NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

26 April 2012

 

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

 

For a trial period (April to June 2012) Council meetings are held on the last Thursday of each month commencing at 5.30 pm AND the second Wednesday before the last Thursday of each month commencing at 8.30 am. ?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 - 26 April 2012

 

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 ? ?????? Special Council Meeting - ?4 April 2012

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Ordinary Council Meeting - 11 April 2012

 

5??????? NOTICES OF MOTION

5.1???? Notice Of Motion - Widening of Footpath, Marshall Way, Nambucca Heads

5.2???? Notice of Motion - Cost Shifting Survey Results For 2009/10 (SF640)

6??????? Notices of Rescission

6.1???? Rescission Motion: Findings of the Odour Testing Free Range Piggery, Tewinga (SF1541, DA2010/031) ?

7??????? PUBLIC FORUM ?- Mr Michael Porter - Speed limits

8??????? ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE ??

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

10????? General Manager Report

10.1?? Outstanding Actions and Reports

10.2?? Investment Report to 31 March 2012

10.3?? Unkya Reserve Playground Grant - Matching Funding

10.4?? Arts Mid North Coast - Nomination for Council Representation on the Board

11????? Director Environment and Planning Report

11.1?? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 30 March 2012

11.2?? DA's and CDC's Received and Determined under Delegated Authority to 13 April 2012

11.3?? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 27 March 2012

11.4?? Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 30 March 2012

11.5?? DA 2012/004 - Further Report on Extensions to Medical Centre

12????? Director Engineering Services Report

12.1?? Bowraville Sewage Treatment Plant ? Proposed Constructed Wetland To Improve Effluent Quality

12.2?? Coronation Park BBQ Kiosk

12.3?? Minutes of the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee - 13 April 2012

12.4?? Capital Works Report

12.5?? Review of Heavy Patching Operations

12.6?? Review of Local Government Engagement with the RFS - Discussion Paper ????


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???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.1????? SF959????????????? 260412???????? Notice Of Motion - Widening of Footpath, Marshall Way, Nambucca Heads

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Council has received a petition and several letters regarding the difficulties faced by residents of Marshall Way Nambucca Heads who need to use prams, wheelchairs and motorised scooters to assist with mobility.? The footpath is not wide enough to accommodate such mobility aids and the residents? rubbish bins.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council consider a future budget allocation to widen the footpath on the northern side of Marshall Way to accommodate motorised scooters and other forms of assisted transport.

 

2??????? That when assessing future development applications for facilities expected to cater for individuals with assisted mobility needs Council consider the adequacy of footpath widths.

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has received a petition and several letters regarding the difficulties faced by residents of Marshall Way who need to use prams, wheelchairs and motorised scooters to assist with mobility.? The footpath is not wide enough to accommodate such mobility aids and the residents? rubbish bins.

 

Marshall Way is home to a significant number of residents who use motorised scooters to access the vicinity of Nambucca Plaza for daily shopping needs and medical appointments.? There is a seniors? living facility on Marshall Way and a preschool.

 

Unfortunately, in order to meet the requirements of our kerbside waste collection, bins need to be left on the footpath and they then cause an obstruction to people needing to use the footpath.? One of the letters received by Council refers to an accident where a motorised scooter tipped over when a rider drove across a sloping layback to avoid bins.

 

If the bins are put on the road itself they become an obstruction to parking.? It appears that the only solution would be to widen the footpath on one side of the street to accommodate the bins and motorised scooters, wheelchairs and prams.

 

This problem is likely to become more frequent in the future given the predicted population demographic for our Shire, hence the second recommendation.

 

A copy of the petition was circulated to all Councillors under cover of a confidential memo.

 

MANEX COMMENT:

 

It is suggested that Council consider a budget allocation to enable the preparing a design which will enable the work to be costed.? It should be noted that the rearrangement of design work may impact on Council?s capital works program.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.2????? SF1714??????????? 260412???????? Notice of Motion - Cost Shifting Survey Results For 2009/10 (SF640)

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Each year the Local Government and Shires Association (LGSA) surveys all 152 councils in NSW to determine the average cost shifting ratio and the LGSA have now released the results for the financial year 2009/10.

 

The survey estimates that for 2009/10 cost shifting amounted to 5.74% of Local Government?s total income before capital amounts or $471 million.

 

To put this into perspective at a local level, based on the state wide average, cost shifting cost this Council $1.76 million.? Considering that a 1% increase on the general rate nets Council approximately $80,000, a 22% rate increase would be required to offset this cost shifting.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the significant burden cost shifting places on its financial position and its ratepayers.

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Cost shifting refers to the act of transferring responsibilities from state to Local Government without transferring adequate associated funding or a means of recovering the actual costs.

 

Each year the Local Government and Shires Association (LGSA) surveys all councils in NSW to determine the average cost shifting ratio and the LGSA have now released the results for the financial year 2009/10.

 

The survey estimates that for 2009/10 cost shifting amounted to 5.74% of Local Government?s total income before capital amounts or $471 million.

 

To put this into perspective at a local level, based on the state wide average, cost shifting cost this Council $1.76 million.? Considering that a 1% increase on the general rate nets council approximately $80,000, a 22% rate increase would be required to offset this cost shifting.

 

Contributions to the NSW Fire Brigade and Rural Fire Services, lack of adequate funding for public libraries and the NSW government?s failure to reimburse for mandatory pensioner rebates for rates are major examples of cost shifting.? Councils are also denied sufficient financial resources to adequately meet their responsibilities for regulation of companion animals, management of contaminated land, control of noxious weeds, maintenance of Regional roads and bridges, flood mitigation works and administration of environmental regulation.

 

The survey also includes cost shifting associated with the 2008 Local Government election, such as inflated charges and the failure to return revenue from penalty notices (fines for not voting).? In the most recent survey, two new examples of cost shifting were identified and included.? These are the revenue raising restrictions on Council managed Crown lands and the shortfall in cost recovery for assessing development applications (assessment fees are regulated).

 


Cost shifting clearly has a significant impact on Council?s finances.? Across the State it almost equals and in some cases exceeds the annual infrastructure renewal gap of $500 million per annum.? (This is the difference between what should be spent to maintain assets and what is actually spent).? Over the five years that the LGSA have been conducting this survey, cost shifting has accumulated to an estimated $2.2 billion.? This is taxation by stealth on a grand scale.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Notice of Rescission

ITEM 6.1????? SF794????????????? 260412???????? Rescission Motion: Findings of the Odour Testing Free Range Piggery, Tewinga (SF1541, DA2010/031)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? John Ainsworth, Councillor ????????

 

Summary:

 

With the additional expense of a Barrister the opinion will not guarantee any further certainty or clarity.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council rescind the following resolution:

 

That, if the number of pigs on the property increases and Council receives further complaints regarding odour, Council seeks legal advice from a Barrister with appropriate expertise as to whether in the light of this new information Council should reconsider the need for a development application for the Tewinga Piggery.

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

That the applicant be given time to address and implement the recommended remediation measures.

 

 

 

SIGNED BY:

 

Cr Rhonda Hoban (Mayor)????????????????????????????? ???????????Date:

 

Cr John Ainsworth (Deputy Mayor)???????????????????????????? Date:

 

Cr Brian Finlayson?????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Date:

 


 

Attachments:

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


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

General Manager

ITEM 10.1??? SF959????????????? 260412???????? Outstanding Actions and Reports

 

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

 

 

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.

Full testing to occur at Senior Citizens Centre on Sunday 11 March.? Issues with testing on 11 March 2012.? Further testing to be scheduled.

 


JANUARY 2010

2

SF839

21/01/10

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

 

GM

On-going.

 

 

 

 

MARCH 2010

 

3

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.

 

Staffing and end of month deadlines means this requirement will always be difficult to meet.

 

 


 

JULY 2010

4

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.

 

Pre-School advised to proceed with preparation of easements for bush fire hazard reduction.

 

5

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

6

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.

 

Included within the contract documentation as a condition imposed on the contractor obligations and compliance with the EIS and amended conditions within the EIS

 

MARCH 2011

7

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.

 

DEP advised meeting arranged with RTA.

 

Draft flood study likely to be presented to Council April/May 2012.

 


 

MAY 2011

8

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.

Further deferral due to workload.

 

JUNE 2011

9

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.

 

Further letter sent 10 January 2012.

 

 

JULY 2011

10

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.

11

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.

SEPTEMBER 2011

12

SF21

1/09/2011

Council investigate an effluent management system for the Saleyards

 

GM

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

 

 

13

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.

14

SF1496

1/09/2011

That more information on the pilot program for the aquatic system monitoring be provided to a future GPC meeting.? (River Health Program)

 

DEP

Information being sought for presentation to February GPC meeting.

 

Deferred to May 2012 Council meeting.

OCTOBER 2011

15

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.

 

16

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.

Inspection to be scheduled to coincide with Work Cover availability.? WorkCover had advised they will be undertaking an audit of the Saleyards at 9am on Friday 13 April 2012.

 

17

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

 

Draft policy to be provided to Councillors at the end of January for comment and report to March GPC.

 

Further work being undertaken on the policy emanating from the resolutions of Council?s meeting 2/2/12.? Draft policy will now be provided to Councillors for comment at end of February.

Due to natural disasters deferred to May 2012.

 

18

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

Reporting on establishing a stand alone library service now the priority.? Arrangements with other Councils to be the subject of on-going investigation.

 

Establishment of a stand alone library now taken priority over arrangements with other Councils.

 

Order has been placed for Spydus software.

 

Librarian position advertised closing 23 April.

 

19

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.

 

Decision made to defer pending determination by IPART re special variation.

 

20

 

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.? Deferred due to resignation of Property Officer.

 

21

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.

 

Sections identified on South Arm Rd and scheduled for May 2012

 

22

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.? Given recent resignation of Rates Officer this may not be possible for reasons of workload.

 

 

23

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.

 

Deferred to April due to natural disaster assessments taking preference over other business.

DECEMBER 2011

24

SF1496

1/12/2011

Council receive a report on consistent terminology for reporting forecast flood frequency, for example 1 in 100 ARI floods.

 

DEP

To January Council meeting.

Deferred to February Council meeting.

Further deferred to May 2012.

 

25

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

 

Response received from the Premier (provided to Councilors week ending 13 Jan 2012) advising the Premier has referred the matter to the Minister   

 

 

 

26

SF674

15/12/2011

That Council investigate the possibility of acquiring additional land from NSW Forests to expand Council?s current waste management depot.

 

DES

Letter sent to NSW Forests 6 February 2012

 

No response as at 6 March 2012.

DES will forward a further letter to Forestry NSW.

 

27

SF844

15/12/2011

That Council forward a request to the Minister that the Country Towns Program subsidy be on the total costs of BORS.

 

Mayor

Letter sent 6 January 2012.? Follow up letter sent 22 February 2012.

 

No response as at 6 March 2012.

JANUARY 2012

28

SF1714

19/01/2012

That an on-site inspection at the Nambucca Beach Holiday Park be conducted by Councillors at a GPC to resolve DA2011/142 and the proposal be pegged out for that site inspection.

 

DEP

Will be scheduled once application is ready for determination.

29

SF85

19/01/2012

Council write to the Minister for Police & Emergency Services and Deputy Premier seeking clarification on the GRN component of the RFS budget.

 

DES

Letter sent 25 January to the Minister for Police & Emergency Services and Deputy Premier

 

Acknowledgement letters have been received advising that matter is being investigated.

30

SF84

19/01/2012

Council write to the Premier requesting a complete audit of the RFS focussing on financial accountability and efficiency of service delivery.

 

DES

Letter sent 25 January to the Premier seeking an audit of the RFS

 

Response received from the Dept Local Government regarding Council?s December resolution (provided to Councillors 20 Jan 2012)

 

Acknowledgement letters have been received advising that matter is being investigated.

 

31

SF742

19/01/2012

Council prepare a draft brochure to demonstrate land slip risk and tips for minimising risk.

 

GM

Aim to have completed by June 2012.

FEBRUARY 2012

32

GB2/12

02/02/2012

Appropriate sized nesting boxes be place in trees in close proximity to the Cabbage Gum site (Link Road)

DES

20 nesting boxes organised and will be installed once they have been received; two advanced trees ordered and will be planted.

 

33

SF741

16/02/2012

That a further report be prepared (on the Paveline) for the year July 2011 to June 2012 for comparison with the same period in the previous year.

 

DES

August 2012


 

MARCH 2012

34

SF959

1/03/2012

Council write to the Hon. Katrina Hodgkinson requesting clarification as to the Native Title Tribunal claim involving the Gumma (Boultons Crossing) Reserve.

 

GM

Letter sent 6 March 2012.

35

DA2011/122

1/03/2012

Re road name Kenwil Drive, that the matter be deferred to enable the policy to be reviewed and exhibited and then the recommendation, that Council advertise its intention to name the road ?Ken Wilson Drive? be reconsidered.

 

DES

In accordance with Council?s direction for 3 weeks notice the matter will be considered in May 2012.

36

SF341

15/03/2012

Council incorporate a question in its 2013 Resident Satisfaction Survey on community attitudes to vehicles on beaches.

GM

Survey to be arranged to be conducted in 2013.

37

SF327

15/03/2012

Council consider making a budget provision of $4,000 to the Nambucca District Band Committee of Management for 2012/2013.

 

GM

To be considered in budget.

38

SF281

15/03/2012

Council staff report to Council regarding the use of Facebook or Twitter to communicate with young people.

 

DEP

Referred to Youth Development Officer for investigation and report to Council.

39

SF777

15/03/2012

Council write to the Hon. Tony Burke MP asking what public consultation occurred prior to the determination re Lowland Rainforest EEC; also requesting any available mapping; and seeking assistance for ground truthing.

 

DEP

Letter sent 3 April 2012.

40

SF772

15/03/2012

Council write to the Minister seeking support to have the Manufactured Home Estate Caravan Park & Camping Regs amended to include a requirement for the provision of a detailed emergency evacuation plan for all occupants.

 

DEP

Letter sent 3 April 2012.

