclose pecuniary interests Council?s preference is for all members to declare pecuniary interests where applicable.


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Minutes of the Access Committee meetings held 25 October 2011 and 22 November 2011

 

PRESENT

 

Cr E South (Chairperson)

Mr Peter Shales

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

Mrs Shirley Holmes

Mr Keith Davis

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Ms Naj Hadzic

Cr A Smyth

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Ms Fiona Holmes

Ms Alba Sky

Mr Matt Sullivan

Mr Les Small

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

RESOLVED: ?(Davis/Smyth)

 

That the Committee endorse the Minutes of the Meeting held 25 October 2011 and note that they have not yet been presented to Council.

 

 

?

ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE ? Nil

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

ITEM 5.1????? SF1614????????????????????????????? 251011???? Report on Business Arising from previous meeting held 25 October 2011

RESOLVED: (Holmes/Davis)

a)?????? The Safe and Savvy Seniors Information Day report is noted.??

b)?????? The Access Committee supports the Safe and Savvy Seniors workshop on Personal and Home Safety and Prevention from Abuse and recognises the importance of raising awareness and providing information to the community of these topics.

 

 

ITEM 5.2????? SF1614????????????? 251011????? Report on Correspondence to the Access Committee Meeting of 22 November 2011

RESOLVED: (South/Davis)

 

That the items of correspondence and related actions be noted.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3????? SF1614????????????? 251011????? Report on General Business and Matters of Interest

RESOLVED: (Holmes/Secomb)

That the constitution is endorsed and adopted by the Access Committee

 

RESOLVED: (Smyth/Davis)

That the constitution adopted by the Access Committee is submitted to the General Manager for review and submitted to Council for endorsement, and attachment of the Common Seal if necessary.

 

The Committee noted the following:

 

a)?????? Information on the Valla Beach market which is supporting Justin to raise funds for a new wheelchair.?

b)?????? International Day of People with Disability is on 3 December 2011

c)?????? That the front entrance, ramp, to the car park at the Nambucca Heads Golf Club has raised boards and is therefore difficult to access for people with walkers or wheelchairs.

 

RESOLVED: (Holmes/Shales)

That Mrs Holmes approach and mention the access issue to the Golf Club and that a letter is also written from the Access Committee to the Golf Club raising the access issue.

 

 

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on 28 February 2012 commencing at 2:00 pm

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting the time being 3:45 pm.?

 

 

 

 

COUNCILLOR ELAINE SOUTH

(CHAIRPERSON)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.5??? LF967????????????? 151211???????? Land Filling Lower Nambucca

 

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

 

Summary:

 

A Question with Notice was submitted by Cr Flack to the 17 November 2011 Council meeting regarding alleged land filling being undertaken on land adjacent to the Nambucca River on Lot 11 DP1017408 - 6004 Pacific Highway Lower Nambucca.

 

This report is an update on the investigations carried out thus far.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the ongoing investigations and consideration of alleged "filling" of land at Lot 11 DP1017408 - 6004 Pacific Highway Lower Nambucca.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

No options available at this time.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council staff had been investigating allegations of unauthorised fill being placed on Lot 11 DP1017408 - 6004 Pacific Highway Lower Nambucca prior to the Question with Notice being submitted.

 

The investigations were hampered with the landowners being out of the country for some time. Following receipt of the Question with Notice, Council's Environmental Compliance Officer and Senior Planner again attended the site to seek further information on the alleged filling.

 

When the officers attended the site they met with the landowners to discuss the filling. The landowners denied permission to take photos of what appeared to be deposited fill.

 

The staff advised them that a DA may be required and due to the proximity to the River it may very well be an integrated application requiring referral and approvals from other agencies.

 

The landowners advised that approximately 5 truck loads of soil has been deposited and some of it had come from one of Council's contractors when laying pipe work along Seaview Street. The landowners? maintain that none of the fill was contaminated. When asked why they undertook the filling and what remained to be done, the landowners indicated that their intentions were to build up a mound adjacent to what was previously a vertical 'cliff' to turn it into a slope leading from the ground level of the house, down to the river. The reason being they have children visit and they felt the 'cliff' was unsafe. They advised they would now need to - at least - cover what has been created with topsoil/grass.

 

A 21 day letter has now been sent to the landowners advising that they need to show cause as to why further action should not be taken for undertaking works without first obtaining Development Consent. Further, that no additional filling/works are to be undertaken until such time as this matter is resolved.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Senior Town Planner

Environmental Compliance Officer

Landowners

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 


Environment

Filling of land requires consent to ensure that any environmental impact may be considered. However, "Environmental Protection Works" are permitted without consent in the RU1 Primary Production Zone.

 

Social

 

There are no social impacts with this report. However should a development application be submitted any social impact will be considered.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic impacts with this report. However should a development application be submitted there may well be economic impacts associated with the preparation of the application and compliance matters.

 

Risk

 

At this stage the risks associated with the filling/works are unknown.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Not applicable

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not applicable

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 10.6??? DA2007/007????? 151211???????? DA2007/231 and DA2007/007 Modification to Remove the Requirement for a Visitors Car Parking Space

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Selina McNally, Senior Town Planner ????????

