NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

15 May 2013

 

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

 

Our Vision

Nambucca Valley ~ Living at its best.

 

Our? Mission Statement

 

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

 

Our Values in Delivery

?            Effective leadership

?            Strategic direction

?            Sustainability of infrastructure and assets

?            Community involvement and enhancement through partnerships with Council

?            Enhancement and protection of the environment

?            Maximising business and employment opportunities through promotion of economic development

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

?            Actively pursuing resource sharing opportunities

 

Council Meetings:? Overview and Proceedings

 

Council meetings are held on the last Thursday of each month commencing at 5.30 pm AND and a full day meeting commencing at 8.30am on the Wednesday two weeks and one day before the Thursday meeting. Meetings are held in the Council Chamber at Council's Administration Centre?44 Princess Street, Macksville.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Meeting Agenda

 

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


 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

1??????? APOLOGIES

2??????? PRAYER

3??????? DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

4??????? CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ? Ordinary Council Meeting - 24 April 2013

5??????? NOTICES OF MOTION

5.1???? Notice of Motion - Council Business Papers (Trim SF271).... 6 ?

6??????? PUBLIC FORUM

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

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

9??????? General Manager Report

9.1???? Outstanding Actions and Reports........................................ 7

9.2???? Independent Local Government Review Panel - Future Directions for NSW Local Government - Twenty Essential Steps.............................................................................. 13

9.3???? Review of Council's Organisation Structure........................ 23

9.4???? Draft 2013/2014 Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges)........ 40

9.5???? Recruitment Arrangements for the Replacement of the Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services.......................................................................... 45

9.6???? Regional State of the Environment Report......................... 47

9.7???? Arrangements for Council Elections to be Conducted by the Electoral Commissioner.................................................... 53

9.8???? 2011/12 NSW Water Supply and Sewerage Performance Monitoring Report............................................................ 55

9.9???? Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft......... 57

9.10?? Draft Projects Administration Contribution Plan.................. 85

9.11?? DRAFT Community Strategic Plan 2022.......................... 101

9.12?? Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework - 2013/14 TO 2016/17......................................................................... 107

10????? Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

10.1?? Review of Alcohol Free Zone in Bowraville CBD............... 112

10.2?? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 26 March 2013 and Annual Confirmation of Committee................... 117

10.3?? Investment Report to 30 April 2013................................. 121

10.4?? Tender for Audit Services............................................... 127

10.5?? Re-reporting Modification to DA2010/004 to remove requirement to construct footpath and cycleway............... 129

10.6?? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 15 April to 3 May 2013.............................................................................. 150

10.7?? Contract Regulatory Officer's Report April 2013............... 154

10.8?? Schedule of Council Public Meetings............................... 155

10.9?? Disaster Grant to Nambucca Shire Council...................... 157


11????? Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

11.1?? NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee meeting No. 3 ? 2012/13......................................................................... 160

11.2?? Review of Policy - Vehicular Access To Beaches.............. 164

11.3?? Plan of Management - Lions Park Ferry Street Macksville 181

11.4?? Plan of Management - Gordon Park Recreational Area - Playing Fields - Wellington Drive Nambucca Heads.......... 193

11.5?? Plan of Management - Gordon Park Rainforest Wellington Drive Nambucca Heads.................................................. 207

11.6?? Asset Management Update - April 2013........................... 219 ???

12????? General Manager's Summary of Items to be Discussed in Closed Meeting

12.1?? Road Maintenance Bond - Allawah Estate, Macksville

It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (g) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

??

??????????? a???? Questions raised by Councillors at 8 above

 

?????? i???????? MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING

?????? ii??????? PUBLIC VERBAL REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING PROPOSAL

???? TO CLOSE

?????? iii??????? CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS

?????????????????? iv?????? DEAL WITH MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING

13????? MEETING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC

14????? REVERT TO OPEN MEETING FOR DECISIONS IN RELATION TO ITEMS DISCUSSED IN CLOSED MEETING.

 

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS

 

 

Name of Meeting:

 

Meeting Date:

 

Item/Report Number:

 

Item/Report Title:

 

 

 

I

 

declare the following interest:

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

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

For the reason that

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed

 

Date

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

Council?s Facsimile Number ? (02) 6568 2201

 

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

 


Definitions

 

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

 

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

(Local Government Act, 1993 section 442 and 443)

 

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

 

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

???


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.1???? SF1817??????????? 150513??????? Notice of Motion - Council Business Papers (Trim SF271)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Kim MacDonald, Councillor ????????

 

Summary:

 

Since the introduction of the IPADS to Councillors, Council staff have been sending some reports to Councillors for meetings that I am finding quite difficult to read on the I-Pad.? Some examples of this have been the Budget and also the Works Schedules.? Due to the size of the reports (significantly larger than A4) by scrolling across the page on the I-Pad I am often losing the detail that is provided in the Row and Column headings of the reports and it is affecting the ease to which I am absorbing the information in the Reports themselves.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council receive any documents larger than A4 size via hard copy not via the I-Pad to assist in Councillors? comprehension of the reports

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Whilst I appreciate that the reason for the introduction of the I-Pads was to reduce the paper/printing generated by Council I do not believe that this should be at the expense of Councillors? understanding of Reports. ?Savings will of course still be generated by the bulk of the reports anyway

 

 

MANEX COMMENT

 

It is agreed that scrolling around landscape and larger formats is a problem.? It is inevitable that with A4 landscape scrolling will still be required.? Management will review documents to endeavour to reduce the amount of scrolling and any A3 documents will be presented in paper form.

 

 

Attachments:

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


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager

ITEM 9.1???? SF959????????????? 150513??????? 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

 

MARCH 2011

1

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

 

GM

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 May/June 2012.

Re the delay, Council?s Strategic Planner has followed up the RMS.

Staff meeting with Consultants on Wednesday 18/10/12.

Funding for a Flood Risk Management Plan which would consider filling is included in the 2013/14 Environmental Levy program.

JUNE 2011

2

SF841

2/06/2011

Council write to the RMS 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.

 

AGMCCS

Letter sent 8 June 2011.

No response as at 6 December 2011.

Further letter sent 10 January 2012.

No formal response, however RMS have verbally advised that a formal response will be with Council prior to the end of May 2012

DEP to follow up with RMS.

To be discussed further with RMS.

Further letter sent 4 January 2013.

No response as at 4 March 2013

Further letter sent 17 April 2013 with copy to Mr Stoner.


 

JULY 2011

3

SF1031

21/7/2011

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

 

GM

Policy under revision and to be reported to future meeting.? Also the State Government policy has recently changed.

 

Awaiting finalisation of Nambucca River Flood Studies

 

OCTOBER 2011

4

SF1595

20/10/2011

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

 

AGMES

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.

Deferred until   October following the election of the new Council and to be included in Tree Register? Item No 11 below. Deferred to November 2012.

 

Memo to be provided to Councillors with Policy procedures for comment in accordance with Policy direction ? March 2013

 

5

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.

 

AGMCCS

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

 

Change in Rates staff meant that there has not been the opportunity to review the criteria.? To be reported in 2012/2013.

Once Finance Structure resolved this matter should progress.

FEBRUARY 2012

6

GB2/12

02/02/2012

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

AGMES

Nesting boxes were installed in December 2012, advanced trees still awaiting delivery.

 

Advanced trees have been sourced and are scheduled for delivery to Council after Easter.

MARCH 2012

 

7

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.

 

AGMES

Report will be presented to Council in August 2012.

To incorporate outstanding action No 5 above.

Deferred until October following Council elections.

Deferred until November 2012.

Memo to be provided to Councillors with Policy procedures for comment in accordance with Policy direction ? March 2013

 


 

AUGUST 2012

8

SF96

15/08/2012

Council develop a policy in relation to the erection of signs on public land.

 

AGMES

A draft policy will be developed for Council in November 2012

 

Memo to be provided to Councillors with Policy procedures for comment in accordance with Policy direction - March 2013

 

Awaiting TASIC guidelines for tourist signage to complete policy and guidelines.? In accordance with Council procedures a memo will be provided to Council with the new policy ? April 2013.

 

OCTOBER 2012

9

DA2012/069

25/10/2012

Council to seek full external funding for independent traffic study for Pacific Highway Upper Warrell Creek Road Intersection

MBD/

G&CO

Investigations underway

Discussed at meeting on 18 March 2013.? Agreed that Boral and APS would prepare a traffic study.

NOVEMBER 2012

10

SF29

29/11/2012

Representatives of Clarence Valley Council be requested to meet with representatives of this Council to discuss the distribution of the assets and liabilities of the CRL.

 

GM

Letter sent 5 December 2012.? Discussion with CVC General Manager who requested the matters of contention be listed in an email.? Points of contention emailed 28 February 2013.

JANUARY 2013

 

11

RF275

16/01/2013

Councillors to be notified of DA?s with a value or cost > $1m.

 

AGMCCS

On-going

 

12??????????

SF1817

16/01/2013

Council review its tree removal policy and incorporate suggestions contained in NoM ? the 6D principles.

 

AGMES

Report February 2013

 

Memo to be provided to Councillors with Policy procedures for comment in accordance with Policy direction in April 2013.

 

 

13

SF734

16/01/2013

Council undertake a seminar on the implications of the upgrade of the Pacific Highway for the Nambucca Valley and a further report come to Council on proposed speakers, a budget and the availability or otherwise of funding from Industry & Investment.

 

GM

Report March 2013.? Deferred to allow for consultation with the RMS and Kempsey Shire Council.

 

 

14

SF1817

31/01/2013

Council write to the Min. for the Arts, through the Hon. Andrew Stoner MP calling upon the Government to implement the submission from the Library Council of NSW for the reform of the funding system for NSW Public Libraries.

 

AGMCCS

Letter to Mr Stoner sent 18 February 2013, Letter of acknowledgement and advice of his representations to the Minister for Arts received 26 February 2013.

 

Response received from Minister 20 March 2013 ? TRIM 7076/2013 attached.

 

15

LF167

31/01/2013

Mayor and AGMCCS visit the owner of 5625 Pacific Highway, North Macksville and explain the seriousness of Council?s orders and discuss options for rectifying the problem.

 

AGMCCS

Arrangements being made.

On site meeting held. Positive steps for progress.

Plumber engaged by landowners. Recent wet weather has restricted any progress.

 

Application received 22 March 2013 and referred to DI&I (Fisheries) 15 April 2013

 

 

FEBRUARY 2013

 

16

SF84

13/02/2013

Council advise the RFS that it is only prepared to accept the RFS Bid for 2013/14 indexed as per the rate pegging levy of 3.4%.

 

AGMES

Letter sent.? Awaiting response.

 

Letter sent to the RFS Commissioner, Minister and RFS Zone Manager.

-???? NIL response from State Government

-???? Amended Bid from the Zone Manager provided ? to be reported at the April Council meeting.

 

 

17

SF1817

28/2/2013

Council write as a matter of urgency to the RMS to place a 60km/hr speed zone on the Pacific Highway at the Link Road, Nambucca Heads intersection.

Also that the RMS be asked to install advising signs on the Highway alerting motorists to the intersection.

 

GM

Letter sent on 6 March 2013.? Response received 28 March 2013 indicating the RMS is in the process of conducting a speed zone review at this location.

 

18

SF453

28/2/2013

Council write to CHCC and EPA requesting a review of the outcomes of the upgraded Biomass plant.

GM

Letter sent 5 March 2013.? Letter received from Coffs Harbour City Council on 15 April advising that the contract agreement incorporates provisions for an operational review of the Biomass processing arrangements to be undertaken before 1 July 2013.? They advise discussions have commenced with the facility contractor to initiate this review.

 

 

MARCH 2013

 

19

PRF54

13/3/2013

A further meeting of stakeholders be arranged to discuss options for the on-going management of the Gumma Reserve.

 

GM

Meeting to be arranged in April 2013.? This meeting was postponed (3/4) to a future date.

 

 

 

20

SF1687

28/3/2013

Council receive a report on how the information obtained from the floor level survey of Macksville will be managed once it is received.? Also that Council ask the RMS whether they will include some homes in the Kings Point area.

 

GM

Report in May 2013

 

21

SF1031

28/3/2013

That there be a review in 6 months time of the policy on rainwater tank rebates to determine whether or not there should be an increase in funding.

 

AGMES

Report due October 2013

 

22

SF1760

28/3/0213

That Council be provided with a report on Waste Depot fees for non-service residents, including the possibility of a voucher system.? The report is to provide feedback on how other councils are handling this matter.

 

AGMES

To be reported with draft budget.? Anticipate May 2013.

 

 

 

23

DA2012/108

28/3/2013

That Council rescind the motion to approve DA2012/108, to enable Mrs Leckie?s delegation to be heard including the new information regarding impacts to her property from the proposed development prior to re-determining DA 2012/108.

 

AGMCCS

DA to come back to Council on 24 April 2012.

 

DA to come back to Council?s meeting on 30 May 2013.

 

24

RF284

28/3/2013

Council write to the Minister for Transport to expedite the upgrade and replacement of load limited railway bridges (overpasses) on Browns Crossing Road

 

AGMES

Letter written w/e 5/4/2013.

 

25

SF1687

28/3/2013

Council be provided with confirmation that cisterns in the Macksville Park amenities building have been rectified.

 

AGMES

May 2013

 

 

 

 

APRIL 2013

 

26

SF601

10/4/2013

Council request RMS to urgently prepare for On and Off ramps for the Pacific Highway in the vicinity in North Macksville as to facilitate a discussion

 

GM

Letter sent to RMS on 12 April 2013

 

27

DA2010/004

10/4/2013

That this application be deferred to the Council meeting 15 May 2013

 

MAC

Scheduled for 15 May 2013 meeting

Valla beach

 

28

DA2012/010

10/4/2013

That this application be deferred to enable further discussion with the applicant

 

MAC

Will be scheduled for further consideration following discussions

Strata subdivision, Princess Street Macksville

 

 

29

PRF54

10/4/2013

Camping Fees for Gumma Reserve be set $5.00/child and $10/adult per day and included in Council?s 2013/2014 Fees and Charges

 

GM

Proposed fees included in Draft 2013/2014 Fees and Charges

 

30

SF669

10/4/2013

That Council respond to draft SEPP Coal Seam Gas exclusion zones

 

GM

Submission sent on 12 April 2013

 

Attachments:

1View

7076/2013 - Information update in relation to the Revitalising Regional Libraries program (Item 14 above SF1817)

0 Pages

?

?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Outstanding Actions and Reports

 


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.2???? SF894????????????? 150513??????? Independent Local Government Review Panel - Future Directions for NSW Local Government - Twenty Essential Steps

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The Independent Local Government Review Panel has suggested the formation of statutory bodies, multi-purpose County Councils, with the following functions (at a minimum):

 

????? Strategic regional and sub-regional planning

????? Regional advocacy, inter-government relations and promoting collaboration with State and federal agencies in infrastructure and service provision

????? Management of, or technical support for, water utilities

????? Road network planning and major projects

????? Waste and environmental management (including weeds and floodplain management)

????? Regional economic development

????? Library services

????? ?High level? corporate services

 

Depending upon the final definition of this minimum set of core functions, there is a real risk that the list as proposed will render smaller ?residual? councils like Nambucca unworkable and redundant.? Even if Council retains its water and sewerage operations staff, the suggested core functions would see the transfer of perhaps 25 to 30 staff from this Council?s operations.? This Council will find it very difficult, if not impossible, to spread its operating overheads across a much smaller revenue base and organisation structure.

 

Perhaps more importantly, the existing elected Council would be emasculated as a decision making authority.? Already the State Government has removed responsibility for major development applications from councils.? The proposed functions of the multi-purpose County Councils would mean that most major policy and expenditure decisions in relation to water, sewerage, roads, waste, environmental management and libraries would be made by the County Council.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.?????? That Council note the proposed creation of a North Coast County Council with the minimum specified set of core functions as indicated on page 34 of the Independent Panel?s ?Twenty Essential Steps? report will potentially render Nambucca Shire Council financially unworkable and functionally redundant.

 

2.?????? That Council make an immediate submission to the Independent Local Government Review Panel requesting they issue a further discussion paper providing more detail on the proposed functions and operations of the proposed County Councils, including financing and staffing, as well as other options for mandatory alliances before preparing their final report.

 

3.?????? That Council defer making a more detailed response to the ?Twenty Essential Steps? paper until after the scheduled discussions with the Panel and the discussions which are likely to occur with MIDROC councils and possibly the councils comprising the proposed North Coast County Council.

 

4.?????? That the Mayor and General Manager be provided with authority to meet with the MIDROC councils and the councils comprising the proposed North Coast County Council to discuss any concerns each Council may have.

 

5.?????? That a further report come to Council by mid June updating the Council on the outcome of any discussions with other Councils prior to Council making a submission on the ?Twenty Essential Steps? paper by the deadline on Friday 28 June 2013.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has many options in the manner in which it responds to the ?Twenty Essential Steps? paper.

 

Council could support or actively oppose the proposed reforms.? An issue with either approach is that given the far reaching nature of the recommendations proposing the establishment of multi-purpose County Councils there is only scant information in the report about it.? The information is limited to eight dot points and a few additional paragraphs.

 

Whilst the information is scant, the Council does need to consider how the proposal may affect its residents.? The report does this whilst seeking to obtain further detail on the proposed multi-purpose County Councils.

 

The report does not canvass other options for achieving economies of scale through mandatory alliances.? One potential model would be to mandate that specified groups of Councils enter into binding alliances for those corporate functions where there are likely to be efficiency gains with increased scale.? IT is one example.? Rather than creating another bureaucracy such as a County Council this could be achieved by a group of Councils jointly owning a company that provides the service to the constituent councils.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Councillors were provided with a copy of this report at the last Council meeting.

 

The ?twenty essential steps? presumably refer to the 20 short chapters in the report.? However the short chapters contain many separate observations and proposals, so the title belies what is really a comprehensive and far reaching proposal for the overhaul of NSW local government.

 

The following comments are structured relevant to each of the 20 chapters or ?twenty essential steps?.? It is not proposed to summarise the findings of each chapter as Councillors have a copy of the report and it is available on the web at www.localgovernmentreview.nsw.gov.au.

 

1.?????? Face the Challenges of Change

 

The Panel believes from their investigations and consultation that the NSW local government sector is weighed down with too many out of date ideas, attitudes and relationships.? They believe that the financial base of the sector is in urgent need of repair as many councils face very serious problems that threaten their sustainability and the provision of adequate services to their communities. (page 6)

 

The Panel asserts, ?the need to focus on the overall strategic capacity of councils to support their communities, rather than simply seeking efficiencies and cost savings?.? (page 7)? This view has featured in their previous consultation.

 

This belief in what will make a good council in the future is at the centre of their observations and recommendations.? This framework for the future Council was also agreed by the ?Lyons? inquiry into UK local government and is also fundamental to the NSW Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework.

 

The notion is that councils will be more ?place shapers? able to more readily engage with the community and partner with different levels of government and the private sector in providing different or higher level services.? As indicated on page 8;

 

?The concept of strategic capacity highlights this aspect of reform:? the need for councils or groups of councils to have the ability to respond to the diverse and changing needs of different communities, and to take on new functions or deliver improved services in order to meet those needs.? This implies a move to larger, more robust organisations that can generate increased revenues through economies of scale and scope and then ?plough back? efficiency gains into benefits for their communities.?

 

The billion dollar question is whether this belief in what will make a good council in the future is better than the alternative paradigm which continues to focus on councils? traditional property related services being roads, drainage, water, sewerage etc.? On the North Coast of NSW the question is even more vexed because most councils have not been able to adequately fund their traditional responsibilities, let alone consider new functions or improved service levels.? Also the existing financial issues for North Coast councils apply irrespective of the scale of the Council, which tends to contradict the notion of a ?plough back? of efficiency gains through economies of scale into benefits for local communities.

 

2.?????? Create a Sustainable System

 

This chapter identifies a mix of new local government structures including amalgamations and ?new look? County Councils.

 

In particular it is proposed that County Councils, hitherto single purpose authorities, be implemented state wide as multi-purpose authorities with a range of functions currently undertaken by local councils.? This is discussed in more detail in Chapter 13.

 

3.?????? Keep the ?Local? in Local Government

 

The Panel believes there is no evidence that the loss of local identity is an inevitable consequence of creating larger local government areas.? Whilst the statement may be true, the commentary does not refer to the de-amalgamation process which has recently occurred in Queensland or previously in NSW with the split of Pittwater from Warringah.? There are significant social pressures which drive such de-amalgamation processes and not to acknowledge them seems to suggest a predisposition towards larger authorities.

 

Instead the Panel believes there are a range of methods that can be used to keep the ?local? in larger local government areas.? These include place management approaches, the use of wards, the use of social media and, ?modern customer service systems that ensure swift replies to requests for information and rapid responses to problems or concerns?.? The latter is possibly a reference to customer call centres and request management systems.? My own observation is that they do not necessarily make an authority ?local? and particularly when it is obvious the call centre operator hasn?t heard of the place.

 

Of interest is that whilst the Panel believes that dividing local government areas into wards may be one answer to keep the ?local? in local government, the recently released discussion paper by the Local Government Act Taskforce noted suggestions for the abolishment of the ward system and actually proposed that it be abolished (page 36).? Therefore the Panel sees wards as a key means for a larger council engaging with the community whilst the Taskforce acknowledges suggestions from Councils with wards that they be abolished as they are not working well.

 

4.?????? Confront Financial Realities

 

This section summarises the work of TCorp.? Whilst there has been some disagreement with the TCorp methodology and perhaps some of the findings, in general they reflect the findings of previous investigations including the 2006 ?Allan? Inquiry which was commissioned by the Local Government Associations.? In 2006, the ?Allan? Inquiry estimated the infrastructure backlog in local government at over $6 billion and concluded that local councils would need to spend at least an extra $900 million per annum.

 

One of the reasons put forward to explain the infrastructure backlog is the wider range of services now being provided by councils.? Since the 1970?s many councils have moved into new areas of activity such as environmental management, economic development, aged care and a variety of other community services.? This has imposed cost pressures, and spending on more traditional items such as road maintenance has been held back to balance budgets.

 

The main message from TCorp is that most councils are reporting operating deficits and a continuation of this trend is unsustainable.? In 2012 only one third of councils (50) reported an operating surplus.? In the instance of Nambucca Shire Council, our net operating result before capital grants and contributions was a deficit of $2.67m in 2012 and $3.69m in 2011.? More specifically in 2012 cash outflows for the purchase of assets, included road and bridge construction totalling $3.1m.? However this compares with the $4.9m annual rate of depreciation of these assets.? And this does not include the estimate to bring those roads and bridges up to a ?satisfactory standard? which is $22.7m.

 

The assessment by TCorp is consistent with advice which has been provided to this Council by its Auditors and previous to that by the Promoting Better Practice Review conducted by the Division of Local Government.

 

The Panel?s view is that underlying weaknesses in the financial position of NSW local government have been allowed to build up for far too long.? They attribute this to misdirected policies at both State and local levels; lack of technical and financial expertise in many councils; inadequate, inconsistent data; and poor long term planning.

 

It is agreed that all stakeholders in NSW local government need to confront these financial realities.

 

5.?????? Ensure Fiscal Responsibility

 

The Panel makes a number of observations about improving benchmarking and delivery programs.? The Panel also proposes that NSW follow the example of Queensland and Victoria in placing local government audits under the oversight of the Auditor General.? It is proposed that work continue to be carried out by private firms but under contract to the Auditor General, not the Council.

 

6.?????? Bolster the Revenue Base

 

This section of the report makes a number of sensible suggestions about simplifying and stream lining rate pegging arrangements.? In particular the Panel proposes that Councils be allowed to increase rates by up to 3% more than the annual cap set or projected by IPART for the following four years, provided documentation certified by the Mayor and General Manager can demonstrate community engagement; that the funding will be applied to asset renewal; that the Delivery Program has been endorsed by the Council?s Auditor as well as other requirements to demonstrate improvements in efficiency and productivity.

 

Another welcome discussion concerns the allocation of the Financial Assistance Grants (FAGs).? The Panel believes that the existing entitlement for each Council to at least receive a per capita grant equivalent to 30% of the general purpose component means that large amounts of assistance are being paid to some councils that could make do with less.? This is evident in the TCorp report.