 

Response received.

See letter attached (TRIM 8279/2012)

41

SF1676

15/03/2012

There be a complete report on all non-recurrent expenditure items in the Engineering Dept. budget including water, sewer, and plant acquisition.? The report is to provide details of the original budget estimates and expenditure to date with comment on any anticipated variance or delay in project completion.

 

DES

Draft format being prepared for presentation to 26 April 2012.

42

SF1743

15/03/2012

The tree register be referred back to the DES so that he may prepare a further report and recommendation to Council on a proposal which addresses historic, senescent or publicly significant trees on public land in urban areas.

 

DES

Report will be presented to Council in August 2012,

43

SF1653

4/04/2012

Senior management establish and lead a continuous improvement program across the organisation to achieve productivity savings, efficiency gains and revenue enhancement.

 

GM

Report in May 2012 on proposed program.

44

SF1653

4/04/2012

Council receive a report on the merit or otherwise of ensuring that all future Director and management positions be advertised on fixed term contracts

.

GM

Report in May 2012.

45

SF1714

11/04/2012

Council write to Minister Hodgkinson seeking an assurance of the continuation of the Business Advisory Service.

GM

Letter sent 16 April 2012.

46

SF1714

11/04/2012

Council receive a report setting out the number of rural blocks which front sealed roads but do not have a building entitlement.

DEP

Deferred to June 2012.

47

SF1714

11/04/2012

Council review the availability of industrial (employment) land at Nambucca Heads and Macksville and if necessary take steps to rezone further land.

DEP

Deferred to June 2012.

48

DA2012/004

11/04/2012

Council review its Car Parking Code

DEP

Deferred to June 2012

49

SF544

11/04/2012

Clarification be sought on the mining and/or extractive industries contribution plan and information also be provided on coal seam gas extraction exploration and its implications for contribution planning.

GM

Report in May 2012

50

SF61

11/04/2012

Council receive a report regarding extending life guard services over the Easter break, including community education.? Also that the report consider markers for boats to access Forsters Beach at Scotts Head without conflicting with swimmers.

DES

Report in May 2012

 

Quotes being sourced and a report prepared for the May 2012 meeting

 

51

SF452

11/04/2012

Council receive a quarterly waste management report including infringements issued, progress with the Biomass, community education, landfill construction etc

DES

Report in July 2012

Attachments:

1View

8279/2012 - Department of Planning response - suggested amendments to the Local Government

 

?

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Outstanding Actions and Reports

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.2??? SF394????????????? 260412???????? Investment Report to 31 March 2012

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Faye Hawthorne, Accountant ????????

 

Summary:

 

The total return on investments from 1 July to 31 March 2012 is $678,812 ? taking into account accrued interest to 30 June 2011.

 

Amount of interest expected from all funds and reserves as per budget is $1,452,000.

 

Council currently has $4.91 Million with Managed Funds, $2.44 Million with On call accounts, $23.50 Million on term deposits and $1 Million in a Floating Rate Term Deposit.

 

This report details all the investments placed during March and Council funds invested as at 31 March 2012.

 

The following investment report has been drawn up in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 (as amended), the Regulations and Council Policy 1.9 ? Investment of Surplus Funds

 

C P Doolan

Responsible Accounting Officer

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Accountants? Report on Investments placed to 31 March 2012 be noted.

 

OPTIONS:

 

This report is for information only.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

This report details all the investments placed during March 2012 and Council funds invested as at 31 March 2012.

 

 

2 Investment Matured & Interest & Returns 1 to 31 March? 2012

 

Managed Funds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Institution

Amount

Period (Days)

Performance for Month

Returns This Month

Annualised Performance FYTD

Returns FYTD

 

UBS Wealth M'ment Aust Ltd

?$199,031.05

31

0.83%

?$1,324.45

6.14%

?$8,242.63

 

ANZ (On call)

?$2,241,314.97

31

4.50%

?$6,658.06

2.64%

?$41,314.97

 

Macquarie Global Income Opportunity

?$3,505,715.97

31

0.71%

?$24,837.40

2.41%

?$83,106.53

 

Long Term Funds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Institution

Amount

Period (Days)

Performance for Month

Monthly change in net asset value

Change in net asset value LTD

Coupons Paid to Date

Annualised Performance FYTD

NSW Treasury Corp

?$979,244.75

31

2.53%

?$24,118.15

-$56,198.20

N/A

2.48%

Averon II*

?$428,500.00

31

-0.56%

-$2,400.00

-$71,500.00

?$28,396.10

3.01%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Investments held at 31 March 2012

Institution

 

?Amount

?Date Invested

Period (Days)

Maturity Date

Interest for month

Interest

?Interest Due at maturity

BCCU - No 1

A2

$566,072.38

03/03/12

159

09/08/12

2,812.53

5.85%

?$14,425.54

BCCU - No 2

A2

$723,112.14

27/05/11

1096

27/05/14

4,053.39

6.60%

?$143,306.96

BCCU - No 3

A2

$1,066,847.97

02/06/11

366

02/06/12

5,844.28

6.45%

?$69,000.22

IMB - No 1

A2

$1,021,024.93

02/02/12

217

06/09/12

4,830.15

5.57%

?$33,811.03

IMB - No 2

A2

$1,064,117.33

19/03/12

108

05/07/12

5,241.87

5.80%

?$18,262.00

Bendigo & Adel.- No 1

A-

$1,060,535.47

14/04/11

469

26/07/12

5,584.52

6.20%

?$84,488.36

Bank of Qld - No 1

B7

$611,526.80

23/02/12

273

22/11/12

2,960.46

5.70%

?$ 26,071.15

Newcastle Perm.-No 1

A2

$1,233,494.91

25/08/11

238

19/04/12

5,814.32

5.55%

?$44,639.00

ME Bank

BBB

$1,024,049.32

08/03/12

224

18/10/12

5,131.47

5.90%

?$37,079.00

NAB - No 3

AA-

$1,072,443.58

05/07/11

731

05/07/13

5,884.04

6.46%

?$138,749.52

NAB - No 4

AA-

$1,173,534.96

09/02/12

188

15/08/12

5,880.54

5.90%

?$ 35,662.60

NAB - No 5

AA-

$800,000.00

05/08/11

286

17/05/12

4,063.12

5.98%

?$37,485.59

NAB - No 6

AA-

$1,173,486.09

09/12/11

370

13/12/12

5,451.73

5.47%

?$65,069.00

NAB - No 7

AA-

$1,034,982.74

19/01/12

182

19/07/12

5,186.26

5.90%

?$30,448.34

NAB - No 8

AA-

$800,000.00

30/06/11

539

20/12/12

4,341.70

6.39%

?$ 75,489.53

Suncorp - No 1

A+

$915,387.71

13/12/11

142

03/05/12

4,563.65

5.87%

?$20,904.45

Westpac - No 1

AA-

$913,025.85

12/01/12

182

12/07/12

4,637.17

5.98%

?$27,224.68

AMP(CPG) - No 1

A

$1,000,000.00

30/06/11

366

30/06/12

5,308.22

6.25%

?$62,671.23

AMP(CPG) - No 2

A

$1,000,000.00

22/07/11

272

19/04/12

5,095.89

6.00%

?$44,712.33

AMP(CPG) - No 3

A

$500,000.00

09/09/11

731

09/09/13

2,547.95

6.00%

?$60,082.19

AMP(CPG) - No 4

A

$500,000.00

09/09/11

731

09/09/13

2,547.95

6.00%

?$60,082.19

Bendigo & Adel.(CPG)-No 2

A-

$750,000.00

17/06/11

367

18/06/12

3,981.16

6.25%

?$47,131.85

ING Bank (Aust) -No.1

A

$500,000.00

26/03/12

213

25/10/12

2,607.40

6.14%

?$17,915.34

Rabobank(Aust)-No.2

AA

$1,000,000.00

25/03/11

1832

30/03/16

6,072.60

7.15%

?$358,871.23

Rabobank(Aust)-No.3

AA

$500,000.00

25/11/11

1827

25/11/16

2,632.88

6.20%

?$155,169.86

ING Bank (Aust) No 2

A

$1,500,000.00

13/12/11

1829

15/12/16

8,038.77

6.31%

?$474,287.26

Investec Bank Australia

BBB

$1,000,000.00

23/02/12

1099

26/02/15

5,435.62

6.40%

?$192,701.37

ANZ (On Call)

At call

$2,241,314.97

30/03/12

31

30/04/12

6,658.06

4.50%

?$ 8,566.12

Macquarie Income

A

$3,505,715.97

30/03/12

31

30/04/12

24,837.40

5.21%

?$15,512.55

UBS Wealth? Aust Ltd

At Call

$199,031.05

30/03/12

31

30/04/12

1,324.45

4.50%

?$760.68

NSW Treasury Corp

A

$979,244.75

30/03/12

31

30/04/12

24,118.15

0.00%

?$?? -??

Averon II

A

$428,500.00

30/03/12

31

30/04/12

(2,400)

0.00%

?$?? -??

TOTAL

 

?$31,857,448.92

 

 

 

?$181,087.70

 

?$2,400,581.17

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

CONSULTATION:

 

Grove Research and Advisory

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental implications.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

That Council may not meet its budget returns for 2011/2012 based on current performance.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

A review of budgeted interest returns for 2011/2012 will be completed with the March 2012 Budget Review and GPG Research & Advisory will provide Council with the updated interest rates.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Interest on investments will be assessed with the March 2012 Budget Review.? Variances will be distributed between the Water, Sewerage and General Funds for the second quarter of the financial year.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.3??? SF1650??????????? 260412???????? Unkya Reserve Playground Grant - Matching Funding

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The Unkya Reserve Trust Committee of Management, applying under the auspice of Nambucca Shire Council, has received a $19,745.50 grant for the creation of a playground (sand lagoon) at Unkya Reserve. The grant requires matching funding.? The Committee of Management was advised that Council approval would be required for the matching funding.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That funding of $19,745.50 be allocated to the Unkya Reserve Playground Project as matching funding for the Community Building Partnership Program 2011/2012 grant.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can decline the request for matching funding in which case the Committee of Management would be forced to decline the funding.

 

 

REPORT:

 

The Unkya Reserve Trust Committee of Management, under the auspice of Nambucca Shire Council, has received a grant from the NSW Communities? Community Building Partnership Program? (CBPP) to create a multi-age play area at Unkya Reserve. The project, designed in consultation with Council?s Engineering staff, would construct a play area featuring activity net, slides, sand lagoon, climbing, balancing and creative play apparatus made from natural, salvaged and recycled materials. Only half the amount requested was received, a total of $19,745.50.

 

The application was based on an earlier application to the Department of Sport and Recreation?s Facilities Grant program submitted by Council?s Grants Officer. This application was reported in her monthly report, in which it was signalled that Council funds of $20,000 would be required for the project.

 

A member of the Unkya Reserve Committee of Management approached the General Manager in early 2011 to ask for in-principle support for matching funding, for the Sport and Recreation application. This support was also requested for the later CBPP funding and the General Manager?s response is provided at the attached e-mail.?

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The need for a playground was identified through a community planning workshop in January 2011 and further assessment of local interest found strong support for this project. It will build on the already strong community use of the Reserve, which occurs through the bi-monthly market and other activities, and would provide activities for older youth in the area as well as a travel stop for commuters on the Pacific Highway.

 

The project design was developed in consultation with Council?s Manager Assets. The original application included funding for a composting toilet, however with only half the requested amount on offer, not all elements of the project will be able to be implemented. Further project planning will occur if Council funding is committed.

 

This process illustrates the challenge of applying for grants which require matching funding, which is the majority of the time. The Grants Officer, in consultation with the General Manager and others, are often asked to indicate that matching funding will be available, and hope that if the grant is awarded, Council will agree to the allocation, often there is limited notice before the deadline for the application lodgement. Many grant applications are not made due to the lack of matching funding.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Director Engineering Services

Manager Assets

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental issues as a result of this report.

 

Social

 

The Eungai community will benefit from the multi-age play area: Families and carers in the Eungai area with children between 2 and 12 will have a family friendly community hub as there are no other play areas nearby. Families from other areas will have access to a play area different to the ones in their villages, and travellers will be able to stop and enjoy the experience.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic issues as a result of this report.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks as a result of this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no impact on the current budget; however, an allocation of $19,745.50 will need to be set aside in 2012/2013 budget.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

30297/2011 - Funding for playground at Unkya

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Unkya Reserve Playground Grant - Matching Funding

 

From:Michael Coulter[EX:/O=NSC/OU=NSCDOMAIN/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=MICHAELC]

To:'karinadaniels@bigpond.com'[SMTP:karinadaniels@bigpond.com]

Cc:Peter Baynes[EX:/O=NSC/OU=NSCDOMAIN/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Peterb]

Cc:Colleen Henry[EX:/O=NSC/OU=NSCDOMAIN/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Colleenh]

Received-Date:20111027

Received-Time:6:42:16 AM

Sent-Date:20111027

Sent-Time:6:42:16 AM

Subject:Funding for playground at Unkya

 

Karina

 

Thanks for the telephone call and your email advice.

 

You advise that the need for a playground incorporating a climbing structure and sand pit at the Unkya Reserve was an outcome of the community planning day conducted by the Unkya Committee of Management in January 2011.? You advise that the Committee has about $2,000 which it could commit to the project.

 

You estimate the total cost of the project to be $40,000 (based on bark chip softfall) and you are proposing to lodge an application for a Community Building Partnership grant which is $ for $.? You are seeking a financial commitment from Council of $20,000 being the matching funding required for the project.? As discussed Council staff are not that keen on bark softfall because of its maintenance requirements and our potential liability if it is not maintained.

 

I advised that Council does not have $20,000 available in its budget for this expenditure and that I can't commit the Council to such expenditure without it being endorsed in a quarterly budget review or in Council's budget for 2012/2013.? Having said that the Council is always keen to support its Committees of Management in their endeavours to obtain grant funds and improve their facilities.

