item no: 1 subject: declaration as honorary citizen of …

MINUTE BY MAYOR Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 1 SUBJECT: DECLARATION AS HONORARY CITIZEN OF THE CITY OF BLUE

MOUNTAINS FILE NO: C00050 Recommendation: That Council declare the former Mayor of Sanda, Japan, Mr Shinji Toshita an Honorary Citizen o f the City of Blue Mountains. Minute by Mayor: The Blue Mountains Sister Cities Committee has suggested that it would be appropriate for Council to acknowledge the contribution to the Sister Cities relationship of the former Mayor of Sanda, Japan, Mr Shinji Toshita. Mr Toshita was Mayor of Sanda at the time of the signing of the original Sister Cities Agreement with Blue Mountains and remained Mayor until his retirement in the Year 2000. Mr Toshita visited the Blue Mountains three times during his te nure - in 1988, 1993 and 1998. During his visit in 1998, to mark the Tenth Anniversary of the Sister Cities Agreement, he was accompanied by a group of more than forty gardening enthusiasts who visited many Blue Mountains gardens during their stay over several days. Immediately after the bushfires of 1994, Mr Toshita raised funds to help victims of the fires and shortly after, sent more than $25,000 to the Blue Mountains. This was one of many ways in which Mr Toshita helped promote the Blue Mountains in Sanda and throughout Japan. Since Mr Toshita retired from Local Government he has been Chairperson of the Sanda International Association and remains actively involved in Sanda’s Sister Cities relationships. He has been a great Ambassador for the Blue Mountains and Australia. He and his wife have made many friends over the years in the Blue Mountains, including a number of Councillors. The Sister Cities Committee has respectfully suggested that it may be acceptable to Council to acknowledge Mr Toshita by declaring him to be an Honorary Citizen of the City of Blue Mountains. The Committee intends to present a small award to Mr Toshita and, if Council agrees, the award will be engraved with the acknowledgement of “Honorary Citizen”. The City of Sanda recently honoured Councillor Colleen Kime for her part in the Sister Cities relationship with a similar award as “Special Honorary Citizen”.

COUNCILLOR’S REPORT Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 2 SUBJECT: BM SPORTS AND AQUATIC LTD – 2001/02 BUSINESS PLAN FILE NO: H00333 Recommendation: That the BM Sports and Aquatic Ltd Business Plan for 2001/02 be received and noted.

Report by Councillor Terri Hamilton, Chairperson BM Sports and Aquatic Ltd.: BM Sports and Aquatic Ltd. officially took over management of Council’s aquatic centres on 1 July 2000 and, since that time, has been working with the staff to develop both the existing centres and the new Katoomba Sports and Aquatic Centre, in accordance with the previously adopted Business Plan. Significant achievements during the past year include: • the establishment of a modern fully equipped gymnasium, • the introduction of a crèche facility, • the introduction of popular aqua aerobics programs, • the extension of the learn to swim program, • the introduction of the very popular children’s birthday parties and • the organization of netball, volleyball, indoor soccer and basketball competitions As reported in the March Quarter – Budget Review report elsewhere on the agenda, the overall financial management of the aquatic centres by the Company has been satisfactory. The report identifies that, due to seasonal fluctuations in attendances, the forecast income for the Springwood and Lawson aquatic centres has not been achieved. It is hoped that this trend will be partly reversed with the closing of the existing Springwood pool and the opening of the new Springwood Aquatic Centre. The past year has also enabled employment and operational patterns at the new Katoomba Sports and Aquatic Centre to be established, which will assist in better budget forecasting for future years. The experience gained here should also prove invaluable in establishing the new Springwood centre. Distributed separately for the information of Councillors is the Business Plan of BM Sports and Aquatic Ltd. for the 2001/02 financial year. The Plan provides an outline of the operations of the Company over the period 1/7/01 – 30/6/02, including proposed fees and a financial plan.

COUNCILLOR’S REPORT Item 2 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

It is proposed that the year be one of consolidation to build on existing programs and activities, with no new expenditure other than the provision of protective shelters at the Blackheath and Lawson centres. The opportunity will also be taken to update and finalise policies and procedure manuals. The financial plan has been prepared to reflect the objectives of the Business Plan and, overall, the level of deficit for 2001/02 has been reduced by $35,000 from that originally estimated for the current year. This projected level of deficit to be funded by Council has been incorporated into Council’s draft 2001/02 Budget. The Business Plan was adopted by the Board of BM Sports and Aquatic Ltd at its meeting held on 26 March 2001 and is submitted for Council’s information.

PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 3 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PART 3 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND

ASSESSMENT ACT – WHITE PAPER: “PLAN FIRST – REVIEW OF PLAN MAKING IN NSW”

FILE NO: C02899 Recommendations: 1. That Council endorse the draft submission, as distributed, as its submission to the

NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning in respect of the review of Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

2. That Council’s submission be forwarded to the NSW Department of Urban Affairs and

Planning by 1 June 2001. 3. That copies of Council’s submission be forwarded to the Local Government and

Shires Association of NSW, WSROC and the State Members for the Blue Mountains for their information.

Report by Group Manager, Strategic Planning: Background Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (the Act) currently provides for the preparation of the following policies and plans: • State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPP’s) • Regional Environmental Plans (REP’s) • Local Environmental Plans (LEP’s) • Development Control Plans (DCP’s) In 1998, the government embarked on a reform of Part 3 of the Act and in early 1999, released a Green Paper entitled Plan making in NSW – Opportunities for the future – discussion paper that explored broad opportunities to improve planning and the plan making system in NSW. At its meeting of 22 June 1999, Council endorsed a submission to government concerning the Green Paper. Since that time, the NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP) has considered the submissions made on the Green Paper, has conducted a range of focus groups on key directions for the reforms and has developed and refined proposals for legislative change.

PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE Item 3 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

As a result of this work, the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning has recently released a White Paper outlining the proposals for legislative change as a precursor to the introduction of a Draft Bill to Par liament which is expected to occur at the end of June this year. The White Paper is entitled Plan First – Review of plan making in NSW (Plan First). DUAP has also released a companion document to Plan First entitled Ideas for Community Consultation (community consultation) in response to submissions on the Green Paper that called for a set of guidelines for improved methods of collaboration with local communities and stakeholder groups during plan making. A copy of Plan First and the community consultation document have been available in the Councillor’s Room and individual copies have been forwarded to councillors separately. A brief summary of the Plan First proposals is also included as Attachment A to this report.

Distributed separately to this report is a detailed draft submission to the NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP) on the Plan First proposals. This submission has been prepared taking into account:

a) Council’s submission to Government of June 1999 on the Green Paper;

b) Participation by Council officers in subsequent discussion forums;

c) Participation by Council officers at various Plan First presentations and workshops;

d) Detailed discussion with officers of DUAP regarding both the Plan First proposals generally and the implications of Plan First for Council’s Draft Local Environmental Plan 2001 (DLEP 2001);

e) Detailed liaison with WSROC, other councils and government agencies;

f) An internal cross-group workshop to identify key issues; and

g) A public information and discussion forum conducted at the Springwood Civic Centre on 9 May 2001 to consider the implication of the Plan First proposals for planning in the local context.

Council’s Planning Programs in relation to Plan First At the broad level, Plan First seeks to formalise, within the EP&A Act, the more integrated, “place based” approaches to planning that have been pursued and advocated by this Council for several years. The transition to Local Plans under Plan First will represent an enormous task for many councils. However, the nature and direction of the strategic planning and related programs undertaken by this Council under its Management Plan means that Blue Mountains is, in many ways, ahead of Plan First and is in a very advantageous position to adapt to the proposed new requirements.


This is exemplified by, but not limited to, the following work undertaken or in progress by Council: a) The development of the integrated City Strategy. The City Strategy will establish a

clear future direction for the City and will provide action plans that coordinate the programs of Council, government and community groups. The City Strategy will, therefore perform the precise role advocated for the “local strategy” component of a Local Plan under Plan First. Work on the City Strategy is currently advancing and will be the subject of a separate progress report to Council in the near future.

b) Stage 1 of DLEP 2001 has been specifically developed in line with the directions set

under Plan First in consultation with the Policy Reform Unit of DUAP. DLEP 2001 is a highly contemporary, place -based instrument that responds to clear, integrated strategic directions for the City, incorporates detailed DCP provisions within a single instrument and has been developed, and will be accessed, using state of the art technology. It has also been designed to readily integrate with other plans and strategies as envisaged for Local Plans under Plan First.

c) Stage 2 of DLEP 2001 for Glenbrook and the other core village areas and the

Katoomba Town Centre Revitalisation Strategy that was developed from the Katoomba Charrette are specifically integrated, place-based planning exercises that will contribute directly to the development of a Local Plan. These plans, together with the Area Community Planning process have already successfully applied some of the contemporary approaches to collaborative planning with local communities advocated in the companion document to Plan First and have set a standard for the future of plan making in the Blue Mountains.

d) Council has, for several years, operated through the complimentary programs of Area

Management and Area Community Planning. This has provided Council with considerable experience and expertise in the type of “locality” or place-based planning and implementation that goes well beyond traditional development control planning as advocated by Plan First. Following the adoption of the City Strategy, the Management Plan identifies an expansion of the Community Area Planning process into a broad Area Planning process incorporating land use, environmental, economic and other planning activities. This will provide an ideal basis for the development and ongoing review of an expanded Local Plan.

e) Council’s recently adopted Economic Development Strategy will be further refined as

a result of the City Strategy and will feed directly into a future Local Plan. f) Council’s City wide Community Plan and cultural, economic and environmental

strategies are amongst the more sophisticated and thorough examples of such plans in NSW and can readily be adapted for integration into a Local Plan.

g) Council’s State of the Environment Report (SoE) is also one of the more sophisticated

and highly regarded in NSW and Council is well positioned to expand the current scope of the SoE as the principal reporting mechanism for a Local Plan.


h) The current review of all of Council’s DCPs and their incorporation into a single City

wide DCP will facilitate the amalgamation of the regulatory components of a Local Plan.

i) The current work to develop a place-based Community Lands Management Strategy

that will also be reported separately to Council. It is in recognition of its proactive approach in programs such as these, but particularly in the light of the work undertaken for DLEP 2001, that this Council has been invited to take part in a select reference/working group with gover nment to develop a “model” Local Plan for NSW. This presents a unique opportunity Council to help shape the direction for local government planning in the future. Whilst the integration of Council’s plans and strategies into a single Local Plan will require the focusing of resources, medium to long term benefits will be manifest in savings and other improvements that flow from better coordination and reduced duplication in Council’s planning and service delivery processes. The community will benefit from this as well as from the reduced complexity of plans that apply to land within the City. Council’s Submission At the broad level the key directions and features of the Plan First proposals are in keeping with Council’s submission on the Green Paper and, it is understood, the general sentiments of local government and the broader community. It is therefore at this broad level that support for the review of plan making is expressed in the draft submission. However, the success of the legislative change in delivering the intended outcomes will rely heavily on the detail of proposed changes and the mechanisms that are put in place to manage them. It is at the detail level, on many key issues, that Plan First is either silent or reflects insufficient consideration of the implications of the proposed changes. This is particularly concerning given the anticipated timing of introduction of the Draft Bill to Parliament. For this reason, the draft submission is very detailed, covering some 22 major topic areas and making 48 recommendations. Many of the issues raised in the submission are common to the concerns being raised amongst local councils and the Regional Organisations of Councils (ROCs). Others have a specific bearing on interests of the Blue Mountains. Given the nature and scope of issues that are raised and the likely timing of the Draft Bill, one of the key recommendations of the submission is that the Draft Bill should, at this stage, be limited to broad scale enabling legislation. This would provide the opportunity for government to give more rigorous consideration to, and consult more widely on, the detail of the proposed changes and related mechanisms that can then be introduced as Regulations to the Act and/or as formal guidelines for plan making. All of the issues raised in the submission are important in ensuring that the reform of plan making results in well considered, positive outcomes. However a number of key issues that have been raised both by Council staff consistently at Plan First forums and by Councillors and the community at the recent local public forum, warrant further discussion.


