Report Page Banner                     

 

Ordinary Council

 

Business Paper

 

date of meeting:

 

Wednesday, 20 November 2013

location:

 

Council Chambers, 17 Burrawan Street, Port Macquarie

time:

 

5.30pm


Council’s Vision                                      A sustainable high quality of life for all.

 

 

 

 

Council’s Mission                                   To provide regional leadership and meet the community’s needs in an equitable and inclusive way that enhances the area’s environmental, social and economic qualities.

 

 

 

 

Council’s Corporate Values                  é   Sustainability

                                                                  é   Excellence in Service Delivery

                                                                  é   Consultation and Communication

                                                                  é   Openness and Accountability

                                                                  é   Community Advocacy

 

 

 

 

Council’s Guiding Principles                é  Ensuring good governance

                                                                  é  Looking after our people

                                                                  é  Helping our community prosper

                                                                  é  Looking after our environment

                                                                  é  Planning & providing our infrastructure

 

 


How Members of the Public Can  Have Their Say at Council Meetings

Council has a commitment to providing members of the public with an input into Council's decision making.  The Council's Code of Meeting Practice provides two (2) avenues for members of the public to address Council on issues of interest or concern at the Ordinary Council Meeting.   These are:

 

Addressing Council on an Agenda Item:

If the matter is listed in the Council Business Paper, you can request to address Council by:

·       Completing the Request to Speak on an Agenda Item at a Council Meeting”, which can be obtained from Council’s Offices at Laurieton, Port Macquarie and Wauchope or by downloading it from Council’s website.

·       On-line at

     http://www.hastings.nsw.gov.au/www/html/2924-addressing-a-council-meeting-in-relation-to-an-agenda-item.asp?intSiteID=1

 

Your request to address Council must be received by Council no later than 4:30pm on the day prior to the Council Meeting.

 

Council's Code of Meeting Practice sets out the following guidelines for addressing Council:

·      Addresses will be limited to 5 minutes.

·      If you wish any written information, drawings or photos to be distributed to the Council to support the address, two (2) copies should be provided to the Group Manager Governance & Executive Services prior to the commencement of the meeting.

·      Where speakers wish to make an audio visual presentation, a copy is to be provided to the Group Manager Governance & Executive Services by 4.30pm on the day prior to the Council Meeting.

·      Council will permit only two (2) speakers "Supporting" and two (2) speakers "Opposing" the Recommendation contained in the Business Paper.  If there are more than two speakers supporting and opposing, the Mayor will request the speakers to determine who will address Council.

 

Addressing Council in the Public Forum:

If the matter is not listed in the Council Business Paper, you can request to address Council by:

·       Completing the Request to Speak in the Public Forum at Ordinary Council Meeting”, which can be obtained from Council’s Offices at Laurieton, Port Macquarie and Wauchope or by downloading it from Council’s website.

·       On-line at

     http://www.hastings.nsw.gov.au/www/html/2926-addressing-council-in-the-council-meeting-public-forum.asp?intSiteID=1

 

Your request to address Council must be received by Council no later than 4:30pm on the day prior to the Council Meeting.

 

A maximum of eight (8) speakers will be heard in the Public Forum.  Each speaker will be limited to 5 minutes.  Council may ask questions of speakers but speakers cannot ask questions of Council.

 

Council will not determine matters raised in the Public Forum session, however may resolve to call for a further report, when appropriate.

 

Speakers will be allowed to address Council in the Public Forum on the same issue no more than three (3) times in each calendar year.  (Representatives of incorporated community groups may be exempted from this restriction).

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

Wednesday, 20 November 2013

 

Items of Business

 

Item       Subject                                                                                                      Page

 

 

01           Acknowledgement of Country............................................................................ 1

02           Local Government Prayer................................................................................... 1

03           Apologies......................................................................................................... 1

04           Confirmation of Minutes.................................................................................... 1

05           Disclosures of Interest..................................................................................... 18

06           Mayoral Minute

06.01..... 2013 Carols by Candlelight Event Funding.......................................... 22

06.02..... Mayoral Discretionary Fund Allocations.............................................. 23

07           Public Forum................................................................................................... 24

08           Ensuring Good Governance........................................................................... 25

08.01..... Confidential Correspondence to Ordinary Council Meeting................... 26

08.02..... Status of Outstanding Reports to Council - November 2013................. 28

08.03..... Code of Conduct Complaint Statistics................................................ 30

08.04..... Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy 33

08.05..... Disclosure of Interest Return.............................................................. 37

08.06..... Report on Attendance at the 2013 AAPA International Flexible Pavements Conference 39

08.07..... Annual Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2013.............. 42

08.08..... Monthly Review of Financial Position - October 2013........................... 50

08.09..... Investments - October 2013................................................................ 52

08.10..... Phasing of Operational Budgets......................................................... 57

08.11..... Development Activity & Assessment System Performance.................. 60

08.12..... 2012 - 2013 Annual Report................................................................. 65

08.13..... Heritage & Cultural Sub-Committee..................................................... 68

08.14..... Transfer Balance of Funds - Port Macquarie-Handa Sister City Sub-Committee            72

08.15..... Section 355  Community Halls Management Committees Membership 2013     74

09           Looking After Our People............................................................................... 79

09.01..... Annual Reporting of Contracts for Senior Staff................................... 80

09.02..... Notice of Motion - Ban Consumption of Alcohol - Town Beach Skate Park (PIN 263)     83

09.03..... Notice of Motion - Illegal Camping...................................................... 84

09.04..... Bicentenary Planning Sub-Committee Membership.............................. 85

09.05..... Recommendations from the Mayor's Sporting Fund Sub-Committee Meeting held on Thursday 16 October 2013................................................................................ 87

10           Helping Our Community Prosper................................................................... 88

10.01..... Notice of Motion - Tastings on Hastings 2013..................................... 89

10.02..... Question on Notice - Council Owned Land in William Street, Port Macquarie (PIN 34119)........................................................................................................ 90

10.03..... Economic Development Strategy....................................................... 95

11           Looking After Our Environment...................................................................... 99

11.01..... Notice of Motion - Walking Track - Jonathon Dixon Reserve to Middle Rock Road, Lake Cathie (PIN 43834)...................................................................................... 100

11.02..... Notice of Motion - Wall Reserve, North Haven (PIN 15194)................. 101

11.03..... Recommended Item from Hastings LGA Floodplain Management Sub-Committee - Camden Haven River and Lake System Flood Study....................................... 102

11.04..... Recommended Item from Hastings LGA Coast & Estuaries Sub-Committee - Lake Cathie Coastal Zone Management Plan....................................................... 103

11.05..... Exhibtion of Koala Habitat and Vegetation Mapping.......................... 106

11.06..... Question on Notice - Kew Waste Transfer Station (PIN 50972, 57445). 123

11.07..... New Planning Bill............................................................................. 127

11.08..... DA 2013 - 0286 - Earthworks Associated With Recreation Area Lot 16 DP 1122022, 79 Ocean Drive, Port Macquarie (PIN 55276).................................................... 130

11.09..... DA2013 - 0349 - Alterations and Additions to 3 Storey Dwelling-House Including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 - Lot 3 DP 236279, 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie (PIN 13336) 134

11.10..... DA2013 - 0481 Alterations and Additions to Two Storey Dwelling House and Construction of a Detached Shed Including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 - Lot 5 DP 22158, 23 Orr Street, Port Macquarie (PIN 15827)..................................................................... 138

11.11..... T-13-25 Kew Waste Management Facility Design and Documentation (PIN 50972-57445)....................................................................................................... 142

12           Planning and Providing Our Infrastructure................................................... 146

12.01..... Wauchope Skate Park...................................................................... 147

12.02..... Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme Round 3 Applications............... 156

12.03..... Rationalisation of Land Boundaries - Lake Road, Gordon and Munster Streets, Port Macquarie....................................................................................................... 162

12.04..... Status of Port Macquarie-Hastings Bus Route Alterations and Associated Bus Stops  165

12.05..... Tender T-13-33 Supply & Install Traffic Signals Hastings River Drive at Boundary Street intersection, Port Macquarie............................................................. 170

12.06..... Thrumster Neighbourhood DCP Provisions: Partridge Creek and West Lindfield - Public Exhibition Report............................................................................. 174

12.07..... Proposed Variation to draft LEP Height of Building Map - Warlters Street, Settlement City Precinct........................................................................................... 187

12.08..... Growth Constraints - Oxley Highway/Wrights Road Intersection, Port Macquarie [SF13/1207]....................................................................................................... 193  

13           Questions for Next Meeting

14           Confidential Matters

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council      20/11/2013

Item:          01

Subject:     ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

 

"I acknowledge that we are gathered on Birpai Land. I pay respect to the Birpai Elders both past and present. I also extend that respect to all other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people present."

 

 

Item:          02

Subject:     LOCAL GOVERNMENT PRAYER

 

A Minister from the Combined Churches of Port Macquarie will be invited to deliver the Local Government Prayer.

 

 

Item:          03

Subject:     APOLOGIES

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the apologies received be accepted.

 

 

Item:          04

Subject:     CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 16 October 2013 be confirmed.

 


pmhc_logo_VER_smallMINUTES                                                                             Ordinary Council Meeting

                                                                                                                        16/10/2013

 

 

 

PRESENT

 

Members:

 

Councillor Peter Besseling (Mayor)

Councillor Rob Turner

Councillor Adam Roberts (Deputy Mayor)

Councillor Lisa Intemann

Councillor Justin Levido

Councillor Geoff Hawkins

Councillor Trevor Sargeant

Councillor Michael Cusato

Councillor Sharon Griffiths

 

Other Attendees:

 

General Manager (Tony Hayward)

Director of Infrastructure & Asset Management (Jeffery Sharp)

Director of Commercial Services & Industry Engagement (Craig Swift-McNair)

Director of Development & Environment (Matt Rogers)

Group Manager Governance & Executive Services (Stewart Todd)

Communications Officer (Stuart Carless)

Executive Assistant to the Mayor / Minute Clerk (Linda Kocis)

 

 

The Meeting opened at 5.38 pm.

 

01       ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

The Mayor opened the Meeting with an Acknowledgement of Country and welcomed all in attendance in the Chamber.

 

02       LOCAL GOVERNMENT PRAYER

Reverend Scott Donnellan from the Presbyterian Church delivered the Local Government Prayer.

 

03       APOLOGIES

Nil.

 

04       CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Resolved:   Intemann/Levido

 

1.       That the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 18 September 2013 be confirmed.

2.       That the Minutes of the Extra-Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 September 2013 be confirmed.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

05       DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

 

Councillor Levido declared a Non-Pecuniary, Significant Interest in Item 11.01 - DA 2013/0349 - 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie, the reason being he is a partner in the Port Macquarie Law Firm, Donovan Oates Hannaford Lawyers.  The firm currently acts for a landowner whose property adjoins the subject property and has caused an objection to be lodged with respect to the proposed development.

Councillor Roberts declared a Non-Pecuniary, Significant Interest in Item 11.01 - DA 2013/0349 - 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie, the reason being the neighbour of the DA site in question ran in the Group C (Team Roberts) election campaign and may be potentially impacted by the outcome of this item.

Councillor Cusato declared a Non-Pecuniary, Less than Significant Interest in Item 11.01 - DA 2013/0349 - 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie, the reason being the direct neighbour of the subject property was a candidate running for Council with him on Group C (Team Roberts).

Councillor Griffiths declared a Non-Pecuniary, Less than Significant Interest in Item 12.05 - Wauchope Traffic Management Strategy, the reason being she is a director and business owner in Wauchope. 

Councillor Griffiths declared a Non-Pecuniary, Less than Significant Interest in Item 12.08 - Tender T-13-26 Port Macquarie Airport - New Carpark for Rental Cars & Staff, the reason being she owns a business and some of tenderers are customers of her business.

Councillor Intemann declared a Non-Pecuniary, Less than Significant Interest in Item 12.05 - Wauchope Traffic Management Strategy, the reason being she is a resident of Wauchope and the Director of a Wauchope business.

 


 

 

06.01  Mayoral Discretionary Fund Allocations

RESOLVED:   Besseling

 

That the Mayoral Discretionary Fund allocations for the period 6 September to 4 October 2013 be noted.

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

 Suspension of Standing Orders

RESOLVED:   Roberts/Intemann

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow Item 08.01 to be brought forward and considered next.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.01  Confidential Correspondence to Ordinary Council Meeting

Resolved:   Roberts/Intemann

That Council determine that the attachments to Item numbers. 09.03 and 12.08 be considered as confidential, in accordance with Section 11(3) of the Local Government Act.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

07       PUBLIC FORUM

The Mayor advised of applications to address Council in the Public Forum from:

1.         Ms Jenny Daniels regarding Big 4 Caravan Park, Bonny Hills.

 

RESOLVED:   Roberts/Intemann

 

That the above requests to speak in the Public Forum be acceded to.

 

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

07.01     Big 4 Caravan Park, Bonny Hills

Ms Jenny Daniels addressed Council in regard to noise from the swimming pool at the Big 4 Caravan Park, Bonny Hills and answered questions from Councillors.

 

Requests to Speak on an Agenda Item

The Mayor advised of requests to speak on an agenda item, as follows:

 

Item 10.01 - Mr Alistair Owen in support of the recommendation.

Item 11.01 - Mr Tony Thorne in support of the recommendation.

Item 11.01 - Mr Todd Scott in opposition to the recommendation.

Item 11.01 - Mr Rob Snow in support of the recommendation.

Item 11.01 - Mr William Amy in opposition of the recommendation.

Item 12.04 - Mrs Kaye Newberry in support of the recommendation.

Item 12.05 - Mrs Jennifer Mackay in opposition to the recommendation.

 

Resolved:   Roberts/Intemann

 

That the requests to speak on an agenda item be acceded to.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

Suspension of Standing Orders

Resolved:   Turner/Intemann

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow Items 11.01, 12.04 & 12.05 to be brought forward and considered next in the above order.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

Councillor Levido and Councillor Roberts left the Meeting, the time being 5.59 pm.


 

 

11.01  DA 2013/0349 - Alterations and Additions to 3 storey dwelling-house including clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (height of buildings) Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 - Lot 3 DP 236279, 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie (PIN 13336)

Mr Rob Snow, King & Campbell Pty Ltd, on behalf of applicants, Mr B & Mrs B Kemmett, addressed Council in support of the recommendation and answered questions from Councillors.

 

Mr Todd Scott, solicitor on behalf of Glenn Scott & Rebecca Davis, addressed Council in opposition to the recommendation and answered questions from Councillors.

 

Mr Tony Thorne, King & Campbell Pty Ltd on behalf of the applicants, Mr B and Mrs B Kemmett, addressed Council in support of the recommendation and answered questions from Councillors.

 

Mr William Amy, on behalf of affected neighbour, Mrs Margaret Norman, addressed Council in opposition to the recommendation and answered questions from Councillors.

 

Resolved:   Sargeant/Hawkins

That the application be deferred so as to provide an opportunity for the plans to be amended to enable the existing building height to be maintained.

carried:      7/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

Councillor Levido and Councillor Roberts returned to the meeting, the time being 06:46pm.

 

12.04  McInherney Park - Western Man-Made Beach (PIN 22006)

 Mrs Kaye Newberry, on behalf of residents of River Park Road, addressed Council in support of the recommendation and answered questions from Councillors.

 

Resolved:   Levido/Cusato

1.       That Council:

          a)    Retain the motorised vessel exclusions zones at the western man-made beach at McInherney Park, Port Macquarie; and

          b)    Ensure that the Port Macquarie-Hastings Recreation Plan currently being prepared deals with the western man-made beach at McInherney Park, Port Macquarie as part of its brief.

2.      That the General Manager cause a report to be made to Council regarding the use of the western man-made beach at McInherney Park, Port Macquarie within 1 month of the adoption by Council of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Recreation Plan.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.05  Wauchope Traffic MANAGEMENT Strategy

Mrs Jennifer Mackay, on behalf of the Wauchope Business Association, addressed Council in opposition to the recommendation and answered questions from Councillors.

 

Resolved:   Griffiths/Intemann

That Council:

1.      Note the contents of the report including the comments and response from the workshop as part of the document.

2.      Place on exhibition the Wauchope Traffic Management Strategy report inviting community comment, noting the exhibition will include a community and stakeholder information session.

3.      Following exhibition, receive a further report detailing the feedback from the exhibition and recommendations to progress actions for the Wauchope Traffic Management Strategy.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

Suspension of Standing Orders

resolved:   Turner/Hawkins

That Standing Orders be suspended to allow Item 10.01 to be brought forward and considered next.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

10.01  Deferral of Payment of Development Contributions

 

Mr Alistair Owen, on behalf of Black Duck Brewery, addressed Council in support of the recommendation and answered questions from Councillors.

 

RESOLVED:   Sargeant/Griffiths

 

That Council:

1.       Commence a 12 month trial to allow the deferral of payment of development contributions for building development or other development not involving subdivision of land subject to:

a)      The deferral period being for a maximum of 2 years from the release of the construction or complying development certificate for building works or from the date of occupation/use commencing where no building works are proposed.

b)      An application made in writing to defer the payment of contributions.

c)      Contributions being secured by an irrevocable, non- time limited Bank Guarantee for the amount of the contributions plus a 12 month interest amount calculated at the average rate of Council’s investments performance over the past 12 months plus 1%.

d)      Contributions to be calculated at the current rate applicable at the time of payment, including contributions paid by instalment during the approved deferral period.

2.       That a report on the progress of expanded deferral provisions be provided in 12 months.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.02  Status of Outstanding Reports to Council - October 2013

Resolved:   Intemann/Griffiths

That the information in the October 2013 Status of Outstanding Reports to Council be noted.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.03  Disclosures Register - Annual Returns 2012/2013

Resolved:   Levido/Sargeant

 

That Council:

1.       Note the information in the Disclosure Register for 2012/2013.

2.       Determine that the following positions become Designated Persons pursuant to the provisions of section 441 of the Local Government Act 1993:

a)      Group Manager Water and Sewer

b)      Group Manager Infrastructure Delivery

c)      Group Manager Transport and Stormwater Network

d)      Group Manager Asset Services

e)      Water and Sewer Planning Manager.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.04  Report on Attendance at the ‘In the Room’ Conference

Resolved:   Roberts/Hawkins

 

That Council note the conference report provided by Councillor Roberts on his attendance at the ‘In the Room’ Conference 2013.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 


08.05  Quarterly Budget Review Statement and Monthly Budget Review - September 2013

Resolved:   Hawkins/Roberts

 

That Council:

1.       Note the Quarterly Budget Review Statement for the September Quarter.

2.       Adopt the adjustments in the “Financial Implications” section of the report for September 2013.

3.       Request the General Manager to report back to the November 2013 Council Meeting how best Council can implement and report phased monthly budgets for all areas of Council to be implemented in the 2014/15 financial year.

4.       Request the General Manager to prepare a report for the November 2013 Council Meeting as to the advantages and/or disadvantages of establishing an appropriate accounting methodology which effectively places all “significant” budgetary gains into a special purpose “transition or holding account” before putting forward recommendations to Council as to how budget gains should be best utilised and how this would impact practically on Council’s operations as a service provider.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.06  Investments - September 2013

resolved:   Intemann/Hawkins

 

That Council receive and note the Investment Report for the month of September 2013.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.07  Glasshouse Financial Quarterly Reporting

Resolved:   Roberts/Cusato

 

That Council note the information provided in the report.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.08  A Proposal to Alter the Boundaries of the Localities of Lake Cathie and Bonny Hills

Resolved:   Intemann/Levido

 

That Council make application to the Geographical Names Board to alter the boundaries of Lake Cathie and Bonny Hills as depicted by the red and white dashed line in the plan “Proposed Boundary - Lake Cathie and Bonny Hills” attached to the report.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.09  Supplementary Report on the 2012-2013 Operational Plan

Resolved:   Turner/Griffiths

 

That Council note the supplementary report on the delivery of the 2012-2013 Operational Plan.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.10  2013 - 2014 Operational Plan Modifications

Resolved:   Sargeant/Cusato

 

That Council adopt changes to the 2013-2014 Operational Plan actions as detailed in this report.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.11  Rescind Correspondence-Response/Acknowledgement Policy

Resolved:   Intemann/Levido

 

That Council rescind the Policy titled “Correspondence - Response/ Acknowledgement” as superceded by the Customer Service Policy and Customer Experience Charter.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

08.12  Recommended Item from the Australia Day Sub-Committee Members Appointment

Resolved:   Intemann/Turner

That:

1.   The Expressions of Interest for Membership to the Australia Day Sub-Committee received from the Rotary Club of Laurieton be accepted.

2.   Council advise the Rotary Club of Laurieton in writing of the group’s appointment to the Australia Day Sub-Committee.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

09.01  Notice of Motion - Glasshouse Sub-Committee

RESOLVED:   Roberts/Intemann

 

That Council:

1.       Establish a Sub-Committee of Council titled the Glasshouse Sub-Committee.

2.       Endorse the Glasshouse Sub-Committee Charter as attached to this Notice of Motion, with the community members increased up to five (5) members.

3.       Call for public Expressions of Interest from independent, community members for membership of the Glasshouse Sub-Committee, in line with the Glasshouse Sub-Committee Charter.

4.       Request the General Manager to report back to the December 2013 Council Meeting with the results and evaluation of the public Expression of Interest for consideration by Council.

carried:      8/1

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts and Turner

Against:       Sargeant

 

09.02  Recommendations from the Mayor's Sporting Fund Sub-Committee Meeting held on Thursday 26 September 2013

Resolved:   Besseling/Cusato

 

That Council, pursuant to provisions of Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993, grant financial assistance from the Mayor’s Sporting Fund to:

1.       Ms Sharni-Lee Pollard in the amount of $200.00 (ex GST) to assist with the expenses she will incur travelling and competing at the National Futsal School Championships to be held in Sydney from 29 September to 4 October 2013 inclusive.

2.       Mr Bradley Paterson in the amount of $700.00 (ex GST) to assist with the expenses he will incur travelling and competing at the Australian National Hockey Championships to be held in Melbourne from 26 September to 6 October 2013 inclusive.

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

 

09.03  Tender T-13-27 Provision of Group Training Services

Resolved:   Sargeant/Roberts

 

That Council:

1.       Accept the tender from HGT Australia Ltd, T/A Novaskill  for the Provision of Group Training Services for the period 17 October 2013 to 16 October 2015 with a further twelve (12) month option available.

2.       Affix the seal of Council to the necessary documents.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.01  New Position - Operations Manager, Transport and Stormwater Network Management

Resolved:   Cusato/Roberts

 

That Council approve the employment of a new role of Operations Manager - Transport and Stormwater Network in the organisational structure.

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.02  Small Villages Sewerage Scheme

Resolved:   Intemann/Levido

 

That Council accept the proposal submitted by NSW Public Works for Project Management of the delivery of the small towns village sewerage schemes of North Shore, Comboyne, Long Flat and Telegraph Point and enter into a formal agreement for an upper limit fee of $901,991 excluding GST.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.03  Recommended Item from Town CENTRE Master Plan Sub-Committee - Proposed Amendment to the Terms of Reference

 

MOTION:        Sargeant

That Council:

1.       Adopt the revised Terms of Reference for the Town Centre Master Plan Sub-Committee which includes the addition of a representative of the Hastings Access Sub-Committee.

2.       Appoint Mr Brian Buckett as the representative of the Hastings Access Sub-Committee on the Town Centre Master Plan Sub Committee for the current term.

 

WAS WITHDRAWN.

 

Resolved:   Hawkins/Turner

That Council:

1.       Adopt the revised Terms of Reference for the Town Centre Master Plan Sub-Committee which includes the addition of a representative of the Hastings Access Sub-Committee.

2.       Appoint Mr Brian Buckett as the representative of the Hastings Access Sub-Committee on the Town Centre Master Plan Sub Committee.

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 


 

 

12.06  Question on Notice - Local Government Area Traffic Study

RESOLVED:   Levido/Cusato

 

That development of a fresh Local Government Area Traffic Study be given priority for funding as part of Council’s determination of the 2014/2015 Operational Plan.

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.07  Land Acquisition - Corner Hastings River Drive and Boundary Street, Port Macquarie (PIN 38881)

Resolved:   Cusato/Griffiths

 

That Council:

1.       Pay compensation in the amount of $11,015 (GST Exclusive) for the acquisition of that part of Lot 21 Deposited Plan 874058 more particularly described as Lot 101 in plan of acquisition Deposited Plan 1179346.

2.       Pay the legal and valuation fees in the amount of $3,850 reasonably incurred by the landowner as part of the acquisition process.

3.       Pursuant to Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 delegate to the General Manager authority to sign:

a)      Deed of Acquisition/Contract for Sale

b)      Land and Property Information Transfer Form 4 Pursuant to Section 10 of the Roads Act 1993 on the acquisition of Lot 101 Deposited Plan 1179346 dedicate Lot 101 Deposited Plan 1179346 as public road.

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.08  Tender T-13-26 Port Macquarie Airport - New Car Park for rental Cars and Staff Vehicles

Resolved:   Levido/Hawkins

 

That Council:

1.       Accept the lump sum tender of $394,305.00 (excl. GST) received from Deklax Pty Ltd (Bridle Group) for Option 2 for the construction of a new car park for rental cars and staff vehicles at Port Macquarie Airport.

2.       Affix the seal of Council to the necessary documents.

3.       Adopt a project budget in 2013-14 of $480,000 (excl. GST) as per the Project Plan, to allow for construction supervision fees, contingencies, and the provision of CCTV cameras, with funding from the Airport Reserve.

 

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.09  Submissions Review - DCP 2011 Reformatting and Housekeeping

Resolved:   Intemann/Sargeant

 

That Council:

1.       Adopt the Port Macquarie Hasting Development Control Plan 2013 Parts 1-3, as described in this report, as an amendment to Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2011 - Parts 1-4.

2.       Publish a public notice of this decision and forward a copy of the approved Development Control Plan to the Director General of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure within 28 days.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.10  LEP 2011 - Refinements (PP2013-8.1, PIN42731)

Resolved:   Sargeant/Cusato

 

That Council:

1.       Prepare a draft planning proposal as described in this report, pursuant to section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, for the amendment of the provisions of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, in relation to 27 issues listed.

2.       Forward the draft planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for a Gateway Determination, and exhibit the proposal in accordance with that determination, pursuant to sections 56 - 58 of the Act.

3.       Request that the Director General of the Department of Planning & Infrastructure issue a Written Authorisation to Council to Exercise Delegation of the plan making functions under section 59 of the Act in respect of the planning proposal.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

12.11  LEP amendment - Eco-tourist facilities (PP2013-11.1)

Resolved:   Levido/Cusato

 

That Council:

1.       Prepare a draft planning proposal as described in this report, pursuant to Section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, for the amendment of the provisions of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, in relation to:

a)      Permitting with consent eco-tourist facilities within Zones RU1 Primary Production, RU2 Rural Landscape, R1 General Residential, R5 Large Lot Residential, SP3 Tourist and E4 Environmental Living, and

b)      Inserting a local clause with the objective of facilitating eco-tourist facilities, as described in this report.

2.       Forward the draft planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for a Gateway Determination, and exhibit the proposal in accordance with that determination, pursuant to Sections 56 - 58 of the Act.