 

SUmmary:

 

When consent was granted for Multi Dwelling Housing, consisting of four (4) units at 7 Bemago Street, under Development Application 2007/007, a condition was included on the Consent to ensure a visitors? car parking space would be provided on the site.? When a subsequent application for strata subdivision was submitted (DA2007/231) an additional condition to ensure the visitors car parking bay would be located on common property was also included on the Consent issued for the strata subdivision.

 

The development has now been constructed and an Interim Occupation Certificate has been issued by Council for the Multi-Dwelling Housing.? The applicant has also submitted a strata subdivision certificate application to Council. However, to satisfy condition 22 of DA2007/007 a visitors? car park space must be provided and also as per condition 4 of the Strata Consent, it must be located on common property.

 

Whilst a "visitor space" has been provided its practical use is now questioned and the applicant has now sought a variation to remove the requirement for the single visitor parking space.

 

Due to the limited time for the 14 December 2011 GPC meeting and the fact that DA 2007/007 has required previous modifications and site visits by Councillors the matter is presented to Council at the Ordinary meeting to enable the matter to be resolved.

 

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 Condition 22 from the Notice of Consent for DA 2007/007 and Condition 4 from the Notice of Consent for DA 2007/231 relating to the provision of 1 visitor parking space be deleted as requested through the modification application on the basis there is a minimum of 3 carpark spaces per unit and sufficient on street parking available in the local vicinity.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council could choose not to support the application for modification and insist the applicant creates a functional visitors car parking space on the site. An engineer will need to be engaged to redesign an appropriate space and the new location, as well as the engineering details, will need to be approved by Council.

 

PROPOSAL

 

The proposal is to modify condition 22 of Development Consent DA2007/007 and condition 4 of DA2007/231 to remove the requirement that a visitors car parking space needs to be provided and be located within common property.

 

The Modification application includes the applicants? justification to allow the modifications, which states the deletion of the visitors car parking space will only increase on street parking by a maximum of one vehicle and this will not have a detrimental effect on the amenity of the locality, as there are many opportunities for on street parking. The justification also advises there is additional parking in front of the units? garages which could be used by visitors.

DISCUSSION:

 

Applications for the Occupation Certificate and a Subdivision Certificate required Council?s Senior Town Planner and Manager of Technical Services to conduct a site inspection. Although it was observed a visitors? car parking space had been provided in front of unit 1, it did not have the appearance of a standard visitors car parking space, resembling more of a landscape feature. It then became apparent that it was impossible to manoeuvre into the space, even using a four wheel drive vehicle, thus making it non-functional.? As such, the requirements to provide a visitors car parking space and on common property has not been complied with, and hence this application for modification.

 

Photo identifying non-capability of parking in visitors? car parking space

 

CONSULTATION:

 

?????? Internal

 

Manager of Technical Services advises the visitors car parking space provided can not satisfy consent conditions as it is impossible to manouvere to park in it, but does concede driveways can be utilised for visitor parking. However, this will result in visitors parking on the driveway of the unit they are visiting and the requirement was to provide a neutral visitors parking space within common property. In addition, MTS advises the use of gravel finishing within the car park space ? if a car were able to access the space - upon exiting it each time a large amount of gravel would be displaced over the driveway for Unit 1 and potentially onto the Council?s public road.

 

?????? External

 

The modification application was notified and an advertisement placed in the Guardian Newspaper. The period of exhibition was from 18 November ? 15 December 2011. At the time of writing this report (6 December 2011) no submissions had been received. Should any submission be received after the close of the business paper an addendum report responding to the submission/s will be circulated to Councillors prior to the Council meeting.

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010

 

This site is Zoned R3 ? Medium Density Residential under the Nambucca Local Environment Plan 2010. The proposal is permissible within the Zone and consistent with the objective for Zone.

 

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

 

There are none specifically relevant to the proposal.

 

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

 

Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010

 

Notification and Advertising

 

The application was notified and no submissions were received at the time of writing the report. Should a submission be received after the close of the business paper a further addendum will be prepared and distributed to Councillors prior to the meeting

 

Environmental Context and Site Analysis

 

The proposal relates to a newly constructed multi dwelling housing development, which comprises of four units and is located on the corner of Bemago and Reed Streets. The area is predominantly residential with a mixture of low and medium density housing in the surrounding locality.

 

The application is to remove the requirement for a visitors car parking space as the one provided is non functional as it is impossible to manoeuvre into. There are other locations within the site that potentially a functional visitors? car parking space could have been provided but no investigation of the suitability of providing the space elsewhere was undertaken by the applicant.

 

Car Parking and Traffic

 

The Development Consent for the multi dwelling housing development and the subsequent Development Consent for Strata subdivision of the development, both include conditions relating to the provision of a visitors car park space on site.

 

Although a space has been created in front of Unit 1 it is not accessible and as such is contrary to the guidance within Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 upon providing specifics for car parking, within Table C4:

 

?Visitors parking spaces should be clearly designated and readily accessible.?

 

In the first instance the visitors? car park space is not clearly identifiable as one and looks more like a garden or landscaping feature. Furthermore as Council officers have proven by trying to manoeuvre into the parking space but to no avail; it is not accessible.

 

 

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

 

Access, Transport and Traffic

 

The removal of the visitors car parking space may impact on traffic conditions in the locality as visitors may be required to park on the street, however as the modification will result in the loss of one car park only it is not considered substantial.

