NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

27 March 2014

 

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 AND on the Thursday two weeks before the Thursday meeting.  Both meetings commence at 5.30 pm.  Meetings are held in the Council Chamber at Council's Administration Centre—44 Princess Street, Macksville (unless otherwise advertised).

 

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 Council’s website: www.nambucca.nsw.gov.au


 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

 

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 - 13 March 2014.................................................................................... 6

5        NOTICES OF MOTION

5.1     Notice of Motion -  Request for Report on Staff Training (SF125)...................................... 14

5.2     Notice of Motion - Request For Council To Convene A Community Forum On Reducing Crime In The Nambucca Valley And To Consider Potential Closure Of The Macksville Court House (SF706).... 15

5.3     Notice Of Motion -  Request For Council To Consider Transferring Returned SES Vehicles To The Local VRA (SF86).................................................................................................................... 20

5.4     Notice Of Motion -  RMS Response To Request To Bridge The Macksville Floodplain (SF841)    21  

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.................................................................................... 25

9.2     "Revitalising Local Government" - Final Report of the NSW Independent Local Government Review Panel October 2013........................................................................................................ 34

9.3     Valla Quarry - Addendum to Quarry Environmental Management Plan................................ 48

9.4     Report on the Financial Impact of Reducing the Cost of Dogs Purchased from the Pound to $150 per Dog............................................................................................................................... 76

9.5     Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads 81

9.6     Ecomomic Directions Committee - Minutes from Meeting on 28 January 2014.................. 115

9.7     Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 25 February 2014................................... 118

9.8     Deep Creek Entrance Management Policy and Offer of Licence for Crown Land occupation (5 years).................................................................................................................................... 123

9.9     Planning Proposal - Commercial Zoned Land Adin Street Scotts Head, Macksville and Nambucca Heads.......................................................................................................................... 125

9.10   Heritage Program and Heritage Strategy........................................................................ 130

9.11   DA2014/008 - 2 Lot Subdivision - Yarrawonga Street, Macksville..................................... 142

9.12   Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined from 31 February to 14 March 2014................................................................................ 151

9.13   Report on December Quarter Budget Review Variations - Nambucca Heads Skate Park; Valla Quarry Legal Costs; Legal Costs generally; "Surplus" from sale of the 3 lots in Short Street; Unforeseen Saleyard Maintenance Expense..................................................................................... 156

9.14   NSW Governments Sustainable Dredging Strategy - Rescuing our Waterways funding initiative   161

9.15   Financial Contribution to Arts Mid North Coast............................................................... 166

9.16   Provision of Waste Services to the Inaugural Scotts Head Food, Wine, Music and Art Festival    170

9.17   Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks 172

9.18   DA2014038 - Additions to a Community Facility (Surf Club) - Ocean Street, Nambucca Heads.... 192

10      Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

10.1   Donations Program (Section 356) 2014/2015 - Applications for Councillor Ranking........... 201

10.2   Schedule of Council Public Meetings............................................................................. 204

11      Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

11.1   Q011/2013 Quotations Road Patching Unit - Local Government Procurement................... 205

11.2   Nambucca District Water Supply - Documentation of Management Plans for Off River Storage Water Licence........................................................................................................................ 207

11.3   Nambucca District Water Supply - Adaptive Management - River Monitoring Committee... 210

11.4   Nambucca District Water Supply Steering Committee Meeting - 5 March 2014.................. 250

11.5   Bowraville Off River Water Storage - Insurance Excess................................................... 256    

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

12.1   Nambucca District Water Supply - Documentation of Management Plans for Off River Storage Water Licence

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) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

12.2   Restructuring of Information Technology Section

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) (a) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains personnel matters concerning particular individuals.

 

12.3   Q011/2013 Quotations Road Patching Unit - Local Government Procurement

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) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

  

            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).

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

Ordinary Council Meeting

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Council Meeting HELD ON 13 March 2014

The following document is the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 13 March 2014.  These minutes are subject to confirmation as to their accuracy at the next meeting to be held on 27 March 2014 and therefore subject to change.  Please refer to the minutes of 27 March 2014 for confirmation.

 

 

PRESENT

 

Cr Rhonda Hoban (Mayor)

Cr John Ainsworth

Cr Martin Ballangarry OAM

Cr Brian Finlayson

Cr Paula Flack

Cr Kim MacDonald

Cr Elaine South

Cr Anne Smyth

 

 

ALSO PRESENT

 

Michael Coulter (General Manager)

Scott Norman (AGM Corporate Services)

Paul Gallagher (AGM Engineering Services)

Monika Schuhmacher (Minute Secretary)

 

 

APOLOGY

 

Cr Bob Morrison on approved leave.

 

 

PRAYER

 

Captain Steve Dorman from The Salvation Army, offered a prayer on behalf of the Nambucca Minister's Association.

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

Councillor PF Flack declared a non-pecuniary significant conflict of interest in Item 9.2 Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads under the Local Government Act as Cr Flack is an employee of Mid North Coast Local Health District, the proposed buyer of land the subject of this item.  Cr Flack left the meeting for this item.

 

Councillor Smyth declared a non-pecuniary less significant conflict of interest in Item 9.4 Flying Fox in Gordon Park under the Local Government Act as Cr Smyth is a member of the Gordon Park Rainforest Committee.

 

Councillor R Hoban declared a non-pecuniary significant conflict of interest in Item 9.7 and Item 12.3 Modification of Consent - Valla Quarry - DA 2001/096 under the Local Government Act as Cr Hoban was involved in negotiating the conditions of consent for the original development application prior to becoming a Councillors.  Cr Hoban left the meeting for this item.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Council Meeting 27 February 2014

 

123/14 RESOLVED:        (MacDonald/Ballangarry)

 

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting of 27 February 2014 be confirmed.

 

 

 

NOTICE OF MOTION - CR Ainsworth

 

ITEM 5.1      SF1933              130314      Notice of Motion - Council Owned Land - Availability (SF600)

Motion:      (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That Council be provided with a report on all available developable land stocks including any unsold blocks.

 

Amendment:       (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Council be provided with a report by 25 March 2014 on all available developable land stocks including any unsold blocks and it be considered at a meeting of the Land Development Committee.

 

The amendment was carried and it became the motion and it was:

 

124/14 Resolved:        (Flack/Smyth)

 

That Council be provided with a report by 25 March 2014 on all available developable land stocks including any unsold blocks and it be considered at a meeting of the Land Development Committee.

 

  

 

Cr Flack left the meeting for the delegation concerning Item 9.2 at 5.38 pm and returned after the conclusion of the Item at 5.50 pm.

 

DELEGATIONS

 

ITEM 9.2      Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue

          i)        Mr Stewart Dowrick, CE on behalf of MNC Local Health District

          ii)       Mr Mark McKiernan on behalf of MNC Local Health District

          iii)      Ms Rebecca Wark on behalf of MND Local Health District

 

ITEM 9.7      Modification of Consent - Valla Quarry      

          i)        Ms Susan Jenvey—objector

          ii)       Mr Peter Sobey—objector

          iii)      Mr Ross Smith on behalf of Quarry Solutions

          iv)      Mr Clayton Hill on behalf of Groundwork Plus

 

Mr Dowrick addressed Council making the following points:

·    Development of a Health One centre has been long time in the planning

·    The funds can only be used for a Health Once centre

·    Provide dental, mental health and other health services

·    Compliment services across the whole mid north coast

·    Largest investment for this Valley

 

Ms Wark addressed Council making the following points:

·    Sought independent valuation critique which has been provided to Councillors – copy on file

 

ITEM 9.2      DA2013/092        130314      Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads

125/14 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

 

That the matter be deferred to the next Council meeting.

 

 

 

DELEGATIONS continued

 

Cr Hoban left the meeting for Item 9.7 at 5.51 pm.

Cr Ainsworth took the Chair for the delegation and the Item.

Cr Hoban returned after the conclusion of the Item at 6.13 pm and resumed the Chair.

 

Ms Jenvey addressed Council making the following points:

·    Lodge a strong objection to the Quarry increasing its extraction limit

·    Has twice exceeded its development consent

·    Mayor will not stand up for residents of Valla and Viewmont

·    Ratepayers and residents have a right to know who votes

·    Easy for quarry and Council to get their way

·    Why does the quarry want to remain being monitored by Council?

·    Loss of amenity to residents who put up with continual stream of heavy trucks, noise, dust, danger, affects ability to live their lives

·    Uncovered trucks

·    B-double quarry trucks being used on country road

·    Stressful driving on the road, windscreen damaged

·    Truck drivers – poor drivers, and often exceed speed limit

·    Road is continually disintegrating – cost in continual upgrading and repair of the road

·    Residents are upset and agitated

·    Seriously considering selling up and leaving

·    Concretes works belong in industrial estates

·    Councillors should think twice before getting their hands dirty on this issue

·    Not many jobs created.

 

126/14 Resolved:        (Flack/Ballangarry)

 

That Ms Jenvey be granted an extension of time for her delegation to Council.

 

·    Viewmont – view being disintegrated

·    Particles in air

·    Council’s job is to maintain pristine beauty of this are

·    Consent should not be allowed to go ahead

·    How much gravel has gone out since consent was issued

·    Residents being sold down the drain

 

Mr Peter Sobey addressed Council making the following points:

·    Lives in Valla Road opposite the quarry

·    His parents opposed the construction of the quarry in 1996

·    Conditions of consent

·    Council sought an independent report – advised not to go ahead with consent – Council went ahead anyway

·    Limit exceeded consent

·    Violated with deliberate impunity

·    One fine of $2,500

·    Does not believe quarry will cease to operate when extraction limit is reached

·    All want the Highway, brings job for a couple of years

·    Residents bring jobs and stay longer than a couple of years

·    Quarry has treated Council and residents with contempt

 

Mr Clayton Hill addressed Council making the following points:

·    Is looking to increase its extraction rate per annum

·    Council did write to quarry regarding output

·    Only change is the output from the quarry

·    Operation practices have improved – leading stringent practices

·    Quarry did conduct community consultation – CPR Group, set up hot line, local media

·    Developed a truck driver code of conduct

·    Aware of some issues around driver behaviour, disciplinary action can be taken

·    Does have sufficient water for dust suppression – town water not used, have own dam

·    Appreciate Council’s consideration of the application.

 

ITEM 9.7      DA2001/096        130314      Modification of Consent - Valla Quarry - DA 2001/096

127/14 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/South)

 

That the matter be deferred to Council’s meeting on 10 April 2014.

 

 

 

ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE

 

There were no questions with Notice.

 

 

QUESTIONS FOR CLOSED MEETING WHERE DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED

 

There were no questions for Closed Meeting where due Notice has been received.

 

 

 

General Manager Report

 

ITEM 9.1      SF959                130314      Outstanding Actions and Reports

128/14 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/South)

 

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

 

 

 

Item 9.2 was dealt with under Delegations.

 

 

 

ITEM 9.3      SF1406              130314      Appointments to Joint Regional Planning Panel

129/14 RESOLVED:        (MacDonald/Ainsworth)

 

That Council recommend to the Regional Panels Secretariat, the appointment of Mr Daniel Walsh to replace Mr Greg Meyers as Council’s second nominee to the Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel.

 

 

 

ITEM 9.4      PRF28                130314      Flying Fox in Gordon Park

130/14 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

 

That the concerns of the surrounding residents, members of the Tennis Club, and Gordon Park Rainforest Committee be noted and that Council write to the appropriate authority pointing out the difficulties of the residents and Gordon Park Rainforest Committee and seek advice as to how those difficulties might be dealt with.

 

131/14 Resolved:        (Flack/Finlayson)

 

That Council write to the Office of Environment and Health and the Department of Health seeking information regarding health risks from flying foxes in close proximity of humans – whether there is a risk to individuals exposed to flying fox urine, faeces or saliva in fresh skin wounds acquired during voluntary work in flying fox habitat.

 

 

132/14 Resolved:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That Council make enquiries from neighbouring councils who also have problems with flying foxes and how they are addressing the problems.

 

133/14 Resolved:        (Smyth/Flack)

 

That Council receive a report on the cost of installing interpretive signage in relation to flying fox habitat and the signage to warn visitors not to touch or pick up flying foxes on the ground including information about the species and their habitat and a WIRES contact phone number.

 

 

 

ITEM 9.5      SF1930              130314      Companion Animal Management

134/14 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Flack)

 

That Council receive a report from the Ranger regarding the financial impact of reducing the cost of dogs purchased from the pound to $150 per dog.

 

135/14 Resolved:        (Ainsworth/Flack)

 

That Council note the inspection of its companion animal facility.

 

136/14 Resolved:        (Hoban/Ainsworth)

 

That Council thank Mr Clough for his informative presentation and Council pass on its support to both of its Rangers for undertaking what is recognised at times to be a difficult job description.

 

 

 

ITEM 9.6      SF841                130314      Pacific Highway Upgrade (Nambucca Heads to Urunga) - Proposed Transfer of "Assets"

137/14 Resolved:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That the RMS be requested to put to Council:

 

i         A proposal for the road classification of the bypassed sections of the Pacific     Highway, the proposed interchanges on the new Highway, and the Macksville Bridge for its consideration.

 

ii        A proposal for a project handover funding package.

 

 

 

Item 9.7 was dealt with under Delegations.

 

 

 

ITEM 9.8      SF1947              130314      Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined from 17-28 February 2014

138/14 Resolved:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

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

 

139/14 Resolved:        (Finlayson/Ainsworth)

 

That Item 2013/129 is called in for determination by Council.

 

 

 

ITEM 9.9      SF1947              130314      2014 February - Development Applications Received

140/14 Resolved:        (MacDonald/Ainsworth)

 

That the Development Applications and Complying Development Applications received in February 2014 be received for information.

 

 

 

ITEM 9.10    SF1947              130314      Construction and Complying Development Certificates Approved February 2014

141/14 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/Ballangarry)

 

That the Construction and Complying Development Certificates approved for February 2014 be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

 

ITEM 10.1    SF1120              130314      Grant Application Status Report

142/14 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That the list of grant applications and their status to 13 March 2014 be received.

 

 

 

ITEM 10.2    SF251                130314      Schedule of Council Public Meetings

143/14 Resolved:        (South/Flack)

 

That the schedule of dates for public Council meetings be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

ITEM 10.3    SF327                130314      Nambucca District Band Committee of Management - Minutes of the Annual General Meeting - 11 February 2014

144/14 RESOLVED:        (Finlayson/MacDonald)

 

1        That Council endorse the Nambucca District Band Committee of Management’s minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on 11 February 2014 and thank the outgoing Committee for their work in the past twelve months.

 

2        That the Nambucca District Band’s comments/suggestions in regard to the Australia Day Ceremony on 26 January 2014 be forwarded to the Australia Day Committee for information.

 

 

 

ITEM 10.4    SF318                130314      Macksville Senior Citizens Centre Committee of Management - Annual General Meeting - 27 February 2014 - Minutes

145/14 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/MacDonald)

 

That Council note the Minutes of the Macksville Senior Citizens Centre Committee of Management’s Annual General Meeting held on 27 February 2014 including the financial statement and thank the outgoing Committee for their work in the past twelve months.

 

 

 

ITEM 10.5    SF1875              130314      Investment Report To 28 February 2014

146/14 RESOLVED:        (MacDonald/Smyth)

 

That the Accountants’ Report on Investments placed to 28 February 2014 be noted.

 

 

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

 

ITEM 11.1    SF85                  130314      NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee Meeting No. 3 - 2013/2014

147/14 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That Council receive, note the report and endorse the minutes for the NSW Rural Fire Service Liaison Committee Meeting Service Level Agreement 2013/14 held on Thursday 12 February 2014.

 

    

 

COUNCIL IN CLOSED MEETING (CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC)

 

148/14 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/MacDonald)

 

1        That Council consider any written representations from the public as to why the Meeting should not be Closed to the public.

 

2        That Council move into Closed Meeting to discuss the matters for the reason(s) listed below.

 

Reason reports are in Closed Meeting:

 

 

 

General Manager Report

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.1    SF839                130314      General Manager's Performance Review

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) (a) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains personnel matters concerning particular individuals.

 

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.2    PRF28                130314      Further Submissions on Flying Fox in Gordon Park

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) (a) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains personnel matters concerning particular individuals.

 

 

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.3    SF1931              130314      Modification of Consent - Valla Quarry - DA 2001/096

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) (c) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

 

 

 

CLOSED MEETING

 

The Ordinary Council Meeting's Meeting IN CLOSED MEETING commenced at 7.06 pm.

 

 

 

RESUME IN OPEN MEETING

 

149/14 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/Ballangarry)

 

That Ordinary Council Meeting resume in Open Meeting. The Ordinary Council Meeting resumed IN OPEN MEETING at 8.47 pm

 

 

 

FROM COUNCIL IN CLOSED MEETING

 

General Manager Report

For Confidential Business Paper in Closed Meeting

ITEM 12.1    SF839                130314      General Manager's Performance Review

150/14 RESOLVED:        (Ainsworth/MacDonald)

 

That the General Manager note the Council’s comments on his performance.

 

 

151/14 Resolved:        (Ainsworth/Finlayson)

 

That submissions for Items 12.2 and 12.3 in the Confidential Business Paper be noted.

 

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Mayor then closed the meeting the time being 8.48 pm. 

 

Confirmed and signed by the Mayor on 27 March 2014.

 

 

 

 

CR RHONDA HOBAN

MAYOR

(CHAIRPERSON)

 

    


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.1      SF1933            270314         Notice of Motion -  Request for Report on Staff Training (SF125)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Rhonda Hoban, Councillor         

 

Summary:

 

As part of the General Managers Performance Review, Councillors were asked to rate the enhancement off staff skill levels by considering the training undertaken in accordance with the organisation wide training plan.  Councillors found this difficult to do as they are not privy to the training plan, or the actual training undertaken.

 

It is recognised that the detail of this is quite operational, but on the basis that it is Council that allocates the training budget, Councillors felt it appropriate that they receive an overview of what the senior staff assess the training requirements to be; how well the training offered matches those requirements (accepting there is a finite budget) and how effective senior staff feel the training provided is in terms of value for money.

 

This information will allow Councillors to be better informed when considering the budget.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council receive a report on staff training outlining what the staff training requirements are, compared to the training offered and the perceived benefit/value/effectiveness of the training given.

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.2      SF1933            270314         Notice of Motion - Request For Council To Convene A Community Forum On Reducing Crime In The Nambucca Valley And To Consider Potential Closure Of The Macksville Court House (SF706)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Rhonda Hoban, Councillor         

 

Summary:

 

Recently I received a delegation from the Combined Nambucca Valley RSL Sub Branches, representing Macksville, Bowraville, Nambucca Heads, Stuarts Point and Taylors Arm Sub Branches. Initially their request was for a public meeting to discuss the issue of Police resources in the Nambucca Valley.

 

Crime and police numbers have been topical in the shire for many months and it now appears that there are moves to close the Macksville and Bellingen Courthouses which will have an impact on Police presence in the valley and the potential to deny residents reasonable access to justice. The Combined Sub Branches have since written to Council requesting that a community forum be arranged by Council to discuss these matters.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council convene a community forum for the purpose of developing strategies to reduce crime in the Nambucca Valley and to consider the impacts of possible closure of the Macksville Court House.

 

2        That Council identify interested community groups and invite no more than two representatives from each organisation to attend the forum.

 

3        That Council liaise with Bellingen Council on the potential closure of both Macksville and Bellingen Court Houses.

 

 

 

Council has lobbied for many years for improved Police resources and public meetings have been held in the past with limited success. There has never been a concerted effort to organise a community wide campaign of lobbying. Public meetings can be difficult to control and while residents willingly attend and express their frustration, public meetings often don’t produce real or rational outcomes.

 

In discussion with the representatives from the respective RSL Clubs it was agreed that an organised community forum was a better approach. It would provide the opportunity to develop strategies for lobbying for improved Police resources, strategies to reduce crime in the first instance and an opportunity to discuss the impacts of the potential closure of the Macksville Court House.

 

Council has in recent months received delegations and letters from a variety of community members and organisations such as the recent approach from the Macksville Chamber of Commerce & Industry over crime in our community. A recent letter is attached as an example. 

 

On the matter of the potential closure of the Court House, I have been approached by Mayor Troy of Bellingen Shire who has been advised that there is a move to discontinue funding for the Macksville and Bellingen Court Houses. Councillors will be aware that a new Police Station and Court facility are being built in Coffs Harbour. While the new facilities in Coffs Harbour are certainly warranted, there are some serious consequences in transferring local court services to Coffs Harbour, both in terms of Policing and the community’s access to justice.

 

To give but one example, Court commences sitting at 9.30am which means all parties, including victims and bailed offenders have to be in Coffs Harbour by 9.30 am. An extensive review of bus and train timetables indicate that for those who don’t have private transport, their only option from the Nambucca Valley is bus transport and the only buses that fit the requirements are the school bus services. This means the potential for victims, witnesses and bailed offenders to all be on the same bus with fifty or so school children. Some of these offenders are recalcitrate teenage offenders and adults charged with all types of crimes.

 

An example of the Policing issues is that just to obtain a warrant Police will have to travel to Coffs Harbour or Kempsey. Not only does this take Police out of the valley for extended periods but it interferes with urgent investigations. Often Police visit the scene of a complaint only then to learn of drugs or a serious matter that requires an urgent warrant. There is also the obvious issue of Police sitting waiting all day at court to be called to give evidence. Some situations can involve several officers and depending on proceedings they can wait all day only to find the matter is carried over to the next day. This removes them from active duty in the community.

 

There are numerous other potential issues if our local court is closed and I intend to document these and distribute them to Councillors and attendees for discussion at the forum if the recommendation is supported.

 

 

 

Description: RSL Badge.jpgRETURNED & SERVICES LEAGUE OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES BRANCH

MACKSVILLE SUB/BRANCH   –   BOWRAVILLE SUB/BRANCH

NAMBUCCA HEADS SUB/BRANCH   –   STUARTS POINT SUB/BRANCH

TAYLORS ARM SUB/BRANCH

“The price of liberty is eternal vigilance”

“Lest we forget”

 

PO Box 422.                                                                                                           phone : 65683275

Macksville.  NSW,

2447.                                                                                                                       emailrslmack@gmail.com

 

6th March 2014

 

Ms Rhonda Hoban.

Mayor.

Nambucca Shire Council.

 

 

SUBJECT  :                     24 Hour Policing, Nambucca Valley.

 

REFERENCE  :               Meeting with yourself, Council Chambers, 0930 6th March 2014.

 

 

Dear Rhonda.

                           Further to our meeting with you today, 6th inst, regarding 24 hour policing here in the Nambucca Valley, may we request from you the organising of a meeting, with delegates from interested community groups, to further discuss this matter.

 

                           We would envisage that you would chair this meeting and each interested group be permitted two delegates to attend and perhaps the meeting be conducted in the council chambers at a time and date suitable to yourself and Council demands.

 

                           On behalf of the veterans of the Nambucca Valley, we feel urgent action is needed to address the lack of effective policing, not because local police are not efficient and dedicated but, police numbers obviously fall below that which is required to effectively police the Nambucca Valley and 24 hour policing is our right as residents of New South Wales.

 

                           Again, we do harbour concerns regards the Macksville Court Prescient  being lost to Coffs Harbour and perhaps this could also be discussed at the meeting.

 

                           We thank you as our Mayor and Nambucca Shire Councillors for their commitment to 24 hour policing and look forward to a favourable reply to our request.

Yours sincerely

Roger Jones. JP.

Acting Minute Secretary

Combined Nambucca Valley RSL Sub/Branches.

 

                          

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

6028/2014 - Copy of letter to  Area Police Commander

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Notice of Motion - Request For Council To Convene A Community Forum On Reducing Crime In The Nambucca Valley And To Consider Potential Closure Of The Macksville Court House (SF706)

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.3      SF1933            270314         Notice Of Motion -  Request For Council To Consider Transferring Returned SES Vehicles To The Local VRA (SF86)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Rhonda Hoban, Councillor         

 

Summary:

 

The President and the Squad Captain of our local VRA have asked Council to consider reallocating the SES 4WD vehicles, which are to be returned to Council, to the VRA.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council receive a report on the request from VRA to reallocate one or both of the returned SES 4WD vehicles to the VRA.

 

2        The VRA be advised of the date the report will be considered by Council so that they can determine whether they wish to address Council on the matter.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Under new State Government arrangements for the State Emergency Service, the local Nambucca SES will be receiving new vehicles funded by the SES. The old vehicles funded jointly by the SES and Council will be returned to Council.

 

Under changed State Rescue Board requirements, our local VRA is now responsible for assisting the SES and the local community in times of flooding, storm and tempest. The local VRA has seen an increase in the number of callouts to support our local Ambulance Service, often in more remote areas. They have also increased their presence at bush and beach related incidents where 4WD capability is required. At present the 4WD capability can only be met through the use of privately owned vehicles.

 

The VRA’s current Primary Rescue responsibilities include Road Rescue, Industrial Rescue, Domestic Rescue, Urban Search and Rescue, Vertical Rescue and Inland Waters Rescue. Their Rescue Licence also requires the squad to “rescue” domestic animals, often in off-road locations.