3.       Request that the Director General of the Department of Planning & Infrastructure issue a Written Authorisation to Council to Exercise Delegation of the plan making functions under Section 59 of the Act in respect of the planning proposal.

carried:      9/0

For:   Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

Against:       Nil

 

13       QUESTIONS FOR NEXT MEETING

 

 

13.01     KEW WASTE TRANSFER STATION

 

Question from Councillor Griffiths:

 

Can the General Manager provide an updated report on the Camden Haven Waste Transfer Station to the November 2013 Council Meeting to address concerns of residents regarding site selection:

 

1.    Detailed costing of each site clarifying rates and volumes including dumping levy.

2.    Advise noise, dust, security impact on each site.

3.    Frequency of crushing and mulching expected.

4.    Area and design of waste transfer station including sketch or photo of existing transfer station.

5.    Advise how transfer sites operate.

6.    Road entry options for sites, ie. Ocean Drive, left in / left out.

7.    How the upgrade of the Dunbogan roadway through flood strategies would alter the cost at this location.

8.    Impact on site 2 Herons Creek Road due to wildlife corridor.

9.    Expected usage taking into consideration the location of sites and future waste transfer stations.

10.  Any other relevant information to inform the community.

11.  Further options for community consultation.

 

Comments by Councillor Griffiths:

Residents have stated they were not informed of the waste transfer station site selection being presented to Council for adoption, therefore unable to present to Council various questions which they believe may have altered the resolution. 

 

The Meeting closed at 8.22 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

………………………………………..

Peter Besseling

Mayor

 

   


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council      20/11/2013

Item:          05

Subject:     DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Disclosures of Interest be presented

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST DECLARATION

 

 

Name of Meeting:     ………………………………………………………………………..

 

Meeting Date:           ………………………………………………………………………..

 

Item Number:            ………………………………………………………………………..

 

Subject:                      ………………………………………………………………………..

                                    …………………………………………………….……………...…..

 

 

I, ..................................................................................... declare the following interest:

 

 

        Pecuniary:

              Take no part in the consideration and voting and be out of sight of the meeting.

 

 

        Non-Pecuniary - Significant Interest:

              Take no part in the consideration and voting and be out of sight of the meeting.

 

        Non-Pecuniary - Less than Significant Interest:

              May participate in consideration and voting.

 

 

For the reason that:  ....................................................................................................

 

.......................................................................................................................................

 

 

 

Signed:  .........................................................................  Date:  ..................................

 

 

Growth Bar b&w(Further explanation is provided on the next page)


 

Further Explanation

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

A conflict of interest exists where a reasonable and informed person would perceive that a Council official could be influenced by a private interest when carrying out their public duty. Interests can be of two types: pecuniary or non-pecuniary.

 

All interests, whether pecuniary or non-pecuniary are required to be fully disclosed and in writing.

 

Pecuniary Interest

 

A pecuniary interest is an interest that a Council official has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the Council official. (section 442)

 

A Council official will also be taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter if that Council official’s spouse or de facto partner or a relative of the Council official or a partner or employer of the Council official, or a company or other body of which the Council official, or a nominee, partner or employer of the Council official is a member, has a pecuniary interest in the matter. (section 443)

 

The Council official must not take part in the consideration or voting on the matter and leave and be out of sight of the meeting. (section 451)

 

Non-Pecuniary

 

A non-pecuniary interest is an interest that is private or personal that the Council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Act.

 

Non-pecuniary interests commonly arise out of family, or personal relationships, or involvement in sporting, social or other cultural groups and associations and may include an interest of a financial nature.

 

The political views of a Councillor do not constitute a private interest.

 

The management of a non-pecuniary interest will depend on whether or not it is significant.

 

Non Pecuniary – Significant Interest

 

As a general rule, a non-pecuniary conflict of interest will be significant where a matter does not raise a pecuniary interest, but it involves:

(a)   A relationship between a Council official and another person that is particularly close, for example, parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child of the Council official or of the Council official’s spouse, current or former spouse or partner, de facto or other person living in the same household.

(b)   Other relationships that are particularly close, such as friendships and business relationships. Closeness is defined by the nature of the friendship or business relationship, the frequency of contact and the duration of the friendship or relationship.

(c)   An affiliation between a Council official an organisation, sporting body, club, corporation or association that is particularly strong.

 

If a Council official declares a non-pecuniary significant interest it must be managed in one of two ways:

1.     Remove the source of the conflict, by relinquishing or divesting the interest that creates the conflict, or reallocating the conflicting duties to another Council official.

2.     Have no involvement in the matter, by taking no part in the consideration or voting on the matter and leave and be out of sight of the meeting, as if the provisions in section 451(2) apply.

 

Non Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest

 

If a Council official has declared a non-pecuniary less than significant interest and it does not require further action, they must provide an explanation of why they consider that the conflict does not require further action in the circumstances.

SPECIAL DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION

 

 

By

[insert full name of councillor]

 

 

In the matter of

[insert name of environmental planning instrument]

 

 

Which is to be considered at a meeting of the

[insert name of meeting]

 

 

Held on

[insert date of meeting]

 

 

PECUNIARY INTEREST

 

 

Address of land in which councillor or an  associated person, company or body has a proprietary interest (the identified land)i

 

 

Relationship of identified land to councillor

[Tick or cross one box.]

 

Councillor has interest in the land (e.g. is owner or has other interest arising out of a mortgage, lease trust, option or contract, or otherwise).

 

Associated person of councillor has interest in the land.

 

Associated company or body of councillor has interest in the land.

 

MATTER GIVING RISE TO PECUNIARY INTEREST

 

 

Nature of land that is subject to a change

in zone/planning control by proposed

LEP (the subject land iii

[Tick or cross one box]

 

The identified land.

 

Land that adjoins or is adjacent to or is in proximity to the identified land.

Current zone/planning control

[Insert name of current planning instrument and identify relevant zone/planning control applying to the subject land]

 

Proposed change of zone/planning control

[Insert name of proposed LEP and identify proposed change of zone/planning control applying to the subject land]

 

Effect of proposed change of zone/planning control on councillor

[Tick or cross one box]

 

Appreciable financial gain.

 

Appreciable financial loss.

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor’s Signature:  ……………………………….   Date:  ………………..


 

 

Important Information

 

This information is being collected for the purpose of making a special disclosure of pecuniary interests under sections 451 (4) and (5) of the Local Government Act 1993.  You must not make a special disclosure that you know or ought reasonably to know is false or misleading in a material particular.  Complaints made about contraventions of these requirements may be referred by the Director-General to the Local Government Pecuniary Interest and Disciplinary Tribunal.

 

This form must be completed by you before the commencement of the council or council committee meeting in respect of which the special disclosure is being made.   The completed form must be tabled at the meeting.  Everyone is entitled to inspect it.  The special disclosure must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i.   Section 443 (1) of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that you may have a pecuniary interest in a matter because of the pecuniary interest of your spouse or your de facto partner or your relativeiv or because your business partner or employer has a pecuniary interest. You may also have a pecuniary interest in a matter because you, your nominee, your business partner or your employer is a member of a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter.

ii.  Section 442 of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that a pecuniary interest is 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. A person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to the matter or if the interest is of a kind specified in section 448 of that Act (for example, an interest as an elector or as a ratepayer or person liable to pay a charge).

iii.   A pecuniary interest may arise by way of a change of permissible use of land adjoining, adjacent to or in proximity to land in which a councillor or a person, company or body referred to in section 443 (1) (b) or (c) of the Local Government Act 1993 has a proprietary interest—see section 448 (g) (ii) of the Local Government Act 1993.

iv.   Relative is defined by the Local Government Act 1993 as meaning your, your spouse’s or your de facto partner’s parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child and the spouse or de facto partner of any of those persons.


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          06.01

 

Subject:     MAyORAL Minute - 2013 Carols by Candlelight Event Funding

Mayor, Peter Besseling

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council provide $4,800 from the Community Grants Program to the Grace Church to assist in their running the 2013 Christmas Carols by Candlelight planned for 7 December 2013.

 

 

Discussion

 

Council was recently contacted by a representative of Grace Church, seeking a donation to assist them in the running of the annual Christmas Carols by Candlelight community event to be held on 7 December 2013.

 

For a number of years, the Ministers’ Fraternal has been running this event and has applied (successfully) to Council for a grant through the annual Community Grants Christmas New Year Events Program.  However, this year, the Ministers’ Fraternal decided that they were no longer able to run the event and consequently, the Grace Church offered to take over the management and running of this well attended community event. 

 

Unfortunately, by the time the Grace Church had agreed to take over the running of the event, the Community Grants Christmas New Year Event funding round had closed.

 

The Ministers’ Fraternal has consistently received $5,000 to cover some of the costs of running this excellent community event.

 

Whilst it is acknowledged that there is a second round of grants occurring, it should be noted that the new round of Community Grants opens on 18 November 2013 and closes on 13 December 2013, and the event has been planned for 7 December 2013.

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          06.02

 

Subject:     MAYORAL Minute - Mayoral Discretionary Fund Allocations

Mayor, Peter Besseling

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Mayoral Discretionary Fund allocations for the period 5 October to 7 November 2013 be noted.

 

 

Discussion

 

Mayoral Discretionary Fund Allocations

 

The total commitment from the Mayoral Discretionary Fund from 5 October to 7 November 2013 was $750.00.

 

This included the following:

 

Donation to Rotary Club of PMQ Sunrise - Love Your Sister Fundraiser

$100.00

Donation to PMQ-Hastings Legacy Club

$250.00

Glasshouse Voucher Donation to Jace Knowles Fundraiser

$100.00

Glasshouse Voucher donation to Cordell Family Benefit Night

$200.00

Glasshouse Voucher Donation to McHappy Day

$100.00

 

$750.00

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

  

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council      20/11/2013

Item:          07

Subject:     PUBLIC FORUM

 

Residents are able to address Council in the Public Forum of the Ordinary Council Meeting on any Council-related matter not listed on the agenda.

A maximum of eight speakers can address any one Council Meeting Public Forum and each speaker will be given a maximum of five minutes to address Council. Council may wish to ask questions following an address, but a speaker cannot ask questions of Council.

Once an address in the Public Forum has been completed, the speaker is free to leave the chambers quietly.

If you wish to address Council in the Public Forum, you must apply to address that meeting no later than 4.30pm on the day prior to the meeting by completing the 'Request to Speak in Public Forum at Ordinary Council Meeting Form'.  This form is available at Council's offices or online at www.pmhc.nsw.gov.au.

 

 

 

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What are we trying to achieve?

A collaborative community that works together and recognises opportunities for community participation in decision making that is defined as ethically, socially and environmentally responsible.

 

 
What will the result be?

 

·         A community that has the opportunity to be involved in decision making.

·         Open, easy, meaningful, regular and diverse communication between the community and decision makers.

·         Partnerships and collaborative projects, that meet the community’s expectations needs and challenges.

·         Knowledgeable, skilled and connected community leaders.

·         Strong corporate management that is transparent.

 

How do we get there?

 

1.1     Engage the community in decision making by using varied communication channels that are relevant to residents.

1.2     Create professional development opportunities and networks to support future community leaders.

1.3     Create strong partnerships between all levels of government and their agencies so that they are effective advocates for the community.

1.4     Demonstrate conscientious and receptive civic leadership.

1.5     Implement innovative, fact based business practices.


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.01

 

Subject:     Confidential Correspondence to Ordinary Council Meeting

Presented by: Executive Services, Anthony Hayward

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

1.4.3  Build trust and improve Council’s public reputation through transparency and accountability.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council determine that the attachments to Item numbers 09.01, 10.02, 11.11 and 12.05 be considered as confidential, in accordance with Section 11(3) of the Local Government Act.

 

Discussion

The following confidential attachment has been submitted to the Ordinary Council Meeting.

Item No.:                                09.01

Subject:                                 Annual Reporting of Contracts for Senior Staff

Attachment Description:     2013 Senior Staff Contractual Arrangements

Confidential Reason:           Relates to personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than Councillors).  Local Government Act 1993 – Section 10A(2)(a)

 

Item No.:                                10.02

Subject:                                 Question on Notice - Council Owned Land in William Street, Port Macquarie (PIN 34119)

Attachment Description:     Confidential - Confidential Reports to Council 2005

Confidential Reason:           Relates to information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.  Local Government Act 1993 - Section 10A(2(c))

 

 

 

Item No.:                                11.11

Subject:                                 T-13-25 Kew Waste Management Facility Design and Documentation (PIN 50972-57445)

Attachment Description:     T-13-25 Evaluation & Pricing Analysis

Confidential Reason:           Relates to information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.  Local Government Act 1993 – Section 10A(2(c)

 

 

Item No.:                                12.05

Subject:                                 Tender T-13-33 Supply & Install Traffic Signals Hastings River Drive at Boundary Street intersection, Port Macquarie

Attachment Description:     T-13-33 Evaluation Scorecard for Distribution - Hastings River Drive Boundary Street Signals

Confidential Reason:           Relates to information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.  Local Government Act 1993 – Section 10A(2(c)

 

 

Attachments

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.02

 

Subject:     Status of Outstanding Reports to Council - November 2013

Presented by: General Manager, Anthony Hayward

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

1.4.3  Build trust and improve Council’s public reputation through transparency and accountability.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the information in the November 2013 Status of Outstanding Reports to Council be noted.

 

Discussion

 

 

Report

 

Status

 

Reporting Officer

Current Anticipated Date for Report

Report on Clr Intemann’s attendance at the 2013 AAPA International Flexible Pavements Conference 22 & 23 September 2013.

(Item 08.04 - ORD 21/08/13)

Reported to this meeting

GM

Nov 2013

Draft Economic Development Strategy - Submissions Received

(Item 06.01 - Ex-ORD 25/09/13)

Reported to this meeting

DCSIE

Nov 2013

QON - Options for Council Owned Land in William Street, Port Macquarie known as “The Hole in the Ground”

(Item 13.02 - ORD 18/09/13)

Reported to this meeting

DCSIE

Nov 2013

Phased Monthly Budgets - Implementation for 2014/15

(Item 08.05 - ORD 16/10/13)

Reported to this meeting

DCSIE

Nov 2013

Kew Waste Transfer Station

(QON 13.01 - ORD 16/10/13)

Reported to this meeting

DDE

Nov 2013

North Shelly Beach Pedestrian Access

(Item 12.01 - ORD 17/07/13)

 

DIAM

Dec 2013

Establishing accounting methodology - “significant” budgetary gains into “transition / holding account”

(Item 08.05 - ORD 16/10/13)

 

DCSIE

Dec 2013

Procurement Strategy - Organisational Support

(Item 08.10 - ORD 18/09/13)

 

DCSIE

Dec 2013

QON - Safety of the bend east of the intersection of Redbank Road and Stoney Creek Road

(Item 13.03 - ORD 18/09/13)

 

DIAM

Dec 2013

Glasshouse Sub-Committee - results of EOI

(Item 09.01 - ORD 16/10/13)

 

DCSIE

Dec 2013

Glasshouse Quarterly Financial Report

 

DCSIE

Feb 2014

Pacific Highway Destination and Tourism Signage - LEP Options

 

DDE

March 2014

Impact of Road Openings and Closures on Private Property

(Item 12.03 - ORD 18/09/13)

 

DIAM

March 2014

Benefits and future options for engagement of community volunteers

(Item 10.02 - ORD 21/08/13)

Report after three months of operation of volunteer arrangement

DIAM

March 2014

Wauchope Traffic Management Strategy - Exhibition Feedback and Progress Actions

(Item 12.05 - ORD 16/10/13)

 

DIAM

March 2014

Glasshouse Quarterly Financial Report

 

DCSIE

April 2014

Tender for the Management & Operation of Council Owned Swimming Pools

(Item 12.03 - ORD 19/06/13)

 

DIAM

April 2014

Glasshouse Quarterly Financial Report

 

DCSIE

July 2014

MIDROC Strategic Plan 2013-2017 Outcomes

(Item 08.03 - ORD 21/08/13)

Annually

GM

July 2014

Deferral of Payment of Development Contributions - Progress of Expanded Provisions

(Item 10.01 - ORD 16/10/13)

 

DDE

October 2014

Use of McInherney Park Western Man-Made Beach

(Item 12.04 - ORD 16/10/13)

Report within 1 month of adoption of PMH Recreation Plan

DIAM

TBA

 

Attachments

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.03

 

Subject:     Code of Conduct Complaint Statistics

Presented by: General Manager, Anthony Hayward

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.4.3  Build trust and improve Council’s public reputation through transparency and accountability.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Note the Code of Conduct Complaint Statistics (zero complaints) for the period 1 September 2012 to 31 August 2013.

2.       Forward the Code of Conduct Complaint Statistics to the Division of Local Government.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council’s Code of Conduct stipulates that Council’s Complaints Coordinator is to report certain statistics pertaining to Code of Conduct complaints to Council each year.

 

Council’s Complaints Coordinator, Group Manager Governance and Executive Services, has prepared the required statistics for Council.

 

The statistics pertain to the period 1 September 2012 to 31 August 2013. There were nil (0) complaints received for the period.

 

Discussion

 

Clause 12.1 of Council’s Code of Conduct stipulates that Council’s Complaints Coordinator is to report certain statistics pertaining to Code of Conduct complaints to Council within three (3) months of the end of September each year.

 

Following, clause 12.2 of Council’s Code of Conduct stipulates that Council is to provide the Division of Local Government a report containing the statistics detailed in clause 12.1 within three (3) months of the end of September each year.

 

Council’s Complaints Coordinator, Group Manager Governance and Executive Services, has prepared the required statistics for Council.

 

Code of Conduct Statistics

 

1

a)

The total number of code of conduct complaints made about Councillors and the General Manager under the Code of Conduct

0

b)

The number of Code of Conduct complaints referred to a Conduct Reviewer

0

c)

The number of Code of Conduct complaints investigated by a Conduct Reviewer

0

d)

The number of Code of Conduct complaints investigated by a Conduct Review Committee

0

e)

The total cost of dealing with Code of Conduct complaints made about Councillors and the General Manager including staff costs

$0

2

a)

The number of Code of Conduct complaints finalised by a Conduct Reviewer at the preliminary assessment stage

0

b)

The number of those complaints finalised by any of the following recommendations:

 

 

To take no action

0

To resolve the complaint by alternative and appropriate strategies

0

To refer the matter back to the General Manager or the Mayor, for resolution by alternative and appropriate strategies

0

To refer the matter back to the General Manager or the Mayor, for resolution by alternative and appropriate strategies

0

To refer the matter to another agency or body such as, but not limited to, the ICAC, the NSW Ombudsman, the Division of Local Government or the Police

0

To investigate the matter

0

To recommend that the complaints coordinator convene a conduct review committee to investigate the matter

0

3

a)

The number of code of conduct complaints investigated by a conduct reviewer or conduct review committee

0

b)

The number of these complaints finalised by any of the following recommendations:

 

 

That the council revise any of its policies or procedures

0

That the subject person undertake any training or other education relevant to the conduct giving rise to the breach

0

That the subject person be counselled for their conduct

0

That the subject person apologise to any person or organisation affected by the breach

0

That findings of inappropriate conduct be made public

0

In the case of a breach by the General Manager, that action be taken under the General Manager’s contract for the breach

0

In the case of a breach by a Councillor, that the Councillor be formally censured for the breach under section 440G of the Act

0

In the case of a breach by a councillor, that the councillor be formally censured for the breach under section 440G of the Act

0

In the case of a breach by a councillor, that the matter be referred to the Division for further action

0

4

Number of matters reviewed by the Division of Local Government

0

a)

Outcome: Decision sustained

0

b)

Outcome: Decision overturned

0

 

The statistics pertain to the period 1 September 2012 to 31 August 2013.

 

Options

 

Nil. This report satisfies the statutory obligations of clauses 12.1 and 12.2 of Council’s Code of Conduct.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Community Engagement

 

Nil.

 

Internal Consultation

 

·    Complaints Coordinator (Group Manager Governance and Executive Services).

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

This report satisfies the statutory obligations of clauses 12.1 and 12.2 of Council’s Code of Conduct.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Nil.

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.04

 

Subject:     Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy

Presented by: General Manager, Anthony Hayward

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

1.4.3  Build trust and improve Council’s public reputation through transparency and accountability.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1.       Adopt the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy, as attached.

2.       Pursuant to section 253 of the Local Government Act 1993, forward to the Division of Local Government:

a)     A copy of the adopted Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy.

b)     A copy of this report.

c)     A copy of the notice of public exhibition and submission.

 

Executive Summary

 

The objective of the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy is to ensure that there is accountability and transparency in the reimbursement of expenses incurred, or to be incurred by the Mayor and Councillors.

 

The Policy provides for adequate, fair and equitable payment or reimbursement of expenses and provision of facilities to the Mayor and Councillors to enable efficient discharge of the functions of Civic Office.

 

The annual review of the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy has now taken place in line with statutory requirements. The draft Policy was publicly exhibited from 20 September 2013 until 1 November 2013. No submissions where received.

 

The amended Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy includes changes to the following provisions:

·    The provision of a delegation for the Mayor and General Manager, jointly, to approve attendance to conferences, seminars or similar functions.

·    A Councillor appointed to a Committee, organisation or body, by Council, will have standing approval, by way of such appointment, to attend any meetings of the Committee, organisation or body outside the local government area provided the method of transport is by road.

·    An Increase for both Councillor and Mayoral maximum monthly limit for home and mobile call costs by $10.00 per month.

·    A more efficient method to enable the calculation of the Mayoral Vehicle Private Use Benefit.

It is a statutory requirement that Council adopt a Policy addressing the payment of expenses and provision of facilities to Councillors and submit the adopted Policy to the Division of Local Government by 30 November each year.

Discussion

 

The objective of this Policy is to ensure that there is accountability and transparency in the reimbursement of expenses incurred, or to be incurred by the Mayor and Councillors. The Policy provides for adequate, fair and equitable payment or reimbursement of expenses and provision of facilities to the Mayor and Councillors to enable efficient discharge of the functions of Civic Office.

 

The Local Government Act 1993 (“the Act”) requires that councils develop a Policy for the payment of expenses and provision of facilities to councillors. Due to the statutory obligations no additional options are available to Council with respect to this Policy. Council must adopt a Policy in some form.

 

Background

 

Section 23A Guideline for payment of expenses and the provision of facilities for Mayors and Councillors in NSW

 

As part of the previous review conducted in 2012, the Policy was bought into line with the Division of Local Government section 23A Guideline for payment of expenses and the provision of facilities for Mayors and Councillors in NSW, which Council is required to consider prior to the adoption of the Policy.

 

Policy Clause 2.13 Care and Other Related Expenses

 

Amendments under clause 2.13 Care and Other Related Expenses have previously been adopted. These changes pertained to submissions received and subsequent research and comparison. The Policy has been previously amended with regard to the annual reimbursable amount for child care being lowered from $3,500.00 to $2,500.00 per financial year.

 

The current adopted annual limit of the Policy, being $2,500.00 per financial year, is considered reasonable and would provide that a Councillor’s civic duty would not create a personal financial impost.

 

Review of the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy

 

The current Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy was adopted at the July 2012 Ordinary Meeting of Council.

 

A review of the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy has now taken place in line with statutory requirements and is now ready for formal adoption.

 

Consultation has taken place with Councillors, relevant staff and the community to ensure that expenses and facilities provided for under the Policy enable Councillors to efficiently discharge the functions of Civic Office.

 

Community consultation was undertaken in adherence to Council’s Community Participation Policy. The Act and the Community Participation Policy required Council to both inform and consult with the community on the draft Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy.

 

The draft Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy was publicly exhibited from 20 September 2013 until 1 November 2013. This period was in excess of the statutory requirement of a 28 day period. Council accepted submissions from the public on the draft Policy during that period. No submissions where received.

 

All feedback from the consultation undertaken has been considered and an amended Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy is provided as Attachment 1 to this report.

 

The amended Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy includes changes to the following provisions:

 

·    The Mayor and the General Manager can jointly approve a Councillor(s) nomination to attend a conference, seminar or similar function, where registration deadlines will not permit a Councillor(s) nomination to be presented to a Council Meeting.

 

If this delegated authority is exercised, the Policy includes the requirement  that all Councillors be notified.

 

·    Travel allowances and incidentals now align with relevant Australian Tax Office taxation determinations.

 

·    A Councillor appointed to a Committee, organisation or body, by Council, will have standing approval, by way of such appointment, to attend any meetings of the Committee, organisation or body outside the local government area provided the method of transport is by road.

 

·    Councillor and Mayoral maximum per month home and mobile call costs have been increased by $10.00 per month, $100.00 to $110.00 for Councillors and $200.00 to $210.00 for the Mayor.

 

This has occurred to increase the data limit per month from three (3) Gigabytes to four (4) Gigabytes. In addition to the increase in data limits, the ability to pool the individual data allocations together will be available. So should one Councillor exceed their four (4) Gigabyte monthly limit any unused data from the other eight (8) Councillors will be available to the Councillor who has exceeded their monthly limit. Ultimately, this means that a total of 36 Gigabytes per month is available to the Councillors as a pool of data. This ability (to pool) does not currently exist with the current mobile telephone plans.

 

·    The calculation of the Mayoral Vehicle Private Use Benefit has been changed. It will remain as a monthly fee, however the calculation will be based on a log kept for a minimum period of  two (2) months, for which a monthly fee will be calculated from extrapolating the log over a 12 month period.

 

In addition to the above, a number of editorial changes have been made.

 

During the Policy review, the associated forms (Expense Claim form, Councillor Private Motor Vehicle Use Log form, Mayoral Vehicle Private Use Log form) were also reviewed and updated.

Options

 

Nil. It is a statutory requirement that Council adopt a Policy addressing the payment of expenses and provision of facilities to Councillors.

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Community Engagement

 

Community consultation was undertaken in adherence to Council’s Community Participation Policy, the community consultation plan was based around Council informing and consulting with the community.

 

The draft Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy was publicly exhibited from 20 September 2013 until 1 November 2013.

 

During the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy submission period no submissions were received.

 

Internal Consultation

 

·    Group Manager Governance and Executive Services.

·    Division of Local Government section 23A Guideline for payment of expenses and the provision of facilities for Mayors and Councillors in NSW.

Planning & Policy Implications

 

The Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy proposes a number of amendments to the current Policy. The amended Policy is provided as Attachment 1 to this report.

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Appropriate budget allocations exist in the 2013-2014 budget for the payment of expenses and provision of facilities to Councillors.

 

Appropriate budget allocations have been made in the draft 2014-2015 budget for the payment of expenses and provision of facilities to Councillors.

 

 

Attachments

1.       Payment of Expenses & Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.05

 

Subject:     Disclosure of Interest Return

Presented by: Executive Services, Anthony Hayward

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

1.4.3  Build trust and improve Council’s public reputation through transparency and accountability.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the Disclosure of Interest returns for the Group Manager Transport and Stormwater Network, Development Engineer and the Group Manager Assets and Systems be noted.

 

Executive Summary

This report informs Council of the lodgement of a return disclosing the interests of a designated person which are required under Section 445 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Discussion

 

Section 445 of the Local Government Act 1993, requires Designated Persons to prepare and submit written returns of interests in accordance with section 449.

 

The positions of Group Manager Transport and Stormwater Network, Development Engineer and Group Manager Assets and Systems have recently been resolved by Council to be designated persons under the Local Government Act.

 

Section 450A(1) requires the General Manager to keep a Register of Returns and section 450A(2) requires the General Manager to table the Returns at the first Council meeting held after the last date for lodgement.

 

The Returns are then held in the Governance and Executive Services section of Council and, as required by section 6 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, are available for public inspection, by appointment

 

The Return for the positions of Group Manager Transport and Stormwater Network, Development Engineer and Group Manager Assets and Systems will be tabled at this meeting.

Options

Nil.  Lodgement of a Return by a Designated Person is a requirement under section 445 of the Local Government Act.

Consultation/Submissions

·    Group Manager Governance & Executive Services.

·    Group Manager Transport and Stormwater Network.

·    Group Manager Assets and Systems.

·    Development Engineer.