 

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

 

The proposal relates to the removal of a visitors car parking space which is considered suitable in this instance as there is additional car parking available on site by utilising the driveways.

 

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

 

The application was notified and no public submissions were received at the time of writing this report. Should a submission be received after the close of the business paper a further addendum will be prepared and distributed to Councillors prior to the meeting

 

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

 

An increase of on street has the potential to adversely impact on public interest.? However, in this instance, as there are additional parking opportunities on driveways available, the likely effect is considered minimal and proposal is considered acceptable.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The loss of one visitors car park space only is not considered to result in significant detriment to the site itself or the surrounding environment.

 

Social

 

The provision of a visitors? car park space is intended to prevent future social conflict in-between visitors to the site and unit occupiers. Removal of the space therefore has the potential to result in future social conflict.

 

Economic

 

The provision of a visitors? car parking space outside unit 1 could harm the potential for sale of this unit.

 

Risk

 

Potential increase in on-street parking.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

None identified.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not applicable.

 

 

DRAFT CONDITION OF CONSENT - TO BE MODIFIED

 

Car Parking/Vehicles

 

22??????? Provision of a minimum 9 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?.? Should Strata subdivision take place the visitor car parking space shall be common property.?

 

??????????? Reason:? To ensure adequate on-site car parking is provided.

 

NOTE: The requirement to provide a visitors? car park space within common property has been deleted.

 

Car Parking

 

4????????? If a strata subdivision is to take place, each strata lot is to comprise a dwelling and at least two (2) car space. Car spaces shall not be given separate strata lot numbers. All visitor spaces are to be included in common property.

 

??????????? Reason:? To ensure resident parking is provided in accordance with Council requirements.

 

 

NOTE: The requirement to provide a visitor space within common property has been deleted.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.1??? SF674????????????? 151211???????? Waste Management ? Carbon Tax

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Simon Chapman, Waste Management Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

The Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency has announced amendments to its Clean Energy Bill that affects the carbon price liabilities for landfill facilities.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the proposed changes to the Clean Energy Bill that affects the carbon price package for smaller landfills set to commence on the 1 July 2012.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

For information only

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Federal Government has consulted with landfill operators and independent experts to determine appropriate measures to deal with the potential diversion of waste from larger landfills to small landfill facilities.

 

In regard to the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) industry submissions indicate that landfill waste emission reductions should be eligible for abatement activities subject to appropriate methodologies.? These methodologies would include landfill avoidance through alternative waste treatments such as anaerobic digestion, composting, gasification, incineration and pyrolsis.

 

As a result of submission by councils and private landfill operators, the following amendments to the carbon price package have been made.

 

Landfills producing between 10,000 and 25,000 tonnes CO2-e

 

Initial Proposal ? Identifies that landfill facilities with emissions of between 10,000 and 25,000 tonnes CO2 e will be subject to the carbon price if they are within a ?prescribed distance? of a designated large landfill facility with emissions of a least 25,000 tonnes CO2-e.

 

Amendment ? Identifies that the initial ?prescribed distance? will be set at ?0 km? so that smaller landfills with emissions less than 25,000 tonnes will not be liable on 1 July 2012 and for at least 3 years from commencement of the scheme. It is possible that the ?prescribed distance? will be increased after the 3 year period has expired which may mean that smaller landfills may be subject to the carbon price after 2015.

 

Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) defines a number of approved or ?positive activities? for offsetting greenhouse gases. The approved activities that pertain to waste are:

 

?????? The application of biochar to soil

?????? The capture and combustion of methane from waste deposited in a landfill before 1 July 2012

?????? The capture and combustion of methane from livestock manure

?????? The diversion of putrescible waste that would otherwise have entered a landfill facility to an alternative waste treatment facility before 1 July 2012.

 

Permits generated under the Carbon Farming Initiative to meet liability for landfills?

 

Initial Proposal ? Identifies that liable entities are permitted to surrender carbon credits generated under the carbon farming initiative (including for renewable energy generated from legacy waste emissions) up to a maximum of 5% of the entity?s total liability during the fixed price period of the scheme (namely 2012-2015).

 

Amendment ? Identifies that the Government has now decided to allow landfill operators to surrender 100% of their liabilities by using carbon credits generated under the carbon farming initiative during the fixed price period.

 

Carbon Tax Impost

 

Industry estimates that the carbon tax cost per tonne of waste = $35.70 (1.19 x $30.00 (average future cost). The average future cost of emissions from waste deposited during the fixed price period is assumed to be $30.00 per tonne CO2-e (not $23.00 + 2.5% pa) as the waste decomposes and produces emissions in the future.? Industry has estimated the carbon tax cost on each household at $34.77 per tonne of waste generated per annum given that each household produces, on average, 0.974 tonnes per year.

 

Potential Impacts for the Nambucca Shire

 

A consulting firm developed a model for estimating emissions from landfills some time ago.? The information that I computed for the Nambucca Waste Facility were only estimates based on past tonnages received at both Nambucca?s old and new landfills.? From that particular model the emissions were quite low and I believe Nambucca does not trigger the 10,000 tonne CO2-e threshold for both the sites.