 

Given Councils current financial constraints, we need to be cautious of adding to our expenses. This includes making sure that we will not be charged by the SES for the new vehicles in an arrangement similar to the RFS charges. While the proposal certainly has merit in terms of the benefit to the community and assistance to the volunteers who serve on the VRA, it is recommended that Council receive a more detailed report on the proposal, including the condition and value of the vehicles and any financial implications for Council before making a decision. 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Notice of Motion

ITEM 5.4      SF1933            270314         Notice Of Motion -  RMS Response To Request To Bridge The Macksville Floodplain (SF841)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Rhonda Hoban, Councillor         

 

Summary:

 

Council wrote to the Minister for Roads requesting that in completing the upgrade of the Pacific Highway, the State Government commit to bridging the Nambucca Valley floodplain in lieu of the option of a filled embankment with culverts. This would provide a superior outcome for attenuating major flood peaks, enhanced outcomes for land use, local access and flora and fauna movement and a superior aesthetic outcome. It is understood that the net present value of bridging is comparable to earthen embankments and culverts because of the quicker construction time and the avoidance of settlement induced maintenance.

 

The attached response has been received from the RMS.

 

It is also worth noting that the promised indicators showing the 1:100 flood levels without the highway and the 1:100 flood levels with an earth filled embankment and culverts have not been erected in the Macksville area. These were to be erected so that Macksville residents could visualise the impact on flooding of an embankment style crossing of the Macksville floodplain.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council consider whether it wishes to make further representations regarding the option of bridging the Nambucca Valley floodplain in preference to a filled embankment and culverts.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

32526/2013 - Pacific Highway Upgrade-Warrell Creek To Nambucca Heads

 

2

4466/2014 - Mayor - Response to Mayors letter

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Notice Of Motion -  RMS Response To Request To Bridge The Macksville Floodplain (SF841)

 

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR

 

Enquiries to:     Cr Rhonda Hoban

Phone No:       6568 0214

Mobile:            0408 661 412

Email:              mayor@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

Our Ref:         

 

 

 

19 December 2013

 

 

 

The Hon Duncan Gay MLC

Minister for Roads and Ports

Level 35 Governor Macquarie Tower

1 Farrer Place

SYDNEY   NSW   2000

 

Dear Minister

 

PACIFIC HIGHWAY UPGRADE—WARRELL CREEK TO NAMBUCCA HEADS

 

Council is aware that the tenders for the construction of the upgrade of the Pacific Highway between Warrell Creek and Nambucca Heads have now closed.

 

The Nambucca Valley community is looking forward to the completion of the project and is extremely grateful for the profound social and economic benefits which the Highway upgrade has and will deliver to our community.  I won’t wax lyrical but nearly all of our community has at one stage been affected by the loss of a friend or family member in a Highway accident.  To know that this tragic era in our community’s development is all but over is liberating.

 

In terms of economic benefits, Council is very pleased that the Australian Precast Solutions (Lend Lease) factory in Macksville is employing over 100 people in the manufacture of pre-stressed concrete products for use in Highway construction.  They utilise local semi-skilled labour which is very welcome in a community which has traditionally been burdened with an unemployment rate of 10% or more.

 

I would like to acknowledge the good work undertaken by Mr Bob Higgins and his team in consulting with this Council and our community over many years and bringing the individual Highway upgrade projects to fruition.  Mr Higgins is always prepared to listen to Council concerns and make or negotiate changes to his plans.  

 

In the spirit of this joyful and festive Christmas message, the Council has one major request.  Unfortunately, I cannot promise it will be the last. 


 

2       

 

The Hon Duncan Gay MLC

Minister for Roads and Ports

 

19 December 2013

 

 

 

The Council urges yourself and the Government to commit to bridging the Nambucca Valley floodplain in lieu of the option of a filled embankment with culverts.  This would provide a superior outcome for attenuating major flood peaks as well as enhanced outcomes for land use, local access and fauna movement.  Whilst I appreciate there will be a capital cost premium, my understanding from other Highway projects is that the net present value of bridging is comparable to culverts because of the quicker construction time and the avoidance of settlement induced maintenance.  I also believe that a bridge is a superior aesthetic outcome. 

 

I understand that the new bridge over the Macleay River floodplain demonstrates all of these outcomes. 

 

I urge the Roads and Maritime Services and the Government to properly weight the benefits of bridging the whole floodplain in lieu of embankment/culverts in the consideration of the tenders. 

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

RHONDA HOBAN

MAYOR

 

RH:ms

 

Cc     Mr Bob Higgins

          The Hon Andrew Stoner MP

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Notice Of Motion -  RMS Response To Request To Bridge The Macksville Floodplain (SF841)

 

     


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager

ITEM 9.1      SF959              270314         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.

 

 

 

 

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.

Part funding for a Flood Risk Management Plan which would consider filling is included in the 2013/14 Environmental Levy program.  A grant has been applied for, if unsuccessful will not proceed until next year.

Grant funding application was successful and Council resolved at the 28 November 2013 meeting to accept the grant.  Project will commence in 2014.

 

JULY 2011

 

2

SF1031

21/7/11

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 which are presently on exhibition, will report to Committee then Council once adopted then proceed with amending the climate change policy and report to Council.

Funding has now been received for the Flood Risk Management Plans.

 

Work to commence in 2014.

 

 

OCTOBER 2011

3

SF1460

17/11/11

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.

 

AGMCS

Change in Rates staff meant that there has not been the opportunity to review the criteria.  To be reported in 2013/2014.

 

Shall be reviewed as part of the 2014-15 budget.

 

To be included in with proposed rates workshop – April 2014.

 

JULY 2013

4

RF275

25/7/13

Council request that RMS consider providing Natural Disaster Funding for the provision of a bicycle/walking/horse riding trail in lieu of reinstating the Bowraville to Bellingen Road.

 

GM

Letter sent 1 August 2013.

Follow up letter sent 8 November 2013

 

Recent (January 2014) advice received from National Parks supporting provision of restricted 4 wheel drive access for National Parks and emergency vehicles.  National Parks also looking for rehabilitation of eroding slopes.  RMS advised that Council supports the submission from National Parks.

 

AUGUST 2013

5

SF1031

14/08/13

That the tree policy be again presented after Councillors have had sufficient time to comment on the amendments presented by Councillors and in view of the previous motion of Council, namely “Tree Removal” (SF629) containing the 6D principles.

 

 

AGMES

Report in September 2013.

Deferred to October 2013.

At the request of Cr Morrison this item has been deferred to the first meeting in November 2013.

Cr Morrison has provided information to the Manager Civil Works who will draft a report to the December Council meeting.

Staff on leave during December – deferred until February 2014.

 

Deferred until April – Staff dealing with landslips.

 

6

SF1817

29/08/13

Wilson Road from 200m west of Coronation Road to 400m west of Spaldings Road.  Council request the RMS to reconsider the 90kph speed zone.

 

And Further…..

Council write to the RMS requesting reinstatement of the 60kph zone on Rodeo Drive travelling east from Bowraville after the Valla Road turnoff where the “s” bends are.

 

AGMES

Manager Technical Services has requested a further review of these sections of the Drive.

No response as at 8/1/14.

 

Raised with RMS at the Traffic Committee 4 Feb 2014 and RMS advised that the matter will be investigated but is subject to resourcing within the RMS.

 

RMS response received advising that since the speed zone review and introduction of new speed limits there has been no significant changes to warrant the changes in the speed zones and no further action will be entered into,

SEPTEMBER 2013

7

SF1817

26/09/13

Council write to the NSW Small Business Commissioner and ask her if Council can be included in the forthcoming Pilot Program to encourage Councils to support small business.

 

GM

The Manager Business Development has contacted the Department of Small Business and registered to be involved in this program.  He has also registered Council as a member of the NSW Business Chamber so as to be eligible to participate in this program.  Council will be contacted early in 2014 regarding its participation in the program.

MBD to follow up (19 March 2014)

 

OCTOBER 2013

8

SF1496

31/10/13

That Council note that the Nambucca River, Creeks, Estuary & Coastline Management Committee supports Council in any initiative to close our rivers to commercial fishing or reduce the impact of commercial fishing on our rivers and encourage Council to become fish friendly Council with the aim of protecting fish habitat and encourage sustainable fishing.  That in this respect, Council request the Dept. of Fisheries to write to those people and organisations where it is considered that this motion may have either a positive or negative effect on their business or the Shire if the river was closed and to ask these organisations and people their opinion eg those with fish licences, fish shops and other organisations that provide tourist facilities like caravan parks and our local tourist committee and associations.

GM

Strategic Planner

Grant Nelson wrote to Fisheries on 6/11/13 (28076/2013), no response to date.

 

Follow-up letter sent 7 February 2014

 

Arrangements being made for Fisheries to address Council in April 2014 in relation to both fish habitat and the impacts of commercial fishing.

NOVEMBER 2013

9

SF1817

13/11/13

RMS be requested to place speed cameras at the northern approach/exit of the Macksville Bridge and a red light camera at Partridge/Cooper Street intersection or Boundary Street/Highway intersection.  Also RMS be requested to make the left lane at the Cooper/Partridge Street lights southbound a left turning lane only.

 

AGMES

Letter sent to RMS 15 November 2013.

 

Acknowledgement letter received from RMS advising the matter has been referred for investigation, (copy of RMS letter provide to Councillors on 17/12/13.)

 

Raised at the Traffic Committee on 4/2/14.  RMS advised that the matter is being investigated.

10

SF600

13/11/13

That a further report come to Council on the estimated cost of the proposed subdivision of land adjoining the Macksville Sewerage Treatment Plant and the recommended terms of any agreement with Mr Gordon.

 

GM

Awaiting lodgement of EIS.

11

SF 825

13/11/13

There be an annual report on the disposal of Council owned surplus materials and small equipment; the items disposed of; how they were disposed of; and the prices received.

 

AGMES

Report to July 2014 Council meeting.

12

SF642

28/11/13

That Council review both the Pesticides Use Notification Policy and Noxious Weed Policy.

AGMES

Report to April 2014 meeting and will include the State change to Noxious Weeds Act.

DECEMBER 2013

13

DA

2013/092

11/12/13

That Council continue its lobbying for the provision of renal dialysis services for the Nambucca Valley and Council note the assurance given by Mr Dowrick, CEO of the Mid North Coast Health District, that funding is available for the provision of a dialysis service.

 

GM

Email sent on 9 January 2014 to CEO of Health District seeking advice on the outcome of the current tender.

 

Follow up email sent 20 February 2014.

14

SF1830

11/12/13

Council consider options for upgrading its Pound when it considers its draft budget

 

GM

Report February/March 2014

Deferred to April 2014

15

SF1830

11/12/13

That grants be sought to assist with the Pound upgrade costs.

 

GM

Report February/March 2014

DLG have announced a grant scheme arising out of the Companion Animals Taskforce.  Will need to await the formal release of the funding guidelines and criteria.

 

16

SF1830

11/12/13

That an on-line companion animal re-homing scheme via the website, Facebook and the local veterinary clinics start as soon as possible.

 

GM

Implementation January 2014.

Update as at 6 February 2014 - Ranger and Manager Information Technology refining template for website and newspaper advertising as well as operational arrangements eg, length of time animals are held, whether website is updated daily, animals unsuited to re-homing.  The view of Council’s Ranger is that animals which are deemed unsuited to re-homing should not be part of the re-homing scheme.  These constitute the large majority of animals euthanized at the pound and comprise animals with a vicious nature or with health risks.

Status as at 17/3/2014 – software has been acquired and installed and is being tested.

 

17

SF1830

11/12/13

Council contact local media outlets to establish whether as a community service they would be prepared to promote Council’s initiative to save animals from euthanasia and that a media release be issued once the web based animal re-homing scheme is operating.

 

GM

Implementation January 2014.

Update as at 6 February 2014 – as per comment on preceding item.

18

SF1915

11/12/13

Council note that before a determination as to whether the pool inspection program be shortened, a compilation of the pools is required through investigation of aerial photographs and the current pool register and that a further report be provided to Council once staff have completed this investigation.

 

GM

April 2014

19

SF1842

11/12/13

That if Council and IPART support a rate increase above rate pegging, Council provide a quarterly report either through a media release or its rates newsletter to confirm to ratepayers that the additional funds are being spent on roads and bridges as indicated in our community consultation.

 

GM

The first quarterly report would be the rates newsletter to be distributed with the 2014/2015 rates notice.

20

SF1856

11/12/13

Council invite Mr Kent Lee (LLS Chair) to make a presentation on the Local Land Services

 

GM

Invitation issued 10 January 2014.

Follow up letter sent 20 February 2014

21

SF818

11/12/13

(Nambucca District Water Supply – Documentation of Management Plans for Off River Storage licence requirements) – following the receipt of the fee schedule from the Public Works a further report be provided to Council on the engagement of the Public Works for the development of the Management Plans.

 

AGMES

Due to Christmas closure of Public Works – report to be presented to March 2014 meeting.

 

 

22

SF1621

11/12/13

(Nambucca District Water Supply – Off River Storage Adaptive Management Workshop) – that Council be provided with a draft Terms of Reference reflecting the amalgamation of the River Monitoring Committee and the Technical Group with a report to be provided for the 30 January 2014 Council meeting for formal adoption.

 

AGMES

Report to 30 January 2014.

 

Due to Christmas closure of Public Works – report to be presented to March 2014 meeting.

 

23

SF6515

11/12/13

(Macksville Industrial Estate Channel Remediation Works) That Council seek legal advice as to the ownership of the lot containing the drainage channel in the event that Eureka 2 Project 6 Pty Ltd becoming insolvent and the responsibility of liability to rectify the channel.  That following legal advice, Council receive another report to determine whether Council should issue a Notice of Intent to issue an order for the remediation of the drainage channel which shall include the terms of the proposed order to be issued to Eureka 2 Project 6 Pty Ltd a) to provide a firm timeline for the remediation of the blocked & unstable drainage channel b) carry out initial works to improve the integrity & capacity of the existing blocked drain c) carry our works that will provide for a permanent solution to unstable drainage walls and floor to the satisfaction of Council.

 

AGMES

Report in February 2014

 

Has not been actioned as yet - Council advised that the company has already been placed into liquidation. Brief being redrafted for the legal advice and report to April Council meeting.

JANUARY 2014

24

SF1933

16/01/14

DA 2013/170 (Boundary adjustment, shed, depot at Valla) be called in for determination by Council and there be a site inspection.

 

GM

Additional information in relation to the proposed crushing and processing of material is to be submitted by a planning consultant.  At this stage it is unknown when the application will be referred to Council for determination.

25

SF1855

16/01/14

Council resolve to progress to detail plans for River Street – Macksville Streetscape Improvement

 

GM

The consultant is to be engaged in February 2014 to prepare the plans.  The matter was presented to the Local Traffic Committee on 5 February 2014.

26

DA2012/069

16/01/14

Council seek a delegation with the Hon. Andrew Stoner regarding a reduced speed zone on the Pacific Highway at the Upper Warrell Creek Road intersection.

 

AGMES

Delegation has not been organised as yet.  RMS has provided verbal information that the speed zone will be reduced. Council waiting for formal confirmation.  If the letter is not forthcoming, the delegation will be organised.

 

27

SF1947

16/01/14

Investigate the possibility of reporting DA’s lodged in the previous month.

 

GM

Report in March 2014.

Deferred to April 2014

28

SF1031

30/01/14

Review Code of Meeting Practice to provide greater clarification of the term “due notice” in relation to business transacted at Council meetings; the conduct of public forums and any other matters that need updating or review.

 

GM

Report April 2014

29

SF1933

30/01/14

Council receive a report on possible ways to remedy time wasting associated with the approval of minor donations.

 

GM

Advice sought from DLG.

 

Report March 2014

Still awaiting advice from DLG, deferred to April 2014

30

SF1431

30/01/14

Quarry solutions be provided with 1 month to submit a revised Quarry Environmental Management Plan.  Consideration of fining for breaches be deferred until after revised QEMP is submitted.

 

GM

Report March 2014

31

SF1031

30/01/14

A further report on the draft Rates Hardship Policy be considered by Council on 13 March 2014 (following the close of the submission period).

 

AGMCS

Submissions close on 23 March.

Report 10 April 2014

FEBRUARY 2014

32

SF1933

13/02/14

Council erect flood height indicators at the causeway located 100m before 71 Sundowner Road.  Council receive a brief report on the merit or otherwise of naming the causeway.

 

AGMES

Report on the naming of causeway/floodway to April 2014. Instructions have been issued to install flood height.

33

SF1933

13/02/14

Council consider a budget allocation of $10,000 for the purpose of recognising and/or supporting existing businesses within the Nambucca Valley ….

 

GM

Report May 2014

34

SF1933

13/02/14

Council try to identify a suitable allotment of land in Nambucca Heads for the Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed.

 

GM

Report April 2014.  Cr Morrison on leave in March.

At Council’s meeting on 13 March it was requested that a report on land stocks be circulated in March. 

35

SF734

13/02/14

Council defer the request from the Leckie’s to acquire a small section of Gordon Park and request representatives of Crown Lands come to Council to explain the proposal and its implications.

 

GM

Letter to Crown Lands’ representatives requesting their attendance at a Council meeting sent on 11/02/14.  Email acknowledgement received the same day.

36

SF1755

13/02/14

Council receive a brief report from the AGMCS indicating the progress in his section, strengths and weaknesses and future direction.

 

AGMCS

Report to March 2014.

 

Deferred to April 2014.

37

SF894

27/02/14

That the response to the Independent Panel be deferred to Council’s meeting on 27 March 2014 to allow Councillors to provide comment and consider the draft submission.

 

GM

Report to meeting on 27 March 2014

38

SF1479

27/02/14

There be a further report to Council on the proposed sale of proposed lots 11 and 12, Railway Road, Nambucca Heads.

 

GM

Report to meeting in April 2014

39

SF844

27/02/14

That Council prepare a Dam Filling Options report as required by the Office of Water and undertake consultation with Fisheries, EPA and downstream landholders.

 

AGMES

Report July 2014

40

SF1870

27/02/14

Council receive a detailed report on the Nambucca Heads Skate Park and Valla Quarry legal costs and a breakdown of the legal costs generally; the surplus in regard to the sale of the 3 lots in Short Street, Nambucca Heads; and the unforeseen saleyard maintenance expense of $7,800.

 

GM

Report in April 2014

41

DA2011/071

27/02/14

Council investigate whether NVC meets the requirements of the LG Act for a consideration in the reduction in (footpath occupation) fees …

 

AGMES

Report to April

42

DA2011/071

27/02/14

Staff review the fees and charges for footpath occupancy in terms of their reasonableness.

 

AGMES

Amended fee structure placed in the draft 2014/15 Fees and Charges for consideration

MARCH 2014

43

SF1933

13/03/14

Council be provided with a report by 25 March 2014 on all available developable land stocks including any unsold blocks and it be considered at a meeting of the Land Development Committee.

 

GM

May be related to item 34.  Had proposed to defer to April as Cr Morrison is absent in March.  Meeting of Land Development Committee arranged for before the Council meeting on 27 March.  Report in this business paper.

44

PRF28

13/03/14

Gordon Park Flying Fox – Council write to the appropriate authorities pointing out difficulties and seeking advice as to how the difficulties might be dealt with – Council write to OEH seeking information regarding health risks.

 

GM

Letters sent 21/3/2014

45

PRF28

13/03/14

Council receive a report on the cost of installing interpretive signage in relation to flying fox habitat with appropriate warnings etc.

 

GM

Report April 2014.

46

SF1930

13/3/14

Council receive a report from the Ranger regarding the financial impact of reducing the cost of dogs purchased from the pound to $150 per dog.

GM

Report in this business paper.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager

ITEM 9.2      SF894              270314         "Revitalising Local Government" - Final Report of the NSW Independent Local Government Review Panel October 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

The Independent Local Government Review Panel has released its final report.  The due date for submissions has now been extended to 4 April 2014.

 

The report is similar to the draft previously reported to council.  In relation to the interests of our council the most notable change is the replacement of the proposed North Coast County Council with a "Joint Organisation" to include the same councils ie, Nambucca, Bellingen, Coffs Harbour and Clarence Valley.

 

This Council’s position on the proposed establishment of a North Coast Joint Organisation is a key strategic and leadership question arising from the Final Report.

 

There are some significant risks being:

 

·      the loss of too many functions may render the residual councils ineffective

·      the creation of another government “body” could add to rather than reduce existing overheads

·      conflict between the regional wide goals of the joint organisation and the local goals of the participating councils

 

On the other hand there are also some significant opportunities being:

 

·      the opportunity to achieve further economies of scale in a range of functions

·      the opportunity to achieve improved outcomes through having access to better trained and more specialist staff

·      if the Independent Panel’s synopsis for the future of local government in NSW is correct, the opportunity for Council to actively participate in shaping its own future rather than having it imposed by the State Government

·      the opportunity for councils to operate more effectively at a regional scale, including through lobbying and resource allocation.

 

With the well documented financial issues facing councils on the Mid North Coast, the option of ignoring or resisting structural change as part of a package of reforms designed to improve service delivery and financial sustainability is unlikely to be defensible in the longer term.  For this reason it is recommended that Council be open to the opportunities which a Joint Organisation will present.

 

The reports other recommendations are on the whole well considered.  They are bold, wide ranging and most importantly address the key financing issues which are plaguing the sector. 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council advise the Division of Local Government that it is broadly supportive of the recommendations of the Final Report of the NSW Independent Local Government Review Panel subject to the member councils of the North Coast Joint Organisation having input into the regional functions to be allocated to the Joint Organisation.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can make a submission as it sees fit or make no submission.

 

Council should have a position on the proposed North Coast Joint Organisation.  The recommendation is one position.  Alternatively Council may consider that the potential risks outweigh the long term strategic benefits and oppose the JO’s either in principle or until such time as further information is brought forward on their exact responsibilities and operational arrangements.

 

A further alternative is that Council support some form of MIDROC alliance as proposed by the MIDROC Executive.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The final report of the NSW Independent Local Government Review Panel has now been released and was circulated to Councillors earlier this month.  The report is 137 pages in length and can be accessed at www.localgovernmentreview.nsw.gov.au

 

The following report highlights some key findings and all of the principal recommendations, particularly as they relate to Nambucca Shire Council.  The submissions on the final report were to close on 7 March 2014.  However on 12 February and after preparing this report, the Government announced a new closing date of Friday 4 April 2014.

 

The Independent Panel is of the view that, “wide-ranging and concerted action is essential to make NSW Local Government sustainable and fit-for-purpose into the mid 21st century”.

 

“Sooner or later amalgamations will have to be part of the package:  the number of councils in NSW has halved during the past century and that trend will surely continue.  Rate-pegging should be reviewed in context of a wider effort to address infrastructure backlogs and ensure financial sustainability.  Cost shifting has been overstated relative to other factors, but local government does have legitimate concerns about rating exemptions and concessions, and the way some fees and charges are fixed below cost.  And all concerned need to face the reality that there are no “pots of gold” in Canberra or Macquarie Street:  councils must make better use of their own revenue base, and limited grant funding must be distributed according to needs, not simply numbers of people”. (page7)

 

On page 28 of the report there is specific reference to infrastructure management and backlogs and to the approach taken by this Council.

 

“The TCorp report makes it clear that tackling local government’s annual asset maintenance gap and the cumulative infrastructure backlog warrants the highest priority.  Economic development, service delivery and community wellbeing all depend on adequate infrastructure, especially roads, bridges and buildings.

 

Both TCorp and DLG now estimate the backlog at over $7 billion.  This figure is based on unaudited council data and might be reduced substantially if councils revise acceptable service levels in consultation with their communities – for example, replacing some dual lane bridges with cheaper single structures or culverts.  On the other hand, important environmental works (eg pollution traps to improve water quality or revegetation of eroding stream banks) may have been excluded from the calculations.

 

This uncertainty, and the need to formulate sensible strategies to address the backlog, highlights the importance of further improving asset and financial planning.  TCorp and DLG have identified continuing weaknesses in these areas and called for ongoing efforts to enhance performance, including upgrading the skills of both managers and councillors to develop and implement appropriate plans and programs.

 

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, numerous old timber bridges, coastal erosion and the demands of tourism.”

 

The report’s principal recommendations with some commentary are listed below.

 

Fiscal Responsibility

 

1        Establish an integrated fiscal responsibility program, coordinated by DLG and also involving TCorp, IPART and LGNSW to address the key findings and recommendations of TCorp’s financial sustainability review and DLG’s infrastructure audit.

 

Despite the recently mandated IP&R reporting requirements, the recommendation seems to stem from a perception that, particularly with small councils, there is too much emphasis on “keeping the books” rather than “strategic management”.  It suggests further monitoring of Councils by TCorp and the DLG.  Whilst it is unlikely that such mandates will change the balance between longer term strategic management and shorter term political pressures (any more than at the State or Federal level), a council which is operating effectively should be open to review and scrutiny.

 

2        As part of the program:

·      Adopt an agreed set of sustainability benchmarks

·      Introduce more rigorous guidelines for Delivery Programs

·      Commission TCorp to undertake a regular follow up sustainability assessments

·      Provide additional training programs for councillors and staff

·      Require all councils to employ an appropriately qualified Chief Financial Officer

 

Introducing more rigorous guidelines for delivery programs is in response to a perception that councils’ delivery programs do not accurately and fully reflect the imperative of fiscal responsibility.  It is agreed that the delivery programs of some Councils which have perpetually large operating losses and which have been rated as having weak (or worse) financial sustainability and a negative outlook, in terms of their strategies have a disconcerting acceptance of their situation as “operation normal”.  Comment as per the first recommendation above.