 

The Panel believes that in a climate of fiscal restraint, where the total grant pool is highly unlikely to increase significantly and may even decline, consideration needs to be given to the option of redistributing more funds to the most needy councils and communities.

 

The Panel identifies a number of initiatives which this Council has already been proactive in pursuing, including;

 

?Councils are failing their communities if they do not make necessary applications for Special Rate Variations above the rate pegging cap? (page 16)

 

Comment ? Nambucca Shire Council has obtained 8 special rate variations over the past 10 years

 

?Asset sales to fund new or replacement infrastructure, including rationalisation of facilities such as road reservations, open space, community halls and libraries?

 

Comment ? Nambucca Shire Council has transferred from its ownership the Bowraville Pioneer Community Centre, the Macksville Showground and is in the process of transferring the Nambucca Senior Citizens Centre.? The Council has also reduced the width of bridge replacements at Eungai and South Arm.? This Council has been proactive in rationalising its assets.

 

7.?????? Tackle the Infrastructure Backlog

 

The Panel notes there is no doubt that the sheer scale of infrastructure problems threatens to overwhelm a significant number of councils.? ?This applies particularly to rural-remote councils that have to maintain extensive networks of roads and bridges that serve very few ratepayers; and to north coast councils having to cope with varying combinations of retiree driven growth, dispersed populations, difficult terrain, frequent flooding and extensive floodplains, numerous old timber bridges, coastal erosion and the demands of tourism.?? (page 20)? This is certainly a statement that won?t be challenged by north coast councils.

 

Another sensible suggestion from the Panel is to secure changes to the natural disaster funding arrangements to give councils greater flexibility in determining how available funds can be spent in restoring damaged infrastructure on a network basis ? not simply replacing individual structures at the same standard.

 

There is also a proposal to investigate regional roads groups similar to the Queensland model, based on the proposed new County Councils.? It is suggested that it could be expanded to include new forms of shared strategic procurement of infrastructure works, such as groups of councils jointly commissioning multiple bridge replacement projects.? However it is suggested that funding may come from setting aside a proportion of the roads component of FAGS for ?strategic projects?.? This could be supplemented in a similar way from an allocation from the federal ?Roads to Recovery? funds.

 

The potential issue for this Council is that it contains a relatively small network of regional roads.? It may not necessarily follow that the earmarked funds will result in an increase in expenditure on this Council?s road network.? With a limited regional road network the expenditure may well be less.

 

8.?????? Promote Innovation, Productivity and Competitiveness

 

This section makes a number of worthwhile observations and suggestions about innovation and best practice, high quality and efficient service delivery, workforce and leadership skills and industrial relations.

 

The Panel notes that, ?some councils regularly survey their communities and local businesses to establish the level of satisfaction with services, but many do not.? Systematic service reviews are implicit in the IPR framework, but there is no specific requirement?.? Whilst this Council has limited resources we have undertaking regular satisfaction surveys of our community.

 

The Panel also comments on the need to demonstrate continuous improvement.

 

9.?????? Advance Improvement and Accountability

 

Again this section makes many worthwhile observations and suggestions.

 

According to the Panel, much of NSW local government exhibits a strong culture of compliance:? have the required processes been completed and the right boxes ticked, rather than, has something valuable been achieved?? At the other end of the spectrum, the Panel notes that relatively little emphasis has been placed on fostering continuous improvement and effective accountability to local communities.? More needs to be done to bring about a change of culture from compliance to improvement, and to ensure that councils are truly accountable for their performance.

 

The Panel notes only about half of NSW Councils have an audit committee and/or some form of internal audit process, and the latter tend to focus primarily on compliance, risk and fraud control.? They observe that some audit committees include external, independent members and have an independent chair, but many are strongly embedded within the council and answerable primarily to the General Manager.? This can generate conflicts of interest.? This Council has had an internal audit program undertaken by an independent auditor (not a staff member) which has investigated many of Council?s processes with a view to improving those processes, not just checking on compliance, risk and fraud control.

 

10.???? Improve Political Leadership

 

The Panel correctly notes the tensions in the councillor?s role.? The Local Government Act divides the role into two parts being as a ?member of the governing body? and as an ?elected person?.? They rightly note that resolving these tensions is no easy matter and suggest some options including some ward councillors with a primarily representative role and others elected at large to take a more strategic view.

 

The Panel believes that mandatory, ongoing professional development is required for councillors.? They suggest that NSW adopt the South Australian approach of requiring councils to prepare a coherent councillor development program and to fund it appropriately.? Programs would include a mix of in-house and external sessions so that councillors from different areas meet and learn together.? As an example, Nambucca and Bellingen Councils conducted joint Code of Conduct training after the September 2012 elections.

 

The Panel has considered how councils may improve their representative democracy, for example in attracting women, younger people and different cultural groups.? As one answer to this they suggest that councillors and mayors be limited to, say, 3 terms in order to ensure turnover and introduction of ?fresh faces? and new ideas.? Maybe the idea could be extended to the State and Federal Governments?

 

11.???? Enhance the Status of Mayors

 

That Panel notes that both internationally and in some other states increasing emphasis is being placed on the mayor as both a political and civic leader.? The Panel believes that enhancing the role of mayors could make a major contribution to focusing councils on strategic issues, improving governance and strengthening inter government relations and partnerships with key stakeholders.

 

The Panel believes that Mayors should be popularly elected as is the case in this Council.? However only about a quarter of NSW councils have popularly elected mayors with the remainder having to face re-election by councillors every year.

 

Whilst there will be differing views on the Panel?s observations, in relation to the election of the Mayor their views are consistent with the existing practice of this Council.

 

12.???? Revisit Council-Management Relations

 

The Panel is correct in identifying that the way the decision making process works in local government means that the line between ?policy? and ?management? is often blurred.? Unlike the State and Federal Governments there are no executive ministers to provide a link between the body politic and the administration.? According to the Panel, that function rests largely on the relationship between the Mayor and the General Manager.

 

Of interest is that the Panel believes that Councils have a legitimate interest in how staff resources are allocated and hence believe the council should retain its current power to approve the organisation structure on the advice of the General Manager.? They note that the precise extent of the Council?s involvement needs to be clarified.? This Council has applied this recommendation.

 

A proposal to require the General Manager?s position to be automatically advertised after 10 years? service for a full merit selection process is supported.

 

The Panel believes that the Mayor should have an increased role in the operation of the Council and the management of senior staff.? Whilst this conflicts with the view of the Local Government Act Taskforce, it is agreed that a Mayor elected by popular vote should have a pre-eminent position in the leadership of a Council and in order to achieve this should have additional responsibilities and powers.

 

13.???? Build Strong Regions

 

This is the chapter of most contention in the report.

 

The Panel investigated the performance of voluntary Regional Organisations of Councils (ROCs) and concluded their performance to be patchy with a tendency for them to wax and wane.

 

Instead the Panel propose the formation of statutory bodies, multi-purpose County Councils, to take over from Councils at a minimum the following functions:

 

????? Strategic regional and sub-regional planning

????? Regional advocacy, inter-government relations and promoting collaboration with State and federal agencies in infrastructure and service provision

????? Management of, or technical support for, water utilities

????? Road network planning and major projects

????? Waste and environmental management (including weeds and floodplain management)

????? Regional economic development

????? Library services

????? ?High level? corporate services

 

There is no further discussion about scope of these proposed responsibilities except on page 36 where reference is made that, ?making water utilities a function of the new multi-purpose County Councils achieves those objectives whilst keeping rural water supply and sewerage assets and operations firmly under local government ownership and control?.? This suggests that all of Council?s water and sewerage functions would be transferred to the proposed North Coast County Council which would cover the existing local government areas of Clarence Valley, Coffs Harbour, Bellingen and Nambucca.

 

As Councils? water, sewerage and waste operations are either separate funds or in the case of waste, a separate budget function, some of the other proposed functional transfers are not so easily defined.? For example where does local planning stop and sub-regional planning start?? This Council?s Local Environmental Plan has elements of both.? Will road network planning and major projects be limited to main or regional roads or include local roads?? What are ?high level? corporate services?? Would Section 94 planning for a sub-regional centre transfer to the County Council?

 

There are a host of ?boundary? issues when discussing functions which are not discrete.? Not only about where the County Council function stops and the Council function starts but how the respective costs and revenues are determined and levied.

 

Another potential issue is the establishment of a purchaser/provider split with the County Council establishing expenditure priorities in say roads and then purchasing road maintenance services off the local council (the provider).? Disagreement as to the price of those services may see the County Council use the services of another constituent council or possibly the private sector.? Conversely the residual councils may choose, for similar reasons, not to purchase ?high level? corporate services off the County Council.

 

Depending upon the final definition of this minimum set of core functions, there is a real risk that the list as proposed will render smaller ?residual? councils like Nambucca unworkable and redundant.? Even if Council retains its water and sewerage operations staff, the suggested core functions would see the transfer of perhaps 25 to 30 staff from this Council?s operations.? This Council will find it very difficult, if not impossible, to spread its operating overheads across a much smaller revenue base and organisation structure.

 

Perhaps more importantly, the existing elected Council would be emasculated as a decision making authority.? Already the State Government has removed responsibility for major development applications from councils.? The proposed functions of the multi-purpose County Councils would mean that most major policy and expenditure decisions in relation to water, sewerage, roads, waste, environmental management and libraries would be made by the County Council.

 

Council?s role would also be emasculated whenever economic development and strategic town planning initiatives had regional or sub-regional implications.? Economic development initiatives such as promoting our sub-regional manufacturing cluster or the Valla Urban Growth Area would seem likely to fall within the ambit of the County Council.? Similarly tourism marketing would seem likely to be a County Council function.

 

For Council?s existing staff, the County Council would seem to present the better opportunity for more important and satisfying work and potentially for career development.? Whilst this is a positive for the County Council model, it demonstrates that the ?residual? councils will be under significant pressure on a variety of fronts ? financial, on-going relevance, and workforce.

 

Indeed, in the case of the North Coast, the Panel seems to concede that, beside the amalgamations which are already recommended, the County Councils may mean further amalgamations in the medium ? longer term.

 

?In some cases amalgamations may form part of medium-longer term solutions.? However, amalgamations alone will not solve the councils? financial problems, and those need to be addressed first.? In the shorter term, the Panel recommends using the proposed County Councils to achieve economies of scale and scope in planning, service delivery, major infrastructure projects and sharing of expertise.?

 

Even though the Panel believes that strategic capacity is more important than efficiencies and cost savings, what is the evidence that larger, more ?robust? County Councils will generate increased revenues through economies of scale and then ?plough back? efficiency gains into benefits for their communities?

 

In an opinion piece in the Sydney Morning Herald on 7 May 2013, Professor Percy Allan, a former secretary of the NSW Treasury who undertook an inquiry into NSW Local Government in 2006 commented as follows:

 

?The average population size of local government units in Australia (and NSW) is already among the largest in the developed world.

 

Yet the share of tax revenues going to the local government sector is one of the lowest.? Another inconvenient truth is that larger councils in NSW have higher average rates than smaller councils.

 

The average cost per resident of running a metropolitan council is not related to its size.? Many rural councils have a higher expense to resident ratio only because they service a dispersed population and a large road network.? The case for bigger councils doesn?t stack up on financial or non-financial grounds.

 

Indeed, a strong case exists for making councils smaller and run more like a building body corporate tha pays close attention to specific place needs and management.

 

The Independent Local Government Review Panel has focused on poor governance and proposed super councils with huge bureaucracies run by directly elected executive mayors as the solution.

 

Such a move by itself won?t generate the massive boost to revenues necessary to put local government on a sound footing.

 

According to the Panel?s own research, past amalgamations have proved costly and did not contribute savings to the bottom lines of councils.?

 

Picking up Percy Allan?s point, how well will these larger, more ?robust? organisations engage with their communities?? In the instance of the proposed multi-purpose North Coast County Council it will be responsible for disparate communities stretching over 150 kilometres of coastline from Iluka in the north to Scotts Head in the south as well as the communities well away from the coast.

 

Whilst the Panel emphasises that County Councils are ?NOT? an additional tier of government (page 34), it makes no comment on the potential inefficiencies of establishing multi-purpose County Councils alongside multi-purpose Councils with both undertaking the business of local government.? Like the constituent councils, the County Council requires a management structure and other operational overheads.? For the proposed cluster of Councils in the North Coast County Council, the bureaucracies will increase from four to five.

 

The report does not provide the rationale for determining the proposed county council boundaries.

 

Nor does the report canvass other options for achieving economies of scale through mandatory alliances.? One potential model would be to mandate that specified groups of Councils enter into binding alliances for those corporate functions where there are likely to be efficiency gains with increased scale.? Information technology is one example.? Rather than creating another bureaucracy such as a County Council this could be achieved by a group of Councils jointly owning a company that provides the service to the constituent councils.

 

The Panel believes that the membership of the County Councils should automatically comprise the mayors of member councils, and that the chairperson should normally be the mayor of the designated regional centre.? According to the Panel this dual role should become a full time position.? Similarly the Panel believes that the General Manager of the regional centre could also fulfil that role for the County Council, and the regional centre council would house the County Council secretariat and support its operations.

 

There are obvious conflicts of interest in the Mayor and General Manager of the regional centre being automatically installed as Chairperson and General Manager of the County Council.? It is difficult to understand how they will reconcile their responsibility to their local government area with their broader responsibility (in the proposed North Coast County Council) to four local government areas.? Whilst there will be other Councillors from constituent councils comprising the board, the issue is more significant for the General Manager who would be responsible to two distinct organisations/employers.

 

14.???? Reconfigure Rural Councils

 

This section is not relevant to Nambucca Shire Council and deals with smaller rural councils (populations of less than 10,000).

 

15.???? Reshape Metropolitan Governance

 

This section deals with Sydney Councils.

 

16.???? Strengthen the Hunter, Central Coast and Illawarra

 

This section deals with these regions.

 

17.???? Establish a ?Western Region Authority?

 

This section deals with the far west of the State and is not relevant to Nambucca Shire.

 

18.???? Progress the State-Local Agreement

 

The section proposes to follow up the State-Local Government agreement with tangible measures to secure practical collaboration between local government and state agencies.

 

19.???? Refocus Local Government NSW

 

This section concerns the role of Local Government NSW (the single association) in representing NSW councils.? Of interest is that the Panel believes LGNSW should give a higher priority to reputation management and play a stronger role in handling instances in individual councils which reflect poorly on the industry as a whole.? Over time this should make it possible for the State to reduce its activities in oversighting and regulating the sector.

 

20.???? Drive and Monitor Ongoing Reform

 

This section restates the Panel?s case that wide ranging reforms are required as otherwise, ?the alternative is a local government sector characterised by an increasing number of under-resourced, under performing councils that will steadily become irrelevant in the wider system of government.? Either there is a change of direction or much of local government faces a dead end?.

 

The section does discuss incentives for voluntary amalgamations on the basis of, ?some carrots and some sticks? which might involve:

 

????? ?Making it clear that ?no change? is not an option, and that Government is committed to steps such as the referral of strategic functions to County Councils and conversion of small councils to Local Boards

????? Publication via the LGDB of unbiased information for local communities about the pros and cons of mergers ?

????? Providing transitional funding via grants and low or no interest loans

????? Conditional exemption from rate pegging for say, 3 years, with the promise of ?permanent? exemption if the new council demonstrates a high standard of financial planning and management and community engagement (subject to periodic review)

????? Professional change management support for negotiating, planning and implementing mergers

????? Offering a higher level of support (both financial and professional) to ?early movers? (eg those committing to a merger by July 2014).

 

There is insufficient information and commitment to make a decision about the quality of the carrots.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been discussion with other General Managers of Mid North Coast councils.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

At this stage there are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

he social implications will depend upon how much the community values its existing council compared to an arrangement which splits its functions between a multi-purpose County Council and the residual Council.

 

Economic

The economic implications will depend upon the operational arrangements for the County Council.

 

Risk

There is a real risk that the list as proposed functions to be undertake by the County Council will render smaller ?residual? councils like Nambucca unworkable and redundant.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

At this stage there are no budgetary implications.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

At this stage there is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

At this stage there is no impact on service levels or staff resources.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.3???? SF1851??????????? 150513??????? Review of Council's Organisation Structure

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Michael Coulter, General Manager; Joanne Hudson, Manager Human Resources ????????

 

Summary:

 

With the Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services position now vacant comes an opportunity to review the organisation structure.

 

There are six options contemplated in this report. Options 1 and 2 are based on a two Assistant General Manager model and both options yield a nett saving of $35,000 per annum. Options 3 and 4 are based on a three Assistant General Manager model and both options would come at a nett cost of $11,000 per annum. Options 5 (minor adjustments to the current structure) and 6 (retain the current structure) are cost neutral but do not yield any savings either.

 

The preferred option is Option 1.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council adopt the Organisation Structure outlined in Option 1.

 

2??????? That the Business Services Unit continues on a trial basis for a further 12 months.

 

3??????? That Council note the work which has been undertaken in reviewing its organisation structure as meeting the requirement to review the structure within 12 months of the election.

 

 

OPTIONS/DISCUSSION:

 

Option 1: Retain two Assistant General Managers, transfer Development and Environment (previously called Applications and Compliance) under General Manager, transfer Strategic Planner to Development and Environment and transfer Grants and Contributions Officer to Financial Services.?

 

Nett saving: $35,000 per annum.

 

This is the preferred option. The option is based on the new Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services having a Bachelor of Business Degree or equivalent with significant experience in local government finance including statutory reporting.? This position could then undertake the duties of the Manager Financial Services during periods of leave and provide additional capacity when the Accountant took leave.? This would obviate the need for a Revenue Accountant and provide a saving of $35,000 per annum being the difference in salary between a Cadet Accountant/Finance Assistant ($44,000) and the Revenue Accountant ($79,000).

 

If it is accepted that the new Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services should have a focus on finance to improve the capacity of the Finance Section, consideration should be given to rebalancing the responsibilities of the existing position to reflect that focus.

 

Accordingly it is proposed to reduce the General Manager?s span of control by removing the Grants and Contributions Officer as well as the Strategic Planner as direct reports and in place of that the Manager Development and Environment would report to the General Manager.

 

The Business Services Co-ordinator would continue to report to the new Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services. The Unit does require management input to identify cost savings through process improvement or through a reduction in service levels. There is generally resistance to any reduction in service levels (both internal and external) and it is apparent that where there is conflict it will not be addressed and resolved without active management.? Various options for the management of the section have been considered.? Given the number of staff involved and the importance of driving process improvement and changes in service levels the unit should report to the new Assistant General Manager.

 

Whilst not a reason in itself to continue with a model of two Assistant General Managers, the model is now almost as common as three Assistant General Managers in rural councils of similar size to the Nambucca.?

 

In applying the two AGM?s model, which is directed at reducing management overheads, one question is whether the General Manager should be ?pitching in? by taking some functional responsibility or whether functional responsibility for the whole organisation should instead be split between the two Assistant General Manager positions.? The proposal in Option 1 that the General Manager have some functional responsibility is not dependent upon the particular qualifications or experience of the incumbent.? It would be open to a new General Manager to reshuffle those responsibilities or indeed to have no functional responsibility.

 

It is also proposed to rename the Applications and Compliance section the ?Development and Environment? section to better reflect the functions of the section.

 

Option 1 is attached as an organisation chart.

 

 

Option 2: Retain two Assistant General Managers, transfer Development and Environment (previously called Applications and Compliance) under Engineering Services, transfer Strategic Planner to Development and Environment and transfer Grants and Contributions Officer to Financial Services.

 

Nett saving: $35,000 per annum.

 

The advantages of this arrangement are that it would allow the General Manager to focus on strategic leadership and direction. It also provides the same savings outlined under Option 1 ie $35,000 per annum. However the significant disadvantage is that the Assistant General Manager Engineering Services will have a very large portfolio and perhaps more importantly a reduced focus on asset renewal and service levels which are this Council?s core areas of financial weakness.

 

 

Option 3: Three Assistant General Managers, the additional one being Development, Environment and Community Services, transfer Strategic Planner to the Development, Environment and Community Services Department and transfer Grants and Contributions Officer to the Finance Section. ?

 

Nett cost: $11,000 per annum.

 

This was the option most preferred by Council?s Consultative Committee and staff.? This option also provides the closest fit to the range of professional disciplines which are required to operate the Council.? This is an issue in a smaller Council where, due to resourcing, a large amount of senior management time is spent undertaking an operational (not management) workload.? However an additional Assistant General Manager does come at a cost being a remuneration package of $163,000 per annum.? If Council wished to return to this three Assistant General Manager structure it could replace the existing position of Manager Applications and Compliance with an Assistant General Manager position and undertake recruitment.

 

The difference in remuneration between the existing Manager?s position (which is a temporary appointment concluding 25 June 2013) and an Assistant General Manager would be $46,000 per annum.? The additional expenditure will not change the number of staff available to do work.? It will provide more accountability by moving another staff member onto a fixed term performance based contract, but at the cost mentioned. The additional $46,000 would be partially offset by replacing the Revenue Accountant with a Finance Assistant (saving of $35,000), resulting in a nett cost of $11,000 per annum.

 

In essence the cost differential between Option 1 (the recommendation) and Option 3 is $46,000 per annum and for this there will be no additional staff.

 

Option 3 is attached as an organisation chart.

 

 

Option 4: Three Assistant General Managers, the additional one being AGM Development and Environment Services; retain Community Services with Corporate Services, transfer Strategic Planner to the Development and Environment Services Department and transfer Grants and Contributions Officer to the Finance Section.

 

Nett cost: $11,000 per annum.

 

See discussion under Option 3. This option is not preferred as the portfolio is relatively small compared to Corporate and Community Services and Engineering Services and does not justify the additional expenditure associated with the higher remuneration. Nett cost to Council $11,000 per annum.

 

 

Option 5: Change ?Applications and Compliance? to ?Development and Environment?, transfer Strategic Planner to Development and Environment and transfer Grants and Contributions Officer to the Finance Section.

 

Nett saving/cost: $nil

 

This option is essentially the status quo with three relatively minor changes ? a title change, and two changes in reporting lines. It retains Development and Environment under Corporate and Community Services but reduces the number of direct reports to the General Manager. This option is cost neutral but does not yield any savings either.

 

The key disadvantage of this option is that it is very unlikely that the head of the Corporate and Community Services Department would be adequately qualified across such a broad range of functions.?

 

With an already lean structure and with significant financial issues, the Council does need to utilise the recent resignation of the Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services as an opportunity to evaluate its service delivery and organisation structure. If Council?s financial outlook does not improve or deteriorates, less frequent review and change will increase the risk of forced redundancies which is neither in the interests of Council or its employees.

 

 

Option 6: No change to the current structure

 

Nett saving/cost: $nil

 

This option is cost neutral but does not yield any savings either.

 

As discussed under Option 5, the key disadvantage of this option is that it is very unlikely that the head of the Corporate and Community Services Department would be adequately qualified across such a broad range of functions.?

 

With an already lean structure and with significant financial issues, the Council does need to utilise the recent resignation of the Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services as an opportunity to evaluate its service delivery and organisation structure. If Council?s financial outlook does not improve or deteriorates, less frequent review and change will increase the risk of forced redundancies which is neither in the interests of Council or its employees.

 

Option 6 is attached as an organisation chart.

 

 


CONSULTATION:

 

Employees, unions and the Consultative Committee were consulted on the proposed changes.

 

Four submissions were received and are attached together with the General Manager?s comments.

 

The Consultative Committee met on 6 May 2013 to consider the report and resolved as follows:

 

The Consultative Committee recommends that Council adopt Option 3 in the General Manager?s report, being a three Assistant General Manager structure for the following reasons:

 

1?????? Improved effectiveness of Council?s three functional areas of responsibility;

2?????? Leaves the General Manager to undertake the higher level strategic functions of Council;

3?????? The additional $11,000 cost compared with the current budget is minimal and offset by the improved effectiveness;

4?????? It is considered inappropriate for the General Manager to represent a functional area at Council meetings. A change of General Manager would potentially change the particular skills held and may make continuing this representation a challenge; and

5?????? Any future appointment of a General Manager would be restricted and only a narrow field of applicants would be equipped to replace the current General Manager?s planning skills. Option 3 removes this limitation.