 

In the circumstances that the grant applications close on 31 October 2011, my suggestion is that you proceed to make application for the grant funding.? In the event that you are successful in securing the grant please contact myself and Council staff will investigate the funding of Council's share, including a contribution from the Committee of Management.? Any funding which Council may be able to apply will need to be included in our budget.? Opportunities to review an adopted budget only occur quarterly.

 

I hope this advice is of some assistance.

 

Thank you for your work as a volunteer.

 

Regards

 

 

Michael Coulter

General Manager

Nambucca Shire Council

PO Box 177 Macksville NSW 2447

Ph:(02)65680200 Mob:0409153788 Fax:(02)65682201

michael.coulter@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

 

-----Original Message-----

From: karinadaniels@bigpond.com [mailto:karinadaniels@bigpond.com]

Sent: Wednesday, 26 October 2011 11:50 PM

To: Michael Coulter

Subject: Funding for playground at Unkya

 

Good Morning Michael,

 

I am writing further to a phone conversation we had in April regarding funding for a playground at Unkya.? My apologies; I was supposed to have emailed you our request ,which I have recently realised I didn't do.? My understanding was that Council was making an allocation in 2011/12 budget to allow dollar for dollar up to $20,000?? Could you please confirm this- we are currently preparing an application for a Community Building Partnership grant and as a section 355 Committee are required to match the amount applied for.

I am hoping to submit application Friday, so would appreciate confirmation beforehand.? I can be contacted on 65699373.

Many thanks

Karina Daniels

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

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

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


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

General Manager's Report

ITEM 10.4??? SF775????????????? 260412???????? Arts Mid North Coast - Nomination for Council Representation on the Board

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Council has been asked to nominate its representative to Arts Mid North Coast Inc Regional Arts Board.

The elected member representing Council for the past twelve months has been Cr Paula Flack.

A copy of the letter and nomination form is attached.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council nominate a representative for the Arts Mid North Coast Board.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? That Council nominate a Councillor to represent it on the Board of Arts Mid North Coast.

2??????? That Council is not represented on the Board of Arts Mid North Coast.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Arts Mid North Coast will be conducting its Annual General Meeting on 25 May 2012 and is seeking this Council?s representation on the Board.? As Council is one of their key stakeholders it is seeking a continuation of Council?s representation.

 

Nominations must be received by Arts Mid North Coast prior to 14 May 2012.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nil

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

This report has no impact on the environment.

 

Social

 

This report has no social impact.

 

Economic

 

There is no economic impact as a result of this report.

 

Risk

 

There is no risk to Council as a result of this report.

 


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

This report has no direct or indirect impact on budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

This report has no direct or indirect impact on working funds.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

8956/2012 - Advice of AGM on 25 May 2012 & invitation to nominate

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Arts Mid North Coast - Nomination for Council Representation on the Board

 


?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Environment and Planning

ITEM 11.1??? SF1709??????????? 260412???????? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 30 March 2012

 

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

 

Summary:

 

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

Council has resolved outstanding matters in relation to the easement.

Application referred to RFS on 27 March 2012

Application being assessed

 

 


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

2011/165

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; Additional information required re OSSM, Bushfire Assessment, Buffer Assessment & ROW

Some information received from applicant but awaiting further Bushfire Assessment - Received

Referred information to RFS

Conflict with rural buffer policy - to be referred to a Council meeting for determination

Final discussions with RFS & applicant prior to Council determination

Report to be presented to Council at its meeting of 16 May 2012

 

2011/142

25/08/2011

Consolidation of 3 existing short term sites to create 1 long term site within the existing Nambucca Beach Holiday Park

Lot 162 DP 755560, 26 Swimming Creek Road, Nambucca Heads

? DA was not publicly advertised

? The proposed site adjoins a public reserve for public recreation and setback variances are greater than 80%

? nine (9) trees will need to be removed to facilitate the DA, including 3 melaleuca trees that provide homes for nesting tawny frogmouth owls;

? Why is Nambucca Shire Council also providing greater variances than 10% to accommodate the park owner's structures

? Dwelling and associated structures will not fit on proposed site;

? Service issues & non-compliance with Regulations;

? Fire risk and issues as to placement of hose reels;

? Submitted plan is not accurate;

? Proposed building 3 times larger than buildings already in the park;

Currently being assessed

Rec'd letter from RFS on 3/01/2012 requesting further information is required to enable them to assess the application.

Matter to be presented to GPC meeting for final determination once assessment completed

 

 


 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2011/182

2011/183

2011/184

14/11/11

Alterations & Additions to unit

Lots 2, 3, 4 SP 36372, 2/3/4 40 Waratah Street, Scotts Head

? Potential overshadowing in the winter months;

? Design is poor, and will undervalue the potential of this prime site;

? Height of proposed buildings 8.5m;

? The proposed pitched roof line with hinder views and be detrimental to the amenity of Scotts Head;

? Overlooking? and noise from the proposed balconies;

? Plans appear to be more in line of a new construction and do not resemble alterations;

? Does not fit with the future character of the locality;

? Development will reduce amount of sea breeze hence affecting cross-ventilation;

? Encroachment on privacy;

Referred to engineers and H&B. Applicant has been advised of additional information required. Clock stopped.

Substantial additional information required

Works impact on community common space (Body Corporate).

Assessing application - Application on hold because of dispute with Body Corporate and resolution to permit the application to be lodged

Strata Management Meeting 2/4/2012

Application will be presented to Council for determination at a later meeting

Strata considering recision motion to withdraw owners consent for DA

7 Day letter issued 17/04/2012 to applicant requesting that applications be withdraw or the matter will be presented to Council for determination based on the information in front of Council

 

2012/024

21/02/2012

Continued use - Carport and Shed, Water Tank, drainage

Lot 23 DP 20689, 13 Old Coast Road, Nambucca Heads

? Issues with drainage onto property and damaged caused when it rains

? Development not approved

? Size of the shed being over 90m2

? Stormwater issues

? Does not fit aesthetically to area

Issues being investigated with applicant to try to resolve before final determination

Hydraulic engineering received 10/4/2012

To be determined by 20 April 2012

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 11.2??? SF1709??????????? 260412???????? DA's and CDC's Received and Determined under Delegated Authority to 13 April 2012

 

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

 

Summary:

 

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

 

 

Recommendation:

 

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

 

 

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED TO 13 APRIL 2012

 

DA Number

Application Date

Applicant/Owner

Development

Address

Estimated Value

2012/040

04/04/2012

Perry Homes/ L Hyde

Dwelling-House

Lot 16 DP 1162372, 8 Susanah Place, Macksville

169,000

2012/041

12/04/2012

Cavalier Homes North Coast/ K A Spear

Two Storey Dwelling

Lot 13 DP 1170352, 8 Nancey Roberts Drive, Macksville

320,163

 

 

COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED 13 APRIL 2012

Including those issued by Private Certifiers

 

DA Number

Application Date

Applicant/Owner

Development

Address

Estimated Value

2012/613

03/04/2012

Daly International Pty Ltd (Optus)/ B & K Shannon

New Telecommunications Facility

Lot 1 DP 592871, 70 Coulters Road, Congarinni North

250,000

 

 

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS/COMPLYING DEVELOPMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO 13 APRIL 2012

 

CONSENT/ DA

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

DEVELOPMENT DETERMINED

EST VALUE

$

2012/025

Lot 233 DP 598873, 1905 Taylors Arm Road, Yarranbella

Recreation Facility (Outdoor) ? Shooting Range

15,000

2012/005

Lot 4 DP 24657, 11 Bellevue Drive, North Macksville

New Carport and Deck

4,800

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 11.3??? SF1719??????????? 260412???????? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 27 March 2012

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Patricia Walker, Aboriginal Community Development Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

Attached for Council?s attention are the minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 27 March 2012. The minutes contain 2 recommendations for Council?s endorsement and they are as follows:

 

1????????? That Council staff investigate and report on the removal of a step, which poses a problem to the public disable toilet in Winifred Street, Macksville.

 

2????????? That the Traffic Committee investigate the replacement of silent cop at the corner of Estuary Lane and Ridge Street, Nambucca Heads.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council staff investigate and report on the removal of a step, which poses an access problem to the public disabled toilet in Winifred Street, Macksville.

 

2????????? That the Traffic Committee investigate the replacement of silent cop at the corner of Estuary Lane and Ridge Street, Nambucca Heads.

 

3????????? That the remainder of the Minutes of the Access Committee held on 27 March 2012 be endorsed by Council.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

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

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

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

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Removal of Step

 

Members where concerned that wheelchair access to these public toilets could be hindered by the step i.e. wheelchairs may 'bounce' back into traffic and the amount of effort it takes to manually drive the wheelchair into the toilet.

 

Replacement of Silent Cop

 

This discussion was around the fact that members witnessed u-turns being made at this one way street. Previously there had been a silent cop in place which caused motorists to use to think twice.

 

 

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

8150/2012 - Minutes - Access Committee - 27 March 2012

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 27 March 2012

 

PRESENT

 

Cr E South (Chairperson)

Ms Alba Sky

Cr A Smythe

Mr Les Small

Ms Patricia Walker

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

Mrs Shirley Holmes

Dr Dorothy Secomb

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Mr Keith Davis

Mr Peter Shales

Mr Matt Sullivan

Mrs Fiona Henwood

 

 

 

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

3499/12 Resolved:??????? (Secomb/Smyth)

 

That the Committee note the recommendations of the Minutes of the Meeting held Tuesday 28 February 2012, will be presented to Council at its meeting of Wednesday 11 April 2012.

 

 

 

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

ITEM 5.1????? SF1719????????????? 270312????? Report on Business Arising from previous meeting held 28 February 2012

 

There were no recommendations coming from this item.

 

 

 


 

ITEM 5.2????? SF1719????????????? 270312????? Report on Correspondence to the Access Committee 27 March 2012

A letter was sent to the BananaCoast Credit Union in relation to ATM in Nambucca Heads and the removal of the step. Members are waiting for a response from the BCU's main office.

 

No formal recommendation was made.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3??????????????????? SF1719??? 270312? Report on General Business and Matters of Interest - 27 March 2012

3500/12 RESOLVED:??????? (Smyth/Hutchinson)

 

That Council staff investigate and report on the removal of a step, which poses a problem to the public disable toilet in Winifred Street, Macksville.

 

3501/12 Resolved:??????? (Secomb/Smyth)

 

That the Traffic Committee investigate the replacement of silent cop at the corner of Estuary Lane and Ridge Street, Nambucca Heads.

 

3502/12 Resolved:??????? (Holmes/Smyth)

 

That the access committee discuss the possibility of engaging in future community projects.

 

 

???

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 commencing at 2:00 pm. This meeting will be the AGM with an ordinary meeting to follow.

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting the time being 4:00 pm.?

 

?(CHAIRPERSON)


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 11.4??? SF1496??????????? 260412???????? Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 30 March 2012

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Attached for Council?s endorsement is a copy of the Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on Friday, 30 March 2012.

 

There are several recommendations from the Committee coming from the Draft Nambucca River Coastal Zone Management Plan, which require an action of Council.

 

1????????? That the following amendments/actions be made to the Coastal Zone Management Plan in relation to the North Valla Beach 4WD access:

 

a??????? Keep the 4WD track open and operational as an interim measure.

 

b??????? Maintain the track surface to a serviceable condition for emergency access, restore/ rehabilitate track margins and provide drainage to reflect natural regimes as much as practical.

 

c??????? Install signage at the track entrances about safe and responsible off road vehicle driving and the sensitivity of coast dune and wetland habitats to disturbance.

 

d??????? Conduct more detailed feasibility assessment of potential alternative routes within the Valla Beach area. Noting other sensitive ecological communities and coastal landforms as well as engineering and safety requirements of alternative routes .

 

e??????? Advise local 4WD clubs/fishing clubs, emergency services and the authority responsible for Wenonah Headland 4WD access that Council is considering alternative off road vehicle access arrangements for North Valla Beach and seek their feedback on providing emergency vehicle access only, or track closure, or the feasibility of other potential local routes or other options further north along the beach.

 

f???????? Investigate means and opportunities for educating persons using the beach to reinforce safety issues (interactions with other beach users) and responsible driving.

 

g??????? Continue to monitor the condition and use of the existing access track (e.g. how many vehicles a month and when does peak use occur).

 

h??????? Depending on the outcomes of these further feasibility studies, driver education and consultation, the matter be reported back to Council for further consideration. Partial closure (except for emergency vehicle access) or full closure and rehabilitation are possible options.

 

2????????? That management actions for Hyland Park pedestrian link to the bridge and the access to black rock area be incorporated into the actions of the CZMP. Management Actions for both areas are to include monitoring and management on an as needs basis.

 

3????????? That the draft CZMP plan be amended where necessary to ensure correct referencing of government agencies and minor wording amendments throughout the document to clarify responsibilities, approval requirements, partnership relationships and the significance of ecological values along the Nambucca coast.

 

4????????? That minor wording changes are made to ensure that the document is directly aligned with any specific layout or wording requirements of the NSW Guidelines for Coastal Zone Management Plans

 

5????????? It is recommended Council review the Section 94 Plans for Surf Life Saving equipment/facilities taking into consideration coastal process issues that may affect the function and safety aspects of the Surf club facilities and surrounding precincts. Precinct plans for Scotts Head Surf Club and Nambucca Surf Club would be required to fully cost works.

 

6????????? It is recommended Council investigate feasibility of a S94 Contributions Plan for the Coastal Zone Management Plan Implementation. Taking into consideration matters identified as short term priorities within the Coastal Zone Management Plan.

 

7????????? It is recommended Council prepared a S94 Plan for the Valla Beach Footbridge. The Catchment area to include the Valla Urban Growth Area.

 

Director?s Note

Following discussions at MANEX, it was agreed that rather than considering the above recommendations 5, 6 and 7 individually, that they be pulled together under one recommendation which says:

 

That Council review its Section 94 Plan for Community Facilities and investigate opportunities for including Surf Life Saving equipment/facilities taking into consideration coastal process issues that may affect the function and safety aspects of the Surf club facilities and surrounding precincts, funding matters identified as short term priorities within the Coastal Zone Management Plan and consideration of including the Valla Beach Footbridge with the Catchment area to include the Valla Urban Growth Area.