 

3        Place local government audits under the aegis of the Auditor General

 

The Panel believes that NSW should follow the example in Queensland and Victoria in placing local government audits firmly under the aegis of the Auditor General.  They believe this is the best way to ensure consistency of approach and provision of reliable data that can be used for sustainability assessments and benchmarking.

 

The content of councils’ audit reports is one of the most regulated reporting requirements in local government.  It is not clear how supervision and oversight by the Auditor General will improve the consistency of approach and the reliability of data.  What it will do is introduce a new layer of supervision and control with an expectation that it will be paid for by councils.  However the Panel believes that the additional costs will be relatively minor, and far outweighed by the benefits of a more robust system.  Will be a case of wait and see.

 

4        Ensure the provisions of the State-Local Government Agreement are used effectively to address cost-shifting

 

The recently signed intergovernmental agreement provides that where local government is asked or required by the State Government to provide a service or function to the people of NSW, any consequential financial impact is to be considered within the context of the capacity of local government.  The recommendation is supported.

 

Strengthening the Revenue Base

 

5        Require councils to prepare and publish more rigorous Revenue Policies

 

The recommendation has been made to enhance transparency and accountability to the community, and to encourage councils to avoid both arbitrary imposition of rates and unnecessary complexity.  Revenue policies should set out a clear rationale for the way their rating systems are structured and what they are designed to achieve.  The recommendation is supported.

 

6        Commission IPART to undertake a further review of the rating system focused on: options to reduce or remove excessive exemptions and concessions; more equitable rating of apartments and other multi-unit dwellings

 

The Panel notes the level of rates paid relative to property values varies greatly from one local government area to another.  This raises a number of equity issues (notably the relatively low rates paid by property owners in many affluent suburbs of Sydney).  The Panel suggests that this may require a partial shift from land value to capital improved value as the basis for rates.  The Panel also confirms it support for the Henry tax review finding that rates are a tax, not a fee for service and need to be set in accordance with the principles of taxation – equity, efficiency, simplicity, sustainability and policy consistency.  They note that whilst some concessions for disadvantaged ratepayers are justified, social welfare should not be a local government responsibility and arrangements for pensioner concessions should be reviewed.  They suggest that further consideration be given to enabling income poor but asset rich ratepayers to defer payment of rates as a charge against their property, rather than receive a concession.  In terms of rating exemptions and concessions, the Panel suggests that the current arrangements where land is used for certain religious, charitable and educational purposes be modified to a minimum rebate.

 

The observations by the Independent Panel are rational and sound in terms of the financial management of NSW local government but as per the previous discussion they do come with significant shorter term political pressures as they will create significant “losers”.  And generally speaking the “losers” will be the more politically articulate and engaged who own expensive city apartments as well as religious organisations and charities which would lose some of their favourably rating exemptions.

 

7        Either replace rate pegging with a new system of “rate benchmarking” or streamline current arrangements to remove unwarranted complexity, costs, and constraints to sound financial management

 

Since 1979 NSW has had a system of rate-pegging designed to prevent excessive increases in rates.  According to advice received from IPART, over the period 2001/2 to 2010/11, growth in the total revenues of NSW councils was 5.7% per annum, compared to an average of 8.0% for the other mainland states.  Rates increased by 4.4% per annum in NSW compared to an average of 8.0% for the other states.  The Panel notes this equates to “revenue foregone” in rates of well over $1b.

 

The Panel also notes that in 2013 only 23 of 152 councils applied for SRV’s.  Yet figures for the 2011/12 financial year show that 83 councils would have needed to increase rates and annual charges by more than 5% to achieve a break-even operating result.

 

The Panel’s first preference is that there be no rate-pegging and instead there be benchmarking through the publication of a cost index and comparative data on rate increases.  The Minister would retain a reserve power to intervene.  That Councils’ have the authority and autonomy to manage their financial affairs is long overdue and the recommendation should be welcomed by all councils.

 

If this is a “step too far” the Panel proposes as an alternative their previous suggestion being streamlined rate pegging wherein Councils’ have a margin of 5% above rate pegging to fix their rates without having to go through a special rate variation application.  This recommendation should allow allow most Councils the necessary autonomy to manage their financial affairs given the community’s capacity to pay effectively prevents rate increases much outside this proposed “band”.

 

A third option is that individual councils be able to “earn” complete exemption from rate pegging by demonstrating consistent high performance in asset and financial management.

 

Both the Panel’s first preference and second preferences are considered to be achievable and should be strongly supported by all councils.  Times have moved on since the introduction of rate pegging in 1979 and all of the evidence suggests that rate-pegging is inhibiting NSW councils in their response to the serious concerns about financial sustainability.

 

The third option of earning exemption from rate pegging is not preferred as it involves yet another approval process when at the same time the Panel has recommended less “red tape”.  In terms of the commitment of resources and time, the existing process for special rate variation approvals is daunting for smaller councils.  This is obvious from the relatively small number of councils who lodge applications.  Similar approval processes to “earn” exemption from rate pegging are also likely to dissuade smaller councils from lodging applications.

 

8        Subject to any legal constraints, seek to redistribute federal Financial Assistance Grants and some State grants in order to channel additional support to councils and communities with the greatest needs

 

The Panel notes that all councils receive a minimum grant.  Under the current law, 30% of the total general purpose component must be set aside for that purpose and distributed on a per capita basis.  The effect of this is that large amounts of assistance are paid to councils’ that could make do with less.  This has been highlighted in several reviews, notably the 2007 study by the Productivity Commission.  The Panel believes that in a climate of fiscal restraint, consideration needs to be given to the option of redistributing more funds to the most needy councils and communities.  Presently around $40m of general purpose grants are being allocated each year to 23 minimum grant councils, all of which are located in relatively affluent areas of the Sydney region north and east of Parramatta.  Those councils also receive a share of the roads component of FAGS and Roads to Recovery grants.

 

The observations and recommendations are agreed with and are favourable to the circumstances of Nambucca Shire Council.  They will require substantial changes to the existing arrangements for grant distribution, including changes to State and Federal legislation.

 

9        Establish a State-wide borrowing facility to enable local government to make increased use of debt where appropriate by reducing the level of interest rates paid by councils and by providing low cost financial and treasury management advisory services

 

The Panel refers to the practice of the Queensland, South Australia and New Zealand governments whereby borrowings (and some investments) are handled collectively by a state-wide agency.  The Panel believes that introducing such a concept for NSW local government will mean that councils will be able to borrow at the same rate as the State Government.  They believe on average there would be an interest rate saving to councils of about 2%.

 

There would seem to be no significant risk in this initiative, particularly as it has already been implemented in other States.  The report says that councils would have the option of participating in the state-wide facility.  If they could get a better offer outside the state-wide facility then they would be free to go to market.

 

The recommendation is practical, implementable and has the potential to provide councils with a better deal on their finance requirements.

 

10      Encourage councils to make increased use of fees and charges and remove restrictions on fees for statutory approvals and inspections, subject to monitoring and benchmarking by IPART

 

It is agreed that the regulation of fees by the State Government to stipulate maximums can prevent councils from recovering the full cost of those services and lead to subsidies from ratepayers.  It is the revenue equivalent of “cost shifting”.  The recommendation is supported.

 

Meeting Infrastructure Needs

 

11      Factor the need to address infrastructure backlogs into any future rate-pegging or local government cost index

 

Whilst “backlogs” may implicitly be accepted by the community as the prevailing or an acceptable level of service, this should not be assumed to be the case.  The evidence is they also vary significantly on a per capita basis between metropolitan and rural areas.  If rate pegging is to continue, it will be difficult to factor a uniform provision across all NSW councils.  A regional based approach may be better.

 

12      Maintain the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) for at least 5 years, with a focus on councils facing the most severe infrastructure problems

 

The Panel suggests two options for special assistance being to refocus an extended LIRS program on the most needy councils to provide interest free loans and secondly to set aside a proportion of the roads component of the FAGS to address the most severe backlogs in roads and bridges.

 

This Council has been strong user of LIRS, however there is a finite capacity for Councils to borrow.  Whilst finance is not the whole answer, the recommendations concerning LIRS are supported and particularly any opportunity for the most needy councils to be provided with interest free loans.

 

13      Pool a proportion of funds from the roads component of the FAGS and, if possible, the Roads to Recovery program in order to establish a strategic projects fund for roads and bridges that would:

·      Provide supplementary support for councils facing severe infrastructure backlogs that cannot reasonably be funded from other available sources

·      Fund regional projects of particular economic, social or environmental value

 

This is an initiative directed at addressing principally roads in rural and regional areas on a priority basis according to need.  There is likely to be “winners and losers” with this initiative.  For example a Council which has been diligent in maintaining its important road and bridge assets may well “lose” on a priority basis to a Council which has not.  Notwithstanding it does present an opportunity to undertake a more rational allocation of expenditure for the maintenance of important roads and bridges.  The initiative would be best delivered through a Joint Organisation.

 

14      Require councils applying for supplementary support from the Strategic Projects Fund to undergo independent financial assessments of their asset and financial management performance

 

This recommendation would seem to be partly in response to the observation made in relation to recommendation no. 13, ie that Councils will need to continue to apply effort to the maintenance of their road and bridge networks and not simply withdraw funds as a consequence of additional support being provided through a Strategic Projects Fund.

 

15      Carefully examine any changes to development (infrastructure) contributions to ensure there are no unwarranted impacts on council finances and ratepayers

 

This is a sensible recommendation arising from the NSW Government’s proposals to reform the land use planning system including further significant changes to the framework for levying infrastructure contributions.  The ability of Councils to address their wider infrastructure needs may be compromised if infrastructure contributions fall short of what is required to service development.

 

16      Adopt a similar model to Queensland’s of Regional Roads and Transport Groups in order to improve strategic network planning and foster ongoing improvement of asset management expertise in councils

 

These groups meet to determine regional priorities, decide on how to optimise state funding and discuss ways of improving the life cycle management of road and bridge assets.  This is a good initiative.

 

17      Establish Regional Water Alliances as part of new regional Joint Organisations proposed in section 11.

 

This recommendation is related to the establishment of the proposed Joint Organisations and their functional responsibilities.  The proposed Joint Organisations are considered in more detail further on in this report.

 

Improvement, Productivity and Accountability

 

This section has the following 3 recommendations which are aimed at allowing councils to focus on the core issue of financial sustainability.  All are agreed with. However there is a risk that trying to mandate certain priorities will only produce more "red tape".

 

18      Adopt a uniform core set of performance indicators for councils, linked to IPR requirements, and ensure ongoing performance monitoring is adequately resourced

 

Good comparative data will lift the overall performance of the local government sector.  The feedback from the UK is that comprehensive performance monitoring and auditing, whilst at times being a “blunt” instrument, has achieved good outcomes.

 

19      Commission IPART to undertake a whole of government review of the regulatory, compliance and reporting burden on councils.

 

Research commissioned by IPART indicates that NSW councils have around 120 regulatory functions involving over 300 separate regulatory roles.  Those roles emanate from 67 State Acts administered by 31 State agencies.  These figures suggest a heavy burden on business and the community, and on local government itself.  Substantial savings can be expected if this burden is reduced.  The initiative is supported.

 

20      Establish a new sector-wide program to promote, capture and disseminate innovation and best practice.

 

Learning from best practice is a key way for the whole industry to improve its performance.  The initiative is supported.

 

21      Amend IPR Guidelines to require councils to incorporate regular service reviews in their Delivery Programs.

 

The Panel observes that many 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.  This Council has not only undertaken regular service reviews but has also been proactive in questioning and changing existing service levels.  The recommendation is supported.

 

22      Strengthen requirements for internal and performance auditing.

 

The recommendation contains a number of elements which are familiar to this Council including:

·      Extending the concept of internal audit towards adding value and continuous improvement

·      Enable councils with smaller budgets to have joint arrangements for internal audit and to share audit committees, under the aegis of regional Joint Organisation.

 

The recommendations are supported.

 

23      Introduce legislative provisions for councils to hold Annual General Meetings

 

Every Council meeting is a public meeting so it is unclear whether a legislative provision requiring an Annual General Meeting will make any difference to focusing public and media attention on the Council’s overall performance.

 

24      Develop a NSW Local Government Workforce Strategy

 

The Panel is concerned with the quality of management in NSW local government.  They query whether managers have not only the technical and professional skills they require, but also the ability to be effective leaders of the workforce.  The Panel sees a need for an increased take up of leadership training amongst senior managers, including General Managers.  The recommendation is supported.

 

25      Explore opportunities for the Local Government Award to continue to evolve to address future challenges facing the sector and changing operational needs

 

The statement is something of a “motherhood”.  There should be no concern with its principles.

 

Political Leadership and Good Governance

 

26      Amend the Local Government Act to strengthen political leadership:

·      Require councils to undertake regular Representation Reviews covering matters such as the number of councillors, method of election and use of wards

·      Before their nomination is accepted, require all potential candidates for election to local government to attend an information session covering the roles and responsibilities of councillors and mayors

·      Amend the legislated role of councillors and mayors as proposed in Boxes 19 and 21, and introduce mandatory professional development programs

·      Provide for full time mayors, and in some cases deputy mayors, in larger councils and regional centres

·      Amend the provisions of election of mayors as proposed in Box 22.

 

The majority of councils in NSW do not have a popularly elected Mayor (only 34 out of 152).

 

My own view is that training for Councillors should not be mandated.  Training is not mandated for the other levels of government.  The role of Councillors is not to be experts in particular fields, but like other politicians, to consider competing interests and apply a community leader’s judgement.  The other issue about mandated training is that councillors invariably have different skills arising from their backgrounds and years of experience serving on a Council.  “One size fits all” professional development is unlikely to be successful.

 

27      Increase remuneration for councillors and mayors who successfully complete recognised professional development programs.

 

Not supported for the reasons discussed in response to recommendation no. 26.

 

28      Amend the legislated role and standard contract provisions of General Managers as proposed in Boxes 23 and 24.

 

There are no significant changes to the roles and responsibilities of the General Manager.  There are proposed to be some changes to the arrangements for the appointment of General Managers to prevent contract renewals 6 months before elections or dismissals 6 months after elections.  It is also proposed that the use of the summary dismissal provisions at any time should require a two-thirds majority of councillors.  The requirement for a two thirds majority to summarily dismiss a General Manager may be viewed by some to create an unnecessary impost on removing a General Manager when the existing provisions only require a simple majority.

 

29      Amend the provisions for organisation reviews as proposed in section 9.6

 

In the Panel’s view, the governing body should be able to determine, on the advice of the General Manager, the upper levels of the organisation structure, and to ensure that staffing resources are being allocated in such a way that the council’s priorities can be pursued.  The Panel therefore proposes that the Act be amended to provide that a council must review the organisation structure after each election, and may do so at other times, but also that the adopted structure may only specify the roles and relationships of the General Manager, designated senior staff and other staff reporting directly to the General Manager.  This contrasts with the existing system whereby every position in the organisation is regarded as being part of the organisation structure which has to be determined by Council.

 

30      Develop a Good Governance Guide as a basis for “performance improvement orders” and to provide additional guidance on building effective working relationships between the governing body, councillors, mayors and General Managers.

 

It is agreed that the criteria for good performance should be well articulated.

 

Advance Structural Reform

 

This section proposes initiatives to accelerate structural reform as follows:

 

31      Introduce additional options for local government structures including regional joint organisations, rural councils and community boards to facilitate a better response to the needs and circumstances of different Regions.

 

The opportunity for Councils to utilise different structures to improve participatory democracy is supported.  However it is not agreed that they be mandated, but instead be a flexible set of structures available for Councils to utilise as appropriate.  In particular, the suggested Community Boards may serve to provide representation and some service delivery at a suburb or district level.

 

32      Legislate a revised process for considering potential amalgamations and boundary changes through a reconstituted and more independent Boundaries Commission.

 

The recommendations concern a reconstituted Boundaries Commission and procedural arrangements designed to help build trust in its independence and capacity.  The recommendation is supported.

 

33      Encourage voluntary mergers of councils through measures to lower barriers and provide professional and financial support.

 

Voluntary mergers should be facilitated and the recommendation is supported.

 

34      Provide and promote a range of options to maintain local identity and representation in local government areas with large populations and/or diverse localities.

 

Again, the opportunity for Councils to utilise different structures to improve participatory democracy is supported. 

 

Regional Joint Organisations

 

35      Establish new Joint Organisations (JOs) for each of the regions shown on Map 2 … under new provisions of the Local Government Act that replace those for County Councils

 

·      Defer establishment of Jos in the Sydney metropolitan region, except for sub-regional strategic planning, pending further consideration of options for council mergers

·      Enter into discussions with 2-3 regions to establish “pilot” Jos

·      Re-constitute existing county councils as subsidiaries of new Joint Organisations, as indicated in Table 5

·      Establish Regional Water Alliances in each JO along the lines proposed in the 2009 Armstrong-Gellatly report

·      Set the core functions of Joint Organisations by means of Ministerial Guidelines

·      Seek federal government agreement to make Jos eligible for general purpose FAGS

 

The Panel’s final proposal is very similar to the Panel’s previous proposal to establish multi-purpose County Councils, the effective difference is strikethrough County Councils and replace with Joint Organisations.  The proposed core functions of the Joint Organisations are listed as:

·              Strategic regional and sub-regional planning

·              Inter-government relations and regional advocacy

·              Information and technical exchange between member councils

·              Activities of existing county councils

·              Regional alliances of local government water utilities

·              Road network planning and major projects (through Regional Roads Groups)

·              Collaboration with State and federal agencies in infrastructure and service provision

·              Strategic procurement

·              Other joint activities specified in the proclamation, such as major infrastructure projects, regional waste and environmental management (including weeds and floodplain management), regional economic development, regional library services and “high level” corporate services or “back office” functions

·              Administrative and technical support for any “Rural Councils” established within the JO’s area

 

As discussed with the County Council model, many of the proposed functional transfers are not readily defined.  For example where does local planning stop and sub-regional planning start?  This Council’s LEP has elements of both.  Does responsibility for inter-government relations and regional advocacy mean that the Joint Organisation would be responsible for seeking and securing all grant funding?  What is strategic procurement?  What are high level corporate services?  What is regional as opposed to local economic development?

 

There has been some subtle change to the previous proposal for, ”management of, or technical support for, water utilities”, to be transferred to a County Council.  The wording is now, “regional alliances of local government water utilities”.

 

The suggestion that the alliances be along the lines proposed in the 2009 Armstrong Gellatly report is of some concern as they would arguably have seen most functional responsibility for water and sewerage services transferred to new utilities.  The Panel does not seem as prescriptive in its approach although the lack of detail as to the functions of the alliance is concerning.  There are just 3 paragraphs in the report about the matter.

 

The boundary of the proposed Joint Organisation which will contain this Council is as previously proposed for the North Coast County Council being the local government areas of Clarence Valley, Coffs Harbour, Bellingen and Nambucca.

 

Despite the extensive range of proposed functions for the Joint Organisation and its coverage of four local government areas stretching over 230km of coastline with a combined population of 150,000 people, the report states that, “staffing of JOs would normally be limited to a Regional General Manager and administrative team.  There would also be a small group of professional staff engaged in regional strategic planning, inter-government relations, technical support to member councils and management of regional projects.  This may involve seconding a few senior management and technical staff from member councils to the JO, although in many cases they could remain based in their current workplace.  The Panel does not see any need for transfer or relocation of operational staff.  However, where an existing County Council has administrative and operational staff and becomes a subsidiary of a JO, they would become employees of the JO under the Local Government Award”.

 

It is proposed that the scope of shared services would be detailed in a government proclamation, and once established there would be no opting out for at least the life of a strategic business plan.  The Panel also notes that a number of shared services activities could be handled by one or more member councils becoming a “centre for excellence” for the region in specific areas of operation eg human resources, IT, waste management, economic development etc.

 

Given the uncertainty about the division of responsibility between the councils and the joint organisations, the Panel’s suggestion for the instant creation of a multi-function JO by proclamation may be a higher risk approach than a more “organic” arrangement whereby the participating councils develop detailed agreements in relation to the respective responsibilities of councils and the JO, with the transfer of responsibilities and the development of the JO being more incremental.  For example, in the initial proclamation it may be agreed that all waste functions, weed management, strategic procurement (tenders >$150,000), as well as regional road planning and maintenance be transferred to the JO.  Subsequent transfers of responsibility could then occur as agreement was reached amongst the participating councils on other functional responsibilities which could be undertaken more effectively by the JO than the individual councils.

 

This Council’s position on the proposed establishment of a North Coast Joint Organisation is a key strategic and leadership question.  There are some significant risks being:

·      the loss of too many functions may render the residual council ineffective

·      the creation of another government “body” could add to rather than reduce existing overheads

·      conflict between the regional wide goals of the joint organisation and the local goals of the participating councils

 

On the other hand there are also some significant opportunities being:

·      the opportunity to achieve further economies of scale in a range of functions

·      the opportunity to achieve improved outcomes through having access to better trained and more specialist staff

·      if the Independent Panel’s synopsis for the future of local government in NSW is correct, the opportunity for Council to actively participate in shaping its own future rather than having it imposed by the State Government

·      the opportunity for councils to operate more effectively at a regional scale, including through lobbying and resource allocation.

 

With the well documented financial issues facing councils on the Mid North Coast, the option of ignoring or resisting structural change as part of a package of reforms designed to improve service delivery and financial sustainability is unlikely to be defensible in the longer term.  For this reason it is recommended that Council be open to the opportunities which a Joint Organisation will present.

 

36      Identify one or more regional centres within each Joint Organisation and:

·      Create a network of those centres to drive development across regional NSW

·      Consider potential mergers of councils to consolidate regional centres, as indicated in Table 6 (11.7)

 

Table 6 nominates a number of potential amalgamations around the regional centres of Albury, Armidale-Dumaresq, Bathurst, Deniliquin, Dubbo, Griffith, Orange, Queanbeyan and Wagga Wagga.  There is no mention of centres on the North Coast.

 

37      Develop close working partnerships between Joint Organisations and State agencies for strategic planning, infrastructure development and regional service delivery, and

·      Add representatives of Joint Organisations to State agency Regional Leadership Groups

·      Give particular attention to cross border issues and relationships in the operations of Joint Organisations and in future regional strategies

 

Such initiatives will need to succeed if Joint Organisations are to succeed.

 

Other

 

The remainder of the report mainly concerns amalgamation proposals for Sydney, the Central Coast and the Hunter as well as a new concept of stripped down rural councils and community boards for those councils which amalgamate.  The respective roles and responsibilities of these organisations with the umbrella council are not well defined.  This is probably intentional to allow some flexibility but a model will be required which provides for mutually supportive organisations which have relevance and purpose.  The overseas experience in achieving this seems to be mixed.

 

Table 11 of the report does canvass long term options for Councils and their merger potential.  For Nambucca Shire Council our merger potential is rated as “medium” with the preferred option being our involvement in a North Coast Joint Organisation.  Out of the 97 non-metropolitan Councils, 29 are listed as having “high” merger potential.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Senior management

 

There has also been discussion at the MIDROC General Managers meeting on 31 January 2014 and also at the MIDROC Board meeting on 21 February.

 

At the MIDROC General Managers meeting it was generally agreed that the large majority of the Panel’s recommendations were sensible and in the industry’s interest.  Concerns were expressed regarding the formation of the proposed Joint Organisations, their role and responsibility and their relationship to MIDROC.

 

The report was also discussed by the MIDROC executive at their meeting on 6 February 2014 and the attached media release was issued.

 

The major difference between the recommendation in this report and the media release is that the MIDROC Executive wish to pursue a slightly different variation to the proposed Joint Organisation across the MIDROC councils rather than the Joint Organisation boundaries proposed by the Independent Panel.  The model discussed by the MIDROC Executive was presented to this Council by the General Manager of Kempsey Shire Council in September 2013.  However both the model proposed by the Independent Panel for Joint Organisations and the model put forward by the General Manager of Kempsey Shire Council for MIDROC propose similar structural changes whereby existing functional responsibilities which would benefit from a regional alliance would be undertaken by a new body.

 

In terms of which is the preferred model it should be noted that despite considerable work and consultation from the General Manager of Kempsey Shire Council and lengthy discussions in MIDROC, progress to reach agreement on change is slow.

 

In terms of the boundary of an alliance a further consideration is the regional “community of interest” for this Council.  Notwithstanding the MIDROC Executive’s desire to maintain the MIDROC boundary, this Council already has a significant waste alliance with Bellingen and Coffs Harbour City Council.  There are also a number of alliances and agreements between Bellingen, Coffs Harbour and Clarence Valley Councils.  Conversely councils in the southern end of MIDROC (Greater Taree, Great Lakes and Gloucester) are a significant distance from the Nambucca Valley and perhaps not as relevant in a regional sense as Coffs Harbour City Council and its adjoining councils.