 

Comment from General Manager

 

As indicated in the report it is agreed that this option provides the closest fit to the range of professional disciplines which are required to operate the Council.? With a model of two Assistant General Managers, if the General Manager has no functional responsibility (regardless of the function) then there will be increased responsibility for the two Assistant General Managers.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

The report essentially concerns balancing the Council?s very limited staff resources to focus on the greatest risks to the governance of the organisation.? Given the available resources there is no solution which will ever provide optimal management and staffing.? Compromises do have to be made.

 

In terms of risk management, it is recommended that the organisation structure be changed to better manage the limited capacity in Council?s Finance Section to meet its statutory reporting obligations.? This is a core obligation for Council?s governance.

 


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The proposed structure outlined in Option 1 (the preferred option) will provide a saving on the existing adopted structure of approximately $35,000 per annum.? This will result in a saving of $35,000 in Council?s operational plan (budget) for 2013/14.

?

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The report discusses changes to reporting arrangements and resourcing.

 

Attachments:

1View

10049/2013 - Draft Organisation Structure Chart - Option 1

0 Pages

2View

10058/2013 - Draft Organisation Structure Chart - Option 3

0 Pages

3View

10089/2013 - Current Organisation Structure Chart - Option 6

0 Pages

4View

10751/2013 - Submissions to the Consultative Committee meeting 6 May following consultation on proposed changes to the organisation structure

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Review of Council's Organisation Structure

 

 

EXECUTIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Organization Chart 

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Review of Council's Organisation Structure

 

 

CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Organization Chart 

 


 


ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT

 

Organization Chart
 

 

 

 

 



?

EXECUTIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Organization Chart 

 



ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT

 

Organization Chart
 

 

 

 

 



DEVELOPMENT, ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Organization Chart 

 


 


EXECUTIVE

CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

 

 

ENGINEERING SERVICES

 

Organization Chart
 

 

 

 

 



?


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Review of Council's Organisation Structure

 

Submission by Strategic Planner (Grant Nelson)

 

As discussed there is a proposal to place the position of Strategic Planner back into the Planning Department reporting to the Manager of Applications and Compliance with an additional supervisory responsibility of senior town planner and technical officer planning.

 

I have no objection to my placement in the planning department of the organisation where I would be more accessible to planning/building staff as required. However, in relation to the supervisory role there would be an expectation that the position will take on supervisory responsibilities of other staff and formal involvement with their respective duties and processes. The Strategic Planner position has already received increased level of responsibility and duties through the original restructure, including the environmental levy, associated projects/activities and coordination and management. Placing further additional demands on the position by formal (written into the structure) involvement in the other processes, such as development assessment may create unrealistic expectations of the position and lead to reduced service levels.  

 

Further as you are aware the Department of Planning and Infrastructure has recently released the planning white paper proposing significant changes to the NSW planning system.  A cursory look at the changes identify  that is has a largely strategic focus, it is unknown at this stage type/ nature or quantity of work that will be required to fulfil state government requirements however it is anticipated this will have a further direct impact on current workload of the strategic planner position as the changes role out.

 

For the above reasons I request the Strategic Planner be positioned under the Manager of Applications and Compliance as proposed, but with no additional supervisory responsibilities  that would encompass a greater range of duties outside of the day to day activities of the strategic planner position as it exists at present.  

 

Thankyou for your consideration of this matter.

 

General Manager?s Comment

 

In relation to Grant's email and discussions with Grant I understand that Grant will make himself available to report on major development applications if required.  However he is keen to ensure that this does not overtake the service level required in strategic planning, including his management of the environmental levy program and other strategic planning work such as planning proposals (LEP's) and community land reclassifications.

 

Given the existing workload/staffing, I accept his argument and concur with his request that he report to the Manager of Applications and Compliance (as proposed) but with no supervisory responsibilities.

 

This concurrence should not be considered as a permanent or indefinite agreement, because as with all positions in the Organisation Structure a change in circumstances (eg workload or staffing) may necessitate a review of service levels and a change in responsibilities.

 

 

Submission by Grants and Contributions Officer (Colleen Henry)

 

I accept that reporting to a Manager makes sense from an organisational point of view, however I would like to propose that my position returns to the Economic Development Unit, with reporting to the Business Development Manager. This is where the position had been reporting to before the previous reorganisation. The primary reason for the first change in which I reported to the General Manager were to do with the need for support in my position as Contributions Officer. I don?t believe that I will get this support from either the Manager Financial Services or the Manager Business Development and therefore this rationale no longer exists, and the position should return to where it came from. This will also save me having to once more change into a different part of the organisation which I am not all that familiar with or comfortable in ? having come from Community Services (a previous position), into Business Development, into Executive Services, on to Financial Services ? I feel like I?m being passed around in an effort to meet some undefined needs of the organisation.

 

I have discussed this with Wayne Lowe and he has acknowledged that I am a low-maintenance report and doesn?t feel as though having an additional report will be a burden.

 

General Manager?s Comment

 

I note the previous reporting arrangements to the Business Development Manager.  Colleen does have to work closely with the Finance Section in grant acquittals and also with contribution plan income and expenditure.  Notwithstanding Colleen's concern about being passed around the building, the role is a closer fit to Finance than Business/Economic development.

 

Consequently I don't support her recommendation.

 

?

Submission by Technical Officer Planning (Lisa Hall), Business Services Officers (Teresa Boorer & Emma Shaw) and Senior Town Planner (Selina McNally)

 

Replacement of AGM Corporate & Community Services

 

Whilst being of the opinion that a three director/AGM structure would better enable Council to perform its functions, if a two director/AGM structure is all that can be funded, then we believe this position should be recruited for and filled as a matter of urgency. We agree with the recommendation by the AGMs and MHR that until recruitment is finalised that a temporary external appointment be made.

 

We believe that qualifications in finance or a related discipline should be an essential requirement for this position if they are to be responsible for Council?s financial reporting. Whilst working knowledge and local government experience in finance is also essential, evidence of having completed a qualification (degree or diploma) shows other qualities that are important for this position. The successful candidate should also be a current member of an organisation such as the Institute of Public Accountants. This ensures that they are undergoing regular and current continuous improvement rather than relying on potentially outdated knowledge and practices.

 

Applications and Compliance

 

We agree with the proposed name change for Applications and Compliance to become Environment and Planning. We are the ones who answer the phone every day with ?Applications and Compliance? and have the inevitable question ?What?s that??. A title with any or all of the words environment, health, building and planning gives the general public a much better idea of what we do.

 

We agree that this Unit should not be under Corporate and Community Services, however we also believe that it should not be under Engineering Services. These three functions of Council are separate and require different knowledge and qualifications. Building, environmental health and planning are specific disciplines in and of themselves, which is why a three director/AGM structure would work best for Council. Having this section under either of the two AGMs would make their portfolios too large and unwieldy.

 

We acknowledge that having this section report directly to the GM may add to his workload, however this issue could be alleviated the next time recruitment is carried out for the Manager Development and Environment position by making it a Senior Manager position ? somewhere between a Manager and AGM position ? to enable more responsibility to be undertaken by that person. When next advertised we believe it is important that this position be filled by someone with extensive experience and preferably qualifications in planning to replace the knowledge and expertise being lost by the outgoing AGMCCS.

 

We agree with the proposal to return the Strategic Planner to the Planning, building and health section (to be renamed Environmental and Planning) and this position should never have been removed as it provides the basis for our application processing, among other things. In particular with the forthcoming changes through the Planning White Paper it is even more fundamental that the Strategic Planner can work closely with assessment staff and have support from colleagues within this section.

 

Structure of the Business Services Unit

 

Our main issue relates to the operation of the Business Services Unit. In our section, we now have a Technical Officer Planning and two full-time Business Services Officers (Emma and Teresa), as well as two part-time BSOs (Candi and Pauline).

 

Having worked within this structure for some time and doing our best to make this structure work, we are of the opinion that Emma and Teresa need to be removed from the BSU and be appointed as Technical Officer Building and Technical Officer Health respectively. The example of removing Terri Brown from the BSU to be a Support Officer for Assets is one that could be followed in our section. We believe that our positions require similar levels of specialist and technical knowledge as do the Finance Officers, Creditors Clerk, GIS officers and the like.

 

We believe that the Development and Environment Unit would be better served by having three specialist technical officers who will be able to fill in for each other when leave occurs rather than having one technical officer and two BSOs. As we work closely together we are able to understand each other?s responsibilities better than anyone else in the BSU. Whilst we are able to fill in for other BSU officers when it comes to counter and phone duties, other BSU officers are generally unable to fill in for Emma, Teresa or Lisa when they are on leave. When Emma recently had a few days? leave, no replacement was provided by the BSU so Lisa did her work instead. The same case would exist if Teresa was on leave, Emma is able to deal with a lot of Teresa?s tasks, however other BSU officers would not be able to take on these tasks. The reverse is the case if Lisa is on leave, Emma can step in and do the 149 certificates and other planning duties also. All duties undertaken by Emma, Teresa and Lisa are technical in nature and the experience of all 3 staff members should be taken in to consideration.

 

The Business Services Unit would operate better as a unit which provides front line customer service to Council?s customers on the phone and at the counter. Once queries require specialist, technical and area-specific knowledge, then other officers can be called upon to take over the enquiry. The current Executive Assistants could remain part of the BSU if required to provide specialist administrative services to Council as a whole. This would also provide a career path for the other BSU officers to follow.

 

Thank you for the opportunity of commenting on the organisational structure. Having worked for Council for many years now and as those who are at the coalface dealing with customers in the often changing structure of Council, we feel well qualified to make the above suggestions and look forward to Council implementing them.

 

General Manager?s Comment

 

Replacement of AGM Corporate & Community Services

 

The preference for 3 Directors/AGM's is noted and is discussed as an option in the report going to Council.

 

Applications and Compliance

 

A name change from "Applications and Compliance" has been incorporated in the revised Organisation Structure with a new name, "Development and Environment".

 

Structure of the Business Services Unit

 

In relation to the Business Services Unit I acknowledge the many requests I have received from management and operations staff that the Unit be effectively dismantled and that Business Services staff return to their former departmental administration.  There is sometimes an acknowledgement that it may be a worthwhile initiative but that it should apply to other staff.  The only problem is that the number of people seeking a return to their former departments means that the "other staff" are likely to be zero in number.

 

The idea behind the Business Services Unit was that it would be better able to allocate limited support staff based on the needs of the whole organisation rather than the three separate ?competing? departments.? It was anticipated that the Unit would also encourage the adoption of processes which would be in the interests of the whole organisation rather than an individual department.? The Unit has had difficulty in progressing as a number of its staff have been backfilling vacant positions in Finance (being the Finance Officer ? Water & Cadet Accountant).

 

As indicated in the report to Council, the Unit does require management input to identify cost savings through process improvement or through a reduction in service levels.? This is because there is generally resistance to any reduction in service levels (both internal and external) and often inertia in tackling process improvement.  I acknowledge that our staffing levels make it difficult to attend to both daily operational tasks as well as process improvement/service level reduction, however our staffing levels also mean it is more important than ever to tackle these issues. I can't perceive any "down side" in continuing with the initiative as a trial and at least for this period don't support any further migration of staff out of the Unit.

 

I am open to alternative suggestions as to how to tackle stretching our limited staff resources.  The Business Services Unit was one idea suggested by Local Government Management Solutions.  I also note a similar suggestion from Stephen Blackadder is being implemented at Bellingen Council.  We have also discussed different approaches to process improvement whereby it is a requirement in the performance agreement of management staff (top down) -v- change initiated by operational staff through continuous improvement (bottom up).

 


 

Submission by Finance Staff (Craig Doolan, Faye Hawthorne, Chris Wills, Jeneen Fuller, Helen Searle, Kylie Johnson and Lanice Milgate)

 

With respect to the request for information on the proposed Organisation Restructure by the MHR on 26th April, Council?s Finance Team would like to make the following comments and requests.

 

We do not want to cover old ground or be accused of cynicism and therefore we only wish that reflection be given to the points in our previous submissions to the many organisation structure changes since the original decision to omit the Director of Corporate Services (DCS).

 

With respect to the latest report by the General Manager the Finance Team would like the following points to be considered:

 

?????? As you would expect the inclusion of sound local government financial experience/knowledge in the ?Assistant General Manager? PD to our section is welcomed by us and believed urgent in dealing with outstanding sustainability issues at the strategic level. This role is now critical moving forward in dealing with the massive external changes proposed for the industry, to ensure the rightful future for this organisation and the community.

?????? The latest structure shows the Finance Officer ? Expenditure remaining on 30hrs/wk. This contradicts the report by the Assistant General Manager Corporate Services (AGMCCS) and subsequent resolution by Council that increased the hours of the position to 35/wk as a result of the review of the finance restructure. These additional hours have been in place for over 12 months and are currently included in the draft 13/14 budget, they are critical to the functioning of the finance section. Also, the decision of Council to appoint a Revenue Accountant was based on lengthy research and discussion by the finance staff and the former AGMCCS to relieve operational workload, deal with leave issues and improve the efficiency of the finance section. It is important that this position be retained.

?????? The Cadet/Finance Assistant position should retain the duties previously undertaken and, importantly, include aspects within the competencies that promote development and future progression within the finance structure. Also, when duties of a higher grade are required the incumbent should be remunerated to ensure satisfaction in the position and therefore the hope of long term tenure. The previous AGMCCS advised that the position if realistically valued should be at least equivalent to the current Finance Officer positions.

?????? A 3 Director model is preferred by the Finance Staff primarily in relation to the experience we have endured since the non replacement of the DCS and that we would not like to see our issues arise in the Town Planning/Environmental Services/Health & Building Department.

 

In summary the finance team see the full-time positions below as paramount for the section to function efficiently:

 

?????? Assistant General Manager Corporate Services (AGMCS)

?????? Finance Officer ? Expenditure

?????? Revenue Accountant

?????? Cadet Accountant/Finance Assistant

 

General Manager?s comment

 

I've read the submission and with the exception of the additional hours for the Finance Officer - Expenditure, I think the issues raised are covered in the report which has been drafted.

 

The proposals constitute a fairly significant increase in specialist finance staff (and staff costs generally) at a time when we have been assessed as having a weak financial sustainability rating and a negative outlook.? The Council has also resolved to seek a special rate variation next year and IPART has previously been concerned to ensure that staffing costs are not going to consume funding earmarked for asset renewal.

 

The report does provide Council with the option of putting a third Director (Assistant General Manager) back and provides the costing for that.? There is also discussion about the Revenue Accountant and the role of the proposed new Assistant General Manager.

 

In relation to the additional 5 hours per week for the Finance Officer Expenditure, I don't have any objection to this proposal.? However my concern was that an approved temporary change seems to have been overlooked and assumed to have become a permanent arrangement.? I would have expected that arrangements to extend or terminate the temporary change would have been at the end of September 2012 which was the conclusion of the approved period.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.4???? SF729????????????? 150513??????? Draft 2013/2014 Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges)

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The report concerns the adoption of a draft 2013/2014 Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges).? These have to be placed on public exhibition for a minimum period of 28 days.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.?????? That Council adopt the draft Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges) for 2013/2014 and place them on public exhibition for a minimum 28 days.

 

2.?????? That Council note the objections to the fee increases for the Gumma (Boulton?s Crossing) Reserve.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Many of Council?s fees and charges are regulated.? Council has no control over those fees and charges.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Attached is Council?s proposed Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges) for 2013/2014.

 

On 31 January 2013 Council resolved to increase its General Fees and Charges by a minimum of 5% for consideration with the 2013/2014 budget, other than for Water, Sewerage and Garbage charges, fees set by statute and those fees that have been specifically modelled and endorsed by Council or those fees that are regulated by annual CPI adjustment such as Section 94 contributions.

 

The significant changes proposed in the fees and charges for 2013/2014 are highlighted in pink in the attached spreadsheet and are summarised as follows:

 

Cemeteries

 

In April 2012 Council resolved on-going increases in some cemetery fees as follows:

 

RESERVATION PERIOD

2011/12 (CURRENT)

2012/13

2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

- Interment Permit per Burial Plots (reserved prior to 31/12/1969)

 

$183.00

$235.00

$243.00

$252.00

$261.00

?- Interment Permit for Burial Plot (reserved 1/1/70 to 30/06/1995)

Min $183 min(provided Council has been paid purchase fee for the plot. Otherwise full fees & charges apply)

Min $235 (less previously paid) plus interment permit of $235

min $305 - pre paid + $252

min $397 - pre paid + $252

min $516 - pre paid + $261

?- Interment Permit for Burial Plot (reserved 1/7/1995 to 30/06/2007)

$378 (less previously paid, plus the Interment permit fee of $183)

$495 (less previously paid) plus interment permit of $235

$643 - pre paid + $243

$836 - pre paid + $252

$1087 - pre paid + $261

 

 

Swimming Pools - Swimming Pool Compliance Certificate ? $77.00

 

Plumbing & Drainage Inspections - New fees being $142 - $154 depending upon class of building

 

Rezoning Fees - Significant fee increases proposed ? previously reported to Council.

 

Gumma Reserve Camping Fees ? Previously resolved by Council to increase fees from $12 per site to $10 per adult and $5 per child.? Whilst not covered by the resolution it is proposed to define a child as a person under 18 years of age.? Objections to the increases have been received and are listed under consultation.

 

Professional Charges and Subpoena Information ? Charge for first hour has been increased from $79 to $120

 

Section 94A Charges ? New charges resolved by Council

 

Swimming Pool Mandatory Inspection ? New charge being $150 for the first inspection and $100 for subsequent inspection

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with management staff.

 

There has been feedback about Council?s resolution to increase fees at the Gumma (Boulton?s Crossing) Reserve.? The feedback is as follows:

 

RE The Price Rise at Boultons Crossing We had the chance to go to the Boulton Crossing? reserve on Wednesday the 17 4.2013 and thought it a lovely spot for familys to go.? But the Rate is going up to $10 per adult and $5 per child.? Now to make that big a jump you will be doing yourself out of a lot of families .The road in is so rough it a discrace and you really need a four wheel drive to get there.? Some of the people there I noticed had 5 children so how can they afford to pay such a rate.? We didnt stay there but were going to next QLD school holidays with our Grandsons as they are mad fisher men.? But we wont be if the rate goes up that much.? Thank you for giving me the chance to air my thoughts.? As I said its a lovely family place but getting to expenses for the average family.? Plus there is only one lot of toilets

 

Regards Lorraine Porter Sydney

 

 

I am writing to let Nambucca Council know that I was and am totally disgusted at your decision by a "very" small minded group of the Councilors who decided? on the huge sudden increase on Fee's for the "Gumma Reserve "($10 per Adult,$5 Per Child, Per Night) From a basic( $12 per site ,Per Night total) . My Family have been long time loyal campers and visitors too the Gumma Reserve as are the many friends and family who also traveled with us to camp there for our holidays several times during each year BUT now we shall NO LONGER be ever visiting Nambucca again do too the ridiculous fees you now propose to charge for the most basic of camping sites which don't even have "Decent reliable toilets", "BBQ Area's", "Shower's Hot or Cold "or Regularly mowed Lawns and as for fishing and swimming NO FISH due to the Rape of the River by some Pro fishermen who have absolutely no respect for fishing laws and net the river "7 days" a week and we can totally forget about the poor Pensioner who find it hard enough now to have any spare cash for food let alone? what once was a fairly" cheap " holiday for them at least once a year. Over the years we have made many many friends from all around Australia who came to Gumma and the Nambucca and we will now be informing them NOT too Bother with Nambucca anymore as the local Council is after nothing more then a cheap money grab exercise or just a sly sneaky way to try and close Gumma Reserve all together because it can't be "Bothered" with it. I will also be sending this letter too "ALL" the camping and holiday clubs that we belong too,NRMA ,Face Book.etc.

 

P Berrigan, Sherwood

 

 

We have been visiting and camping at Gumma Reserve for a number of years and think it is a wonderful spot to stay.? Our visits have lasted from overnight to 3 weeks.? The fee was a flat $12 per night which wasn?t too bad considering the state of the toilets but we could get fresh water if we needed it.

 

Unfortunately we have heard news that the price will now rise to $10 per adult per night plus $5 per child per night.? For us that would mean $20 per night but if we bring our grandchildren and their mother, it would be $40 per night and for probably less than that we could find a caravan park with all amenities.

 

We are members of Campervan and Motorhome Association and feel we must strongly object to your planned fee ?hike?.? If your collection person called every afternoon and everyone who stayed even one night at $12 paid, you would get more income.

 

You should also put a board spelling out the fees because then campers would have no comeback if a range approached them for payment.

 

For your information, Chaffey Dam out of Tamworth has a fee of $5 per car per day and has hot showers available for $1 plus toilets which are cleaned daily.? It is approximately 40kms from Tamworth.

 

Do you realise how much money the people who frequent spots like Gumma spend in your area?? Yesterday I spent $94 in one supermarket, $44 in another and $34 in the third, $22 at a local butchers, plus $20 at the Post Office.? And then there is the diesel for our vehicle which is almost $100 per thankful and when we are here we usually fill up at least once a week.

 

Also further to Chaffey Dam, they use an honesty system which may be worth looking into.? Also some ?grey nomads? have been known to act as ?caretaker? in lieu of camp fees.

 

We implore you to reconsider raising your fees.? It if the volunteer or ranger called every day (preferably mid to late afternoon) you would collect more funds than the regulated twice weekly visits that were happening, because some campers would come in late afternoon and leave before he was due again.

 

Guy and Anne Usher, Calala

 

 

What are Councillors thinking by voting a motion to raise the fees at Gumma Reserve. What are the 2 councillors thinking who proposed the motion. They must be wealthy folk with no cares for the struggling families in the shire.? A family with 4 children will be expected to pay $280 per week for a camp site with little facilities ( septic toilet & tank water).??

 

There are many wealthy nomads who pass through and will gladly hand over their $20 but most will escape free of fees as they know to come in late and leave early.?

 

I would like to know what is proposed for the increased revenue. Most families like primitive camping and the people i have talked to do not want any major upgrade to the place.

 

This rise is an insult to the families of the district and it's obvious that the movers of the motion can afford to holiday in more expensive accommodation.

 

Di Sims, Macksville

 

 


SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no significant implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There has been negative feedback in relation to the proposed fee increase at the Gumma (Boulton?s Crossing) Reserve.

 

Economic

 

Increases in fees and charges do have local economic implications, both positive and negative.? On the positive side they improve Council?s financial position which was recently assessed by the NSW Treasury Corporation as ?weak?.? On the negative side increased fees and charges do remove funds that may otherwise be spent locally.

 

Risk

 

There are no significant risks.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Council has made a deliberate effort to increase revenue from fees and charges by at least 5% (where it has authority) and also through new fees and charges such as the Section 94A contribution requirement.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no implications for working funds.? The fees and charges will apply in the new financial year.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no implications for resourcing or service levels.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised Document - Draft Fees and Charges 2013-14 (Trim 11030/2013)

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Draft 2013/2014 Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges)

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Draft 2013/2014 Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges)

 

 

 

Circularised Document - Draft Fees and Charges 2013-14 (Trim 11030/2013)

 

??Pages

 


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.5???? PV4/2013???????? 150513??????? Recruitment Arrangements for the Replacement of the Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Section 337 of the Local Government Act provides that the General Manager may appoint senior staff only after consultation with the council.? This report concerns the consultation arrangements for the appointment of an Assistant General Manager Position or Positions.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Mayor and Deputy Mayor assist in short listing and interviewing of candidates for the Assistant General Manager Position or Positions.?

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The full Council could undertake the final interviews of the short listed candidates.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The proposed organisation structure arising out of the resignation of the Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services is separately reported in the business paper.? Depending upon Council?s decision there will either be one or two Assistant General Manager positions requiring recruitment.

 

It is proposed that any Assistant General Manager position be defined as a senior staff position with the employment terms as set out in the standard fixed term contract approved by the Division of Local Government.

 

Under Section 338 of the Local Government Act, the term of a contract must not be less than 12 months or more than 5 years (including any option for renewal).? Consistent with the contracts for the General Manager and Assistant General Manager Engineering Services it is proposed that the term be for 5 years.? The longer term is likely to attract the best field of candidates.? The remuneration package would be $163,000 being the minimum payable for Senior Officers.? The package comprises salary, superannuation and lease back motor vehicle..