 

8????????? That a submission be made to the Catchment Management Authority seeking funding for the construction of a bridge or culvert duplication for the access to Stuart Island and also investigate to have this on the Catchment Plan for 2012-2020.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That the following amendments/actions be made to the Coastal Zone Management Plan in relation to the North Valla Beach 4WD access:

 

a??????? Keep the 4WD track open and operational as an interim measure.

 

b??????? Maintain the track surface to a serviceable condition for emergency access, restore/rehabilitate track margins and provide drainage to reflect natural regimes as much as practical.

 

c??????? Install signage at the track entrances about safe and responsible off road vehicle driving and the sensitivity of coast dune and wetland habitats to disturbance.

 

d??????? Conduct more detailed feasibility assessment of potential alternative routes within the Valla Beach area. Noting other sensitive ecological communities and coastal landforms as well as engineering and safety requirements of alternative routes .

 

e??????? Advise local 4WD clubs/fishing clubs, emergency services and the authority responsible for Wenonah Headland 4WD access that Council is considering alternative off road vehicle access arrangements for North Valla Beach and seek their feedback on providing emergency vehicle access only, or track closure, or the feasibility of other potential local routes or other options further north along the beach.

 

f???????? Investigate means and opportunities for educating persons using the beach to reinforce safety issues (interactions with other beach users) and responsible driving.

 

g??????? Continue to monitor the condition and use of the existing access track (e.g. how many vehicles a month and when does peak use occur).

 

h??????? Depending on the outcomes of these further feasibility studies, driver education and consultation, the matter be reported back to Council for further consideration. Partial closure (except for emergency vehicle access) or full closure and rehabilitation are possible options.

 

2????????? That management actions for Hyland Park pedestrian link to the bridge and the access to black rock area be incorporated into the actions of the CZMP. Management Actions for both areas are to include monitoring and management on an as needs basis.

 

3????????? That the draft CZMP plan be amended where necessary to ensure correct referencing of government agencies and minor wording amendments throughout the document to clarify responsibilities, approval requirements, partnership relationships and the significance of ecological values along the Nambucca coast.

 

4????????? That minor wording changes are made to ensure that the document is directly aligned with any specific layout or wording requirements of the NSW Guidelines for Coastal Zone Management Plans.

 

5????????? That Council review its Section 94 Plan for Community Facilities and investigate opportunities for including Surf Life Saving equipment/facilities taking into consideration coastal process issues that may affect the function and safety aspects of the Surf club facilities and surrounding precincts, funding matters identified as short term priorities within the Coastal Zone Management Plan and consideration of including the Valla Beach Footbridge with the Catchment area to include the Valla Urban Growth Area.

 

6????????? That a submission be made to the Catchment Management Authority seeking funding for the construction of a bridge or culvert duplication for the access to Stuart Island and also investigate to have this on the Catchment Plan for 2012-2020.

 

7??????? That the remaining Minutes from the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on Friday, 30 March 2012 be endorsed.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Endorse the minutes

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

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

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

In addition to the members of the Nambucca River Estuary and Coastline Management Committee, all Councillors were invited to attend the Meeting as the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan was on the Agenda and Ms Pam Dean-Jones was in attendance to present the outcomes of the exhibition and proposed amendments to the Draft Plan on behalf of the Consultants, Umwelt Australia in conjunction with SMEC Australia.

 

The Committee made a number of recommendations in relation to this Draft Plan and other matters on the Agenda, which are contained in the summary above.

 

Councillors are requested to bring their hard copy of draft Plan to the meeting should any discussion or clarification be required.

 


SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental issues with this report.

 

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

 

Social

 

There are no social issues with this report.

 

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

 

Economic

 

There are no economic issues with this report.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There were no recommendations which would impact on any budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No variation required.

 

Attachments:

1View

7273/2012 - Minutes - Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuaries and Coastline Management Committee - 30 March 2012

 

?

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Minutes of the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary and Coastline Management Committee Meeting held on 30 March 2012

 

 

John Ainsworth (Chairperson)

Peter McNally (Nambucca Valley River Users Group)

James Hallam (NSW Farmers)

Tim Ryan (Landcare) (from 9.14 am)

Theresa Spens-Black (Oyster Farmers)

Fay Lawson (Flood Affected Landowner)

Joy van Son (Environmental Group)

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Greg Meyers (Director Environment & Planning)

Barbara Parkins (Minute Secretary)

Jacqui Ashby (Environmental Compliance Officer)

Cr Anne Smyth

John Schmidt (DECC)

Cr Martin Ballangarry

Anna Sedlak (Maritime)

Pam Dean Jones (Umwelt Environmental)

Damien Telfor (Geco Consulting)

Cr Michael Moran (from 8.42 am)

Cr Elaine South (from 8.42 am)

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Rod McDonagh (Roads and Maritime Services)

Cr Flack

Stephen Channells (Department of Lands)

Cr Court (Leave of Absence)

Chels Marshall (NHLALC)

Glenn Storrie (NPWS)

Peter Shales (SES)

 

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

The following Disclosure of Interest was tabled at the meeting:

 

Cr John Ainsworth ? Non-Pecuniary Interest for Item 5.3

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

3493/12 RESOLVED: ????? Spens-Black/Hallam

 

That the Committee note the adoption and resolutions in relation to the Minutes of the Meeting held 18 November 2011, by Council at its meeting of 1 December 2011.

 

 

 

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

ITEM 5.1????? SF1496????????????? 300312????? Report on Business Arising from previous meeting held 18 November 2011

The following information was presented for information to the Committee:

 

There has been confirmation from Manly Hydraulics who have confirmed they have looked at sites at Twilly Willy, Gumma, Highway Bridge over Scotts Head Road and Wilson Bridge, in relation to River Gauge Postsmet. They have also met with SES.

 

Questions ? does Council want gauges in the water or above high tide level. If they are in the water, they will need to be maintained every 6 months. Manly Hydraulics would provide upgrade of gauges.

The recommended positions are:

Gumma ? western side of the bridge

Scotts Head Road ? near bridge abutment and bend where road blocked (extra gauge)

Tilly Willy ? western side of the bridge

Wilsons Bridge ? western side of the bridge

 

 

 

ITEM 5.2????? SF1184????????????? 300312????? Preparation of the Nambucca Coastal Zone Management Plan - Report following exhibition of document

3494/12 RESOLVED:?????? (McNally/van Son)

 

1????????? That the following amendments/actions be made to the Coastal Zone Management Plan in relation to the North Valla Beach 4WD access:

 

a??????? Keep the 4WD track open and operational as an interim measure.

 

b??????? Maintain the track surface to a serviceable condition for emergency access, restore/rehabilitate track margins and provide drainage to reflect natural regimes as much as practical.

 

c??????? Install signage at the track entrances about safe and responsible off road vehicle driving and the sensitivity of coast dune and wetland habitats to disturbance.

 

d??????? Conduct more detailed feasibility assessment of potential alternative routes within the Valla Beach area. Noting other sensitive ecological communities and coastal landforms as well as engineering and safety requirements of alternative routes .

 

e??????? Advise local 4WD clubs/fishing clubs, emergency services and the authority responsible for Wenonah Headland 4WD access that Council is considering alternative off road vehicle access arrangements for North Valla Beach and seek their feedback on providing emergency vehicle access only, or track closure, or the feasibility of other potential local routes or other options further north along the beach.

 

f???????? Investigate means and opportunities for educating persons using the beach to reinforce safety issues (interactions with other beach users) and responsible driving.

 

g??????? Continue to monitor the condition and use of the existing access track (e.g. how many vehicles a month and when does peak use occur).

 

h??????? Depending on the outcomes of these further feasibility studies, driver education and consultation, the matter be reported back to Council for further consideration. Partial closure (except for emergency vehicle access) or full closure and rehabilitation are possible options.

 

2????????? That management actions for Hyland Park pedestrian link to the bridge and the access to black rock area be incorporated into the actions of the CZMP. Management Actions for both areas are to include monitoring and management on an as needs basis.

 

3????????? That the draft CZMP plan be amended where necessary to ensure correct referencing of government agencies and minor wording amendments throughout the document to clarify responsibilities, approval requirements, partnership relationships and the significance of ecological values along the Nambucca coast.

 

4????????? That minor wording changes are made to ensure that the document is directly aligned with any specific layout or wording requirements of the NSW Guidelines for Coastal Zone Management Plans

 

5????????? It is recommended Council review the Section 94 Plans for Surf Life Saving equipment/ facilities taking into consideration coastal process issues that may affect the function and safety aspects of the Surf club facilities and surrounding precincts. Precinct plans for Scotts Head Surf Club and Nambucca Surf Club would be required to fully cost works.

 

6????????? It is recommended Council investigate feasibility of a S94 Contributions Plan for the Coastal Zone Management Plan Implementation. Taking into consideration matters identified as short term priorities within the Coastal Zone Management Plan.

 

7????????? It is recommended Council prepared a S94 Plan for the Valla Beach Footbridge. The Catchment area to included the Valla Urban Growth Area.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3????? SF765??????????????? 300312????? Gumma Gumma and Watt Creek Water Quality Project

3495/12 RESOLVED: ????? (van Son/Ryan)

 

1????????? That the Committee endorse the recommendations contained in the review document for the Gumma Creek and Watt Creek Water Quality Monitoring Program prepared by Damon Telfer ? GECO Environmental Services and refer to Green Span Pty Ltd for implementation.

 

2????????? That a further report come to the Committee in the future when accurate analysis data is available on the sampling of the water quality in Gumma and Watt Creek.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.4????? SF1496????????????? 300312????? Report on Outstanding Items 30 March 2012

3496/12 RESOLVED: ????? (Ryan/Spens-Black)

 

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

 

 

 

ITEM 5.5????? SF1065????????????? 300312????? Investigate Opportunities for Financial Assistance through the Catchment Management Authority to Construct a Bridge

3497/12 RESOLVED: ????? (Lawson/McNally)

 

That a submission be made to the Catchment Management Authority seeking funding for the construction of a bridge or culvert duplication for the access to Stuart Island and also investigate to have this on the Catchment Plan for 2012-2020.

 

 

 

ITEM 5.6????? SF1496????????????? 300312????? Reports from Committee Members and Attendees as required 30 March 2012

Recommendation:

 

That the verbal reports as given, be noted.

 

MEMBER

ORGANISATION

CONTENT OF REPORTS

ACTION/RESPONSE

James Hallam

NSW Farmers

Interested in the runoff that affects farmlands only

NSW Farmers involves the Oyster Growers and Fishers

Joy Von Son

 

Minutes 18 Nov ? table requested for status ? Masterplan and Estuary Plan are missing from the table ? the actions from these brought to the next meeting and their status

For future meetings a brief about the actions and brief update if the status changes ? be put on the Agenda

 

The table contained the actions from the Masterplan and the Estuary Plan.

 

Future meetings will have a brief update on any status changes on these actions

Peter McNally

River Users Group

Last weekend replaced bottom part of Ferry Street Ramp

Put in 3 truck loads of sand to create a kayak pull-in beach for dragon boats and kayakers

Only left to build toilets and solar lighting

This will be done through insurance (toilets) and there will be an official opening and naming of the area

 

 

 

??

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on at the end of April or first Friday in May, commencing at 8.30 am.

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairman then closed the meeting the time being 10.30 am.

 

 

 

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

(CHAIRPERSON)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 11.5??? DA2012/004????? 260412???????? DA 2012/004 - Further Report on Extensions to Medical Centre

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Applicant:????????????????????? Alan Rudge Architects

 

Proposal:?????????????????????? Extensions to Bawrunga Medical Centre

 

Property:??????????????????????? Lot 1 SP 76307, 1/1 Marshall Way, Nambucca Heads

 

Zoning:?????????????????????????? R1 General Residential

 

This application relates to an extension of an existing medical centre, though conversion of office space currently occupied by Farringdon Village, and some minor physical extensions.

 

Council resolved at it?s Ordinary Meeting on 11 April 2012 to allow a variation to the car parking standards in this instance, however, the proposed variation was considerable and Council requested the applicant and Council staff look again at possible ways of providing any additional car parking to serve the development.

 

Council staff have analysed various amendments to the existing car parking arrangement and following discussions with the applicant, both parties have preliminary agreed on a revised car parking plan, which will ultimately allow for 10 (ten) on site car parks and the potential for 5 (five) off site parks to be located near by, subject to the approval of Traffic Committee and discussed in greater detail later in this report. This is an increase in 3 (three) additional on-site car park spaces which, although still equates to a shortfall in car parking requirements as per Part C of the NDCP, is still a valuable increase to the existing situation and this combined with the proposed reconfigurations and restrictions of use of the car parks, it is predicted existing car parking arrangement will be improved.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council approve the application subject to the conditions drafted below and on the basis that Traffic Committee does not support the proposal for the ?1 Hour? parallel parking bays on Marshall Street the Consent remains valid as 3 (three) additional on site car parks will still be provided.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Option 2 is that Council approve the application subject to the Traffic Committees approval of the ?1 hour? parking bays on Marshall Way.

 

Option 3 is that Council refuse the application on the basis it does not meet Council?s DCP car parking requirements for on site parking and there is insufficient provision of car parking to be utilised near by.

 


DISCUSSION:

 

This proposal was previously reported to Council on 11 April 2012 and the report and Council?s resolution are Attachments 1 and 2 for Councillors reference. Since this resolution, Council?s technical staff has suggested some improvements to the existing car parking arrangements. The applicant has also managed to reconfigure the on site car parking and provide a further three car park spaces to the rear of the building, now totalling 10 (ten) on site car park spaces.

 

Council has suggested these new car parks along with the existing one, resulting in four located at the rear of the building, are be utilised by staff on the medical centre. This leaves the existing four at the front of the building to be available for visitors and it is suggested these be limited to a ?one hour? maximum time limitation, which should allows ample time for patients waiting and appointment time, but will not permit doctors or health consultants to occupy them for longer period.