Planning & Policy Implications

Nil.

Financial & Economic Implications

Nil.

 

 

Attachments

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.06

 

Subject:     Report on Attendance at the 2013 AAPA International Flexible Pavements Conference

Presented by:  General Manager, Anthony Hayward

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.4.3  Build trust and improve Council’s public reputation through transparency and accountability.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note the conference report provided by Councillor Intemann on her attendance at the 2013 Australian Asphalt Pavement Association International Flexible Pavements Conference.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 21 August 2013, Council resolved that Councillor Intemann attend the 2013 Australian Asphalt Pavement Association (AAPA) International Flexible Pavements Conference as a Council delegate.

 

The 2013 AAPA International Flexible Pavements Conference was held in Brisbane from 22-25 September  2013. The Conference focused primarily on technical issues associated with flexible pavements and the industry. The conference was attended by 300 plus delegates.

 

Councillor Intemann has submitted her conference report as per the requirements of Council’s Payment of Expenses & Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy.

 

Discussion

 

The 2013 Australian Asphalt Pavement Association (AAPA) International Flexible Pavements Conference was held in Brisbane, from 22 to 25 September 2013.

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 21 August 2013, Council resolved that Councillor Intemann attend the 2013 AAPA International Flexible Pavements  Conference as a Council delegate.

 

The 2013 AAPA International Flexible Pavements Conference focuses primarily on technical issues associated with flexible pavements and the industry.  All facets of flexible pavements were covered, including research, manufacture, construction, maintenance and test methods, with a focus on perpetual pavements (long life pavements).

 

 

 

The Conference speaking program can be accessed via the AAPA Conference website at:

 

https://custom.cvent.com/644F27099A9141F7BE46F3F34C683883/files/0628f704db6f4ed2b489a8a09100c505.pdf

 

Councillor Intemann’s Report on the 2013 AAPA International Flexible Pavements  Conference

 

The 15th AAPA International Flexible Pavements Conference was a fabulous opportunity for me as Chair of the Roads and Infrastructure portfolio to learn about road surfacing and make contacts in the industry. Attendance was 300 plus. I came back with a pile of industry brochures and contacts for sharing with senior management, and a head full of information and notes to better inform me on the topic.

 

I’m not going to try to summarise the wealth of information I gathered there, but have and will continue to have conversations with senior management about it, and I certainly feel better informed from having attended.

 

I made contact with the President and CEO of the AAPA and the outgoing President, to get an idea of the issues from their perspective. Because of these conversations I became aware that the AAPA was holding a strategic planning breakfast, which I attended and came away much better informed on the political issues from the industry perspective.

 

I made a very good contact at Brisbane City Council and regional Roads and Maritime Services, I also had numerous conversations with industry representatives about future directions in their view. The organisers commented that I was definitely the only councillor in attendance, and possibly the first councillor ever to attend, which I think says a lot for the portfolio system.

 

There were two session rooms running concurrently at all times, each with a different theme. Senior management at Council had given me suggestions as to which of the sessions would be best to attend, I mostly followed their advice, with a couple of exceptions. The speakers were mostly very good on their topics, and there was a good proportion from overseas, which was great because there was a strong emphasis on highlighting differences and similarities.

 

In the technical sense, it seems there is a strong similarity among Australian road surfacing standards as a whole, with speciality niches being developed in the chemical detail of the surfacing compounds.

 

I can think of no better way to summarise the issues in general than to attach notes from the keynote speaker, Dr Keith Suter, Futurologist.

 

The notes from the conference keynote speaker, Dr Keith Suter, are attached to this report as Attachment 1.

 

Options

 

Nil.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Community Engagement

 

Nil.

 

Internal Consultation

 

·    Group Manager Governance and Executive Services.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Reporting Requirements for Conferences

 

As per the Payment of Expenses & Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy, a Councillor or Councillors attending a conference are required to provide a report in writing to Council on the outcome of the conference.

 

Relevant Policy extract provided below:

 

2.8 Reporting Requirements

 

Councillors will report in writing to an Open session of Council on the outcome of the conference, seminar or similar function. The report will be submitted to the General Manager within one (1) month of the Councillor's attendance at the conference, seminar or similar function.

 

If a number of Councillors attend the same function, a single report maybe submitted on behalf of all Councillors that attended, however the report must be signed by all Councillors that were in attendance.

 

The report to Council will be in writing and include the following:

·    The purpose/subject matter of the conference, including the reason for the attendance of the delegate(s).

·    The agenda of the conference.

·    Any items of interest to Council discussed at the conference.

·    Recommendations for further areas of action or investigation (if applicable).

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Nil.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Dr Keith Suter, Futurologist - Notes

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.07

 

Subject:     Annual Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2013

Presented by: Commercial Services & Industry Engagement, Craig Swift-McNair

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.4.2  Manage Council’s financial assets, and provide accurate, timely and reliable financial information for management purposes and provide plain English community reporting.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the Annual Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2013, as submitted, together with the Auditor’s Report.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Local Government Act, 1993 requires that Council hold a public meeting for the purpose of considering the Annual Financial Statements, together with the Auditor’s Report.  These are now presented for Council’s consideration.

 

Discussion

 

Section 418 to 420 of the Local Government Act, 1993 provides that Council must give public notice of its intention to consider the Annual Financial Statements and the Auditor’s Report.  This notification has been given by way of advertisements placed in local newspapers.

 

Section 420 of the Act allows any person to make a written submission on the content of the Annual Financial Statements or the Auditor’s report.  At the time of writing this report, no submissions had been received.  If any submissions are received, they will be distributed prior to the meeting.

 

A copy of the 2012/13 Annual Financial Statements is attached to this report for information.

 

The following information will concentrate on the major items within the financial statements.

 

Results for the year

 

The Income Statement discloses that Council’s activities for the 2013 financial year resulted in a net operating result of $36.353 million. This is an increase of $23.759 million over the 2012 result.  The variation between the two years is predominantly accounted for by movements in capital grants and contributions which increased by $16.852 million and interest on investments which increased by $4.602 million. Grant funding can be one of the main causes of year-on-year variations as it is recognised when it is received and will often not match the timing of the expenditure of those funds. The increase in interest on investments was largely attributable to the reversal of impairments on two CDO investments.

 

Statement of Financial Position

 

Council’s Statement of Financial Position is disclosed in accordance with current accounting standards and reporting requirements of the Local Government Act and its Regulations.  Council’s net asset position has improved by $135.964 million over the 2012 financial year.  This improvement is primarily due to the increase in infrastructure, property, plant and equipment assets due to revaluations and asset purchases.  Included in this figure is the complete revaluation of building and operational land assets along with the indexation of water, sewerage, parks, stormwater and road assets.

 

Local Government Sustainable Financial Health Check

 

In April 2002, a colour coding “Traffic Light” system was developed by The NSW Division of Local Government Managers Australia (LGMA) and endorsed by the Minister of Local Government to rate and present the relative position of Council’s performance.  Below are the Council’s results for the last 4 years.  All figures are shown in thousands:

 

1.   Revenue Sources

 

 

2012/13

$’000

2011/12

$’000

2010/11

$’000

2009/10

$’000

Rates and Annual Charges – General Purpose

39,013

35,947

34,676

31,088

Rates and Annual Charges – Specific Purpose

36,410

34,146

32,365

31,187

User Charges and Fees

26,954

24,413

22,849

25,381

Interest

9,156

4,554

8,248

6,893

Grants Operating – General Purpose

9,394

11,818

9,194

8,438

Grants Operating – Specific Purpose

3,411

3,517

3,125

3,152

Grants Capital

13,970

11,025

3,107

7,515

Contributions Operating

3,049

1,438

1,543

1,584

Contributions Capital

27,008

13,101

25,806

16,329

Profit on Sale of Assets

 

 

 

1,866

Other

5,290

5,370

5,603

5,027

Total Income from continuing operations

173,655

145,329

146,516

138,460

 

Commentary:

 

The revenue sources table is a measure of the degree of dependency on a particular revenue source.  This information is also useful for trend analysis and for considering future sources of revenue.  As opposed to general purpose revenue, specific purpose revenue may only be used for the purpose for which it was collected, for example, water and sewer revenue.

 

Rates and annual charges account for 43.43% of Council’s 2012/13 revenue and as such are a significant and important source of revenue.  Rates and annual charges are the primary maintainable source of revenue to service outstanding loans and provide services to the community.

 

 

 

Rates and Annual Charges Ratio

2012/13

2011/12

2010/11

2009/10

43.43%

48.23%

45.76%

44.98%

 

This year’s rates coverage ratio shows a reduction over the prior year.  Whilst the rates income has still increased, the proportion of total revenue has reduced due to an increase in grants and contributions in the 2012/13 financial year.  In the 2012/13 financial year a number of large one off grants were received, including the airport redevelopment and non cash contributions for bypass roads and subdivisions.

 

Capital grants are usually one-off but may recur for a fixed period, eg. Roads to Recovery are a capital grant for the renewal of road infrastructure which may have a fixed term.  This type of funding is generally specific and variable and therefore would not be relied upon to service any long term debt.

 

 

2.   Cash/Liquidity Position – not including external restrictions

 

 

Unrestricted Current Ratio

2012/13

2011/12

2010/11

2009/10

2.21:1

1.88:1

1.89:1

1.41:1

 

 

 

Commentary:

 

This ratio is a measure of the liquidity of Council and its ability to pay debts when they fall due. It may imply that Council needs to do something else to raise funds or liquidate assets to have cash available to meet debts as they fall due.

 

Council’s Unrestricted Current Ratio has improved from 2011/12 and is above the benchmark of 1.5:1 though the following is relevant.  As with all performance ratios, this figure represents a snapshot in time, which is not necessarily representative of the full position.

 

Acceptable Measures

 

Less than 1:1 = Red

1:1 to 1.5:1 = Amber

Over 1.5:1 = Green

 

Council’s result (2.21:1) = GREEN

 

3.   Operating Result

 

 

Operating Result from continuing operations (from income statement)

2012/13

2011/12

2010/11

2009/10

 

 

36,353

 

 

12,594

 

 

17,072

 

 

27,062

Cashflow Surplus (from cashflow statement)

 

69,043

 

55,121

 

43,854

 

50,163

Net operating result for the year before capital grants and contributions

 

 

-4,625

 

 

-11,532

 

 

-11,841

 

 

3,218

 

Commentary:

 

As shown, Council’s result before capital grants and contributions is again in deficit.  This is primarily due to increased depreciation levels based on the major revaluation of water and sewer assets in the previous year.

 

The cashflow surplus is considered a more pertinent figure for Council.  It shows the operating cash surplus from operations excluding all non-cash transactions like depreciation.  These cash surpluses are used to repay principal on loans and to undertake capital renewals.  Below are the non-cash items that are included in the operating result.

 

Item

2012/13

2011/12

2010/11

2009/10

Depreciation & Impairment

46,143

44,740

41,032

36,798

Asset Dedication Contributions

 

-22,541

 

-7,300

 

-16,656

 

-6,510

Unrealised (gain)/loss on investments

-229

-675

-589

-669

Impairment (gain)/loss on investments

-2,115

2,009

-2,489

-1,251

Write-off of Infrastructure Assets

2,550

3,788

5,695

36

 

Total non-cash items

23,808

42,562

26,993

28,404

 

 

4.   Asset Condition Management (Asset Renewal)

 

 

 

Building and Infrastructure Renewal Ratio

2012/13

2011/12

2010/11

2009/10

 

41.50%

 

20.40%

 

21.73%

 

23.21%

 

 

 

Commentary:

 

This is a longer term indicator of the condition and cost to maintain public infrastructure assets.  This ratio is measured by the cost of assets renewals for buildings and infrastructure over the depreciation expense of those assets.  The definition of renewals used for the ratio is “Replacement of existing assets with equivalent capacity or performance as opposed to the acquisition of new assets”.  Council often upgrades the capacity of an asset as part of the renewal process. Capacity includes widening a road or bridge, or increasing a load capacity on a bridge. As this capacity work is regarded as an improvement and not renewable these costs are not included within this ratio calculation.

 

Council has embarked on a process of improving its Asset Management Planning processes in line with the State Government’s Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework.  Generation 1 Asset Management Plans were completed in 2009 with Generation 2 Plans completed in 2010.  These plans provide a strategic framework for assessing and addressing asset management issues (including appropriate Renewals and Maintenance) in future years.  Like all Councils, the ability to meet acceptable levels under this benchmark will be limited to the funding available to do so.

 

Acceptable Measures

 

100% = Green

Less than 100% = Red

Council’s result (41.50%) = RED

 

 

5a. Debt Management (Debt Service Ratio)

 

 

 

Debt Service Ratio

2012/13

2011/12

2010/11

2009/10

 

11.15%

 

12.12%

 

12.37%

 

12.18%

 

 

Commentary:

 

This ratio shows the amount of annual revenue necessary to service annual debt obligations (loan repayments).  Generally Council only borrows for major capital works such as the Airport or Stingray Creek Bridge.  However, in keeping with IPART’s recommendations Council is now borrowing $1m each year for road and stormwater capital works.

 

Acceptable Measures for Developing Councils

 

<15% = Green

15 to 20% = Amber

>20% = Red

 

Council’s result (11.15%) = GREEN

 

 

5b. Debtor Management (Rates and Annual Charges Outstanding)

 

 

 

Rates and annual charges outstanding percentage

2012/13

2011/12

2010/11

2009/10

 

7.73%

 

8.70%

 

8.70%

 

8.39%

 

 

Commentary:

 

This ratio measures the effectiveness of Council in recovering debts legally owed to it and represents an average of Water, Sewer and General outstanding rates.

 

Whilst Council’s general fund ratio (including waste management) for 2012/13 was 7.95%, the Water fund recorded the highest ratio at 11.28%. This is due to the fact that accounts are generated constantly and may not be due for payment at year end.  Consistent with prescribed methodology, these outstanding amounts must still be included in the ratio as they are outstanding at year end.  This means Council will compare unfavourably to council’s with no water infrastructure function.

 

The overall ratio has improved significantly from last year.  This is considered a very positive result as the prevailing economic climate has made it difficult for ratepayers to meet their financial commitments.

 

Recovery action is constantly underway to ensure that Council’s collection rates are as high as possible. 

 

Acceptable Measures

 

Rural Councils

 

<6% = Green;

6 to 9% = Amber;

>9% = Red

 

Council’s result (7.73%) = AMBER

 

 

5.   Re-votes of Expenditures (Carry-over of Expenditure)

 

 

2012/13

$’000

2011/12

$’000

2010/11

$’000

2009/10

$’000

Operating expenditure (Original Budget)

95,648

86,216

83,969

78,773

Capital expenditure (Original Budget)

76,550

45,298

45,298

54,149

 

172,198

131,514

131,514

132,922

Carry-over expenditure

23,090

5,866

21,634

16,084

Carry-over of expenditure ratio

 

 

13.40%

 

4.46%

 

16.44%

 

12.10%

 

 

Commentary:

 

This ratio measures the percentage of carried-over expenditure compared to the original budget for operating and capital expenditure for the year (excluding principal on loans, depreciation and reserve transfers).  The ratio indicates that some funded projects/outcomes were not delivered in accordance with the 2012/13 Operational Plan.  As shown Council’s carry-overs are above what is considered acceptable.   This may theoretically indicate poor budgetary planning or project management and/or misuse of the carry-over (or ‘revote’) process.

 

It should be noted that included in the ratio are projects that are split over two years due to funding constraints and/or the natural timing of project roll-out.  This has a negative effect on the ratio even though the decision as to staging/timing is made in order to complete the project in an efficient manner.  The ratio may be improved in some part by a change in process for budgeting of these jobs in the future.

 

The quantum of carry-over works needs to be monitored closely and further improvement is required in the planning and completion of agreed works.  However, it is questionable whether Council may ever meet the “Green” rating for the aforementioned reasons.

 

Acceptable Measures

 

<2% = Green;

2% to 5% = Amber;

>5% = Red

 

Council’s result (13.40%) = RED

 

Options

 

Not applicable.

 

Consultation/Submissions

 

Extensive consultation has taken place with the Finance Section and with Council’s Auditors.  The public have also been notified by way of advertisement.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Not applicable.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

As outlined in the body of this report.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       2012 - 2013 Annual Financial Statements

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.08

 

Subject:     Monthly Review of Financial Position - October 2013

Presented by: Commercial Services & Industry Engagement, Craig Swift-McNair

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

1.4.2  Manage Council’s financial assets, and provide accurate, timely and reliable financial information for management purposes and provide plain English community reporting.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopt the adjustments included in the “Financial Implications” section of the Monthly Review of Financial Position report for October 2013.

 

Executive Summary

Each month, Council’s budgets are reviewed by Managers and Directors and any required adjustments are reported.

Discussion

The budget result for October 2013 has remained unchanged from the September 2013 result. The forecast for the adjusted 2013/14 financial year is a deficit of $867,149.

This is a deterioration of $61,006 over the original adopted budget deficit, which projected a deficit of $806,143.

Commentary of Key Variance Items

1.    Council adopted a funding strategy for The Ruins Way project in August (Item 12.12).  The budget has been altered in line with that resolution.

2.    The Group Manager Water & Sewer has made a number of adjustments to the sewerage capital budgets with a nil impact on the result of the fund.

3.    Council has received grant funding for a storm event project.  A budget has been included for the grant funding along with the associated expenditure of those funds.

Options

Council may adopt the recommendations as proposed or amend as required.

Consultation/Submissions

Consultation in this matter has occurred across each Division and Section with input from Directors and Managers

Planning & Policy Implications

Nil.

Financial & Economic Implications

Attached to the report for information is each individual budget adjustment by Division and Section.  The net budget movements for the month maintain the current deficit position.

Responsible Accounting Officer Statement

The approved budget deficit for 2013/14 following the September monthly financial report was $867,149. The adjustments included in this report will maintain this deficit.  This is considered to be an un-satisfactory result for the year and as such budgets will continue to be monitored closely during the year so that any savings can be applied to this deficit.

 

 

Attachments

1.       2013-2014 October Budget Review

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.09

 

Subject:     Investments - October 2013

Presented by:  Commercial Services & Industry Engagement, Craig Swift-McNair

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.4.2  Manage Council’s financial assets, and provide accurate, timely and reliable financial information for management purposes and provide plain English community reporting.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the Investment Report for the month of October 2013.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Investment balances and performance for the month of October 2013 are presented in this report.

 

Discussion

 

This report provides details of all funds that Council has invested under Section 625 of the Local Government Act, as at 31 October 2013. All investments were made in accordance with the Act, Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

Developments

 

Staff continue to monitor opportunities to switch to allowable alternate investments with a greater forecast investment return to maturity. Council’s independent advisor, Denison Advisory Services is continuing to work with the Finance team in reviewing Council’s portfolio and investment strategy.

 

The investment portfolio as at 31 October 2013 is as follows:

 

 

Other Issues

 

“Current value in $” in the table above is the estimate of current realisable value for the investment as provided by Denison Advisory Services. It should be noted that this is not necessarily the amount that is expected to be received upon maturity.

 

Investment Portfolio Summary (Denison Advisory Services)

 

The following sections relate to Council’s portfolio at October month end. PMHC’s portfolio totals $140.8mm (September $138.3mm) and is represented in the graph below showing each component – note that these amounts use the face value amounts of each investment made.

 

 

At October month end the market valuation for the portfolio was $140.6mm.

 

The pricing for the Floating Rate Note was relatively flat as they dropped marginally whilst the Capital Protected Notes were improved. The portfolio continues to retain a very high level of overall liquidity. The cash component totals $9.8mm (down from $17.3mm last month) and both the FRNs and Capital Protected investments can be liquidated – the TD portfolio has a spread of maturities providing the portfolio additional liquidity if required.

 

Market News - Interest Rates

 

The RBA left the cash rate to 2.50% following on from no change in September – early November has also seen the rate unchanged.

 

Bank bill yields were again largely unchanged on a month-on-month basis remaining around 2.60% - the selloff in market expectations for rates as expressed by the futures curve continued steadily across the month.

 

On the inflation front and as per expectations from last month’s report which viewed the sustained high prices at the petrol pump as likely to flow through to the headline CPI the data did indeed indicate a slightly inflationary environment.

 

 

 

The average yield for the 12 bank bill futures contracts (a 3yr period) is currently at 3.37% a large rise again from September’s end of month level of 3.23% and a full half a per cent higher than July. It is higher than the level of last year at 3.036% but below the 4.17% back in 2011.

 

Forward expectations for short term rates in Australia were up from the previous month with slightly higher expectations in years 2 and 3. The graph below shows the market view that rates rise slowly in early 2014 before rising more aggressively than previously priced in.

 

The Australian Dollar

 

The Australian dollar was again stronger both against the USD and on

the trade weighted index basis adding to the recent upward move in September. The Australian dollar rose by in excess of 1% during October on a trade weighted basis.

 

The US currency was weaker on the non-taper delay whilst the Aussie again benefitted from improved investor sentiment and risk taking appetite.

 

Our currency hit a multi month high of USD97.6c mid-month but fell back slightly to settle in the mid 90c range. The strength of our currency is also driven by our relative yield advantage over the US as well as the good data from China which provides support to our outlook.

 

Options

 

This is an information report.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Council uses the services of Denison Financial Advisory in relation to the investment portfolio, including advice on the placement of investments, assistance with policy development and general advice.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Not applicable.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Council’s total investment portfolio performance for October 2013 was 2.38% above the benchmark (4.98% against 2.60%) and year-to-date investment income has reached 53.18% of the total annual budget. Details of investment income performance (Year to Date):

 

 

 

The graph shows YTD investment income has reached $2,212,315  of the total budget of $4,160,000 (53.18%)

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.10

 

Subject:     Phasing of Operational Budgets

Presented by:  Commercial Services & Industry Engagement, Craig Swift-McNair

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.5.2  Provide and maintain efficient and effective information management systems that are accessible, user friendly and meet community and organisational requirements.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Request that the General Manager implement phased monthly operational budgets from the 2014-2015 financial year.

2.       Request that the General Manager implement phased monthly budgets for capital works budgets from the 2015-2016 financial year.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to detail information relating to the implementation of phased monthly operational budgets as per the third Council resolution as detailed below.

 

Discussion

 

At an Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 16 October 2013, Council resolved the following:

 

RESOLVED: Hawkins/Roberts

 

That Council:

1. Note the Quarterly Budget Review Statement for the September Quarter.

2. Adopt the adjustments in the “Financial Implications” section of the report for September 2013.

3. Request the General Manager to report back to the November 2013 Council Meeting how best Council can implement and report phased monthly budgets for all areas of Council to be implemented in the 2014/15 financial year.

4. Request the General Manager to prepare a report for the November 2013 Council Meeting as to the advantages and/or disadvantages of establishing an appropriate accounting methodology which effectively places all “significant” budgetary gains into a special purpose “transition or holding account” before putting forward recommendations to Council as to how budget gains should be best utilised and how this would impact practically on Council’s operations as a service provider.

 

CARRIED: 9/0

FOR: Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Intemann, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

AGAINST: Nil

 

Currently all Group Managers prepare annual budgets for both the operational and capital works programs which are then collated and assessed by  relevant Finance staff, for presenting to Councillors and ultimately the community.

 

This is a multi phase process involving considerable discussion between Finance, Group Managers and the Executive team to ensure that all budgets are realistic and achievable and are within available funding sources.

 

As stated above, budgets are currently prepared on an annual basis, but are monitored monthly by Management and relevant Finance staff via a straight split of costs and income across the 12 month period.  All Group Managers have visibility of the monthly accounts,

 

The 2014/15 budget process has already commenced with the first drafts of each area’s budget now under review. Whilst it is possible to move to phased monthly budgets for the upcoming 2014/15 year, considerable work will be required to unwind the work already undertaken by Group Managers in order to make modifications to allow for monthly budgeting.

 

This work will involve:

 

1.       Exporting all first draft 2014/15 budgets out of the financial system into Excel and then;

2.       Calculating all 2014/15 budgets to a monthly format using the 2013/14 actuals as the basis for the monthly allocations. A percentage of the total will be calculated and applied to the total 2014/15 budget, based on the previous year’s actual expenditure. This will involve a total of approximately 10,000 separate job numbers.

 

Using the 2013/14 actuals as the basis for monthly allocations can only be applied to Operational budgets and not the Capital Works budget.  As the Capital Works budget is project specific, no historical data can be used to assist with the monthly allocations. A monthly Capital Works budget process will need to be further developed for implementation in the 2015/16 financial year, as this will not be achievable for the 2014/2015 financial year.

 

Options

 

Council can resolve to adopt the recommendation as included in this report or not adopt same.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Internal consultation has taken place with the following people:

-     General Manager;

-     Directors;

-     Group Manager Financial Services;

-     Manager Corporate & Financial Planning.

 

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

There are no direct planning & policy implications as a result of this report.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

The introduction of phased budgeting will provide Management with more accurate and robust reporting against operational budgets and will allow Council to move towards a regime of managing budgets by exception i.e. there will be a greater focus on activities that have occurred or are occurring unexpectedly, or not as expected. This should also result in the Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS) reporting being of more value to the Councillors and the community.

 

The financial implications for the implementation of the phasing of operational and capital budgets relate to the internal resources to be able to prepare the relevant data and to liaise with management across the organisation to ensure phased budgets that are meaningful into the future. The phasing of budgets requires a re-work of our internal financial systems and processes; however at the time of writing this report, the full resource impact of this re-work is not known. It is anticipated that further analysis of the resource impact will take place in the coming months, with a further report to be tabled at a future meeting of Council if additional resources are required to ensure the phasing of budgets can take place in line with the recommendations included in this report.

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.11

 

Subject:     Development Activity & Assessment System Performance

Presented by:  Development & Environment, Matt Rogers

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.5.3  Ensure ratepayer value for money through continuous improvement in quality, effectiveness and efficiency of delivery of Council services.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note the Development Activity & Assessment System Performance Report for the first quarter of 2013-2014.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report provides a summary of development assessment and building certification activities for the July to September quarter. Data on the number of applications and processing times, together with relevant commentary on development trends is provided for the information on Council.

 

Discussion

 

The table overleaf provides data on the volume of applications received and determined over the quarter relative to the monthly average of the preceding 2 years.

 

The most notable trend from the data is the increase in development applications (DAs) received and determined. During the quarter the monthly average for DAs determined was 73 compared to the 2011/12 and 2012/13 monthly average of 52/53. The increase in Complying Development Certificates and Construction Certificates received by Council also highlights an increase in building activity and suggests confidence in the sector is improving.

 

The bulk of applications determined for the quarter relate to alterations and additions to dwellings, new single dwellings and dual occupancies. Other applications of interest include:

-     DA2013/148 - UNSW educational facility, Highfields Circuit (determined by Joint Regional Planning Panel).

-     DA2013/18 - 14 lot large lot residential subdivision, Logans Crossing Road.

-     DA2013/218 - 13 lot subdivision, Lakeside Way.

-     DA2013/181 - Primitive Campground, Wauchope Showground.

-     DA2013/449 - 12 Aged Care Units, River Park Road

-     DA2006/351 (modification) - 5 year extension to Festival of the Sun.


 

 

 

Application Type

2011-12 Monthly average

2012-13

Monthly average

Jul 2013

Aug 2013

Sept 2013

2013-14

Average to date

DAs received

 

52

73

68

77

73

DAs determined

53

53

71

74

59

68

DA Modifications Received

 

11

12

15

6

11

DA Modifications determined

11

11

15

12

14

14

Complying Development Certificates received by Council

 

10

18

13

18

16

Complying Development Certificates Determined (inc private certifiers)

25

20

31

25

24

26

Construction Certificates received by Council

 

35

46

28

50

41

Construction Certificates (building) determined (inc private certifiers)

49

45

54

50

42

48

S.68 Water and Sewer work applications determined

 

42

62

48

52

54

 

 

The following table outlines the estimated value of works per development type approved for the quarter.