 

Consideration has been given to the possible impact of the recommendations of the Independent Local Government Review Panel.? Whilst the Panel?s recommendations create uncertainty for the top two layers of Council management, this applies across all of NSW and in that respect this Council?s position is no better or worse than any other Council.? Under the standard contract, senior staff can be terminated during the contract period with a maximum termination payment of 38 weeks.? No reason has to be given.? So if there are substantial changes in governance arrangements for Councils, this Council is not locked into a 5 year employment period.

 

Section 337 of the Local Government Act provides that the General Manager may appoint senior staff only after consultation with the council.

 

A quotation has been sought from a firm specialising in recruiting senior staff for local government.? The total cost of using the firm to recruit one position would exceed $25,000.? Whilst some of the cost includes advertising and other expenses which would be incurred by Council, given the Council?s financial circumstances it is recommended that the recruitment be undertaken ?in house?.???

 

It is proposed that the interview panel to shortlist and interview candidates comprise the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, General Manager, Manager Human Resources and a qualified accountant with a knowledge of local government.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Manager Human Resources and with a firm specialising in recruiting senior staff for local government.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are risks in recruitment.? The remuneration package has to be competitive to attract high quality candidates.? Besides the interview process, referee checking will be undertaken.? Consideration will also be given to personality profiling.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There will be advertising costs and other expenses which should be able to be met from the current or next year?s budget.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There is considerable work for the Manager Human Resources in undertaking recruitment for senior staff.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.6???? SF135????????????? 150513??????? Regional State of the Environment Report

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority is seeking confirmation from Council of its commitment to the Regional SoE report for a cost of $9,800.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.?????? That Council confirm its commitment to the Regional SoE report in accordance with the quoted costs and payment schedule being a total cost of $9,800 invoiced in two parts being $1,500 in 2014/2015 and $8,300 in 2015/2016.

 

2.?????? That the Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority be advised of Council?s decision.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council could elect to prepare its own 2016 State of the Environment Report but this would cost considerably more than the proposed $9,800 for participation in a regional report.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has received that attached letter from the Northern Rivers Catchment Authority.

 

Council has a legislative requirement to prepare State of Environment Reports (SoE) in conjunction with their Integrated report on their strategic plan in the year of an ordinary election.

 

The Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority is happy to again host a Regional SoE report.? The cost estimates for the 2016 Regional SoE Report are:

 

Annual data collection costs over 3 years = $750 per council per annum in non reporting years

 

2016/17 report = $7,550 per council

 

Total cost over 4 years = $9,800 to be invoiced in two parts being $1,500 in 2014/15 and $8,300 in 2015/16.

 

The Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority is seeking confirmation from Council of its commitment to the Regional SoE report for the indicated cost.

 

It is recommended that Council confirm its commitment to the Regional SoE report in accordance with the quoted costs and payment schedule.? The cost is less than what would be incurred by Council if it tried to produce a ?stand alone? report.? Also because the report is providing a regional perspective it may have more standing in the media, with the public and also with government authorities.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with Council?s Strategic Planner.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The report provides important information on the state of the local and regional environment.

 

Social

 

Resident satisfaction surveys indicate that the state of the environment and particularly the health of our river system is of high importance to the community.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are no significant risks.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The total cost to Council of the 2016 Regional State of the Environment Report will be $9,800.? The cost will be met from the Environmental Levy budget.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There is no impact on service levels or staffing requirements.? If Council were to attempt to produce its own ?stand alone? report there would be significant staffing implications.

 

Attachments:

1View

10916/2013 - Regional State of the Environment Report 2016

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Regional State of the Environment Report

 





Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.7???? SF1026??????????? 150513??????? Arrangements for Council Elections to be Conducted by the Electoral Commissioner

 

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

 

Summary:

 

A summary is not required.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the General Manager be provided with delegated authority to enter into arrangements with the Electoral Commissioner for the provision of election services for the Council until the conclusion of the following ordinary election.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The Council can administer its own elections but this is not recommended as the General Manager does not have the time and resources to undertake this.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

There is an interesting and relatively recent change to the Local Government Act 1993 which provides as follows:

296   Elections to be administered by general manager of council or Electoral Commissioner

(1)  Elections for the purposes of this Chapter are to be administered by the general manager of the council concerned.

(2)  Despite subsection (1), a council may resolve that the council is to enter into a contract or make arrangements with the Electoral Commissioner for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all elections for the council for the purposes of this Chapter.

(3)  Such a resolution may only be made within 12 months after an ordinary election of councillors for the council?s area.

(4)  If such a contract is entered into or such arrangements made, the Electoral Commissioner is to administer all the elections of the council until the conclusion of the following ordinary election for councillors.

(5)  In this section, election does not include an election of the mayor or a deputy mayor by the councillors.

 

Since the Government has allowed Councils to either conduct their own elections through contractors or to utilise the Electoral Commissioner for election services, the legislative change would seem to be aimed at providing the Electoral Commissioner with certainty as to the on going business they will secure from local government.

 

In the circumstances that the Electoral Commissioner conducted the 2012 elections for this Shire for close to the budgeted provision and that this Council does not have the capacity for the General Manager to administer the elections it is recommended that Council enter into arrangements with the Electoral Commissioner for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all elections.? These arrangements will of course need to be based on pricing similar to that provided for the 2012 elections.

 

The arrangements will presumably cover any bi-elections which may be required as well as the next election.


 

CONSULTATION:

 

There is proposed to be consultation with the Electoral Commissioner.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental implications.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are no significant risks.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

At this stage there is no budgetary impact.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There would be significant resourcing requirements if the Council has to administer its own elections.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.8???? SF203????????????? 150513??????? 2011/12 NSW Water Supply and Sewerage Performance Monitoring Report

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The 2011/12 NSW Water Supply and Sewerage Performance Monitoring Reports have been released by the Minister for Primary Industries and Minister for Small Business, the Hon. Katrina Hodgkinson MP.

 

The Report has important comparative data on the performance of 105 local water utilities in regional NSW.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the release of the 2011/12 NSW Water Supply and Sewerage Performance Monitoring Report.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

No options provided as this report is for Council?s information only

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

This report is the definitive guide to the relative performance of local water utilities across a range of criteria including the typical residential bill, developer charges, water quality, operating costs and best practice management.

 

The General Manager has a hard copy of the report.? A link to the report can also be found on the NSW Office of Water?s website www.water.nsw.gov.au/urban water.

 

It is not proposed to summarise the outcome for this Council for all of the criteria but to direct Council?s attention to some of the more topical.

 

With the typical residential bill ($ per assessment) for water supply, out of 93 water utilities Nambucca Shire Council is ranked no. 19 from least to most expensive.? The least expensive is Albury and the most expensive is Bogan.

 

With the typical residential bill ($ per assessment) for sewerage, out of 99 water utilities Nambucca Shire Council is ranked no. 32 from least to most expensive.? The least expensive is Balranald and the most expensive is Bega Valley followed by Byron and MidCoast Water.

 

For both water and sewerage this Council sits well within the 40th percentile for cost.

 

The Council sits at about the 50th percentile for complaints about water quality.

 

Complaints concerning odour from sewerage were relatively high with the Council sitting above the 80th percentile.

 

In terms of delivering water supply, the Nambucca Valley has one of the cheapest operating costs per property ratios in the State.? The Council?s assessed costs rank it no. 7 in NSW.

 

Conversely operating costs per property for sewer rank Council at about no. 80 or the 80th percentile.

 

The Council?s typical developer charges for water supply rank it as one of the most expensive Councils in the State.? Our charges are the fourth highest behind Byron, Bega Valley and the Tweed.? In terms of developer charges for sewerage, the Council ranks as being the sixth most expensive after Richmond Valley, Byron, Palerang, Eurobodalla and MidCoast.

 

This Council?s ranking in developer charges reflects the substantial capital investments which have and continue to be made in both water supply and sewerage.? This includes the $54m off stream water storage and the recently completed $20m upgrade of the Nambucca Heads Sewerage Treatment Plant and system.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Manager Water & Sewerage.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The reports provide data on the performance indicators relating to Council?s water and sewerage operations.

 

Social

 

The reports provide data on the performance indicators relating to the social impact of Council?s water and sewerage operations.

 

Economic

 

The reports provide data on the performance indicators relating to the economic impact of Council?s water and sewerage operations

 

Risk

 

The reports provide data that may assist in highlighting issues that could pose a risk to Council.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no impact.? The report is for information.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There is no impact.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.9???? SF544????????????? 150513??????? Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Colleen Henry, Grants and Contributions Officer; Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

This report submits the Draft Upper Warrell Creek Road Developer Contributions Plan 2013 for approval by Council before being placed on public exhibition for 28 days. A copy of the draft plan was circulated to Councillors two weeks before the meeting; no comments were received.???

 

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.

 

 

Recommendations:

 

1??????? That Council approve the Draft Upper Warrell Creek Road Developer Contributions Plan 2013.

 

2??????? That the draft plan is put on public exhibition for 28 days.? After the public exhibition period, the plan will be resubmitted to Council for final approval, accompanied by a report of public comments and any proposed changes, for Council?s consideration.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

That Council decide not to adopt the Draft Upper Warrell Creek Road Developer Contributions Plan 2013; the South Macksville Development Contributions Plan 2005 will remain active.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

This draft plan will replace the current South Macksville Roadworks 2005 Development Contributions Plan. Under section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1979) (EP&A Act) and Part 4 of the Planning and Assessment Regulation (2000) (Regulation), Council is required to review its developer contributions plans regularly. This review is long overdue and there are some issues associated with the existing Development Contributions Plan as it considerably underestimated the cost of the required infrastructure works.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

The draft Upper Warrell Creek Road Developer Contributions Plan 2013 differs from the earlier plan in the following ways:

 

1.?????? The catchment area which will be subject to this new plan now encompasses the Upper Warrell Estate (UWE), centred around the Strawberry Road area, as well as the South Macksville Estate, Areas 1 and 2 as per the previous plan.? The future development and increased population at UWE will increase the use of Upper Warrell Creek Road and therefore contributions will need to be collected for these works.

2.?????? The schedule of roadworks required for Upper Warrell Creek Road have been amended.? The roundabout which was proposed to deal with traffic generated by Area 2 of South Macksville Estate has been replaced by a less costly intersection, with no reduction in safety or functionality.

3.?????? The portion of Upper Warrell Creek Road which must be improved runs between the intersection of Yarrawonga Street and Travelling Stock Route (TSR) 99.? This road will be upgraded in two different sections: a wider carriageway between Yarrawonga Street and the as yet unnamed major internal collector road of the South Macksville Estate as it will carry more traffic, and a slightly narrower and less expensive carriageway between the collector road and TSR 99, as it will only carry increased traffic associated with UWE.?

 

Funds collected under the existing plan are able to be used for the works under the new plan, however due to low levels of development activity in the Shire, there has only been a total of $3058.00 collected in the past two years.

 

Negotiations are currently underway with the developer of South Macksville Estate regarding the construction of the intersection as Works in Kind; this work would be done in lieu of contributions collected for Area 2 of the Estate.

 

Development applications made under the existing plan will be assessed against that plan; the new plan will only be relevant to development which has not yet been subject to the DA process.

 

Following approval of the draft by Council, the draft plan will be exhibited for 28 days. At the close of that consultation period, comments will be assessed and a report provided to Council for its consideration with recommendations for changes, if any, to be made to the draft plan. A final advertising period would notify the public of the Council?s endorsement, at which date the plan would come into effect.?

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Assistant General Managers

Manager Technical Services

Manager Applications and Compliance

Accountant

Strategic Planner

Senior Town Planner

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

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

 

Social

 

The modifications to Upper Warrell Creek Road will bring the road up to standard and provide safer transport infrastructure to Shire residents, especially the residents living along the road.

 

Economic

 

The current Developer Contribution base rate collected per lot under the South Macksville Roadworks Plan 2005 is $551 (Area 1) and $951 (Area 2).? The new plan charges a rate per lot of $4,485.32 (Area 1), $8,489.78 (Area 2) and $11,560.28 (UWE).

 

Risk

 

The new developer contributions rates are significantly higher than the old rates, as the revised cost of the infrastructure is much higher and it will be borne by a smaller number of developers. There is a risk that developers affected by the change will see this as inequitable, however there is no other way to recoup the actual cost of the required works, and points to the need to continually review our contributions plans.

 


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no impact on the current budget for the Upper Warrell Creek Road project. There will be an increased level of funds available over time to meet the costs of the required road work, and recoup the funds expended on work undertaken.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not required.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The Council?s schedule of Fees and Charges will require updating when the plan comes into effect. Council staff responsible for setting contributions required as a condition of consent will need to use the new set of charges.

 

Council?s Financial Management System will need to incorporate a new General Ledger income number associated with the new plan, as under legislative requirements it must be clear what income has been collected under each contributions plan.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

7602/2013 - Draft Upper Warrell Creek Road Developer Contributions Plan 2013

28 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

DRAFT

Upper Warrell Creek Road

Developer Contributions Plan 2013

 

 

May 2005

(Revised April 2013)

 

Nambucca Shire Council

Administration Centre

44 Princess Street

Macksville

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

Contents

 

Part A: Introduction, Operation and Administration of the Plan

????? 1. Introduction?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 5

????? 2. Administration and Operation of the Plan???????????????????????? 9

 

Part B: Contribution Plan Nexus, Development Profile and Projected Infrastructure Works

3. Basis for Levying a Contribution?????????????????????????????????????? 17

 

Part C: Schedules

????? 4 Catchment Map, Work Schedules and Contribution Rates 23

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

Notes and Corrections to this Issue

 

Please note the following and corrections:

 

There are no corrections

 

Amendments and Revisions

 

Issue No

 

Date

Issue Title

Amendment

1

2

3

 

4

05.05.05

12.05.05

xx.xx.xx

 

xx.xx.xx

Adopted by Council

Effective Date

Revised version adopted by Council

Effective Date

 

 

Construction costs revised

Work Schedule updated

Catchment boundaries changed

 


Part A

Introduction, Administration and Operation of the Contribution Plan

 


1??? Introduction

 

1.1?? Name of this plan

 

This section 94 Developer Contributions Plan is prepared in accordance with the provisions of section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1979) (EP&A Act) and Part 4 of the Planning and Assessment Regulation (2000) (Regulation).

 

The Plan is named the ?Upper Warrell Creek Road Developer Contributions Plan 2013?.

 

1.2?? Commencement of contribution plan

 

This contribution plan is prepared pursuant to the provisions of section 94 of the EP&A Act and Part 4 of the Regulation and is effective from (date to be inserted following adoption by Council).

 

1.3?? Area to which this plan applies

 

This Plan applies to all land within the Nambucca Shire as described in Section C: Map C1 Contribution Catchment, of this Plan.

 

This development contribution plan applies to applications for development consent and applications for complying development certificates under Part 4 of the Act.

 

1.4?? Definition of a Section 94 contribution plan

 

Section 94 of the Act authorises Council to levy contributions from developers as a condition of consent for the provision of public infrastructure, facilities and services that are required as a result of increased development. The section 94 plan remains a public document and describes Council?s policy on developer contributions.

 

A section 94 contribution plan details the expected increase in demand as a result of new development and links this to an increased demand for local public services, facilities and infrastructure to be provided through developer contributions. This ?nexus? is one of the underlying core principles of section 94 and is the key factor in deciding if a contribution can be sought.

 

A contribution plan must contain a description of how the contribution rate has been determined, and the formulae for determining the rate; the contribution rates; the works schedule; and timeframe for expenditure and project delivery.

 

The Plan should be flexible, it should be able to respond to the changing needs of an area, and it should allow for the planned, efficient provision of facilities and infrastructure expected to be required as a result of, or to assist, new development.

 

The plan should operate over a specific period of time, which in this case is 20 years, for determining both the rate of development and the infrastructure, facilities and services to be provided within that period. The plan should be reviewed and amended periodically every 5 years, however the plan may be reviewed at any time.

 

Council can only demand a contribution if it is satisfied the development, the subject of the development application, will or is likely to require the provision of or increase the demand for, public facilities within the area. Contributions may be in the form of monetary payments, dedication of land at no cost to Council, the provision of a material public benefit, or a combination of these.

 

The ability to fund new works facilities and the embellishment of existing infrastructure in the community through the use of section 94 contributions is highly important for Nambucca Shire Council. Through the use of developer contributions Council reduces the cost and impact on existing residents in the Shire for the provision of additional services and infrastructure generated by new development. The use of section 94 contributions guarantees the service level for the existing population is maintained while ensuring an equivalent level is provided for the incoming population.

 

1.5?? Purpose of this contribution plan

 

This Plan satisfies the requirements of the EP&A Act and Regulation. This Plan authorises Nambucca Shire Council to require payment of a monetary contribution, a dedication of land or in lieu of, to accept the provision of material public benefit, including the dedication of land, or the carrying out of a works in kind agreement, towards provision, extension or augmentation of public road infrastructure that will, or are likely to be, required or have an increased demand, as a consequence of development in the catchment area covered by this plan.

 

The purpose of this Plan is to:

 

? Provide the framework for the efficient and equitable determination, collection and management of development contributions towards the provision of new local road and traffic infrastructure;

? Ensure that all new development that benefits from these public facilities and infrastructure contribute towards their provision;

? Determine the likely development patterns and needs of the population which will result from that development;

? Ensure that the existing Nambucca Shire community is not unreasonably burdened by the provision of public facilities and infrastructure required as a result of the ongoing development and redevelopment undertaken within the area described in this contribution plan;

? Provide an overall strategy for the coordinated delivery of public facilities and infrastructure consistent with Council?s strategic plan and management plan;

? Provide a comprehensive and transparent strategy which is implemented for the assessment, accounting and review of development contributions made under section 94 of the Act and regulation for the Nambucca Shire; and

? Indicate a program of works and capital expenditure for the provision of public works required as a result of development within the Shire.

 

1.6?? Relationship to other plans

 

Contributions raised and paid under the authority of this Plan will be directed towards the respective facility and infrastructure described in the Works Schedule of this Plan.

 

This Plan supersedes the South Macksville Roadworks 2005 Development Contributions Plan and incorporates the outstanding fund balance of the superseded plan current at the time of this Plan?s introduction. The name of this plan has been changed as it draws from a wider catchment than just South Macksville.

 

Contributions levied under the previous plan may be adjusted according to movements in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). This would arise where the timing of the payment of the contribution is at least one (1) year from the date of development consent, which contains the condition imposing the section 94 contribution/s.

1.7?? Infrastructure for which contributions will be levied

 

This contribution plan establishes strategies that allow section 94 contributions to be levied towards the provision of the following categories of infrastructure or service provided these relate to the need generated through increased development demands:

 

? Local Road Upgrade to Upper Warrell Creek Road ? Yarrawonga Street to Major Collector Road (currently unnamed)

? Local Road Upgrade to Upper Warrell Creek Road ? Major Collector Road (currently unnamed) to Travelling Stock Route (TSR) 99

? Intersection Upgrade at Upper Warrell Creek Road and unnamed development collector road.

 

1.8?? Contribution plan structure

 

The contribution plan is structured in three (3) parts:

 

Part A: details essential components of the Plan, including the basis for preparing a development contribution plan, describes the Plan?s operation and administration, defines the area affected by the Plan and its relationship to other plans.

 

Part B: provides details of the need for public facilities planned, including the expected development and population characteristics of the catchment and the plan for the delivery of required facilities and infrastructure.

 

Additionally details on the strategies to deliver each of the categories of facilities and infrastructure, including the causal, spatial and temporal link between the expected development and the facilities required, and the philosophy, standards and manner of facility and service delivery is provided

 

Part C: details work schedules, catchment maps, contribution summaries and references.


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

2??? Administration and Operation of the Plan

 

2.1?? Operation of the plan

 

Section 94 permits Council to require developers to provide or assist in the provision of new facilities and infrastructure required as a result of new development. The mechanism to require the contribution is through the development assessment process.

 

In determining a development application or issuing a complying development certificate, Council may impose a condition of consent requiring the payment of a monetary contribution, dedication of land and / or works in kind, in accordance with the provisions of the plan.

 

This Plan identifies the quantum of contribution to be levied on an individual development, and what facilities and infrastructure the contribution may be directed towards. Such details are to be included in the respective development approval. The parameters and assumptions used to identify contributions and the works as a result of development occurring are dynamic. As a result this plan will be reviewed periodically.

 

Information on the contributions received, and details of how these contributions have been applied towards the provision of the public amenities and services described in this Plan will be reported in Council's annual financial statements. A register of contributions received under this Plan will also be maintained and made publicly available by Council.

 

2.2?? What is the life of this plan?

 

This Plan seeks development contributions for facilities and infrastructure required as a result of population increases occurring over the next ten (10) year period. The time frame selected accords with the estimated rates of development and population projections completed to identify growth from 2012.

 

2.3?? What is the contribution formula?

 

The formula used to determine the contributions regarding each type of facility and service are set out in Part B of this Plan. The formulas have been based on a generic contribution formula that applies to each infrastructure item.

 

The contribution rate will be indexed according to the CPI set out in section 2.9.

 

A summary of the contribution rate is provided in this plan.

 

The contribution rates for residential development are calculated per person, and then converted to a per dwelling bedroom occupancy and per new lot.

 

2.4?? When are contributions payable?

 

The amount of developer contributions will be determined as a part of the assessment of a development application and will appear as a condition of approval on the respective development consent issued under section 80 of the EP&A Act. The notice will include a condition indicating the timing, amount of payment and the specific public amenity or service in respect of which a condition is imposed.

 

For development applications involving subdivisions, payment of a monetary contribution must be made prior to the release of the subdivision certificate. For development applications involving building work, payment must be made prior to the release of the occupation or interim occupation certificate. For development applications where no building work is involved, payment must be made at the time of issue of occupation or interim occupation certificate, subdivision certificate or where no such certificates are required prior to the issue of an approval.

 

Where a developer negotiates a material public benefit, works in kind or dedication of land in lieu of paying a monetary contribution required under this Plan, the developer must also pay Council's reasonable costs for the management of this contribution plan.

 

The amount of monetary contribution to be paid will be the contribution payable at the time of consent, and depending on when the development consent is acted upon, may be subject to reasonable adjustment due to movements in the financial indices and rates in section 2.9.

 

2.5?? Are contributions payable for complying development?

 

Under section 94E contributions are payable on complying development. It is the responsibility of the principal certifying authority to accurately calculate and apply the section 94 contribution conditions where applicable. It is the responsibility of any person issuing a construction certificate to certify that the contributions have been paid to Council prior to the issue of the certificate. Deferred payments of contributions required by a condition of complying development certificate will not be accepted.

 

Payment of a monetary contribution is to be made prior to the issue of the construction certificate. In the case of subdivision, the contribution is to be made prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.

 

Where a developer negotiates a material public benefit, works in kind or dedication of land in lieu of paying the monetary contribution required under this Plan, the developer must also pay Council's reasonable costs for the management of this contributions Plan.

 

2.6 ? Offer to enter into a voluntary planning agreement

 

If an applicant does not wish to pay a levy in connection with the carrying out of a development, the applicant may offer to enter into a voluntary planning agreement with Council under s.93F of the EP&A Act in connection with making a development application.

 

Under the planning agreement, the applicant may offer to pay money, dedicate land, carry out works or provide other material benefits for public purposes.

 

The applicant's provision under a planning agreement may be additional to or instead of paying a contribution in accordance with a condition of development consent authorised by this Plan. This will be a matter of negotiation with Council.

 

The offer to enter into the planning agreement together with a copy of the draft agreement should accompany the relevant development application.

 

Council will publicly notify the draft planning agreement and an explanatory note relating to the draft agreement along with the development application and will consider the agreement as part of its assessment of that application.

 

If Council agrees to enter into the planning agreement, it may impose a condition of development consent under s.93I(3) of the EP&A Act requiring the agreement to be entered into and performed. If Council does not agree to enter into the planning agreement, it may grant consent subject to a condition authorised by this Plan requiring the payment of a contribution.