 

A draft revised car parking layout is shown in the plan below at Figure 1 with the staff parking numbered 1-4, visitor (patients) parking numbered 5-8, a drop off park space numbered 9 and the existing disabled parking bay numbered 10.

 

Figure 1 : 10 on-site parks - numbered parking to show each car park space?s restriction

 

1-4 = staff????????? 5-8 = Visitors?????????? 9 = Drop Off Zone??????? 10 = Disabled Bay

During assessments of the existing car parking area and analysis of existing traffic problems on site, it was discovered some other factors were contributing to existing problems, in addition to limited parking being available. Firstly, that the existing disabled parking bay is barely long enough to accommodate a vehicle and when a vehicle is parked in it,? it blocks access to the car parking bay next to it and also pedestrian activity on the footpath. It is considered this disabled bay can be reconfigured to be at a more appropriate angle for easier parking for this park itself and allow access into the space next to it. It is also considered a wheel stop can be provided to prevent drivers from running into the Medical Centre building and to encourage them to park as necessary, close to the building to avoid obstructing the pedestrian footpath. This has been incorporated into condition 4 of the drafted conditions.

 

A further suggestion from Council staff is that an area on the south side of Marshall Way is also dedicated for one hour parking bays ? it is predicted 5-6 car park spaces could be accommodated. As the nearby residences do not front Marshall Way, it is considered appropriate to locate parallel parking with a one hour parking restriction. Furthermore, it is suggested that the restriction for ?one hour parking? is restricted only for week days from 9.00 am until 5.00 pm only; leaving the bays free to be utilised by residents or visitors to the residences outside of these times. These times being when the one hour parking bays can be utilised by visitors to the Medical Centre, although it is not possible to give them exclusive rights.

These parking bays will be located across the road from the Medical Centre on Marshall Way and as such visitors will need to cross this road. It is therefore suggested that the applicant, at their cost, look at providing a safe pedestrian route from these bays to the Medical Centre, following the broken line in Figure 2. It is considered ramps to the kerb will need to be installed as well as a pedestrian refuge point within the existing blister.

 

It is predicted that these parking bays will reduce the need for car parks on the opposite side of the road to Marshall Way where there is presently an issue with cars parked over the pavement causing a hazard for pedestrians.

 


CONSULTATION:

 

Manager of Technical Services

 

Discussions with regards to improving existing car park arrangements have included MTS throughout negotiations and his concurrence has been given to the amendments.

 

Applicant Alan Ridge Architects (see attachment)

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The proposed revised parking layout will lessen the negative impact on the surrounding environment.

 

Social

 

The application site relates to a well established important community facility.

 

Economic

 

None identified.

 

Risk

 

Council has addressed issues in relation to potential risk of accidents due to lack of parking and although not ideal, the proposal will not significantly impact

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The upgrade to the pedestrian route from the proposed one hour parallel parking bays needs to be at the cost of the applicant as per condition 4 or Council will inevitably bare the cost for such works sometime in the future.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not applicable.

 

 

Should Council resolve to approve the development, the following draft conditions are recommended:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS CONSENT

 

Development is to be in accordance with approved plans

 

1??????? The development is to be implemented generally in accordance with the plans and supporting documents endorsed with the Council stamp, dated *** and authorised signature, and set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

 

Plan No/Supporting Document

Version

Prepared by

Dated

Survey DA-01

 

Alan Rudge Architects

Nov 2011

Floor Plans DA-02

 

Alan Rudge Architects

Nov 2011

Elevation DA-03

 

Alan Rudge Architects

Nov 2011

Statement of Environment Effects

 

Alan Rudge Architects

21.12.2011

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE FOR BUILDING WORKS

 

Access and facilities for disabled

 

3??????? The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate access and facilities for persons with access disabilities to and within the development in accordance with AS 1428.1 - Design for Access and Mobility and Part D3 of the Building Code of Australia.

 

Such plans and specifications must be approved as part of the Construction Certificate.

 

Car Parking Plan

 

4??????? A revised car parking plan showing the 10 (ten) on site parks and the restrictions which apply to them needs to be submitted to Council for approval. Other amendments, such as the wheel stop for the disabled parking bay, the realignment of the car park space to be used for the drop off zone and modified routes for pedestrian thoroughfare  also need to be shown on the plan all for approval by Council?s Engineering Department to ensure all spaces are accessible

 

In addition, the proposal for providing parking bays on Marshall Way will need to be submitted to the Local  Traffic Committee for consideration and the applicant will need to demonstrate a safe pedestrian route can be provided from the new parking bays to the Medical Centre, and following a  favourable Local Traffic Committee recommendation being adopted by Council all works to be undertaken to provide the safe pedestrian route are to be at the cost of the applicant.

 

 

Landscaping plan required

 

5??????? The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate the landscaping of the site. Such landscaping plan must incorporate adequate detail to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010. Such plans and specifications must be approved as part of the Construction Certificate.

 


Plumbing standards

 

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

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH DURING CONSTRUCTION

 

Construction times

 

7??????? Construction works must not unreasonably interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood. In particular construction noise, where audible on adjoining residential premises, can only occur:

 

????????? a?????? Monday to Friday, from 7.00 am to 6.00 pm

????????? b?????? Saturday, from 8.00 am to 1.00 pm

????????? c?????? No construction work can take place on Sundays or Public holidays.

 

Builders rubbish to be contained on site

 

8??????? All builders rubbish is to be contained on site in a ?Builders Skips? or an enclosure. Building materials are to be delivered directly onto the property. Footpaths, road reserves and public reserves are to be maintained clear of rubbish, building materials and all other items.

 

Site construction sign required

 

9??????? A sign or signs must be erected before the commencement of the work in a prominent position at the frontage to the site:

 

a??????? showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

b??????? showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

c??????? stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

 

The sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed. No sign is to have an area in excess of one (1) m2.

 

Standards for demolition work

 

10 ???? All demolition works are to be undertaken in accordance with the provision of Australian Standard AS 2601-2001 ?The Demolition of Structures?. Prior to demolition, all services are to be disconnected and capped off.

 

No work is to be commenced in regard to the demolition or removal of the building until such time as the appropriate fees for disconnection of water and sewerage services are paid to Council where such services are no longer required. The sewer drainage system is to be appropriately sealed to prevent ingress of water and debris into the Council?s main. Arrangements are to be made with Council for the withdrawal of the garbage services and collection of the waste bins.

 

 


THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

Fire Safety Schedule

 

11????? At the completion of works an upgraded fire safety schedule is to be prepared and an essential fire safety statement issued, a copy of which is to be sent to Council, the Fire Commissioner and displayed on the premises.

 

Car Parking Signage

 

12????? Adequate signage must be erected to direct people into the appropriate car parks i.e. those spaces dedicated to staff parking should be labelled ?staff only? or similar and those spaces dedicated for visitors parking should be clearly identified as having ?5 Minute? or ?One Hour? parking time restrictions on them.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES

 

Car Parking Management

 

13????? That the car parking area be appropriately managed in terms of use by staff and visitors, and that adequate signage be used to direct people to the correct car parking areas and clearly informs drivers of any time or user restrictions.

 

Attachments:

1View

9258/2012 - Letter of agreement to parking proposal DA 2012/004

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

DA 2012/004 - Further Report on Extensions to Medical Centre

 

 

16 April, 2012

 

Nambucca Shire Council

PO Box 177

MACKSVILLE NSW 2447

 

 

ATTENTION: Selina McNally

 

 

 

 

Dear? Selina,

 

 

RE: D.A. #2012/004 for Bawrunga Medical Centre.

 

 

Further to our discussions at Council last Friday, 13th April, 2012, we have conveyed your suggested parking proposals to Bawrunga Medical Service who are in agreeance.

 

Please contact us on 0409891796 should you require further information.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely


ALAN RUDGE

Registered Architect

NSW No. 5163

 

 

ATR:kw

 

 

c.c. Bawrunga Medical Service.

 

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 12.1??? SF1642??????????? 260412???????? Bowraville Sewage Treatment Plant ? Proposed Constructed Wetland To Improve Effluent Quality

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Bowraville Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP) has been unable to consistently meet the licence requirements that specify the minimum quality of effluent discharge from the plant.? Over the last few years there have been a number of occasions where the concentration limits for both Total Suspended Solids and BOD have been exceeded.

 

Council has been able to manage this problem by reusing the wastewater for irrigation purposes on a farm that they own and lease.? However it is considered that it would be to Council?s advantage to improve the quality of effluent produced by the plant in order to prolong its useful life for as long as possible.

 

Investigation revealed that constructed wetlands have been successfully used at similar STP?s on the Far North Coast to polish the final effluent being discharged to the environment. The Water and Carbon Group have a record of involvement in these projects and they were engaged to investigate and prepare a report on the feasibility of utilising this approach at Bowraville STP.? A copy of the report is circularised for Council?s information.

 

The report concludes that a constructed wetland could be readily integrated into the existing treatment plant site and that it would result in a more consistent effluent quality that would easily comply with existing licence requirements.? On this basis it is recommended that Council pursue the design and construction of a wetland as part of the treatment train at the Bowraville STP in accordance with the option outlined in the report for the estimated cost of $435,000.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council allocate funding of $450,000 spread across the 2012/13 and 2013/14 budget years for the design and construction of the proposed constructed wetland.

 

2??????? That Council seek a fee proposal from suitable companies for the preparation of concept, detail design and documentation for the proposed constructed wetland.?

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council may choose to ignore the recommendation and continue to operate the plant as it is currently. However this option is considered to carry a higher risk of the EPA forcing Council to upgrade or replace the current plant in the short to medium term at a far greater capital cost

 

The IWCM strategy has recommended the installation of chemical dosing facilities in the short term and has also allowed for future replacement of the plant.? Chemical dosing will have ongoing operational costs and related WHS issues and Council should be looking to avoid replacing the plant if at all possible. The constructed wetland option has minimal operation and maintenance costs and is considered to provide Council with an environmentally friendly way of extending the life of the plant

 

DISCUSSION:

 

For some time now the Bowraville STP has failed to consistently meet the EPA licence requirements for the quality of effluent discharged from the site.? This is considered to have been due to a number of factors including the high frequency of wet weather events resulting in flushing of microbiological growth off the trickling filter stones and algae growth in the tertiary bonds

 

Council has been able to manage the problem by setting up an effluent reuse system on a farm that they have purchased.? The effluent is disinfected during transfer to a farm dam which provides additional detention and settling time further improving the quality of the wastewater.? The farm is leased under the condition that as much effluent water as possible must be used on the farm for irrigation purposes.?

 

The problems mainly arise during prolonged periods of wet weather such as that which has occurred over the last 3 years.? During these times there is considerably less demand for irrigation water and effluent overflows to the river occur at the treatment works site.

 

The existing STP is a valuable asset for Council and with Bowraville unlikely to experience significant population growth it is to Council?s advantage to take action to prolong its useful life.? Recent improvements have been made to the plant in the form of new sludge drying beds and the installation of an automatic screening system at the inlet.? The later is removing a lot of solid material upfront and is having a significant impact on the quality of the effluent.

 

The effluent quality is also affected by algae growth in the tertiary ponds as this brings about an increase in the concentration of suspended solids.? This organic matter also reacts with the disinfection chemicals and means that larger doses are required to achieve the desired results.

 

Investigation has revealed that a number of Council?s in Northern NSW with similar problems have achieved a marked improvement in effluent quality through the use of constructed wetlands.? A wetland added to the end of a trickling filter plant and replacing a portion of the tertiary ponds has been proven to produce effluent with BOD and SS concentrations less than 5 mg/L.? This is significantly below licence requirements and better than results achieved at plants designated as ?modern technology?.

 

The Water and Carbon Group have been directly involved in much of the work completed at Casino and Lismore and as a result were engaged to provide a feasibility report for the introduction of a constructed wetland at the Bowraville STP site.? The investigation and modelling indicated that a suitable wetland could be incorporated into the existing site and the expectation is that a much improved quality of effluent would be produced.

 

The Bowraville plant has been identified for major upgrade or replacement in Council?s IWCM Strategy and this would incur a significant cost.? It is considered that the need for this work could be greatly delayed or even negated if a constructed wetland was included in the treatment train.? This option is considered to be a very cost effective and environmentally friendly way of polishing the final effluent from the plant and ensuring that a consistent, high quality wastewater is produced at the final point of discharge.

 

It is noted that the wetland has limited capability to reduce phosphorous levels and this may be something that needs to be addressed in the long term.? However phosphorous is not a problem for reuse water and given that Council intends to continue to use the majority of wastewater for farm irrigation the quantity of phosphorous that is discharged to the Nambucca River is being greatly reduced.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

?????? Director Engineering Services

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The incorporation of a constructed wetland into the Bowraville STP treatment train will have a significant environmental impact as a result of the expected improvement in the quality and consistency of the effluent being discharged from the plant.

 


Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There incorporation of a constructed wetland into the Bowraville STP treatment train is considered to provide Council with a significant economic benefit by significantly delaying and possibly negating the requirement for a major upgrade or replacement of the treatment plant.

 

 

Risk

 

The incorporation of a constructed wetland into the Bowraville STP treatment train is considered to greatly reduce Council?s risk of coming under the scrutiny of the EPA for breaches of its licence requirements

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Funding for the works is proposed to be included in the 2012/13 and 2013/14 budgets

 

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Funding is proposed to be sourced from the Sewerage Reserves

 

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised Document (Trim 7599/2012)

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Bowraville Sewage Treatment Plant ? Proposed Constructed Wetland To Improve Effluent Quality

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Bowraville Sewage Treatment Plant ? Proposed Constructed Wetland To Improve Effluent Quality

 

 

 

Circularised Document (Trim 7599/2012)

 

??Pages

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 12.2??? PRF15????????????? 260412???????? Coronation Park BBQ Kiosk

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The Nambucca Heads Senior Rugby League has requested funding assistance for the construction of a BBQ Kiosk at Coronation Park.? It is proposed that the kiosk will provide the club a means of raising funds to complete Stage 2 of the renovations of the old amenities building at Coronation Park.