 

The impacts for Coffs Coast Waste Service as a whole will be interesting given the current diversion of waste from landfill and the biomass upgrade which will be commissioned by 1 July 2012, achieving additional diversion rates.? The details of the reporting obligations for local councils and methodologies for calculating the offsets in regards to waste are still unfolding and will become clearer in the coming months.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

All kerbside waste materials are collected and reprocessed through the materials recycling facility and the biomass plant with only the reject and residual materials being landfilled.? Self hauled wastes are source separated and recycled or landfilled accordingly.

 

Social

Potential increased costs.

 

Economic

Potential increases in the domestic waste management charge and landfill gate fees as a result of the carbon tax.

 

Risk

No identifiable risks.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Potential increases in the garbage service and landfill gate fees per year.

Source of fund and any variance to working fund

Additional income will need to be sourced from the annual domestic waste management charge

 

Attachments:

1View

33205/2011 - Price Summary and Tax Calculations

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Waste Management ? Carbon Tax

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.2??? SF85??????????????? 151211???????? NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee meeting 21 November 2011

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Paul Gallagher, Director Engineering Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

The Deputy Mayor and the writer attended the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) Lower North Coast Zone, Liaison Committee on Monday 21 November 2011.

 

Council Officers instigated the Liaison Committee meeting (as the Committee had not met since April 2009) to address Councils continued concerns surrounding the increases in the RFS contribution, the lack of financial reporting and transparency and to review the performance report on the Lower North Coast Zone.

 

The Committee is not a Committee of Council or the RFS as defined under Clause 9 of the District Service Agreement and meets to consider the annual RFS budget, the RFS business plan and to review the quarterly financial and performance reports.

 

The Liaison Committee comprises of two representatives from Kempsey and Nambucca Councils, Group Captains (RFS Volunteer members) and the management representatives of the NSW Rural Fire Service, Lower North Coast Zone

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council receive and note the report on the Rural Fire Service (RFS) Liaison Committee Meeting No.1 -2011/12 held on Monday 21 November 2011.

 

2??????? That the District Service Agreement be amended as follows:

 

a)?? Amend clause 10 (b) and delete the wording ?Compulsory third party and insurance in relation to any motor vehicles which form part of the District equipment, except where otherwise agreed in writing between Councils and the Commissioner? and Replace the wording within Clause 10 (b) with ??Compulsory third and comprehensive insurance in relation to any motor vehicles which form part of the District equipment, except for motor vehicles which are listed on the register for RFS ?Red Fleet: vehicles or where otherwise agreed in writing between Councils and the Commissioner?

 

b)?? Amend clause 10.3 by adding an additional paragraph to read ?The Commissioner agrees that the RFS will during the Term, effect and keep current the RFS?s indemnity coverage with the NSW Treasury Managed Fund (the TMF Fund) to provide, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the TMF indemnity, third party liability cover and comprehensive motor vehicle cover in relation to any motor vehicles which form part of the District equipment and are listed on the register of RFS ?Red Fleet? vehicles, except where otherwise agreed in writing between Councils and the Commissioner.

 

3??????? That the General Manager be authorised to sign the amended District Service ????????? Agreement.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Receive and note the report

 


DISCUSSION:

 

The Liaison Committee is not a Committee of Council or the RFS as defined under Clause 9 of the District Service Agreement.? The membership comprises a Councillor and a staff representative from Kempsey and Nambucca Councils, Group Captains of the Liaison Committee (RFS Volunteer members) and the management representatives of the NSW Rural Fire Service, Lower North Coast Zone.

 

The purpose of the Liaison Committee is to:

 

1??????? Monitor the performance of the Agreement

 

2??????? Review the following documents prepared by the Zone Manager prior to submission to and consideration by the Councils:

 

a)?????? The annual budget and business plan and,

b)?????? The quarterly financial and performance reports.

 

The Liaison Committee has not met since April 2009 and the Director Engineering Services had repeatedly requested the RFS to instigate a Liaison Committee meeting to address the continued increases in the RFS contribution, the lack of financial reporting and accountability on the service and to review the performance reports.

 

It is acknowledged that between April 2009 and November 2011 there have been a number of staff movements within both Councils on the committee as well as several Acting Zone Managers appointed to the Nambucca Fire Control Centre.? However, if Liaison Committee meetings had been conducted throughout 2009/2010, the current issues surrounding the budget, purchasing, procurement and budget administration may have been averted.

 

The Liaison Committee meeting cycle is now back on track and considered the following agenda items:

 

1??????? District Service Agreement

 

The Service Agreement commenced on 10 July 2010 pursuant to the provisions of SECTION 12 A of the Rural Fires Act 1997 (NSW) and in essence, the agreement provides for the Rural Fire Service to exercise the functions imposed on Council by and under the Rural Fires Act 1997 (NSW) and other functions as specified within the schedule of the Agreement.

 

The Service Agreement provides the authority for the Commissioner to manage the day to day functions of the Service and outlines Council responsibility in providing administration, accounting and maintenance services and the provision of premises to the service.

 

Following the transfer for payment of the insurance from Council to the RFS (red fleet) the Service Agreement now requires amendment to reflect the change in responsibility, and the Commissioner has formally written to Council seeking the amendment as follows;

 

Amend clause 10 (b) and delete the wording ?Compulsory third party and insurance in relation to any motor vehicles which form part of the District equipment, except where otherwise agreed in writing between Councils and the Commissioner? and replace the wording within Clause 10 (b) with ??Compulsory third and comprehensive insurance in relation to any motor vehicles which form part of the District equipment, except for motor vehicles which are listed on the register for RFS ?Red Fleet? vehicles or where otherwise agreed in writing between Councils and the Commissioner?.