 

Development Category

Jul 2013

Aug 2013

Sept 2013

Ancillary Development

$1,411,235

$507,065

$1,869,459

Residential

$6,977,939

$6,240,360

$7,933,533

Commercial

$2,724,060

$486,500

$753,760

Industrial

$58,000

$754,492

$36,000

Rural

$108,000

$623,000

$755,995

Community

$0

$13,100,000

$282,600

 

Residential development continues to consistently be the dominant sector of the development industry. The large value associated with the ‘community’ category above is the $13 million educational facility approved on Highfields Circuit.

 

 


 

The following graph provides an indication of trends in total annual application volumes over the past 3 years. The graph reflects the downward trend in development activity since the GFC. Despite this trend over recent years, increasing development application lodgements discussed above are an encouraging indicator of confidence in the development sector.

 

 

 

The following table provides data and trends on monthly application processing times.

 

PMHC Application Processing Performance

Measure Description

2011-12  NSW Ave

2011-12  Ave

2012-13 Ave

Jul 2013 Ave

Aug 2013 Ave

Sept 2013 Ave

2013-14 Ave

DA Processing - Net Median Days

31

34

32

30

28

28

29

DA Processing - Net Average Days

46

34

35

35

29

30

31

DA Processing - Gross Average Days

71

62

67

86

40

51

59

Complying Development Processing - Net Average Days

18

6

5

8

6

5

6

Construction Certificate Processing - Net Average Days

-

16

13

6

9

17

11

 

Despite the increase in applications received, processing times for the quarter have remained roughly the same as the preceding years and below NSW State average for 2011/12 (12/13 data not yet released by Department of Planning and Infrastructure).

 

It is noted for the month of July that the gross average DA processing time was 86 days, significantly higher than the Sate average of 71 days. This is a result of a long standing development application (approximately 5 years) that relied on a Local Environmental Plan amendment and a Voluntary Planning Agreement. The particular circumstances prevented a more timely determination. The net median and net average times for July and the gross average times for August and September highlight that this is not reflective of ‘normal’ processing times.

 

The following graph shows application process time trends over the past several years and indicates improving processing times or steady performance across all application types.

 

 

The upward trend in development assessment activity is positive and is being closely monitored by management to ensure sufficient resources are available to respond to the increase in work. While application processing times have not yet increased in the face of recent increases in applications, it is expected that there will be negative implications for processing times should resource levels not be adjusted. Planning staff are currently processing in excess of 20 applications each and this is not a sustainable work load in the long-term.

 

In this regard, a new development assessment planner has recently been recruited to ensure that sufficient resources are available to maintain acceptable development application processing times.

 

Options

 

This is an information report.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Development assessment statistics are discussed internally as the key indicator of system performance. The statistics are provided to and discussed at quarterly Hastings Construction Industry Liaison meetings.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Nil

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

This report does not have direct financial or economic implications. However monitoring the performance of the development assessment system is an important undertaking given the role of development regulation in the broader economy and the need to minimise costs to businesses and the community in managing development

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.12

 

Subject:     2012 - 2013 Annual Report

Presented by:  Community & Organisational Development, Lesley Atkinson

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.4.1  Engage with the community on impacts and changes of operations.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Adopt the 2012 - 2013 Annual Report, comprising Parts 1, 2 and 3.

2.       Submit the adopted 2012 - 2013 Annual Report to the Minister for Local Government by the 30 November 2013.

3.       Publish the adopted 2012 - 2013 Annual Report on Council's website and make copies of the report available at all Council Offices and Libraries.

4.       Note the Community Report Card 2012 - 2013.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Under Section 428 of the Local Government Act (1993) Council is required to submit its Annual Report to the Division of Local Government no later than the 30 November each year.  There are a range of statutory requirements which must be included in this report.  Once adopted this report must be published on Council’s website and available at Council’s offices. The purpose of this report is to formally present to Council the 2012 - 2013 Annual Report.

 

Council has developed a brief overview of the achievements for 2012 - 2013 in a community friendly format and will also publish this for the community.

 

Discussion

 

In accordance with Section 428 of the Local Government Act (1993) and Local Government (General) Regulation (2005), Council must, within 5 months after the end of each year, prepare an Annual Report which must include its audited financial statements, a range of statutory requirements and outline achievements in implementing the Delivery Program.  This includes the achievements in relation to the Operational Plan.

 

This report is separated into three parts.

 

Part 1 includes details to meet a range of statutory requirements including:

·        Amount of rates and charges written off during the year.

·        Details of overseas visits by Councillors, Council staff or other persons representing Council (including visits sponsored by other organisations).

·        Total cost during the year of the payment of expenses of, and the provision of facilities to, Councillors in relation to their civic functions.

·        Details of contracts awarded for amounts greater than $150,000.

·        Summary of the amounts incurred by the Council in relation to legal proceedings.

·        Summary of resolutions made under Section 67 of the Local Government Act concerning work carried out on private land.

·        Total amount contributed or otherwise granted under Section 356 (financially assist others).

·        Statement of all external bodies that exercised functions delegated by Council.

·        Statement of all corporations, partnerships, trusts, joint ventures, syndicates or other bodies in which Council held a controlling interest.

·        Statement of all corporations, partnerships, trusts, joint ventures, syndicates or other bodies in which the Council participated.

·        Statement of activities to implement its Equal Employment Opportunity management plan.

·        Statement of the total remuneration comprised in the remuneration package of the General Manager.

·        Statement of the total remuneration comprised in remuneration packages of all senior staff members, expressed as the total (not of the individual members).

·        A statement detailing the stormwater management services provided (if levied).

·        A statement detailing the coastal protection services provided (if levied).

·        Particulars of any environmental upgrade agreement entered into, in accordance with any requirements imposed under Section 54P.

·        Report on special variation expenditure if required to do so by the instrument made by the Minister.

·        Report on capital works projects.

·        Statement on activities relating to enforcing and ensuring compliance with the Companion Animals Act and Regulation

·        Information included on Government Information Public Access (GIPA) activity.

·        Particulars of compliance with and effect of planning agreements in force during the year under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

·        Information included on Public Interest Disclosures.

·        Statement relating to Compliance with the Carers (Recognition) Act.

 

Part 2 of the Annual Report includes Council’s achievements in implementing the Delivery Program objectives through a description of the achievements against the Operational Plan activities framed by the “Towards 2030 Community Strategic Plan” which include, the guiding principle of ensuring good governance and four focus areas, looking after our people, helping our community prosper, looking after our environment and planning and providing our infrastructure.

 

Part 3 of the Annual Report includes a copy of Council’s audited financial statements.

 

The development of the Annual Report 2012 - 2013 completes the suite of reporting documents Council is required to deliver under the Integrated Planning and Reporting provisions of the Local Government Act (1993). 

 

Council has also prepared a Community Report Card which is an easy to read snapshot of key achievements delivered during 2012 - 2013.  While this is not a legislative requirement it meets the need to provide a plain English summary to our community.

 

For information the 2011 - 2012 report card achieved a highly commended at the Local Government NSW Communications Awards to acknowledge the documents role in helping the community understand what Council has delivered. 

 

The Community Report Card 2012 - 2013  will be distributed electronically to the Community Reference Group (CRG) and will also be used in future engagement activities.  Hard copies will be made available in Council offices and Libraries in Port Macquarie, Wauchope and Laurieton.  It will also be loaded onto Council’s website. 

 

Options

 

Council could seek additional information on the Annual Report.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

·        General Manager

·        Directors

·        Group Managers and relevant staff

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

The submission of the Annual Report meets Council’s legislative requirements under the Local Government Act (1993) and Local Government (General) Regulation (2005) .

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Nil.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Annual Report 2012 - 2013 PART 1 - Statutory Information

2.       Annual Report 2012 - 2013 PART 2 - End of year report - Delivery Program Operational Plan

3.       Annual Report 2012 - 2013 PART 3 Financial Statements

4.       Community Report Card 2012 - 2013

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.13

 

Subject:     Heritage & Cultural Sub-Committee

Presented by:  Community & Organisational Development, Lesley Atkinson

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

2.5.2  Facilitate, support and/or advocate for cultural and heritage education within the community.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Approve the development of a new overarching Heritage and Cultural Sub-Committee which amalgamates the existing Arts and Cultural Development Committee and the Museums and Heritage Sub-Committee.

2.       Call for Expressions of Interest for members from the community.

3.       Advise all existing members of the Arts & Cultural Development Committee and Museums & Heritage Sub-Committee of the development of an overarching Sub-Committee.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Since February 2013, a number of meetings have occurred separately with the Arts & Cultural Development Committee (ACDC) and Heritage & Museums Sub-Committee as well as some combined meetings of these 2 committees. The purpose of these meetings has been to consider the development of a new overarching Sub-Committee of Council, which will provide advice to Council on a range of matters associated with culture and heritage in the LGA.

 

Discussion

 

The strong Hastings arts and cultural sector was recognised through the greater Port Macquarie region being named New South Wales Fourth City of the Arts in 2001 to 2003. This came with a grant of $150,000 per annum ( for two years) , and a $50,000 contribution from Council. These funds were expended on a variety of projects, many of which are still in place today (predominantly the public art throughout the LGA). Council created a City of the Arts Taskforce and appointed a Project Officer who reported to Council’s Cultural Planner. The Arts and Cultural Development Committee was developed out of the Taskforce and had a key role in the lobbying of Council for the Glasshouse (along with the Gallery Advisory Committee), and the planning of a wide range of projects, three of which still continue - namely AquaSculpture, FreshArt and PlayRites. This Committee worked closely with the Cultural Planner, and since the Cultural Planner was made redundant in 2009, the Committee has been very restricted in its activities due to the lack of a designated Council officer to support the group through the implementation of their ideas and plans.

The Museums and Heritage Committee was originally two separate committees which were combined in 2008. With the Heritage Officer also being made redundant in 2009, this combined Committee found it difficult to action items/plans when there was no dedicated officer in Council support or facilitate the ideas or initiatives. This group has continued to meet regularly, primarily focussed on information sharing, the annual Heritage Festival, and discussions with Council’s contracted Heritage Officer.

Proposal

The following proposal is put forward for consideration:

That the two Committees be amalgamated to form a new Sub-Committee of Council.

This will result in a streamlined approach to heritage and cultural policy for Council and potentially a broader number of community driven groups, organisations and projects being supported by Council than ever before. It is anticipated that the new Sub-Committee will provide advice, ideas and recommendations to Council regarding policy matters that relate to the combined heritage and cultural sectors in the Hastings. 

The main Council staffing resource of this Sub Committee will be the Community Development Officer  - Heritage & Culture, who will be focussed on supporting the resolutions of Council and the new Sub-Committee, as well as driving some Council initiated projects from time to time in this sector as required.

 

As a consequence of this change, it is expected that there will be a refreshing of the level of involvement and ideas from the community coming forward to Council, as well as a greater focus on assisting the community cultural and heritage groups to be more  self supporting and sustaining.

Membership of the Committee

Council will develop a Charter for the Sub-Committee and call for Expressions of Interest from the community, seeking representatives from the community as well as a wide range of organisations and community groups in the LGA to become members of the Sub-Committee. Half the positions will be spilt every two years to enable new members to join and also to ensure continuity of knowledge can be maintained. A Councillor appointed by way of Council resolution would be the Chairperson of this Sub-Committee with a second Councillor also appointed the same way as an Alternate Chairperson.

 

Interested applicants will be asked to submit an application, outlining their interest and experience in the Heritage, Cultural and or Arts sector in the LGA,  their ability to commit to regular meetings and possible working groups, the reasons for their seeking involvement on the Sub-Committee, what they can contribute, and their level of commitment to representing the whole sector, not just their own area of expertise. The membership would be no greater than 10 community members, with the goal being to have as many art and cultural forms represented as possible within this group.  Should the new Sub-Committee be established, Councillors would be appointed to the new Sub-Committee and Councillor representation on the current committees would cease by default when the existing Committees of Council are ceased.

 

Once Expressions of Interest have been received, a report would be put to Council with recommendations for Sub Committee membership. This process could be carried out during December/January,  with the new Sub-Committee to commence meeting in February/March 2014.

 

Role of Sub-Committee

 

The Sub-Committee would report to Council, with relevant advice and recommendations  pertaining to the heritage, culture, arts and local creative industries.

 

In the first Term of the Sub-Committee (2 years) the focus will be on working with Council staff to review all current Heritage planning documents, the development of a Cultural Plan for the PMHC LGA , review of the Public Arts Policy/Procedure and have input into Operational Plan development.

 

It is also proposed that there be discussion with the broader community regarding the possibility of skills development workshops to be provided, with the intended outcome of increasing the sustainability of the heritage and cultural sector.

 

Sub-Committee Charter

Key components would include:

1.   Assist in the assessment of possible heritage and cultural based projects, using a set criteria.

2.   Provide input into current heritage and cultural strategic planning and resourcing.

3.   Advise Council on the development of comprehensive cultural strategies.

4.   Represent community interest and organisations in the formulation of Council Policies relating to arts, culture and heritage.

5.   Advise on strategies for fostering community engagement with an active participation in heritage, arts and cultural programs/ projects/ policy.

6.   As individual members of the Sub-Committee, facilitate information flow between Port Macquarie-Hastings Council, heritage and cultural organisations and the wider community.

7.   As community members, facilitate partnerships and/or links to establish Port Macquarie-Hastings as a major heritage and cultural destination.

8.   Promote and support local creative industries and initiatives.

 

Options

 

Council could make no change to the two existing Committees - Arts and Cultural Development, and the Heritage and Museums Sub-Committee.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

The concept of a combined Sub Committee has been discussed with both the Museums and Heritage Sub Committee and the Arts and Cultural Development Committees, Councillors and internal staff including General Manager, Executive,  Group Manager Governance, Group Manager Community Development.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

The establishment of the Heritage & Cultural Sub-Committee will assist with future planning and policy matters.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Nil.

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.14

 

Subject:     Transfer Balance of Funds - Port Macquarie-Handa Sister City Sub-Committee

Presented by:  Community & Organisational Development, Lesley Atkinson

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.4.3  Build trust and improve Council’s public reputation through transparency and accountability.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council approve an amount of $5,300 from the Port Macquarie-Handa Sister City Sub-Committee 2013/2014 Budget be transferred into a Port Macquarie-Handa Sister City Reserve.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Port Macquarie-Handa Sister City Agreement was signed by the then Mayor of Port Macquarie-Hastings Council, Aldermen Robert Woodlands, and Mayor of Handa City - Mr Koichi Yamada on April 14 1990 at a ceremony in the Auditorium of the Central Public Hall in Handa Japan.  2015 marks the 25th Anniversary of this Agreement.

 

Discussion

 

Council has received advice that a delegation from Handa City Council will travel to Port Macquarie to celebrate the 25th Anniversary of the two Council’s Sister City officially formed in April 2015.  This proposed visit will be in addition to the annual Study Tour Group from Handa Higashi Senior High School which will take place during July/August 2015.  The proposed visit by the delegation from Handa City Council will provide an opportunity for Port Macquarie-Hastings Council to enhance and demonstrate its strong commitment to our Sister City Agreement with Handa.  The restricted funds from the 2013/2014 allocation would meet the expenses Council could incur during this visit, and therefore reduce the need to identify funding closer to the date. 

 

The amount to be transferred is $5,300.00.

 

Options

 

Transfer the remaining funds from the 2013/2014 budget allocation to the 2014/2015 budget as a restricted asset. Not undertake the transfer and identify and allocate funding in the immediate lead up to April 2015. 

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Port Macquarie-Handa Sister City Sub-Committee.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Nil

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Nil

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpgDescription: Governance Strap.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          08.15

 

Subject:     Section 355  Community Halls Management Committees Membership 2013

Presented by:  Community & Organisational Development, Lesley Atkinson

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

2.6.2  Create access to community facilities that allow a range of social, health and wellbeing activities.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1.       That Council endorse the membership of Bonny Hills Community Hall Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Ms Francis Hoad - President

·        Ms Ann Drury - Treasurer/Booking Officer

·        Ms Lorraine Winner - Minutes Secretary

·        Ms Carmel Power - Correspondence Secretary

·        Mr Bill Howell - Maintenance Officer

·        Mr Roger Barlow - Committee Member

·        Ms Pam Barlow -  Committee Member

 

2.       That Council endorse the membership of CC “Mac” Adams Music Centre Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Ms Leanne Howlett - President

·        Ms Jan Hunter - Vice President

·        Mr Glen Stanley - Treasurer

·        Mr Greg Cook - Secretary/Booking Officer

·        Mr Brian Corrigan - Committee Member

·        Ms Betty Hobby - Committee Member

·        Mr Dale Bleasdale - Committee Member

·        Mr Maurie Griffin - Committee Member

 

3.       That Council endorse the membership of Lorne Recreation Centre Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Mr Brian Alley - President

·        Ms Janet Lewin - Vice President

·        Ms Nicola Nosworthy - Secretary

·        Ms Stephanie Williams - Treasurer

·        Ms Jenny Higgins - Committee Member

·        Mr Phil Higgins - Committee Member

·        Mrs Helen Anderson - Committee Member

·        Mr Alan Anderson - Committee Member

·        Ms Gerda Butlin - Committee Member

 

4.       That Council endorse the membership of Pappinbarra Recreation Reserve Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Ms Sue Frost - President

·        Ms Kelly Benson - Secretary

·        Ms Emma Frost - Treasurer

·        Ms Brenda Patrick - Committee Member

·        Mr Steve Ostler - Committee Member

·        Mr Rob Frost - Committee Member

 

5.       That Council endorse the membership of Pembrooke Community Hall Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Mr Kirk Byrnes - President

·        Ms Jeanette Rainbow - Secretary

·        Ms Margaret Davies - Treasurer

·        Mr Des Freeman - Committee Member

·        Mrs Shirley Freeman - Committee Member

·        Ms Clair Cutler - Committee Member

·        Ms Jean Moore - Committee Member

 

6.       That Council endorse the membership of Port Macquarie Historic Court House Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Mr Roger Heath - President

·        Mr Barry Dowse - Vice President

·        Ms Lyn Stevenson - Secretary

·        Mrs Veronica Heath - Treasurer

·        Mrs Brenda Pebedy - Maintenance Officer

·        Mrs Audrey Dowse - Booking Officer

·        Mr Ramsey Collins - Committee Member

·        Mr John Scholz - Committee Member

·        Ms Carole Neil - Committee Member

·        Mr David Baird - Committee Member

·        Mr Ross Pebedy - Committee Member

·        Mr Glen Dick - Committee Member

·        Mr David Martin - Committee Member

 

7.       That Council endorse the membership of Port Macquarie Seniors Centre Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Mr Allen Ross - President/Booking Officer

·        Mrs Lyn Manley - Treasurer

·        Ms Trish Davis - Secretary

·        Mrs Di Last - Committee Member

·        Mr Don Newson - Committee Member

·        Mr Norm Bodenham - Committee Member

·        Ms Kathy O’Neale - Committee Member

 

8.       That Council endorse the membership of Wauchope Community (Arts) Hall Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Ms Krissa Wilkinson - President

·        Ms Julie Muller - Vice President/Maintenance Officer

·        Ms Deborah Murrell - Treasurer

·        Ms Lyndall Goetz - Secretary

·        Ms Lis Tuck - Hall Coordinator

·        Mr Peter Bower - Assistant Hall Coordinator

·        Ms Susan Ashton - Committee Member

·        Ms Mei Ling Yuen - Committee Member

·        Ms Amy Hubers - Committee Member

 

9.       That Council endorse the membership of Wauchope Rotary Youth Hall Management Committee as elected at their 2013 Annual Review Meeting, comprising:

·        Mr Paul Froome - President

·        Mr Kevin Whitbread - Secretary

·        Mrs Marie Winter - Treasurer/Booking Officer

·        Ms Helen Clunus - Committee Member

·        Ms Annie Peel - Committee Member

·        Mr Stuart Weir - Committee Member

·        Ms Narelle Stokes - Committee Member

·        Mr Andy Neal - Committee Member

 

10.     That Council thank in writing, the outgoing committee members.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The following nine section 355 volunteer management committees of community halls have reported their current committee members and office bearers for the 2013-2014 financial year, following their annual review meetings between 1 July and 2 September 2013;

Bonny Hills Community Hall, CC “Mac” Adams Music Centre, Lorne Recreation Centre, Pappinbarra Recreation Reserve, Pembrooke Community Hall, Port Macquarie Historic Court House, Port Macquarie Seniors Centre, Wauchope Community Hall (Arts) Hall, Wauchope Rotary Youth Hall.

 

Outgoing committee members are;

Ms Sheryl Brough (Bonny Hills Community Hall), Mr Brian Tisdell, Mr John Carter, Ms Glennice Hollis, Mr Max Davis, Mrs Dianne Davis, Mrs Sue Carter (Lorne Recreation Centre), Mr Victor Love, Mr Alan Thomson, Mr Jeff Prigg (Port Macquarie Seniors Centre), Ms Judy Smith (Wauchope Community (Arts) Hall), Ms Patti Berrigan, Mr Neville Parsons and Ms Kirrili Stafford (Wauchope Rotary Youth Hall).

 

Incoming committee members are;

Ms Janet Lewin, Ms Nicola Nosworthy, Ms Stephanie Williams, Mrs Helen Anderson, Mr Alan Anderson, Ms Gerda Butlin (Lorne Recreation Centre), Mr Paul Froome, Ms Annie Peel and Mr Andy Neale (Wauchope Rotary Youth Hall).

 

Discussion

 

Section 355 Volunteer Management Committees of Community Halls

 

Nine of Council’s 17 community halls are managed by section 355 volunteer management committees. These volunteers greatly assist Council in managing these important community facilities.

 

The committee ideally consists of six to ten members. Each committee holds regular meetings to manage the operation of the facility. These meetings may be monthly, bi-monthly or quarterly, as deemed appropriate, according to the frequency of bookings of the facility. A quorum of four members is required to open a meeting.

 

Council’s Building Services manage all maintenance and any capital works to these facilities. This ensures all work complies with Council’s procurement policy, Buildings Assets Management Plan and all relevant policy and legislation.

 

Each year, usually between 1 July and 31 August, each committee holds an Annual Review Meeting (ARM).

 

This meeting is conducted in accordance with Council’s Community Facilities Operations Manual, adopted by Council on the 18 April 2012.

 

The following is a brief description of this process.

 

Reports from the President, the Treasurer and the Booking officer will be tabled at the ARM. During this meeting the operation of the facility over the previous 12 months is discussed and suggestions may be made to improve the operation for the following period.

 

At the conclusion of the meeting, the President declares all committee positions open and oversees the election of a new committee.

 

The Annual Review Meeting is open to the public and is advertised in the local newspapers 21 days prior to this meeting. All residents of the Port-Macquarie-Hastings local government area are eligible to nominate for committee membership. Membership is also sought from regular users of the facility.

 

When the committee members are decided, the new committee nominate and vote for the positions of office bearers. These are typically;

 

·    President

·    Vice President

·    Secretary

·    Treasurer

·    Booking Officer

·    Maintenance Officer

 

Other office bearers may be appointed as agreed by the committee, such as promotions officer, assistant secretary (or assistant to other roles) as deemed necessary by the committee.

 

Committee members who are not office bearers assist the office bearers as required.

The current members and office bearers of the nine section 355 volunteer management committees, as elected at their ARMs of 2013 are as listed in the recommendations.

 

Options

 

Council could seek additional information on this report.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Consultation has occurred with the nine section 355 volunteer management committees of community halls.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Nil change required to the 2011-2015 Delivery Program or the 2013/2014 Operational Plan.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Nil

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       S355 Management Committees of Community Halls Membership 2013/2014

2.       Community Facilities Operations Manual Adopted by Council 18 April 2012

 

 


Description: Corner Art People.jpgAGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

What are we trying to achieve?

Our social infrastructure and community programs create a healthy, inclusive and vibrant community.

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


What will the result be?

·         Community hubs which provide access to services and social connections.

·         Services that support an ageing community to live in a way that they desire.

·         Available and accessible preventative health and medical services.

·         A safe, caring and connected community.

·         A healthy and active community that is supported by recreational infrastructure

·         A strong community that is able to identify and address social issues.

·         Community participation in events, programs, festivals and activities.

 

How do we get there?

2.1  Create an environment and culture that allows the Port Macquarie-Hastings community to feel safe.

2.2  Provide young people with a range of leisure activities and opportunities for personal development.

2.3  Provide medical and social services for all members of the community.

2.4  Develop partnerships within the community to build on existing strengths and improve areas of social disadvantage.

2.5  Create events and activities that promote interaction and education.

2.6  Provide social and community infrastructure and services.

2.7  Empower the community to be active and involved in community life.

2.8  Promote cultural and artistic expression.

2.9  Promote a healthy lifestyle through education, support networks and facilities.


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          09.01

 

Subject:     Annual Reporting of Contracts for Senior Staff

Presented by: General Manager, Anthony Hayward

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

1.4.1  Comply with Local Government legislation, policies and agreed standards and communicate the impacts of this to the community.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note the contractual conditions for the following Senior roles in the Organisation:

·    General Manager

·    Director Infrastructure and Asset Management

·    Director Community and Organisational Development

·    Director Commercial Services and Industry Engagement

·    Director Development and Environmental

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Local Government Act requires the General Manager to report to Council on the contractual conditions of senior staff on an annual basis.

 

Details are provided in the confidential attachment titled “2013 Senior Staff Contractual Arrangements” which contains information that relates to personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than Councillors).  Local Government Act 1993 – Section 10A(2)(a).

 

Discussion

 

Under the NSW Local Government Act 1993, in particular s338, there is a requirement that annually a report is submitted to Council outlining the contractual conditions of senior staff. The Local Government Act outlines under s338 the following:

338   Nature of contracts for senior staff

(1)      The general manager and other senior staff of a council are to be employed under contracts that are performance-based.

(2)      The term of a contract must not be less than 12 months or more than 5 years (including any option for renewal). A term that is less than 12 months is taken to be for 12 months and a term for more than 5 years is taken to be limited to 5 years.

(3)      Contracts may be renewed from time to time.

(4)      The Director-General may, by order in writing, approve one or more standard forms of contract for the employment of the general manager or other senior staff of a council.

(5)      A standard form of contract approved by the Director-General is not to include provisions relating to the level of remuneration or salary (including employment benefits) of the general manager or other senior staff of a council, performance-based requirements or the duration of the contract.

(6)      A council is not to employ a person to a position to which one or more standard forms of contract approved for the time being under this section applies or apply except under such a standard form of contract.

(7)      The council may include in an employment contract for the general manager or another member of the senior staff additional provisions to those contained in the standard form of contract but only if those provisions relate to any of the following:

(a)       the level of remuneration or salary (including employment benefits) of the person employed under the contract,

(b)      subject to subsections (1) and (2), performance-based requirements or the duration of the contract.

(8)      Despite subsection (6), the approval, amendment or substitution of a standard form of contract under this section does not affect any employment contract between a council and the general manager of the council or another member of the senior staff of the council if the employment contract was entered into before the approval, amendment or substitution of the standard form of contract.

(9)      However, subsection (6) does apply to the renewal of any such employment contract occurring after the standard form of contract is approved, amended or substituted and to all new contracts entered into after the standard form of contract is approved, amended or substituted.

 

The current requirements of the Director-General are that all officers identified as senior officers are required to be employed under a contract that applies to the Senior Executive Service (SES) of the NSW State Public Sector.