 

Council has previously resolved that renovations of the amenities building be completed without further funding from Nambucca Shire Council.? Furthermore it has been noted in previous reports that there was a risk Council may be approached for additional funding.

 

Whilst this request for financial assistance is not directly related to the amenities building itself, the intent of the kiosk is to raise funds towards Stage 2 of the amenities building refurbishment.? On that basis it is recommended Council not provide the required assistance.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council not provide financial assistance to the Nambucca Senior Rugby League for funding the construction of a BBQ Kiosk at Coronation Park.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1????????? That $10,000 financial assistance to the Nambucca Senior Rugby League for funding the construction of a BBQ Kiosk at Coronation Park be considered in the 2012/13 budget.

 

2????????? That $10,000 financial assistance to the Nambucca Senior Rugby League for funding the construction of a BBQ Kiosk at Coronation Park be provided from working funds.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Nambucca Heads Senior Rugby League has requested funding assistance for the construction of a BBQ Kiosk at Coronation Park.? It is proposed that the kiosk will provide the club a means of raising funds to complete the renovations of the old amenities building at Coronation Park.

 

HISTORY

 

In 2009 a new amenities building was constructed at Coronation Park to serve the senior and junior rugby league clubs.? At the time the intention was to demolish the old amenities building at the site as it was considered to be in very poor condition.

 

A recommendation was made to Council in July 2010 to call for quotations to demolish the old amenities building and to advise the leagues clubs that they would be required to build separate facilities for beer, barbeque and hot chip preparation and sales at their own cost.? Following representations to Council by the leagues clubs Council resolved to defer a decision on demolition to allow the leagues clubs the opportunity to put a proposal to Council for retention of the old amenities building.?

 

In February 2011 a report to Council recommended deferral of demolition for a further 3 months to allow the leagues clubs time to complete their proposal.? Council resolved to accept this recommendation.?

 

In June 2011 a structural engineers report was received confirming that the old amenities building would be structurally adequate for the intended use once proposed modifications were carried out.? Following this advice a report to Council recommended a further three month deferral to the demolition of the old amenities building to allow the finalisation of plans for refurbishment and for the Coronation Park Trust to demonstrate their ability to fund the shortfall in funding for the refurbishment and ongoing maintenance.? It was also recommended that Council allow $19,200 allocated for demolition of the old amenities building to be used towards the refurbishment of the old amenities building.? Council resolved to accept these recommendations.?

 

In October 2011 a report to Council recommended approval of the submission from the Coronation Park Trust for retention and renovation of the old amenities building subject to a number of conditions relating to the timing and conduct of the work.? The work was to be carried out in two stages.? Stage 1 encompasses all external works including the demolition of unsound sections of the building.? Stage 2 is the internal refurbishment of the building, other than the public toilets.? That report also recommended reallocation of the $19,200 allocated for demolition of the old amenities to the renovation works.? The report had a further recommendation: That the entire project be completed without further funding from Nambucca Shire Council.??? Council resolved to accept these recommendations.?

 

The report to Council in October also noted that: ?The submission received from Coronation Park Trust fails to provide any detail as to how the Coronation Park Trust will raise funds to complete Stage 2 of the renovation works or to continue to maintain the building into the future..? That report also included the following comment on risk:? There is a risk that the allocated funds of $19,200.00 will not be sufficient to complete Stage 1 or that the Committee will not be able to raise the funds required to complete Stage 2. In either case the Committee may seek further funding from Council to complete the works.

 

NAMBUCCA HEADS SENIOR RUGBY LEAGUE REQUEST

 

The Nambucca Heads Senior Rugby League has requested funding assistance for the construction of a BBQ Kiosk at Coronation Park.? It is proposed that the kiosk will provide the club a means of raising funds to complete Stage 2 of the renovations of the old amenities building at Coronation Park.? The club has obtained quotations for $20,135 for the construction of the kiosk and are seeking financial assistance from Council for $10,000.? These funds will be used to acquire materials for the kiosk.

 

Their request suggests that there may be unspent funds available from Council?s maintenance budget that could be diverted to the kiosk construction.? At this stage there appears there will be minimal unspent funds in the maintenance budget by the end of the Financial Year.

 

POWER SUPPLY ISSUES

 

Following completion of the new amenities building an issue arose where players were experiencing minor electric shocks when using he shower facilities in the new building.? Remedial work was carried out to eliminate these shocks.? In investigating the cause of the shocks Country Energy identified an underlying issue with the power supply to the buildings.? Essentially the supply cables are not adequately sized for the present load in the buildings.? A suggested remediation is to increase the capacity of the supply cables and to upgrade from a single phase to three phase connection to allow better balancing of loads in the buildings.? Preliminary quotes indicate this work will cost in the order of $35,000.?

 

The undersized cables result in the voltage at the buildings being lower than standard.? Measurements taken show voltage at 205V which is well below the standard level of 240V.? This does not pose an immediate problem other than perhaps reducing the efficiency of electrical appliances and increasing the risk of damage to those appliances.? The construction of a new BBQ Kiosk may contribute to additional electrical load and exacerbate the situation of reduced voltage at the site.

 

The power supply issue will need to be resolved though and Council will need to allow money in future budgets for this purpose.? Funding for this work is in effect, competing with the request for funds for the kiosk.

 


FLOODLIGHTING ISSUES

 

Council is aware of issues with two floodlight support poles at Coronation Park.? Whilst maintenance of luminaries is a Committee of Management responsibility, Council is responsible for the lighting infrastructure.?

 

A discussion on remedial works for the poles is pending a review of lighting facilities across the Shire.? Given the prominent rule of Coronation Park it seem highly likely that Council will need to allocate funds for remedial works on floodlighting in future budgets.? Once again, funding for this work is in effect competing with the request for funds for the kiosk.

 

CORONATION PARK TRUST POSITION

 

The request for financial assistance has come from the Senior Leaguers Club rather than the Coronation Park Trust Committee of Management.? The Committee of Management has advised they support the allocation of any unspent maintenance funds to the kiosk.? As mentioned earlier, it is likely that there will be minimal unspent maintenance funds..

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Council has previously resolved that renovations of the amenities building be completed without further funding from Nambucca Shire Council.? Furthermore it has been noted in previous reports that there was a risk Council may be approached for additional funding.

 

Whilst this request for financial assistance is not directly related to the amenities building itself, the intent of the kiosk is to raise funds towards Stage 2 of the amenities building refurbishment.? On that basis it is recommended Council not provide the required assistance.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Mayor

General Manager

Director Engineering Services

Engineering Designer

Coronation Park Trust

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

There are no environmental issues arising from this report.

 

Social

Council has previously provided close to $1M in funding to building works at Coronation Park.? Whilst Coronation Park is a major sports venue within the shire it is important that other sports venues and clubs receive comparable levels of support.? Further funding for facilities at Coronation Park reduces Council?s capacity to provide funding other venues.

 

Economic

Provision of adequate levels of service from infrastructure assets contribute to the economy of the Shire.

 

Risk

There is a risk that construction of the BBQ Kiosk, whether funded by Council or not, will increase the electrical loading at the site and require allocation of Council funds to resolving the electrical supply issues at Coronation Park.? This may occur sooner than Council would otherwise desire.

 

 


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The proposal requires expenditure above current budget allowances.? Funding of this request, if granted, will require allocation of working funds.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

General funds.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

5492/2012 - Letter from NHSRL Club

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Coronation Park BBQ Kiosk

 














Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 12.3??? SF843????????????? 260412???????? Minutes of the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee - 13 April 2012

 

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

 

Summary:

 

A meeting of the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee was held on the 13 April 2012.? The minutes of the meeting are attached for adoption by Council.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council continue with a series of media releases leading up to the holiday periods.

 

2??????? That the minutes of the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee meeting on 13 April 2012  be noted and adopted.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

a?????? Endorse the minutes

b?????? Not endorse the minutes

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Committee considered the following items:

 

1??????? Outstanding Actions as at 30 March 2012

2??????? Financial Report as at 30 March 2012

3??????? Report from Council?s Director Environment and Planning for the period September 2011 to March 2012 relating to the ranger position

4??????? Parks Supervisor Inspection Report ? March 2012

5??????? Honorary Rangers Verbal Reports ? March 2012

6??????? Compliance of 4WD Vehicles on Beaches

7??????? Conduct polling on community attitudes to 4WD vehicles on beaches

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

None

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There is some illegal vehicle access to beaches that could cause environmental damage.

 

Social

 

There are no issues as a result of this report.

 

 

Economic

 

There are no issues as a result of this report.

 

Risk

 

Use of vehicles in unauthorised areas could lead to injury to other beach users.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Funds are available in current budget through the income generated by the sale of beach permits.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

No variance to working funds.

 

Attachments:

1View

9197/2012 - Minutes - Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee - 13 April 2012

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Minutes of the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee - 13 April 2012

 

PRESENT

 

Cr Janet Court (Chairperson)

Cr Paula Flack

Mr Tony Hardge

Mr Kevin Morrison

Mr Bob Bennett

Ms Georgette Allen

Mr Bill Watts

Mr Brian Hall

Mr Paul Gallager (Director Engineering Services)

Mr Graham Jones (Observer)

Ms Tracey Suter (Observer)

Mr John Schmidt (Dept Environment and Heritage) (Observer)

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Cr John Ainsworth

Cr Michael Moran OAM

Mr Rhett Smyth

Mr Kevin Morrison Jnr

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

57/12 Resolved: (Brazel/Hardge)

 

That the Committee note the adoption of the Minutes of the Meeting held on the 11 November 2011.

 

 

 

?

Director Engineering Services Report

ITEM 6.1????? SF843??????????????? 130412????? Outstanding Actions as at 30 March 2012

58/12 RESOLVED: (Flack/Hardge)

 

The progress on the outstanding actions identified at the previous meeting held on the 11 November 2011 and presented to the meeting held on the 13 April 2012 be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 6.2????? SF843??????????????? 130412????? Financial Report as at the 30 March 2012

59/12 RESOLVED: (Watts/Bennett)

 

1??????? That the Financial Report as at the 30 March 2012 noting Income of $ 5307.00 and Expenditure of $ 3924.73 be received and noted.

 

 

 


 

ITEM 6.3????? SF843??????????????? 130412????? Report from Council's Director Environment and Planning for the period September 2011 to March 2012 relating to the Ranger position

60/12 RESOLVED: (Flack/Hardge)

 

That the report from the Director Environment and Planning for the period September 2011 to March 2012 relating to the Ranger position be received and noted.

 

 

 

ITEM 6.4????? SF843??????????????? 130412????? Parks Supervisor Inspection Report March 2012

61/12 RESOLVED: (Flack/Hall)

 

That the report from the Parks and Reserves Supervisor as at the 29 March 2012 be received and noted.

 

 

 

ITEM 6.5????? SF843??????????????? 130412????? Honorary Rangers Reports - 13 April 2012

DISCUSSION:

 

The following verbal reports were provided by the Honorary Rangers:

 

Brian Hall??????????????? Nothing to report

Bob Bennett??????????? Nothing to report

Bill Watts??????????????? Nothing to report

Jim Brazel?????????????? Access is okay. Complaints about dogs in Little Beach swimming area

Georgette Allen??????? Dogs on beaches; flagged down 3 young men in 4WD?s near the cliff at Valla Beach. Thought they came in from Nambucca Shire side but had accessed beach through Bellingen Shire at Winona.

Kevin Morrison???????? Nothing to report

Tony Hardge??????????? 5 dead She-oaks fallen in car park at Scotts Head need removal.

 

The Director Engineering Services advised that he had discussions with the former Director Engineering, Wayne Butler, of Bellingen Shire Council with a view to their joining the joint Beach Permit operation with Nambucca, Port Macquarie Hastings and Kempsey Shires.? Bellingen Shire Council currently do not issue beach permits.

 

62/12 RESOLVED: (Bennett/Flack)

 

That the verbal reports from the Honorary Rangers provided on the 13 April 2012 be received and noted.

 

 

 


 

ITEM 6.6????? SF843??????????????? 130412????? Compliance of 4WD vehicles on beaches

63/12 RESOLVED: (Flack/Hardge)

 

1??????? That the Committee receive and note the report.

2??????? That the Committee recommend that Council continue with a series of media releases leading up to the holiday periods.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 6.7????? SF843??????????????? 130412????? Conduct polling on community attitudes to 4WD vehicles on beaches

DISCUSSION:

 

The Committee noted the verbal advice from the Director Engineering Services that the various policies relating to beaches are going to be reviewed with the intention to combine into one policy.? This will be provided to the Committee in advance of the November 2012 meeting for comment.

 

The Committee were advised by the Director Engineering Services that the questions for the polling will be developed in consultation with the Vehicular Access to Beaches Committee.

 

64/12 RESOLVED: (Flack/Allen)

 

1??????? That the Vehicular Access To Beaches Committee receive and note the report that Council resolved to poll community attitudes to 4WD vehicles on beaches within the Nambucca Local Government area and that Council will be conducting this poll through the auspices of the 2013 Resident Satisfaction Survey.

 

 

???

?

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Friday 9 November 2012 commencing at 1.30 pm.

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting the time being 2.20 pm.

 

 

 

Cr Janet Court

(CHAIRPERSON)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 12.4??? SF1676??????????? 260412???????? Capital Works Report

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Noel Chapman, Manager Civil Works ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council has resolved at the March Ordinary Council meeting to receive a report on the non recurrent budget items (Capital Works) within the Engineering section.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Capital Works Report for the period ending March 2012 be received and noted.

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The report is presented for the period ending March 2012 (copy circularised for Councillors).

 

It should be noted that the Authority costing system is still experiencing problems.? This report is based on the best available information extracted manually by the Manager Information Technology.

 

Comment from General Manager:

 

The Manager Information Technology has provided the following comments on the problems which have been recently encountered with the Authority costing system.