 

2.7?? Works in Kind and Material Public Benefits

 

Council may allow applicants to make a contribution by way of a material public benefit, (for items NOT included in the Works Schedule) or by works in kind (for items included in the Works Schedule) as referred to in section 94(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Council may, but is not obliged to, accept material public benefits or works in kind when:

 

? Agreement is reached between the developer and Council as to the proposed material public benefit or works in kind

? A monetary contribution in accordance with the Section 94 plan is unnecessary or unreasonable in the circumstances

? The value of the material public benefit or works in kind is at least equal to the value of the monetary contribution assessed in accordance with the plan, and

? The material public benefit of all works in kind will not prejudice the timing or the manner of the provision of the public facility for which the contribution was required.

 

It may also accept a material public benefit for an item not included on the contribution plan work schedule where it considers the acceptance of that material public benefit will not create an unacceptable shortfall in contributions collected which may lead to difficulty in providing other items on the work schedule.

 

The offer from an applicant or any other entitled to that consent must be made in writing as part of the development application and include details of the extent and nature of the works proposed to be undertaken.

 

Council will require the applicant to enter into a written agreement for the provision of the works.

 

Acceptance of any such alternative is at the sole discretion of Council. Valuation of any land to be dedicated will be obtained by Council at the applicant?s expense. The cost of the dedications are to be borne by the applicant. The terms of the offer as accepted by Council will be included in the development consent.

 

 

2.8?? Monitoring and review of contributions

 

Nambucca Shire Council acknowledges the need to continually monitor and review this contribution plan. The contribution plan will be subject to review that will account for such matters as community need, provision costs, development rates, contribution affordability and performance of provision of works.

 

In the event of Council identifying changes as a result of the review process, amendments to the contribution plan, (apart from the periodic adjustment of contributions that is provided for in s.2.9 of this Plan, based on published indices), will be publicly exhibited in accordance with the requirements of the EP&A Regulation 2000.

 

Pursuant to Cl 32(3) of the Regulation 2000, Council may make certain minor adjustments or amendments to the Plan without prior public exhibition and adoption by Council.

 

2.9?? Adjustment of contributions

 

To ensure that the values of the contributions are not eroded over time by movements in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), Council will amend the contribution rates. The contribution rates listed in Part C will be amended annually from 1st July and increased according to the previous March Quarter CPI to allow for increases in the cost of provision for facilities. Contributions required as a condition of development consent will be adjusted at the time of payment in accordance with the latest CPI (All Groups ? Sydney) as published quarterly by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), using the following formula.

 

Contribution at the time of payment =??????? C?????? x??????? CPI 2

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? CPI 1

 

Where:

 

C?????? =??????? The original contribution amount as shown on the consent

CPI 2??? =???? The CPI Number (All Groups ? Sydney) currently available from the ?????? ABS at the time of payment.

CPI 1??? =???? The CPI Number (All Groups ? Sydney) last published by the ABS at ?????? the time of coming into effect of the Plan, or subsequent amendment ?????? of the Plan.

 

2.10??? Accountability

 

Financial management and accountability are important components of section 94, and Council is obliged to maintain an accurate and up to date register of all section 94 contributions.

 

Monetary contributions received under the authority of this Plan must be recorded and kept through a separate account specifically established for this Plan. The records must indicate the contributions received, contributions expended and must include the interest, if any, earned on invested funds for each account.

 

These records are updated on a monthly basis.

 

Separate accounting records are maintained for all Council?s section 94 contribution plans. Information on section 94 accounts and funds relating to this plan will be provided in a condensed format within Nambucca Shire Council?s Annual Report/s in accordance with requirements of the EP&A Regulation 2000. Information is also available in Council?s contribution register relating to this plan, which can be inspected at Council during normal business hours.

 

2.11? Deferment of payments

 

Council will accept a deferred or periodic payment of contributions subject to the contribution being secured by Bank Guarantee and the deferment being no longer than 24 months. In such a case, the applicant must make a written request.

 

Council will require the applicant to provide a bank guarantee by a bank for the full amount of the contribution or the outstanding balance on the condition that:

 

1. indexing will be calculated from the date the contribution was due until the date of payment;

2. the bank guarantee be by a bank for the amount of the total contribution, or the amount of any outstanding contribution plus an amount equal to 25 months? interest plus any charges associated with establishing or operating the bank security;

3. the bank unconditionally pays the guaranteed sum to the Council if the Council so demands in writing not earlier than 24 months from the provision of the guarantee or completion of the work;

4. the bank must pay the guaranteed sum without reference to the applicant or landowner or other person who provided the guarantee, and without regard to any dispute, controversy, issue or other matter relating to the development consent or the carrying out of development;

5. the bank?s obligations are discharged when payment to the Council is made in accordance with this guarantee or when Council notifies the bank in writing that the guarantee is no longer required;

6. where a bank guarantee has been deposited with Council, the guarantee shall not be cancelled until such time as the original contribution and accrued interest has been paid;

7. the applicant will be charged an administrative fee based on the professional fees set in Council?s Revenue Policy; and

8. periodic payments for a staged development will be on a pro rata basis ? the proportion of the stage of the development in relation to the overall development.

 

 

2.12? PooIing of contributions

 

This plan authorises monetary section 94 contributions paid for different purposes to be pooled and used progressively or otherwise for those purposes, and are described in the works schedule.

 

Monetary contributions collected under previous issues of this contribution plan, or under equivalent contribution plans to be extinguished or repealed on adoption of this contribution plan, are authorised to be pooled and used for purposes outlined in this plan where those uses are consistent with the purpose for which the contributions were originally collected, and the intended original purpose has been either completed, abandoned or provided for by other means and/or the contributions are surplus.

 

2.13? Transitional arrangements

 

A development application submitted prior to the adoption of this Plan but not determined shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Plan, which applied at the date of determination of the application.


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

Part B

Contribution Plan Nexus, Development Profile and Projected Infrastructure Works


3??? Basis for Levying a Contribution

 

The underlying principle of section 94 legislation requires a contribution plan to meet the tests of reasonableness and accountability. It is the responsibility of Council to determine what is reasonable, however the concepts of fairness, equity, sound judgement and moderation are seen to underpin the definition.

 

Reasonableness is demonstrated in terms of nexus between the contributing development and the infrastructure being provided through that contribution, and apportionment of costs

 

3.1???? Nexus

Legislation requires that in order to demand a contribution for the road and traffic projects detailed in this plan, the plan must meet the three separate conditions of connectivity:

 

????? Causal nexus

????? Physical nexus, and

????? Temporal nexus

 

3.1.1? Causal nexus

Anticipated new residential development in, or close to, existing urban centres will place new demands on the established local road and traffic network. Greater capacity will be required at key local intersections and on local roads to meet the expected demand from the predicted increase in vehicles.

 

3.1.2? Physical nexus

Contribution catchments have been identified and determined with regard to the collective nexus between the projects and the community being served by the works.

 

3.1.3? Temporal nexus

The schedule of works identifies projects being planned to be provided to satisfy the future demands on the local traffic network. The work schedule details the type, cost and timing of projects to be provided within a specified time frame related to expected contributions.

 

3.2?? Apportionment

The approach and rate of apportionment will vary in each circumstance, however the critical tests of apportionment are that it is:

????? practical

????? equitable

????? based on best available information at the time

????? reasonable in the circumstance, and

????? publicly accountable

 

The rate of apportionment for each project is detailed in Part C Work Schedules. The rate of apportionment is in part calculated on the predicted rate of growth and increased traffic generation across the catchment, measured against the existing road infrastructure capacity.

 

3.3?? Developer contribution schedule of works

The road and traffic infrastructure projects detailed in this plan will attract a contribution from development occurring within the catchment. The projects fall into the following categories and attract an apportioned contribution dependent on scale and type of works and level of need. That is, where a works project is required to provide increased traffic capacity or to service the needs solely or uniquely to a development catchment, in all cases the development within that catchment will be required to pay 100% of the cost of provision. Where the improvement will be shared with the existing community, such as where an existing intersection within an established area is upgraded to meet demands from new infill development, then the cost of that provision will be apportioned between the development and the existing community. The level of apportionment will vary on catchment population and degree of population demand.

 

Local infrastructure projects attracting a contribution under this plan provide for road and traffic improvements on the existing Upper Warrell Road alignment and formation, and include:

 

????? Existing formation reconstruction, widening, sealing, drainage and shoulder improvements.

????? Intersection improvements, including lighting and service relocation.

????? Signage and line marking.

 

The catchment contribution schedules provided in Part C of this plan detail the contribution apportionment percentage for each project, including the distribution of cost between residential and commercial development types.

 

Given that the nature of residential development is guided by a combination of particular market factors, which in turn are directed by broader political and financial influences such as employment, migration (external and internal) and age of the population, the forecast development timeframes may be affected. The increase in population is forecast to be gradual over the life of this plan, however growth spikes may occur within some sectors during the period. As a result, a gradual increase in local traffic volumes due to residential development will be experienced on Upper Warrell Creek Road requiring improvements to key local traffic infrastructure to provide greater capacity.

 

Development of non-residential uses, such as those permissible within Zone R1 ? General residential (child care facilities, motels, community facilities, places of worship, group homes, respite (day care) centres, boarding houses and hostels, and neighbourhood shops, would introduce a spike in traffic generated during the period of this Plan. The calculation of contributions associated with non-residential development such as these will be predicated on the traffic generated by the development. Proposed developments should conduct a traffic study to provide estimated Average Annual Daily Traffic which will be used to calculate the required contribution for that development based on the trips per day.

 

3.4?? Predicted development

 

The basis for levying a developer contribution is predicated on the predicted population increase and the future demand for new infrastructure to meet the needs of that population. This contribution plan authorises Council to demand a monetary contribution towards the design and construction of new road and traffic infrastructure required to service the needs of the local community as a result of new residential developments and potential non-residential developments within the designated development catchment.

 

3.5?? Development profile

 

Existing and approved development

As at February 2013, within the areas subject to this plan, there were 135 dwellings. Within the catchment of the proposed intersection (Area 2 on Map X) there were five dwellings. There were also 26 existing vacant or approved lots within the Upper Warrell Estate, with 123 vacant or approved lots within the intersection catchment.

 

Future development

Residential Subdivision

It is anticipated that there will be 706 residential lots at full development in the overall catchment, based on detailed design work carried out during preparation of the Nambucca Development Control Plan No 17 ? South Macksville Urban Release Area 2005 (since incorporated into DCP 2010 Section J) and subsequent assessments of the Upper Warrell Estate carried out for this plan.

 

The majority of the lots will be within the South Macksville Estate, with the remainder being the result of subdivision in the Upper Warrell Estate. Of the lots within the South Macksville Estate subdivision, 296 are anticipated to be within the traffic catchment of the intersection (Area 2 on Map C.1). These lot numbers represent the number of detached dwellings anticipated.

 

Based on data provided from the 2011 Australian Bureau of Statistics Census (the latest for which data is currently available), the assumed occupancy rates in the Nambucca Local Government Area for an average-sized 3 bedroom detached dwelling is 2.3 persons.

 

Dual Occupancy and Medium Density Residential Development

It is anticipated that a proportion of lots will be developed for dual occupancy or medium density development. However, given the nature and location of the subject area and? the anticipated timing of development, this proportion is likely to be low. This is estimated to be 28 additional dwellings, ie 56 medium density dwellings in place of 28 detached dwellings.

 

Rural Residential

The Rural Residential Strategy rezoned large lot (1ha) rural residential in this area and there is potential for four of these to be taken up in South Macksville. There is an additional future development area identified at Upper Warrell Estate which will provide approximately 135 lots rural residential at full development.

 

3.6?? Projected infrastructure works

 

3.6.1? Upgrade of Upper Warrell Creek Road

Upper Warrell Creek Road, between Wallace Street, Macksville and Snakey Creek Bridge, Congarinni, forms the sole road access to the South Macksville area, including the Macksville Industrial Area. Besides this role, Council proposes that it form part of the long-term preferred access to Taylors Arm and the south-west of the Shire. Under Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 ? South Macksville Urban Release Area, a future east-west road adjoining and parallel to Travelling Stock Route No. 99 will extend from Upper Warrell Creek Road to form this new route. This new route is needed as alternative access if Taylors Arm Road east of Congarinni is destroyed in a major flood.

 

Upper Warrell Creek Road is currently constructed as a minimal standard rural road, with a sealed carriageway of no more than six metres width and minimal shoulders. This is inappropriate to its future role as access to significant urban development along the road. Increased traffic volumes generated by the new residential development will require Upper Warrell Creek Road to be upgraded. The upgrade would occur in two parts:

1. Reconstruction of 900m of Upper Warrell Creek Road from Yarrawonga Street to the major collector road with an 11m wide carriageway and 9m seal and

2. Reconstruction of 300m from the major collector road to TSR 99 with a 9m wide carriageway and 9m seal, with some significant earthworks.

 

The estimated total project cost is $1.2 million, which has been revised significantly from the previous plan?s estimate of $400,000. In line with the previous plan,? 80% of the cost of this upgrade is to be attributed to future development within the subject area.

 

3.6.2??? Intersection works

 

The proposed intersection is to be located at the junction of Upper Warrell Creek Road and the major internal collector road for the South Macksville Urban Release Area. This intersection will be used by a significant level of traffic when full development of the area is achieved.

 

Under DCP 2010, there will be limited access points to Upper Warrell Creek Road. As a result, Council does not intend to light this road to urban standards. However, as there will be significant traffic at this intersection, it is proposed to provide urban standard street lighting at this location. The estimated cost of the intersection and lighting is $260,000.

 

3.6.3? Program of Works

Works are scheduled to be undertaken post 2013.

 

3.6.4??? Road Infrastructure Provided Ahead of Development ? Recoupment of Costs

Council may choose to provide local road infrastructure ahead of development, whereby costs will be recouped through the provisions of this contribution plan.

 

3.7?? Contributions cap

In accordance with Direction S.94E [1(1)], commencing 16th September 2010, contributions levied under this plan are not to exceed $20,000 for each dwelling authorised by the consent or residential lot created by subdivision, unless an increase in the maximum amount above $20,000 has been approved by the Minister, [1(3)].

?

3.8?? Contributions collected under the previous plans

Contributions collected under the previous plans will be made available under the new plan.

 

3.9?? Contribution base rate calculation

The contribution base rate detailed in the contribution plan Work Schedule Table C.1 is calculated as follows:

 

3.9.1? Table C.1: Residential Contribution Base Rate Calculation

 

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

????????????????????????? ??? (Total Cost of Infrastructure ? Previous Contributions Balance)

Per Person Contribution =? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ________ X Apportionment???????????????????????? ?????????????

????????????? ?????????? ??? Increase in population due to development

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

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

 

Contribution per lot?????? =???????? Contribution per person X 2.3?????????

 

 

 

 

Part C

Catchment Map, Work Schedule and Summary of Contribution Rates

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

 

Residential Contribution Rates and Schedule of Works

 

 

 

 

 

Upper Warrell Creek Road Developer Contributions Plan 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

04/2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Item

Description

Unit

Qty

Rate

Sub-total

Cost Contingency

Total Project Cost

Apportionment

Adjusted Total

Rate/ Person

Rate/ New Lot

Delivery Threshold

1

Reconstruction and pavement sealing of Upper Warrell Creek Road Yarrawonga Street to major collector road to Council specification

Lin.m

900

$1,016.00

$914,400.00

$114,300.00

$1,028,700.00

80%

$822,960.00

$1,950.14

$4,485.33

Post 2013

2

Reconstruction and pavement sealing of Upper Warrell Creek Road? from major collector road to TSR 99 to Council specification

Lin.m

300

$957.00

$287,100.00

$35,887.50

$322,987.50

80%

$258,390.00

$3,076.07

$7,074.96

Post 2013

3

Construction of intersection between Upper Warrell Creek Road and major internal collector road SME Area 2, lighting

 

1

$260,000

$260,000.00

$32,500.00

$292,500.00

100%

$292,500.00

$1,741.07

$4,004.46

2013

Total

 

 

 

 

$1,461,500.00

$182,687.50

$1,644,187.50

 

$1,373,850.00

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan - Draft

 

Table C.2? Contribution Summary

 

Upper Warrell Creek Road

Development Contributions Plan 2013 Summary

 

South Macksville Estate Area 1

Applies to all determinations from XXXXXXX

 

 

Application Type

 

Residential

 

Per Person Rate

?$1,950.14

Subdivision/New Lot: [eqv 2.3 persons]ea

 

?$4,485.32

Detached [Dual Occupancy]

 

1 BR [1.6]

?$3,120.22

2BR [1.9]

?$3,705.27

3BR [2.3]

?$4,485.32

Additions/Increased Capacity/Additional BR [eqv 0.3 persons] ea

 

 

?$585.04

Tourist per Bed [eqv 0.3 persons]

 

?$585.04

Aged Care per Bed [eqv 0.3 persons]

?$585.04

 


 

Upper Warrell Creek Road

Development Contributions Plan 2013 Summary

 

South Macksville Estate Area 2

Applies to all determinations from XXXXXXX

 

 

Application Type

 

Residential

 

Per Person Rate

?$3,691.21

Subdivision/New Lot: [eqv 2.3 persons]ea

 

?$8,489.78

Detached [Dual Occupancy]

 

1 BR [1.6]

?$5,905.94

2BR [1.9]

?$7,013.30

3BR [2.3]

$8,489.78

Additions/Increased Capacity/Additional BR [eqv 0.3 persons] ea

 

 

?$1,107.36

Tourist per Bed [eqv 0.3 persons]

 

?$1,107.36

Aged Care per Bed [eqv 0.3 persons]

?$1,107.36


 

Upper Warrell Creek Road

Development Contributions Plan 2013 Summary

 

Upper Warrell Estate

Applies to all determinations from XXXXXXX

 

 

Application Type

 

Residential

 

Per Person Rate

?$5,026.21

Subdivision/New Lot: [eqv 2.3 persons]ea

 

?$11,560.28

Detached [Dual Occupancy]

 

1 BR [1.6]

?$8,041.94

2BR [1.9]

?$9,549.80

3BR [2.3]

?$11,560.28

Additions/Increased Capacity/Additional BR [eqv 0.3 persons] ea

 

 

?$1,507.86

Tourist per Bed [eqv 0.3 persons]

 

?$1,507.86

Aged Care per Bed [eqv 0.3 persons]

?$1,507.86


References

 

Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006 Census: Nambucca (A)(LGA 15700) Commonwealth of Australia, 2007

 


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.10?? SF544????????????? 150513??????? Draft Projects Administration Contribution Plan

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Colleen Henry, Grants and Contributions Officer; Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

The first Section 94 Contribution Plan: Project Administration was approved by Council in July 2007 and has been in effect since August 2007. The plan now has been reviewed for the first time. This report submits the Draft Project Administration Contributions Plan 2013 for approval by Council, to be put on public exhibition for 28 days.

 

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.

 

 

Recommendations:

 

That Council approve the Draft Project Administration Contributions Plan 2013 for public exhibition for 28 days, after which the plan will be resubmitted to Council, accompanied by a report of public comments and any proposed changes for final approval.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

That Council decide not to adopt Draft Project Administration Contributions Plan 2013.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

This draft plan will replace the current s94 Contribution Plan: Project Administration 2007. Under section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1979) (EP&A Act) and Part 4 of the Planning and Assessment Regulation (2000) (Regulation), Council is required to review its developer contributions plans regularly. As this plan was originally produced by Contributions Coordinator Bruce Potts, it is consistent with good practice and requirements under the Department of Planning and Infrastructure?s Developer Contributions Practice Notes ? July 2005, and therefore changes have been minor.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

The Draft Project Administration Contributions Plan 2013 differs from the previous plan in the following ways:

 

1??????? The contribution formula, which uses a calculation of the total cost of administration for contributions plans and the estimated total annual s.94 income based on the previous year, has indicated a need to increase the percentage levy of the contribution from 6% to 10%.

2??????? The addition of a section to enable the adjustment of contributions in line with CPI changes.

3??????? The addition of wording consistent with Council Policy - Section 94/64 Contributions (last reviewed in October 2010) on deferment of contribution payments.

 

Following approval of the draft by Council, the draft plan will be exhibited for 28 days. At the close of that consultation period, comments will be assessed and a report provided to Council for its consideration with recommendations for changes, if any, to be made to the draft plan. A final advertising period will notify the public of the Council?s endorsement, at which date the plan would come into effect.?

 

This contribution plan would be advertised at the same time as the Draft Upper Warrell Creek Road Contributions Plan.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Accountant

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

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

 

Social

 

There are no social issues associated with this report.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic issues associated with this report.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks associated with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no impact on the current budget of the Project Administration Fund. There will be an increased level of funds available over time to meet the costs already incurred against this account.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not required.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The Council?s schedule of Fees and Charges will require updating when the plan comes into effect. Council staff responsible for setting contributions required as a condition of consent will need to use the new set of charges.

 

Attachments:

1View

8736/2013 - DRAFT S94 CP Administration 2013 Council Report Version

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Draft Projects Administration Contribution Plan

 

Nambucca Shire Council????

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DRAFT

Developer Contribution Plan:

Project Administration

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


April 2013

?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes and Corrections to this Issue

 

Please note the following and corrections:

 

There are no corrections

 

Amendments and Revisions

 

Issue No

 

Date

Issue Title

Amendment

1

Aug 2007

Section 94 Contribution Plan: Project Administration

Reviewed April 2013

2

XXXXX

Public Exhibition Draft

 

3

XXXXX

Adopted

 

4

XXXXX

Commencement

 

 


Table of Contents

 

?????????? Introduction??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 4.

Text Box: PART A

A.1???????? Name of this contribution plan??????????????????????????????? ???? 5.

A.2???????? Purpose of this contribution plan????????????????????????????????????? ???? 5.

A.3???????? Land to which this contribution plan applies???????????? ???? 5.

A.4???????? Development to which this contribution plan applies ???? 6.

A.5???????? Relationship to other plans???????????????????????????????????? ???? 6.

A.6 ??????? Performance and review of this contribution plan????????????? ???? 6.

A.7???????? Adjustment of contributions??????????????????????????????????? ???? 6.

A.8???????? Date of commencement of the contribution plan?????????????? ???? 7.

A.9???????? Duration of the plan?????????????????????????????????????????????? ???? 7.

Text Box: PART  B

?? ?

B.1???????? Operation of the contribution plan?????????????????????????? ???? 8.

B.2???????? The contribution formula??????????????????????????????????????? ???? 8.

B.3???????? When contributions are payable???????????????????????????? ???? 9.

B.4???????? Exemptions and deferments????????????????????????????????? ???? 9.

 

Text Box: PART C

C.1???????? Nexus?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 10.

C.2???????? Causal nexus??????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 10.

C.3???????? Future growth?????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 11.

 

Text Box: PART D											?????????

D.1???????? Work schedule ????? and contribution rate?????????????????????????? ?????? 12.

Text Box: APPENDICES											????????????

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

???????????? Appendix A: List of Nambucca Council contributions plans????????? 13.

???????????? Appendix B: Map of contributions catchment????????????????????????????? 14.

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Draft Projects Administration Contribution Plan

 

INTRODUCTION

 

 

Section 94 Contributions ? Summary

 

Section 94 (S.94) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1979) is a legislative mechanism permitting a Council to recover costs associated with the provision of infrastructure, facilities and/or services required within the local community owing to intensified demand due to development that results in increased population.?

 

Increased population within an area intensifies demand on public infrastructure provided by Councils. Public infrastructure includes local roads and stormwater drainage, recreation and community facilities such as parks, community centres and libraries, and Council supported community service providers such as Surf Life Saving Associations and Emergency Services.

 

Section 94 guarantees that the provision of additional facilities to be provided is not borne disproportionately by Council and the existing community, by permitting Council to levy a contribution towards the part or full cost of facility provision on any development creating an intensification of demand.

 

The levy is incorporated within a Section 94 Contribution Plan, which authorises the collection of a levy for specified purposes, authorised within the Plan. The levy is calculated according to the demand generated, by either the number of new building lots being created in a subdivision, or the expected occupancy of the new lots. A contribution may be imposed on any form of development that creates additional demand including, residential, commercial, industrial and tourist development.

 

Additionally, the levy is calculated to provide protection to the development guaranteeing the costs of providing new facilities or infrastructure are equitably shared according to the development level.

 

There are significant legislative requirements and legal precedents governing plan preparation, management, monitoring and implementation. The contribution plans themselves require constant maintenance, including the detailed monitoring of development, financial management including calculation of contributions rates and expenditure priorities, indexation, reacting to legal precedent and formal review.