 

Amend clause 10.3 by adding an additional paragraph to read ?The Commissioner agrees that the RFS will. During the Term, effect and keep current the RFS?s indemnity coverage with the NSW Treasury Managed Fund (the TMF Fund) to provide, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the TMF,? indemnity, third party liability cover and comprehensive motor vehicle cover in relation to any motor vehicles which form part of the District equipment and are listed on the register of RFS ?Red Fleet? vehicles, except where otherwise agreed in writing between Councils and the Commissioner.

 


SLA Business Plan/Quarterly Performance Report

 

The quarterly financial and performance reports for July to September 2011 are presently on track with the agreed outcomes with explanations to variations for the period.? These documents have been provided to Councillors within attachment A (TRIM 33420/2011) for information.? It is anticipated that the next reporting period will provide greater detail as the fire season commences.

 

2??????? 2011/12 Allocation ? NSW Rural Fire Fighting Fund

 

The 2010/2011 allocations were provided to Council by the RFS in late December 2010 with a significant increase.? Council received the 2011/12 budget on 10 November 2011 containing another significant increase being an additional $40,000.00 on the 2010/11 budget or 30.3% increase ($132k to $172k)? If a liaison meeting had been conducted through 2009/10, the issues surrounding the increases within the RFS budget, purchasing, procurement and administration of the budget may have been averted.

 

At the April 2011 GPC meeting the new RFS Acting Zone Manager presented a draft budget for Council consideration.? The draft budget indicated that there would be an increase of 4.14% for the 2011/12 financial year.? The Liaison Committee were advised that once the ?BID? is forwarded to the State, other program charges may be added to the budget without local staff input.

 

The line item within the RFS budget titled ?Other support? is an amount of $1,125,542.00 for the Nambucca Shire Council. Attachment B ?Other Support? (TRIM 33136/2011) was provided to the Committee for information and outlines the break up of the item charges imposed by the State.

 

The transfer of the responsibility for payment of the insurance for the RFS ?Red Fleet? resulted in a reduction in Councils fleet insurance premium of $19631.37 (incl.GST) however there is a significant amount within the Insurance line item of the RFS budget of $73,815.00 without a detailed explanation.

 

3??????? 2012/13 Allocation ? NSW Rural Fire Fighting Fund

 

It was acknowledged by the Commissioner at the Coffs Harbour RFS forum in November and RFS management at the Liaison Committee meeting that there are requirements under the District Service Agreement that requires an estimate of probable expenditure for the District for the next financial year.?? (?THE BID?) is prepared by the Zone Manager and supplied to the Committee for consideration and then presented to Council:

 

CLAUSE 8 FINANCE of the District Service Agreement defines the following:

 

8.1???? The Council will, in consultation with the Commissioner, by no later than 30 September of each ???? year, submit to the Commissioner an estimate of probable expenditure? for the District? for the next ???????? financial year (?THE BID?)

 

8.2???? Following consultation with the Councils, the Commissioner will by no later than the 28 February ?? of each year submit to Councils

a)?????? A probable allocation of expenditure for the District for the next financial year( the probable allocation) and

b)?????? A probable contribution by the Councils to the NSW Rural Fire Fighting Fund (?the Fund?).

 

A Liaison Committee is scheduled for December to consider the 2012/13 BID, which will be provided to Council for consideration in early 2012.? The provision of the proposed 2012/13 budget from the Acting Zone Manager is not in accordance with Clause 8 as set out above, however appropriate changes are being implemented to ensure that future budgets will be brought back onto the correct timetable and provided to Council for consideration.? It is anticipated that the BID for 2012/13 will be in the vicinity of the 2011/12 contribution; however, once the BID goes to the state there is the distinct possibility that program charges could again increase the contribution.

 

Council has written to the Premier, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Local Government and Shires Association (LGSA) expressing concern surrounding the substantial increases in the RFS contribution and the ability of Councils to fund the increases.

 

CLAUSE 8.5 within the District Service Agreement requires the Commissioner to consult with Council in relation to the Councils capacity to contribute to the fund.

 

4??????? Financial Report

 

The Acting Zone Manager presented the expenditure for the RFS for the period July to September 2011.? The expenditure is in accordance with the budget allocations.

 

5??????? Operational Report

 

NSW Rural Fire Service Operations Officer provided an overview of the operations for the July to September 2011 Attachment C (TRIM??????? /2011).? It is anticipated that the next reporting period will provide greater detail as the fire season commences.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

NSW Rural Fire Service

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

There are no environmental implications associated with this report.

 

Social

There are no social implications associated with this report.

 

Economic

There are no economic implications associated with this report.

 

Risk

There are no risks implications associated with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The 2011/12 budget incorporated the RFS contribution for 2011/12.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no variation to working funds required this financial year as the increase to the RFS contribution was anticipated based on previous budget increases.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

34041/2011 - Attachment A (Trim 34041/2011)

 

2View

33136/2011 - Attachment B (Trim 33136/2011)

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee meeting 21 November 2011

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee meeting 21 November 2011

 



Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.3??? RF328????????????? 151211???????? Hawks Road, Newee Creek - Extension of Maintenance

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Peter Baynes, Manager Assets ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council has received a written request from the owners of a property located at the end of Hawks Road asking Council to extend its maintenance program to include the last 200m of the road.