 

?Civica releases regular patches for its Authority product on a bi-weekly basis. These patches are intended to provide prompt resolutions to problems occurring at customer sites however from time to time bugs are also introduced.

 

When Nambucca applied patch 18 to our Authority 6.4 LIVE environment a bug was introduced that caused balances associated with work order expenditure to be misreported on both the enquiry screens inside the Authority product and custom reports written by Nambucca Shire Council. This issue is to do with the way individual transactions are managed within the accounts payable module. When a purchase order is invoiced and subsequently receipted, the amount is not correctly associated with the originating work order, hence the balances for that work order are not correct.

 

The *cause* of the issue was recently resolved (after well over a month) and has been applied to our environments, however significant data corruption has occurred during that time. Civica are working on several fixes that will be run by consultants at affected sites. An email this morning suggests these will be ready on 24/4/2012, however with many sites being affected it's not known when Nambucca will be scheduled.

 

The issue has caused significant stress for Nambucca Shire Council when required to provide reports to the RMS regarding expenditure relating to flood damage and has made expenditure tracking far more difficult. It may also have affected some budget preparation.

 

We now have a relatively reliable program that identifies incorrect transactions associated with a work order and makes necessary adjustments. This was not attempted sooner due to the inherent risk associated with making assumptions regarding financial data in a system as complicated as Authority.?

 


Comment from Director Engineering Services:

 

The attached spreadsheets reflect the expenditure for capital works for the March quarterly budget review period and will now be provided to Council each quarter as part of the Quarterly Budget Review (QBR).

 

Council staff have been hampered in monitoring the expenditure with the issue surrounding Authority as detailed by the General Manager.

 

This period of reporting has experienced substantial wet weather which has impeded or delayed some works which have been pushed back to the March ? June reporting period. The impact of the wet weather has reflected in the bridge construction program with the need for remedial works required to open roads following landslips and damage to rural roads. Council have been previously advised of the flood damage claims emanating from January and February storm events and the issues surrounding various landslips.

 

????????? Rural Fire Service ? Service Level Agreement

 

Council are aware of the issues that have surrounded the RFS budgets and the Service Level Agreement (SLA). The Liaison Committee meeting cycle is now back on track which reviews the Business Plan and Quarterly Performance Report. The main issue is the revolving door surrounding the Zone Managers position which has seen four (4) Acting Managers, and the lack of accountability associated with the expenditure for the Service

 

????????? Rural Fire Service - Buildings

 

The RFS identified capital works to buildings within the 2011/12 financial year for Eungai extensions $50.000 and Taylors Arm extensions $14.000.? This funding was subject to government matching grants which did not eventuate for the RFS and an allocation of $64,000 will not be required this financial year. In accordance with the recommendations from the RFS Liaison Committee and adopted by Council, unexpended funds are to be placed into a reserve to offset future budgets and the amount of $64,000 is recommended to be placed into a reserve for future budgets.

 

????????? Rural Fire Service - Plant

 

There are two items of plant contained in the 2011/12 budget.? The RFS have advised that these will be procured by the end the financial year.

 

 

Comment from Manager Civil Works:

 

The major rain events in January/February severely disrupted the works program with further rain in April also having a negative impact.

 

Notwithstanding these disruptions, I anticipate the majority of the works program will be completed by 30 June 2012.

 

There is one project, Weekes Bridge, which may overrun resulting in a revote of an amount yet to be determined.? This will involve mainly labour and plant costs.

 

Projects identified as completed may still have accounts outstanding for payment and this is reflected in the column ?Expend to Finish?.


 

ITEM

DESCRIPTION

COMMENTS

1

Adam Lane Construction

Awaiting replacement of sewer main prior to road constructions.

2 & 3

Flood Damage 2009

(including Johns Bridge

All works will be completed by 30 June 2012 in accordance with Natural Disaster Funding requirements.

4

Gorleys Bridge

Side track washed out on several occasions.? Some claimed under flood damage.? Not all eligible.

6

Hampton Court Bridge

As above

9

Weekes Bridge

Material being purchased.? Construction to commence at the completion of Johns Bridge.? There may be some revote consisting of labour and plant costs.

15 & 16

Stormwater Drainage ? Adin Street

Internal house sewer required replacement.? Stages 1 & 2 combined into one project.

17 & 18

Stormwater Drainage ? Seaview Street

Additional works approved during construction due to unforseen conditions.? Stages 1 & 2 combined into one project.

22&23

Stormwater Drainage ? West Street

Stages 1 & 2 to be combined into one project.? Clearing of open drain completed.? Pipe work to be carried out by contractor. (Commencing May).

28

Gumma Road

Geotech information received and pavement design being completed.

31

Valla Road

Preliminary geotech investigation prior to detailed design, funds sourced from Developer Contributions.

33

Rodeo Drive Tewinga

Funding for this project is part of the RMS block grant which is in untied allocation.?

A major pavement failure on Scotts Head Road reduced the amount of available funds.? Other large pavement failures in Rodeo Drive were also considered a higher priority and hence given preference over this project.

45 & 69

Walter Monro Street

Macksville Tennis Court Carpark

These projects will be completed together.? Detail design of the car park revealed available funding insufficient.? Savings within the Roads to Recovery (R2R) funds will be reallocated to this project.

49

Regatta Drive

Project not required.? Funds can be reallocated.

52 & 53

Dudley Street and

East Street

Works scheduled for 2010/11 were deferred due to DA application for a school on Dudley Street.? Funds were placed into a reserve awaiting the outcome of the DA (as DA conditions would have resulted in external funds to undertake the work in lieu of Council).? These funds have now been brought back to complete the project with the works to be completed by 30 June..

54

Reseals

Wet weather has delayed the reseals, intermediate work on the shoulders has been completed.? Awaiting contractor confirmation of commencement date which is anticipated end April, these are short term and anticipated to be completed in one week..

62

Hennessy Tape Floodlights

Quotations received for the lighting were higher than the grant received.? Lower prices have been negotiated and awaiting Committee approval to proceed with reduced lighting output and higher level of ?in kind? contribution.

73 & 74

Rural and Urban Road

Heavy Patching

Contractor continuing with the program, works have been subject to rain delays and the program will be completed by 30 June.

 

The landslip remediation works along Riverside Drive have commenced and are anticipated to be completed by 30 June. A variation to the contract was approved when asbestos was found on one of the sites and had to be treated in accordance with Work cover requirements.

 

Comment from Manager Assets:

 

????????? Buildings

 

The only anticipated revote at this point in time is the awning on the Bowraville Museum not being completed in 2011/12.? We are currently awaiting finalised designs in order to seek quotations for the work.? Timing will then be dependant on capacity of building contractors to complete work in 2011/12.? Potential revote of $8,500 to 2012/13 if work not completed.

 

????????? Plant

 

All planned plant purchases are complete or scheduled for completion by 30 June 2012. The five utilities which were initially intended to be leased are on order following Council?s resolution in November 2011 to revert to purchase of vehicles.

 

Purchase of a compressor (general fund) and tractor/slasher (sewer fund) have been deferred.? Budget allowance for these items ($70,000) will be transferred to the Plant Reserve.

 

Comments from Manager Water and Sewerage:

 

????????? Nambucca Sewerage Augmentation

 

Final commissioning of the plant was seriously delayed as a result of electrical problems associated with the automatic control of the aeration system and the UV disinfection system.? These issues have now been resolved and the new treatment plant is now in operation.

 

However the delays have meant that a number of outstanding works are yet to be completed including demolition of the old works and upgrades and repairs to the existing IDEA tank.? Council is also holding $200,000 of retention monies for the contract.? As a result of these delays expenditure will occur in the 2012/13 budget, however, Council can still claim $1 million subsidy through the Country Towns and Water Scheme upon completion of the project.

 

????????? Off River Storage Construction

 

When the budget was prepared in early 2011 the program for the project allowed for construction commencing in March 2012. Council?s attempts to obtain funding commitments from the State Government and delays in completing the detailed design have meant that the project has been delayed.? Construction will not commence until August 2012 subject to Council decision on the tenders, and therefore the $9,000,000 will be required as a revote into the 2012/13 budget.

 

The expenditure required from reserves and loans have not been drawn down for this financial year as they are not required until the 2012/13 financial year.

 

????????? South Macksville URA ? Pump Stations

 

Development approval has been granted for subdivision at South Macksville and when the budget was prepared for 2011/12 it was envisaged that the development would have progressed to a stage where Council would have had to commit to commencing the pump station works.

 

This has not been the case and construction works are being postponed until they are absolutely necessary and as a result no further expenditure will occur in 2011/12.? However the developer has commenced work on site and pump station construction will have to be undertaken in 2012/13 and hence a revote has been requested. This work will be funded from reserves and revenue collected from developer contributions.

 


Conclusion:

 

At this point in time, expenditure is on track for completion of the capital works program which encompasses the revotes emanating from the 2011/12 financial year. Staff have identified some works that may progress into the first quarter of the 2012/13 financial year as a revote.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Director Engineering Services

Manger Assets

Manager Technical Services

Manager Water and Sewerage

Manager Information Technology

Waste Officer

Technical Officer Assets

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

No issues associated with this report.

 

Social

 

No issues associated with this report.

 

Economic

 

No issues associated with this report

 

Risk

 

Wet weather remains a risk to Council?s works program.? This year has seen substantial storm and rain events which has impacted or delayed some projects.? The development of the works program allows for staff to monitor the progress and make the necessary adjustments to delivering a completed program.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Undelivered projects due to delays attributed to weather may require a potential revote.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised report for Councillors

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Capital Works Report

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Capital Works Report

 

 

 

Circularised report for Councillors

 

??Pages

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 12.5??? SF444????????????? 260412???????? Review of Heavy Patching Operations

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:???? Noel Chapman, Manager Civil Works ????????

 

Summary:

 

As part of a review of Council?s heavy patching operations, Council engaged NorthPipe Constructions to trial an American machine called an Asphalt Zipper

 

The results varied and an interim report from the Manager Civil Works together with an activity summary report from NorthPipe Constructions is attached for Council?s information.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the interim report into heavy patching operations from the Manager Civil Works and the activity summary report from NorthPipe Constructions be received and noted.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Note the reports

2??????? Make a different resolution

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

An Asphalt Zipper has been trialled for use in the restoration of large pavement failures (heavy patching).

 

An interim report has been prepared on the findings to date.? The machine trialled was extremely efficient at ripping and mixing existing pavements however, its relatively large size and design limited its use on small patches particularly in urban areas.? Further, trialling on larger rehabilitation projects remains an option.

 

In order to compare the overall value of this machine further trials are being undertaken using two other contractors with different equipment.

 

A further report will be prepared once these further trials have been completed.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Director Engineering Services

NorthPipe Constructions

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental issues as a result of this report.

 

Social

 

There are no social issues as a result of this report.

 


Economic

 

Improved rehabilitation techniques will lead to more efficient movement of vehicles and reduced vehicle operating costs benefiting both private and business road users.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks associated with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The 2011/12 budget contained an allowance for urban and rural heavy patching.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no variations to working funds attributed to this report.

 

 

 

 


Attachments:

1View

6969/2012 - Review of Heavy Patching Operations - Interim Report 1 - Asphalt Zipper

 

2View

9530/2012 - Report from NorthPipe Constructions - Asphalt Zipper Trial

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Review of Heavy Patching Operations

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVIEW OF HEAVY PATCHING OPERATIONS

 

INTERIM REPORT 1?ASPHALT ZIPPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author:???????? Noel Chapman

?????????????????? Manager Civil Works

?????????????????? March 2012

SF444

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 



1?????? INTRODUCTION

 

1.1?????? Council?s sealed road network consists of 104.5 km (915,000m2) urban streets and 247 km (1,600,000m2) rural roads.

 

1.2?????? Limited funding over many years has resulted in full reconstruction being replaced by a program of cement stabilisation as the preferred method of rehabilitation as a means to treat a greater length of the network.? This reduced treatment combined with reduced roadside mowing and several wet seasons has let to an increased number of large pavement failures.

 

1.3?????? In October 2011 Council was advised of a new machine (Asphalt Zipper) which had been recently imported from the United States of America.? In order to test its capabilities and options available for the restoration of large pavement failures a trial was arranged for November 2011.

 

1.4?????? A contractor was engaged to undertake the trial.

 

 

2?????? CAUSES OF LARGE PAVEMENT FAILURES

 

2.1??? There are two main causes of large pavement failure.

 

2.2?????? Firstly, aging pavements.? The gravel pavement loses its compaction and strength that can lead to sinkage over large areas.

 

2.3?????? Secondly, water in the pavement.? This weakens the gravel and leads to the subgrade, often clay materials, pumping through the pavement causing heaving.? Water in the pavement is usually the result of poor drainage and a lack of shoulder maintenance.? Over recent years a reduction in roadside mowing has resulted in grass and material in the shoulders building up higher than the bitumen seal hence retaining water in the pavement.

 

 

3?????? SCOPE OF THE TRIAL

 

3.1?????? In preparing the 2011/12 budget Council recognised the fact that the sealed road network required significant funding to rectify large pavement failures.? Allocations of $200,000 and $250,000 were included in the budget for rural and urban roads respectfully.

 

3.2?????? This interim report will concentrate on the remediation of the failed sections using the Asphalt Zipper in conjunction with other earthmoving equipment.? The trial focuses on failures on Gumma Road and a patch in Nambucca Heads.

 

3.3?????? The effectiveness of a trial of this nature can be difficult to assess as the aim is to carry out works that will provide a cost effective, long term benefit.? The success of any one treatment may not be evident for months or even years after the works.

 


3.4?????? The adopted method also needs to take account of the condition of the surrounding pavement.? It is of little benefit to treat a patch for a life of 30 years if the adjacent pavement only has a life of 5 years.? The primary objective is to remove an immediate hazard in order that the overall pavement may reach the end of its service life.

 

3.5?????? A preliminary cost of heavy patching is estimated to be $100 per sqm.? The trial will provide a more accurate costing.