 

On 12 February the Government announced that the period for comment had been extended from 7 March to 4 April 2014.  This has enabled the Mayor and General Manager to attend a Leaders Forum conducted by Local Government (LG) NSW at Coffs Harbour on 14 March 2014.  There was also a meeting of the Country Mayors on 14 March which also considered the Panel’s recommendations and particularly the formation of Joint Organisations.  The feedback obtained from the Leaders Forum was broadly consistent with the recommendations in this report.  The advice of the President of the LG NSW is that most councils are open to the idea of Joint Organisations and indeed many are keen to participate in the pilot program. 

 

A Mayor from the Mid North Coast who attended the Country Mayors’ meeting heard from the Minister for Local Government.  His belief is that the Minister intends to act quickly on the Panel’s recommendations, in this Parliamentary session.  He gave the impression to those in attendance that it is, “game on”.  He also announced that he has lifted the restriction on JO pilots as there had been a very positive response.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT

 

Not applicable at this stage

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Not applicable at this stage

 

Attachments:

1

3885/2014 - MIDROC Media Release - Text

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

"Revitalising Local Government" - Final Report of the NSW Independent Local Government Review Panel October 2013

 



Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.3      SF1431            270314         Valla Quarry - Addendum to Quarry Environmental Management Plan

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

Council has now received an addendum to the Valla Quarry Environmental Management Plan (QEMP).  The Addendum was received on 28 February 2014.  It would seem that the matter has triggered a thorough review of the quarry’s existing mining and rehabilitation plan.  The review has determined that the available resource is significantly greater than previously thought and about 50% more than the approved extraction limit of 950,000m3.  Because of this the quarry operator was requested to and has further revised the QEMP to delete stages 3A and 3B of the original plan.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.       Council approve the variations to the Valla Quarry Environmental Management Plan (QEMP).

 

2.       That Council request that Groundwork Plus on behalf of the quarry operator provide Council           and the EPA with a complete and current QEMP, ie the original document incorporating the           changes described in the addendum.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option of approving or not approving the variations to the Valla Quarry Environmental Management Plan.

 

Council has options in relation to fining or taking other legal action in relation to the breaches of development consent identified in the annual environmental management audit report for the year ending 1 October 2013.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At Council’s meeting on 30 January 2014 it was resolved that Quarry Solutions be provided with a period of one (1) month to submit a revised Quarry Environmental Management Plan (QEMP) for consideration by Council and the Environment Protection Authority (EPA).  It was also resolved that consideration of fining for breaches be deferred until after the Quarry has submitted their revised QEMP.

 

It will be recalled that the annual environmental management audit report for the year ending 1 October 2013 identified non-compliance with conditions of the development consent (DA2001/096) as follows:

 

1.       Development and subsequent extraction has occurred in Stage 2 to allow for efficient and safe extraction in stage 1a and 1b.  The current Quarry Environmental Management Plan (QEMP) addresses all Stages, however, approval has only been given for Stage 1.  An updated QEMP is required to be lodged for approval with Council.

 

9.       The approved quarry design in the EIS has created issues with respect to safe access and gradients and subsequently has been altered.  A review and update of the QEMP to reflect operations on site and future works will be undertaken.

 

12.     The site extracted 84,944.49m3 (in situ) of material, above the 50,000m3 specified.  An application to increase the maximum annual extraction of material to 79,500m3 has been lodged.

 

25B    Noise monitoring undertaken on 23 July 2013, by MWA Environmental show noise levels above 35.5 dB(A) in the absence of wind.

 

79      Development and subsequent extraction has occurred in Stage 2 to allow for efficient and safe extraction in Stage 1a and 1b.  Revegetation has been undertaken within Stage 1a and 1b of the batter areas identified as terminal and not being required for on-going operations.  Due to changes in design, a significant amount of Stage 1 is still required for haul road and extraction and rehabilitation (and) could not be carried out in full accordance with Figure 8 of the QEMP.

 

80      The pit sump is no longer in use however water is stored in Sediment Dam A.  The mean pH for samples collected from Sediment Dam A was 4.4 which is outside the pH range of 6.5 to 8.5 specified.

 

Partial compliance of conditions in Development Consent DA2001/096 were identified as follows:

 

28      Operator confirmed notification was provided to neighbouring properties however this was undertaken 24 hours prior to the blast, not two (2) days as specified in the condition.

 

The audit also identified that Conditions 44 – 49 do not appear to have relevance to the Valla Quarry.  As per the previous annual audit these conditions were not assessed.

 

In relation to EPA Licence No. 13136 the following non-compliance with conditions were identified:

 

L2      pH measured outside 5.0-7.5 range measuring 4.5 and 4.7 during the two quarterly discharge sampling events.

 

L4.1

L4.2   Noise limits were exceeded during noise monitoring undertaken on 23 July 2013 by MWA.

 

O4.1   Operations have commenced in Stage 2 and 1c however this condition still stands.  Operations have encroached on Stage 2 to ensure safe and efficient operations in Stage 1a and 1b.

 

Partial compliance of conditions in the EPA Licence No. 13136 were identified as follows:

 

L5.6

L5.7   As per previous audits, monitoring is not undertaken at nearest residential dwellings as other locations have been identified for access and safety reasons.  These have historically included the property adjacent to the weighbridge (house) and Valla Hall however a third location, Valla Road, was also monitored during this reporting period.

 

M4.2  The operator has been recording rainfall, however has only been doing so once daily.

 

U2.1   Dump trucks have been rubber lined however the completion date was not met.  The EPA was advised throughout this process.

 

U3.1   The primary crusher enclosure has been lined internally with an insulating material and the size of the openings for the personnel access and conveyor penetrations has been reduced, however the completion date was not met.  The EPA was advised through this process.

 

E4.2   Clearing and preparation of an unquarried area has been undertaken in a section of Stage 2 without notification to the EPA.  Operations have encroached on Stage 2 to ensure safe and efficient operations in Stage 1a and 1b.

 

In relation to the noise monitoring which was undertaken in July during the calm and lighter south westerly conditions prevailing during the earlier morning period it was found that:

 

·      Quarry noise levels exceeded the relevant limit by 2 to 3 dB(A) at residences R1 and R2 to the north

·      Quarry noise levels exceeded the relevant limit by 4.5 dB(A) at residences R3 and R4 to the northwest

·      Quarry noise levels exceeded the relevant limit by 2.5 dB(A) at residence R5 to the northwest

·      Quarry noise levels were compliant or within 0.5 dB(A).

 

In response to these exceedances the report advises as follows:

 

“Quarry Solutions has undertaken significant mitigation works onsite over the previous three (3) years which are considered Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BATEA) as defined by the NSW Industrial Noise Policy 2000 (INP).  These mitigation works have included:

 

Implementation of a Peak Noise Mitigation Plan

Full enclosure of the processing plant and installation of insulation at the primary crushing house

Construction of noise attenuation bunds and fencing

Installation of rubber lining of dump truck trays.

 

At a meeting (held on 17 October 2013) the EPA agreed with Quarry Solutions that all measures considered BATEA have been undertaken.  The next option to the INP was to negotiate agreements with the relevant land owners.  Connelly Project Resources Group (CPR Group) has been engaged by Quarry Solutions to provide community consultation services in relation to the site’s activities including the agreements with the five (5) stakeholders experiencing noise levels in exceedance of the licence limits.  CPR Group has met with the relevant stakeholders with the view to reaching suitable agreements consistent with the INP.”

 

Quarry Solutions has now submitted the attached addendum to the Quarry Environmental Management Plan which was received by Council on 28 February 2014.

 

Whilst the revised QEMP was submitted within one month, it required further revision by the authors to deal with a significant underestimate of the available resource.  Based on the work in reviewing the QEMP it was determined that the available resource for the three stages identified in the consent was 1,478,800 m3 in situ compared to the total allowable extraction limit of 950,000m3.

 

Groundwork Plus on behalf of Quarry Solutions Pty Ltd was requested to and has now responded by agreeing to delete the previous approved stages 3A and 3B which contained a collective volume of 488,700 m3 in situ.  They state the problem has arisen because the previous extraction plans substantially underestimated the available extractive resource.  The resulting two stages are still estimated to exceed the total approved limit by 40,000m3 in situ, however it is acknowledged that the approved limit cannot be exceeded and that Quarry Solutions will need to reduce output from the final Stage 2B to remain compliant.

 

In terms of possible action against the Quarry in relation to the reported breach of consent conditions, Council should be guided by its Compliance, Enforcement and Prosecution Policy adopted in March 2009 and reviewed in October 2010.  The policy provides that the selection of the appropriate response and priority to be given to a matter be determined on the basis of a number of tests being:

 

Test 1 – Likelihood of Consent or Approval

 

An unauthorised activity/development is understood to “pass” this test in the event that it is likely that the development or activity would have been granted consent/approval, had the application been made for such consent/approval prior to the undertaking of the activity or development.

 

Comment – this test is relevant to the extraction not occurring in accordance with the approved staging for WHS and operational reasons.

 

Test 2 – Environmental Impact

 

Is the unauthorised development or activity likely to cause a significant environmental impact, including impacts on the natural and the built environment?  The application of this test requires a determination of the fact of any environmental impact and an assessment of the degree of that impact which will be undertaken by a qualified consultant if required.

 

Comment – the quarry operator, Quarry Solutions has been proactive in responding to the quarry’s environmental impacts, and particularly noise, by working with the EPA to firstly modify their operations and then when this failed to achieve compliant noise emissions, to negotiate with the affected property owners pursuant to the EPA’s Industrial Noise Policy.

 

Test 3 – Public Safety

 

Is the unauthorised development or activity likely to lead to injury and/or create a public liability?

 

Comment – the change to the staging which resulted in the non-compliance with the consent condition was made partly in response to work, health and safety issues for the quarry’s employees.

 

Other personal matters of consideration are:

 

A  The person in breach has shown contrition

Comment – Groundwork Plus on behalf of Quarry Solutions has been open and transparent in reporting on their non-compliances.  They have acknowledged their non-compliance with the consent conditions.

 

B  Inaction would cause hardship to the complainant

 

C  Action would cause hardship to the person the subject of the complaint

 

D  The person has received previous warnings or has been the subject of legal action

 

E  An educative approach would be effective

 

For the reasons discussed it is not considered that Council should fine Quarry Solutions for the breaches of consent conditions identified in their annual environmental management audit report for the year ending 1 October 2013.  Notwithstanding, the tests have some subjectivity and it is acknowledged that different knowledge, interpretations and weightings may produce a different answers.

 

So that Council and the EPA have a current and complete QEMP, Council should request that Groundwork Plus provide a copy of the original document incorporating the changes described in the addendum.  This is necessary to reduce the potential for confusion and to allow all parties to readily assess actual performance against required performance.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with Groundwork Plus, environmental and mine plan consultants to the quarry operator.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

At this stage there are no environmental implications.

 

Social

 

At this stage there are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

At this stage there are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are potential risks in accepting a quarry plan which does not meet the requirements of the development consent.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There are no budgetary impacts.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There are no impacts on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Staff time is required to read the submitted information and report it to Council.

 

Attachments:

1

6106/2014 - Revised Addendum 1 to Quarry Environmental Management Plan

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Valla Quarry - Addendum to Quarry Environmental Management Plan

 
























Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.4      SF1930            270314         Report on the Financial Impact of Reducing the Cost of Dogs Purchased from the Pound to $150 per Dog

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

Council has received complaints about its euthanasia rate for impounded dogs.  The Council is addressing this with an initiative to advertise dogs suitable for rehoming on its web site and in the media.  At a recent briefing provided by Council’s Ranger, Mr Reg Clough, another suggested initiative was to reduce the charge for dogs sold/“rehomed” from the pound to $150.00.  The current charges are up to $411 for a female dog and $341 for a male dog.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council advertise a change in its fees and charges to sell dogs from its pound for $150.00 with the funding subsidy to initially be provided from the Environmental Levy with grant funding to be sought in the longer term from the Government’s foreshadowed response to the report from the Companion Animals Taskforce.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can accept the recommendation; propose no subsidy or propose a different subsidy.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At Council’s meeting on 13 March 2014 it was resolved that the Council receive a report from the Ranger regarding the financial impact of reducing the cost of dogs purchased from the pound to $150 per dog.

 

This report has been prepared by the General Manager with information provided by Council’s Ranger, Mr Reg Clough.

 

The current charges for purchasing a dog from the pound are set out below.

 

Current Charges – Sale of Female Dog

 

Desexing                        $245

Vaccination C3                $63

Microchip                        $22

Lifetime registration         $49

Sale (pound release)        $32

 

Total                               $411

 

*note this is the maximum for a dog which is not desexed, microchipped etc

 

“Out of Pocket” Costs (no overheads/staff time) – Sale of Female Dog

 

Desexing                        $245

Vaccination C3                $63

Microchip                        $11

Lifetime registration         $49

Sale                                $00

 

Total                               $368

 

Current Charges – Sale of Male Dog

 

Desexing                        $175

Vaccination C3                $63

Microchip                        $22

Lifetime registration         $49

Sale                                $32

 

Total                               $341

 

*note this is the maximum for a dog which is not desexed, microchipped etc

 

“Out of Pocket” Costs (no overheads/staff time – Sale of Male Dog

 

Desexing                        $175

Vaccination C3                $63

Microchip                        $11

Lifetime Registration        $49

Sale                                $00

 

Total                               $298

 

Actual Cost of Euthanasia of Dog Including Tip Fees (excluding wages)

 

Lethal injection & tip fee  $25

 

For each dog that is sold instead of euthanized we achieve a $25 cost reduction.

 

Based on these figures if we sell each dog from the pound for $150 the actual subsidy required is averaged at $183 per dog.

 

If we include the saving of twenty five dollars for what it would have cost to euthanize the dog, then the actual subsidy is $158.

 

As the number of dogs we sell is totally dependent upon the quality and suitability of the animals that are available from the pound it is difficult to know exactly how many dogs we will sell in a year.

 

The advertising of dogs on Councils website will certainly increase the opportunity for us to reach a broader audience and based on this, a reduced purchase price and our current impounding rates I would estimate we may sell 25 dogs in the first year.

 

This would mean a subsidy of four thousand dollars per annum would be required. This could be reviewed on an annual basis and adjusted as needed.

 

It is recommended that Council advertise a change in its fees and charges to sell dogs from its pound for $150.00 with the funding subsidy to initially be provided from the Environmental Levy with grant funding to be sought in the longer term from the Government’s foreshadowed response to the report from the Companion Animals Taskforce (refer to the attachment)..

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation involving the General Manager, Council’s Ranger and Councillors at the on-site inspection.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There will be a benefit to the environment if more dogs in the community are desexed, microchipped and registered.

 

Social

 

Concern has been expressed about the numbers of dogs which have to be euthanized by councils, mainly as a consequence of irresponsible breeding and ownership.  There has been recent criticism of this Council in some social media for our euthanasia rate.  The issue is not particular to this Council but it was identified in this Council’s Promoting Better Practice Review.  Any reasonable initiatives undertaken to reduce Council’s euthanasia rate should be well received amongst those in the community who have expressed these concerns.

 

Economic

 

There are no significant economic implications.

 

Risk

 

The management of companion animals is a relatively high risk area for Councils.  Besides criticism of Council’s practices and the potential loss of reputation, Councils’ have relatively high risk exposure when dealing with potentially aggressive or dangerous animals.  The risk is not only to Council’s Rangers but also to the general public if complaints are not acted upon or an impounded animal is subsequently involved in an attack.  Coronial inquests are likely to closely scrutinising the role of a Council in managing a particular animal, eg, whether the Council was aware of the animal via complaints etc; what it had done to ensure the proper management of the animal; whether its actions were timely and effective etc.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

As indicated in the report the forecast cost to Council for the subsidy is $4,000 per annum.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Depending upon the length of time to advertise the change in Council’s fees and charges and the number of dogs which may be sold, there will only be a minor or no impact on working funds

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There will be a minor increase in resources required to advertise the dogs for sale on-line.

 

 

Attachments:

1

5826/2014 - Announcement of increased funding to promote responsible pet ownership

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Report on the Financial Impact of Reducing the Cost of Dogs Purchased from the Pound to $150 per Dog

 



Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager

ITEM 9.5      DA2013/092      270314         Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

Council has received a valuation of $125,000 for the site of the proposed Health One community health facility in Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads.  The valuation is substantially different to one obtained for the adjoining land which was sold to the Bridge Club.  The Mid North Coast Local Health District object to paying $125,000 for the land (the higher valuation) and seek Council’s consideration to transfer the land for $55,000 being that recommended by Tew Property Consultants who were commissioned by the Health District to review the valuation obtained by Council.

 

By way of resolving the impasse it is suggested that Council adopt a median of the values recommended by Tew Property Consultants ($55,000) and Country Coast Valuers ($125,000).  The median is $90,000, exclusive of GST.  It is further suggested that the $35,000 difference between the median price of $90,000 and the $55,000 recommended by Tew Property Consultants, be applied by way of a donation to a public health initiative in the Nambucca Valley.  To this end it is recommended that Council make a $35,000 donation to the Nambucca Valley Cancer Support Group Inc. for their work in providing cancer support services in the community.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council adopt a sale price of $90,000 (excluding GST) for the site of the proposed Health One community health facility in Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads.

 

2        That following settlement, Council make a donation of $35,000 to the Nambucca Valley Cancer Support Group Inc. for their work in providing cancer support services in the community.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has valuation opinions that range from $47,551 to $125,000.  It is open to Council to select either or any value in between.  Council could also decide not to sell the land in which case the project would not proceed.

 

Whether or not Council wishes to make a donation to the Nambucca Valley Cancer Support Group Inc. or to some other public health initiative are other options.

 

It was suggested at Manex that the Council could seek expressions of interest from other “not for profit” public health care providers for the $35,000 and then assess the applications.  Council would need to be aware that there are differing levels of government support for providers.  The funding could then be distributed to a single provider or multiple providers.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

This matter was considered by Council at its meeting on 13 March 2014 and it was resolved that it be deferred to this meeting.

 

On 28 March 2013 Council resolved to advise the Mid North Coast Local Health District that subject to satisfactory completion of the required rezoning, reclassification and development assessment processes, that Council would be agreeable to offering a site for acquisition by the Health District in accordance with a valuation determined by the Valuer General.  Further the Health District be liable for all application fees, council contributions, legal, survey, registration costs and government charges associated with the creation of the title and its transfer to the Health District and for the development application for the facility.

 

Council has subsequently proceeded with the exhibition of a planning proposal (for the reclassification of part of the site from community to operational land) and development application for the Health Facility.  A public hearing has been conducted in relation to the planning proposal, the outcome of which was reported to Council’s meeting on 11 December 2013.

 

The land proposed to be transferred has an area of 2,766.24 square metres.  Council has now received a valuation report from Country Coast Valuers.  Council did enquire with the Valuer General about providing the valuation, but was advised that the DPI no longer conduct these valuations and instead suggested Council use one of three recommended private sector valuers.  Country Coast Valuers were one of the three recommended and provided the cheapest quote.  The valuation report is attached.  The valuation report has determined the fair market value to be $45 per square metre which for the area of land means a value of $125,000 exclusive of GST.

 

The valuation report has been forwarded to the Project Manager acting on behalf of the Mid North Coast Local Health District.  The Project Manager has now responded taking issue with the valuation and arguing that a more appropriate valuation would be consistent with that relied upon in determining the value of the adjoining Bridge Club site.  In the first instance it has been suggested to the Project Manager that the Health District seek their own valuation and then both parties discuss the differences.  However it has been argued by the Project Manager that the project has been developed with a business case and funding approval based on the bridge club valuation and that the valuation relies on residential and commercial sales outside of Nambucca Heads.  The Health District seeks confirmation from Council as to the price it is seeking for the land.

 

Since preparing the report to the Council’s meeting on 13 March the Health District has lodged with Council a review of the valuation undertaken by Country Coast Valuers.  The review was undertaken by RW Tew, a registered valuer with Tew Property Consultants.  That review recommends adopting $55,000 as current market value.  A copy of the valuation is attached.

 

The site of the Bridge Club was valued by the North Coast Valuation Service in November 2008, approximately 5 years before the current valuation.  That valuation determined a fair market value of $15 per square metre to be appropriate and based on the proposed 1,283 square metre site, the valuation was $19,000 exclusive of GST.  The recent general revaluation of all land in the LGA, with a base date of 1 July 2013, indicated the value of the Bridge Club site to be $22,000.  A copy of the Bridge Club valuation is attached.

 

It is acknowledged that even allowing for the 5 years between the valuations, there is a considerable difference between them.

 

The 1 July 2013 valuation of the Bridge Club at $22,000 equates to a value of $17.15 per square metre compared to the $45 per square metre proposed by Country Coast Valuers.  Applying these different values to the 2,766.24 square metre site of the proposed Health One facility yields the following range:

 

Site for Proposed Health One Facility - Valuation Range

 

Value based on previous Bridge Club valuation

Value as per Country Coast Valuers

$47,441

$125,000

 

Note:  Both valuations exclude GST

 

Council needs to determine the price for the land.

 

In deciding the appropriate price, matters which the Council may care to consider are:

 

·      The Health One Facility is a community health facility targeted at those with socio-economic disadvantage.  This would be regarded by many as an important community service and given the transaction is between two government authorities, it may be argued that comparisons with commercial valuations are less relevant

·      The Council has been rated by the NSW Treasury Corporation as having weak financial sustainability and a negative outlook.  We run significant annual operating losses in the General Fund (not considering grants and capital contributions) as a consequence of unfunded depreciation whilst our major source of revenue (rates) is pegged.  We have shed jobs, reduced service levels and increased rates but are still labelled as financially weak.

·      The Health One Facility is of significant economic benefit, providing jobs during construction and also during its opening hours.  Some of the specialists may also decide to reside in the local government area.

·      In terms of health policy, preventative public health care is generally considered to be significantly under resourced compared to the costs of treating preventable illness.

·      The area required for the proposed Health One facility is the equivalent of four standard residential allotments with the highest valuation being more representative of one standard, vacant residential allotment.

·      The Mid North Coast Health District has advised that the budget for the project is coming from another source of State Government funding and an additional unbudgeted expenditure of $78,000 may not be able to be met from that budget.

·      The price of the land may influence the Health District’s attitude to a number of disputed conditions of development consent, including the provision of a footpath.

·      The Health District is entering into agreements with other local service providers such as Durri.  If the project does not proceed, the benefits of these service agreements will not flow to the local community.

 

By way of resolving the impasse it is suggested that Council adopt a median of the values recommended by Tew Property Consultants ($55,000) and Country Coast Valuers ($125,000).  The median is $90,000, exclusive of GST.  It is further suggested that the $35,000 difference between the median price of $90,000 and the $55,000 recommended by Tew Property Consultants, be applied by way of a donation to a public health initiative in the Nambucca Valley.  To this end it is recommended that Council make a $35,000 donation to the Nambucca Valley Cancer Support Group Inc. for their work in providing cancer support services in the community.  Council will be aware that the Group opened a Cancer Resource Centre in the grounds of the Macksville Hospital in 2011 with the following functions:

 

·      A place where services can be offered, such as counselling for groups and individuals, provision of information and resources for patients and their carers

·      A place where education can be offered to people living with cancer, palliative care patients and their carers

·      A venue for visiting doctors with a special interest in cancer and palliative care issues

·      A base for Cancer/Palliative Care Staff who provide services to the Nambucca Shire

·      A central area for the storage and distribution of equipment for people with cancer and palliative care patients

·      A place for community health promotion activities such as the Biggest Morning Tea, Daffodil Day and ongoing fund raising activities for cancer and palliative care patients.

 

The Cancer Support Group has advised that they intend to proceed in the near future with the proposed third building stage of the Resource Centre.  The proposed donation could be applied to this project or for the purchase of equipment.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

The report has been forwarded to the Mid North Coast Local Health District and they have been invited to address Council on the matter.  Project Manager Rebecca Wark has now responded as follows:

 

On behalf of the Mid North Coast Local Health District (MNCLHD) I respond as follows:

 

1.   There appears to be no assessment by Council of the report by Tew Property Consultants which we have provided for this matter and which we spoke to at the Council meeting last Thursday.

2.   In our view it would be reasonable that Council makes an informed critique of its Country Coast Valuation report on the basis of information we have provided, rather than an arbitrary meeting half-way to determine a sale price.

3.   MNCLHD cannot support any pricing without a reasonable basis.

4.   The Nambucca HealthOne project is providing significant investment by the State into Nambucca Shire. In addition to the capital and recurrent funding provided for the Nambucca project, Council may not be aware that MNCLHD has made a commitment to Durri AMS based on a separate strategic relationship and for the development of joint facilities at Bowraville (as part of the hub & spoke model of Nambucca HealthOne). The financial commitment to Durri AMS is already greater than that proposed in your recommendation to be provided to Nambucca Valley Cancer Support Group.   

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The social implications are discussed in the report.

 

Economic

 

The economic implications are discussed in the report.

 

Risk

 

The major risk is that the proposed community health facility will not proceed and the considerable expenditure of public funds in developing the project to date on this site will be wasted.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The financial implications are discussed in the report.

 

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 significant service level or resourcing implications.