 

The following employees of council have been identified as Senior Staff:

·    General Manager

·    Director Infrastructure and Asset Management

·    Director Community and Organisational Development

·    Director Commercial Services and Industry Engagement

·    Director Development and Environmental

 

Each of these employees are also employed under the standard contract approved by the Director-General. Under this arrangement there are requirements to develop a performance plan and at least annually undertake a performance review. Following successful completion of the performance review, an increase is applied to the salary component of the total remuneration package. The level of increase is set by the SES remuneration tribunal on an annual basis.

 

Options

 

Council needs to receive the report on an annual basis.

 

Consultation

 

Group Manager Employee Engagement.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Nil as this is a legislative reporting requirement.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

In the annual budget, funds are allocated to not only remunerate the senior staff but all employees of the Council.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       2013 Senior Staff Contractual Arrangements (Confidential)

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          09.02

 

Subject:     Notice of Motion - Ban Consumption of Alcohol - Town Beach Skate Park (PIN 263)

 

 

 

Councillor Turner has given notice of his intention to move the following motion:

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council erect notices, pursuant to section 632 of the Local Government Act 1993, to ban the consumption of alcohol at the Town Beach Skate Park at any time.

 

 

Comments by Councillor (if provided)

Nil.

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          09.03

 

Subject:     Notice of Motion - Illegal Camping

 

 

 

Councillor Turner has given notice of his intention to move the following motion:

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Prioritise compliance action during the 2013-2014 summer in relation to illegal camping and overnight stays in public car parks and reserves.

2.       Request the General Manager provide a report to the December 2013 Council Meeting on the implications of erecting notices, pursuant to S.632 of the Local Government Act 1993, to prohibit camping and overnight stays in public car parks and reserves.

3.       Make representations to the NSW Government on the inadequacy of the current regulatory framework in relation to this issue.

 

 

Comments by Councillor (if provided)

Nil

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          09.04

 

Subject:     Bicentenary Planning Sub-Committee Membership

Presented by:  Community & Organisational Development, Lesley Atkinson

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

2.5.2  Facilitate, support and/or advocate for cultural and heritage education within the community.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1.       That Council endorse the establishment of a Bicentenary Planning Sub-Committee.

2.       That 2 Councillors be nominated to become Chairperson and Alternate Chairperson of the Bicentenary Planning Sub-Committee.

3.       That all of the Expressions of Interest in participating on the Bicentenary Planning Sub-Committee be accepted.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

In March  2013 Mr John Channon from Rotary District 9650 area met with the Mayor to discuss the possibility of establishing and planning for celebrations to mark the bicentenary of European settlement in Port Macquarie.

 

The matter was referred to the Heritage & Museums Sub-Committee and then to the 17 July 2013 Council meeting.

 

The matter is now being referred to Council to seek their approval to appoint the community members who submitted an Expression of Interest to participate on the Bicentenary Planning Committee.

 

Discussion

 

At the July 2013 Council meeting Council resolved to:

1.   Support the creation of a planning committee for the lead-up to the Bicentenary of Port Macquarie by calling Expressions of Interest from community members who would like to be involved.

2.   Commit an annual allocation to create a reserve for the Bicentenary celebrations.

3.   Seek advice from the committee regarding a schedule of events that will form the basis of the celebrations leading up to the Bicentenary celebrations for Port Macquarie.

4.   Determine which dates will be highlighted during the celebrations.

 

An Expression of Interest (EOI) was advertised on Council’s Website, in the 3 local newspapers, media releases, through the Heritage & Museums Sub-Committee and via Council’s extensive Google group database.

 

The following community members submitted an EOI to participate as a member on the Committee and a copy of all EOI’s received are attached to this report:

 

·    Mr John Urquhart

·    Mr Trevor Doyle

·    Mr Keith Uptin

·    Mr Brian Bucket

·    Mrs Jeanette Rainbow (received after the EOI period closed)

 

Council now needs to determine whether they will accept all of the EOI’s received (including the one received from Mrs Rainbow after the close date of 13 September 2013), and indicate how they would like this Committee to proceed into the planning phase of the celebrations.

 

Once we have Council’s resolution of membership, the Director of Community & Organisational Development will arrange the initial meeting of the Committee.

 

It would be ideal, if Council could nominate one or two Councillors to participate on the Bicentenary Planning Committee to Chair and to steer the direction of the Committee.

 

Options

 

Council could accept all or some of the EOI nominees or seek further interest from the community.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Internal consultation has taken place between the Mayor, General Manager, Director of Community & Organisational Development, members of the Heritage & Museums Sub-Committee and with the community via an EOI.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Nil.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Nil.

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          09.05

 

Subject:     Recommendations from the Mayor's Sporting Fund Sub-Committee Meeting held on Thursday 16 October 2013

Presented by:  Community & Organisational Development, Lesley Atkinson

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

2.9.1  Provide a range of sporting and recreational opportunities.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council, pursuant to provisions of Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993, grant financial assistance from the Mayor’s Sporting Fund to:

 

1.       Mr Patrick Hamilton in the amount of $250.00 (ex GST) to assist with the expenses he would have incurred travelling to and competing at the 2013 National Youth Championships (soccer) held in Coffs Harbour from 30 September to 4 October 2013 inclusive.

 

 

 

Executive Summary                         

 

The Mayor’s Sporting Fund Sub-Committee at the meeting held on Thursday 24 October 2013, reached consensus on Item 6 (attached) and now submits the above recommendation for Council consideration.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Item 06 Mayors Sporting Fund Sub-Committee Minutes 24102013

 

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

What are we trying to achieve?

The Port Macquarie-Hastings region is able to thrive through access to a range of educational, employment and business opportunities.

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 


What will the result be?

·           Greater availability of educational opportunities.

·           Key business sectors are able to benefit from our natural and existing attributes.

·           Business and industry, training and education facilities sustain our population growth.

·           Increased employment opportunities.

·           An environmentally harmonious and prosperous tourism industry.

·           Widely available communications technology.

 

How do we get there?

3.1  Create opportunities for lie long learning and skill enhancement with the availability of a broad range of education and training facilities.

3.2  Promote and support an increase in business capacity in order to generate ongoing economic growth.

3.3  Expand tourism business opportunities and benefits through collaborative planning and promotion.

3.4  Maximise innovation and economic competitiveness by providing high quality communication technology throughout the Port Macquarie-Hastings region.

3.5  Target and encourage business enterprise by providing favourable business conditions including infrastructure and transport options.


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          10.01

 

Subject:     Notice of Motion - Tastings on Hastings 2013

 

 

 

Councillor Sargeant has given notice of his intention to move the following motion:

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Formally congratulate contractors, staff and volunteers on the success of the 2013 Tastings on Hastings.

2.       Request the General Manager report to the February 2014 Council Meeting on the total cost of running the event and the source and application of those funds provided by Council.

 

 

Comments by Councillor (if provided)

Nil

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          10.02

 

Subject:     Question on Notice - Council Owned Land in William Street, Port Macquarie (PIN 34119)

Presented by:  Commercial Services & Industry Engagement, Craig Swift-McNair

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

3.2.5  Optimise the commercial focus on Council’s property portfolio to deliver improved returns to Council and the community.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Offer for sale through an Expression of Interest process Council’s land located at 99 William Street, Port Macquarie with a report being presented to Council of the outcome.

2.       Remove the Special Condition requiring a purchaser of Council’s land located at 99 William Street, Port Macquarie to provide 180 on site public car parking spaces when the site is developed.

3.       Reimburse Section 94 funds initially borrowed from the Section 94 fund when the site was purchased  and place the remaining funds into Council’s Property Reserve until a viable alternative project is identified for investment, should Council resolve to sell the land located at 99 William Street.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 18 September 2013, the following Question was asked from Councillor Roberts:

 

“Can the General Manager provide the history of and the potential future options for the William St  Port Macquarie, 'hole in the ground', land holding including how and when Council will present this asset for any future Expression of Interest noting that current development restrictions on the site have made it an unviable proposition for potential buyers or joint ventures. What are, and how will the current restrictions on the site be relieved to present an attractive opportunity for development?”

 

Discussion

 

Background

 

Council purchased property situated at 99 William Street, Port Macquarie in December 2005 for an amount of $3.866 million (exc GST). Section 94 funds to the amount of $1.071 million were used to assist in funding this purchase.

 

The 2,400m² vacant site on the corner of Murray Street within the Port Macquarie CBD, includes substantial excavation and retention works as part of the initial construction of a new cinema complex. The confidential reports to Council recommending the acquisition of the site identified the property as a suitable option to provide future car parking within the Port Macquarie CBD.  Please see the confidential attachment titled "Confidential - Confidential Reports to Council 2005."  (Relates to information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.  Local Government Act 1993 - Section 10A(2(c)).

 

1.            Sale attempts

 

Expressions of Interest No 1:

 

Expressions of Interest offering the site for sale (including a joint venture or lease) were called in March 2006 (outlined in the report to Council 05/12/2005). A condition of the sale included that any future development of the site was to incorporate provision for 180 public car spaces in addition to parking requirements with any new development.

 

Although several enquiries were made by prospective purchasers no applications were received.

 

Expression of Interest No 2:

 

To improve the prospect of selling the land Council called for a fee proposal from Architects to prepare a concept design of the site to maximise potential development and provide public car parking. In September 2006 Council engaged McNeill Architects for this purpose, with the result being that a design concept was prepared including underground car parking in William and Murray Streets with an underground entry from Murray Street, along with a proposed link to a Gordon Street/Lake Road roundabout. Entry was also provided from the Port Central car park.

 

Using this design concept a second Expression of Interest was called to purchase the site (including a joint venture or lease) in October 2006.

 

As with the first Expression of Interest enquiries were made, however no applications were received.

 

Enquiries since 2006

 

Despite several purchase enquiries having been received in recent years the public car parking condition of 180 on site spaces has resulted in discussions not proceeding, due to this requirement impacting on the financial viability of a development on this site.

 

Further Concept Plans

 

In an endeavour to explore alternate designs for this land including provision of public car parking spaces, McNeill Architects prepared a further 2 concept plans in late 2012, taking into account Council’s DCP 2011 that now places different limitations on the development of the site compared to the plans prepared in 2006.

 

These revised plans considered configurations of:-

 

·    A  building over the whole site plus 180 public car spaces and accessing the development from Port Central car park (minus parking under William/Murray Streets)

·    A building over half of the site and using the balance of the site for 180 public car spaces with access from Port Central car park.

 

Cost estimates for all of these designs ranged from between approximately $20 million to in excess of $40 million and were considered to still render the development financially unviable.

 

Value of the land

 

A market valuation report has recently been obtained. The valuation is provided on the basis that there is no condition to provide 180 public car spaces in addition to the car parking required with any development on the site.

 

The site has added value as a consequence of the site excavation works and retaining wall which are anchored under the road. These ground improvements are considered to be attractive to a potential purchaser as they would be a cost saving in any development proposal. The valuation report also notes that the land is a corner site within the main CBD precinct. The market for the type of land has been slow in recent years due to the high costs of development. Since the land was purchased by Council, market instability has resulted from the global financial crisis.

 

As with any valuation, the valuation indicates a range to determine an upper and lower range for sale purposes. Please refer to the confidential attachment titled "Confidential - Valuation Report."  (Relates to information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.  Local Government Act 1993 - Section 10A(2(c)).

 

Parking Strategy

 

In considering the options associated with 99 William Street, Council should continue to consider the need for centralised parking in the Port Macquarie CBD. Parking surveys carried out to inform development of the Parking Strategy 2011, demonstrated that in particular, there is a high demand for all-day parking in Port Macquarie, with up to 94% of these spaces utilised. This demand is primarily because of town centre workers.

 

Well planned and located parking stations are an effective option to address parking demand. The 2011 Parking Strategy proposes a parking station located within the Port Macquarie CBD (“central parking station”), with preliminary options being parking on the subject site, an upper deck on Port Central Parking Station, Hayward Street (current Coles site) and the Gordon Street old SES headquarters site. Community consultations support provision of additional centralised parking and continuation of investigations for these sites. A site options study is included in the 2013/2014 budget, with infrastructure delivery being identified as a long-term action in the Strategy.

 

Should 99 William St be sold, opportunities for incorporating some all-day parking into any site redevelopment should still be pursued. However, while Council could enter into negotiations with any successful purchaser to allocate some public parking into future development, there is no guarantee that suitable outcomes would be achieved as evidence by previous attempts to sell the site.

 

The sale of the site and its potential loss as an option for public parking in the CBD needs to be weighed up against the long-term viability of developing the site with its current 180 parking space requirement. While the sale of the land would return $1.071 million to the S94 car parking reserve (bringing total available funding for parking in Port Macquarie to around $3.9 million), this level of funding is not sufficient (even with projected revenues) to develop a traditional all-day car parking station in the long-term (prior to 2030). This may be a catalyst for Council to look at other options for the provision of all-day parking, such as arrangements with developers to provide the parking in conjunction with commercial developments as mentioned above.

 

The Proposed Way Forward

 

The current condition of sale requiring a purchaser to provide 180 on site public car parking spaces on development is currently making the site unviable for development. The removal of this requirement will improve viability and should renew interest from potential developers.

 

A new Expression of Interest (EOI) could be advertised in relation to the land. The results of this process would provide Council with an indication of current market conditions including the added value (if any) of the excavation and retention works. A further report could then be presented to Council on the outcome of this process.

 

Subject to the results of the EOI process, should Council resolve to sell the land and to remove the 180 parking space requirement, Section 94 funds would need to be reimbursed from the sale proceeds. The balance of sale proceeds could be placed into the Property Reserve until a viable alternative project is identified for investment.

 

Options

 

Council could choose not to seek Expressions of Interest in purchasing the land and/or not to remove the special condition requiring a purchaser to provide 180 on site public car parking spaces on development.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Not applicable

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Not applicable

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Should the land be sold, subject to EOI outcomes, and consideration of the valuation range and original purchase price, the proceeds will be used to repay the S94 car parking reserve, and to provide an opportunity for investment into an alternative project.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Confidential - Confidential Reports to Council 2005 (Confidential)

2.       Confidential - Valuation Report (Confidential)

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          10.03

 

Subject:     Economic Development Strategy

Presented by:  Commercial Services & Industry Engagement, Craig Swift-McNair

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

3.2.1  Identify, support and advocate for effective programs that assist the growth of appropriate business and industry.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Note the submissions and feedback received during the exhibition of the draft Economic Development Strategy

2.       Adopt the Port Macquarie Hastings Economic Development Strategy 2013-2016.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Following exhibition of the draft Economic Development Strategy which concluded on 25 October 2013, this report outline the submissions and feedback received during the exhibition period and presents the revised draft Strategy for Council's approval as attached to this report.

 

Discussion

 

Following the 2012 review of economic development and tourism services, in early 2013, Council resolved to establish and Economic Development Steering Group (EDSG).  Objective 2.1 of the EDSG Terms of Reference states that the EDSG will work with Council to develop an overarching strategy for economic development across the local government area.

 

A draft of this Strategy was presented to an extraordinary meeting of Council on 25 September and endorsed for public exhibition from 26 September 2013 to 25 October 2013. The Council resolution was as follows:

 

RESOLVED: Turner/Cusato

 

 1. Place the Draft Economic Development Strategy on public exhibition for a period of 28 days from 26 September 2013 to 25 October 2013 inclusive.

2. Undertake broad consultation during the exhibition period with industry and business groups.

3. Request that the General Manager prepare a report for the November meeting of Council detailing information contained in submissions received during the exhibition period for further consideration by Council.

FOR: Besseling, Cusato, Griffiths, Hawkins, Levido, Roberts, Sargeant and Turner

AGAINST: Nil

 

As was detailed in the Economic Development Strategy Consultation Plan (Attachment 1), Council conducted wide ranging discussions with local business, industry and stakeholders on the draft in an effort to encourage feedback on the Strategy's direction and content. The feedback received on the draft during the consultation period was overwhelmingly positive.

 

Approximately 130 people attended discussion forums (held in Port Macquarie, the Camden Haven and Wauchope. The forums comprised an overview of the Strategy development process, an introduction to its content and round table discussions facilitated by members of the EDSG.  The views on the draft captured during these discussions are included in an attachment to this report titled ‘Draft Economic Development Strategy Discussion Forum Feedback Summary’ (Attachment 2).

 

Overall, the forum discussions were constructive and participants saw the draft as a good 'step forward' for Council's approach to economic development.  Specific feedback on the strategy was wide-ranging with the most prominent subject of discussion being the Strategy’s first action under Outcome 1: Embracing Business and a Stronger Economy, which is to ‘Ensure a whole-of-organisation/solutions-focused culture and approach to supporting business - countering red tape with solutions focused outcomes and ensuring this approach is reflected in Council policies'.  The community sent a very clear message that this action is seen as the most important change which needs to be occurring within Council under the new Strategy.

 

In addition to the discussion forum feedback, 15 formal submissions, and one on-line comment via the PMHC Listening website were received during the exhibition period.  The majority of submissions were complimentary of the work of the EDSG, in developing the Strategy.  Indeed, many were accepting of the Strategy and chose to focus their comments on how the Strategy will / should be implemented.  In particular, respondents and forum participants were keen to ensure strong collaboration between Council and industry in the development of the Industry Action and Advocacy Plans under the 'Partnering for Success' outcome.  Valuable suggestions were made on how the Strategy could be more explicit in outlining what was planned in this regard with the Strategy now having been amended to take on board these views.

 

Feedback on the performance measures presented in the draft strategy varied, with some stakeholders advocating for very specific measures associated with each action and others suggesting the current strategy approach was more appropriate.  In reconsidering the performance measures included in the draft, the EDSG decided higher level measures were most appropriate in terms of resource allocation i.e. they did not want Council staff to be spending too much time on measuring every specific action, when that time could be spent actually implementing the Strategy. However in light of the comments on performance measures, the wording of some measures has been modified to ensure the Strategy clearly identifies what is being measured i.e. real growth. It is also the view of the EDSG that the Strategy document itself should be a ‘living document’, meaning that the strategy itself and the associated performance measures should be reviewed annually to ensure the best possible outcomes are achieved.  The requirement for this review has now been included as a specific action (see action number 12), within the final draft.

 

All feedback received during the exhibition period was considered by the EDSG at its 30 October 2013 meeting.  As a result of these discussions, a variety of minor amendments have been made to improve the quality of the draft, in particular ensuring its intent is clear and comprehensive.  When considering some individual comments (particularly those relating to Strategy implementation or actions), the EDSG was reluctant to revise the Strategy specifics, but felt that there was scope to consider such suggestions as implementation occurs.

 

The EDSG are of the opinion that the draft has been well considered and look forward to working with Council staff on the implementation of Strategy actions.

 

Options

 

Council has the option of adopting the proposed Strategy as attached to this report or not adopting same, in which case the Strategy would be referred back to the EDSG for further consideration.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Council's Economic Development Steering Group has been integral to the development of this strategy and should be commended for their time and commitment.  In addition to business and industry input via this Group, wider community engagement occurred during the 28 day exhibition period.  Internally, the draft was also discussed with Councils Group Managers and Executive and information has been provided to all Council staff via our internal newsletter.

 

Please find attached to this Report the submissions received and Council’s response (Attachment 3).

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

If Council chooses to adopt the Economic Development Strategy, some of the actions identified in the strategy will result in the Council reviewing a range of policies and related documents to ensure that economic development considerations are taken into account.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

The adoption of this Economic Development Strategy will have resource implications for Council.  The resourcing of the Economic Development team will largely be based around the roles that Council will play in undertaking each of the outcomes identified in the Strategy.  As the Strategy takes a 'whole of organisation' approach, there are some outcomes and actions that will also require the dedication of resources from other areas of Council.  Any anticipated future financial implications for Council as a result of the Strategy implementation, will be reported to Council as appropriate.

 

It is anticipated that the adoption of the Strategy will result in a more focused and 'whole of Council' approach to economic development across our Local Government Area, with greater collaboration between Council, business and industry.  It is difficult to forecast the implications of the Strategy implementation on our local economy, however the performance measures noted in the Strategy outline what the Economic Development Steering Group hope to achieve via the Strategy's implementation. 

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Economic Development Strategy Consultation Plan

2.       Draft Economic Development Strategy Discussion Forum Feedback Summary

3.       Draft Economic Development Strategy Responses to Submissions

4.       Draft Economic Development Strategy

 

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

What are we trying to achieve?

We understand and manage the impact that the community has on the natural environment. We protect the environment now and in the future.

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

What will the result be?

·      Accessible and protected waterways, foreshores, beaches and bushlands.

·      Renewable energy options.

·      Clean waterways.

·      An environment that is protected and conserved for future generations.

·      Development outcomes that are ecologically sustainable and complement our natural environment.

·      Residents that are environmentally aware.

·      A community that is prepared for natural events and climate change.

 

How do we get there?

4.1     Protect and restore natural areas.

4.2     Ensure service infrastructure maximises efficiency and limits environmental impact.

4.3     Implement total water cycle management practices.

4.4     Continue to improve waste collection and recycling practices.

4.5     Provide community access and opportunities to enjoy our natural environment.

4.6     Create a culture that supports and invests in renewable energy.

4.7     Increase awareness of and plan for the preservation of local flora and fauna.

4.8     Plan and take action to minimise impact of natural events and climate change.

4.9     Manage development outcomes to minimise the impact on the natural environment.


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.01

 

Subject:     Notice of Motion - Walking Track - Jonathon Dixon Reserve to Middle Rock Road, Lake Cathie (PIN 43834)

 

 

 

Councillor Sargeant has given notice of his intention to move the following motion:

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council request that the General Manager report to the December Council meeting on the implications of extending the existing walking track from Jonathon Dixon Reserve to Middle Rock Road.

 

 

Comments by Councillor (if provided)

On 4 November, 2013, Councillors and staff met with members of the Lake Cathie Landcare Group to discuss the Group's interest in extending the length of the existing walking and maintenance track to Middle Rock Road. The residents in attendance at the on-site meeting indicated that they were prepared to undertake this work at their cost as a Landcare activity.  It is requested that the report include consideration of impacts relating to track maintenance, feral animal control (particularly deer) and also weed control. 

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.02

 

Subject:     Notice of Motion - Wall Reserve, North Haven (PIN 15194)

 

 

 

Councillor Sargeant has given notice of his intention to move the following motion:

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council investigate the options for facilitating the formation of a self-help entity, such as a LandCare Group, aimed at maintaining the current untended section of Wall Reserve, North Haven in accordance with Council’s standards and that a report be provided for consideration by Council at the February 2014 Council Meeting.

 

 

Comments by Councillor (if provided)

Council has previously resolved to maintain only some parts of the Wall Reserve and to leave the balance in its natural state.  Inspection has shown however that the non-maintained sections have become quite unsightly and not in the best interests of local amenity.  This Notice of Motion proposes an alternative means of achieving residents', Chamber of Commerce's and tourism industry's desire for a more appealing and visually attractive parkland without impacting on Council's resources, (the intent of the original resolution by Council ). Discussions with the Chamber and residents indicate that there would be a number of people, some experienced in these matters, who would be willing to contribute to the proposed self- help group.

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.03

 

Subject:     Recommended Item from Hastings LGA Floodplain Management Sub-Committee - Camden Haven River and Lake System Flood Study

Presented by:  Development & Environment, Matt Rogers

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

4.8.1  Carry out relevant studies to determine the likely extent of natural events and the impact of climate change, develop relevant mitigation strategies.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Camden Haven River and Lake System Flood Study (2013) be adopted.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Hastings LGA Floodplain Management Sub-Committee met on 15 August 2013, and reached consensus on Item 08 (attached) and now submits the above recommendation for Council consideration.

 

Discussion

 

Following the Hastings LGA Floodplain Management Sub-Committee met on 15 August 2013, minor amendments were undertaken to further clarify small misinterpretations identified by the Committee. This included a clear delineation of the location of the Logans Crossing Stream Gauge and the Logans Crossing Road Bridge.

 

In addition, a small adjustment to the Floodway, located on the northeast corner of the Dunbogan Bridge, was made due to the receipt of additional detailed survey data.

 

The amended Camden Haven and Lakes System Flood Study 2013 is attached.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Item 08 Hastings LGA Floodplain Management Sub-Committee 2013 08 15

2.       Camden Haven and Lakes System Flood Study 2013 [Final]

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.04

 

Subject:     Recommended Item from Hastings LGA Coast & Estuaries Sub-Committee - Lake Cathie Coastal Zone Management Plan

Presented by:  Development & Environment, Matt Rogers

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

4.8.1  Carry out relevant studies to determine the likely extent of natural events and the impact of climate change, develop relevant mitigation strategies.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1.       That Council adopt the Lake Cathie Coastal Zone Management Plan (2013).

2.       That landowner funding contributions to the revetment wall only be considered as a last resort option in the event that sufficient project funding is not available from NSW State and Federal Governments and Council.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Hastings LGA Coast & Estuaries Sub-Committee met on 1 November 2013, reached consensus on Item 07 (attached) and submits the above recommendation for Council consideration.

 

Discussion

 

The Hastings LGA Coast & Estuaries Sub-Committee met on 1 November 2013, reached consensus on Item 07 (attached). The  Sub-Committee submits the above recommendation for Council consideration.

 

The Sub-Committee also requested the report to Council on this matter include an analysis of the impact of increasing property values on Council’s general rate revenue as a result of the construction of a revetment. It had been suggested that any increase in rate revenue resulting from recovering of land values would be a sufficient contribution by landowners to the construction and maintenance of a revetment. Information about the impact of any increase in rate revenue needs to be considered in context with the cost of the revetment and its maintenance.

 

In addition, the Hastings LGA Coast & Estuaries Sub-Committee also noted the need to clarify the ability of Council to levy landowners for any contribution to the revetment.

 

Property Values and Rate Revenues

A basic analysis of the impact of revetment construction on rate revenues has been carried out. The following assumptions were made in relation to that analysis:

 

-     Analysis carried out in today’s dollars.

-     2006 land values were used to estimate the general rate revenue for 2013 (i.e. land values not impacted by the identification of coastal hazards).

-     Inclusion of rate increases since 2006.

-     No allowance for increase in property values between 2006 & 2013. This is considered a reasonable assumption given the state of the property market and the fact that no costs escalations have been taken into account for the revetment construction and maintenance.

 

 

The land values (for the purpose of rating) for properties affected by the immediate coastal hazard risk classification are as follows:

 

2006 average land value - $394,882

2009 & 2012 average land value - $363,824

 

The analysis revealed that had general rates been calculated on the basis of 2006 land valuations, that an additional total annual rate revenue of approximately $1,850 would be generated from all 19 properties affected by the immediate coastal hazard risk classification.

 

This additional revenue is not significant in the context of the $2.94million construction cost for a revetment and ongoing maintenance costs of $103,000 every 5 years.

 

Even if calculated over the 50 year design life of a revetment, additional rate revenues associated with recovering property values are not considered sufficient as a landowner contribution, should such a funding option be necessary.

 

Landowner Contributions

The report to the Committee provided a brief commentary on the Coastal Protection Service Charge, a method of levying landowners under the Local Government Act 1993 to enable funding of coastal protection works. This Charge relies on the joint provision of coastal protection works by landowners and the Council. Whilst not a viable proposition at the present time, it is possible that landowners and Council may agree to joint construction of coastal protection works in an environment where funding for such works is scarce and where predicted coastal recession continues to threaten Illaroo Road and residential properties.

 

In addition the above, the Council has the ability to levy residents for the cost of works and services under the Local Government Act 1993:

495   Making and levying of special rates

(1)  A council may make a special rate for or towards meeting the cost of any works, services, facilities or activities provided or undertaken, or proposed to be provided or undertaken, by the council within the whole or any part of the council’s area, other than domestic waste management services.