 

 

4?????? METHODOLOGY

 

4.1?????? The contractor was given a brief to undertake repairs to large pavement failures based on the use of the Asphalt Zipper.? Information on the company website indicated similar use by various councils in the United States.

 

4.2?????? The Zipper is essentially a pavement recycling machine that rips an existing pavement and mixes the insitu material ready for relaying.? For the trial there were no geotechnical pavement tests taken prior to the works.? Therefore, onsite assessment of treatment options was required.

 

4.3??? Options available to the contractor were:

 

???? Rip and relay existing material

???? Rip and remove material and replace with new road base

???? Rip and modify the material using cement, lime or other stabilising agents.

 

4.4?????? The contractor was required to keep records of location, method, equipment used and costs.

 

 

5?????? RESULTS

 

5.1?????? The Zipper proved to be very efficient in ripping and mixing the existing pavements.? However, this efficiency resulted in considerable idle time while waiting for the remainder of the process to be completed.

 

5.2?????? A number of teething problems were experienced as this was the first time the machine had been used in Australia.? It is now evident that the United States have different (lesser) workplace safety and vehicle operating standards.? Whereas in the United States the Zipper can be used on small loaders and transported on a trailer and utility, a much larger loader and truck transport is required in Australia to meet the relevant legislative requirements.? This limits the flexibility of operations.? In particular, the large loader and the position of the Zipper in the bucket make it impossible to excavate up to existing kerbs in urban area thus requiring an additional process.

 

5.3??? A copy of the contractor?s report is attached as Appendix A.

 

5.4?????? In assessing the effectiveness of the Zipper, two factors have impacted on the quality of the patches.?

 

5.5?????? Firstly, rain throughout the trial caused delays and had a negative impact on placement and compaction of treated material.? This could lead to early failure and higher costs due to reworking.? Secondly, the lack of familiarity with the machine slowed the process thus increasing costs.

 

5.6?????? The contractor has reported his costs to equate to approximately $72 per sqm which is an average for patches excavated to a depth of approximately 300 mm.

 

5.7?????? Initial inspection of these patches has indicated some failure particularly along he shoulder area where the Zipper could not access and where substantial additional drainage works would be required at additional costs.? There were also some problems with temporary seals and stripping of aggregate.

 

 

6?????? CONCLUSION

 

6.1?????? The Zipper performed its part of the operation extremely well in the rural area but was very limited in the urban situation.? There are smaller versions of the Zipper available that maybe more suitable for urban patches.

 

6.2??? It is evident the larger the patch the more efficient the Zipper becomes.

 

6.3?????? For heavy patching the Zipper is limited to a depth of 300 mm whereas some locations may require deeper dig outs (sometimes greater than 600 mm) thus requiring more conventional machinery such as an excavator.

 

6.4?????? As stated, the Zipper is effective in its part of the operation, however, overall success is a factor of the particular site conditions, especially the depth of existing pavement and the sub grade quality.? Uncertainties in this area could be overcome by geotechnical investigation at each site to determine the appropriate solution.? This would be at an additional cost of up to $15 per sqm for a patch 20m long by 4m wide.

 

6.5?????? In order to fully assess the heavy patching activity it will be necessary to undertake further trials for comparison against the costs determined so far.

 

6.6?????? In conclusion, large pavement failures can vary in cause and extent and no one solution will apply cross the board.? Each road and location will need assessment to determine the most appropriate solution.

 

 

7?????? THE NEXT STEP

 

7.1?????? The contractor engaged to undertake this trial has indicated that he considers other options are available as alternatives for the Asphalt Zipper.? This would be based around a smaller Skid Steer Loader profiling attachment.? Availability of this type of equipment is being investigated.

 

7.2?????? In order to compare processes and relative costs, further trials have commenced on both Taylors Arm Road and Wilson Road.

 

7.3?????? The Taylors Arm Road trial is being carried out using traditional methods using an excavator to depths up to 600 mm, installation of subsoil drainage and geofabric, rock fill and new road base material.? Initial indications are that this process will cost in the order of $145 per sqm.

 

7.4?????? A further trial is also being arranged using a different contractor with dedicated road profiling equipment.? This trial will also incorporate geotechnical investigation and a pavement design.

 

7.5?????? Once the trials have been completed Council will have a range of treatment solutions that can be considered for application on a job by job basis.

 

 


Appendix A

ASPHALT ZIPPER TRIAL - SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES

 

Gumma Road ? Job 1

Wednesday 16 November 2011 ? Day 1

????? Site establishment&Set up traffic control

????? The council hired front end loader from conplant could not hold the weight of the asphalt zipper (3.9 tonne) in the front bucket so delays were present whilst another replacement loader could be found and loaned from a local quarry.

????? Once milling production commenced the road was milled to depth of 300mm using the asphalt zipper. This was achieved in a timely manner as the asphalt zipper was found to be very quick in this process.

????? Once milled the area was then trimmed ready for compaction. A council hired padfoot roller from conplant was onsite and on its first run broke down in the middle of the job and could not be moved thus resulting in storms approaching and a replacement machine being floated in from Coffs Harbour (more delays due to machine breakdowns)

????? Agreement was made to remove half the depth (150mm) of pavement into an onsite truck and commence compaction of the remaining milled pavement (150mm) with an onsite 7t smooth drum roller whilst waiting for the replacement roller to arrive. During this process mechanics were able to free the broken down roller to enable it to be moved to the side of the road.

????? With the use of an under sized 7t smooth roller we proceeded to compact the pavement to our best ability with storms approaching.

 

????? Komatsu loader not suitable for Zipper ? delay waiting for replacement from Coates

????? Pad foot roller broke down ? delay waiting for replacement from Coates

 

Thursday 17 November ? Day 2

(Rain and storms overnight)

????? Set up traffic control

????? Mill section of road not completed yesterday due to breakdown of roller to depth of 300mm

????? Pavement found to have excess moisture thus resulting in an area of 70m2 removed and replaced with 2 layers of roadbase (300mm total depth) over geo fabric.

????? This area was then trimmed and compacted to final height as well as the table drains reshaped and cleaned.

????? Density tests were also taken on this area

 

Friday 18 November ? Day 3

????? Set up traffic control

????? Clean and reshape drain

????? Spread bags of cement and lime and mill with Zipper

????? Trim and compact

????? Seal road

 

Monday 21 November ? Day 4

????? Set up traffic control

????? A section of 200m2 of pavement failed due to excess moisture in worked area prior to storms on Friday afternoon/evening and over weekend

????? This area was re-milled, an additive of Polycom was applied, re- milled, trimmed and compacted with? the Import, lay and compact road base where required

 

 

Gumma Road ? Job 2

Wednesday 16 November 2011

????? Site establishment

????? Set up traffic control

????? Rip pavement with grader? to a? depth of 150mm

????? Add Polycom and mill

????? Import, lay and compact road base where required to fill low areas

????? Trim and compact pavement

????? Seal pavement

Gumma Road ? Job 3

Wednesday 16 November 2011

????? Site establishment

????? Set up traffic control

????? Table drains where cleaned and reshaped prior to pavement repair

????? Rip pavement with grader? to depth of 150mm

????? Add Polycom and mill

????? Import, lay and compact road base where required to fill low areas

????? Trim and compact pavement

????? Seal pavement

 

Loftus Street and Lee Street ? Job 4

Wednesday 16 November 2011

????? Site establishment

????? Set up traffic control

????? Mill pavement to depth of 300mm

????? Add Polycom and mill

????? Import, lay and compact road base where required to fill low areas

????? Mill pavement

????? Trim and compact pavement

????? Seal pavement

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

????? The use of the combined asphalt zipper (4 tonne) and the front end loader (15 tonne) would be more suitable for rural roads and not urban areas wether rural residential or residential due to the sheer size of the machinery.

????? The weight alone causes unworked pavement to fail due to the weight of combined machinery resulting in more work needed.

????? Whilst the speed of the milling process was deemed very efficient, the very same process could be achieved with different machinery with cost reductions in not having as many machines on hand.

 

 

 

Regards

Barry Hezlett

Managing Director

 

 


APPENDIX A

 

Asphalt Zipper Trial - Summary of Costs

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Review of Heavy Patching Operations

 

Asphalt Zipper Trial - Summary of Activities

 

Gumma Road ? Job 1

Wednesday 16 November 2011 ? Day 1

????? Site establishment&Set up traffic control

????? The council hired front end loader from conplant could not hold the weight of the asphalt zipper (3.9 tonne) in the front bucket so delays were present whilst another replacement loader could be found and loaned from a local quarry.

????? Once milling production commenced the road was milled to depth of 300mm using the asphalt zipper. This was achieved in a timely manner as the asphalt zipper was found to be very quick in this process.

????? Once milled the area was then trimmed ready for compaction. A council hired padfoot roller from conplant was onsite and on its first run broke down in the middle of the job and could not be moved thus resulting in storms approaching and a replacement machine being floated in from Coffs Harbour (more delays due to machine breakdowns)

????? Agreement was made to remove half the depth (150mm) of pavement into an onsite truck and commence compaction of the remaining milled pavement (150mm) with an onsite 7t smooth drum roller whilst waiting for the replacement roller to arrive. During this process mechanics were able to free the broken down roller to enable it to be moved to the side of the road.

????? With the use of an under sized 7t smooth roller we proceeded to compact the pavement to our best ability with storms approaching.

 

????? Komatsu loader not suitable for Zipper ? delay waiting for replacement from Coates

????? Pad foot roller broke down ? delay waiting for replacement from Coates

 

Thursday 17 November ? Day 2

(Rain and storms overnight)

????? Set up traffic control

????? Mill section of road not completed yesterday due to breakdown of roller to depth of 300mm

????? Pavement found to have excess moisture thus resulting in an area of 70m2 removed and replaced with 2 layers of roadbase (300mm total depth) over geo fabric.

????? This area was then trimmed and compacted to final height as well as the table drains reshaped and cleaned.

????? Density tests were also taken on this area

 

Friday 18 November ? Day 3

????? Set up traffic control

????? Clean and reshape drain

????? Spread bags of cement and lime and mill with Zipper

????? Trim and compact

????? Seal road

 

Monday 21 November ? Day 4

????? Set up traffic control

????? A section of 200m2 of pavement failed due to excess moisture in worked area prior to storms on Friday afternoon/evening and over weekend

????? This area was re-milled, an additive of Polycom was applied, re- milled, trimmed and compacted with? the Import, lay and compact road base where required

 


 

 

Gumma Road ? Job 2

Wednesday 16 November 2011

????? Site establishment

????? Set up traffic control

????? Rip pavement with grader? to a? depth of 150mm

????? Add Polycom and mill

????? Import, lay and compact road base where required to fill low areas

????? Trim and compact pavement

????? Seal pavement

Gumma Road ? Job 3

Wednesday 16 November 2011

????? Site establishment

????? Set up traffic control

????? Table drains where cleaned and reshaped prior to pavement repair

????? Rip pavement with grader? to depth of 150mm

????? Add Polycom and mill

????? Import, lay and compact road base where required to fill low areas

????? Trim and compact pavement

????? Seal pavement

 

Loftus Street and Lee Street ? Job 4

Wednesday 16 November 2011

????? Site establishment

????? Set up traffic control

????? Mill pavement to depth of 300mm

????? Add Polycom and mill

????? Import, lay and compact road base where required to fill low areas

????? Mill pavement

????? Trim and compact pavement

????? Seal pavement

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

????? The use of the combined asphalt zipper (4 tonne) and the front end loader (15 tonne) would be more suitable for rural roads and not urban areas wether rural residential or residential due to the sheer size of the machinery.

????? The weight alone causes unworked pavement to fail due to the weight of combined machinery resulting in more work needed.

????? Whilst the speed of the milling process was deemed very efficient, the very same process could be achieved with different machinery with cost reductions in not having as many machines on hand.

 

 

 

Regards

Barry Hezlett

Managing Director

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 26 April 2012

Director of Engineering Services Report

ITEM 12.6??? SF85??????????????? 260412???????? Review of Local Government Engagement with the RFS - Discussion Paper

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The LGSA have developed a discussion paper in response to the ongoing concerns expressed by councils in relation to their engagement with the NSW Rural Fire Service. (Trim 9378/2012 attachment)

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council provide a submission to the LGSA advising Council endorse Option 1 within the discussion paper ?Retracting Local Governments operational involvement with the RFS ?

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Receive and note the report

2??????? Provide additional comments

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council would recall the many reports over the past two years on the significant increases imposed on Council for the RFS contribution.? The Discussion Paper: Review of Local Government Engagement with the RFS, outlines the past and present engagement of Local Government with the RFS and proposes the following options for the future.

 

Option 1?????? Retract Local Government?s operational involvement with the RFS

Option 2?????? Merger of two fire services (RFS/FR NSW)

Option 3?????? Retain current arrangements with process improvements

Option 4?????? Local Government recover bushfire responsibilities

Option 5?????? Maintain the status quo.

 

Councils are requested to comment on their current arrangements with the RFS, Identify issues/problems commonly arising and highlight any current arrangements that are considered effective and clearly indicate a preferred option.

The feedback received from the discussion paper will be collated and reviewed to help develop a new policy position on the future engagement of NSW Local Government with the RFS.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

RFS Liaison Committee

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 


Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

The economic implications associated with the ability to fund RFS contribution increases off-set against the reduction of Council services to Nambucca Valley communities to compensate for the increase

 

Risk

 

There is the continued risk of an ever increasing RFS contribution and lack of accountability.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The 2011/12 budget incorporated the RFS contribution based on advice of the RFS Area Acting Manager for the Lower North Coast Zone at the April GPC meeting originally set at $235,282.51, however Council staff anticipated a continuation of the unwarranted increase in contributions and allocated $184,000.00 in the 2011/12 budget

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no variation to working funds attributed to this report

 

Attachments:

1View

9378/2012 - RFS Discussion Paper - letter

 

2View

9659/2012 - RFS Discussion Paper

 

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Review of Local Government Engagement with the RFS - Discussion Paper

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 26 April 2012

Review of Local Government Engagement with the RFS - Discussion Paper

 














? ?