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

5359/2014 - Valuation Report - Proposed Health One Facility

 

2

5455/2014 - Valuation Report - Bridge Club

 

3

7211/2014 - Review of Valuation Report - Tew Property Consultants

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads

 

















Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads

 




Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Valuation for Site for Proposed Health One Facility - 4 Fred Brain Avenue, Nambucca Heads

 












Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.6      SF1639            270314         Ecomomic Directions Committee - Minutes from Meeting on 28 January 2014

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Wayne Lowe, Manager Business Development         

 

Summary:

 

This Committee was formed in 2013.  The minutes of the last Committee meeting which was held on 28 January 2014 are attached.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the minutes of the meeting of the Economic Directions Committee held on 28 January 2014.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

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

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The last meeting of the Economic Directions Committee was held on 28 January 2014.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

None

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

This report has no impact on the Environment.

 

Social

There is no social impact.

 

Economic

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

 

Risk

There are no risks as a consequence of this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

There are not direct or indirect impacts on current and future budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

There is no impact on source of funds or variance to working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

There are no changes to service level and resourcing/staff implications.

 

Attachments:

1

2713/2014 - Economic Directions Committee Meeting - 28 January 2014 - Minutes

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Ecomomic Directions Committee - Minutes from Meeting on 28 January 2014

 

 

PRESENT

 

Steve Benson

 

Paul Hoffman

Express Coaches

Adrienne Smith

MidCoast Trucks

Noel Spalding

 

Wayne Lowe

Manager Business Development

Rhonda Hoban

Mayor

John Ainsworth

Deputy Mayor

Michael Coulter

General Manager

 

 

1          Role of Committee

 

It was agreed that the Committee should add the appropriateness of land zonings to the list of functions under its Role and Objectives.

 

2          Other Business

 

RESOLVED:               (Benson/Spalding)

That the Committee support a reduction in speed limit on the Pacific Highway at the Upper Warrell Creek Road intersection to 80 kph.  A letter to the RMS is to be drafted and sent to Adrienne Smith for endorsement.

 

RESOLVED:               (Spalding/Smith)

That the Committee support the proposed Highway Service Centre at Nambucca Heads.

 

There was discussion about a mobile kidney dialysis unit which Express Coaches are constructing for the Victorian Government and its potential for local application. 

 

There was discussion about the proposal from Cr Morrison to seek the banning of commercial fishing from the Nambucca River.  The Committee believes that further information is required before they could take a position.  There was interest in the Council being supplied with all the available science on the matter.

 

RESOLVED:               (Spalding/Hoffman)

That Council write to the Fisheries Department and request as a matter of urgency that Fisheries fund a study into the causes of the reduction of fish stocks in the Nambucca River.

 

3          NATIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK (NBN)

 

There was discussion about the NBN and the poor ADSL speeds available in the Macksville Industrial Estate.  It was queried why the Macksville Industrial Estate could not access the NBN wireless network. 

 

There was discussion about the lack of rental housing stock in the Nambucca Valley and the problems this is causing in attracting and retaining employees. 

 

 

NEXT MEETING

 

It was agreed that the next meeting of the Committee would be held in approximately two (2) months.

 

 

MEETING CLOSURE

 

The meeting closed at 1.30 pm. 

 

 

 

 

Cr John Ainsworth

CHAIRPERSON


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.7      SF1920            270314         Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 25 February 2014

 

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

 

Summary:

 

The minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held Tuesday 3 December 2013 are attached for Council’s endorsement. 

 

Although there are a number of matters which could be noted, there is one item for Council’s specific attention as follows:

 

That the Engineers look into signage around Nambucca Plaza precinct to alert motorists to high pedestrian activity.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.       That the Engineers look into signage around Nambucca Plaza precinct to alert motorists to high pedestrian activity.

 

2.       That the minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 3 December 2013 be endorsed.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option of not endorsing the minutes or making additional or alternative resolutions.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council is reminded of its plans to install a pedestrian refuge in Bellwood Road sometime in the near future.  Perhaps the Committee’s request for pedestrian signage could be incorporated into the design and construction of this project.  Alternatively if the project is some time away, advisory signage could be installed for the time being.  The Council’s Engineers could assess the most appropriate response.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Manager Technical Services

 

 

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 identified

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Nothing identified

 

 

Attachments:

1

5976/2014 - Minutes - Access Committee - 25 February 2014

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 25 February 2014

 

PRESENT

 

Mrs Shirley Holmes (Chairperson)

Cr E South (Deputy Chairperson)

Ms Lee-anne Funnell

Ms Jenny Adams

Mr Peter Shales

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

Cr A Smyth

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Ms Alba Sky

Mr Keith Davis

Mr Les Small

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Ms Lyndel Bosman (Guide Dogs)

 

 

 

General Manager’S Report

ITEM 3.1                    SF1920    250214  Confirmation of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting held 3 December 2013

ReSOLVED:  (Smyth/adams)

 

That the Committee confirm the minutes of the meeting held 3 December 2013.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 3.2                    SF1920    250214  Business Arising from Previous Meeting held 3 December 2013

Resolved:  (davis/shales)

 

That the matters arising from the minutes of the 3 December 2013 be noted.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 3.3                    SF1920    250214  Correspondence to the Access Committee meeting 25 February 2014

Resolved:  (smyth/sky)

 

That the correspondence be noted and that as a follow up to correspondence with the Nambucca Plaza; that Mr Ryan firstly be thanked for his report on progress with access improvements and secondly be asked what specific plans they have for painting the directional arrows as some lanes are one-way but are now barely visible. 

 

 

 

 

ITEM 3.4                    SF1920    250214  Report on General Business to the Access Committee 25 February 2014

Recommendation:  (south/smyth)

 

That the following items be noted or acted upon:

 

1.  Report on the use of the footpath around Autumn Lodge;

2.  Progress on the “Fun in the Park” project at Bellwood and Partridge Street;

3.  Report on the draft Disability Inclusion Bill;

4.  The Swimathon at the Macksville Aquatic Centre Sunday 1 March 2014, raising funds for more equipment for people with disabilities;

5.  Grant to Nambucca Valley Phoenix to upgrade their façade;

6.  The Committee’s support for changes to disability toilet/shower at the Hydrotherapy Pool to convert them to “unisex” allowing greater use at peak times;

7.  That the Engineers look into signage around Nambucca Plaza precinct to alert motorists to high pedestrian activity.

 

 

 

   


 

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday 25 March 2014 commencing at 2.00 pm.  The Committee noted that this will include the annual confirmation of Committee. 

 

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting with the time being 3.25 pm. 

 

 

 

 

………………………………

SHIRLEY HOLMES

 (CHAIRPERSON)

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.8      SF734              270314         Deep Creek Entrance Management Policy and Offer of Licence for Crown Land occupation (5 years)

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council that the Department of Trade and Investment (Crown Lands) has offered Council a licence to occupy crown land for a period of 5 years in order to allow for the management of the entrance to Deep Creek should the entrance close to ocean.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council agree to the licence to occupy crown land for the purposes of managing the Entrance to Deep Creek in accordance with the Deep Creek Entrance Management Policy.

 

2        That the General Manager and Mayor be authorised to sign the license agreement and Council’s seal be attached to the documentation.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council may choose not to accept the offer of occupation. If Council proceeds in this manner formal approval from the Department of Trade & Investment (Crown Lands) will be required to manage the entrance on each occasion it closes.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

On the 31 October 2013 reflecting the support of the Nambucca River, Estuaries Creeks and Coastline Management Committee, Council resolved the following:

 

4        That Council adopt the Deep Creek Entrance Management Policy incorporating the following changes and notify the adopted Policy as required by the Local Government Act:

 

-         Identify an option to raise the level of residential yards in Hyland Park where inundation may occur;

 

-         Identify an option to investigate powered craft management on Deep Creek. Particularly during times the entrance is closed.

 

-         Identify options to plan for ‘Coastal Squeeze’ including widening of riparian areas in appropriate locations and revegetation with suitable species.

 

The adopted policy as amended, was forward with other relevant information to the Department of Trade and Investment (crown lands) for approval and endorsement and with a formal application to occupy the land as necessary over a five (5) year period.

 

Deep Creek is recognised as an Intermittent Closed and Open Lake and Lagoon (ICOLL) which is primarily open to the ocean. According to the investigations undertaken in the system, Deep Creek generally only closes during period of low rainfall and appropriate coastal conditions. When the system does close Council receives submissions from the public requesting its management. Historically Council has required a permit from Crown Lands Department to open the entrance.  The policy adopted by Council provides the management triggers which are primarily set by water level and water quality parameters.

 

The purpose of the application was to allow Council to actively manage the entrance to Deep Creek in accordance with Councils adopted policy and without requiring a separate approval on each occasion it closes.

In accordance with the conditions of the licence and the adopted policy, Council staff will provide the Department of Trade and Investment and the Office of Environment and Heritage notice of its intention to open the entrance and a copy of the relevant Review of Environmental Factors (REF).

 

A template REF has been prepared based on previous applications to open the entrance. Some factors need additional consideration on each occasion. For instance, the opening location should not interfere with threatened shorebirds that may be nesting in the area at certain times of the year.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

NIL

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The Deep Creek Entrance Management Policy has been developed to provide a sustainable approach to the management of Deep Creek.

 

Social

 

The Deep Creek Entrance Management Policy has been developed to provide a sustainable approach to the management of Deep Creek.

 

Economic

 

The five year licence costs $499.40. This is proposed to be funded via the Environmental Levy. 

 

Risk

 

The licence will allow for the sustainable approach to the management of Deep Creek in a timely manner.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The five year licence costs $499.40. This is proposed to be funded via the Environmental Levy. 

 

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Environmental Levy

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

On the rare occasions the entrance closes, staff time is required to manage community responses to concerns, the monitoring of the trigger parameters and to undertake the works if required.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.9      SF1541            270314         Planning Proposal - Commercial Zoned Land Adin Street Scotts Head, Macksville and Nambucca Heads

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a planning proposal to rezone Commercial land at Adin Street Scotts Head from B2 Local Centre to B4 Mixed Use and commence preparation of a planning proposal for a similar proposed amendment in Macksville and Nambucca Heads.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council support the preparation of a planning proposal to allow commercial zoned land at Scotts Head to be rezoned to B4 Mixed Use, with an appropriate Floor Space Ratio (FSR) reflecting existing development character and the surrounding FSR.

 

2        That Council endorse the commencement of investigations and preparation of a planning proposal into a refinement of the commercial zones in both Nambucca Heads and Macksville. A further report would be presented for the endorsement of a planning proposal once the matter has been further investigated.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1        Council may resolve not to support any changes to zoning of the land; or

2        Council may resolve that an alternative zone would be more appropriate.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Adin Street Scotts Head (Commercial Zone Amendment)

 

In mid 2013 Council received an enquiry regarding rezoning of land in Scotts Head.  The land is located in Adin Street on an individual allotment within the area identified as B2 Local Centre on the below plan.

 

At present residential development is not permitted in a commercial zone unless it is shop top housing.  The enquiry requested advice on an LEP amendment that would allow residential development without the requirement to have an associated business premises.

 

In considering a response to this enquiry the following was noted:

 

·   Although identified as commercially zoned land a large proportion of the land in this area is residential in nature;

·   New residential development is not permitted unless it is shop top housing;

·   Residential dwellings in this area rely on existing use rights for redevelopment, extensions and like modifications;

·   Should an existing dwelling change its use to a business premises, it cannot revert back to a residential dwelling;

·   Other B4 Mixed Use zone exists in Ocean Street at Scotts Head.

 

There are a number of possibilities or actions that could be considered including those identified below:

 

·      Do nothing no changes made and the status quo is maintained;

·   Consider an amendment to the land zoning or similar change on an individual property to allow a dwelling;

·   Amend the land zoning in the area to B4 Mixed Use which would allow land owners to have either residential development or commercial development;

·   Amend the zoning of part of the area outside existing commercial land uses to residential to reflect the existing character of the area.

 

Each of these options presents advantages and disadvantages, however the option that would most closely reflect the existing situation, legitimise the existing residential development and allow new residential development would be option 3 to amend the land use zone in the area to mixed use.

 

The main disadvantages of option 3 are:

 

-   if a residential land use is provided as an alternative option to commercial, there is a risk that the future commercial growth of Scotts Head will be limited should residential development become the preferred landholder option. It is noted there is additional vacant commercial zoned land located on Scotts Head Road near the entrance to the village and the future growth areas may allow for commercial use.

-   A mixed use zone is similar in nature to an RU4 Village zone (for instance Bowraville) and as such comes with the associated potential for land use conflicts between residents and businesses. However in this instance there is presently a mix of residential/ commercial land uses on the site and as such these conflicts may already occur.

 

To gauge local landholders thoughts on the matter a letter was sent to the residents of the commercial zoned land at Adin Street. Of the twelve (12) landholders consulted, four (4) responses were received each of these four (4) responses were in favour of the B4 Mixed Use zone.

 

In consultation with Councils Strategic Planner, planning consultants acting on behalf of the original enquiry have agreed to prepare a planning proposal on behalf of Council to amend the zoning to B4 Mixed Use over the subject land. This proposal will need to give appropriate consideration to the existing density of the area and adjoining land to develop a floor space ratio for the site.

 

It is proposed that Council staff will assist by providing advice and data to support the preparation of the proposal including relevant GIS information and economic studies that may be relevant to the land and Scotts Head and the current masterplan for the Scotts Head Crown Reserve.

 

Should Council resolve not to support this planning proposal, the applicant may request at site specific planning proposal for the individual property identified  in the above figure, in which case appropriate fees and charges would be payable to Council.

 

Nambucca Heads and Macksville (Commercial Zone amendment)

 

The observation and opportunities report prepared by staff as part of the Past the Bypass strategies identified the following opportunities in relation to landuse zoning within the Macksville Area:

 

Observations

 

-     The B3 Commercial Core Land use zone should be reconsidered in areas where the actual land use is predominately residential.

-     An alternative may be to rezone the land B4 Mixed Use which allows either commercial or residential uses. Acknowledge the potential for landuse conflicts or the land could be rezoned to the predominate use in that area (an appropriate residential zone).

 

Opportunities

 

-     Landholders should be consulted or surveys conducted in these areas.

-     The impending highway bypass will have a greater impact on businesses relying on passing highwaytraffic, service centres, highway eateries and motels.Consideration should be given to alternative usesand appropriate land uses zones in these areas.

-     Landholders should be consulted; and

-     Alternative zones and uses should be considered.

 

An Extract from the Opportunities and Observations report is presented below.

 

The extent to which the commercial zone covers predominately residential areas in Nambucca Heads is unknown but this will be examined further as the planning proposal is prepared for Council endorsement.

 

Other matters for consideration in all areas:

 

Other matters that will need to be considered during the preparation of each of the planning proposals include:

 

-     Implications for rates;

-     Implications for land values

-     Land constraints (such as bushfire and flooding);

-   Appropriate floor space ratios will also need to be provided should these areas allow standalone residential development.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Nil

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The proposal will not have any detrimental impacts on the Environment

 

Social

 

The issues regarding land use conflicts were identified in the body of the report, other social implications will be considered during the preparation of the planning proposals.

 

Economic

 

Potential loss of commercial land through landholder preference to develop the land for residential purposes is a possibility. Other potential economic impacts will be investigated as the planning proposals are prepared.

 

Risk

 

No obvious risks are identified other than those listed in the body of the report. The planning proposal will need to be exhibited at which time Council will gain the views of the broader Scotts Head community.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nil

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nil

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The preparation of the planning proposal for Scotts Head will be undertaken by consultants acting on behalf of a landholder. Councils Strategic Planner will be required to assist in the preparation of the planning proposal and run LEP amendment process.

 

Councils Strategic Planner will progress investigations in regards to the Macksville and Nambucca amendments as time permits among current projects.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.10    SF1370            270314         Heritage Program and Heritage Strategy

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is for Council to endorse the draft Nambucca Shire Heritage Strategy 2014-2017. 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1              That Council adopt the draft Heritage Strategy 2014-2017.

 

2        That Council approve the refund of fees related to 138 permits in the 2013/14 round of Heritage fund applications.

 

3        That Council approve in principle the refund of fees related to permits that may be required by Council in future rounds of the Heritage program. Development Application fee refunds will be determined on individual basis.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1        Council may choose to amend the strategy

2        Council may not to adopt the strategy

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council recently accepted funding from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage part of the requirements of the funding was to prepare a Heritage Strategy which will guide Council in Heritage Related activities for the coming 3 years.

 

Councils recently appointed Heritage Advisor, Mitch McKay has prepared a draft strategy for Councils consideration [attachment 1].

 

It is recommended Council adopt the Draft Heritage Strategy

 

Heritage Fund Update

 

Mitch Mackay (Port Macquarie Hastings Heritage) has been engaged as Councils Heritage Advisor and has to date attended Council on three (3) occasions. Visits to local museums and items of heritage significance have been scheduled into the visits.

 

As well as completing the draft strategy our advisor has reviewed applications made under the Heritage Fund program and made recommendations.

 

Heritage fund

 

Council advertised and sent letters of interest to landholders regarding the heritage fund in November and early December. Applications closed in December however Council also received a few late applications. All applications were considered in this round of funding in order to gain as much take up of the available funding as possible.

 

An overview of the applications received is provided below:

 

Location: Hill Top Store Bowraville 51 and 53 High Street Bowraville

Applicant: Mr Peter Turnbull

Project: Roof Maintenance façade painting and gutter replacement

 

Location: State Bank 72 High Street Bowraville;

Applicant:  Mr Robert Cruikshank

Project: façade and side wall painting

 

Location: Bank 88 High Street Bowraville

Applicant: Anthony Bennett (Nambucca Valley Phoenix)

Project: Façade painting and un enclosing second floor balcony;

 

Location: Bowraville Theatre (Bowraville Arts Council)

Applicant: Dale Hawkins

Project: Replacement of façade window.

 

Works totalling approximately $30,000 are proposed.

 

The total grant funding available is $17,000. Only $12,435 of this is to be expended at this stage. In order to use the remainder of the funds ($4,565), an email was sent to staff involved with Council assets which may benefit from the fund, however matching funds are required. An email was also sent to the owners of the 2 heritage hotels in Macksville (the Star and the Nambucca), Despite positive initial discussions regarding repainting or other improvements a project never eventuated.

 

For the initial funding round Council has received a 73% take up rate which is considered a reasonable outcome. Noting that projects need to be completed in a short time frame and applications were called for over the Christmas period, which was necessary to meet the funding deadlines.

 

Successful applicants of the fund are well underway with planning works which are likely to be commencing within the 2 weeks for completion in mid-April.

 

Permits and application fees

 

As Council is trying to encourage the program which is aiming to preserve/ restore heritage places and buildings and also contribute to the amenity of the private domain it is requested Council endorse in principle the refund of fees related to permit applications.

 

In this round of funding the majority of projects will require a 138 Permit to occupy Councils footpaths while works are being undertaken. The application fee for this is $110 and according to the works required, a per day lease for the occupation of Councils land.

 

For this round it is recommended Council refund any fees associated with 138 permits for each of the projects.

 

The majority of projects that will be successful under this program will be maintenance related works and the Nambucca LEP 2010 provides exemptions for heritage items where Council considers the works to be sympathetic or in character with the heritage nature of the building. For this reason the majority of projects under this program will not require a DA. Should a future project require a DA it will be assessed on its merits at that time and a report will be prepared to Council if it is considered appropriate to consider waiving of any fees.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Councils Heritage Advisor

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The Heritage program will assist in the conservation and awareness of Heritage issues and items within the Nambucca Shire.

 

Social

 

The program will provide valuable insight into the fabric of the Nambucca LGA and provide opportunities for local the local community to benefit from improvements to the private domain and protection of significant local items.

 

Economic

 

The program is jointly funded by Council, the Office of Environment and Heritage as well as persons successful in obtaining grant funds.

 

Risk

 

Nil

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

This year the funding has been sourced from Section 94a funds combined with funding from the Office of Environment and Heritage. Future funding sources will be considered with new budget allocations.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nil

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Nil

 

Attachments:

1

7684/2014 - Nambucca Heritage Strategy (2014 - 2017) PRELIM

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Heritage Program and Heritage Strategy

 










Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.11    DA2014/008      270314         DA2014/008 - 2 Lot Subdivision - Yarrawonga Street, Macksville

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Daniel Walsh, Senior Town Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The proposed development includes a two lot subdivision of Lot 31 DP 248561, Yarrawonga Street, Macksville. The land is owned by Council and Council is the applicant of the development application. In accordance with clause A3.6.1 of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010, this development application has been referred to Council for determination because the General Manager does not have delegated authority to determine the application.

 

The subject site is split zoned with the northern half of the site located within the IN2 Light Industrial Zone and the southern half located within the RE1 Public Recreation Zone. The proposed two lot subdivision will divide the site in the location of the existing split zone boundary with Lot 1 (IN2 Zone) having an area of 2497m² and Lot 2 (RE1 Zone) having an area of 1085m². A copy of the proposed subdivision plan can be found in attachment 1 of this report.

 

The application has been notified and assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and subject to the recommended conditions of consent, is considered to be consistent with all of the relevant matters for consideration.

 

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

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council as the consent authority, pursuant Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, grant consent for Development Application 2014/008 for a 2 lot subdivision of Lot 31 DP 248561, subject to the schedule of conditions outlined in attachment 2 of this report.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

(a) Grant consent to the application, either unconditionally or subject to conditions, or

 

(b) Refuse consent to the application.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Nambucca Shire Council lodged this development application on 22 January 2014 which includes a two lot subdivision of Lot 31 DP 248561, Yarrawonga Street, Macksville. The site is owned by Nambucca Shire Council, has an area of 3582m², contains a gradual slope towards the north with significantly modified vegetation, and is split zoned with the northern half of the site located within the IN2 Light Industrial Zone and the southern half located within the RE1 Public Recreation Zone.

 

It is proposed to subdivide the site into two allotments with the dividing boundary in the location of the existing split zone boundary. It is proposed that Lot 1 (IN2 Zone) have an area of 2497m² and Lot 2 (RE1 Zone) have an area of 1085m².

 

The proposed subdivision is considered to be satisfactory with regards to the relevant sections of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as follows:

 


Section 5A  - Significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats

 

Having regard to the modified nature of the site and its location; it is not considered that the proposed development will result in any impacts on any critical habitat, threatened species, populations, ecological communities, or their habitats.

 

Section 79BA - Consultation and development consent—certain bush fire prone land

 

The subject site is bushfire prone land. It is not considered that the proposed development is contrary to Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 as suitable access and water supplies will be available to both allotments as part of the consent; with defendable spaces, construction standards, utility services, emergency management arrangements, and landscaping to be addressed as part of any future development consent for a defined land use on the site.

 

Section 79C (1) - Evaluation

 

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

 

(a) the provisions of

 

(i) any environmental planning instruments

 

·      The Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010 (NLEP 2010)

 

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant provisions of the NLEP 2010 (clauses 2.3, 5.5, 7.4 and 7.6) because it is not contrary to the objectives of the IN2 or RE1 zones, it will not result in any impacts on the coastal environment, conditions have been included with the recommended conditions of consent requiring the extension of essential utility infrastructure to the site, and any potential impacts resulting from the minor earthworks required as part of the development (extension of utility infrastructure) will be mitigated by measures to be implemented in accordance with the recommended conditions of consent.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land

 

In accordance with clause 7, the site is not considered to be contaminated.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy No 71—Coastal Protection

 

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the matters for consideration outlined in Clause 8 of SEPP 71 because it will not contradict the aims of the policy or result in any significant impacts on the coastal environment having regard to scenic qualities, access, archaeological significance, ecosystems, coastal processes, wildlife corridors; water quality; or result in conflict between land-based and water-based coastal activities.

 

·      North Coast Regional Environmental Plan

 

Having regard to the proposals consistency with the environmental planning instruments addressed above, Council’s Development Control Plan, and with the inclusion of the recommended conditions of consent; it is not considered that the proposal is inconsistent with the relevant clauses of this SEPP as they are similar in context with those in the above mentioned instruments.

 

(ii) any draft environmental planning instrument

 

There are no draft environmental planning instruments applicable to the proposed development.

 

(iii) any development control plan (DCP)

 

·      Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (DCP)

 

The proposed subdivision is considered to be consistent with the relevant clauses of the DCP as follows:

 

Notification and Public Participation (Part A)

The application was notified to adjoining owners in accordance with Part A of the DCP. No submissions were received.

 

Environmental context (Part A)

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent and as assessed against the relevant clauses of the LEP and DCP in this report, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under clause A5.0.

 

Subdivision (Part B)

It is not considered that services need to be provided to the RE1 zoned allotment as it is community land. The provision of services will be undertaken as part of any future development on the land. Reticulated water is already available to the proposed industrial site, with stormwater drainage capable of be discharged to the street as part of any future industrial land use (subject to separate development consent).

The provision of sewage and electricity has been conditioned to be provided to the industrial allotment. The proposed industrial site will provide street frontage, site area, and width which exceed the minimum standards set for industrial subdivision within this part of the DCP.

 

Sediment and Erosion Control (Part D)

All works to be undertaken as part of any consent will be subject to a condition of consent requiring the installation of adequate erosion and sedimentation devices which are consistent with Part D of the DCP.

 

Industrial Developments (Part G)

The proposed industrial site will provide a site area and width which exceed the minimum standards set for industrial subdivision within Part G of the DCP. This, along with the conditioned extension of sewer and electricity to the site, will ensure that future development on the land can be consistent with the remaining clauses within Part G which relate to the built form.