a) The protection of the unique character of the Blue Mountains in regional planning

The need for strong, integrated regional planning has long been acknowledged as a failing of the planning system in NSW. The ad hoc approach to the preparation of single issue Regional Environmental Plans or state policies that do not recognise the diversity, or take best advantage, of places within and between regions has been the subject of wide consideration and discussion. It is important to acknowledge that Plan First offers improvement in this regard over the current system. Plan First ident ifies proposed regions within NSW that would be the basis for Regional Plans. For Sydney, Plan First identifies two (2) options for regional boundaries based on the current local government area groupings associated with the ROCs. These options would see the Blue Mountains included in either a Western Sydney Region (as is currently the case) or a Greater Western Sydney Region. Regional Plans would be developed by regional forums that would draw their membership from government agencies, local councils, local members of state parliament, and industry and interest groups. The regional forums would, however be limited in size to 18 to 20 members and, given the makeup of the forum, local council representation is likely to be limited to a single representative. Under the above arrangements, considerable concern has been raised, by both staff and the community, about the ability for the unique characteristics and role of the Blue Mountains to be recognised, protected and properly managed. The Blue Mountains is, without doubt, a special and unique place in terms of its role and location in the very sensitive environment of the World Heritage National Park and Sydney’s drinking water catchment, its unique settlement pattern and town character, its cultural heritage, diversity and identity, its social characteristics and its significant role as both a domestic and international tourist destination. For these reasons, there is a strong view that the Blue Mountains has little in common with Western Sydney and this has led to calls by some in the community that the Blue Mountains should be established as a separate region for the purpose of regional planning. There are also concerns that, if included within Western Sydney, the interests of the larger, more “homogeneous” council areas would dominate the direction of the Regional Plans at the expense of the interests of the Blue Mountains. In the main, these concerns are shared and the draft submission focuses in detail on these issues. However, the following factors must also be considered:

• Approximately 40% of Blue Mountains residents in the workforce work in Western Sydney;

• A significant majority of Blue Mountains residents rely on Western Sydney for

higher order retail facilities and commercial activity;

• A significant proportion of Blue Mountains residents, particularly younger people, rely on Western Sydney for sport, recreation and entertainment;

• Western Sydney and the Blue Mountains are integrally linked in relation to the

transport system, particularly the major road and rail corridors;


• The Blue Mountains is an important contributing area to the

Hawkesbury/Nepean Catchment and other bioregion catchments of Western Sydney; and

• Western Sydney is a significant contributor to tourism visitation to the Blue

Mountains.

Therefore, there is a range of economic, environmental and social issues that are of direct mutual importance between Western Sydney and the Blue Mountains. Further, it must be recognised that the Regional Strategies, when prepared, will provide the basis for the allocation of a significant proportion of government agency program and other grant funding. Should the Blue Mountains, with a population of some 75,000, form a separate region, it will need to compete with much larger regions (some, like Western Sydney, with a population in excess of 2.5 million people) for government funding. Due to its sensitive environmental location and settlement pattern that requires duplicated services and has only marginal population thresholds for facilities, the Blue Mountains requires funding well above average per capita expectations to adequately sustain it. In these circumstances, Blue Mountains could face considerable difficulty in successfully lobbying for an appropriate level of funding to cover the wide range of infrastructure, environmental management, economic and social programs required. Similarly, if Council seeks to influence the nature of State Policies and other non-funding government decisions through either the Urban Development Committee of cabinet or other significant cabinet committees, the ability to do so is substantially enhanced if the Blue Mountains is aligned with a larger region with a commensurately broader political base. On balance, it is therefore considered that the interests of the Blue Mountains can best be served by its inclusion within a strong Western Sydney region under a Regional Strategy that recognises and supports the unique characteristics and role of the Blue Mountains within that region. In this regard, it should be recognised that no region is “homogeneous”. All regions are comprised of places that have their own unique characteristics. Plan First strongly advocates the need for place-based planning at both the regional and local level that properly reflects the needs of each “place”. In a similar manner to DLEP 2001, which both deals with city wide issues but is very specifically “place-based” and establishes unique controls for villages or precincts, a sophisticated Regional Strategy can be developed for Western Sydney that protects the role of the Blue Mountains and, in fact, promotes it as an important and unique part of the region.


The draft submission makes specific recommendations to facilitate this outcome. In summary, the submission recommends that: • The Draft Bill should explicitly require that the diversity and important role of

places within regions are recognised within Regional Strategies. There needs to be a partnership approach that recognises the need for Local Plans to acknowledge Regional Strategies and vice versa.

• On the basis that implementation of the Regional Strategy will predominantly occur

through Local Plans, representation on the forum must be expanded to include a representative of each council comprising the region to ensure that Regional Strategies adequately and accurately reflect and respond to the diversity of issues within the region.

• Council seeks an assurance from government that the interests of the Blue

Mountains and the special role that it plays in the Sydney Region is appropriately represented on any future regional forum.

• In the review of current SEPPs, REPs and other planning policies to create a single

set of State Policies, Council seeks that the Minister establish a new State Policy requiring that any Regional Strategy for a region that incorporates any part of the Blue Mountains World Heritage National Park must recognise and protect the important role of the WHA in the conservation of bio diversity and as a major tourist destination for the region, NSW and Australia. The State Policy should also require that the Regional Strategy put in place appropriate mechanisms to protect and manage the unique characteristics of urban places that operate as a gateway to the WHA.

• Option 2, which proposes four (4) regions for Sydney and for Western Sydney is

restricted to the area currently covered by WSROC, should be adopted as the basis for regional boundaries for Sydney as it best reflects existing “sub-regional” identity by virtue of the operation of the ROCs and represents a more manageable basis for the development of Regional Strategies.

b) The power for the Minister to amend Regional Strategies and Local Plans

Plan First proposes that the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning will have the power to make and amend Regional Strategies and Local Plans in response to matters of state or regional importance. Again, this has been a matter of considerable concern to the local community and Council staff. This concern has also been raised by the ROCs and other council representatives attending Plan First workshops.