 

Hawks Road, Newee Creek runs off Birds Road and provides access to a number of rural properties.? Council has traditionally maintained all but the last 200m of the road which is an unformed track.

 

Investigations have revealed that Hawks Road is actually classified as a Crown Road.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council make an application to the Department of Lands to formally acquire the Crown Road known as Hawks Road, Newee Creek to have the road classified as a public road under the control of Council as the Road Authority.

 

2??????? That Council designate Hawks Road as follows:

 

????????? a) ???? Category 4 within its road hierarchy commencing at the intersection of Birds Road ???????? chainage 0.0 m to chainage 0.9 m being a distance of 900 m

????????? b) ???? Category 5 being a track within its road hierarchy commencing at chainage 0.9 to chainage 1.1 being a distance of 200m and note that there is to be no routine maintenance on this section of unformed road in accordance with the road hierarchy definitions.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? That Council take no action and the unformed section of road remains classified as a Crown Road.

 

2??????? That Council acquire the last section of unformed pavement on Hawks Road, Newee Creek and classify the section of pavement as Class 5 road (Track) within Council?s Road Hierarchy and not undertake any work on the section of pavement.

 

3??????? That Council endorse the extension of maintenance on Hawks Road, Newee Creek in accordance with this being a Class 4 road in Council?s Road Hierarchy pending the allocation of $10,000 in a future budget to upgrade the road to the minimum standard required.

 

4??????? That Council endorse the extension of maintenance on Hawks Road, Newee Creek in accordance with this being a Class 4 road in Council?s Road Hierarchy and approve a variation of $10,000 in the current budget to upgrade the road to the minimum standard required.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Background

 

Hawks Road, Newee Creek runs off Birds Road and provides access to a number of rural properties.? The first 246m of Hawks Road is sealed and the next 654m is unsealed road.? Beyond the section of the road currently maintained by Council is a further 200m of Crown road which has not previously been maintained by Council.

 

Council has been approached by the property owner of Lot 1  DP 420944 which is located at the end of Hawks Road with a request to extend its maintenance program to include the last 200m of the road.

 

Council has adopted a Road Hierarchy Plan which classifies rural roads into the following 5 classes based on Average Annual Daily Traffic count (AADT).? This plan is currently under review, but the current classifications are as follows.

 

CLASS

TRAFFIC COUNT

Class 1 ? Primary

Greater than 700

Class 2 ? Secondary

200 ? 700

Class 3 ? Minor

50 ? 199

Class 4 ? Access

10 ? 49

Class 5 ? Track

Less than 10

 

 

The section of Hawks Road currently maintained by Council is classified as a Class 4 road.? The Road Hierarchy prescribes maintenance levels for each class of road.? According to the Road Hierarchy, a Class 4 unsealed road should receive annual light maintenance grading and heavy grading once every three years.

 

Issues

 

In considering the request for extension of maintenance the following issues have been identified:

 

1??????? Whilst actual traffic counts for this section of road are not available a ?rule of thumb? figure provided by AusSpec for planning purposes is five (5) vehicle movements per day for rural properties.? As this section of Hawks Road serves one property the approximate traffic count would be 5 which would see this section classified as a Class 5 track.? According to the Road Hierarchy, a Class 5 unsealed road would receive no maintenance grading.

 

2??????? Although Hawks Road has been maintained by Council for many years it is, in fact, a Crown Road.? This is not an uncommon situation due to past confusion regarding road ownership and land classification.? Past experience is that once a situation such as this is identified the usual course of events is to have the Crown road transferred to Council as the Road Authority.

 

An option that can be considered is to classify the 200m section of road as a Class 4 road despite the low traffic count.? This would have the advantage of having all of Hawks Road being of uniform standard and maintained at a consistent level.

 

For this to occur the section of road in question would need substantial work to upgrade it to the minimum standard required for a Class 4 road.? Estimated cost of this work would be in the order of $8,000 ? 10,000.? Council should be aware that this expenditure is not included in the current budget and, as such, funds would need to come from working funds or from the deferral of other planned work.

 

The expenditure of this amount on Hawks Road is not considered a high priority when compared with work on repairing large pavement failures, correcting deficiencies with roadside drainage and maintenance of road shoulders.

 

Should the road be classified as a Class 4 road there will be ongoing additional maintenance required.? Over a three year cycle there would be an increase of $350 per annum in maintenance grading costs.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Director Engineering Services

Manager Civil Works

Senior Overseer

Surveyor

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no impacts from this report.

 

Social

 

No impacts from this report.

 

Economic

 

There are no impacts from this report.

 

Risk

 

The road was formerly a Crown road and although maintenance had been carried out by Council, gazettal to a dedicated public road would see Council formally inherit the liability for maintenance of the road.?

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Should Council decide to classify the 200m section of Hawks Road as a Class 4 Road there will be a requirement to commit an additional $8,000 ? 10,000 to upgrade the road to the required standard.