 

(iiia) Any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F.

 

There are no planning agreements applying to the subject site.

 

(iv) Any Matters prescribed by the Regulation

 

·      Clause 92(1)(a) – NSW Coastal Policy 1997

 

Matters for consideration to implement the NSW Coastal Policy are provided in clause 5.5 of the NLEP 2010 and clause 8 of SEPP 71. Due to the proposals consistency with these clauses (as outlined above) it is not considered that it is contrary to the NSW Coastal Policy.

 

(v) Any coastal zone management plan

 

It is not considered that the proposed development will be contrary to the Nambucca Shire Council Coastal Zone Management Plan.

 

(b)        The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality.

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposal will result in any significant impacts on the natural or built environments or any negative social or economic impacts on the locality due to its scale, location and the modified condition of the site.

 

(c)      the suitability of the site for the development

 

It is not considered that the proposed subdivision will impact on the existing character of the locality as the dividing boundary will be consistent with the existing split zone boundary on the site (RE1/IN2) and it does not include any built form. The size of the IN2 zoned section of the site exceeds the minimum standards set by Councils DCP which will facilitate future industrial development while maintaining the existing public recreation land.

 

(d)      any submissions made in accordance with the Act or the regulations

 

No submissions were received.

 

(e)      the public interest

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposed development will be contrary to the public interest.

 

Section 94 - Contribution towards provision or improvement of amenities or services

 

With the zoning of the land being RE1 and IN2, developer contributions are only applicable to future development (separate development consent) on the land pending on the type of future land use and its built form.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

As discussed above, the application was notified to adjoining owners in accordance with Part A of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010. No submissions were received.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

It is not considered that the proposal will result in any significant impacts on the natural environment because it includes a two lot subdivision of an existing modified site on the fringe of an existing industrial estate which is boarded by Yarrawonga Street and a railway line. Works associated with the development include the minor extension of utilities within the road reserve, with appropriate pollution mitigation measures included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Social

 

The proposal will not result in any works or land uses which are inconsistent with the existing character of the area.

 

Economic

 

The proposal will facilitate the development of the IN2 Light Industrial Zoned section of the site (Lot 1) which will increase economic development within the locality.

 

Risk

Nil.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Nil.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

Nil.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

Nil.

 

Attachments:

1

7767/2014 - Attachment 1 - Subdivision Plan - DA2014/008

 

2

7766/2014 - ATTACHEMENT 2 - Schedule of Conditions - DA2014/008

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

DA2014/008 - 2 Lot Subdivision - Yarrawonga Street, Macksville

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

DA2014/008 - 2 Lot Subdivision - Yarrawonga Street, Macksville

 




Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.12    SF1947            270314         Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined from 31 February to 14 March 2014

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Lorraine Hemsworth, Executive Assistant         

 

Summary:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Recommendation:

 

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

 

 

TABLE 1:       UNRESOLVED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IN EXCESS OF 12 MONTHS OLD

 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2012/011

03/02/2012

Nambucca Gardens Estate 346 Lot Residential Subdivision with Residue, Associated Works – Staged

Lot 2 DP 1119830, Alexandra Drive, Bellwood

134 public submissions

Submissions outlined in previous report to Council 27 September 2012 – Item 10.1

Voluntary Planning Agreement supported by Council at its 28 February 2013 meeting.

Meeting with applicant and planning agreed that Council would assess its section of the link road under Part 5 of the EPAA.  Concept plan for Link Road currently being prepared for assessment.  Will be exhibited with VPA.

Status report to Council meeting 16 October On-site briefing meeting held with JRPP 18 October 2013 – advice to be sought from applicant.

 

Report in Business Paper of 13 Nov 2013.

 

Please note that there is two unresolved Development Applications in Excess of 12 months old.

 


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

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2013/092

29/08/2013

Health Services Facility & Subdivision

Lot 1 DP 1004209 & Lot 22 DP 1161807, Centenary Parade, Nambucca Heads

4 public submissions

 

·     Zoned community land and should be left that way.

·     Should be located closer to other health facilities or other appropriate zonings

·     Only one entry and exit road (Centenary Parade) therefore increasing traffic to area and can be dangerous with lots of school children. Issues with emergency evacuations

·     Parking an issue during carnivals etc

·     Little consultation into the development of this Health Care Centre - request for dialysis services to be included in the new centre

·     Existing levels and types of crimes already in area maybe exacerbated

·     Re-zoning costs borne by Council not required for alternate sites

·     Request for further consultation with police, schools, school bus providers and other primary health providers for another site

Matters pertaining to comments on the submissions particularly the type of health services provided and need for, car parking and traffic – Referred to Applicants Consultant

 

In principal support provided by Council.  LEP Amendment referred to DOP for consideration.  Conditions forwarded to applicant for consideration by the Crown.

 

Awaiting Planning Proposal and resolution of land sale

2013/170

18/11/2013

Boundary Adjustment, shed, operate depot

Lot 2 DP 881651, 296 Valla Road, Valla

11 public submissions

 

·     Land zoned Agricultural/Rural and this is to establish an Industrial enterprise

·     Industrial site planned for the Cow Creek area and this is where should be located

·     More than enough trucks on Valla Road especially with the application for the Valla Quarry being considered with more trucks

·     Applicant owns very large machinery

·     Increase in residential numbers over the past years therefore increase in vehicles and these will have to compete with industrial vehicles

·     Increase in noise and dust

·     If granted, potential to cause a decrease in the value of the land

·     Water issues – drains directly into Deep Creek and floods are observed frequently on this land

·     Air quality reduced by dust and toxics

·     Green fill would be odorous – comparable to a rubbish tip

·     Valla Road is not coping with current usage with pot holes – stone chips are common

·     No compatibility of the proposal to adjoining grazing properties

·     No mention of 2 operations involving use of concrete crusher and greenwaste tub grinder which is exceedingly noisy

·     Disagree with “development compatible with adjoining neighbours”

·     Feeders – running times and how monitored, location

·     No selling of materials – secondary aggregate is valuable commodity

·     Water pollution

·     Most properties in neighbourhood are rated Residential/Village Estate not compatible to industrial

·     Directors do not reside near property so removed from noise pollution

·     Visual amenity

·     Staff amenities not appear convenient for industrial use

·     Unsupported by adequate environmental impact studies

·     Council setting precedent for the use of vital agricultural land

Notification period extended for a further 14 days

Additional information requested

 

·     SOEE

·     Small vegetable garden near by

·     No adjoining properties have similar development – how compatible

·     Servicing of site for plant and vehicles – what petroleum being used and storage

·     Drainage bunded to prevent fuels into water table

·     What sort of clean fill

·     Recycled materials being used – what

·     ? weekday will allow for non impact crushing and plant operation

·     Construction of sediment ponds

·     Rubbish – increase in traffic

 

1 late submission

Applicant finalising information required

2013/186

18/12/2013

Dwelling & Shed Staged Development

Lot 42 DP 1179889, Grandis Glen, Congarinni North

1 public submission

 

·     Placement of aerated pits are parallel, and in very close proximity to neighbours southern boundary fence

·     Due to lay of land and location of pits any extra run off will impact on neighbours residence as pits located in natural waterway of dam and children swim in dam and animals drink the water

 

Planning Consultant addressing issues

1998/055

5/12/2013

Extractive Industry Modification

Lot 1 DP 1106647 & Lot 2 DP 1181639, Pacific Highway, Way Way

2 public submissions

·      Noise and dust from Quarry

·      Several instances where Quarry operating unsatisfactorily and contact has had to be made with owners and Council

·      Using excessive explosives resulting in residences shaking – now using monitors and seems acceptable

·      Use of rock breaking machine operating from 6.00 am to 5.30 pm

·      Black sooty dust landing on neighbours homes and if permitted to increase then increase in this dust – allergies in neighbours

 

Recent RMS report to be addressed by Boral

Information submitted

Final appraisal being carried out

2014/001

02/01/2014

Tourist Accommodation

Lot 3 DP 1035204, Seascape Place, Scotts Head

1 submission received and requested that content remain confidential

2014/015

31/01/2014

Additions - Residential

Lot 6 Section 1 DP 245317, 5 Gregory Street, Valla Beach

1 public submission

·      Impinge on privacy of neighbour as bathroom faces adjoining back fence

·      Surface rain and roof catchment run into neighbours property

DA Consented

2013/183

12/12/2013

Part Collector Road

Lot 74 DP 832082, Marshall Way, Nambucca Heads

15 public submissions

·      Increased traffic flow

·      Large delivery trucks and semi-trailers driving up quiet street

·      Impact of traffic with older residents of area eg Osprey Villas and Farrington Village

·      Thought to be a closed road

·      Decrease in land and house values

·      Increased noise

·      Traffic from homes onto street causing traffic hazards

·      Road in poor condition

·      Short cuts to Waste Transfer Centre and to and from Bowraville and other facilities at Plaza and area

·      Concerned over Endangered Ecological Community Swamp Sclerophyll Forest

·      Even though no recorded sites of Aboriginal cultural heritage values with the property does not mean there are not any

·      120m away fence shows little respect for area given

·      Provision of screening does not satisfy “the Aboriginal People”

·      Concerns of the men of the Gumbaynggirr Nation to be taken into account and the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan 2003

·      Playing Fields will be exposed to traffic

·      Endangered swamp area

·      A number of steep driveway accesses

·      Reduction of speed limit to 40km/h in vicinity of the Plaza and Medical Centre

·      Vehicles parked on both sides of road at Pre-School

·      Vehicles go round RoundaBout the wrong way

·      Negative effect on Koala population

·      Means to “backdoor” to earlier DA2012/11

·      Statement of Environmental Effects associated with Collector Road does not address traffic issues

·      Dispute Traffic Report which states that traffic will use Old Coast Road overpass as consider vehicles will use Marshall Way

·      Sell properties

·      Conflict of Interest

·      Acid Sulphate soils

 

Planning Consultant to work in house and provide report

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.  


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.13    SF1870            270314         Report on December Quarter Budget Review Variations - Nambucca Heads Skate Park; Valla Quarry Legal Costs; Legal Costs generally; "Surplus" from sale of the 3 lots in Short Street; Unforeseen Saleyard Maintenance Expense

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager; Wayne Lowe, Manager Business Development         

 

Summary:

 

In relation to the Nambucca Heads Skate Park issue, Council’s total expenditure on legal advice representation was $143,258.  There are other costs associated with the action which have been previously reported.

 

Council’s expenditure on legal advice for the proposed modification to permit an increase in the annual output of the Valla Quarry was $8,953.

 

The net proceeds from the sale of the three lots in Short Street was $182,000 which is less than the $250,000 committed by Council’s General Fund for the new amenities buildings in Coronation Park.  Therefore there is no “surplus” to be returned to the Coronation Park Committee of Management.

 

The “unforeseen saleyard maintenance expense” relates to works attended to after 30 June including final maintenance and mowing, the installation of new water meters at the showground and sale yards, electrical works, lighting, internal road grade, WHS signage both internal and external of show grounds and additional work required within the existing old sewage holding pit to meet safety, access and OHS requirements. 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the additional information concerning the budget review variations for the Nambucca Heads Skate Park; the Valla Quarry legal costs; the “surplus” from the sale of the 3 lots in Short Street and the unforeseen saleyard maintenance expense.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The report is for information.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

When Council considered the December quarter budget review it requested a further report on a number of noted variances of $5,000 or more being:

 

Ledger

Description

Variance

Explanation

04010.0365

Legal & debt recovery costs

71,000

N/H Skate Park & Valla Quarry

01240.0130

Sport Grounds – other income

-48,600

Short St surplus & Jockey Club sale refer 8190.708

04160.0532

Other structures maintenance

7,800

Unforeseen saleyards maintenance

 

Nambucca Heads Skate Park

 

It is understood that Councillors were interested in the total costs of the Skate Park matter.  All invoices have been retrieved from Council’s Solicitors Norton Rose Fulbright going back to April 2011 when the Skate Park matter commenced.  Copies of the invoices can be provided but the following is a summary of each.

 

Period

Description of Work

Cost

13/4/11 – 27/4/11

Consultation with Council staff (Greg Meyers), considering correspondence and emails from claimant’s solicitors, reviewing Council’s files, reviewing Coronation Park Plan of Management, research case law on enforceability of a code of conduct, researching caselaw on abatement of public nuisance, drafting responses to claimant’s solicitors, seeking advice on insurance.

$3,880.47

28/4/11 – 23/5/11

Considering public liability issues, considering emails and letters from Addendorfs (claimants’ solicitor), emails concerning insurance, emails to Mr Meyers.

$1,244.20

10/8/11 – 23/11/11

Considering emails and letters from Council and Addendorfs, reviewing consent, drafting correspondence, considering engagement of a noise consultant, discussions with Mr Meyers.

$4,011.59

24/11/11– 15/12/11

Considering defences, case law, insurance matters, nuisance decisions, telephone calls to Mr Meyers and obtaining instructions from Mr Meyers.

$4,013.85

16/1/12 – 22/3/12

Considering emails and correspondence from Addendorfs, telephone calls to Addendorfs and Mr Meyers, emails to Council.

$1,377.60

26/3/12 – 23/4/12

Considering emails and letters from Addendorfs, drafting responses, considering instructions, considering advice from acoustic consultant, considering defences, consider options for acoustic monitoring, emails and telephone calls to Mr Meyers.

$3,414.82

3/5/12 – 10/5/12

Considering instructions re letter to Addendorfs, considering emails from Mr Meyers, sending emails to Mr Meyers.

$877.95

28/5/12 – 21/6/12

Considering letters from Addendorfs, deliberations on mitigation costs with Greg Meyers, letters and emails to Greg Meyers (to and from).

$1,740.98

29/6/12 – 14/9/12

Consider GIPA application, consider letter from Addendorfs, telephone call to Greg Meyers re GIPA, considering potential liability and challenges, considering case law.

$4,102.21

25/9/12 – 22/11/12

Letter to Addendorfs, response to Council, making arrangements to view files, emails to and from Greg Meyers and Addendorfs.

$1,357.35

4/12/12 – 17/12/12

Considering letters to Addendorfs, consulting with Greg Meyers, telephone calls to Greg Meyers and Addendorfs.

$1,170.95

18/12/12 – 18/1/13

Considering emails and letters from Addendorfs, considering protection provided by building certificate, review material provided by Addendorfs re breaches, letters & emails to Greg Meyers and Addendorfs.

$6,427.03

21/1/13 – 6/2/13

Consider CC issue, attend meeting with Addendorfs and residents by phone, emails and letters to Greg Meyers and Addendorfs.

$5,720.00

8/2/13 – 13/3/13

Considering emails and letters from Addendorfs and Greg Meyers, considering reports, considering instructions, reviewing reports, letters & telephone calls & emails to Greg Meyers and Addendorfs.

$5,464.80

25/3/13 – 26/4/13

Letters, emails, telephone calls with Addendorfs and Greg Meyers.

$2,465.10

29/4/13 – 9/5/13

Email to Michael Coulter regarding threat to commence Class 4 proceedings, emails, telephone calls with Michael Coulter and Addendorfs about threatened litigation, drafting letters and emails in response to threatened litigation.

$3,604.70

4/7/13 – 11/7/13

Reviewing Class 4 appeal grounds, consider Class 4 practice directions, letters & emails to/from Michael Coulter and Addendorfs.

$4,703.27

12/7/13 – 21/8/13

Arrangements for mediation, preparing documents, reviewing documents, preparation of position papers, checking privilege, drafting mediation agreement.  Letters and emails to/from Michael Coulter and Addendorfs.

$19,708.99

22/8/13 – 9/9/13

Mediation related time and expenses including flights

$24,940.64

16/9/13 – 21/10/13

Further work associated with executing mediation agreements.  Emails and letters to Michael Coulter and Addendorfs.

$6,783.87

22/10/13 – 8/11/13

Arrangements for works, discussion about confidentiality provisions, requirements for a “banking” of fence, requirements of Deed, allegations by Addendorfs, letters and emails to Michael Coulter and Addendorfs.

$10,560.00

11/11/13 – 5/12/13

Emails, letters to Addendorfs and Michael Coulter concerning progress of fencing, gate, reviewing settlement deed.  Attend court directions hearing.

$6,277.33

6/12/13 – 19/12/13

Preparing & negotiating deed of release

$7,059.80

20/12/13 – 24/2/13

Finalising deed of release, preparing for and attending directions hearing

$12,350.80

Total

$143,258.30

 

In relation to the legal costs paid to Norton Rose Fulbright, there was $55,576.87 incurred before the Class 4 related mediation and $87,681.43 associated with the mediation and the work leading up to the final deed of settlement which has now been endorsed.

 

There are other costs associated with the action which have been previously reported.

 

There is an on-going cost for Council staff to unlock and lock the gate every day.

 

Valla Quarry Legal Costs

 

The relevant invoices from Norton Rose Fulbright are summarised in the following table.  Again the actual invoices can be provided.

 

Period

Description of Work

Cost

15/11/13– 15/11/13

Consider instructions, review advice from Corrs, review consent, consider updated SEE, consider case law, retrieve council file from court registry, consider history of 2002 proceedings.

$6,973.29

19/11/13– 26/11/13

Consider EIS, correspondence with operator, relevant decisions, reviewing noise compliance assessment provided with SEE, drafting advice and recommendations to Council.

$1,980.00

Total

$8,953.29

 

 

“Surplus” from the sale of the 3 lots in Short Street

 

On 21 May 2009, Council resolved to provide a written undertaking to the Coronation Park Committee of Management that all proceeds from the sale of the land (in Short Street) will be expended on agreed improvements to Coronation Park.  On 19 August 2010 it was resolved that the net proceeds of the sale of the proposed lots from the subdivision be reimbursed to the Coronation Park amenities project and that Council reiterate its previous written undertaking to the Coronation Park Committee of Management that all proceeds from the sale of the land will be expended on agreed improvements to Coronation Park.

 

On 20 May 2009 Council resolved to proceed with a tender for the construction of the new amenity buildings at Coronation Park.  Council allocated $935,677 to the project of which $423,000 was funded from the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program.  The balance was to be funded from Section 94 being $262,677 and Council being $250,000.  It is understood that undertaking related to any net surplus achieved from the sale of the land over and above the $250,000 being funded by Council.

 

The three lots have now been sold with the sale prices as follows:

 

No. 32 – 513m2 - $98,000 in October 2012

 

No. 34 – 580m2 - $105,000 in October 2013

 

No. 36 – 666m2 - $115,000 in January 2013

 

Therefore the gross proceeds from the land sales were $318,000.  However from these gross proceeds, Council incurred costs in developing the land which were:

 

·      DA, survey, legal, plan lodgement                       $7,291

·      Stormwater & sewer connection                                    $72,154

·      60m of footpath                                                 $5,760

·      Section 94 & Section 64                                               $31,214

·      Legals & marketing                                             $19,400

 

Total                                                                    $135,819

 

Therefore the net proceeds from the land sales are $182,180, which is less than the $250,000 committed by Council.  As a consequence there is no “surplus” to be distributed to the Coronation Park Committee of Management.

 

The reference in the budget review to an income of $48,600 relates to unbudgeted income from the sale of land in Short Street and also the sale of land to the Nambucca River Jockey Club.

 

Unforeseen Saleyard Maintenance Expense

 

The ownership of the Macksville sale yards and Showground complex was transferred to the Nambucca River District Agricultural Association Limited on 11 March 2013 with a list of conditions related to the transfer, one being the installation of a new sewerage effluent system and repairs of associated infrastructure to guarantee that the new system would operate efficiently for the new owners.  Council also installed a water meter at the saleyard and electrical meters to record ongoing usage and to allow charging.

 

As at 30 June 2013 the implementation of the effluent system was not completed, nor had all of the handover conditions negotiated by council and the show committee been completed.

 

The works attended to after 30 June included, final maintenance and mowing, the installation of new water meters at the showground and sale yards, electrical works, lighting, internal road grade, WHS signage both internal and external of show grounds and additional work required within the existing old sewage holding pit to meet safety, access and OHS requirements.  This included the installation of a gantry to provide safe access to the sludge pump located in the holding pit.

 

At the time of reporting to council (September 2013) on the commissioning of the new effluent system and the final handover to the Nambucca River District Agricultural Association Limited, some of the outstanding invoices had not been submitted to council by contractors being; the final electrical and lighting, and outdoor staff works relating to installing independent water and electrical meters.

 

The costing of $7,800 shown in the budget review as “unforeseen saleyards maintenance” is comprised of staff costs (Laverty, Williams, Ronan, Clews, Schultz, Howle, McGivern), truck usage (internal plant hire), as well as payments to suppliers and contractors being Mid Coast Fabrications, Boral, Barrier Signs and Tony Gordon Septics.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with finance staff.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

Council may be criticised for the very large legal expenditure associated with the Nambucca Heads Skate Park.  The report is not intended to review the history of the Skate Park which led to the legal action.  This history includes the critical decisions made in selecting the Coronation Park site from the other sites reported to Council; issuing a conditional consent with some problematic conditions; the difficulty for Council in demonstrating compliance with its own conditions of consent; and related to that the communication between the Engineering and Town Planning Sections.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The report is for information.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The report is for information

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There was over a day of work required in retrieving the information and preparing this report.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.14    SF732              270314         NSW Governments Sustainable Dredging Strategy - Rescuing our Waterways funding initiative

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner; Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of the State Governments Rescuing our waterways initiative and provide options for Council consideration, should Council wish to apply for funding under the program.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council not apply for funding under the NSW Government’s Sustainable Dredging Strategy at this time.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council may choose to develop a project to investigate the current level of shoaling in the lower estuary and highlight any urgent areas that need to be addressed with future works. However, it should be noted that the high cost of the works and the likely temporal nature of the benefit may make the actual future works unfeasible and as such additional investigations unwarranted.

 

Should Council become aware of a specific urgent matter in the future it be considered for future rounds of this funding.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Grant Program

 

The Rescuing Our Waterways grant is available for projects in estuaries where dredging will provide public benefits, with preference for projects where the main purpose is to aid navigation by recreational and commercial vessels. The deadline for the application is 14 April.

 

Council has been invited to apply for the funding; local stakeholders (for example incorporated community or industry groups, local businesses or chambers of commerce, commercial operators or boating clubs) are also invited to apply.  Council staff are unaware of other applications for funding being made for the Nambucca River. The guidelines state that preference will be given to applications that demonstrate a formal agreement with a local council to act as proponent and project manager.

 

Funds will be available for both preconstruction activities and implementation, however the NSW Government will only fund up to 50% of the approved cost of the work and Council must make a financial contribution of at least 50%.

 

Funding decisions will be made on the strengths and merits of each project and the estimated costs of the proposal. Eligible dredging projects are expected to be completed by June 2015.

 

Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan and Study (Shoaling and related Dredging)

 

In terms of navigation the Nambucca River is characterised by a shallow outer bar, together with shoals in the lower estuary which limit the draft of vessels that can enter or leave the estuary. With unfavourable conditions offshore access is gained from Shelly Beach.

 

An objective of the Nambucca River Estuary Management Study and Plan was to investigate the entrance Management behaviour of the Nambucca River and identify management options. The resulting Estuary Management Study states the following regarding the river entrance:

 

The historical works to improve navigation were centred on shipping being the primary mode of transport for trade at that time. With the demise of the need for shipping trade, the commercial justification for major entrance works to improve navigation is limited.”

 

Nevertheless some parts of the community believe there may be some benefit to a more navigable entrance and the study states the following: 

 

“the shallow, unstable and often dangerous nature of the entrance remains a major constraint to present users. It also limits the potential for the region to attract passing ocean vessels and development of associated tourist/ commercial activities.

 

Appendix B of the Management Plan discusses entrance conditions and management options. Within these options it provides for two (2) types of dredging (Major and Minor Dredging). Major dredging is aimed at providing a deep navigable channel through the entrance of the river and minor dredging targeting the lower estuary where constraints are greatest. The benefit and costs and consideration of both options are presented below:

 

 

 

Major Dredging (maintaining Deep navigable channels and entrance)

 

In regards to the major dredging it concludes that due to the highly mobile nature of the sediments in the lower estuary substantial resources would be required to dredge and maintain deep navigable channels including training walls and ongoing dredging works at high cost. No further discussion of this is provided, presumably due to the likely high costs and temporal nature of the works.

 

In addition to the above, part of the brief for the Nambucca River Masterplan was to consider the investigations and reports available to assess the social, environmental and economic benefits, impacts and sustainability of dredging the Nambucca River.  The Nambucca River Masterplan concluded that dredging the river is not a viable or practical option. Any dredging is cost prohibitive with no assured positive outcomes as a result.

 

Minor Dredging (isolated area management)

 

The Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan Strategy 15 (medium priority) recommends localised minor shoaling issues could be addressed in the lower estuary where navigation issues have become critical. A number of isolated areas are discussed in the document which could benefit from minor dredging including boats ramps at Stuart Island and Gordon Park, and waters surrounding the Volunteer Marine Rescue Shed on Wellington Drive.

 

Indicative Cost

 

As no urgent issues have been identified to Council no plan or costing have been completed to address specific sites that may be suitable for minor dredging, therefore costs are difficult to quantify at this time. Nevertheless, the following information is noted.