The development of Regional Strategies and Local Plans will be required to follow a prescribed and thorough process of consultation with the community, government and key stakeholders. The resulting Regional Strategies and Local Plans will represent an integrated strategic response to the needs, aspirations, imperatives and physical and social characteristics of that region or local area. The development and introduction of new State Policies into Regional Strategies or Local Plans can have a profound impact on the strategic directions for the relevant area.


It is considered that the Minister should not have the power to unilaterally amend Local Plans or Regional Strategies other than as a temporary measure in clearly defined emergency situations. Rather, the introduction of such State Policies should follow a similar process of consultation with local councils and other key stake holders as is required under Plan First for Regional Strategies and Local Plans. Where Ministerial action is required in response to defined emergency situations, related State Policies should be incorporated in a schedule to the Local Plan or Regional Strategy as a “holding mechanism” to allow appropriate consultation to occur within a prescribed period and more pe rmanent inclusions in the Local Plan or Regional Strategy to be prepared. The draft submission to government makes appropriate recommendations in line with the above discussion.

The Process from Here It is recommended that Council endorse the draft submission as distributed as its submission to DUAP on the Plan First review of the plan making system in NSW. It is further recommended that, if endorsed, Council’s submission also be forwarded to the Local Government and Shires Association, WSROC and the State Members for the Blue Mountains for their information. Whilst no formal advice has been received by Councils at this stage, it is understood, from DUAP’s recent presentations, that submissions from all parties will be considered prior to the introduction of the Draft Bill to Parliament in late June. It is also anticipated that the Draft Bill will be available for public comment between the Autumn and Spring sessions of Parliament. The Draft Bill is expected to be debated by Parliament during its Spring session. Conclusion The plan making system is a fundamental element of Council’s functions and civic responsibilities. As such, changes to that system will have implications for the way in which Council dispenses those responsibilities, as well as the way in which it engages its community and utilises its scarce resources. The changes will also have fundamental implications for the way in which Council, in conjunction with the local community, plans for the future of the City. It is, therefore, impor tant that Council makes known its views on any proposed changes to the plan making system to all relevant parties. At the broad level, the Plan First proposals represent an opportunity to significantly improve the nature and operation of plans and plan ma king in NSW in ways similar to those that have been pursued and/or advocated by this Council for several years. At this broad level, it is considered that the proposed reforms should be supported in principle.


However, it is at the detail level, on many key issues, that Plan First is either silent or reflects insufficient consideration of the implications of the proposed changes. This is particularly concerning given the anticipated timing of introduction of the Draft Bill to Parliament. Consequently, the draft submission deals in detail with the issues of concern to both local government and the local community and presents clear recommendations to government to ensure that positive partnerships between levels of government and maximum improvements in plan making are achieved. It is therefore recommended that the draft submission as distributed be endorsed by Council and forwarded to DUAP.


Attachment A

Summary of Plan First Proposals

(Adapted from NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning White Paper entitled “planFIRST – Review of Plan Making in NSW”. This summary should not be

interpreted as reflecting the views of Blue Mountains City Council)

Introduction In mid 1998, the NSW Government, through the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP), commenced a review of Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). Part 3 is that part of the EP&A Act that deals with the making of: • State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPP); • Regional Environmental Plans (REP) • Local Environmental Plans (LEP); and • Development Control Plans (DCP). The review to date has included the release, for public comment, of a discussion paper (Green Paper) in February 1999 setting out ideas and opportunities for changes to the planning system, a wide range of discussion forums and focus groups, and the release of the current White Paper – Plan First for public comment. Following consideration of public submissions on Plan First, a draft bill will be introduced to Parliament to amend Part 3 of the EP&A Act. Key features of the new system The Government is simplifying the plan making system by reducing the number and layers of plans applying to land and making those plans easy to find and understand. It is also strengthening the approach to regional planning as the important link between planning for the state and local area planning. Plan First’s proposed reforms will also enable the plans and policies of other agencies, which have a bearing on environmental planning, to be better connected to the planning system. Plan First proposes three tiers of plans for NSW: • Local Plans; • Regional Strategies; and • State Policies. 1. Local Plans

A Local Plan will be a single plan for a local (council) area that coordinates actions and contains all land use controls for a site. A local Plan will: • be a strategic whole-of-council, place-based plan, coordinating goals , policies

and activities; • replace, in some cases, hundreds of LEPs and DCPs;


Attachment A

• guide the future of a local area, linking social, economic and environmental

issues relevant to planning under the EP&A Act; • contain a vision, policies, an action plan and regulatory provisions; • be drawn up by the council in consultation with the community; • be consistent with the Regional Strategy and implement its outcomes in local

areas; • be approved by the council with the Minister’s concurrence • can be amended by the council or the Minister; and • provide a focus for state of environment reporting. Local plans will be prepared in close consultation with the local community and a regional forum (see Regional Strategies below) will provide advice to the Minister on whether a Local Plan is consistent with the Regional Strategy. Local Plans will be reviewed on a 3 – 5 year basis.

2. Regional Strategies

A Regional Strategy is a single strategy for a region providing clear direction and coordinating regional policies and actions. A Regional Strategy will: • provide a context for regional actions and local planning; • be a whole-of-government, place-based strategy, involving state and local

government, business and the community; • guide the future of a region, linking social, economic and environmental

issues relevant to planning under the EP&A Act; • contain a vision, policies and an action plan; • be drawn up by a regional forum in consultation with the community; • be approved by the NSW Government; and • can be amended by the Minister.

The membership of a regional forum will comprise 18 – 20 members including state agencies, peak business groups, social organisations, environmental organisations, councils (1 representative) and all local State Members of Parliament. Members of the regional forum will be recommended by the Minister and appointed by Government. Regional Strategies will be prepared in close consultation with the community. Outside of Sydney, NSW will be divided into 11 regions. For Sydney Plan First identifies two (2) options for regional boundaries each following local government boundaries:


Attachment A

Option 1 Option 1 proposes two (2) regions: - Greater Western Sydney - comprising all local government areas within the

Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) and the Macarthur Regional Organisation of Councils (MACROC); and

- Eastern Sydney - comprising all local government areas within the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (SSROC), Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) and Shore Regional Organisation of Councils (SHOROC).