 

This decision would also commit Council to $350 per annum in maintenance grading costs over a three year cycle.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The upgrade works would need to be funded from working funds or from the deferral of other planned work.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View

34046/2011 - Hawk Road

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Hawks Road, Newee Creek - Extension of Maintenance

 

Fig 1.? Locality Map

 

Fig 2.? Sealed section of Hawks Road

Fig 3.? Unsealed section of Hawks Road

 

Fig 4.? Unformed section of Hawks Road


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.4??? SF86??????????????? 151211???????? State Emergency Service 2010/11 Annual Report

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Paul Gallagher, Director Engineering Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council has recently been provided with the State Emergency Service (SES) Annual Report for 2010/2011. The annual report is a lengthy document and a copy of this report can be provided to Councillors upon request or can be viewed online through www.ses.nsw.gov.au/about/annual-reports/annual-report-10-11.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council receive and note the State Emergency Service Annual Report for 2010/2011.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Receive and note the report

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The SES is made up of approximately 10,000 volunteers and 225 members of staff.? In November 2010 the executive framework for the SES was segmented to better enable the focus on delivery of the two main drivers of the service being ?operations? and ?corporate services and planning?.

 

During 2010/11 the SES? total expenses were $90,398 million and the SES received additional funding of $5 million which was used to conduct a recruitment campaign and employment for 32 new positions (20 based in Wollongong and 12 in Regional NSW).

 

The Commissioner reaffirms that the SES priorities continue to be:

?????? To work with Councils to continue to improve the awareness of the community about how to protect themselves and their property from the effects of floods and storms

?????? To work with Councils where required to upgrade the facilities of the SES Units

?????? To work with Councils on Floodplain Risk Management Committees to assist in the development and implementation of a floodplain risk management plan for the Council area

?????? Further upgrade the flood intelligence so that they can provide timely and accurate information to communities threatened by floods

?????? Continue to improve the public profile of the SES by working closely with local media, Councils and communities and utilising their network of SES trained community liaison officers.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been no consultation in preparing this report

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no issues arising from this report.

 

Social

 

There are no issues arising from this report.

 

Economic

 

There are no issues arising from this report.

 

Risk

 

There are no issues arising from this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no financial implications associated with this report

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

N/A

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 December 2011

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.5??? T020/2011??????? 151211???????? Bowraville and Macksville Sewerage Infrastructure Condition Assessment and Inflow/Infiltration Investigation.

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Stormwater inflow and infiltration has an adverse impact on Council?s sewerage systems and this impact is most prevalent in Macksville and Bowraville.? The 2011/12 budget has allocated funding to complete investigation works to determine the source of the stormwater ingress.

 

Tenders were called to complete sewerage infrastructure condition assessment and inflow/infiltration investigation works in both Bowraville and Macksville.? Advertisements were placed in the Coffs Coast Advocate on 19 October 2011, Nambucca Guardian News on 20 October 2011 and the Sydney Morning Herald on 25 October and 4 November 2011.? Tenders closed at 2 pm on 17 November 2011, with a total of nine (9) tenders submitted.

 

Tenders were received from:

 

AJ Pipelines and Constructions Pty Ltd

High Tide Plumbing

Veolia Water Network Services

Nolan Group Pty Ltd t/as Regional Australia Infiltration Network

Kembla Watertech Pty Ltd

Interflow Pty Ltd

GMA Environmental Waste Water Services

A & L Pipe-Eye Pty Ltd t/as All About Pipes.

 

The tenders were assessed by an evaluation panel comprising the Director Engineering Services, Manager Civil Works and the Manager Water and Sewerage. Details of the tender evaluation have been provided as a separate confidential document for Council?s information.

 

The preferred tenderer is Regional Australia Infiltration Network and it is recommended that they be awarded the contract.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council award Tender No T020/2011 for the Bowraville and Macksville Sewerage Infrastructure Condition Assessment and Inflow/Infiltration Investigation to Regional Australia Infiltration Network (RAIN) in accordance with their tender .

 

2??????? That Council authorise a budget variation of $40,000 to allow the full cost of the works to be completed including an allowance for any variations that may occur.? The additional funds to be funded from the existing Work Order 1947 (Installation of automatic screening at Bowraville STP) and the total sewerage budget to remain unchanged.

 

3??????? That Council endorse staff taking all necessary and appropriate action to ensure that any identified cross connections between stormwater and sewer pipes on private property are rectified by the responsible property owners.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

As funding for this investigation work has been allocated in the current budget and an open tender procurement process has been adopted there is no alternative proposed.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Stormwater inflow and infiltration has a significant impact on all the sewerage systems in the Nambucca Shire.? Monitoring of sewage treatment works and pumping stations clearly indicates a higher volume of inflows and increased pump run hours in some catchments following other than low intensity rainfall events.

 

The volume of stormwater flow in the sewerage system increases pumping times and therefore energy costs and has and adverse impact on the quality of treatment at the sewage treatment plant as detention time through the plant is reduced and beneficial bacteria are flushed from the system.? The sewerage systems that are worst impacted are Bowraville and Macksville.

 

The 2011/12 budget has allocated an amount of $150,000 to complete an inflow / infiltration investigation of designated catchments within Councils sewer networks.? The funding allocation was initially proposed for investigation of catchments on the northern side of Macksville that drain to Pump Station 9.? This was in response to a number of written complaints received from a ratepayer in regard to a wet weather surcharge issue in catchment 9 downstream of these catchments.