 

Cost estimates for dredging in the Nambucca River Estuary Management Plan are highlighted as $10/m3.  A more recent paper prepared for a Coastal Conference (Navigation Dredging – improving outcomes through partnerships and beneficial use of dredged materials) identifies indicative costs at $13/m3 with typical dredging projects undertaken by LPMA fitting into the following broad categories:

 

 

The same paper also notes the following:

 

The cost of undertaking a dredging project can vary enormously according to material composition, the presence of contaminants, site conditions, scale of the project, disposal options and market forces/timing. Accordingly, historical costs or rates are not always an accurate guide to predicting the cost of a dredging project.

 

In addition, there are substantial fixed costs associated with dredging projects. The component cost of mobilising and demobilising a dredge can sometimes exceed the component cost of dredging, particularly on small projects. Once established, a decision to vary the contract volume within certain limits can be made based on the attractiveness of the tendered dredge rate.

 

Other matters

 

The Estuary Management Plan indicates material dredged from the river needs to be retained in the system, for example distributed to Shelly Beach, Beilby’s Beach or Main beach. Such beach nourishment has social and tourism benefits, but at high cost. Any proposals to sell extracted or dredged sands would trigger the Native Title Act as the entire entrance is Crown Land.  Commercial extraction as designated development would also trigger a requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement.

 

Funding

 

There are a number of barriers in applying for funding at this time.

 

-     In regards to major dredging to creating a deep navigable channel at the entrance to the Nambucca River, there is no firm action or strategy in the Estuary Management Plan to support a project largely due to the high costs and temporal nature of the dredging solution. Further to this the Nambucca River Masterplan indicates the dredging of the river is not a viable or practical option.

 

Given the issue has been contentious within the local community and lacks support within our two (2) strategies related to the Nambucca River, the Government is unlikely to support a project of this type.

 

-   In regards to minor dredging Council would need to identify the extent of the required maintenance dredging.  It would need to undertake this in consultation with the various river users.

 

Consultation that might help build support, or increase understanding of the benefits of dredging is unable to be carried out in the short amount of time before the application is due, and the application itself requires demonstration of the level of public support.

 

 CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Grants and Contributions Officer

 

Other consultation

 

A submission from Nambucca River Marine Rescue (Mr Owen Rushton) late last year indicated that maintenance dredging would be of economical value to our Shire and would make navigating our river system a lot safer, and Marine Rescue Nambucca is more than happy to show councillors or the Deputy Premier the difficulty of navigating the Nambucca River System.

 

At the time of writing this report, there was also an article in the local newspaper authored by the Boatshed Crew (20 March 2014), which indicated there was a large amount of sand in the lower estuary.

 

Staff have not had an opportunity to consult with these bodies at the time of writing this report.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The likely environmental, social and economic impacts associated with dredging have been considered previously within the Nambucca River Estuary Study and Plan, as well as the Nambucca River Masterplan.

 

Should Council choose to proceed with any dredging an appropriate site specific investigation would be required at that time.

 

Social

 

The likely environmental, social and economic impacts associated with dredging have been considered previously within the Nambucca River Estuary Study and Plan, as well as the Nambucca River Masterplan.

 

Should Council choose to proceed with any dredging an appropriate site specific investigation would be required at that time.

 

Economic

 

The likely environmental, social and economic impacts associated with dredging have been considered previously within the Nambucca River Estuary Study and Plan, as well as the Nambucca River Masterplan.

 

Should Council choose to proceed with any dredging an appropriate site specific investigation would be required at that time.

 

Risk

 

NIL

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

A project under this program would require matching funding. Both the Nambucca River Masterplan and the Estuary Management Study and Plan were funded from the Environmental Levy with matching grant funds.

 

The only source of matching funding would be from the Environmental Levy, unless funding could be matched through general maintenance budget for boat ramps or like facilities under Councils management that require attention.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Councils Grants officer and Strategic Planner would need to develop a project and provide detail to support an application, which would be difficult in the period allowed.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.15    SF775              270314         Financial Contribution to Arts Mid North Coast

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

A summary is not required.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council make provision in its 2014/2015 budget for a contribution of $5,058 to Arts Mid North Coast and advise Arts Mid North Coast of its continuing financial support.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can choose whether or not to make the contribution.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has received the attached correspondence from Arts Mid North Coast (AMNC) advising of their recent activities and seeking a contribution from Council for 2014/15 of $5,058, inclusive of GST.

 

The letter advises that whilst no applications were received last year by groups in the Nambucca for funding under the Community Arts Special Projects grants and the Regional Arts fund, to overcome this in 2014 AMNC will be running workshops specifically for Nambucca.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been no consultation in preparing this report.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The work of AMNC is about improving social and cultural outcomes through the arts and creative industries.

 

Economic

 

Similarly AMNC is concerned about building economically sustainable arts and creative industries.

 

Risk

 

The risk primarily relates to the return on Council’s financial contribution.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The budgetary impact is $5,058.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no staffing implications.

 

Attachments:

1

6869/2014 - Arts Mid North Coast - request for ongoing support

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Financial Contribution to Arts Mid North Coast

 



Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.16    SF24                270314         Provision of Waste Services to the Inaugural Scotts Head Food, Wine, Music and Art Festival

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

A summary is not required.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Mayor and General Manager be provided with delegated authority to approve expenditure of up to $500 on the provision of waste management for the inaugural Scotts Head Food, Wine, Music and Art Festival.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can decide whether it wishes the support the festival and the extent of that support.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Scotts Head Events Committee of Management (a Section 355 Committee of Council) has sought Council’s assistance in providing a waste service for the inaugural food, wine, music and art festival which commences on Friday 11 April with a whole day of festivities in the Scotts Head Reserve on Sunday April 13 from 10am to 6pm.

 

Musicians will perform all day Sunday and a large array of food and wine stalls will line the road into the day area of the Reserve.  Carnival rides, a jumping castle, face painting, temporary tattoos, plaster painting and children’s workshops will be set up outside the surf club.  The music line up includes Driftwood, Loose Cannons, Ali Christopher and headline act Ebb n Flo.  There will be entry by gold coin donation.

 

The event organisers have requested Council provide financial support via the provision and collection of additional waste bins.  The exact number of additional bins to be provided is still to be determined with the Committee, but is likely to be approximately ten (10).  The cost of providing and emptying them (including waste depot fees) is likely to be less than $500.

 

Council should provide some support to the Committee in organising this major new event and it is recommended that the Mayor and General Manager be provided with delegated authority to approve expenditure on waste management for the event of up to $500.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with Pip Midson who is on the organising committee for the event.

 

There has been consultation with Council’s Waste Management Officer as to the most economical means of providing additional waste services for the event.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There needs to be an increased number of bins to avoid litter pollution.

 

Social

 

Events are important in improving social cohesion.

 

Economic

 

To the extent that the event attracts people from outside the local government area, it will have a positive economic impact.

 

Risk

 

The Committee of Management has prepared an event plan which has been assessed by the Police and Council staff.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There will be an impact of up to $500 on the waste budget.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Final arrangements for the collection of the bins are still to be made but one option will be to use Council’s town services truck to collect the waste and transport it to Council’s waste depot.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.17    SF1933            270314         Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Michael Coulter, General Manager         

 

Summary:

 

The report covers Council land holdings in Hyland Park, Nambucca Heads, Macksville and Valla Beach.

 

It provides an “up to date” assessment of the status of the various landholdings.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.       That the information in the report concerning council owned land – available, developable           land stocks, including unsold blocks be received.

 

2.       That Council close the section of unused road reservation on the corner of Hyland Park           Road and Mann Street and incorporate the land into the proposed Lot 14 in Council’s           approved subdivision

 

3.       That Council’s seal be attached to any documents relating to the road closure, the creation of a title and the incorporation of the land into the proposed Lot 14 in Council’s subdivision.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The report indicates a range of options if Council wishes to financially support the Nambucca Heads Mens’ Shed.

 

Councillor Morrison requested that this matter not be considered until he returned from leave in April.  Councillors may wish to consider whether or not any matters concerning the Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed be deferred until then.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At Council’s meeting on 13 March 2014 it was resolved that Council be provided with a report by 25 March 2014 on all available, developable land stocks including any unsold blocks and it be considered by a meeting of the Land Development Committee.  However it is understood that the reference in the yet to be adopted minutes to the Land Development Committee may have been to the Economic Directions Committee which meets on 25 March.  This report has been circulated to that Committee.

 

There was also a resolution from Council’s meeting on 13 February that Council try to identify a suitable allotment of land in Nambucca Heads for the Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed.

 

This report deals with both resolutions.

 

Hyland Park

 

Council has an approved 13 lot subdivision for land it owns in Hyland Park.  A locality plan showing the site is attached.

 

In 2010 Council staff obtained a proposal from Hopkins Consultants for design services as well as an estimate of development costs.  A copy of that proposal is attached.

 

Recently the State Government announced that land development activities being undertaken by Councils with borrowed funds would be eligible for an interest rebate of 3% under the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) funding program.  The LIRS program is based on the repayment of principal and interest over a term of not more than 10 years.  With interest rates at historic lows and a 3% rebate being available, the holding costs using finance to undertake the subdivision are very low.

 

With this attractive financing option some consideration has been given to undertaking the Hyland Park residential subdivision.

 

However there are other matters which weigh towards Council continuing to defer the development of the land.

 

A significant factor is that recent modelling undertaken by the Assistant General Manager Corporate Services, suggests that Council cannot continue to support so much of its capital works program with borrowed funds and that the commitment of finance to the Hyland Park project would likely be at the expense of its capital works program.

 

This issue may not be significant if the subdivision could be completed and sold within a relatively short period.  When discussed by Council staff there was not a high level of confidence that Council would receive a reasonable return within a reasonable period and notwithstanding the availability of LIRS funding it would be better deferred to a period when property prices were stronger.  In this respect it is believed that with continuing low interest rates, property prices at Hyland Park should show some improvement following the completion of the Nambucca Heads to Urunga Pacific Highway upgrade.

 

The consensus was that the development should remain on hold.

 

Nambucca Heads Industrial Land

 

Council owns an approved but undeveloped and unregistered 4 lot subdivision in Railway Road, Nambucca Heads.

 

A locality plan showing the land is attached.

 

The parcel has a total area of 2.65 hectares.

 

A plan showing the approved subdivision is attached.

 

Council staff have been negotiating with a company Precision Formwork for the sale of proposed lot 11 (the lot closest to the railway station) which has an area of 4,450 square metres.  The proposal is to have a contract which requires Precision Formwork to undertake the civil works to satisfy the conditions of consent and allow the subdivision to be registered.  The required civil works include the provision of road shoulder seal, kerb and gutter, interallotment drainage, sewer and water connections, the provision of an electricity connection and retaining walls as necessary.  Contributions are also required for water and sewer being $4,860 for water and $4,506 for sewerage.  There are also plan lodgement fees to Council and the Registrar General.

 

Council staff have not fully investigated and compiled the costs for undertaking the required civil works for the subdivision.  This requires a major commitment of staff time.  With the other lots there are additional requirements for the provision of stormwater detention and also the provision of a sewer pump station.

 

A general estimate of the development costs was provided by Hopkins and Associates in February 2010.  At the time they estimated the total development costs to be $518,000, however this did not include provision for the sewerage pump station, for stormwater detention, electricity connections and consultants fees.

 

The current proposal from Council staff is that with the proceeds of the sale of the proposed lot 11, that Council consider developing the proposed lots 12 and 13, hopefully with contributory grant funding from NSW Trade and Investment.  Whilst there have been promising discussions with NSW Trade and Investment about them contributing $250,000 to the project, as yet this application has not been approved.

 

If Council is looking at an opportunity to locate the Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed on Council owned land then the best opportunity would be in relation to the subdivision of the proposed lot 13 which will be encumbered by a water detention basis and sewer pump station but which will still have a residual area of over 2,500 square metres.

 

Based on the advice of Hopkins and Associates plus the other known costs, allowing say $600,000 for all development costs, it should be understood that the current estimated cost of developing the land to allow the registration of the subdivision will be in the vicinity of $30 per square metre.  For a 2,000 square metre site for the Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed this will equate to a financial contribution of $60,000 plus the englobo value of the land.  It needs to be understood that this is a preliminary estimate and a very substantial amount of staff work would be required to develop a firm budget.

 

The disadvantage of the suggested option for the Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed is that it is dependent upon a number of outcomes occurring, being the sale of Lot 11 and the provision of contributory funding from NSW Trade and Investment.  Whether and how long this will take to occur is uncertain.

 

In terms of certainty and cost, another option for supporting the Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed is purchasing the vacant lot of 1,800 square metres which is located beside the existing Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed and which is for sale for $132,000 including GST.  Given the development costs and possible delays associated with the Council land, this may be a proposition if the Council wishes to financially support the Men’s Shed in locating onto their own land.  It is unknown what, if any contributory funding the Men’s Shed may be able to put to acquiring the land.

 

As a footnote to the discussion about the Council’s industrial land, there is section of about 3,000 square metres of land at the corner of Hyland Park Road and Mann Street which is unused road reservation.  This section of road should be closed and the land incorporated into the proposed Lot 14.  As the road reservation contains a constructed Council road, Council will be the owner of the land and will not have to pay Crown Lands for its englobo value.

 

Farringdon Fields

 

Farringdon Fields is flat, cleared land with an area of over 3 hectares.  The land is located at the end of Marshall Way.  The land was dedicated to Council in lieu of substantial Section 94 contributions for the Marshall Way subdivision but has never been used as sporting fields because of its location in close proximity to a sacred Aboriginal place.  The cultural significance of the site to Aboriginal people is such that Aboriginal women and children do not visit the place and hence it cannot be used by schools or sporting associations.  The Council maintains the land by mowing and other than occasional passive recreation it has no identified function.

 

A locality plan showing Farringdon Fields is attached.

 

Because of the nature of a Men’s Shed, its location on part of Farringdon Fields would be culturally appropriate.  A recategorisation and rezoning of the land would be required for a Men’s Shed project to proceed.

 

Yarrawonga Street, Macksville

 

There is a report to Council’s meeting on 27 March concerning the creation of an industrial lot in Yarrawonga Street.  A plan showing the proposed subdivision is attached.

 

The site is owned by Nambucca Shire Council, has an area of 3582m², contains a gradual slope towards the north with significantly modified vegetation, and is split zoned with the northern half of the site located within the IN2 Light Industrial Zone and the southern half located within the RE1 Public Recreation Zone.

 

It is proposed to subdivide the site into two allotments with the dividing boundary in the location of the existing split zone boundary. It is proposed that Lot 1 (IN2 Zone) have an area of 2497m² and Lot 2 (RE1 Zone) have an area of 1085m².

 

It is proposed that once the subdivision is completed that the lot be marketed for sale with the proceeds to be applied to the Land Development Reserve which is budgeted to have a balance of $192,172 as at 30 June 2014 (not including the sale of the Yarrawonga Street land).

 

Lower Nambucca

 

A number of years ago, Council received a report from an ecological consultant indicating the existing forest on the land has ecological significance.  There have also been issues in obtaining access to the Pacific Highway.  Whilst the relocation of the highway should reduce the cost of a direct access, the resolution of the ecological issues will likely be difficult, expensive and impractical.  As a consequence there has been no staff time spent on further investigating the development potential of the land.

 

Land attached to the Valla Beach Pre-School and Hall

 

There is a substantial area of unused forested land located below the Valla Beach Pre-School and Hall.

 

Similar to the land at Lower Nambucca, preliminary environmental investigations indicate that the forest has ecological significance which is likely to make development difficult, expensive and impractical.  .  As a consequence there has been no staff time spent on further investigating the development potential of the land.

 

Kelly Close

 

Council received an enquiry from Mr Tony Gordon concerning the development of a grease trap effluent recycling plant next to the Macksville Sewerage Treatment Plant which is located off Kelly Close and behind Council’s Works Depot.

 

Council obtained a valuation for subdividing 2,500 square metres of land adjoining the Macksville Treatment Plant.  The valuation was for $87,500 based on its RU1 Zone with a proposed industrial use.  The potential use of land beside a large sewage treatment plant is very limited and the valuation reflects this. 

 

The proposed development is designated development and there has been no further progress with negotiations pending the submission of an EIS.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Manager Business Development.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The report has not canvassed the social issues concerning the Men’s Shed.  There are significant social issues concerning the use of Farringdon Fields.  These are outlined in the report.

 

Economic

 

Council has a reasonable stock of vacant land which it can use to improve economic outcomes.

 

Risk

 

The report is for information.  There are no risks.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The report is for information.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

The report is for information.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There has been about a day’s work required in compiling the information and writing the report.

 

Attachments:

1

7660/2014 - Hyland Park PDF

 

2

1917/2010 - Fee Proposal and development Cost Estimate - Hyland Park Estate, Nambucca Heads

 

3

7664/2014 - Nambucca Industrial Land PDF

 

4

7665/2014 - Nambucca Industrial Land - Approved Subdivision TIF

 

5

7735/2014 - Farringdon Fields PDF

 

6

7744/2014 - Subdivision Plan - Yarrawonga Street

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks

 











Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Council Owned Land - Available, Developable Land Stocks, Including any Unsold Blocks

 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.18    DA2014/038      270314         DA2014038 - Additions to a Community Facility (Surf Club) - Ocean Street, Nambucca Heads

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Daniel Walsh, Senior Town Planner         

 

Summary:

 

The proposed development includes additions to the existing surf club at Lots 77 & 478 DP 755550 and Lot 7312 DP 1153709, Ocean Street, Nambucca Heads. The land is owned by Council. In accordance with clause A3.6.1 of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010, this development application has been referred to Council for determination because the General Manager does not have delegated authority to determine the application.

 

The proposed additions include the infill of the existing subfloor of the surf club to create additional storage room. A copy of the plans of the proposed development can be found in attachment 1 of this report.

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and subject to the recommended conditions of consent, is considered to be consistent with all of the relevant matters for consideration.

 

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

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council as the consent authority, pursuant Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, grant consent for Development Application 2014/038 for additions to an existing community facility on Lots 77 & 478 DP 755550 and Lot 7312 DP 1153709, subject to the schedule of conditions outlined in attachment 2 of this report.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

(a) Grant consent to the application, either unconditionally or subject to conditions, or

 

(b) Refuse consent to the application.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The subject land is located off Ocean Street, Nambucca Heads and is legally known as Lots 77 & 478 DP 755550 and Lot 7312 DP 1153709. The land is owned by Nambucca Shire Council, contains an existing surf club excavated into the steep escarpment adjacent to Main Beach and is located within the RE1 Public Recreation Zone.

 

It is proposed enclose the subfloor of the existing surf club to create additional storage room. All works will be within the footprint of the existing building. A copy of the plans of the proposed development can be found in attachment 1 of this report.

 

The proposed additions are considered to be satisfactory with regards to the relevant sections of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as follows:

 


Section 5A  - Significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats

 

Having regard to the location of the works within an existing building and the recommended conditions of consent requiring the implementation of environmental protection measures during construction; it is not considered that the proposed development will result in any significant impacts on any critical habitat, threatened species, populations, ecological communities, or their habitats.

 

Section 79BA - Consultation and development consent—certain bush fire prone land

 

The subject site is bushfire prone land. Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposed additions are contrary to Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 (as referred to in section 4.2.6) due to its consistency with the objectives of PBP as seen in its compliance with the standards outlined in section 4.2.7 of PBP as follows:

·   The managed land to the north of the building and the location of the fire exit on the northern elevation away from the hazard will enable occupants and emergency service workers to enter and exit the building without experiencing radiant heat levels greater than 10kW/m². Furthermore, the managed land to the north of the building is a concrete driveway and managed beach access which will be managed for the life of the development.

·   The existing road network is suitable for the proposed development.

·   The existing provision of services is not proposed/required to be upgraded for the minor additions.

·   A condition requiring an emergency evacuation plan to be prepared in accordance with PBP has been included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Section 79C (1) - Evaluation

 

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

 

(a) the provisions of

 

(i) any environmental planning instruments

 

·      The Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010 (NLEP 2010)

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the relevant provisions of the NLEP 2010 (clauses 2.3, 5.5, and 7.4) because it is not contrary to the objectives of the RE1 Public Recreation Zone; it will not impact on the coastal environment having regard to scenic qualities, access, archaeological significance, ecosystems, effluent, stormwater, or coastal hazards; and it is not considered that public utility infrastructure is essential for the proposed development.

·      State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land

 

In accordance with clause 7, the site is not considered to be contaminated.

 

·      State Environmental Planning Policy No 71—Coastal Protection

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposal is considered to be consistent with the matters for consideration outlined in Clause 8 of SEPP 71 because it will not contradict the aims of the policy or result in any significant impacts on the coastal environment having regard to scenic qualities, access, archaeological significance, ecosystems, coastal processes, wildlife corridors; water quality; or result in conflict between land-based and water-based coastal activities due to its location within the footprint of the existing building.

 

·      North Coast Regional Environmental Plan

 

Having regard to the proposals consistency with the environmental planning instruments addressed above, Council’s Development Control Plan, and with the inclusion of the recommended conditions of consent; it is not considered that the proposal is inconsistent with the relevant clauses of this SEPP as they are similar in context with those in the above mentioned instruments.

 

(ii) any draft environmental planning instrument

 

There are no draft environmental planning instruments applicable to the proposed development.

 

(iii) any development control plan (DCP)

 

·      Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 (DCP)

 

The proposed subdivision is considered to be consistent with the relevant clauses of the DCP as follows:

 

Environmental context (Part A)

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent and as assessed against the relevant clauses of the LEP and DCP in this report, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under clause A5.0.

 

Coastal Hazards (Part K)

The existing surf club (and subsequently the proposed additions) are located within the 2050 Zone of Wave Impact and Slope Adjustment. Although clause K2.3 of the DCP prohibits development within this area, section 79C (3A) (b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to be flexible in applying this clause to the development.

 

With regards to the proposed additions; due to their minor nature and location within the footprint of the existing surf club, it is considered that their location forward of the 2050 Zone of Wave Impact and Slope Adjustment is acceptable as this is consistent with the key actions of the NSW Coastal Policy which allows development seaward of public set back lines for the purpose of facilities associated with Surf Life Saving.

 

Waste Minimisation And Management (Part N)

Conditions have been recommended to be included within the consent regarding the management of waste during construction.

 

(iiia) Any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F.

 

There are no planning agreements applying to the subject site.

 

(iv) Any Matters prescribed by the Regulation

 

·      Clause 92(1)(a) – NSW Coastal Policy 1997

 

Matters for consideration to implement the NSW Coastal Policy are outlined above in clause 5.5 of the NLEP 2010, clause 8 of SEPP 71, and clause K2.3 of the DCP. It is considered that the matters for consideration outlined in the above clauses have been satisfactorily addressed, therefore, satisfying the requirements of the NSW Coastal Policy.

 

(v) Any coastal zone management plan

 

It is not considered that the proposed development will be contrary to the Nambucca Shire Council Coastal Zone Management Plan.

 

(b)        The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality.

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposal will result in any significant impacts on the natural or built environments or any negative social or economic impacts on the locality due to its scale and location within the footprint of the existing building.

 

(c)      the suitability of the site for the development

 

It is considered that the proposed enclosure of the existing surf clubs subfloor is suitable for the site because it will not result in any significant impacts on the natural, social or economic environments due to its consistency with and location within the footprint of the existing building. A condition has been included within the recommended conditions of consent requiring the materials and colours to be consistent with the existing building.

 

(d)      any submissions made in accordance with the Act or the regulations

 

No submissions were received.

 

(e)      the public interest

 

Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposed development will be contrary to the public interest.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

The application was not required to be notified to adjoining owners in accordance with Part A of the Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010.

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

It is not considered that the proposal will result in any significant impacts on the natural environment because all works will be located within the footprint of the existing building; with appropriate pollution mitigation measures included within the recommended conditions of consent.

 

Social

Having regard to the above and subject to the recommended conditions of consent, it is not considered that the proposed development will result in any negative social impacts on the locality because it is for minor additions to an existing surf club which are consistent with the existing building.

Economic

Considering the minimal social impacts posed by the development and the funding of the works being by way of government grant, it is not considered that it will result in any negative economic impacts on the locality.

Risk

Nil

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Nil

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

Nil

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

Nil

Attachments:

1

7761/2014 - Attachment 1 - Development Plan - DA2014.038

 

2

7759/2014 - Attachment 2 - Schedule of Conditions - DA2014/038

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

DA2014038 - Additions to a Community Facility (Surf Club) - Ocean Street, Nambucca Heads

 



Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

DA2014038 - Additions to a Community Facility (Surf Club) - Ocean Street, Nambucca Heads

 

ATTACHMENT 2 - SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS CONSENT

 

Development is to be in accordance with approved plans

 

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

 

Plan Name

Plan Number

Dated

Ground Floor Plan

DA-01

Undated

Elevation - N

DA-02

Undated

 

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

 

2.       Bushfire emergency and evacuation

          Arrangements for emergency and evacuation are to comply with section 4.2.7 of Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006.

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITION IS TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF ANY CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

Details of Materials & Colours

           

3.         Final design details of the proposed external materials and colours shall be submitted for approval by Council prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The external building materials are to incorporate the use of muted, natural colours that will blend with, rather than stand out from, the natural landscape.