 

Council considers that costs involved with administrating the developer contributions system are an integral and essential component of the efficient and effective provision of public services and amenities within the Nambucca Local Government Area (LGA). Council therefore considers it reasonable that the expenses directly related to the administration of the S.94 contribution plans be recovered from developer contributions.

 

The calculation of contributions is determined from the cost of administration as a percentage of the total annual developer contributions received under the provisions of all contributions plans and development servicing plans in operation within the Nambucca LGA as explained in Part B of this plan. Council considers the recovery of this oncost to manage developer contributions to be reasonable.

 


PART A

 

 

A.1 Name of this contribution plan

 

This contribution plan is known as:

?

Nambucca Shire Council

Developer Contribution Plan: Project Administration

 

A.2 Purpose of this contribution plan

 

This plan is prepared in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

This legislation permits Council to place conditions to consents that can require persons, corporations or other organisations undertaking a specific development to make a monetary or in kind contribution, towards the provision of public infrastructure and community facilities that are identified as being required to meet the need of the community as a result of that development.

 

This contribution plan has the following aims and objectives:

 

? To determine an equitable and fair contribution rate for the administration of developer contribution plans.

 

? To recover the fair and reasonable direct costs incurred by Council in the development, assessment, administration, monitoring and review of the s.94 program.

 

? To ensure the existing community is not financially disadvantaged by the need to provide additional services for the administration of the s.94 program in the Council area.

 

? To formulate a comprehensive and definitive strategy for the assessment, collection, accounting, expenditure, reporting and review of developer contributions.

 

? To develop a mechanism to deliver the community a service or facility to an acceptable and appropriate level within a reasonable timeframe.

 

? To meet the requirements of the EP&A Act and Regulation.

 

A.3 Land to which this contribution plan applies

 

This contribution plan applies to all land within the Local Government Area of Nambucca Shire.

 

 


 

A.4? Development to which this contribution plan applies

 

This plan applies to all development occurring within the areas identified in (A.3) Land to which this Contribution Plan Applies, and which requires a Development application to be submitted to the Council, and which is subject to payment of developer contributions in accordance with any contributions plan approved by Nambucca Shire Council.

 

A.5 Relationship to other plans

?

This contribution plan supersedes:

Nambucca Shire Council s.94 Developer Contribution Plan: Project Administration 2007.

 

This plan incorporates the outstanding fund balance of the superseded plan current at the time of this plan?s introduction.

 

This contribution plan has been prepared in relationship to:

 

? Nambucca Shire Council LEP 2010

? Nambucca Shire Council Development Control Plan 2010

 

This contribution plan relates to all developer contribution plans currently adopted and in operation in the Nambucca LGA. These documents are indexed in Appendix 1.

 

 

A.6? Performance and review of this contribution plan

 

This contribution plan is based on specific assumptions concerning predicted levels of development and Council?s administrative costs. The performance of this plan, in meeting the objectives of:

 

? providing effective support for the administration of the S.94 program,

? meeting the needs of new development, and

? ensuring the income from contributions are providing effective and efficient administration of the S.94 program,

 

will require a regular process of review, which should be undertaken within five (5) years of commencement.

 

 

A.7 ????? Adjustment of contributions

 

To ensure that the values of the contributions are not eroded over time by movements in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), Council will amend the contribution rates annually from 1st July and increased according to the previous March Quarter CPI to allow for increases in the cost of provision of services. Contributions required as a condition of development consent will be adjusted at the time of payment in accordance with the latest CPI (All Groups ? Sydney) as published quarterly by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), using the following formula.


 

 

Contribution at the time of payment??????? =??????? C?????? x??????? CPI 2

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? CPI 1

 

Where:

 

C???? =??????? The original contribution amount as shown on the consent

CPI 2??????? =??????? The CPI Number (All Groups ? Sydney) currently available from the ????????????????????? ABS at the time of payment.

CPI 1??????? =??????? The CPI Number (All Groups ? Sydney) last published by the ABS ?????????????????????? at the time of coming into effect of the Plan, or subsequent ???????????????????????????????????? amendment of the plan.

 

A.8 ????? Date of commencement of this contribution plan

 

This contribution plan was adopted by Nambucca Shire Council on XXXX.

 

The notification of adoption was published in local newspapers on XXXX

 

This plan commences on, and is effective from XXXX.

 

This plan applies to all development applications determined on and after this date.

 

A.9 Duration of this contribution plan

 

The duration of this contribution plan is five (5) years from the date of commencement.

 

Services to be provided are described in Part D.1 Works Schedule.

 


PART B

 

 

B.1???? Operation of the contribution plan

 

In the determination of a development application, a condition may be imposed by Council requiring a monetary contribution according to the provisions of this contribution plan.

 

The plan applies to all development that will create a potential increase in demand for public amenities, infrastructure and services identified in Council?s developer contribution plans.

 

B.2???? The contribution formula

 

The contribution rate is calculated by determining the cost of administering S.94 plan preparation and accounting as a percentage of the total annual income from all development contributions.

 

Tca x t%

Contribution Rate (CR%)? = ??????? ????Tpi

 

Where: Tca = total cost of administration

Tpi = estimated total annual income derived from S94 contributions

???? CR = contribution rate, expressed as a percentage

???? Ca = administration contribution

 

Worked Example:

 

Tca - Total cost of administration for S94/yr. ??????????????????????????? = $19,730

 

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

Tpi ? Estimated total annual S94 income (based on actual income from previous year) ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? = 191,562

 

 

CR%? =??????? $19,730

$191,562

=?? 0.10

=?? 10%

 

Average weighted contribution?? = $6,869.00

Ca?????? = $6,869.00 x .10

????????????? = $686.90

 

Total S94 Contribution including administration levy ???????? = $6,869.00 + $686.90

?????????????????????????????????????????? = $7,555.90

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 


B.3???? When contributions are payable

 

? Where the contribution relates to development applications involving subdivision the contribution is payable prior to the release of the subdivision certificate.

 

? Where the contribution relates to development applications involving building approvals, the contribution is payable prior to release of the building construction certificate.

 

? Where the contribution relates to development applications where no building approval is required, the contribution is payable prior to occupation or use.

 

B.4???? Exemptions and deferments

 

There are no exemptions from this contribution plan.

 

Council will accept a deferred or periodic payment of contributions subject to the contribution being secured by bank guarantee and the deferment being no longer than 24 months. In such a case, the applicant must make a written request.

 

Council will require the applicant to provide a bank guarantee by a bank for the full amount of the contribution or the outstanding balance on the condition that:

 

1. indexing will be calculated from the date the contribution was due until the date of payment;

2. the bank guarantee be by a bank for the amount of the total contribution, or the amount of any outstanding contribution plus an amount equal to 25 months? interest plus any charges associated with establishing or operating the bank security;

3. the bank unconditionally pays the guaranteed sum to the Council if the Council so demands in writing not earlier than 24 months from the provision of the guarantee or completion of the work;

4. the bank must pay the guaranteed sum without reference to the applicant or landowner or other person who provided the guarantee, and without regard to any dispute, controversy, issue or other matter relating to the development consent or the carrying out of development;

5. the bank?s obligations are discharged when payment to the Council is made in accordance with this guarantee or when Council notifies the bank in writing that the guarantee is no longer required;

6. where a bank guarantee has been deposited with Council, the guarantee shall not be cancelled until such time as the original contribution and accrued interest has been paid;

7. the applicant will be charged an administrative fee based on the professional fees set in Council?s Revenue Policy; and

8. periodic payments for a staged development will be on a pro rata basis ? the proportion of the stage of the development in relation to the overall development.
PART C

 

 

C.1???? Nexus

 

The ongoing development and maintenance of Council?s S.94 contribution plans requires the direction of significant resources towards the program to ensure the continued relevance, accuracy and compliance in meeting the Legislative requirements of the Act and the needs and expectations of the community.

 

The ongoing provision of infrastructure and facilities under the S94 program is dependent on the sound administration and performance monitoring of Council?s S.94 Contribution Plans.

 

The legislative and administrative functions required to support and maintain the S.94 program include:

 

? Preparation, administration and review of planning and design studies.

? Development of contribution plans and attendant policy documentation.

? Review of contribution plans.

? Financial management and accounting of collection, scheduling and expenditure of contributions.

? Development of project and works schedules.

? Administration of works in kind agreements.

? Community consultation.

? Reporting and performance monitoring.

? Annual reporting.

 

Nambucca Shire Council has employed a Grants and Contributions Officer whose part-time role is to undertake these functional tasks and to ensure they are executed effectively. This position is accountable to the General Manager. The Contributions Officer is assisted in these tasks by Council?s Accountant.

 

The cost of managing the S.94 program for Council is apportioned as being 50% of the Grants and Contributions Officer?s salary and costs and 4% of the Accountant?s salary and costs, being a total of $19,730/pa.

 

C.2???? Causal nexus

 

Causal nexus requires the demonstration that the need of a facility or service being subject of the levy is a direct result of the subject development.

 

The development of a contribution plan places an obligation on Council to provide resources that can effectively manage, administer and monitor the performance of the plan.

 

Council further has an obligation to review, update and amend the contribution plans to guarantee and maintain the operational relevance of the program, and when necessary identify and prepare new contribution plans to meet the future needs of the community.

 

 

It is clearly demonstrated that the costs associated with the administration and management of the contribution plan program is directly related to the demands of development, and that this contribution plan is required to continue effective administration and management of the s.94 program.

 

C.3???? Future Growth

 

The Nambucca Shire continues to experience an uneven yet sustained population growth through increased residential and tourist oriented development.

 

Council has identified target areas where future growth is to occur and be subject to increased demand for public infrastructure, facilities and services. Given the current trends in new housing starts the areas of highest growth will continue to occur in close proximity to the coast and established town centres.

 

Established centres at Nambucca Heads and Macksville will retain strong growth and planned release areas north of Nambucca Heads will provide longer term residential and commercial development opportunities.

 

This contribution plan will levy residential development.

 


PART D

 

 

D.1 Work Schedule and Contribution Rate

 

Work Schedule

 

 

 

 

 

 

Item

Description

Cost over Life of Plan

%s.94

Date

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

Developer Contributions Officer, Accountant

 

 

 

$98,650

 

100

 

2013-2018

 

 

 

Contribution Rate

 

Item

Description

Rate %

Calculation

1

All Development

10%

Calculated on subtotal of payable contributions

 

?

 


??????

APPENDIX A

 

s.94 Developer Contribution Plans

 

The following Developer Contribution Plans are currently adopted in Nambucca Shire Council:

 

 

? Valla Beach Road Overbridge

 

? Mines and Extractive Industries Road Maintenance

 

? South Macksville Roadworks

 

? Scotts Head Road/Grassy Head Road Intersection Upgrade

 

? Bellwood Local Roads and Traffic Infrastructure

 

? Bald Hill Road

 

? Upper Warrell Creek Road Overbridge

 

? Hyland Park Road

 

? Community Facilities and Public Open Space

 

? Surf Life Saving Facilities

 

? Smiths Lane Local Roads and Traffic Infrastructure


?APPENDIX B

 

B.1?????? Map of Contribution Catchment


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.11?? SF1618??????????? 150513??????? DRAFT Community Strategic Plan 2022

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Colleen Henry, Grants and Contributions Officer; Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

This report presents the revised Community Strategic Plan 2023? (CSP) for Council?s consideration before being placed on public exhibition for 28 days. The Council is required to review and adopt a new Community Strategic Plan following an election in the previous year.

 

In preparing this revised version, submissions were sought from a range of government and non-government service providers in January 2013. Comments also were invited on the draft CSP for two weeks in late April/early May. The five submissions are presented in their entirety for Council?s consideration, as required under the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework process. All the community submissions were about antimony mining and Council?s responsibilities. Three of these submissions contained a great deal of information which should be considered by Council, but which cannot all be included in the Community Strategic Plan due to the nature of the document as a strategic planning framework.??

 

 

RecommendationS:

 

1??????? That Council note the submissions received as part of the first stage community consultation process and the range of recommendations associated with antimony mining and consider ways to address these submissions outside the process of adopting the Community Strategic Plan.

 

2??????? That Council approve the draft Community Strategic Plan 2023 for public exhibition from 17 May to 14 June 2013.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

That Council not approve the draft Community Strategic Plan 2022 and direct staff to make changes for future consideration by Council.

 

REPORT

 

Background

 

The Nambucca Shire Council Community Strategic Plan 2022 (CSP) was first adopted in October 2011. Under the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework, the CSP must be reviewed by a newly elected Council and completed by 30 June in the following year.

 

Consultation

In reviewing the CSP, the following government and non-government agencies were asked for input, specifically whether they had strategic plans which would affect the Nambucca Valley, and therefore should be included in the Nambucca Shire CSP. Their responses and staff comment are as follows:

?

Organisation

Input

Comment

NSW Police Force Mid North Coast Local Area Command (LAC)

The MNCLAC strategic plan encompasses crime and crime prevention in line with Police organisational directives.

Noted.

Roads and Maritime Services

Key concerns are safety and efficiency of road network, traffic management, infrastructure maintenance. Referral to long term transport master plan and various websites.

Cross checked with CSP to confirm alignment.

TAFE North Coast Institute

Organisation?s Charter provided.

Cross checked with CSP to confirm alignment.

Department of Education and Communities

Strategic plan and directions provided.

Cross checked with CSP to confirm alignment.

Mid North Coast Local Health Network

Strategic plan currently underway and final plan will be forwarded.

Plan not yet received.

Ambulance Services of NSW North Coast

No response received.

Noted.

NSW Rural Fire Services

Thanked Council for opportunity to be involved, however no input at this time.

Noted.

North Coast Emergency Management

No response received.

Noted.

Meals on Wheels

No response received.

Noted.

Coffs Harbour, Bellingen, Nambucca Community Transport

Provided copy of strategic plan for the organisation.

Cross-checked with CSP to confirm alignment.

Department of Planning and Infrastructure

No new strategic plans that should be considered.

Noted.

 

 

 

 

There were five respondents in the call for comments from the wider community in April/May. These are summarised below, and the full submissions are circularised.

 

Individual

Input

Comment

Georgette Allen

Support for Lock the Valley submission (see below); request for Council to reject future antimony mining due to environmental impacts.

Noted.

Mark O Caillan

Request for Council to reject future antimony mining due to environmental impacts.

Noted.

Tony Jacques

Need for the CSP to adequately incorporate the community?s position on mining, and an analysis of where mining operations are likely to conflict with the existing CSP strategies. Request that Council conduct an analysis of threats posed by mining activity, including completion of a risk management plan and other processes, define strategies to deal with the risks, engage with community members and groups to assist in the analysis and develop objectives, and finally, to consider and adopt a Council policy to oppose all mining in the Nambucca River catchment.

Noted. Reference to community opposition to antimony mining has been made in the Community Engagement Strategy section, and an additional measure has been incorporated in the Environmental Protection strategy (7.3), as well as incorporation of antimony mining as a trigger for a review of Council?s risk management plan (1.3).

Lock the Nambucca Valley

The CSP should recognise the community?s opposition to antimony mining; that specific changes be made to sections 1.3, 3.2, 3.3, 7.3, 7.4, 9 10 and 11 (see submission for full details), and that the Council form a committee or conduct a workshop to further discuss how reference to antimony mining should be addressed in the CSP.

Noted. Reference to community opposition to antimony mining has been included in Community Engagement Strategy section.

 

1.3 ? Risk management: Rejected. The risk management referred to in the CSP is related to Council?s business operations, not the wider community.

3.2 ? Clean water: Rejected. Nambucca drinking water comes from North Arm not Taylors Arm, which is the site of possible antimony mining; Council already monitors public drinking water as per Health Department regulations.

3.3 ? Personal Health and Wellbeing: Rejected. Outside the scope of the CSP; there are no stakeholders in the Nambucca Shire which could undertake research into the impacts of antimony mining on public health.

7.3 ? Environmental Protection: Agreed. An additional measure has been created relating to environmental impacts of mining. See Discussion section for inserted wording.

7.4 ? Biodiversity: Rejected. Assessment of impacts associated with large scale industrial developments is done through existing planning regulation; costs of assessment would not be able to be met by the Shire Council or any other Nambucca stakeholders.

9 ? Transport: Rejected. Too fine a detail for this level of planning, and impacts associated with large vehicles are already addressed in development contributions regime.

10 ? Dynamic Resilient Local Economy: Rejected. Too fine a detail for this level of planning; there are insufficient resources to conduct independent assessment of economic sustainability of antimony mining in the Shire by any stakeholders.

11 ? A Sustainable Water Supply: Rejected. Council?s adherence to Integrated Water Catchment Management is considered sufficient to address this concern. Also see reference to 3.2 above.

 

Rudy Van Drie

Proposes use of matrix to analyse appropriate and inappropriate land use as a way to guide development activity in the Shire, in addition to statutory planning requirements, which would be based on strong community input and clearly identify all constraints or conditions for a development. An example of layers of data which can be ?built? for the Shire and assist in the analysis, is provided as well as offer of assistance to develop the matrix and create an in-house flood modelling capability. Areas of the CSP which are lacking have also been identified: the importance of tourism, which relies on the natural environment, needs to recognised and protected; and the threat of mining to the natural environment needs to be recognised and addressed in the CSP.

Noted. The proposal for the development of a land use matrix is outside the bounds of the CSP review. This submission requires assessment and recommendations to Council by planning staff and should be subject to a separate process. In regard to the recommendation specific to the CSP, specifically that ?Council show it values and protects the natural environment above all? ? it is important that Council maintain its triple-bottom line approach to sustainability and considers environment, social and environmental aspects and not place environment above all. It is considered that the current wording in the CSP adequately addresses this, but this will be strengthened by adding a measure to section 7.3 related to antimony mining.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

The Community Strategic Plan is the highest level plan that a council will prepare. The purpose of the plan is to identify the community?s main priorities and aspirations for the future and to plan strategies for achieving these goals. In doing this, the planning process will consider the issues and pressures that may affect the community and the level of resources that will realistically be available to achieve its aims and aspirations. While a council has a custodial role in initiating, preparing and maintaining the Community Strategic Plan on behalf of the local government area, it is not wholly responsible for its implementation. Other partners, such as State agencies and community groups may also be engaged in delivering the long-term objectives of the plan.

 

No changes have been made to the CSP as a result of the government and organisation consultation in January. In regards to the community consultation, three of the five submissions were quite detailed and included suggestions that require consideration by Council outside the CSP review process. These submissions have requested further engagement with Council and with the wider community so that a Council policy can be developed which opposes all mining in the Nambucca River catchment. That process falls outside the scope of this report and it is suggested that Council consider whether they wish to progress such a policy.

 

Also, the submissions identified a range of activities (primary research, impact assessment and environmental monitoring through the use of independent consultants) which are not generally the responsibility of local government, but are also well outside the resources available to Council or to any other known stakeholders in the Nambucca Shire. So, although many of the ideas were well-argued and thought out, Council should not raise expectations that they could be achievable by including them in the CSP.

 

Text to be added to CSP

 

The revised Community Strategic Plan will appear as it was prepared originally in 2012, with the addition of the following text regarding antimony mining, as raised in the submissions:

 

Community Engagement Strategy

(Addition of the following:)

 

Stakeholder consultation, January 2013

Government and non-government organisations were asked for relevant strategic planning objectives for possible inclusion in the reviewed CSP.

 

Burrapine Community Forum, 28 March 2013?????????????????

Council conducted its Ordinary Meeting on 28 March at Burrapine Hall. The meeting commenced with a Community Forum. 20 residents attended and six addressed the Forum. Subjects included the impacts of antimony mining and the community?s opposition to future mining proposals in the Shire which would affect water, the environment and biodiversity as well as public health impacts; waste disposal services; Thumb Creek Bridge; road maintenance and lack of Council resources. Attendants were encouraged to make submissions to the CSP review.

 

First round public consultation, April 2013

Call for submissions for the review of the CSP 2022. Five submissions were received, all concerning antimony mining in Nambucca Shire. The CSP was modified in relevant sections and submitted for Council?s consideration at its meeting of 30 May 2013.

 

7.3 ? Environmental Protection

(Addition of the following:)

 

Measure ? Short term and long term impact assessments of mining, in particular antimony mining as part of any consideration of any development proposal.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The CSP includes a number of strategies which relate to the environment. All community comment received as a result of the first stage of consultation of the CSP focused on the potential damage to the environment which may be caused by antimony mining.

 

Social

 

The CSP includes a number of strategies which relate to the social sustainability.

 

Economic

 

The CSP includes a number of strategies which relate to the economic sustainability.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks associated with the public exhibition of the CSP.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

None.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not required.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

None.

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised document - Community Strategic Plan Review - Community Submission (Trim 11055/2013)

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

DRAFT Community Strategic Plan 2022

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

DRAFT Community Strategic Plan 2022

 

 

 

Circularised document - Community Strategic Plan Review - Community Submission (Trim 11055/2013)

 

??Pages

 


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.12?? SF1620??????????? 150513??????? Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework - 2013/14 TO 2016/17

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Peter Wilson, Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services; Craig Doolan, Manager Financial Services; Colleen Henry, Grants and Contributions Officer ????????

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is to approve the Draft 2013/2017 Delivery Program and Operational Plan to be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days (copy circularised).

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.?????? That Council adopt the Draft 2013/2017 Delivery Program and Operational Plan to go on public exhibition.

 

2.?????? That Council note that the draft documents will be placed on public exhibition for a 28 day period from Friday 17 May 2013 until close of business on Friday 14 June 2013 and the community will be encouraged to provide feedback on the documents during that time.

 

3.?????? That the draft documents be placed in the Branch Libraries and Administration Building for viewing during the exhibition period.

 

4.?????? That a public meeting, to brief the community on the Draft Delivery Program and Operational Plan, be held on the evening of Wednesday 22 May 2013 and that this be advertised.?

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

It is a statutory requirement that the Draft Delivery program, Operational Plan, Fees and Charges be placed on public exhibition for 28 days and be adopted prior to 30 June.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework was introduced in 2009 and was developed as part of the Local Government Reform Program. It introduced changes to the NSW Local Government Act 1993 to improve council?s long term community, financial and asset planning.

 

The Framework opens the way for councils to identify and plan for funding priorities and service levels in consultation with their community, while preserving local identity and planning for a more sustainable future.

 

Council elected to be a ?Group 3? Council in relation to the implementation of the framework, which required adoption by 30 June 2012.

 

The IP& R Framework is made up of the following plans:

????? A Community Strategic Plan (CSP) covering at least 10 years;

????? A Council Delivery Plan (DP) covering 4 years;

????? A one-year Council Operational Plan (OP) including a budget, revenue policy and fees and chages;

These plans are supported and informed by a Resourcing Strategy made up of:

????? A Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) covering at least 10 years;

????? An Asset Management Strategy covering at least 10 years; and

????? A Workforce Management Plan (WMP) covering at least 4 years.


 

The Community Strategic Plan is a 10 year plan that identifies the main priorities and aspirations for the future of the Nambucca Shire local government area. It is the primary document within the IP&R Framework.

 

The Delivery Program details the principal activities to be undertaken by Council to implement the strategies established by the CSP within the resources available under the Resourcing Strategy. Whilst it is essentially a four year plan that is aligned to the term of the new Council, it must still be reviewed each year when preparing the Operational Plan.

 

Council is required to develop a schedule of fees and charges each year as part of the Revenue policy within the Operational Plan. In determining the appropriate level of fees to be charged, a range of issues are considered such as what is fair and equitable, and how much the service costs to provide.

 

As part of the Resourcing Strategy, Council has developed a 10 year Long Term Financial Plan which is used to inform decision making and must be updated annually as part of the development of the Operational Plan. The update of the LTFP will therefore be completed by 30 June 2013.?

 

A major review of the IP&R Framework is required following the election of a new council (September 2012). Principally, Council has to review the Community Strategic Plan, the Delivery Program and the Long Term Financial Plan. The revised draft Community Strategic Plan and Delivery Program/Operational Plan have to be placed on public exhibition for 28 days.

 

Separate reports on the review of the CSP and the Draft 2013/2014 Revenue Policy (Fees and Charges) have been prepared for council?s consideration.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Consultation for the review of the Community Strategic Plan 2023 has been carried out. The engagement process sought input from the community via submissions and a community forum, government and non-government agencies and staff.