Option 2 Option 2 proposes four (4) regions : - Western Sydney – comprising all local government areas within WSROC; - South Western Sydney – comprising all local government areas within

MACROC; - Southern Sydney – comprising all local government areas within SSROC; and - Northern Sydney - comprising all local government areas within NSROC and

SHOROC. 3. State Policies

State Policies will bring together State Government policies relating to environmental planning in the one place. State Policies will: • provide a state context for regional planning; • contain whole-of-government, issues based, outcome focused policies; • include social, economic and environmental policies relevant to planning

under the EP&A Act; • contain a vision, policies and regulatory provisions to be included in Local

Plans; • be prepared by the NSW Government in consultation with the community;

and • be approved by the NSW Government. The Minister will have the power to insert State Policies directly into Regional Strategies and Local Plans.

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 4 SUBJECT: QUARTERLY MANAGEMENT PLAN AND BUDGET REVIEW FILE NO: Recommendations: 1. That the Acting General Manager’s report together with the “Management Plan

2000/2001 Quarterly Report on Performance Targets Third Quarter January – March 2001” (separately enclosed) be endorsed.

2. That those Management Plan Actions listed in this report under “Exceptions” that are

not completed in 2000/2001 be listed for completion in 2001/2002. 3. That the Acting General Manager’s Report incorporating the separate documents

titled:

• Budget Review March 2001 • 2000/2001 Capital Works Programme Quarterly Review March 2001 be noted.

4. That the variations of income and expenditure as identified in the documents titled Budget Review March 2001, and 2000/2001 Capital Works Programme Quarterly Review, be approved and voted.

Report by Acting General Manager: This report presents the third quarterly report on this year’s performance targets for the Council’s 4 Year Management Plan (2000/2001-2003/2004). The “Management Plan 2000/2001 Quarterly Report on Performance Targets Third Quarter January - March” (forwarded to Councillors under separate cover) has been designed to provide information about overall progress and performance in a concise and readable format. The 2000/2001 Performance Targets contribute to the overall Performance Targets as stated in the four year Management Plan. The concept of illustrating the performance status for Management Plan actions graphically was introduced for the first quarter report and has been continued with this report. The status for each action that has commenced or is due to commence will therefore again be identified on a graded bar chart indicating whether each performance target is: On Target, Above Target, Below Target or Off Target. Explanations in respect to any actions in the later two categories are given later in this report.

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT Item 4 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

Summary of Third Quarter Progress As indicated, this report is for the third quarter of the first year of Council’s adopted four year program. The majority of projects are on target with some projects ahead of target. Projects that are clearly behind or off target have reasons for this given in the section of this report below headed “Exceptions”. Where projects are scheduled to commence in the fourth quarter the status has not been shown. It is important to note that some projects are scheduled over more than one reporting year and others are ongoing. Achievements: Quality Local Government Asset Management - Successful implementation of a rental property management system to assist Council in effectively managing its commercial properties. Capital Works Program - A further 6 minor projects were completed and an additional 4 minor projects commenced during the March Quarter. Completion of Weroona Park Community Facility, refurbishment of 6-10 Station Street Katoomba, and Megalong Hall disabled access project. Land Use Management Application Information on Web Site - To improve information to the community on land use applications a new link has been established to the Councils Web Site which provides information on all applications which are currently being notified. This aims to ensure that the community is better informed and has an opportunity to comment on proposals. The applications are automatically taken off the listing at the closure of the relevant notification period. Health and Safety Management New approach to achieving sewer connections - As part of Councils approach to better managing sewer management a financial assistance package has been developed that will provide interest free loans for residents to connect a residential property to a sewer main. This has the benefit of reducing the number of on site disposal systems, with the cost repaid to Council over an agreed period. An associated Orders Policy has also been prepared to support this approach. The financial package has been included in the Councils Draft Management Plan for 2001/02 which is currently being exhibited. Awning Program - Following the collapse of an awning in the centre of Bathurst, Council officers have commenced a program in the Blue Mountains seeking engineering reports on all awnings to ascertain their structural condition and need for any additional works. The program is being pursued centre by centre with initial work in Katoomba and Blackheath due to the general age of premises and the more extreme weather conditions in the upper Mountains. The general response has been good within these Centres and the program will be progressed in stages.


Facilitating Community Development Access and Equity - Commuter Parking and Access Facilities at Blue Mountains Railway Stations Strategy and Action Plan endorsed as part of implementing Council’s Access and Equity Policy. Transportation and Roads Link Roads Strategy Funding - Successful whole of government approach to Link Roads Program achieved with $950,000 matching grant from RTA over 5 years.

Exceptions: Management Plan Action 1.4 Commence implementation of preferred option for Lawson

Awaiting RTA direction on the final option. Management Plan Action 1.5 Complete a study of Blackheath Township

Consultant engaged and public meeting scheduled for June 2001. Study scheduled for completion September 2001.

Management Plan Action 1.7 Develop a checklist to ensure all decisions take into account protection of the natural environment

Project will not be completed until early 2001/2002 due to staff shortages and other organisational priorities.

Management Plan Action 2.1 Improve community consultation/collaboration to better inform Council decision making

Project will not be completed until early 2001/2002 due to resignation of staff assigned to project and other organisational priorities.

Management Plan Action 2.4 Develop and implement a Statement of Best Practice in Ethical Decision Making for Councillors and staff

Project will not be completed until early 2001/2002 due to staff shortages and other organisational priorities.

Management Plan Action 2.5 Develop and implement a proactive communication strategy for the Blue Mountains community

Draft strategy developed - however will not be finalised until 2001/2002 due to benefit of linking with consultation framework being developed under Management Plan action 2.1.


Management Plan Action 3.1 Develop a Capital Works Program process which has transparent decision making that is relevant to community needs

A draft reporting format and prototype have been developed to assist in managing the Capital Works Program. Further policy development is required to establish high level assessment criteria for nominated Capital Works projects. This component of the project has been delayed due to resourcing constraints.