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING OR CONSTRUCTION WORKS COMMENCING

 

Construction Certificate

 

4.         The erection of the building the subject of this development consent MUST NOT be commenced until:

(a)     Detailed plans/specifications of the building have been endorsed with a Construction Certificate by:

(i)        the Council, or

(ii)        an accredited certifier, and

(b)     The person having the benefit of the development consent has:

(i)        Appointed a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) for the building work, and

(ii)       Notified Council of the appointment, and

(iii)        Notified the PCA that the person will carry out the building work as an owner-builder; or

Appointed a contractor for the building work who is the holder of a contractor licence if any residential building work is involved, notified the PCA of any such appointment, and notified the contractor of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work.

(c)    The person having the benefit of the development consent has given Council written notice, at least two days prior to work commencing on site, of the name and details of the PCA and the date construction work is proposed to commence.

 

 

 

 

Site construction sign required

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

Erosion & sediment measures

 

6.       Erosion and sedimentation controls are to be in place in accordance with Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction Vol 1, 4th Edition prepared by Landcom and Development Control Plan (Erosion and Sediment Control) 2009.

 

Note: Council may impose on-the-spot fines for non-compliance with this condition.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH DURING CONSTRUCTION

 

Compliance with Building Code of Australia

 

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

 

Standards for demolition work

 

8.       All demolition works are to be undertaken in accordance with the provision of Australian Standard AS 2601-2001 “The Demolition of Structures”.

 

Construction times

 

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

 

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

b        Saturday, from 8.00 am to 1.00 pm.

 

No construction work is to take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

 

Builders rubbish to be contained on site

 

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

 

Support for neighbouring buildings

 

11.     If an excavation extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation to be made:

 

a        must preserve and protect the adjoining building from damage;

b        if necessary, must underpin and support the building in an approved manner;

c        must, at least 7 days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, give notice of intention to do so to the owner of the adjoining allotment of land and furnish particulars of the excavation to the owner of the building being erected or demolished.

 

The owner of the adjoining allotment of land, public road or any other public place is not to be held liable for any part of the cost of work carried out, whether carried out on the allotment of land being excavated or on the public road, any other public place or the adjoining allotment of land.

 

 

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO OCCUPATION OF THE BUILDING

 

Occupation Certificate required

 

12.        The building must not be occupied until the Principal Certifying Authority has issued an Occupation Certificate.

 

REASONS FOR CONDITIONS

 

·      To ensure that the proposed development:

(a)      achieves the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment  Act 1979;

(b)      complies with the provisions of all relevant Environmental Planning Instruments;

(c)      is consistent with the aims and objectives of Council’s Development Control Plans, Codes and Policies.

 

·      To ensure the protection of the amenity and character of land adjoining and in the locality of the proposed development.

 

·      To minimise any potential adverse environmental, social or economic impacts of the proposed development.

 

·      To ensure the development does not conflict with the public interest.

 

 

 


OTHER APPROVALS

 

The following Section 68 Approvals

have been issued with this consent:        NIL

 

Integrated Development:                          NO

 

 

 


 


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Assistant General Manager Corporate Services Report

ITEM 10.1    SF25                270314         Donations Program (Section 356) 2014/2015 - Applications for Councillor Ranking

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Colleen Henry, Grants and Contributions Officer         

 

Summary:

 

Council’s Donations Program 2014/2015 accepted applications from November 2013 to mid-February 2014. Sixteen applications were received, however two of these were from schools/education and were not required. In accordance with Council’s Donations Policy, copies of all applications are distributed to Councillors at this meeting, prior to the meeting at which the annual allocation of Section 356 financial assistance will be approved. Each Councillor is to rank applications (out of session) according to the directions and criteria set out in the package and return their completed packages to the General Manager by 3 April.

 

This year, for the first time, the Donations Program has had to take into account donations to charitable organisations seeking to dispose of waste at the Nambucca Waste Management Facility, instead of having these disposal fees waived. The Donations Program budget of $12,000 is insufficient to meet these requests, but without the assistance from Council provided through fee waivers, these organisations report they will not be able to operate.

 

In addition to allocations within the formal Donations Program, individual requests for Council assistance require Council consideration, as determined at Council’s meeting of 12 June 2013. The Grants and Contributions Officer will prepare reports to Council for these requests for assistance for Council to determine. For consideration at this meeting is the annual contribution of $200.00 to Legacy. This donation has been made over the past three years.

 

 

RecommendationS:

 

1.       That Council agrees to rank applications out of session according to the criteria and Donations Policy requirements set out in the package circularised to Councillors on 13 March and return completed packages to the General Manager by 3 April 2014.

 

2.       That Council agrees to allocate money from Council’s Waste Management budget to meet the waiver of tip fees for charitable organisations in 2014/2015, following consideration of the applications through the Donations Program process.

 

3.       That Council approves a donation of $200.00 to Legacy and that a cheque be drawn from Section 356 funds for this purpose.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

That Council not adopt any or some of the recommendations above, however not adopting Recommendation 1 would require an alternative process to allocate money under the Donations Program.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Donations Program Assessment

Sixteen applications were received under the Donations Program (Section 356) 2014/2015 program, open from November 2013 to mid-February 2014, summarised in the table below:


 

 

Organisation

Amount Requested

Use of funds

Source of funds

Frank Partridge Military Museum

$500.00

Chairs for museum staff.

GL

Nambucca Entertainment Centre

$1,275.00

Repair/renovate main hall dressing rooms.

GL

North Coast TAFE Macksville

$100.00.00

Award for graduation presentation.

GL

Macksville High School

$50.00

Award for graduation presentation.

GL

Nambucca District Historical Society

$1,000.00

Operational costs and cleaning equipment.

GL

Nambucca Heads Lions Club

$1,000.00

Contribution toward construction of jetty at Anzac park to benefit 2015 Anzac centenary celebration.

GL

NSW Marine Rescue – Nambucca

$2,000.00

Operational costs – fuel, electricity and maintenance plus training materials.

Request to photocopy training materials.

GL

Nambucca District Band

$7,500.00

Music, instruments and some running costs.

GL

Scotts Head Sports Field Committee (s.355)

$1,200.00

Line marking supplies. (Late application)

GL

Mary Boulton Pioneer Cottage

$6,400.00

Re-roofing of lock-up cell and creamery (Late application)

GL

Salvation Army

$14,000.00

Tip fees which have previously been waived. Disposal costs in 2012/13 were $4313.07

Waste

Budget

Anglican Parish – Op Shop

$6,500.00

Tip fees which have previously been waived. Disposal costs in 2012/13 were $2057.22.

Waste

Budget

Nambucca Heads Men’s Shed

$350.00

Tip fees which have previously been waived. Disposal costs in 2012/13 were $235.39.

Waste

Budget

Nambucca Camp Quality

$200.00

Tip fees which have previously been waived. Disposal costs in 2012/13 were $122.10.

Waste

Budget

Nambucca Valley Christian Life Care (Care N Wear)

$10,000.00

Tip fees which have previously been waived. (Late application) Disposal costs in 2012/13 were $1039.65.

Waste

Budget

Nambucca Valley Craft and Art

Photocopying

Photocopying

N/A

TOTAL

$51,925.00

 

 

 

The applications from Macksville High School and North Coast TAFE were not required and need not be considered in the assessment; as per last year each of the schools in Nambucca Shire will receive $50.00 towards awards and TAFE will receive $100.00, totalling $450.00.

 

Each Councillor’s package contains a set of the full applications received, a summary sheet with space to rank each of the applications, and a list of criteria to consider in making their determinations. Once all Councillor assessments have been returned to the General Manager, Council’s Grants and Contributions Officer will collate responses and prepare a report recommending specific amounts to preferred applicants for Council’s approval.

 

Charitable organisations and need for consideration

This year for the first time the Donations Program has had to take into account donations to charitable organisations seeking to dispose of waste at the Nambucca Waste Management Facility, as Council adopted a new Donations Policy 2012.

 

Five of the eight organisations which have had their tip fees waived previously have applied under this round. These requests total $31,050. Actual disposal costs to Council’s Waste Facility during 2012/2013 for all eight organisations totalled $8,737.37. There is some discrepancy between actual costs and requested funding which could be taken into account when allocating donations funding. All organisations report that if they did not receive the support from Council to meet their disposal costs they would not be able to operate their shops or services, which provide great community benefit through employment and funding services to the needy or sick.

 

There is a clear need for the tip disposal fees to be met and this cannot occur within the current Donations Program budget. An amount of $10,000 from the Waste Management budget would  allow for CPI increases and be sufficient based on the quantum of fee waivers in 2012/2013.

 

Outside-of-program request

The Legacy organisation has received a $200 donation from Council for the past three years. It is recommended that this donation be made for 2013/2014 from the Section 356 allocation.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Manager Financial Services

Waste Management Officer

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental impacts associated with this report.

 

Social

 

There are positive social benefits associated with the donation of money to various community groups throughout the Nambucca Shire.

 

Economic

 

All of the charitable organisations report that if they do not receive assistance from Council to dispose of wastes, they will not be able to provide the services they currently offer.

 

Risk

 

There are no risks associated with this report.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

A total amount of $12,000 (80% of the total allocation of $15,000) is available in the 2014/2015 budget.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

General ledger funds as established by Council. Waste management budget.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

No change or implications.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.  


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Corporate Services

ITEM 10.2    SF251              270314         Schedule of Council Public Meetings

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Monika Schuhmacher, Executive Assistant/Business Services Unit         

 

SUMMARY:

 

The following is a schedule of dates for public Council meetings.  The meeting dates may change from to time and this will be recorded in the next available report to Council.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the schedule of dates for public Council meetings be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

MEETING

DATE

VENUE

COMMENCING

Access Committee

25/03/2014

Council Chambers -

2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

27/03/2014

Council Chambers

5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

02/04/2014

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

10/04/2014

Council Chambers

5.30 PM

Access Committee

22/04/2014

Council Chambers

2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

24/04/2014

Utungun Hall – depart at 4.30 pm

5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

07/05/2014

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

15/05/2014

Council Chambers

5.30 PM

Access Committee

27/05/2014

Council Chambers

2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

29/05/2014

Scotts Head – depart at 4.30 pm

5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

04/06/2014

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

12/06/2014

Council Chambers

5.30 PM

Access Committee

24/06/2014

Council Chambers

2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

26/06/2014

Council Chambers

5.30 PM

 

Note:   Departure times to Rural Halls have been added.

Note:   Meetings at the Rural Halls commence with light refreshments at 5.00 pm.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.   


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.1    Q011/2013        270314         Q011/2013 Quotations Road Patching Unit - Local Government Procurement

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Stephen Fowler, Engineering Designer; Paul Gallagher, Assistant General Manager - Engineering Services         

 

Summary:

 

Councils 2013/14 budget has an allocation for the replacement of the bitumen patching truck. Council’s invited quotations for the supply of a patching truck through the LGP Vendor Panel.

 

Two quotations were received for the supply of a bitumen patching truck from the following suppliers:

 

·      Austroad Systems Pty Ltd

·      Paveline International Pty Ltd

 

and one offer received for private purchase.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council accept the quotation from Austroad Systems Pty Ltd for the purchase bitumen patching truck as resolved within the confidential report.

2        That Council allocate an additional $80,000.00 from the plant reserve fund for the purchase of the bitumen patching truck.

3        That Council update the contract register.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1        Accept the recommendation

2        Not accept a tender

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

LGP are prescribed under the Local Government Act which gives Council an exemption from calling tenders. The Vendor Panel is a secure system similar to a tender process. In lieu of Council calling a tender itself quotes were sought from the LGP Panel.

 

Original quotes closed on 4 December 2014 however supplementary quotes were sought for the provision of 6 rod suspension truck and chassis in lieu of air bag truck and chassis and a trade or purchase outright price form other suppliers for the existing Paveline truck. The supplementary quotes closed on 28 February 2014.

 

Two quotations were received for the supply of a bitumen patching truck from the following suppliers:

·      Austroad Systems Pty Ltd

·      Paveline International Pty Ltd

 

and one offer received for private purchase.

 

Council’s budget allocation in the 2013/14 management plant is a net $230,000 after trade/sale for a new bitumen patching truck. The anticipated trade value in the budget was over exaggerated at $160,000.00 which had been based on advice from the industry at the current market some 18 months ago when the budget was being prepared, and since going to market there is a significant difference to what has been offered.

 

The bitumen patching truck is an integral piece of plant in Councils maintenance operations for maintaining the sealed road network. The current Paveline truck was purchased to introduce efficiencies across Councils operations and minimise the intense labour component required when using the former Flowcon machine.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Plant Superintendent

Site Leader Bitumen

Overseer

Manager Civil Works

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no issues for the environment 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

 

An allocation of $230,000.00 was made available in the 2013/14 budget for the purchase of a new bitumen patching truck and at the time of preparation of the budget an anticipated trade/sale value of $160,000.00 was place in the budget. Therefore if Council purchase either machine there is an impact on the current budget allocation with additional funds required to match the short fall for the purchase of the a new bitumen patching truck.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

A variation is required to meet the difference in the allocation to match the required funds to purchase a new machine the source of the variation will be drawn from the plant reserve which has a current balance $303,000.00 There is also an opportunity to consider the deferment of the garbage compactor purchase and use these funds for shortfall and place the compactor into the following 2014/15 budget

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.  


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.2    SF818              270314         Nambucca District Water Supply - Documentation of Management Plans for Off River Storage Water Licence

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Richard Spain, Manager Water and Sewerage         

 

Summary:

 

The licence conditions for the operation of the Nambucca District Water Supply Off River Storage require Council to develop a number of Management Plans prior to operating the storage. A report on the preparation of the Management Plans was provided to Council at their meeting on 11 December 2013 where the following resolution was made:

 

1        That Council seek a fee offer from Public Works in accordance with Section 55 of the Local Government Act 1993 (LGA) Clause 3 for the documentation of the Management Plans.

 

2        That following the receipt of the fee schedule from the Public Works a further report be provided to Council on the engagement of the Public Works for the development of the Management Plans

 

NSW Public Works have now submitted the requested fee proposal to Council and a copy is attached as a confidential document for the information of Councillors only.

 

The fee offer is considered to be reasonable and it is recommended that Public Works be engaged to complete the documentation of the management plans

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council engage NSW Public Works to complete the documentation of the Management Plans in accordance with their fee proposal dated February 2014.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council could choose to engage a consultant through the open tender process however for the reasons detailed below it is considered that Council would not benefit from that approach.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Statutary Compliance

 

Council is free to engage Public Works without going through an open tender process as Section 55 of the Local Government Act 1993 (LGA) sets out the requirements for tendering and Clause 3 states in part the following:

 

This section does not apply to the following contracts:

 

·      a contract entered into by a council with the Crown (whether in right of the Commonwealth, New South Wales or any other State or a Territory), a Minister of the Crown or a statutory body representing the Crown

 

NSW Public Works is a statutory body and is therefore exempt from the tender requirements.

 

Council does not have the time and in many cases the experience to fully document all of the Management Plans required.  Both Public Works and GHD have intimate knowledge of the project due to their continued involvement from the preconstruction phase through to final construction.

 

In the report presented to Council in December 2013, it was reported that staff considered that it is unlikely that any benefit would be gained by going to open tender for the following reasons:

 

·      Public Works have supervised the construction of the majority of the dams built in recent times and have completed similar Management Plans for the Councils responsible for their operation and maintenance.  This experience combined with the specific knowledge relating to this project would be reasonably expected to translate into a streamlining of the time taken to complete the task of documenting the Management Plans

 

·      In contrast a consultant with no background knowledge of the project would have to spend considerable amounts of time going through the myriad of information compiled on the project to date including the EIS and design reports.  They would also be more likely to require more time from Council staff to assist them in obtaining all the relevant information required to document the management plans.

 

·      The tender process including preparation of documents, assessment of tenders and awarding of contracts would take considerable time and resources that Council does not have to spare.

 

·      The tender assessment processes would be based around on an Evaluation Plan that includes a significant non – price weighting for tenderers that have experience on similar works specifically related to dams. This would ensure that Council only selects a tenderer with a proven capability to complete the work required.  Therefore the assessment weighting would be likely to heavily favour Public Works as they have experience on similar projects and have all the background knowledge on this project in particular

 

·      Throughout the course of this project Public Works have been able to demonstrate that their hourly rates and fees are cost competitive with those of private consultants.

 

·      If a tender were to be called, Public Works in their role as Council’s Project Manager would normally provide any assistance required to prepare the tender documentation.  However, as they would be providing a tender submission it would be inappropriate to utilise their services.

 

·      An external consultant with no background knowledge of the project would have to be engaged and this would most likely result in additional cost and time being incurred by the project.

 

Public Works as a statutory body are exempt from the tender requirements and Council can engage them without going to tender.  Given their experience and knowledge of the project as well as the known competiveness of their hourly rates this is considered to be a practical, expedient and reasonable way to proceed with the documentation of the Management Plans.

 

The fee offer submitted by Public Works is considered to be reasonable and it is recommended that it be accepted.  It should be noted that the Public Works fee offer is not a fixed fee but is the maximum fee they believe will be required to complete the work based on hourly rates and assessed hours to complete the tasks. The fee is subject to a number of assumptions that are clearly stated in the proposal.

 

Should changes to these assumptions occur then Public Works reserves the right to vary their fee in accordance with the hourly rates included in the fee offer.  However any savings made in hours allocated to tasks or assumed meetings that are not required will be passed on to Council.

 

Council staff will assist were possible in the preparation of some of the more basic plans and this may result in savings to the Public Works fee.  However this will be very dependent on available time, resources and work load.

 

The current project budget has an allowance for the preparation of the Management Plans.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services

NSW Public Works

NSW Office of Water

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

The preparation of the Management Plans will have no direct environmental impact however the implementation of a number of the plans will determine how the environmental impact of the storage is managed.

 

Social

The preparation of the Management Plans will have no direct social impact however a plan such as the Recreation Plan will govern how the general public are able to use the asset.

 

Economic

The preparation and implementation of the Management Plans will provide no direct economic benefit

 

Risk

A number of the Management Plans are put in place to establish procedures that address Council’s risk in the ongoing operation and maintenance of a water supply storage.

 

 

FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Council has provided funding in the 2013/14 budget for the preparation of the Management Plans as part of the budget.

 

Source of funds and any variance to working funds

Funding for the project will be sourced from reserves, grants and loans.

 

The Office of Water has confirmed a $14.8 million subsidy as part of the existing Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage program.  $11.5 million of the funding has been claimed and paid to date.

 

Council has also signed a Stage 2 funding deed for the remaining $9 million of a $10 million grant offered by the Federal Government.  $8 million of this Stage 2 funding has been claimed and paid to date with the remaining $1 million to be paid on completion of the works.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

There are no implications related to levels of service and resourcing.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.3    SF1621            270314         Nambucca District Water Supply - Adaptive Management - River Monitoring Committee

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Richard Spain, Manager Water and Sewerage         

 

Summary:

 

The surface water licence issued by the NSW Office of Water for the operation of the off river storage includes a condition requiring Council to prepare and implement and Adaptive Management Plan.  An Adaptive Management Workshop was held on 21 November 2013 with a view to introduce new Councillors to the concept of adaptive management and to make all Councillors aware of Council’s obligations in meeting the requirements of the licence.

 

Subsequent to the workshop Council resolved that the proposed River Monitoring Committee and the Technical Group be amalgamated and that an amended Terms of Reference reflecting the amalgamation be documented for adoption by Council:

 

A revised Terms of Reference has been documented on the basis that a single committee will manage Council’s adaptive management obligations in relation to monitoring the Nambucca River to assess any impact of the operation of the Off River Storage.  A copy of the revised document is attached for Council’s information and adoption.

 

GHD have previously prepared an Adaptive Management Strategy dated June 2012 and have been involved in the collection of baseline data to assist in monitoring the impact of the storage.  A copy of this document is also attached for Council’s information and adoption.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That Council adopt the Terms of Reference for the Off River storage River Monitoring Committee.

 

2        That Council adopt the Adaptive Management Strategy prepared by GHD dated June 2012.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

No other option is proposed.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The proposal is considered to be straightforward and there have been a number of previous reports and workshops in relation to Adaptive Management and no further discussion is considered to be required.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

NSW Public Works

NSW Office of Water

GHD Pty Ltd

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The AMS is designed to protect the environment by monitoring any changes in the river system downstream of the storage with the aim of taking action to manage the operation of the storage to minimise the impacts.

 

Social

 

The AMS will provide no direct social benefit.

 

Economic

 

The AMS will provide no direct economic benefit. And will be an ongoing management cost for the operation of the storage

 

Risk

 

The AMS is to be used as a tool to assist Council in making decisions to mitigate against the risk of the dam and its operation having an adverse impact on the Nambucca River System.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The monitoring regime associated with the AMS will impact on future budgets as it will have to be included in the operational cost of the storage.  The cost of river monitoring will come out of the current budget

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Funding for the ongoing costs of the AMS will be generated from water supply income through rates and water usage charges.  There will be no variance to existing working funds

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no implications related to levels of service and staffing arrangements.

 

 

Attachments:

1

6826/2014 - PDF copy of  River Monitoring Committee Terms of Reference

 

2

1891/2013 - Copy of Bowraville Off River Storage Adaptive Management Strategy issued by GHD June 2012.

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Nambucca District Water Supply - Adaptive Management - River Monitoring Committee

 





Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Nambucca District Water Supply - Adaptive Management - River Monitoring Committee

 



































Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.4    SF844              270314         Nambucca District Water Supply Steering Committee Meeting - 5 March 2014

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Richard Spain, Manager Water and Sewerage         

 

Summary:

 

Water and Sewerage Steering Committee (WSSC) meetings relating to the Nambucca District Water Supply Bowraville Off-River Storage Project are scheduled to be held monthly at the construction site office

 

A quorum was not available at the meeting held on 5 March 2014 so the agenda items were raised for the information and discussion only.

 

The minutes relating to the meeting are attached for Council’s information.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the minutes of the record of discussion held on 5 March 2014 in lieu of the formal Steering Committee Meeting be received and noted by Council.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

No other options considered

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Main items of discussion were the ongoing risks to the project and their impact on the project budget

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Director Engineering Services

NSW Public Works

NSW Office of Water

Haslin Construction Pty Ltd

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The environment impacts of the project are detailed in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that was prepared by GHD.  The contractors are required to prepare and work to Environmental Management Plans that conform to the requirements of the EIS.

 

Social

 

The project aims to provide a social benefit through security of water supply.

 

Economic

 

The project will have a significant economic impact on the community as increases in both the typical residential bill and developer charges will be required to service Council’s financial commitment to the project.

 

The construction works should also provide an economic stimulus to the Shire.

 

Risk

 

This is a major project for the Shire and there are significant risks associated with construction contracts of this size.  An updated project risk register is kept by the Project Managers and the risks are discussed during the meetings.

 

 

FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Council has committed funding for in the 2013/14 budget sufficient to complete construction works on the Off River Storage Project.

 

Source of funds and any variance to working funds

 

Funding for the project will be sourced from reserves, grants and loans.

 

The Office of Water has confirmed a $14.8 million subsidy as part of the existing Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage program.  $11.5 million of the funding has been claimed and paid to date.

 

Council has also signed a Stage 2 funding deed for the remaining $9 million of a $10 million grant offered by the Federal Government.  $8 million of this Stage 2 funding has been claimed and paid to date with the remaining $1 million to be paid on completion of the works.

 

A significant variation is being negotiated between the NSW Public Works and the Contractor which will have a formal impact on the budget.  The quantum of variation is unknown at this stage as the contractor is yet to submit the claim to the NSW Public Works.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no implications related to levels of service and resourcing.

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

6747/2014 - Minutes of Steering Committee held on 5 March 2014.

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2014

Nambucca District Water Supply Steering Committee Meeting - 5 March 2014

 





Ordinary Council Meeting                                                                                                  27 March 2014

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.5    SF1669            270314         Bowraville Off River Water Storage - Insurance Excess

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:    Richard Spain, Manager Water and Sewerage         

 

Summary:

 

Council has resolved to extend the insurance policies for material damage to contract works and public liability on the Off River Storage Project.

 

Council previously paid the contractor a sum of $700,000 to accept all risk associated with payment of any excess in relation to insurance claims.

 

Haslin have advised that they will accept that same risk over the extended period if Council pays them an amount of $375,000.

 

The risk of a flood event causing major damage to the works has significantly reduced and it is considered reasonable for Council to assume the risk of paying the insurance excess.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council assume the risk of a flood event and accept that they will pay the insurance excess in the event that the works suffers significant damage.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council pay Haslin an amount of $375,000 to assume all risk for insurance claims and payment of any excess required similar to the original arrangement.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has recently resolved to extend the insurance policies for material damage to contract works and public liability to cover the extended construction period for the Off River Storage Project.  At that time the matter of how best to deal with the insurance excess had not been resolved.

 

For the original insurance cover Council had negotiated to pay the contractor Haslin Constructions a variation in the amount of $700,000 to accept all risk associated with the insurance claims and payment of any excess required.  Council requested Public Works to negotiate with Haslin Constructions in relation to the excess for the insurance extensions.

 

Public Works have now advised the following:

 

“Further to the Insurance extension item discussed at the Council meeting on 27 February 2014 (Item 9.9), we can providing the following details:

 

Discus