 

The documents will be placed on public exhibition from Friday 17 May 2013 to Friday 14 June 2013. The documents can be accessed on the Council?s website and printed copies will also be available for inspection at the Administration Building and Branch Libraries.

 

A public meeting to brief the community on the Plans will be held in May.

 

An Information For Ratepayers Sheet will also be published outlining the rates and charges proposed for the 2013/2014 rating year.

 

The public exhibition period will provide further opportunity for stakeholders to make comment on the community strategic direction.

 

All submissions received will be considered prior to the adoption of the final suite of documents on 27 June 2013.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

The IP&R Framework arises from state wide planning reforms that are based on sustainability principles and each component addresses social, environmental, economic and civic leadership issues.

 

Environment

 

The draft documents include a number of strategies to assist and contribute to the environmental sustainability of the Nambucca Shire.

 

Social

 

The public exhibition process will assist community engagement in the finalisation of the IP&R Framework. Consistent with the ongoing intent of the Nambucca Shire Council Community Strategic Plan 2023, the draft documents include a range of strategies to enhance the social development of the shire.

 

Economic

 

The IP&R Framework enables a number of strategies aimed at assisting and contributing to the economic development of the shire.

 

Risk

 

Failure to adopt a reviewed Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan by 30 June 2013 would contravene legislative requirements.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

The documents included in this report detail Council?s financial position over the medium term of 5 years and should be referred to when making decisions in relation to the allocation of council?s limited financial resources.

 

TCorp has developed a definition of financial sustainability being:

 

A local government will be financially sustainable over the long term when it is able to generate sufficient funds to provide the levels of service and infrastructure agreed with its community.

 

The definition takes into account the effect ongoing change could have on a Council?s operating position and service levels over the long term. The definition brings together what TCorp considers are the key elements of financial strength, service and infrastructure requirements, and needs of the community. TCorp considers that this definition is concise enough to be remembered, whilst broad enough to cover the key aspects.

 

TCorp?s report into the Financial Sustainability of the NSW Local Government Sector (April 2013) assessed Nambucca Shire Council as having a WEAK Financial Sustainability Rating (FSR) and assigned a NEGATIVE outlook

 

For Councils assigned a Negative Outlook, TCorp provided some recommendations and areas of

investigations to assist in improving the sustainability position. The recommendations include:

-???? The need to source additional revenue, such as under an SRV, to improve financial flexibility

and to assist in reducing the Infrastructure Backlog

-???? For Councils with the borrowing capacity, consider using debt funding to reduce the

Infrastructure Backlog and improve intergenerational equity

-???? Devising programs and strategies to contain rising costs and improve efficiencies

-???? Further improvement required in AMPs and integration into the Long Term Financial Plan

(LTFP)

-???? Increasing spending on maintenance and infrastructure renewal, balancing this with the need

for capital expenditure on new assets

?

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

A summary of the four year budget covered by the delivery program is as follows:


 

Year

General Fund Budget Estimates ? Surplus/(Deficit) $

2013/2014

(28,800) Deficit

2014/2015

(2,224,600) Deficit

2015/2016

(1,455,200) Deficit

2016/2017

(1,813,500) Deficit

2017/2018

(1,813,500) Deficit

Total

(7,088,200) Deficit

 

The financial information presented in the draft plan highlights the vulnerability of Council?s General Fund position in the medium to long term. This has previously been highlighted by the Manager Financial Services in a report back in June 2012.

 

?The proposed 2013/2014 capital works program totals $31.8million. Some of the major items in the works program include:

 

Off-Stream Water Storage - $24.0m

Roads/Streets Rehabilitation/Resealing - $2.5m

Bridge Construction - $1.5m

Sewerage Works South Macksville - $0.75m

Stormwater and K&G Reconstruction/Augmentation - $0.2m

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

?

The 2013/2014 consolidated budget forecasts an overall deficit of $25,000. This compares with a $3,000 consolidated surplus in the 2012/2013 original budget.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

No implications identified.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1View

?- Circularised Document - Draft Delivery Program and OPerations Plan (Trim 11235/2013)

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 15 May 2013

Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework - 2013/14 TO 2016/17

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework - 2013/14 TO 2016/17

 

 

 

Circularised Document - Draft Delivery Program and OPerations Plan (Trim 11235/2013)

 

??Pages

 

?


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.1?? SF97??????????????? 150513??????? Review of Alcohol Free Zone in Bowraville CBD

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The Alcohol Free Zone (AFZ) in and around High Street Bowraville concludes on 1 June 2013.

 

Whilst there are no provisions to simply extend the life of the Zone, it could be re-established following a review if the outcome was that the AFZ is still necessary.

 

This report is to advise Council that a review of the AFZ has been conducted, and the conclusion is that the Zone continues to achieve its aim and has improved the community?s perception of safety in this area.

 

It is proposed that the Alcohol Free Zone be re-established with a small extension of the boundary to incorporate the eastern boundary of Bowraville Central School, for the maximum period being 4 years.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council establishes an Alcohol Free Zone under Section 644 of the Local Government Act in the business precinct of Bowraville; described as High Street from its intersection with Young Street to its intersection with Bowra Street; Cook Street for the section between Young Street and the T intersection with Belmore/Conen Streets; and Belmore Street to its intersections with Adam Lane and Cook Street.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1????????? Re-establish the Alcohol Free Zone with the current or a different boundary.

2????????? Not re-establish the Zone.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

In brief, an Alcohol Free Zone is a designated area in which the consumption of alcohol is prohibited 7 days a week, 24 hours a day.? If you are observed drinking in the AFZ you may be warned and/or have the liquor tipped out. AFZ?s apply to public roads, footpaths, car parks and are enforced by the Police. They are established under Section 644 to 644C of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

In 2009 Council established an Alcohol Free Zone in and around the central business area of Bowraville following substantial community support.? AFZs can be established for only 4 years and therefore the Zone will conclude 1 June 2013.

 

There are no provisions for Council to just extend an Alcohol Free Zone, however it could be re-established following a review of the Zone?s impact on the community. To assess this, Council should consider the effectiveness of the Zone in reducing unacceptable street drinking and anti-social behaviour, and in improving community safety. Following that, Council may re-establish the Zone as it currently stands, establish a Zone with a new boundary or not re-establish the Zone at all.

 

This report supports re-establishment of the current AFZ with an extension to its boundary.?

 

Whilst AFZs are designed to be a short-term solution to street drinking, there is evidence to support the re-establishment of this AFZ based on community feedback, although its success is difficult to show statistically. A direction by Police for someone to cease drinking in the AFZ would not usually be recorded in the Police statistics, as the intention of the AFZ is to discourage street drinking whilst taking a minimum of Police resources. Therefore it could be argued that the success of an AFZ may be measured by the lack of statistics.

 

For the most part, the evidence that the Bowraville AFZ has worked has come from the community during the 4 years of the Zone?s operation.? The submissions received during the review provide further evidence and the conclusion is that Council should re-establish the AFZ with a change to the eastern boundary as shown below.?

 

 

X Shows previous eastern boundary

 

CONSULTATION:

 

During a period of community consultation which closed 5 April 2013, letters were sent to licensed premises and key community organisations.? The Police has also been consulted.? The review was advertised in the Guardian News, on Council?s Website, at the Council Administration Centre and in the Bowraville Newsletter. Six (6) submissions were received as follows:

 

1.?? Maureen Gallagher

 

Council should definitely consider re-establishing the Alcohol Free Zone in Bowraville, even extending the boundaries, in particular the section of Bowra Street which joins Adam Street, and along Adam Street both ways.

 

Being a resident of Bowraville and living on the corner of Adam and Bowra Streets, I would like to see the continuation, and above extension happen.? There are quite often beer or alcoholic drink cans on the grass verge , and one example of drunkenness springs to mind;  last year I was woken about midnight by  a group of teenagers (and younger) sitting on the corner grass verge drinking &  behaving in an intoxicated manner ? they moved on along Adam Street when I put the verandah lights on.   This is not acceptable behaviour.

 

I would urge Council to keep the AFZ going, and make sure that it is policed properly.

 

2.?? Bowraville Arts Council

 

The members of the Bowraville Arts Council on balance believe the Alcohol Free Zone has resulted in improved behaviour in the town centre.? This is a general ?impression? with no statistical basis and continuation of the zone as it stands is supported.

3.?? Bowraville Central School (from Malcolm McFarlane Principal)

 

 

4.?? Shane Welsh, Manager Bowraville Hotel

 

As the Manager of the Bowra Hotel I am in full support of the continuation of the current Alcohol Free Zone in Bowraville beyond June 2013.? There has been a vast improvement in the safety of patrons and the community in general with the AFZ?s in place.

 

5.?? Bowraville Technology Centre

 

The Bowraville Technology Centre was a supporter of the original move to establish the alcohol free zone and continues to support it and its continuation.

 

We have seen a marked reduction in alcohol related incidents around our location at 39 High St since this zone was introduced.  We have also seen a marked drop in incidents where people using our Centrelink Access facilities have been under the influence of alcohol and have been abusive or threatening to our staff and volunteers. 

 

We do continue to see evidence of street drinking and urge the police to continue their monitoring of that.  While the area around the IGA corner is still a favourite meeting place it no longer is also a favourite drinking spot.  The bench outside our premises is often littered with left over bottles which would indicate people still drink in the vicinity.  Our front door glass was broken about 12 months ago by a beer bottle thrown at it during the evening.  Unfortunately the offender was out of sight of the BCU monitoring cameras so we were not able to pursue the matter.

 

Our community based board strongly supports the continuation of the zone.

 

6.?? Inspector Matt Webb, Nambucca Heads - Mid North Coast Local Area Command

 

In relation to the current alcohol free zones in Bowraville. Although I have not been in this area area for an extended period of time, I can confirm that complaints of persons consuming alcohol in the alcohol free zones has been minimal during this time. This is certainly not to say that they have not been effect, but quite the contrary. This is supported by police who have worked in the area for sometime, who confirm that the introduction of the AFZ's certainly saw a reduction in public drinking and anti-social behaviour within the said zones. Through the relevant enforcement of this legislation police have been able to reduce the public complaints of drinking in the town and still do enforce this legislation when breaches of the legislation are detected. For this reason, to allow for police to continue to assist in maintaining the order of the town, I strongly urge the AFZ's to remain in force for another period of the maximum time permissible within the legislation.

 

In relation to extending the Zone beyond the boundaries of the school as required. I strongly support this move. Young persons of that age need not be exposed to this behaviour and the influences that it promotes and displays.

 

Again, as the Inspector in charge of the Nambucca Valley Cluster I strongly supported the continuation of the AFZ's in Bowraville and the extension of the Zones to include the boundaries of the school.

 

Conclusions:

 

1????????? There is community evidence that the existing AFZ has worked and should be re-established for a period of 4 years from June 2013.

2????????? Whilst AFZ?s can been applied to residential streets, the intent is to prevent street drinking ? particularly around licensed premises and places where the general public congregate.? Councils are discouraged from applying the provisions of AFZ?s too broadly as they can lose their importance.? That said, people who experience anti-social behaviour, malicious damage, vandalism etc resulting from alcohol consumption are encourage to report it via the Police Assistance Line (131 444) so that occurrences can be recorded and the statistics called upon to support any future changes to the AFZ.?

3????????? The existing western, southern and northern extents of the boundary of the AFZ should remain with the addition of the Cook Street along the eastern boundary of Bowraville Central School as shown above.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Considerations for the environment are reduced littering and broken glass.

 

Social

 

Improved amenity and perception of safety.

 

Economic

 

One of the aims of an AFZ for this area is an improved town social environment where people will feel comfortable shopping, dining and conducting business.

 

Risk

 

There may be reduced exposure for Council as a result of anti-social and violent behaviour.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

This report recommends a minor change to the AFZ boundary to cover the area of Cook Street along the eastern boundary of Bowraville Central School.?

 

A small amount of funds are needed to cover changing the dates on existing signs and purchase of approximately 5 new signs and posts.? (Relocation of existing signs may be possible, depending on their exact location.)? These items would be covered by the existing signs budget.?

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required.?

 


Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The Signs Maintenance Officer will be required to apply new dates to existing signs and erect and/or relocate up to 5 new/existing signs to cover the new area in Cook Street behind the School.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.2?? SF1822??????????? 150513??????? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 26 March 2013 and Annual Confirmation of Committee

 

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

 

Summary:

 

Attached for Council?s information and endorsement are the minutes from the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 26 March 2013.

 

The minutes contain a recommendation regarding the annual confirmation of the Committee which require Council?s endorsement.? In addition, the following recommendations are listed:

 

1.?? That meeting times and dates of the Access Committee continue to be the 4th Tuesday of the month at 2:00 pm.

 

2.?? That Woolworths Macksville Store Manager be invited to the next meeting to discuss access issues.

 

3.?? That Nambucca Shire Council Assistant General Manager - Engineering Services be invited to the next Access Committee meeting to discuss proposed footpath works in the next budget.

 

4.?? That the matters arising from the minutes of the 26 February 2013 Access Committee meeting be noted and that a letter of thanks be sent to the relevant Council staff for their work on the Foodworks car park.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.?? That Council endorse the office bearers and members of the Access Committee listed as follows: Chairperson: Shirley Holmes, Deputy Chair: Cr Elaine South; and Committee Members: Peter Shales, Margaret Hutchinson, Keith Davis, Cr Anne Smyth, Dr Dorothy Secomb, Les Small, Lee-anne Funnell, Alba Sky, Lyndel Bosman (Guide Dogs) and Jenny Adams.

 

2.?? That a letter of thanks be sent to relevant Council staff on behalf of the Access Committee, to thank them for the work done to create a disability car parking space in Foodworks car park which used by people who have roof-mounted mobility devices.

 

3.?? That the remaining minutes be endorsed.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option of not endorsing the minutes.?

 

DISCUSSION:

 

It is the author?s view that a formal resolution of Council is not required to invite people to attend an Access Committee as this is covered by the Committee?s constitution/terms of reference.?

 

In regard to meeting times, this has previously been endorsed by Council as the Committee has conducted its meeting at the same time since its inception.?

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nothing required.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Nothing identified

 

Social

 

Nothing identified

 

Economic

 

Nothing identified

 

Risk

 

Nothing identified

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nothing required

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The Manager Community and Cultural Services currently attends Access Committee meetings, prepares the business paper and does most of the follow-up actions resulting from meetings.? Preparation of the minutes in lieu of a Secretary for the coming year is not a significant addition to that workload.


 

PRESENT????????????????????

 

Cr Elaine South (Chairperson)

Mrs Fiona Henwood

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Mrs Shirley Holmes

Cr Anne Smyth

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Mr Keith Davis

Ms Alba Sky

Miss Lee-Anne Funnell

Mr Les Small

 

APOLOGIES

 

Mr Peter Shales

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

 

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

 

ITEM 3.1???? SF1822????????????? 260313???? Annual Confirmation of Committee and Election of Officer Bearers

Recommendation: (Holmes/davis)

 

That Council endorse the office bearers and members of the Access Committee listed as follows: Chairperson: Shirley Holmes, Deputy Chair: Cr Elaine South; and Committee Members: Peter Shales, Margaret Hutchinson, Keith Davis, Cr Anne Smyth, Dr Dorothy Secomb, Les Small, Lee-anne Funnell, Alba Sky, and Jenny Adams.

 

Note:? As Mrs Henwood will be on leave for the next 12 months or so, Ms Coral Hutchinson will provide secretarial assistance to the Committee. ?Mrs Henwood will be replaced by a Guide Dogs colleague.

 

Recommendation: (secomb/Holmes)

 

That meeting times and dates of the Access Committee continue to be the 4th Tuesday of the month at 2:00 pm.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.2???? SF1822????????????? 260313???? Confirmation of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting held 26 February 2013

Recommendation:

 

That the Committee confirm the minutes of the meeting held 26 February 2013.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.3???? SF1822????????????? 260313???? Report on Business Arising from the Previous Meeting held 26 February 2013

Recommendation: (davis/henwood)

 

That the matters arising from the minutes of the 26 February 2013 Access Committee meeting be noted and that a letter of thanks be sent to the relevant Council staff for their work on the Foodworks car park.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

1.          A picture of the Foodworks car park was circulated to outline the reconfiguration of parking to allow access to the accessible toilet and use by roof-top mounted wheelchairs.

 

2??????? YMCA Dive In and Help Out / Australia?s biggest swim was discussed.? Jenny Adams spoke to the committee about the equipment they are fundraising for. They are looking at getting a hoist to help people get in and out of the pool ? this will also assist people with an injury.? They are also looking at getting a second water wheelchair as there is demand for another.? The funding may also come from the Swimathon, Ex-Services Club and other areas.? To be discussed at future meetings.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.4???? SF1822????????????? 260313???? Report on Correspondence to Access Committee meeting 26 March 2013

Recommendation:

 

The correspondence was noted.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.5???? SF1822????????????? 260313???? Report on General Business to Access Committee meeting 26 March 2013

DISCUSSION:

 

The following matters were raised by members and discussed:

 

  1. Woolworths Macksville toilets should be available to customers, but Shirley Holmes was recently refused entry to the toilets by Woolworths staff.
  2. Hyland Park footpaths ? there is a section of Eggleton St / Julie Anne Cl that has no footpath and school children have to walk on the road in this section to get to the bus stop.
  3. Wellington Drive ? uneven footpath slabs and palm tree fronds on the path.
  4. Lack of seating in Bowra St, Nambucca Heads on the western side of the street.? Also discussion on contacting taxis in this area.
  5. Exercise Hub ? Macksville site progressing well and Nambucca will be looked at in the future.

6.?? Members were pleased that the crossing in front of the CWA is being fixed.

 

Recommendation: (smyth/davis)

 

That Woolworths Macksville Store Manager be invited to the next meeting to discuss access issues.

 

Recommendation: (smyth/funnell)

 

That Nambucca Shire Council Assistant General Manager - Engineering Services be invited to the next Access Committee meeting to discuss proposed footpath works in the next budget.

??? NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday 23 April 2013 commencing at 2.00 pm.

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting the time being 3.25 pm.?

 

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

(CHAIRPERSON)

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.3?? SF1771??????????? 150513??????? Investment Report to 30 April 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Faye Hawthorne, Accountant; Craig Doolan, Manager Financial Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

The return on investments from 1 July 2012 to 30 April 2013 is $1,267,494 (Cash Result)

Estimated Accrual interest up to 30.6.13 is $828,565.

Anticipated interest return for financial year is $2,096,059.

 

The budget allocation for the financial year ?2012/13? is $1,825,600.

 

Council currently has $45.362 Million invested:

????? $7.110 Million with Managed Funds,

????? $37.757 Million on term deposits,

????? $0.495 Million in a Floating Rate Note.

 

This report details all the investments placed during April and Council funds invested as at 30 April 2013.

 

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 30 April 2013 be noted.

 

 

 

 

INVESTMENTS MATURED & INTEREST & RETURNS 1 TO 30 APRIL? 2013

 

 

 

 

 

Term Deposits/Bank Bills

 

Institution

?Amount

Period (Days)

Rate

?Interest

 

 

 

 

Bank of Qld

?$700,000.00

301

5.05%

?$29,151.64

 

 

 

 

IMB

?$823,400.33

89

4.30%

?$8,633.30

 

 

 

 

NAB

?$1,065,431.09

273

5.12%

?$40,800.47

 

 

 

ANZ

?$1,000,000.00

153

4.65%

?$19,491.78

 

 

 

 

Managed Funds/On Call

Institution

Amount

Period (Days)

Performance for Month

Returns This Month

Annualised Performance FYTD

Returns FYTD

 

UBS Wealth M'ment Aust Ltd

?$201,260.06

30

0.53%

?$1,392.75

0.82%

?$1,646.47

 

ANZ (On call)

?$1,494,098.44

30

0.28%

?$4,112.77

2.71%

?$35,597.70

 

ANZ (Business Online Saver)

?$4,000,000.00

30

0.00%

$??? -??

0.00%

?$?? -??

 

Macquarie Global Income Opportunities Fund

?$3,815,580.23

30

0.76%

?$28,811.82

8.00%

?$295,291.64

 

 

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

?$1,126,981.15

30

2.38%

?$26,159.38

? 115,765.16

N/A

17.01%

Averon II*

?$472,400.00

30

-4.72%

-$23,400.00

-$27,600.00

?$28,396.10

10.77%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Floating Rate Term Deposits/Notes

 

 

 

 

 

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

ING

?$495,240.00

30

0.00%

-$ 7,355.00

-$7,355.00

?$?????? 24,509.85

0.00%

Investec Bank

?$1,000,000.00

30

6.40%

?$16,657.53

?$16,657.53

$?? -??

0.00%

 

INVESTMENTS HELD AT 30 APRIL 2013

 

Institution

 

?Amount

?Date Invested

Period (Days)

Maturity Date

Interest for month

Interest

?Interest Due at maturity

BCCU - No 1

A2

$580,497.92

09/08/12

273

09/05/13

2,442.86

5.12%

?$22,230.05

BCCU - No 2

A2

$723,112.14

27/05/12

365

27/05/13

3,922.64

6.60%

?$47,725.40

IMB - No 1

A2

$1,076,643.61

07/02/13

147

04/07/13

3,628.14

4.10%

?$17,777.89

IMB - No 3

A2

$832,033.63

16/04/13

359

10/04/14

2,838.03

4.15%

?$33,961.79

Bank of Qld - No 1

BBB+

$1,044,776.94

07/02/13

182

08/08/13

3,778.37

4.40%

?$22,922.12

Bank of Qld - No 2

BBB+

$729,151.64

11/04/13

203

31/10/13

2,666.90

4.45%

?$18,046.00

Bank of Qld - No 3

BBB+

$1,000,000.00

16/04/13

177

10/10/13

3,698.63

4.50%

?$21,821.92

Bank of Qld - No 4

BBB+

$1,000,000.00

16/04/13

1457

12/04/17

4,027.40

4.90%

?$195,597.26

ME Bank

BBB+

$642,978.22

31/01/13

145

25/06/13

2,272.44

4.30%

?$10,983.48

NAB - No 2

AA-

$1,000,000.00

06/02/13

85

02/05/13

3,509.59

4.27%

? 9,943.84

NAB - No 3

AA-

$1,072,443.58

05/07/11

731

05/07/13

5,694.23

6.46%

?$138,749.52

NAB - No 4

AA-

$1,243,529.51

07/03/13

728

05/03/15

4,599.36

4.50%

?$111,611.03

NAB - No 5

AA-

$863,976.53

18/12/12

366

19/12/13

3,223.93

4.54%

?$39,332.00

NAB - No 6

AA-

$1,173,486.09

13/12/12

182

13/06/13

4,398.16

4.56%

?$26,682.18

NAB - No 7

AA-

$1,106,231.56

18/04/13

182

17/10/13

3,964.25

4.36%

?$24,049.78

NAB - No 8

AA-

$800,000.00

20/12/12

203

11/07/13

2,985.21

4.54%

?$20,199.89

NAB - No 9

AA-

$1,000,000.00

16/04/13

212

14/11/13

3,575.34

4.35%

?$25,265.75

AMP(CPG) - No 2

A

$1,000,000.00

10/01/13

365

10/01/14

3,698.63

4.50%

?$45,000.00

AMP(CPG) - No 3

A

$500,000.00

09/09/12

366

09/09/13

2,465.75

6.00%

?$30,082.19

AMP(CPG) - No 3

A

$500,000.00

09/09/12

366

09/09/13

2,465.75

6.00%

?$30,082.19

AMP(CPG) - No 4

A

$1,000,000.00

07/12/12

550

10/06/14

3,698.63

4.50%

?$67,808.22

ING Bank (Aust) Ltd -No.4

A

$1,028,997.26

21/02/13

364

20/02/14

3,619.82

4.28%

?$43,920.42

Rabobank(Aust)-No.1

AA

$500,000.00

23/04/12

1827

24/04/17

2,630.14

6.40%

?$160,175.34

Rabobank(Aust)-No.2

AA

$1,000,000.00

30/03/13

365

30/03/14

5,876.71

7.15%

?$71,500.00

Rabobank(Aust)-No.3

AA

$500,000.00

25/11/11

1827

25/11/16

2,547.95

6.20%

?$155,169.86

Rabobank(Aust)-No.4

AA

$1,000,000.00

07/09/12

286

20/06/13

4,109.59

5.00%

?$39,178.08

Rabobank(Aust)-No.5

AA

$1,000,000.00

18/04/13

230

04/12/13

3,616.44

4.40%

?$27,726.03

Rabobank(Aust)-No.6

AA

$1,000,000.00

18/04/13

335

19/03/14

3,616.44

4.40%

?$40,383.56

Rural Bank

A-

$1,019,369.86

24/01/13

119

23/05/13

3,611.08

4.31%

?$14,323.96

ANZ

AA

$1,000,000.00

20/06/12

372

27/06/13

3,569.43

5.00%

?$50,958.90

ANZ (Coffs Harbour)

AA

$1,019,491.78

24/04/13

153

24/09/13

3,678.55

4.39%

?$18,760.60

Westpac(Coffs Harbour)

AA-

$1,000,000.00

17/04/13

70

26/06/13

3,328.77

4.05%

?$7,767.12

Westpac(Coffs Harbour)

AA-

$1,000,000.00

17/04/13

239

12/12/13

3,468.49

4.22%

?$27,632.33

ING Bank (Aust) Ltd -No 1

A

$500,000.00

09/01/13

181

09/07/13

1,857.53

4.52%

?$11,207.12

ING Bank (Aust) Ltd No 2

A

$1,500,000.00

12/12/12

1464

15/12/16

7,779.45

6.31%

?$379,637.26

ING Bank (Aust) Ltd -No 4

A

$800,000.00

27/03/13

183

26/09/13

2,958.90

4.50%

?$18,049.32

Investec Bank Australia

BBB-

$1,000,000.00

26/02/13

89

26/05/13

4,093.15

4.98%

?$12,143.01

ING Bank (Aust) Ltd No 3

A

$495,240.00

26/04/12

1426

22/03/16

2,706.86

6.65%

?$128,666.07

ANZ (On Call)

At call

$1,494,098.44

31/03/13

30

30/04/13

4,112.77

3.25%

?$3,991.08

ANZ (Business Online Saver)

At call

$4,000,000.00

17/04/13

13

30/04/13

0.00

4.30%

?$6,126.03

Macquarie Global Income Opport.Fund

A

$3,815,580.23

31/03/13

30

30/04/13

28,811.82

3.00%

?$9,408.28

UBS Wealth? Aust Ltd

At Call

$201,260.06

31/03/13

30

30/04/13

1,392.75

2.10%

?$347.38

NSW Treasury Corp

A

$1,126,981.15

31/03/13

30

30/04/13

26,159.38

0.00%

?$?? -??