Management Plan Action 4.2 Improve community lands plans of management to meet the requirements of the Local Government Act in relation to natural areas

The principles of the community lands plans of management have been agreed and are being progressed by the organisation. The completion is dependent on the vegetation mapping which now is expected to be completed by early 2001-2002.

Management Plan Action 7.2 Review and recommend land fill pricing structure to support objectives

Delayed due to bulky green waste project. Deferred to 2001/2002

Management Plan Action 7.5 Review the recommendations arising from the Katoomba Waste Management Facility Options Study and establish program to implement approved recommendations

A Feasibility Study and concept design has been developed. Expressions of Interest and the proposed selective tender for this work will close 10 April 2001. Due to the timing of the Expression of Interests and proposed selective tender this project will not be completed until 2001/2002.

Management Plan Action 7.6 Commence review of unused waste depots

The Blackheath unused waste depot has been subject to a land claim investigation. The scope of works for this site is currently under review. The Lawson unused waste depot draft design and specification has been completed and will be reviewed nest quarter. The reviews are expected to be finalised early 2001/2002 with works commencing in the same year.

Financial Position Councillors are referred to the separately enclosed document titled Budget Review March Quarter 2001 . The Budget Review is prepared by the Responsible Accounting Officer in accordance with the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation and details budget variations that have now been identified and which have not previously been adopted by the Council. As a result of the review the estimated effective level of Working Capital has increased by $7,226 to an estimated balance at 30 June 2001 of $1,179,573. This estimate is within the optimum range identified by Council of between $1.1 and $1.3 million based on the local government industry standard of working capital being within a range to cover the amount of stores and hard core debtors.


While there have been some significant variations within individual programs, Council has been able to manage these variations and minimise the overall impact on the anticipated budget result. Explanation of the major variations are given in the Report by the Responsible Accounting Officer and were outlined at the recent Councillor’s Briefing on the Budget Review. The smaller variations are explained by notation throughout the Budget Review document. Under the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation the Council’s Responsible Accounting Officer is also required to formally report on whether the Council’s financial position is considered “satisfactory” and if not, what remedial action needs to be taken. In the accompanying Budget Review document the Responsible Accounting Officer has reported that the Council’s financial position is considered “satisfactory”. Capital Works Programme Councillors are referred to the separately enclosed document titled Capital Works Programme Quarterly Review March 2001 . This document details each project in the Capital Works Programme together with recommended variations. While progress in the programme has not been as favourable as expected in this quarter, there have been a number of achievements:

• 6 projects were completed and; • A further 5 were commenced during the March quarter.

The above takes the total to 48 completed projects and 39 projects in progress in the 2000/2001 financial year. There are currently 7 major and 47 minor projects not yet commenced with 3 minor projects abandoned and a further 7 projects deferred until 2001/2002.

QUALITY LOCAL GOVERNMENT Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 5 SUBJECT: COUNCIL LAND - LOT 1 DP 504576, 6 LONGTON ROAD,

BLACKHEATH FILE NO: A38224 Recommendations: 1. That Council sell Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 504576, being 6 Longton Road, Blackheath

to the adjoining owner for the sum of $5,000. 2. That upon completion of the matter Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 504576 be consolidated

with the original land being Lot 2 Deposited Plan 504576. 3. That Council’s Common Seal be affixed to any documents relating to this matter. Report by Acting Group Manager, Assets & Corporate Services: Council acquired Lot 1 Deposited Plan 504576, 6 Longton Road, Blackheath for a proposed reservoir site in 1963 for three hundred pounds. At that time, the land was subdivided out of a property, which was used as an orchard. The land is no longer required for the purpose for which it was acquired. The property is located within an area zoned Rural Conservation (Shipley Plateau) under Local Environmental Plan 1991. Access to the property is difficult as Longton Road is an unformed road. The subject property has a land area of approximately 2,049m2, which is insufficient for a residential development with on-site disposal of sewerage. Accordingly, the property provides no benefits to the community at large and is therefore no longer required by Council. The current owner of the land adjoining this property has requested that Council sell the land for consolidation with the original lot. The subject property is classified as “Operational” land and therefore can be sold under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993. The recommended sale price is consistent with the valuation prepared by an independent Registered Valuer.

QUALITY LOCAL GOVERNMENT Item 5 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

Attachment


ITEM NO: 6 SUBJECT: SCHEDULE OF INVESTED MONIES FILE NO: C00694 Recommendation: That the Schedule of Invested Monies as at 30 April 2001 be received. Report by Acting Group Manager, Assets & Corporate Services: This report is submitted for the purposes of financial accountability and in satisfaction of the Financial Regulations under the Local Government Act, 1993. The Schedule of Council’s Invested Monies as at 30 April 2001 is attached for information.


Attachment

BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL

SCHEDULE OF INVESTED MONIES

Report prepared to 30th April, 2001

No Institution Invested

Date Maturity

Date Interest

Rate Amount

1. Australian Mutual Provident Society 30.06.99 At Call Variable 1,996,651.16 2. Commonwealth Bank of Australia * 04.01.01 27.06.01 5.74% 5,773,757.56 3. ANZ Bank – Cash Plus Fund 27.01.00 At Call Variable 2,123,941.88 4. Commonwealth Bank of Australia 14.03.00 At Call Variable 1,577,941.33 5. National Australia Bank – Offset * 28.06.00 28.06.01 6.08% 4,000,000.00 6. National Australia Bank - Call a/c At Call Variable 2,000,000.00 7. Macquarie Bank -Treasury Plus Fund At Call Variable 2,054,402.08 $19,526,694.01 * These investments off-set loans at a differential of 0.15%.

Summary by Institution Australian Mutual Provident Society 1,996,651.16 Commonwealth Bank of Australia 7,351,698.89 ANZ Bank 2,123,941.88 National Australia Bank 6,000,000.00 Macquarie Bank 2,054,402.08 $19,526,694.01

I certify and report that the Schedule of Invested Monies listed above describes all Council’s funds invested by virtue of Section 625 of the Local Government Act, 1993. The monies referred to in this Schedule are invested in accordance with the Act, Regulation 19(3) to the Act and Council Policy.