(2)  The special rate is to be levied on such rateable land in the council’s area as, in the council’s opinion:

(a)  benefits or will benefit from the works, services, facilities or activities, or

(b)  contributes or will contribute to the need for the works, services, facilities or activities, or

(c)  has or will have access to the works, services, facilities or activities.

 

Whilst there are certain procedures that are required for Council to proceed with such a levy (including consultation), applying this type of charge does not rely on coastal protection works being jointly provided by landowners and Council.

 

Both charging mechanisms are relevant to the consideration of this matter, notwithstanding the preferred funding option outlined in the draft CZMP and the recommendation from the Committee. The Guidelines for the Preparation of Coastal Zone Management Plans require Plans to outline funding arrangements and this is a matter that must be addressed to enable a CZMP to be certified by the Minister.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Item 07 Hastings LGA Coast & Estuaries Sub-Committee 1/11/13.

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.05

 

Subject:     Exhibtion of Koala Habitat and Vegetation Mapping

Presented by:  Development & Environment, Matt Rogers

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

4.7.1  Promote the conservation of key habitats.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Endorse the Koala Habitat and Vegetation Mapping Datasets.

2.       Endorse the process and methodology for revision of these datasets as outlined in the reports as tabled to Council at the 21 August 2013 Ordinary Meeting.

3.       Commence review of the vegetation map for specific issues and areas raised in submissions and amend the mapping where required.

4.       Consider allocating $55,000 funding in the 2014-15 budget to undertake koala habitat mapping refinement in rural areas west of the Pacific Highway.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the 21 August 2013 Council meeting, Council resolved as follows;

 

1.       Place the Vegetation Mapping and Koala Habitat and Population Assessment Reports for the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Government Area on public exhibition for a period of 6 weeks.

2.       Prepare Plain English summaries to support the exhibition.

3.       Hold a stakeholder information session during the exhibition period.

4.       Formally thank the NSW Koala Preservation Society for their contribution to the mapping work.

 

This report summarises the outcomes of the public exhibition period for these datasets and the submissions received.

 

Discussion

 

The vegetation mapping was undertaken in accordance with the NSW Draft Vegetation Standard 2009 which sets out field work and classification standards to derive a vegetation map. Mapping accuracies, in terms of mapping and classification accuracies, have been independently audited by Landmark P/L (independent ecological consultancy) and Council’s Ecologist.

The vegetation mapping is divided into two areas based on intensity of sampling and resultant accuracy. Areas identified for growth in the PMHC Urban Growth Management Strategy (UGMS area) have been mapped to an accuracy of 90% + 5% confidence intervals. The remaining rural areas have been mapped to an accuracy of 75% +5% confidence intervals. This level of accuracy has resulted in the vegetation mapping data being recognised as one of the most accurate board scale vegetation mapping data sets on the east coast of Australia.

Koala habitat mapping was undertaken based on systematic field sampling strategy using Spot Assessment Technique (SAT) methodology at 4000m, 2000m, 1000m and 500m (supplementary) intervals to gather data on koala presence/absence, food tree preferences, density and activity in all land tenures across the LGA. Collectively, 405 field sites were sampled comprising 354 primary and 51 supplementary field sites, the latter focused around areas of significant koala activity within the coastal portion of the LGA.

Data from 10,186 trees collected during the course of the field assessment were augmented by that from other local studies in order to investigate issues associated with utilisation of preferred koala food trees. Over 6,000 historic records were analysed to assess generational persistence (i.e. occupancy of an area over three koala generations; 18-20 years) of the local populations.

Koala field data sites were limited to public reserves in the Port Macquarie urban area due to practicalities of coordinating access to koala habitat in multiple private properties. Historical analysis of records has been used in these areas to overcome the limitations of the field sampling method. 

The vegetation mapping identifies endangered ecological communities under the NSW Threatened Species Act 1995 and the Federal Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

 

Options

 

Council has various options in relation to this matter. Options include any or a combination of the following:

 

-     Not endorsing the data sets

-     Examining alternative methodologies for revision of the data over time

-     Determining various levels of funding to support the refinement of the koala habitat mapping over time.

 

Given the level of investment made to date on the acquisition of this data and its importance from an operation and future planning perspective, it is considered that the recommendations in this report represent both a reasonable and appropriate response for Council’s consideration.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

A 6 week period from 9 September to 18 October 2013 was provided for the exhibition these datasets, with accompanying plain English summaries. During this period, three information sessions were held for stakeholders within governmental agencies, local industry and the general community.

 

The government agency information session was attended by Forest Corp, Northern River Catchment Management Authority, Office of Environment and Heritage (Private Native Forestry and Biodiversity Planning and Assessment) and Department of Primary Industries - Crown Lands Division.

 

The industry information session included the following participants:

 

Darkheart Eco-Consultancy

Port Macquarie Landcare

Koala Preservation Society

King and Campbell

Residents Action Network

Bonny Hills Progress Association

North Coast Environment Council

JKL consultants

Love Project Management

Vilro P/L represented by Jim Charley

St Vincents Foundation P/L

Sancrox Employment Lands; represented by James Dunn

Collins and Collins

Bolwarra Bushland Services

 

These stakeholders represent the local development industry, volunteer green groups, environmental NGOs, environmental consultancy industry, community advocacy groups and major landholders engaged with Council’s urban growth management strategy.

 

The community information session was publicised through Council’s rural notice boards, local papers, ABC radio, and in writing to all the progress associations. In addition, all landholders who provided their land for field data collection / verification, purposes were invited, representing 273 specific properties throughout the local government area. Twenty-three (23) people attended the community information session.

 

Eleven (11) formal submissions were received during the public exhibition period. The issues raised in these submission and staff /consultant responses are provided below.

 

 

Submission: Vegetation and Habitat Mapping

 

Issue

1.

Residents Action Group

 

In favour of Council adopting the datasets, expecting that this will strengthen Council’s resolve to proceed with the development of the long awaited Biodiversity Strategy and LGA-wide Koala Plan of Management.

 

Response/

Comment:

Noted. Use of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

 

Submission: Vegetation and Habitat Mapping

 

Issue

2.

Bonny Hills Progress Association

 

Urges council to endorse the datasets and encourages Council to proceed with the development of a Biodiversity Strategy and LGA-wide Koala Plan of Management.

 

Response/

Comment:

Noted. Use of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

 

Submission: PMHC Vegetation Community Mapping and Koala Habitat Mapping

Issue

 

 

3.

Darkheart Eco-Consulting

Strongly urge Council to adopt the information by;

1.   Adding the data to PMHC GIS

2.   Validated core koala habitat mapping to be added to the LEP. In the interim, consider the information as a ‘yardstick’ requesting specific survey to verify the mapping when a DA is lodged for the relevant land.

3.   Use this baseline data for preparation of a Key habitat and Corridors / Biodiversity Management Strategy similar to the Clarence Valley and Coffs City Council.

4.   Use this baseline data for the preparation of a Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management as an immediate priority.

Support the proposal for ongoing refinement of both datasets.

Suggest a simple means to download raw data and to upload data for review for both datasets

Establish a webpage allowing public and consultants to map the data over cadastral and LEP information  similarly to Coffs Harbour City Council.

Suggest further refinement of the koala habitat mapping focusing in the areas of coarser field sampling

Suggested reclassification of the ECC status of some vegetation communities  as tabled

 

Response/

Comment:

Data has been added to Council’s internal GIS.

Use of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

Upload and download options for data can be explored with users  upon endorsement of the datasets.

Support the need for ongoing refinements of both datasets as per recommendations 2 and 3 of this report.

The provision of online mapping to the community is currently in initial planning phase, however there are currently no timeframes set for the delivery of this service.

Refinements of both datasets are proposed as per recommendations 2,3 and 4 of this report.

Submission: Exhibition of Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping

Issue

 

4.

Tierney Property Services

Council should not adopt the dataset set, rather just remain as a source document for information only.

Suggested errors in vegetation and koala habitat mapping in the Area 14 precinct area

Where more detailed data exists such as Area 14 then this data have precedence over the mapping.

 

Response/

Comment:

Noted.

Vegetation Mapping differs to Area 14 as due to the differing vegetation classification systems used. Koala Habitat Mapping differs due to time and scale differences. However, where there are legitimate errors it is recommended that these be amended as per recommendation 2 and 3 of this report.

It is also noted that Area 14 and other areas already mastered planned (including Area 13 and 15) on a set of previous environmental data. Any future planning policy based on this data would have no significant implication for Area 14

 

Submission:  Vegetation and Koala Habitat Submission

Issue

5.

Bolwarra Environmental Services

Council is to be highly commended for initiating both datasets

 

Encourage Council to develop a Biodiversity Strategy to further build on these mapping outputs.

 

Differing scales of mapping and accuracy between the urban and rural areas of the LGA make it difficult to compare.

 

Noted some potential vegetation mapping amendments particularly along Ponsfords road ridge area.

 

Anomalies are noted between Comboyne Vegetation Mapping and the greater LGA Mapping.

 

Suggestion to include community surveys to gain more local knowledge of koalas in the western areas of the LGA.

 

Soil nutrient mapping was not present in the Koala Habitat report and should be.

Response/

Comment:

Council staff response.

Noted, however the use of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council

Differing  mapping accuracy and minimum mappable units between urban and rural areas of the LGA  were necessary to provide a cost effective dataset, tailoring accuracy with intended utility.

Individual threatened plants located along Ponsfords road can be added to Council roadside vegetation GIS data.

Future data and additional data sources can be assimilated into the dataset with proposed future revisions.

Response from Biolink P/L

 

(Vegetation Study refers): In the process of taking a LGA-wide approach to re-defining vegetation communities and the way they were named, the specific communities referred to in the submission were amalgamated into others.

 

(Koala Habitat Study refers): Analysis of historical records was undertaken to investigate broad trends in koala distribution and habitat occupancy rates across the PMHLGA as a whole (as opposed to specific areas such as the Comboyne Plateau) and to examine any changes over time frames of relevance to koala conservation and management. The inherent bias that comes in analysing these records was acknowledged on page 16 of the report and the means by which bias was reduced further detailed on page 18.

 

(Koala Habitat Study refers): The influence of soil landscape on palatability of koala food trees is discussed on page 40 of the study, while the method by which soil landscapes were partitioned for the purposes of informing the Koala Habitat Map is detailed on page 42. It is acknowledged that Volcanic soils were not included as a specific group in the two categories of “Medium to High” and “Low – Medium” respectively; notwithstanding the potential for overlap in such broad categorizations, volcanic soils were generally partitioned on the basis of whether they were represented as either residual or colluvial [slope induced erosion] landscapes respectively.

Submission:  A Preliminary Analysis of the Koala Habitat and Vegetation Mapping Reports - Prepared for PMHC by Biolink

Issue

 

6..

Charley Brothers P/L

Reports were verbose, confusing and difficult to read.

Funding bodies are unlikely to fund ongoing monitoring and survey for koala habitat management works

SAT methodology used is subject to criticism and does not provide a mechanism to determine koala population numbers or activity levels.

Anomalies have been identified between using spotlight surveys  and SAT methodology for Charley Bros Land. SAT method provides a population estimate 5-10 times higher that actual koala numbers on the Charley Land.

SAT methodology mapping in the western portion of the LGA has produced erroneous data, suggesting that the data has underestimated the distribution of koalas in the rural areas of the LGA.

SATs sites for State forest and National Parks missing in Appendix 1

Vegetation mapping is contrary of vegetation undertaken on Charley Land

Recommends the adoption of the dataset on the proviso further detailed mapping is incorporated into amending the maps.

Suggests using the Dique method for further koala habitat refinement.

 

Response/

Comment:

Council staff response.

 

Plain English summaries were provided for both reports during the exhibition period to assist with interpretation.

 

The NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) have verbally confirmed funding availability for ongoing refinement of Koala Habitat Assessments, this is consistent with precedents set for previous 2 years.

 

SAT methodology is recognised as the principle methodology to determine Koala Habitat in Australia. All recent Koala Plans of Management development by NSW Councils and adopted by the NSW Department of Planning use this methodology. The Federal Government mandate the use of SAT field data to determine koala Habitat, when assessing applications under the EPBC Act 1999.

 

Response from Biolink P/L

 

Points 1 – 6 on pages 4 – 5 of the submission the following responses are provided:

 

Point 1 – this comment misses the point of the SAT approach, which is to primarily to provide data on koala presence/absence, and (if koalas have used the site) tree species preference data. Use of an ancillary sampling technique such as a 25m fixed radius census and/or a 1ha line transect search for koalas is an entirely appropriate and scientifically sound means to gather additional information. 

 

Point 2 – the purpose of the grid at whatever scale is to ensure a uniform coverage of study sites and associated survey effort across a given area and to do so in such a way as to virtually eliminate any bias in terms of site selection. 

 

Point 3 – whether or not “activity” is the right word remains a matter of opinion that has no bearing on the outcomes of the study. 

 

Point 4 – this claim is not supported by my experience nor has any data been provided to support the claim in so far as it might apply to the moist forests of the east coast of Australia.

 

Point 5 – saturation spotlighting has already been demonstrated to be a less than effective technique for cencusing koalas because it consistently under-estimates density. This was most recently demonstrated in the case of the Oxley Highway deviation where SAT-based density data of 0.63 and 0.25 koalas ha-1 derived from the Lake Innes study undertaken for Charley Brothers some years previous were used to estimate the number of koalas likely to be present in the deviation footprint. The estimate (9 – 15 koalas) was subsequently validated by the number of koalas observed and captured during the course of the project.

 

Point 6 – this comment demonstrates a lack of understanding of the thin-plate splining technique used to model koala population boundaries. The splining technique is one of interpolation whereby information is also gathered by the specialist software program (ESRI’s Spatial Analyst extension) about activity scores in adjoining sites. In this way the modeling responds to activity gradients (i.e. the changes in activity between sites), rather than the precise value at a single point.

 

To Points 8 & 9 on page 7 of the submission I provide the following responses:

 

Preamble

Scratches on grey gums are made by a variety of species, including possums, gliders, koalas and goannas. Contrary to what is claimed in the submission the identification of koala scratch marks is not a straight forward exercise and indeed has been discounted by most – if not all – koala ecologists because of the uncertainty that exists. Moreover and contrary to the argument presented in the submission, grey gums do not completely decorticate on an annual basis, rather they shed in linear plates which further complicates scratch mark interpretation because some trees exhibit scratch marks which can be up to a decade old.

 

Points 8 – even if the modeling outcomes were disregarded, there can be no disputing the fact that only a small percentage of sites in the western areas of the LGA contained evidence of koalas.

 

- It is inappropriate to extrapolate the transect-derived density figure across unoccupied areas of habitat when they were only undertaken in areas that were occupied by koalas. 

 

- The different methods (i.e. SAT and Line transect) are employed so as to enable the very response the submission is concerned with i.e. a) a broad estimate across all habitat areas independently of the presence of koalas and b) a more refined estimate that relates entirely to occupied areas. Accordingly, fixed 25m radial searches are undertaken independently of the presence of koala activity, while line transects are only employed when evidence of koalas is recorded in a field site.

 

Point 9 – this is an oversimplification of impact that additionally fails to take into account the higher nutrient values and associated koala carrying capacities of the Innes Peninsula when compared to lower koala carrying capacity on lower nutrient soils elsewhere in the LGA. My response in terms of koala numbers (Point 5 above refers).

 

To Points 3 -20 on page 9 onwards I provide the following responses:

 

Point 3 – misses the objective about survey design/sampling intensity. Regardless, fact that only 10/72 unbiased primary field sites returned evidence of koalas and that the associated activity levels were also low is a standalone result.

 

Point 4 – there is no intent to compare results, report emphasizes reliance on primary field sites only and discounts others (for such things as density estimates) because they are inherently biased; they remain useful however for modeling koala activity.

 

Point 5 – earlier comments (see response to Point 8 above) refer.

 

Point 6 – is not about mapping core koala habitat but about informing occupancy and population estimates. Survey effort was more than adequate in terms of intent to provide tenure blind baseline data on koala distribution and abundance across PMHLGA.  

 

Point 7 – Appendix contains all primary field sites including those on National Park and State Forests; not included are supplementary sites – these can/will be added in the form of a modified Appendix.

 

Point 8 – results cannot be explained by survey bias. Yes – there have been koala sightings in State forests over years (Fig 2.1 of KHS refers) and no records were ignored. Study acknowledges (page 63) that 4km grid is too coarse to capture small populations (that was not the intent), but that does not detract from the value of the results in terms of informing occupancy considerations for each of the three land tenure.

 

Point 9 –no spotlighting surveys were undertaken (response to Point 5 on page 3 of this response refers).

 

Point 10 – this assertion demonstrates a lack of understanding of koala population dynamics and factors affecting long-term population viability.

 

Point 11 – intent is to increase probability of encountering a koala and so reduce central tendency measures around density estimate. Data only used to provide derive density estimates in occupied areas. There is no point in trying to count koalas and/or direct resources to do this in areas where there are no koalas.

 

 Point 12 – previous responses regarding survey methodology/design refer.

 

Point 13 – application of activity level thresholds has been (exquisite accuracy aside) to also include the 10% activity contour in areas where activity cells resulted from the modeling process, in which case if on low nutrient soils significant activity boundaries were identified, if on med –high nutrient soils – not so because higher activity level thresholds were also provided.

 

Point 14 – attached rebuttal to Woosnam Merchez et al refers – stratification can be undertaken post hoc.

 

Point 15 – nowhere in the study have koala scats been used to derive population estimates.

 

Point 16 – this is an example of selective referencing by the authors who in common with Woosnam Merchez deliberately choose to ignore the 3rd criteria for site selection, this being (and I quote) “… any other tree known or considered to be potentially important… or of interest for other assessment purposes” .

 

Point 17 – semantics

 

Point 18 – response to Point 5 on page 3 refers.

 

Point 19 – response to Point 6 on page 3 refers.

 

Point 20 – point of this is unclear; corresponding sites can be checked.

 

 

Submission:  LGA wide Koala Habitat Mapping and Vegetation Mapping

Issue

7.

Love Project Management

Request the Koala Habitat Mapping and Vegetation Mapping be adopted with the proviso that the data be updated on a regular basis as more detailed information is received.

 

Concern using SAT methodology to update the koala habitat mapping, request Dique methodology be used.

 

Koala Habitat mapping in the western areas of the LGA is too coarse. Request that the koala habitat data in the western areas be discounted until more detailed field work is conducted.

 

Response/

Comment:

Noted as per recommendation 2 and 3 of this report

 

SAT methodology is recognised as the principle methodology to determine Koala Habitat in Australia. All recent Koala Plans of Management development by NSW Councils and adopted by the NSW Department of Planning use this methodology. The Federal Government mandate the use of SAT field data to determine koala Habitat, when assessing applications under the EPBC Act 1999.

Noted as per recommendation 2 and 3 and 4 of this Council report.

Submission:  Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping    

Issue

 

8.

Sunniva  Bolton

Congratulate Council for proceeding with the provision of both datasets and recommends Council proceed with a Biodiversity Strategy and LGA-wide Koala Plan of Management.

Response/

Comment:

Noted, the use of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council

 

Submission:   Comments on the Port Macquarie -Hastings Koala Habitat and Population Assessment

Issue

9.

Forest Corporation NSW

Concerns with some misleading conclusions drawn from the data including

1.   Report significantly underestimates koala activity in forest west of the Pacific Highway due to data limitations, particularly in the Cairncross State forest

2.   Statements that the local koala populations have occurred in Wauchope, Bago and Laurieton are not supported by contemporary records

3.   One estimate of the size of the koala population in the council area in the report is deduced from an observation of a single animal

4.   Statement that adverse cumulative impacts on logging are not supported.

5.   Development and implementation of a Koala Plan of Management should utlise but not rely on the current data.

Response/

Comment:

Comments from council staff

State forest data to be incorporated into koala habitat mapping as per recommendations 2 and 3 of this report.

These statements refer to small areas of koala habitat in the rural residential areas of King creek, West Rainbow Beach and Laurieton, in which the current data does indicate a local extinction of koalas. This seems to be linked to the increase in domestic dog populations and urban expansion, rather than any logging operations.

Population estimate is based on the all contemporaneous records and estimates of carrying capacity on the various landscapes in which koalas were found.

Noted, the set of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

Comments from Biolink P/L

 

The submission from Forests Corp raises a number of issues that primarily relate to interests in timber harvesting more than they do koala conservation. I reiterate that the coarseness of the 4km survey grid is acknowledged in the report and is certainly

not capable of detecting small koala populations. Subject to the qualifications below I have noted that there is no dispute regarding the occupancy rate of habitat in State Forest areas. A 95% confidence interval for the 14% SF occupancy estimate is 8% -

20% of available habitat, a value that I do not consider unrealistic given that the intended purpose of these areas is timber harvesting. Unfortunately, the associate Tabs referred to in the correspondence in terms of further partitioning the koala

activity data are not defendable in a statistical sense and thus only serve to weaken the underlying argument by broadening the associated confidence intervals to an extent where they become meaningless.

 

That there has been a decline in the habitat occupancy rate and the general abundance of koalas in State Forests can also be indirectly implied through records of the Koala Preservation Society to which end they have not had a koala admitted to the Hospital from a State Forest for at least the past 5 – 8 years. This observation aside and in the interests of time I am unable to respond in more detail to various issues that have been raised in the Forests Corp submission, save to say that many of the responses I have provided above will be of some relevance. I would also advise that I have held several positive discussions with forestry officers regarding outcomes from the Port Macquarie Koala Habitat Study. I hope that these discussions continue and that we continue to work positively towards more sustainable management of koalas in such areas.

Submission:  Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping

Issue

10.

Simone Lake

Support of the mapping reports and that they are included in future planning and development policies

 

Concern over the recent loss of koala habitat in the Ruins Way / Lake Innes locality.

 

Response/

Comment:

Noted.

Use of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

Recent loss of Koala habitat in the Ruins way area has been undertaken under approved Koala Plans of Management and Council conditions which require offset plantings where habitat loss cannot be avoided. Much of this planting is too occur in the next 2-3 months.

Submission:  Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping for the Port Macquarie Hastings Local Government Area.

Issue

11.

King and Campbell

Suggests the Vegetation mapping accuracy for the Urban Growth Management Strategy Area is below the stated 90% +- 5% confidence intervals as stated in the Council report 21 August 2013. Any accuracy statements should be qualified with the fact that vegetation mapping is dynamic.

 

Concern over the identification of Endangered Ecological Communities (EEC) as the vegetation mapping does not take into account edaphic [soils], structural and fluvial [influences from flooding and flowing water] characteristics for floodplain EEC. Submit that Council should not be designating EECs without firstly undertaking more detailed investigations.

 

Support the use of the data in developing a local biodiversity strategy and local offsets.

Questioned the use of this data for assessing DA’s

 

Question the use of this data to assist rural landholders biodiversity investment / funding opportunities as it is not core business of Council.

 

If data are used to develop a koala plan of management, then it should be prepared in the format that also recognises the importance of the Embracing Business Key Outcome of the Economic Development Strategy.

 

Specific concern that the adoption of  the  9% koala habitat contour  as default line to determine significant populations under the EPBC Act 1999 and or core koala habitat under SEPP-44,  is too conservative and should not occur as an interim measure to any policy development.

 

Vegetation mapping data is incompatible with AutoCad which is the main software used by the development industry. Council should provide more accessible mapping

 

Future policy development based on these data sets should include broad community presentation and have regard to other Council policies.

 

Submission provides site specific examples of differences to vegetation, including Sancrox Employment, Sanctuary Springs, Pacific Drive, PMHC Crematorium,  PMHC Airport Lands.

 

Should Council adopt the datasets for the purposes of policy development there should be clear direction for the purpose of that policy and board community development.

Response/

Comment:

The vegetation mapping report states on page 35 that “a  third verification run in July 2012 based on 72 randomly selected polygons indicated that the overall accuracy estimate of the reworked mapping within the UGMS area was within the required precision bounds (90.47 ± 4. 7%)”

 

Floodplain EECs determination has taken into account edaphic, structural and fluvial attributes, as the vegetation mapping was informed by peer reviewed soil landscape, Quaternary (last 2.5M years) floodplain soil mapping, slope and aspect. Each mapped vegetation community also as a set of floristics and vegetation structure that can be assessed against any scientific determination for EECs. Notwithstanding this, as per the Council report recommendations 2 and 3 there is a proposal for the vegetation mapping to be amended based on standard revision protocols as stated in the original data documents. This would include any assessment of EECs.

 

Noted, however, the of data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council

 

Accuracy of the vegetation mapping in the urban development area is confirmed at 90% ± 4. 7%. Furthermore the minimal mapping unit of vegetated areas in the growth area is 0.25ha (0.1ha for littoral rainforest). Applicants/landowners can submit data to amend the mapping based on the proposed standard protocol and any site specifics. These measures provide a robust dataset for development applications assessment.

Refuted, assisting local community to voluntary manage ecological assets is key in Environment Focus Area of Council’s Community Strategic Plan, and the Northern Rivers Catchment Action.

Noted, however, use of the data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

Noted, however, use of the data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

GIS data can be readily and easily imported into AutoCAD, a daily practice undertaken by Council staff. Suggest local firms undertake GIS / CAD integration training or invest in GIS software to be able to efficiently work with Council strategic planning data. Staff will continue to work with industry in this respect.

Noted, however, use of the data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

Sancrox Employment Lands EEC in question has actually been incorporated into a vegetation community that is not and EEC and it was below the minimum mappable unit. This mapping difference is actually in favour of the developer in this instance.

Mapping is based on 2009 aerial photography. Any vegetation cleared since then would not have been picked up as per the case in Sanctuary Springs.

The advice given by Peter Parker with reference to Pacific Drive, Shelly Beach, is incorrect as it fails to properly determine the vegetation type (lowland rainforest) based on the EPBC Act listing. Notwithstanding this error, Council Staff have approved the DA based on the correct vegetation on site as the  development footprint provided for the adequate conservation of this EEC. Advice to this effect was provided to King and Campbell upon DA approval.

The future development of the Crematorium as per the master plan has not been approved and thus will be subject to the environmental constraints that exist on the property and the relevant environmental legislation. This issue really relates to the fact that during the master planning of the crematorium, council failed to take into account of such environmental data. If these data was available to Council at the time of master planning, a more infirmed layout would have been made in the first instance, preventing the need for  possible revision. To this end this issue exemplifies the need for Council to endorse these datasets to ensure future strategic planning projects address all environmental legal obligations and constraints.

Council will need to make considerations to Koala habitat and EEC in relation to the future airport upgrades, regardless  of the data is endorsed or not. Both datasets will provide Council the means to negotiate environmental offsets for the airport upgrade with the state government which is an inevitable need.

Preliminary scoping work would suggest that Council has adequate land to offset vegetation and koala habitat loss if required for the Airport expansion.

Noted, however, use of the data for planning and policy development has yet to be considered by Council.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

These data will be critical to assist Council to meet its own statutory obligations associated with internal operations, planning and capital construction activities.  The data will make significant inroads in reducing corporate risk to future environmental litigation.

 

If Council chooses, these data will also provide the framework for evidence based planning and strategic assessment for future landuse and development decisions in the LGA. This is in-line with the current NSW Government planning reforms and best practice landuse planning.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Funding for the development of the datasets was provided through the 2010-11 and 2011-12 budgets. The cost of the community engagement process was met from normal operation budgets in 2013-14.

 

Any proposed vegetation mapping amendments noted in submissions could be reviewed by Council’s ecologist on a case by case basis within allocated operational budgets. Any future amendments to the vegetation map associated with landuse assessment can be reviewed by Council’s Ecologist upon receipt of standardised field datasheets by the proponent.