 

The scope of work in the tender document was then expanded to include the township of Bowraville as a result of a Pollution Reduction Program notice issued by the Office of Environment and Heritage.? This notice relates to a number of licence non ? conformances at the treatment plant that have been attributed to the excessive fresh water flow through the plant which is believed to have had an adverse impact on the treatment process.? Hence Council has been instructed to investigate and take action to reduce stormwater ingress into the Bowraville sewerage system.

 

The investigation work will involve access chamber inspections, camera survey of pipelines and smoke testing of sewer property connections.? The data obtained from the investigations will not only identify locations of stormwater ingress but will also provide an invaluable insight into the condition of Council?s sewerage assets.? This is of particular relevance as it is understood that asset valuations for water and sewerage infrastructure are due to be revised this financial year and this information can be utilised to provide a more accurate assessment of the condition and value of these assets.

 

The investigation will also provide a starting point for Council to begin planning any necessary remedial works to prevent the ingress of stormwater and ensure the useful life of the assets is maximised.

 

An open tender for the investigation and condition assessment work was advertised on Tenderlink as well as in the Coffs Coast Advocate on 19 October 2011, Nambucca Guardian News on 20 October 2011 and the Sydney Morning Herald on 25 October and 4 November 2011.? Tenders closed at 2.00 pm on 17 November 2011.

 

A total of nine (9) tenders were received and these were from:

 

AJ Pipelines and Constructions Pty Ltd

High Tide Plumbing

Veolia Water Network Services

Nolan Group Pty Ltd t/as Regional Australia Infiltration Network

Kembla Watertech Pty Ltd

Interflow Pty Ltd

GMA Environmental Waste Water Services

A & L Pipe-Eye Pty Ltd t/as All About Pipes

 

The tenders were assessed by an evaluation panel comprising the Director Engineering Services, Manager Civil Works and the Manager Water and Sewerage. Details of the tender evaluation have been provided as a separate confidential document for Council?s information.

 

It is recommended that the contract be awarded to Regional Australia Infiltration Network.

 

However the preferred tender price exceeds the current budget amount and it is recommended that additional funding be allocated to award the contract for the full scope of work proposed.? This will provide for economies of scale and eliminate any requirement for a contractor to have to remobilise to complete a portion of the work at a later date.

 

The additional funding for this contract can be accommodated through savings achieved within Work Order 1947 for the installation of automatic screening at Bowraville Treatment Plant with no net change to the total sewerage budget.?

 

 

Smoke Testing

 

Smoke testing of private properties is likely to identify many instances where stormwater pipes have been cross connected to the sewer pipe.? It is an offence under Section 638 of the Local government Act (1993) to discharge prohibited matter into a sewer or drain.? In respect of a sewer, prohibited matter includes stormwater.

 

Once discovered, the elimination of these illegal cross connections is critical to the success of any attempt to reduce stormwater flows through the sewerage system.? It is also the issue that is most likely to upset ratepayers as any rectification works will be at their cost.

 

It is expected that Council would support staff efforts to engage property owners to rectify any problems identified during the investigation even if that requires utilising their powers under the Local Government Act 1993 and Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1993 to enforce compliance.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Director Engineering Services

Manager Civil Works

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no direct environmental implications to accepting a tender for the works.

 

Social

 

The works involved in the contract are likely to impact on property owners as many of the assets are located in private property and will have to be accessed for inspection.? In addition smoke testing may find evidence of illegal stormwater cross connections to the sewer and Council may be required to enforce orders to have these rectified.

 

There may be cases of illegal cross connections where the property owner is simply unable to afford the rectification work (eg pensioner).? In such instances there will be negotiations with the property owner as per Council?s normal approach for hardship cases.

 

Economic

 

There are no direct economic implications to accepting a tender for the works. .However smoke testing of private sewer lines is likely to identify some illegal stormwater cross connections to the sewer and there will be a cost to landowners to carry out the necessary rectification works.

 


Risk

 

There are no significant risks associated with the works included in the contract.? However it is envisaged that the outcomes of the investigation will assist Council in identifying sources of inflow and infiltration into the sewerage system.? Further work to repair and eliminate these sources will then reduce the risk of surcharges impacting on properties and will reduce the hydraulic load on the treatment plants improving the quality of effluent discharged to the environment.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Funding has been included in the current budget however as a result of an expanded scope of works the tender price recommended to be accepted is $31,266.48 over the budget allocation.

 

The investigation works may have the indirect impact of highlight problems within the sewer system that will require rectification and funding in future budgets.

 

Source of funds and any variance to working funds

 

The current budget allocation is insufficient to cover the full scope of works included in the contract. A variation will be required and this can be sourced within the current 2011/121 budget.

 

It is recommended that $40,000 be deducted from Work Order 1947 where works have been completed under the anticipated budget and reallocated to this project.? The $40,000 will also provide for a small contingency to cover any variations during the course of the contract.

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Confidential Circularised Document - For Councillors Only

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 December 2011

Bowraville and Macksville Sewerage Infrastructure Condition Assessment and Inflow/Infiltration Investigation.

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Bowraville and Macksville Sewerage Infrastructure Condition Assessment and Inflow/Infiltration Investigation.

 

 

 

Confidential Circularised Document - For Councillors Only

 

 

? ?