Paul Bennett Responsible Accounting Officer


ITEM NO: 7 SUBJECT: PROPOSED LEASE OF SHOP 6 TOWN CENTRE ARCADE,

KATOOMBA FILE NO: C02048 Recommendations: 1. That Council Lease Shop 6 Town Centre Arcade, Katoomba to Trent Lees and Angela

Brown, trading as SK8 Logic in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in this report.

2. Tha t the Common Seal of Council be affixed to the necessary documents. Report by Group Manager, Assets & Corporate Services: Background Council owned property being Shop 6 Town Centre Arcade, Katoomba has been vacant since October 2000. Mr Lees and Ms Brow n wish to locate their business within the Town Centre Arcade and the establishment of their business should provide a good tenant mix. Reference checks have been conducted and provided a positive outcome. Lease Negotiations The details of the proposed lease terms and conditions negotiated reflect current market conditions and can be summarised as follows: Lessee: Trent M Lees and Angela H Brown, trading as SK8 Logic Use: Retail sale of Skateboards, equipment and clothing Rental: $11,040 per annum plus GST (first years rental payable in advance) Term: One year Option: Two years Rent Reviews: Annually to CPI & market review at option Insurance: $10 million public liability Security Bond: Equivalent to one months rental Authority to Execute Leases Council at its meeting of 13 June 2000 resolved (Minute No.245) to appoint the General Manager and Mayor as its attorneys to execute on Council’s behalf leases of Council owned commercial property, Council’s commercial/retail rental and leasing matters. Due to the resignation of the General Manager, the current power of attorney registered with the Land Titles Office requires amendment to the names noted on the power of attorney. This will not happen until the commencement of Council’s new General Manager. In the interim, leases of this nature will require Council’s approval and must be signed under Council’s Common Seal for registration at the Land Titles Office.


Katoomba Town Centre Arcade Based on the current design concepts for the proposed refurbishment of the Katoomba Town Centre Arcade and the possible link between the TAFE Site and the Katoomba Town Centre Arcade, Shop 6 may be affected. However, only a small splay corner of Shop 6 may be required to enhance the flow of the pedestrian access way. This information has been disclosed to the tenants in accordance with the provisions of the Retail Lease Amendment Act 1998. Conclusion Shop 6 Town Centre Arcade, Katoomba is classified as Operational Land under the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and therefore can be leased. Mr Lees and Ms Brown’s proposal to lease Shop 6 Town Centre Arcade, Katoomba will provide a good tenant mix within the Arcade. The terms and conditions of the proposal are considered reasonable and consistent with market rates. This lease will reduce the current vacancies within the Town Centre Arcade and increase Council’s income stream. Accordingly, it is recommended that Council grant a lease to Mr Lees and Ms Brown as outlined in this report.

PROTECTION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 8 SUBJECT: WEED MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FILE NO: C03358 Recommendation: That the Draft Weed Management Strategy, Discussion Paper and Annual Action Plan for 2001/02, be exhibited for public comment for a period of 28 days, prior to the consideration of the Strategy for adoption. Report by Group Manager, BM City Services: BACKGROUND – THE PURPOSE OF A WEED MANAGEMENT STRATEGY Environmental weeds and their causal agents are considered to be one of the greatest threats to biodiversity and ecosystem function in the Blue Mountains. The weed management issues facing the Blue Mountains City Council are unique. The Blue Mountains Local Government Area (LGA) lies at the head of the catchment, amid an expanse of World Heritage listed National Park, which is directly affected by nutrient-enriched runoff from the urban areas. Weeds are a symptom of these degrading influences. The elevated plateau of the Upper Mountains also provides climatic and soil conditions that are not common in other areas where weed infestation is induced by urbanization. As a consequence of the magnitude of the environmental weed problem and the community concern regarding weeds, the Council and the State Government have devoted substantial resources to weed management. Significant achievements have been won as the result of the weed management programs to date, but it is vital that the weed management programs address agreed priorities. The Draft Weed Management Strategy responds to the issues and recommendations of the Discussion Paper. The details of the proposed weed control programs for 2001/02 are contained in the Annual Weed Control Action Plan. These documents are separately enclosed for the information of Councillors. There has been some preliminary consultation with the representatives of major interest groups in the course of preparing the Strategy. It is proposed that the documents be exhibited for public comment after which time the Draft Strategy will be considered by Council for adoption together with any amendment to take into account submissions from the community.

PROTECTION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Item 8 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

The adoption of the Strategy will provide the accountability, monitoring and review mechanisms necessary to implement the weed management programs to meet the Council’s objectives. Difficult choices must be made in order to contain weed infestations and make progress towards the suggested goal of “To minimize the impacts of weeds upon the natural environments of the Blue Mountains”. THE WEED MANAGEMENT ISSUES – THE DISCUSSION PAPER The Discussion Paper identifies the dimensions of known weed problems and the control methods applied and the known outcomes to date. There are over 400 known weed species in the Blue Mountains. The Strategy identifies some of the more well known and significant weed species, the estimates for the extent of infestation and it also identifies the species that are known to be the most aggressive invaders of healthy bushland. (For example, the Strategy identifies 10 weeds that are highly aggressive and that infest more than 100 hectares of bushland in one or more of 5 Planning Areas of the City.) Weed control programs have no lasting effect unless they also do something to control the factors that are causing the infestation in the first place. The Discussion Paper identifies that the overwhelming majority of weeds follow disturbance to the natural condition of the bushland. This can be obvious in the form of clearing of native vegetation or it can be much less apparent, such as nutrient enrichment of soil from dumping of garden rubbish or stormwater runoff from the urban area. The area to be managed is very large, and the natural values of the areas impacted are exceptionally high. Blue Mountains City Council is a direct land manager for approximately 6,000 ha, it has a support role for monitoring, planning and implementation for appr oximately 6,000 ha of Crown land and there is approximately 20,000 ha of private land where Council has a monitoring, planning, assistance and regulatory role. The World Heritage listing of the Greater Blue Mountains National Park has served to underscore the significance of the weed management issues. The weed control methods currently in use include bush regeneration, tree weed control, slashing, herbicide spraying, regulation of declared ‘Noxious Weeds’ on private land, and some limited use of biological controls on a trial basis. Each of these control methods has advantages and disadvantages that are discussed in detail within the Strategy. The most effective strategy utilises these activities in combination. Over the last 3 years the Council has funded weed control programs to a level of approximately $1.5 million and the State Government has funded bush regeneration to a level in excess of $3 million. The following pie chart shows the approximate allocations of the BMCC budget to each of the principal weed control methods and the supporting community and planning / monitoring programs.