                              

Council may consider undertaking additional Koala habitat mapping to refine the coarser sampling in the rural areas. A 2km grid refinement survey and remodelling  is estimated to cost $80,000, of which Council’s Environmental Services 2014-15 budget could allocated $27,000 towards this cost. Additional funding may also be available through government grants. 

The issue of economic impact, among many other considerations, would be one that is relevant as part of any future policy development processes.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Residents Action Network- Vegetation and koala habitat mapping Submission.pdf

2.       Bonny Hills Progress Association - Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping submission

3.       Jason Berrigan. Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping Submission October 2013.pdf

4.       Tierny Property Services Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping.pdf

5.       Bolwarra Vegetation and Koala Habitat Mapping Submission.pdf

6.       Charley Brothers submission KPOM and Veg Oct 2013.pdf

7.       Love Project Management  Koalal Habitat and Vegetation Mapping submission.pdf

8.       S Bolton submission Vegetation and Koala Habitat.pdf

9.       Forest Corp Submission on Koala Habitat and Population Assessment.pdf

10.     Simone Lake - Vegetation & Koala Habitat Mapping Submission .PDF

11.     King and Campbell Vegetation and Koala Habitat mapping submission

12.     Woosnam-Merchez et al 2012 Paper

13.     Biolink response to Woosnam-Merchez et al Paper

14.     Biolink PL response to select submissions

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.06

 

Subject:     Question on Notice - Kew Waste Transfer Station (PIN 50972, 57445)

Presented by:  Development & Environment, Matt Rogers

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be noted.

 

 

Question from Councillor Griffiths

 

Can the General Manager provide an updated report on the Camden Haven Waste Transfer Station to the November 2013 Council Meeting to address concerns of residents regarding site selection:

 

1.       Detailed costing of each site clarifying rates and volumes including dumping levy.

2.       Advise noise, dust, security impact on each site.

3.       Frequency of crushing and mulching expected.

4.       Area and design of waste transfer station including sketch or photo of existing transfer station.

5.       Advise how transfer sites operate.

6.       Road entry options for sites, i.e. Ocean Drive, left in / left out.

7.       How the upgrade of the Dunbogan roadway through flood strategies would alter the cost at this location.

8.       Impact on site 2 Herons Creek Road due to wildlife corridor.

9.       Expected usage taking into consideration the location of sites and future waste transfer stations.

10.     Any other relevant information to inform the community.

11.     Further options for community consultation.

 

Comments by Councillor (if provided)

 

Residents have stated they were not informed of the waste transfer station site selection being presented to Council for adoption, therefore unable to present to Council various questions which they believe may have altered the resolution. 

 

Response

 

1.       At this point in time, detailed costings for each site are not available. The costings for the purpose of the site selection process are based on general site concept drawings with unit rates being drawn from Rawlinsons Construction Cost Guide (2013) and engineering experience with similar projects in the area. Refer to attached concept cost estimates. These estimates have been updated slightly to reflect confirmed waste levy costs and the double counting of sewerage options for the Taylor’s Quarry site.

 

The EPA have confirmed that only waste deposited in the last two (2) years (in this case approximately 3,350 tonnes) would be exempt from levy payments associated with the transfer of that waste to the Cairncross landfill. Taking into account this exemption and the recent increase in the levy, the estimated cost has increased to $1,362,900. The increase in the levy outweighs any exemption for waste and confirms this cost to be a significant factor.

 

2.       Minimal noise and dust would be expected from the operation of a waste transfer station and general operations would be the same no matter which site is selected. Activities expected to generate noise and dust include greenwaste mulching and concrete crushing. However, these activities will only occur relatively infrequently (refer to point 3 below).

 

Heavily trafficked areas on all sites including access roads are proposed to be sealed, thus reducing the potential for dust. Bulk waste bins are fitted with lids top prevent windblown litter and particulate matter. Experience with waste transfer stations at Port Macquarie and Wauchope demonstrates that noise and dust issues can be managed effectively.

 

Security would be expected to be similar for each site. Dunbogan currently has minor issues with the theft of non-ferrous metal. It is possible Herons Creek may experience similar thefts. However, both these sites have passive surveillance from existing roads. Security would be a more significant issue for the Taylors Quarry site given its isolated location and limited surveillance potential. Council has the option of providing security company surveillance of the waste transfer station (if necessary) as it does with many other Council operated utility sites.

 

3.       Concrete crushing is expected to take place once every one to two years, depending upon the volumes of material received (domestic quantities only). Similarly greenwaste mulching is expected to take place quarterly each year.

 

4.       The area proposed for the transfer station is approximately 1.4ha. Refer to attached concept design for the transfer station at Herons Creek Road. Each site would have a similar design footprint. However, the final layout and traffic configuration are subject to detailed design.

 

Attached are photos of the Wauchope (PMHC) and Bulahdelah  (Great Lakes) Waste Transfer Stations for context.

 

5.       Waste transfer stations operate generally as follows.

 

Customers deliver the waste to the transfer station where the waste is segregated, sorted and stockpiled in relevant areas, bins or containers. General solid waste is regularly transferred to Cairncross Landfill. Greenwaste and inert building materials (e.g. Concrete and brick etc) are stockpiled and then processed before removal from site. Other items such as scrap metals, e-waste (TVs etc), batteries, oils, mattresses, cardboard etc are stored in separate areas for removal from site and future reuse/recycling.

 

6.       For the Taylors Quarry site, a major intersection would be required on Ocean Drive to facilitate all turning movements in/out of the site. The existing Pacific Highway approach and departure lanes would impact the required intersection. Existing transition power lines are also likely to impact the intersection. It is likely the constrains would result in an intersection of significant cost. Design options for such an intersection have not been pursued given the other more favorable site options available

 

For the Herons Creek Road and Dunbogan sites, only minor intersection adjustments would be required to facilitate all standard traffic movements.

 

7.       No allowance has been included in the costs for the upgrade to the “Tip road” in the Dunbogan Transfer Station option. Tip road upgrading has been identified through the Camden Haven Floodplain Management Plan 2004 as a flood event evacuation response and is funded separately.

 

8.       The impact to flora and fauna will be assessed in detail and documented in a Statement of Environmental Effects as part of the planning requirements for the site. However, a preliminary assessment has been undertaken by Council’s ecologist and it is considered unlikely that significant  flora and fauna issues will be encountered. While the site has not been formally recognised as a habitat corridor of significance, this issue would be taken into consideration as part of the design and approval process when an appropriate level of detail is available.

 

9.       It is expected that the Kew Transfer Station will serve the southern portion of the local government area which includes, North Haven, Laurieton, Dunbogan, Kew, Kendall and surrounding rural areas. The Council’s broader strategy for the provision of local waste transfer stations includes a future facility to service the Lake Cathie/Bonny Hills growth area (Area 14). This facility would be constructed when sufficient residential development generates a demand for the service in that local area.

 

10.     The fact sheet which outlines a summary of each site is attached. This information was exhibited during the site selection process. Further information on the waste transfer station on the Heron’s Creek Road site will be available to the community when a detailed design is complete and a development application is publically exhibited.

 

11.     The community will have further opportunity to review the detailed design through the development application exhibition process. It is proposed that residents in the vicinity of the Heron’s Creek Road site and those who made submissions to the site selection process be formally invited to comment on the development application and that the application will be advertised publically to enable community representations to be made.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Cost Estimate - Site 1 - Taylors Quarry

2.       Cost Estimate - Site 2 - Herons Creek Road

3.       Cost Estimate - Site 3 - Dunbogan

4.       Kew Transfer Fact Page

5.       Kew WMF - CONCEPT PLAN - SITE 2

6.       Bulahdelah Waste Transfer Station

7.       Wauchope Transfer Station

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.07

 

Subject:     New Planning Bill

Presented by:  Development & Environment, Matt Rogers

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

4.9.1  Strategically and financially plan for the infrastructure that will cater for population growth.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Proceed with the Draft Major Roads and Open Space Contributions Plans.

2.       Make representations to the Minister for Planning & Infrastructure regarding Council's ability to negotiate planning agreements on appropriate infrastructure to cater for the growth in the local government area.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The new Planning Bill has recently been introduced to the NSW Parliament. The Bill clarifies some aspects of how development contributions will be administered under the new legislation. While some aspects of the proposed legislation have been improved since the initial exposure draft, Council should take steps to ensure an orderly transition to the new legislation.

 

Discussion

 

The new Planning Bill will restrict Council’s ability to levy local infrastructure contributions to :

(a) local roads,

(b) local drainage works,

(c) open space,

(d) community facilities

 

A significant exclusion is carparking which is essential for town centres where the lack of ability to provide a contribution may lead to the refusal of development or limit Council’s ability to recover the cost of parking infrastructure.

 

The new legislation does however provide for 3 years for Council to finalise existing draft contributions plans. Council previously resolved on 5 November 2007 to exhibit draft contributions plans for Major Roads and Open Space. Due to subsequent announcements on government review of contributions guidelines and then the new legislation, the draft plans have been constantly deferred. The provisions of the new legislation provide an opportunity for Council to continue with the draft plans which may allow a simpler transition to the new legislation while also providing updated plans in a more timely manner.

 

The draft plans will still need to include current costings. The Roads Plan should also incorporate the revised apportionments from a fresh Local Government  Area Traffic Study as resolved by Council on 16 October 2013. The Open Space Plan should also reflect the findings of the Open Space and Recreation Needs study currently underway.

 

Under the new legislation Council will be effectively restricted to negotiating planning agreements on the local infrastructure noted above unless Minister has issued a Ministerial Planning Order. Whilst it may be possible to obtain such an order after the commencement of the new legislation, significant uncertainty surrounds Council’s ability to commence negotiations on a range of issues for which Council has previously entered into planning agreements.

 

As a minimum the following infrastructure should be included in the ability to Negotiate Planning Agreements:

 

·    Local Infrastructure listed above

·    Pedestrian Paths and Facilities

·    Bicycle Paths and Facilities

·    Traffic Facilities

·    Car Parking Facilities

·    Town Centre Improvements

·    Streetscape works

 

Options

 

Council has the option of waiting until the commencement of the new legislation to commence updates to contributions plans.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Community engagement will be undertaken in relation to draft contributions plans including public exhibition as required by legislation.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

The proposal to continue with the draft Major Roads and Open Space Contributions Plans may provide a simpler method to the updating of the existing contributions plans given the changes in planning legislation. However, Council will still have the option to prepare plans under the new legislation.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

Up to date contributions plans are necessary to ensure appropriate levels of funding for infrastructure to serve population growth.

 

In relation to Planning Agreements, if Council’s ability to negotiate on a range of appropriate infrastructure and material public benefit is removed this may  impact on the viability and the certainty needed for development to proceed.

 

 

Attachments

 

Nil

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.08

 

Subject:     DA 2013 - 0286 - Earthworks Associated With Recreation Area Lot 16 DP 1122022, 79 Ocean Drive, Port Macquarie (PIN 55276)

Report Author: Matt Rogers

 

 

 

Property:                 Lot 16 DP 1122022, 79 Ocean Drive, Port Macquarie

Applicant:               Port Macquarie Hastings Council

Owner:                    Port Macquarie Hastings Council

Application Date:   13 June 2013

Estimated Cost:     $43,000

Location:                 Port Macquarie

File no:                    DA 2013 - 0286

Parcel no:               55276

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.9.2  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2013/286 regarding earthworks associated with a recreation area at Lot 16, DP 1122022, No. 79 Ocean Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

This report considers a Development Application for earthworks associated with a recreation area at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Subsequent to exhibition of the application, one (1) submission was received.

 

Being a Council application on Council land, the proposal is subject to Council’s Conflict of Interest Policy and needs to be determined by Council.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 2.245ha.

 

The site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation and SP2 Sewerage System in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://hq-dekho-pr1:8080/Dekho/dekhoproxy?urlparam=proxy_url_start%5bpnturl5251_C0A8C986:0141760CCEB5:6ED3:0DD9C396%5dproxy_url_end&sessionid=C0A8C986:0141760CCEB5:6ED3:0DD9C396

 

It should be noted that the majority of work will occur within the RE1 zone.

 

The site of the proposed filling is predominately cleared grassland, while the drainage line to be cleaned comprises sections of a reed based channel.

 

Adjoining the property to the north is a child care centre, while to the south is Council’s existing reclaimed water treatment building. West of the site is a residential area, while to the east is Ocean Drive road reserve (approx 30m wide) and then further residential development.

 

The existing subdivision pattern and location of development within the immediate locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://hq-dekho-pr1:8080/Dekho/dekhoproxy?urlparam=proxy_url_start%5bpnturl401_C0A8C986:0141760CCEB5:6ED3:0DD9C396%5dproxy_url_end&sessionid=C0A8C986:0141760CCEB5:6ED3:0DD9C396

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the application proposal include the following:

 

·    The property was identified by Council in 2012 as a potential site to be used as an Environment and Creativity Centre; consisting of community gardens, Landcare nursery, a creativity centre for local art and craft and a children’s playground. Preliminary studies were carried out and deemed the site to not be viable at present due to costs associated with constructing the building, upgrading infrastructure and dealing with flooding.

·    The General Manager has requested that development consent be sought to allow excess fill from other Council works to be placed onsite. This will allow Council to not only deal with the disposal of excess soil from other projects but also improve the flood free nature of the subject site. In addition to the excess fill being deposited on-site, the other aspect of the application is to allow Council machinery to be used to clean out the channel when not in use elsewhere. The overall outcome will be a more useable flood free public recreational area constructed at low cost to the Council and community.

·    The application relies on previous flood and flora & fauna studies completed onsite as part of the Environment and Creativity Centre.

·    The fill area will be 1500m² and compacted to a level of approx 2m above existing ground level or 4.8m AHD so as to not affect flooding or create impacts on the drainage channel. The fill will be shaped as per Figure D of the Environment and Creativity Centre Flood Study.

·    3737m³ of fill is required to construct the flood free recreation area.

·    1670m³ of fill material will be excavated out of the drainage channel and the remaining 2067m³ will be sourced from other Council projects.

·    It is estimated that a truck will carry approx 4m³ and that approx 517 truck movements will be required to transport the 2067m³ fill to the site. Trucks will enter the site via Ocean Drive and the Burgess Close intersection.

·    A water cart will be onsite at all times to manage dust.

·    Hours of operation would be 7am to 5pm, Monday to Friday and between 7am to 3pm Saturday.

·    Erosion and sediment controls will be utilised during filling with the mound to be compacted and vegetated at the end of the project.

·    The application was treated as integrated development requiring approval from the Office of Water under the Water Management Act 2000. The Office of Water advised that the works were exempt from requiring an approval under Clause 38 of the Water Management (General) Regulation 2011.

·    The application was referred to the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) as access to the site is proposed via Ocean Drive being a classified road.

 

Being a Council application on Council land, the proposal is subject to Council’s Conflict of Interest Policy and needs to be determined by Council, following consideration of the application by the Development Assessment Panel.

 

A copy of the report considered by the Development Assessment Panel on 9 October 2013, is provided in the attachments. Based on the report and Council’s Conflict of Interest Policy requiring the application be determined by Council, the Development Assessment Panel resolved the following:

 

That it be recommended to Council that DA 2013/286 regarding earthworks associated with a recreation area at Lot 16, DP 1122022, No. 79 Ocean Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting of consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Attachments

 

1.       DA2013 - 0286 DAP Report 9 October 2013

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.09

 

Subject:     DA2013 - 0349 - Alterations and Additions to 3 Storey Dwelling-House Including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 - Lot 3 DP 236279, 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie (PIN 13336)

Report Author: Matt Rogers

 

 

 

Property:                 Lot 3 DP 236279, 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie

Applicant:               BJ & BJ Kemmett CARE King and Campbell

Owner:                    BJ & BJ Kemmett

Application Date:   27 June 2013

Estimated Cost:     $185,000

Location:                 Port Macquarie

File no:                    DA2013 - 0349

Parcel no:               13336

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.9.2  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2013 - 0349 for alterations and additions to a 3 storey dwelling-house, including clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (height of buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, at Lot 3, DP 236279, No. 105 Matthew Flinders Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

This report considers a Development Application for alterations and additions to a 3 storey dwelling-house including a clause 4.6 variation to Clause 4.3 (height of building) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at the subject site.

 

This matter was reported to an Ordinary meeting of Council on 16 October 2013. Council resolved:

 

‘That the application be deferred so as to provide an opportunity for the plans to be amended to enable the existing building height to be maintained’.

 

 

 

The Applicant has subsequently lodged amended plans in response to the Council resolution. The amendments reduce the roofline of the proposed alterations to maintain the existing building height.

 

As previously reported, this report to Council is required due to the Clause 4.6 variation being greater than 10% variation to the height standard in the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP). The amendments to the roof design have resulted in a reduction of roof height for the sections of the roof above the existing roof line by 630mm. A detailed assessment, as reported to  Council’s Development Assessment Panel on 25 September 2013 is provided as an attachment.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

The site has an area of 809.4m2.

 

The site is zoned R1 General Residential in accordance with the LEP, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://hq-dekho-pr1:8080/Dekho/dekhoproxy?urlparam=proxy_url_start%5bpnturl9716_C0A8C986:01412DCC531A:D3BA:28F8C2A6%5dproxy_url_end&sessionid=C0A8C986:01412DCC531A:D3BA:28F8C2A6

 

The site is currently occupied by an existing 3 storey dwelling-house with the top floor level setback from the front and eastern sides of the building.

 

The site has a primary frontage to Matthew Flinders Drive and secondary rear frontage to Watonga Street.

 

The site has a moderate fall from west to east towards Matthew Flinders Drive.

 

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the immediate locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://hq-dekho-pr1:8080/Dekho/dekhoproxy?urlparam=proxy_url_start%5bpnturl5925_C0A8C986:01412DCC531A:D3BA:28F8C2A6%5dproxy_url_end&sessionid=C0A8C986:01412DCC531A:D3BA:28F8C2A6

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the application proposal include the following (as amended):

 

Ground floor (garage level)

·    Extension of the southern garage’s eastern walls to provide an additional 10m2 of garage area.

·    Inclusion of columns adjacent the existing entry door to accommodate alterations on upper floors.

 

First floor

·    Conversion of the existing kitchen to a wet bar.

·    Inclusion of a new wall opening.

 

Second floor

·    Expansion of the gross floor area to include relocation of the living/dining area to this level and expand the floor space including addition of a multipurpose room.

·    New bedroom and sitting area within north-western corner, new master bedroom and expansion of outdoor terrace area.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report including new amended plans.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    10 to 24 July 2013 - Neighbour notification (original proposal)

·    26 July 2013 - Additional information requested - initial concerns with building height

·    1 August 2013 - Meeting with applicant and follow up additional information requested to address submission issues and clarified assessment concerns.

·    13 August 2013 - Additional information received.

·    23 August to 6 September 2013 - Neighbour notification of amended plans.

·    9 September 2013 - Summary of submission issues forwarded to Applicant.

·    11 September 2013 - Additional information received.

·    29 September 2013 - Report to Council’s Development Assessment Panel.

·    16 October 2013 - Report to Ordinary meeting of Council

·    25 October 2013 - Amended plans submitted.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       DA2013 - 0349 Plans

2.       DA2013 - 0349 Council Report 16 October 2013

3.       DA2013 - 0349 Additional Info Cover Letter

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.10

 

Subject:     DA2013 - 0481 Alterations and Additions to Two Storey Dwelling House and Construction of a Detached Shed Including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 - Lot 5 DP 22158, 23 Orr Street, Port Macquarie (PIN 15827)

Report Author: Matt Rogers

 

 

 

Property:                 Lot 5 DP 22158, 23 Orr Street, Port Macquarie

Applicant:               G J Wiggins

Owner:                    G J Wiggins

Application Date:   27 August 2013

Estimated Cost:     $45,840

Location:                 Port Macquarie

File no:                    DA2013 - 0481

Parcel no:               15827

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.9.2  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2013 - 481 for a alterations and additions to a two storey dwelling house and construction of a detached shed, including clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (height of buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 5, DP 22158, No. 23 Orr Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions. 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a Development Application for alterations and additions to an existing dwelling and construction of a detached shed at the subject site. The application includes a Clause 4.6 variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP).

 

This report provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Subsequent to exhibition of the application, 1 submission was received.

 

The matter was reported to Council’s Development Assessment Panel on 23 October 2013 for prior consideration. The following resolution was made:

 

That it be a recommendation to Council that DA 2013-481 for a alterations and additions to a two storey dwelling house and construction of a detached shed, including clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (height of buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 5, DP 22158, No. 23 Orr Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

It was also noted at the DAP meeting, due to confirmation of site levels, that the variation to the height limit was amended to be 1m over the 8.5m height limit at the uppermost point of the building. Given the existing levels on site and minor nature of the works relative to the existing building, the findings of the original assessment are not considered to be compromised by the height clarification. The variation is considered to be justified in this instance.

 

This report to Council is required due to the Clause 4.6 variation representing more than a 10% variation to the height standard contained in the LEP. A detailed assessment, as reported to Council’s Development Assessment Panel on 23 October 2013, is provided as an attachment.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 1042m2

 

The site is zoned R1 General Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://hq-dekho-pr1:8080/Dekho/dekhoproxy?urlparam=proxy_url_start%5bpnturl3271_C0A8C986:0141EDA213DC:65F8:73D1B1AC%5dproxy_url_end&sessionid=C0A8C986:0141EDA213DC:65F8:73D1B1AC

 

The site is currently has a two storey dwelling on the site with a single storey elevation to Orr Street and two storey to the rear.

 

The site has a fall of approximately 8 metres from front to rear (South to North).

 

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the immediate locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://hq-dekho-pr1:8080/Dekho/dekhoproxy?urlparam=proxy_url_start%5bpnturl3789_C0A8C986:0141EDA213DC:65F8:73D1B1AC%5dproxy_url_end&sessionid=C0A8C986:0141EDA213DC:65F8:73D1B1AC

 

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the application proposal include the following:

 

·    Extension of first floor deck to the rear (including roof over).

·    Construction of detached shed.

·    Extension of hard stand/driveway area.

·    Additional window opening and internal alterations.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    11 - 25 September 2013 - Neighbour notification

·    6 September 2013 - Request for additional information - Clause 4.6 variation, reduced driveway width, levels and balcony compliance.

·    17 September 2013 - Request additional information relating to stormwater drainage.

·    23 October - Report to Council’s Development Assessment Panel.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       DA2013 - 0481 DAP Report 23 October 2013

 


AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

Description: Governance Strap.jpg                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          11.11

 

Subject:     T-13-25 Kew Waste Management Facility Design and Documentation (PIN 50972-57445)

Presented by:  Development & Environment, Matt Rogers

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

4.4.1  Reduce waste to landfill, utilising appropriate education, facilities and strategies.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Accept the lump sum tender of $235,173.00 (excl. GST) received from Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd for Design and Documentation of Kew Waste Management Facility.

2.       Affix the seal of Council to the necessary documents.

1.          

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the results of the recent tender for the Design and Documentation of Kew Waste Management Facility, and to recommend Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd as the successful tenderer to be engaged by Council on the project.

 

Discussion

 

Current volume calculations indicate the Dunbogan Waste Landfill has approximately 18 months of remaining life. The development of a new Waste Transfer Station (WTS) to serve the Camden Haven and southern areas of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council (PMHC) Local Government Area (LGA) will allow the existing Dunbogan Waste Landfill to close in line with EPA timelines.

An investigation of three (3) sites for the Kew Waste Transfer Station was undertaken with a concept design and concept cost estimate developed for each site. Site 2 (Herons Creek Road, 1.4km north of Kew) was identified as the preferred site for the proposed Waste Transfer Station.

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 21 August 2013 Council resolved;

 

That Council adopt the Herons Creek Road site (Site 2) for the location of the Kew Waste Transfer Station.

 

A Tender for the Design and Documentation of the facility was advertised on 27 August 2013, and closed on Thursday 26 September 2013. During the tender period sixty five (65) individual organisations downloaded the tender documents from the Council’s tendering website.

 

At the time of closing, seven (7) tender submissions were received from the following

organisations (listed in alphabetical order):

 

-     Alan Taylor & Associates;

-     Brewster Murray;

-     Enstruct;

-     Hyder Consulting;

-     King & Campbell;

-     SMEC;

-     Style Developments.

2.             

A Tender Evaluation Panel was formed consisting of:

 

-     Environmental Projects Officer;

-     Waste & Environmental Engineer;

-     Consulting Environmental Engineer

 

All Panel members signed tender confidentiality and conflict of interest declarations. One panel member (Consulting Environmental Engineer) previously provided consulting services to one of the tenderers and made a Non-Pecuniary (less than significant interest) declaration. The declaration was considered and the Panel formed the view that it did not present a probity risk to the evaluation of tenders.

 

The first evaluation meeting was held on 4th October 2013 and an initial compliance check was conducted to identify submissions that were non-conforming with the immediate requirements of the Request for Tender (RFT).  This included compliance with contractual requirements and provision of requested information.

 

Following this preliminary assessment, several clarifications were sought from the tenderers. On the basis of the tenders and clarifications received, the qualitative criteria assessment was carried out individually by the Evaluation Panel Members in the days following, with Panel Members scoring the tenders in accordance with the assessment criteria.

 

Having requested and received clarifications, a second evaluation meeting was held on 31st October 2013.  At this meeting the individual scores were combined and summarised to demonstrate a ranking for priced and non- priced criteria. 

 

The criteria which tender submissions were evaluated are;

 

·   Value for money;

·   Proposed methodology and demonstrated understanding of the project and services to be provided, including indicative timing required for delivery of the project as outlined in this Tender Agreement;

·   Demonstrated relevant experience and performance on similar projects as provided for in this Tender Agreement (including provision of reference projects and referees);

·   Demonstrated qualifications, experience and competency of the personnel to be appointed to the project as provided for in this Tender Agreement

 

The weighting of the above criteria was not disclosed to any tenderer.

 

Please refer to the confidential spreadsheet titled “T-13-25 Evaluation & Pricing Analysis” which details the final evaluation scores for the tenders as determined by the Evaluation Panel and lists the tender prices offered by each of the tenderers. This analysis contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.  Local Government Act 1993 – Section 10A(2(c).

 

Based on this process, the Panel determined that the tender received from Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd represented the most advantageous for Council in consideration of the assessment criteria above. In particular the Panel noted that the submission from Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd provided:

 

·   a detailed and comprehensive methodology which demonstrated a thorough understanding of the brief, in particular the requirements for documenting environmental and planning assessments;

·   highly experienced personnel with significant experience in the type and scope of works required including experience with numerous Transfer Station and Resource Recovery development projects;

·   a multi-disciplinary team covering all aspects including planning, civil, structural, environmental, geotechnical and servicing aspects of the design;

·   a high quality of reporting and documentation necessary to convey and explain the project clearly to the community;

·   a fee proposal that was in line with the expected cost for this type of project.

 

Options

 

Council has the option of accepting the tender submitted by Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd, or not accepting same, in which case Council would be required to re-tender for this work.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

The proposed Kew Waste Transfer Station site options were placed on public exhibition from 3 June 2013 to 5 July 2013. A total of 38 submissions were received.

Council adopted the Herons Creek Road site for the Kew Waste Transfer Station at its Ordinary Meeting on 21 August 2013.

 

Council provided further information to local residents via written correspondence after the site selection was made. Further information was requested at the October 2013 Council Meeting and a Question on Notice report outlining further clarifications is separately presented to this Council Meeting.