Averon II

A

$472,400.00

31/03/13

30

30/04/13

-23,400.00

0.00%

?$?? -??

TOTAL

 

?$45,362,280.15

 

 

 

?$173,700.26

 

?$2,186,944.25

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

This report is for information only.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

This report details all the investments placed during April 2013 and Council funds invested as at April 2013.

 

 

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 2012/2013 based on current performance.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

A review of budgeted interest returns for 2012/2013 will be completed with the March 2013 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 2013 Budget Review.  Variances will be distributed between the Water, Sewerage and General Funds for the third quarter of the financial year.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Not applicable

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.4?? T001/2013??????? 150513??????? Tender for Audit Services

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Faye Hawthorne, Accountant; Craig Doolan, Manager Financial Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

The contract with Council?s current auditors, Forsyths, terminates on 30 June 2013. Pursuant to Section 422 (5) ?an auditor may not be appointed unless tenders for the appointment have been called.?

 

Tenders have now been invited for Council?s audit services.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note tenders have been invited for Audit Services for the six years commencing 1 July 2013.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The report is for information only.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

In accordance with Sections 422 & 424 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council must appoint an Auditor for period of six (6) years.

 

The contract with Council?s current auditors, Forsyths, terminates on 30/6/13. Pursuant to Section 422 (5), ?an auditor may not be appointed unless tenders for the appointment have been called?.

 

Advice from the Department of Local Government confirmed that the previous mentioned clause also covers re-appointment after an auditor has held office for six (6) years.

 

It is therefore appropriate now to invite tenders for the appointment of Council?s auditor for a period of six (6) years commencing 1/7/13.

 

The Tender Specifications have been completed and are available for inspection upon request.

 

Advertisements will be placed in the Nambucca Guardian News and Sydney Morning Herald calling for tenders to be received by 6 June 2013.

 

Council will be advised of the assessment process upon closure of tenders with an appointment to be made by the end of June.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

No consultation is necessary.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental implications.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

That the cost of Audit Services not be provided for in the annual budget.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The cost of Audit Services is provided for in the annual budget.? There may need to be additional funds provided after the finalisation of the audit tender.

?

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Any additional expenses will be a variance to working funds each year.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Not applicable.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 15 May 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.5?? DA2010/004???? 150513??????? Re-reporting Modification to DA2010/004 to remove requirement to construct footpath and cycleway

 

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

 

Summary:

 

On 10 April 2013 Council conducted a site inspection in relation to an application for a proposed Modification to Consent DA2010/004. It was resolved to defer the matter to the meeting of 15 May 2013 to allow the applicant time to return from overseas and address Council. The content of the report and recommendation submitted for the agenda of 10 April 2013 remains unchanged.

 

In 2010 a subdivision was approved for a 13 (thirteen) Lot Residential subdivision which will form part of the Ocean Waves Estate in Valla Beach. Consent DA2010/004 was issued on 3 May 2010 and part of condition 4 of this consent requires the provision of a footpath and cycleway to link Seaforth Drive to Ocean View Drive.? The requirement was placed on the consent by Council?s town planning staff at the time and was in response to the relocation of the public open space to the far end of the residential estate, so that it could be more efficiently accessed by all residents of the estate.

 

A modification application has now been lodged under Section 96 of the Environment Planning and Assessment Act to remove the requirement for the construction of a foot/cycle path.? Council?s town planning and engineering staff do not support the request and are of the view the linkage is fundamental to building a sustainable community for the Ocean Waves Estate.

 

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 refuse the application to Modify Consent DA2010/004 for the following reasons:

 

1.? The application is inconsistent with the intention of the residential zoning to provide new residential development and adequate infrastructure to support it as it proposes to remove infrastructure fundamental to sustainable development.

 

2.? The application does not comply with the requirements of Part B of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 and in particular clause B2.4.2 ?Pedestrian and Cycle Networks? which requires pedestrian and cycle ways to public reserves to be provided at the cost of the applicant.

 

3.? The application is inconsistent with the intentions and objectives of Policy B2.4.1 of the NDCP to provide interconnected urban environments, efficient and safe access to open spaces areas and reduce vehicle dependency.

 

4.? There would be a lack of connectively for a growing community which requires access to the nearby public recreation

 

5.? The removal of the linkage will discourage physical activity and alternatives to car use, which will subsequently increase the traffic accessing the development via Swordfish Drive and negatively impact on properties there.

 

6.? The submissions received raise relevant concerns and indicate significant community concern with the proposed modification.

 

7.? It is not in the public interest to remove a safe linkage from a new residential area to public recreation areas and subsequently discourage physical activities, enjoyment of these areas and social interaction within the community.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can consent to the modification in accordance with the draft conditions of consent at the end of this report.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

This report relates to a Modification received under Section 96 of the EP & A Act to remove part of condition 4 of Consent DA2010/004. The requirement proposed to be deleted relates to the construction of a footpath and cycle way link to be provided on Ocean Waves Estate in Valla Beach. Draft condition 4 shows the condition will be modified by deleting this requirement, should Council resolve to approve it, in the draft conditions at the end of this report.

 

 

Figure 1: Showing the location of foot/cycle path proposed to be removed in context with surrounding area

 

In 2010 an application was lodged for a 13 (thirteen) residential subdivision to extend the Ocean Waves Estate in Valla Beach to Stage 5.? The 13 Lot subdivision was based largely on a conceptual draft Masterplan for these stages of the Ocean Waves Estate.

 

However, one difference in-between the subdivision layout proposed by the development application DA2010/004 and the original Masterplan, was the location of the land to be reserved as public open space and dedicated as public reserve. The original location was central to the overall residential estate of Ocean Waves (once completed). The proposed new location was at the very end of the Ocean Waves Estate at the end of Ocean View Drive, before Valla Beach Resort (Tourist Park and Manufactured Homes Estate) and is now known as Lot 35.

 

This proposed relocation for the public open space was questioned during the assessment process of the original development application due to it being at the far end of the Ocean Waves Estate and the town planner indicated that good town planning practise and urban design, supports a more central location. Indeed the previous location of the public open space on the Masterplan was near to the centre of the estate.

 

The applicant argued the Lot identified in the Masterplan was too steep and as such not suitable for public open space. The new location for the public open space would only be accessed by Ocean View Drive and any future residents of Seaforth Drive, or the further expanding residential subdivision of Ocean Waves Estate, would have to also use Ocean View drive via Swordfish Drive to access it. Subsequently, as a compromise, the town planner consented to the relocation of the public open space but conditioned the consent that a footpath and cycleway be constructed by the developer to link Seaforth Drive and the rest of the development to the public open space, thus avoiding the need for these residents to access the nearby recreation areas via Swordfish Drive and Seaforth Drive.

 

Future stages of Ocean Waves Estate will see the extension of Swordfish Drive and further residential allotments created west of it, which means there will already be an increase in traffic at this location.

 

 

Figure 2: Shows the relocation of the public open space as part of original Development Application 2010/004

 

 

In November 2012 the applicant submitted an application for a Construction Certificate and associated Engineering drawings. These drawings did not include the footpath and cycle-way required by condition 4 of Consent DA2010/004 and Council staff bought this to the applicant?s attention. The applicant advised that he did not wish to construct the linkage. Council staff advised the applicant, as per Section 96 of the EP&A Act, that a formal Modification application must be submitted should they propose to amend or remove any conditions of consent and that such a proposal would unlikely be supported by council staff.

 

The applicant proceeded with submitting the formal S96 Modification application. As Council staff do not support the application, the applicant was informed in writing of this report and was given the option to withdraw the Modification application. No response has been received.

 

The applicants argue that there had been no requirement for a footpath/cycleway at this location on any of the previous Consents, that the location is not suitable due to it being on a brow of a hill, that there are no other cycle ways at Valla Beach and that VPR Development constructed a footpath link from Swordfish Drive to Valla Beach Road.

 

The linkage is considered fundamental to increase the already limited permeability within this new residential area which is consistent with many structure plans and strategies, including the Mid North Coast Regional Strategy and compliments the Government?s ongoing ?Healthy Communities? initiatives.

 

Other strategic planning documents and regional guidelines support linkages such as this, for example, NSW Planning Guidelines for Walking and Cycling encourage the construction of cycleway/footpaths as they are considered to be in the public interest, and enable positive social, physical and environmental impact on communities

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Manager of Technical Services (MTS)

 

Councils MTS advises that he does not concur with the developers view that the cycleway would not bring any advantage to local residents, and indeed has the opposite view that it would be a great advantage for local residents as the only way out of the entire subdivision detailed at present is on the northern end and the cycleway would provide a link to the beaches and Valla Beach reserve.

 

MTS further advises that additional road linkages were supposed to be provided onto Ocean View drive (detailed on the original concept master plan) but were deleted due to steep grades and these roads were then instead sold as development Lots. Thus the developer has already received additional lots, creating additional profit, and saved money on these road constructions.

 

MTS concludes that the request to modify the Consent, by deleting the requirement for a footpath and cycleway, be refused.

 

Council?s Healthy Communities Project Officer (HCO)

 

HCO was consulted as part of the assessment process as the proposal is considered contrary to the ethos of Healthy Communities.

 

HCO does not support the proposal and advises there are a number of very good reasons why the cycleway should be constructed as part of DA 2010/004.? A cycleway/footpath at Valla Beach is significant to the community because it offers a practical route, a pleasant outdoor public space, links the whole neighbourhood to the beach and recreational facilities, and enables healthy and active living.

 

HCO also raises the following comments in relation to the proposal:

????? The proposal will connect residents to the beach and park;

????? The path will create a safe and accessible staff for everyone, regardless of ages, ability etc

????? Important to Increase opportunity for physical activity;

????? Encourage social interaction;

????? Add attractiveness to the area.

 

 

New South Wales Rural Fire Services (NSW RFS)

 

The NSW RFS have issued a Bushfire Safety Authority Certificate for the proposal, as per the requirements of section 100B of the Rural Fires Act.

 

 

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

 

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

 

a????????? the provisions of

 

(i) any environmental planning instruments

 

Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010.

 

(ii) any draft environmental planning instrument

 

There are none specifically relevant to the proposal.

 

(iii) any development control plan (DCP)

 

Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (NDCP)

 

The application relates to the removal of a condition on a previously approved residential subdivision and so Part B of the NDCP is applicable and certain parts of Part A are applicable.

 

????? Notification Part A

 

The application was notified to owners of properties in close proximity to the location of the footpath and cycleway link and was also advertised, in accordance with Council?s Advertising policy, to inform interested parties in the wider surrounding area.

 

4 (four) individual submissions have been received, as well as a letter from the Valla Beach Community Association, which included their unanimous decision to object to the proposal and also a petition with 147 signatures on it.

 

????? Environmental Context Part A

 

Bushfire

 

There is currently one formal way out of the Oceans Waves Estate from Seaforth Drive which is suitable for vehicular traffic i.e. Swordfish Drive. There is an unofficial and unformed track, suitable only for pedestrian traffic only at the moment, which is the location subject to this proposal as the proposed location required previously by condition to provide a formal linkage.

 

Although council?s town planning staff have concerns of the practicability and safety of one entry/exit point for a residential development such as this should evacuation be required, NSW RFS have not objected to the proposal.

 

????? Subdivision Part B

 

Policy B2.4 of the NDCP advises that pedestrian and cycle ways shall be provided to connect roads and to potential public routes, public reserves, education facilities and community facilities. The policy goes on to require such linkages to be provided by applicant?s expense and as part of any development consent. The town planner responsible for the original consent was following the guidance in Clause B2.4.2 when applying the condition to provide the foot/cycle path, which the applicant now seeks to remove.

 

Even though the modification is a clear contradiction to this DCP policy, the developer has provided no justification to vary this requirement of NDCP.

 

The objectives of B2.4 are to provide highly interconnected urban environments that encourage pedestrian and cycle usage, to provide efficient and safe routes to public areas and reduce the dependency of vehicle use. It is considered the deletion of this requirement for a footpath at this location is contrary to all the objectives of clause B2.4.

 

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

 

Context and Setting

 

The site relates to an urban release area, now known as Ocean Waves Estate, which is currently growing and being developed by releasing multiple residential allotments in stages.

 

Access, Transport and Traffic

 

The requirement for this linkage was imposed previously be town planning staff as a condition of consent and was discussed thoroughly in the officer?s report and considered it to be necessary to provide a vital link at this location. The primary reason behind the town planner?s decision at the time was the proposed location for the public open space which was to be provided by the developer and to ensure the developer fulfils their responsibility to ensure this is accessible by residents. However, since this original decision was made, it has become apparent by the fact an informal bush track which has been established, that this location requires a linkage. It therefore remains the view of council?s town planning staff that this link is vital to provide existing and future residents of Ocean Waves estate with a route to the nearby public reserve and also the beaches and other recreational areas.

 

Natural Hazards

 

Although NSW RFS have not objected to the proposed, it is considered common sense that having alternate routes in and out of a development could be important should any type of natural disaster occur (not exclusively but including Bush Fire) and where evacuation may ne necessary.

 

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

 

The site is suitable for the footpath/cycleway development and already provides an existing informal access track utilised by residents to access the nearby recreation areas. It is considered that the site is not suitable for alternate uses and as such the construction of the formal footpath and cycleway should be enforced.

 

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

 

The submission from the applicant as well as the individual submissions from residents and a petition have been previously circulated to councillors and have not been relisted in this business paper.?? There was one individual submission in support of the modification.? There were 4 individual submissions and a petition containing 137 signatures opposed to the modification.

 

Submissions objecting to the modification

 

The points referred to were:

 

????? the pathway/bikeway will keep Valla Beach residents connected;

????? contributing to a healthy community atmosphere benefits council and the developer by encouraging people to move to the area;

????? lack of access in-between the areas of the community limits diversity and general community;

????? The developer?s argument that this location is too steep in not justified;

????? The footpath is the minimal requirements for this location.

????? Did not received adjoining owner notification of the modification;

????? Already increased to 15 Lots from the 13 as originally approved;

????? Would lead to difficulty for future Lot owners to design a suitable dwelling;

????? The rough track access is already utilised by existing residents to access Deep Creek, Valla Reserve and the beach;

????? If this access is not formalised, the only link from Seaforth to Swordfish Drive is to the north of the subdivision.

????? The current walk is already used by existing residents;

????? The path which will allow residents to cycle or walk promotes a healthier lifestyle, opposed to forced car use;

????? The gradient of the bush track is more acceptable than the steep gradient of Swordfish Drive;

????? The track?s location makes the beach and estuary easily accessible for residents including children;

????? It would provide another exit from the estate apart from Swordfish Drive with respect to potential Bushfire Hazards and only having one way out of the estate.

????? The cycleway is essential for safety and lifestyle;

????? Part of the sales pitch by Estate Agent acting for the developer included this cycleway being constructed;

????? Needed for residents to access beach, creek, park, resort and other facilities within Valla Beach;

????? Without this, Ocean Waves Estate is ringed by Nature Reserve and has only one entrance/exit down Swordfish Drive, which would be the only way out if there was afire;

????? More blocks are on the market, placing even more traffic burden on the only road (Swordfish Drive);

????? Swordfish Drive is also steep for pedestrians and cyclists.

 

Submission received in support of the modification:

 

????? The proposed bike and skateboard track will run the entire length of his property?s southern boundary;

????? The path would ruin the quiet enjoyment of any future occupiers of any future residence;

????? Given the steepness of the land would result in accident or injury;

????? Was never informed of this requirement during purchase of the land.

 

Petition ? 147 Signatures and Covering Letter

 

Covering letter covers

????? The Valla Beach Community Association gave unanimous support for the cycleway to go ahead.

????? There are safety concerns, particularly bushfire hazard, with the only exit from Seaforth Drive being Swordfish Drive.;

????? Many residents purchased their properties? with the expectation of some form of pathway at this location;

????? Community Infrastructure should encourage cycling and walking for health and community benefits;

????? There are numerous references to promotion of cycleway in Nambucca Shire and Mid North Coast Region strategic planning documents including the Mid North Coast Regional Strategy, the Nambucca Shire Structure Plan and Nambucca Shire Council Cycleway Plan.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 


Environment

 

The proposed location of the footpath and cycleway is already an informal bush track adjacent to the Valla Beach Tourist Park boundary, so will not require clearing of vegetation.

 

The linkage will provide a connection to the nearby recreation areas and facilitate enjoyment of our existing beautiful natural environment.

 

Social

 

There are many social benefits to providing good connectivity though new residential subdivision, including encouragement of physical activity, facilitating safe route for families and older residents to enjoy the nearby recreation areas and socialise interaction within the community as a whole.

 

Economic

 

The provision of attractive and viable connection ways brings economic benefits to a locality by making it more attractive, which is particularly important to an area such as Valla Beach which is a popular tourist and visitor destination.

 

Risk

 

The risk associated with refusing the application is that the applicant could utilise their right to appeal to the Land and Environment Court.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Refusal of the application could potentially cost the Council money if the applicant appeals the decision and Council need to make representation to uphold the decision.

 

Approval of the application could potentially cost the Council money if, in the future, it becomes apparent that a connection is needed at, or near to, this location, at which time there would be no opportunity to require the developer a provide a link in the form of footpath and/or cycle-way, and Council would have to bare the cost to provide one. The amount of submissions and signatures on the petition objecting to the proposal to remove the foot/cycle path requirement is evidence there is already a community demand for such a linkage.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

None identified.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The risk associated with not requiring the developer to provide this footpath and cycleway could result in Council having to provide it at a later stage, and this could potentially take funds and/or resources away from other projects and services.

 

 

DRAFT CONDITIONS OF CONSENT

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

1??????? Development is to be in accordance with approved plans

 

The development is to be implemented generally in accordance with the plans and supporting documents, endorsed with Council stamp dated April 2010 and authorised signature, set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

 

Plan No/Supporting Document

Version

Prepared by

Dated

Subdivision Plan

 

Amos and McDonald Surveyors?

13/05/09

 

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.

 

 

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

 

2??????? Sediment and erosion measures required

 

The application for a Construction Certificate is to include plans and specifications that indicate the measures to be employed to control erosion and loss of sediment from the site. Control over discharge of stormwater and containment of run-off and pollutants leaving the site/premises must be undertaken through the installation of erosion control devices such as catch drains, energy dissipaters, level spreaders and sediment control devices such as hay bale barriers, filter fences, filter dams, and sedimentation basins. The sediment and erosion control plan is to be designed in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Department of Housing Manual, ?Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction?.

 

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

 

3??????? Long Service Levy to be paid

 

A Long Service Levy must be paid to the Long Service Payments Corporation. This amount payable is currently based on 0.35% of the cost of the work. This is a State Government Levy and is subject to change. These payments may be made at Council?s Administration Office. Cheques are to be made payable Council.

 

4??????? Engineering Construction Plans

 

Three (3) copies of engineering construction plans and specifications must accompany the construction certificate application. Such plans are to provide for the works in the following table in accordance with Council?s current Design and Construction Manuals and Specifications.

 

Required work

Specification of work

Kerb & Gutter, Road Shoulder Construction

Kerb and gutter, road shoulder and associated drainage construction, footpath formation and turfing including any necessary relocation of services across the frontage of the subdivision.

Full Width Road Construction

Full width road and drainage construction for all proposed roads on the approved plan.

Footpath/Cycleway?

A 2.5 metre wide reinforced concrete pathway linking Seaforth Drive to Ocean View Drive in the south eastern corner of the site, including installation of gates or bollards at each end to restrict vehicle entry.

Service Conduits

Service conduits to each of the proposed new allotments laid in strict accordance with the service authorities? requirements.

Street Lighting

Street lighting being provided to the requirements of Country Energy.

Stripping and Stockpiling

Stripping and stockpiling of existing topsoil on site, prior to commencement of earthworks, and the subsequent re-spreading of this material together with a sufficient quantity of imported topsoil so as to provide a minimum thickness of 80mm over the allotments and footpaths and public reserves, upon completion of the development works.

Inter-allotment Drainage

Inter-allotment drainage to an approved public drainage system for each of the proposed new allotments where it is not possible to provide a gravity connection of future roof water to the kerb and gutter.

Stormwater Outlets

An energy dissipating pit with a suitably installed locked grated outlet to all pipes or any other drainage structures. Grates must be of galvanised weldlock construction.

Stormwater Quality

Stormwater quality must be suitable for discharge in accordance with Department of Land and Water Conservation NSW (1998) The Constructed Wetlands Manual and NSW Department of Housing Manual (1989), Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction.

Water

 

Reticulated water supply to serve the development including installation of water mains and services to all lots.

 

Sewer

Sewer mains to serve the development including sewer main extension to the site, mains, sidelines and junctions to all lots.

 

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF SUBDIVISION WORKS

 

5??????? Consent required for works within the road reserve

 

Consent from Council must be obtained for all works within the road reserve pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. Three (3) copies of engineering construction plans must accompany the application for consent for works within the road reserve. Such plans are to be in accordance with Council's Adopted Engineering Standard.

 

6??????? Water and Sewerage Section 68 approval required

 

An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 to carry out water supply work and sewerage work must be obtained. Sewerage and water mains are to be extended to service all residential allotments in the subdivision.

 

7??????? Erosion & sediment measures

 

Erosion and sedimentation controls are to be in place in accordance with the Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction Vol. 1, 4th Edition prepared by Landcom. Particular attention is to be given to the provision of the following sediment and erosion control measures:

 

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

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

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

 

Additionally the enclosed sign, to promote the awareness of the importance of maintenance of sediment and erosion controls, is to be clearly displayed on the most prominent sediment fence or erosion control device for the duration of the project.

 

Note: Council may impose on-the-spot fines of up to $600 for non-compliance with this condition.

 

8??? Toilet facilities

 

Toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. Each toilet provided must be a standard flushing toilet connected to a public sewer.

 

9??? Site construction sign required

 

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, add