 

In assessing this tender, consultation has taken place with the:

 

-     Environmental Projects Officer;

-     Waste & Environmental Engineer;

-     Consulting Environmental Engineer;

-     Group Manager Environmental Services

-     Director Development and Environment

-     Procurement Coordinator

 

The tender has been conducted in accordance with Section 55 of the Local Government Act 1993 and Part 7 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

The development of the Kew Waste Transfer Station to serve the Camden Haven and southern areas of the PMHC LGA was identified in the Hastings Waste Management Strategy (1999) and was further supported by the 2011-2015 Waste and Resource Management Strategy (2011).

In addition, the remaining capacity at the Dunbogan Waste Landfill is limited and the design and future construction of this site will allow the existing Dunbogan Waste Landfill to close in line with EPA timelines.

The site’s development is an essential element in PMHC’s overall waste service in the southern part of the LGA.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

The development of the project brief and the tender assessment process have been undertaken in the context of over-arching principles of best value service delivery, which include quality and cost standards, responsiveness to community needs, accessibility and continuous improvement.

Allocations exist in the 2013-14 budget to undertake the design and construction of the new Kew Waste Transfer Station facility.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       T-13-25 Evaluation & Pricing Analysis  (Confidential)

 

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpg

AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

What are we trying to achieve?

Our population growth is supported through public infrastructure, land use and development strategies that create a connected, sustainable and accessible community.

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 


What will the result be?

 

·         Supported and integrated communities.

·         Infrastructure provision and maintenance that respects community expectations and needs.

·         A natural environment that can be accessed by a network of footpaths, cycleways, coastal and hinterland walkways.

·         Accessible, convenient and affordable public transport.

·         Employment and population growth that is clustered within urban centres.

 

How do we get there?

 

5.1     Create and maintain integrated transport system that eases access between population centres and services.

5.2     Ensure transport options are safe, functional and meet access needs across the Local Government Area.

5.3     Develop and enhance quality open space and recreational facilities.

5.4     Plan settlements to accommodate a range of compatible land uses and projected population growth.


Description: Governance Strap.jpg

AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          12.01

 

Subject:     Wauchope Skate Park

Presented by:  Infrastructure & Asset Management, Jeffery Sharp

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

5.3.1  Plan, investigate, design and construct open spaces and recreational facilities.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopt Landrigan Park as the location for a new skate park at Wauchope and that concept plans for this facility be developed by 30 June 2014.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The aim of this project was to determine an appropriate and community acceptable location for a new skate park at Wauchope. The existing skate park in Wauchope is in poor condition and its location is within the alignment of a proposed heavy vehicle  bypass (from the railway to Cameron Street).

 

The Wauchope Urban Framework Plan 2009 had proposed a new skate park for Wauchope to be located in Bain Park. Although there was community support for the location, a number of groups were opposed to the skate park at that location.

 

Council has undertaken a community engagement process seeking wider community input on the preferred site for the skate park.

 

The project considered all Council parkland in the Wauchope town centre and involved:

discussion with community and school groups;

a publicly advertised open community workshop;

and a survey inviting participants to nominate a preferred skate park location.

 

Several parks were nominated by community members as possible locations for the new skate park. Council staff provided advice on each location regarding park management issues. The advantages and disadvantages of each location were compared and discussed with community members, and the community was asked to nominate their preferred location for the new skate park.

 

The results from the community have been collated and Landrigan Park is recommended in this report to Council as the proposed skate park location. 

 

Discussion

 

There is an existing skate park located at High Street, Wauchope (near the road/railway crossing). It is small, its facilities are in poor condition, and it has reached the end of its usable life. In addition, it is located within the footprint of the proposed realignment of the main road entry to Wauchope. Relocation of the skate park and provision of improved facilities was recognised in the Wauchope Urban Framework Plan that was adopted by Council in 2009. At the time, the Framework proposed the new skate park be located in Bain Park. 

 

Following this decision, some community members asked Council to consider alternative sites for the proposed facility. In particular Wauchope Community Progress Association was concerned about Bain Park as the location, due to possible noise impacts and disruption to other park users. They suggested Landrigan Park (north of the indoor stadium in Cameron Street) as an appropriate location.

 

A number of community members interested in pursuing the skate park project formed ‘Skatewauchope’ - a community group of parents and skaters keen to facilitate the development of the new skate park for Wauchope. The group undertook a community survey at the existing Wauchope skate park on 16 March 2013. The survey asked respondents where they would like to see a new skate park located. Over 150 survey responses were collected and the following sites for a new skate park were nominated (a map of Wauchope and the locations is attached for information):

·    Landrigan Park (adjacent to Andrews Park and the indoor stadium);

·    Bain Park;

·    Old Park (near the swimming pool);

·    Lasiandra Park (at the top end of Cameron Street); and

·    Fairmont Gardens (near the soccer fields).

·    Other respondents didn’t care where the new park was as long as it was close to the town centre.

 

Council then initiated a wider community engagement process to provide greater opportunity for community involvement in the decision of where the new skate park should be located, and to seek community support for a preferred site.

 

Monthly meetings were held with Council officers and Skatewauchope representatives and it was determined to hold an open community workshop in Wauchope at which residents could consider the various locations for the skate park, and decide their own preferred location.  In addition, direct consultation with school-aged residents was undertaken to involve as many potential users of the new skate park in the decision making process as possible.

 

As a tool for discussion, a location matrix was developed which compared the advantages and disadvantages of each suggested skate park location against key criteria (such as visibility, park size, site amenities etc.). Advice from Council Recreation & Buildings and Community Development staff regarding maintenance, access, existing facilities, and possible park management issues at each of the locations was incorporated into the location matrix. The location matrix is attached for information.

 

The location matrix was discussed at an open community workshop held 10 October 2013. The workshop was facilitated by Council staff and attended by 46 community members. Most attendees (50%) were over 45 years of age, with 24% of attendees below 15 years of age, and 6.5% between 16 and 19 years of age. The attendees predominantly identified as either interested residents (41%), or skaters/potential users (35%).

 

In addition to being a safe place, participants determined that the key elements of an ideal skate park location were that it needs to be:

·    Close to toilets;

·    Close to shops; and

·    Away from houses/schools/businesses.

 

The key concern of forum attendees regarding skate parks was noise.

 

The advantages and disadvantages of each suggested skate park location was discussed in groups among the workshop participants. Attendees were also provided opportunity to nominate alternative locations that they considered could be potentially suitable for the new skate park. No new locations were suggested. The results of the workshop discussions are outlined below.

 

Landrigan Park

Overwhelmingly, participants written comments about Landrigan Park as a skate park location were positive (87%), with 20% of Landrigan Park comments stating that it was an ‘ideal spot’. The key points were:

·        Close to toilets;

·        Close to shops;

·        Not too close to residents; and

·        Has good parking.

 

Although only small in number, there were also negative points raised regarding this location. The key negative points were that it was too small in size (3% of comments received on Landrigan Park) and that it was flood prone (also 3%).

 

Bain Park

Most of the written comments about Bain Park as a possible location were negative (87.5%). The key negative concerns were:

·          Too close to preschool/primary aged children (15% of comments received on Bain Park);

·           Too close to houses/residents;

·           It’s already an active park used by multiple groups - no room; and

·           Young children are in the Park - potential incompatibility issue.

 

The key positive comment about Bain Park as a location was that it was centrally located to shops/schools etc (7.5% of comments received on Bain Park).

 

Old Park

Seventy percent of comments written about Old Park were positive; with 6% of Old Park comments stating that it was a ‘good location’. The key points were:

·          Next to pool;

·          Close to tennis courts/pool/river;

·          Close to town; and

·          Close to high school.

 

The key negative concerns about Old Park were whether the expansion of the pool would be an issue (8% of comments received on Old Park), and that there were no toilets (6%) (However, toilets are available on the northern side of the swimming pool entrance).  Nearly 5% of comments received on Old Park stated: “leave it alone”.

 

Lasiandra Park

Comments received regarding Lasiandra Park were overwhelmingly negative (94%).

The key concerns were:

·          Too far out of town;

·          Too close to residents;

·          Too far away from shops; and

·          Too many retired residents and pensioners near the area.

 

Although only small in number, there were some positive comments received for Lasiandra Park. The key positive point was that it was accessible by pedestrians.

 

Fairmont Gardens

Almost all comments received on Fairmont Gardens as a possible skate park location

were negative, with only one positive comment received. The key negative points

raised were:

·   Too far from town;

·   Very close to houses; and

·   No shops close by.

 

Prior to leaving the workshop, each attendee completed a survey which asked them to prioritise their concerns and nominate their preferred skate park location. The survey is attached for information. The workshop attendees’ responses to the survey confirmed their ranking for the preferred skate park location as:

1.  Landrigan Park;

2.  Old Park;

3.  Bain Park;

4.  Lasiandra Park; and

5.  Fairmont Gardens.

 

The same survey was available online through Council’s “pmhc listening” webpage for residents who were unable to attend the workshop. Thirty-nine community members completed the online survey. The composition of the online respondents was predominantly older: 41% were over 45 years of age and 31% were between 35 and 45. No respondents were under 19 years of age.

 

The key priorities for a skate park as nominated by the online survey respondents were:

1.   A safe place;

2.   Close to amenities (toilets); and

3.   Close to town.

 

The online survey respondents’ preferred ranking of skate park locations is:

1.   Landrigan Park;

2.   Old Park;

3.   Bain Park;

4.   Fairmont Gardens; and

5.   Lasiandra Park.

 

The survey was also used in discussions with school students from Wauchope High School. Sixty-eight students all under 19 years of age (with 47% being under 15 years of age) completed the survey. Their key priorities for the students for a skate park location were:

·    Close to town;

·    Close to amenities (toilets); and

·    A safe place.

 

The preferred skate park locations as ranked by the high school students were:

1.   Old Park;

2.   Bain Park;

3.   Landrigan Park;

4.   Fairmont Gardens; and

5.   Lasiandra Park.

 

There were also hard-copy surveys completed by an additional 32 residents and students of Wauchope, who either submitted their completed survey at the Council’s Wauchope office or handed it directly to a Council officer following individual discussion about the skate park.  Of these additional survey respondents:

·    28% identified as a user or potential user of the skate park;

·    Four were under 10 years of age;

·    Nearly 41% of all of the respondents were 19 years of age or younger; and

·    Nearly 41% were over 45 years of age.

 

The preferred skate park ranking as selected by this group of survey respondents is:

1.   Landrigan Park;

2.   Old Park;

3.   Lasiandra Park;

4.   Fairmont Gardens; and

5.   Bain Park.

 

Collectively, 185 surveys were completed by community members. Considering the total number of survey respondents:

·    47% of respondents were 19 years of age or younger (with 2% aged 10 years or younger; 25% aged between 11 and 15; and 20% between 16 and 19 years); and

·    28% of all respondents were over 45 years of age.

 

Overall, the preferred ranking of possible locations for the new skate park is:

1.   Old Park;

2.   Landrigan Park;

3.   Bain Park;

4.   Fairmont Gardens; and

5.   Lasiandra Park.

 

The survey results indicate that preferences for Old Park and Landrigan Park are very close.  In general, younger people prefer Old Park as the new skate park location, while the most strongly preferred park among older residents is Landrigan Park.

 

In considering these top two preferred locations, additional matters have been taken into account. Each park fulfils the survey respondents’ key skate park location priorities - they are both safe places (that is, they are open spaces visible to the public); close to town; and close to amenities.  Therefore each park has been examined in more detail in relation to their available space, proximity to residents, and future development.

 

Ideally, the new skate park would be setback a minimum of 50m from the nearest residents (this is a desirable target, however, there is no legislated minimum setback); have approximately 400m2 of available space to construct the skate park (again, this is only a desirable target); and be compatible with any future proposals in the vicinity.

 

If the skate park were located at Old Park and set back 50m from the nearest residents, less than 300m2 of space would be available for the skate park. In addition, a large existing tree is growing within the 300m2 space and it removal would be required to accommodate the skatepark. The limited space available within Old Park is further compromised by possible future development proposals to extend the adjacent swimming pool. The proposed pool extensions will encroach further into Old Park and reduce the available area for a skate park, unless the skate park was constructed closer to residents than 50m.

 

At Landrigan Park, a minimum 50m setback from the nearest residents can easily be accommodated while providing approximately 800m2 of available space for a skate park to be located.

 

The development of the skate park at Landrigan Park would impact on existing use of this space by netball. There is adequate space available within Andrews Park to provide an additional turf netball court adjacent to the existing three courts to offset the loss of the Landrigan Park field.

 

Landrigan Park is therefore recommended is this report to Council as the proposed skate park location:

·    It is the second highest preferred location for the skate park (as indicated by overall resident survey responses). However, there was only a narrow margin between first and second preferences.

·    It has more available space to construct the skate park;

·    The skate park could be more than 50 metres from the nearest residents; and

 

Options

 

As mentioned above a number of sites were considered for the location of the new skate park:

·    Landrigan Park;

·    Bain Park;

·    Old Park;

·    Lasiandra Park; and

·    Fairmont Gardens.

 

Council can adopt the recommended location as included within this report. Alternatively, Council also has the option of selecting another site as the preferred location.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

The level of impact of the project is “Level 2 - High level of impact of a local nature, e.g. a local area, specific community”, as it has a high level of impact to the skating community and park user groups within Wauchope.

 

The level of community participation required for this project was to “Collaborate - To partner with the public in each aspect of the decision, including the development of alternatives and the identification of the preferred solution”.

 

A community engagement strategy was prepared for the project. The strategy is attached for information. The engagement process involved:

 

·    Monthly meetings with Skatewauchope representatives;

·    Interviews with Council staff;

·    Three sessions with Wauchope High School students (including focus group sessions);

·    Meeting with Wauchope’s Rotary Youth Group;

·    An open public workshop; and

·    Community survey (distributed at the workshop and community meetings, and available online).

·                      

Skatewauchope were an ‘advisory group’ throughout the engagement process. They were encouraged to participate in discussions and decision making as they were an interest group formed especially to progress the new skate park in Wauchope. Monthly meetings were held with Skatewauchope (and are ongoing) to discuss the project and to work toward the desired outcome of determining a suitable new location for a skate park; to ensure a community driven project supported and facilitated by Council to reach the desired outcome for the community.

 

Skatewauchope helped develop the location matrix used at the community workshop, and the survey that was distributed to the community and available online seeking preferences for a new park location.

 

The community workshop was held 10 October 2013 and aimed to provide individual members of Wauchope’s skating community with the opportunity to participate in the decision making process, as well as engaging wider community participation. An open invitation to the public to attend the workshop was advertised through Wauchope’s local newspaper, via Council’s website, an announcement at Wauchope High School assembly; and posters were placed around town. It was also advertised via connections with youth groups and Skatewauchope.  Additionally adjacent residents of all the sites to be considered at the community meeting were advised of the event via letterbox drop the week preceding the meeting.

 

Council staff (including Council’s Youth Development Officer, Group Manager Recreation and Buildings, Group Manager Community Development, and Landscape Architect) facilitated the ‘world cafe’ style workshop. 

 

At the workshop, groups of 5-10+ participants gathered around aerial images of each of the suggested skate park locations. Critical aspects of a successful skate park location were discussed, and then each of the nominated skate park locations was considered. The participants were invited to put forward their concerns and completed the survey nominating their preferred location for the skate park.

 

Two written submissions were received during the community engagement period for this project. These submissions are attached for information and are summarised in the table below:

 

Submission Wauchope Skatepark site selection

 

Issue

1.

LG & JA Brown

 

Concerns about litter and noise associated with skatepark facilities. Also concerned about anti-social behaviour associated with skateparks.

Suggested Cowarra Wheeled Precinct as a potential site.

Concerned about the loss of greenspace to concrete.

 

Response/

Comment:

Skateparks are significant community recreational facilities and there is broad community support for such a facility in Wauchope.

The loss of greenspace can be mitigated against by providing landscaping at the site.

This community engagement process has confirmed staff thinking that the siting of the skatepark needs to be close to the centre of town. On this basis Cowarra Wheeled Precinct is not considered to be a suitable site.

 

2.

Jack & Rosie Pike

 

Strong objection to construction of skatepark in Bain Park due to potential noise impacts, impacts of potential operating hours, lack of supervision, risk concerns, change in nature of park usage, concern about lack of visibility and perceived conflict with the donation of the land as public space.

 

Response/

Comment:

The provision of a skatepark within Bain Park is consistent with the Wauchope Framework Plan and Council’s obligations as trust managers for this crown reserve.

Supervision of skateparks is enhanced by collocating with other recreational infrastructure and by installing within vision of dwellings and businesses.

Facility design can be managed to control use outside of daylight hours.

It is acknowledged that provision of a skatepark within Bain Park will change  the nature of park usage, however as a recreational activity it is consistent with use of the playground, shared walkway/cycleway, and the turf space which is used for more active recreational activities.

 

 

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

The Wauchope Framework Plan, which was adopted by Council in 2009, includes reference to construction of a new skatepark in Bain Park. During the planning phase of the Wauchope All Abilities Playground it became apparent that there was some community concern about the development of a skatepark in Bain Park. As a result of this concern staff identified the need to more broadly consider the siting of a new skatepark for Wauchope.

 

If the recommended location is adopted by Council, the next phase of this project will be to prepare a concept design with costs and funding options to see the development of the park over the next few years as outlined in the current capital works program. The concept design would be prepared by a specialist skate park designer/s. This next phase of the project will continue to include community engagement.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

It is expected that the project to construct the new skate park would cost approximately $250,000.

 

An allocation of $122,507 for the upgrade of the Wauchope skate park is included in the draft Recreation & Buildings rolling works program for 2014/15. A pre-construction budget of $20,000 is included in the 2013/14 Operational Plan. To ensure a reasonable quality skate park it will be necessary to secure additional funding, possibly through grants and/or fundraising activities. Local community groups have indicated they intend to apply for a grant for the new skate park facilities.

 

 

Attachments

 

1.       Map of Wauchope - options for new Skate Park location

2.       Wauchope Skatepark Location Matrix

3.       Wauchope Skatepark Location Survey

4.       Wauchope Skatepark Community Engagement Strategy

5.       Wauchope Skatepark Submission LG JA Brown

6.       Wauchope Skatepark Submission Jack & Rosie Pike

7.       Wauchope Skatepark Survey Results

 


Description: Governance Strap.jpg

AGENDA                                                                                Ordinary Council

                                                                                                                      20/11/2013

 

 

Item:          12.02

 

Subject:     Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme Round 3 Applications

Presented by:  General Manager, Anthony Hayward

 

 

Alignment with Delivery Program

 

5.1.1  Plan, investigate, design and construct road and transport assets which include pedestrian, cyclist and vehicular needs.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.       Submit an application under Round 3 of the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme for construction of Hastings River Drive from Gordon Street to Aston Street at an estimated cost of $5,600,000.

2.       Write to the Minister for Local Government expressing concern over the program and the inability to deliver total outcomes if Councils are not in a position to borrow funds for a significant project even when a subsidy is provided for interest on any loan approved.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The State Government is currently providing a total of $100 million over six years for the implementation of the overall local infrastructure backlog policy, of which the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) is one component. Investment in infrastructure has the capacity to stimulate and enhance the productivity of the economy in both the short and long term. It is an investment that has a multiplier effect throughout the economy, generating lasting economic, social and environmental benefits.

Traditionally, the focus on infrastructure asset management was the provision of new assets such as roads, water and sewerage networks, airports and the like. However it is becoming more and more apparent, that it is no longer sustainable to focus on meeting infrastructure needs through investment in the creation of new assets alone, without recognising the long-term lifecycle costs associated with the ongoing operation, maintenance and renewal of existing assets. Many councils are struggling to keep up with maintenance and renewal of their assets to a level that is satisfactory to their community.

In recognising this increasing backlog in infrastructure renewal needs, the NSW Government has responded by committing significant funding to help councils meet the cost of borrowing to fund the required works. The Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) provides councils with a subsidy towards interest costs to make it affordable to take out major bank loans to fund their projects. This investment in debt funding has been proven to be far less expensive than paying for the long-term recurring maintenance requirements of deteriorating assets.

 

LIRS Round 3 applications will be called for in August 2013.

 

Council has previously successfully secured funding under this program for the upgrade of Stingray Creek Bridge. There was another project that also qualified for funding under Round 1 of this program - Hastings River Drive, however T-Corp recommended that Council only proceed with one project.

 

Discussion

 

Council Staff have identified two projects that would be greatly assisted by the awarding of LIRS grants being:

 

Upgrade of Hastings River Drive

 

The upgrade of Hastings River Drive is needed to maintain the regional road network which is vital to the continued economic development of the Council and Regional communities. The upgrades were planned to be undertaken between 2000 to 2005 and community expectations for these upgrades has been very high in recent years,  primarily due to traffic congestion and asset deterioration caused as a result in the deferral of the planned works. Delivery of the upgrades as planned and supported by the community through the development of Council’s Major Roads Improvement Strategy will result in road safety and efficiency improvements that benefit the community.

 

Council’s Delivery Program identifies the provision of safe and effective Transport Assets (including Roads and Bridges) as the highest priority core service area for the community. The reconstruction of Hastings River Drive is included in the Delivery Program. Council’s Infrastructure delivery staff have advised that the estimate to complete all required works from the Gordon Street intersection to the Boundary Street intersection of Hastings River Drive is in the order of $16-17m. Key sections to be upgraded are:

·    Gordon Street to Aston Street

·    Newport Island Road Intersection

·    Hughes Place to Boundary Street

 

This work would include dual carriageway as well as other intersection upgrades between Boundary Street and Gordon Street.

 

Design Status;

·                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

·    Gordon to Parks Sts, concept designs and surveys complete, estimated construction cost            $1,600,000

·                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

·    Park  to Aston Sts; Designs 100% complete, need to review Aston St intersection treatments, expected completed Sept 2013, estimated construction cost                        $4,000,000

 

·    Newport Island Road to Kemp St; Final Prelim designs complete, outsource design using Hughes Place design as a template design for this location. Expected design completion Dec 2013, estimated construction cost                                                                                                  $2,600,000

 

·    Hughes Pl to Boundary St; designs 75% complete to Hibbard Dr west. Need to investigate Hibbard Dr West intersection options. Expected design completion May 2015, estimated construction cost  $5,700,000

 

·    Hibbard Drive East intersection and asphalt overlay of existing sections of Hastings River Drive upgraded to four lanes                                                                                         $2,600,000

                                                                                                       __________

Total                                                                                               $16,500,000

 

Staging:

 

Currently the upgrades are proposed as follows subject to final design and cost estimate outcomes;

Stage 1 Boundary St Intersection (works have commenced) 2013/14

Stage 2 Park to Aston Streets 2014/15

Stage 3 Gordon to Park Streets 2015/16

Stage 4 Newport Island Road to Kemp St 2015/16

Stage 5 Hughes Place to Boundary St 2016/17

 

Houston Mitchell Drive Upgrade

 

Houston Mitchell Drive is in the Top 5 roads within the Local Government Area identified for major upgrade works.  With the provision of a new Primary School it will place additional pressure not only on Ocean Drive, but also on Houston Mitchell Drive. This road is also a major link between the Pacific Highway and Ocean Drive.

 

Council’s Infrastructure delivery staff have advised that approximately 6km of this road (except for the widened section in the middle) requires upgrading to a standard equivalent to the middle section. The estimated cost of these works is in the order of $10m.

 

Assessment

Based on the current weightings allocated to Council roads to determine a priority, Hastings River Drive is identified as a higher priority than Houston Mitchell Drive.

 

Options

 

1.   Apply for both projects

2.   Apply for the highest priority project

3.   Not apply for funding under this round of the program

 

It is considered that to raise the loan would place further strain on Council’s ability to fund other projects and services. Details are set out in the financial section of the impact of securing either a $10M or $15M subsidised loan.

 

It is recommended that Council apply for funding for Hastings River Drive. However Council needs to be aware that T-Corp has previously indicated that Council would have difficulty in delivering its range of services if its loan portfolio was too great, therefore we are not applying for the total amount through the LIRS process.

 

Council could also write to the Minister for Local Government expressing concern over the program and the ability to deliver outcomes if Council’s are not in a position to borrow funds and repay the principle and interest even when a subsidy is provided to partially reduce the interest component on any loan approved.

 

Community Engagement & Internal Consultation

 

Identified as part of the Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program and Operation Plan Community Consultation.

 

Planning & Policy Implications

 

Successful completion of these projects will reduce the works identified as requiring funding for upgrade/reconstruction.

 

Financial & Economic Implications

 

With any loan Council is required to repay the principle however, through this program Council receives subsidy towards the interest component of the loan.

 

·    Round 1 interest subsidy was 4%

·    Round 2 interest subsidy was 3%

·    Round 3 interest subsidy is 3%

 

The following financial modelling quantifies the financial impact on Council of servicing new loans. Tables 1 through to 4 show the net cost to Council of taking out a range of different loans utilising the interest subsidy i.e. $15m, $10m, $5m and $2.5m. The key assumptions that the information below is based on is that the loans are taken over a ten (1) year period (this is the term that State Government will provide the subsidy for) at an estimated interest rate of 5.5% and a LIRS interest subsidy of 3%.

 

The following tables assume loans are taken over a ten year period (this is the term that State Government will provide the subsidy) at an interest rate of 5.5% and a LIRS interest subsidy of 3%.

 

Table 1: Loan Principal $15m

 

Year

Total Debt Service Cost

Less: LIRS subsidy @3%

Net Cost to Council

1

$1,970,152

($440,269)

$1,529,883

2

$1,970,152

($400,763)

$1,569,389

3

$1,970,152

($360,061)

$1,610,091

4

$1,970,152

($318,130)

$1,652,022

5

$1,970,152

($274,931)

$1,695,221

6

$1,970,152

($230,426)

$1,739,726

7

$1,970,152

($184,577)

$1,785,575

8

$1,970,152

($137,341)

$1,832,811

9

$1,970,152

($88,678)

$1,881,474

10

$1,970,152

($38,544)

$1,931,608

Total

$19,701,520

($2,473,720)

$17,227,800

 

Table 2: Loan Principal $10m 

 

Year

Total Debt Service Cost

Less: LIRS subsidy @3%

Net Cost to Council

1

$1,313,435

($293,513)

$1,019,922

2

$1,313,435

($267,175)

$1,046,260

3

$1,313,435

($240,041)

$1,073,394

4

$1,313,435

($212,086)

$1,101,349

5

$1,313,435

($183,287)

$1,130,148

6

$1,313,435

($153,618)

$1,159,817

7

$1,313,435

($123,051)

$1,190,384

8

$1,313,435

($91,561)

$1,221,874

9

$1,313,435

($59,119)

$1,254,316

10

$1,313,435

($25,696)

$1,287,739

Total

$13,134,350

($1,649,147)

$11,485,203

 

Table 3: Loan Principal $5m

 

Year

Total Debt Service Cost

Less: LIRS subsidy @3%

Net Cost to Council

1

$656,718

($146,757)

$509,961

2

$656,718

($133,588)

$523,130

3

$656,718

($120,020)

$536,698

4

$656,718

($106,043)

$550,675

5

$656,718

($91,644)

$565,074

6

$656,718

($76,809)

$579,909

7

$656,718

($61,526)

$595,192

8

$656,718

($45,780)

$610,938

9

$656,718

($29,559)

$627,159

10

$656,718

($12,848)

$643,870

Total

$6,567,180

($824,574)

$5,742,606

 

Table 4: Loan Principal $2.5m

 

Year

Total Debt Service Cost

Less: LIRS subsidy @3%

Net Cost to Council

1

$328,359

($73,378)

$254,981

2

$328,359

($66,794)

$261,565

3

$328,359

($60,010)

$268,349

4

$328,359

($53,022)