Slashing2%

Bio-control trials0%

Program planning / administration

3%Weed education7%

Bush regeneration40%

Herbicide spraying18%

Tree weed control7%

Private property inspections

10%

Community action on-ground support

(Bushcare)13%

Approximate proportion of annual BMCC budget for each weed management activity The large majority of the funding is applied to on ground actions, 3% of the budget is directed to program planning, monitoring and administration including grant applications and reporting. Council receives some funding from the Department of Agriculture to support control of Noxious Weeds. The Discussion Paper describes the parameters by which the level of grant funding is determined and the significance and implications of the institutional arrangements and the planning frameworks that govern the administration of grant funding programs for weed control. The potential advantages of adopting a more appropriate bioregion for weed control based upon the World Heritage listed Greater Blue Mountains is a recommendation that flows from the consideration of these issues. The Discussion Paper describes the features of the different weed control methods, their strengths and weaknesses. Recommendations are then made to guide the formulation of a strategy that sets an agreed goal and provides a basis to implement programs to meet agreed targets and outcomes. Lantana and Radiata Pines are two weed species that have caused such concern within the community that the Council has sought to assess the potential for significantly improving the level of control. Privet is another weed that is regularly the subject of community concern. The Discussion Paper contains several case studies that illustrate the implications of aiming to eradicate or significantly increase the level of control applied to large scale infestations of these weeds. The case studies demonstrate that a large proportion of the weed budget would have to be directed at the control of lantana and other large scale infestations such as those of privet, for a relatively small gain and that significant increases in the control level for these weeds is not sustainable at this time.

77 % On-ground weed control actions 23 % Community programs, education, planning, monitoring


For these reasons the Strategy proposes a strategy of containment for these species at this time, other than where they occur in areas that will receive more comprehensive weed treatment in order to consolidate past investment and to protect the areas of highest ecological value. THE WEED MANAGEMENT STRATEGY The goal of the Draft Strategy is to minimize the impacts of weeds upon the natural environment. The recommended actions are therefore guided by objectives that are principally driven by a need to protect the biodiversity values of the bushland and the need to meet the Council’s statutory requirements. The strategies must also aim to address the causal factors by adopting an integrated approach to regulation of the sources of infestation on private land, the control of weeds on public land and the education and support of the community to take action across the City to attack the source of infestations. Making the Most of the Resources – Prioritising the Actions A key component to the Draft Strategy is the establishment of agreed priorities that can then drive the design of the most effective implementation programs. The Strategy proposes that the weed management programs be prioritised in two ways. Weed species are prioritised according to six criteria including factors such as the level of threat posed to bushland biodiversity or human health, the potential for further spread of the weed and cost effectiveness of current treatment methods. Those weeds that are causing the greatest impact to the environment, and are still within the capabilities of Council to treat, are recommended to be targeted first. Weed control works are also proposed to focus wherever possible on specific catchments. The criteria for selection include the levels of infestation, the cost of control and the level of investment in catchment by community and government funded programs to date. The outcome of these criteria is that there will be a consolidation of healthier catchments, a priority on prevention and the control of weeds that present the greatest risk to healthy bushland. Programs seek to work from better bushland to worst, from upstream areas of catchments to downstream areas. Over the last 4 years, the NSW State Government has funded the ‘Urban Runoff Control Program’ in the Blue Mountains, a component of which is a $4 million bush regeneration program in 13 catchments (totalling 216 hectares of bush regeneration sites). Responsibility for the ongoing maintenance of these sites will pass to Council at the conclusion of the current contracts that expire in 2003.


At the Council meeting of 5 December 2000 (Item 10, Minute 530), Council endorsed the Strategic Plan for Phase 2 of the URCP (2000-2003), thereby committing to structure the planning of weed programs to take account of investment already made in these catchments and sites by the URCP. Strengthening Co-operative Weed Management Working in partnership with other land management agencies is an essential part of a successful weeds strategy and a more relevant regional planning process is one of the outcomes sought in order to improve co-ordinated weed management. Weed Control on Private Land The declaration of Noxious Weeds is a crucial element in the coordination of effective weed control, as it is the principal means by which re-infestation of public land can be controlled. It provides Council power to direct action to weeds in accordance with the level of control specified for that weed. It is therefore very important that the Noxious Weeds pr ograms complement the priority weed species and the other work programs. Community Programs Action by the community to assist in protecting bushland reserves, is a critical component of any successful strategy to control weeds. The Strategy maintains the emphasis on the Bushcare program and the promotion of educational information on weeds. More specific action to support the weed control strategy is being developed as part of the Environmental Education Strategy. Monitoring and Review The Draft Strategy contains performance measures which will chart the progress against some of key elements of the Strategy. ANNUAL ACTION FOR WEED CONTROL Targets for the Control of Weed Species The Annual Action Plan contains the targets for weed control and more detailed actions for the 2001/02 financial year. The level of control achieved for a particular species will be reviewed on an annual basis as it will alter in response to significant alterations in funding levels. Emphasis will maintained for the top priority weeds to meet the eradication and containment goals specified in that Action Plan. The targets for the levels of control are set based upon the works and noxious weeds programs maintaining a focus on the priorities as determined by the criteria under the Strategy.


Annual Weed Control Work Programs and Service Levels The annual work programs reflect the recommendations of the strategic approaches. In summary the proposed annual program for 2001/02 will: • Increase the level of private property inspection to complement the work programs on

priority sites and priority weeds. • Increase the proportion of the target weeding for the priority weed species. • Maintain a comprehensive bush regeneration capacity within the Environmental Weeds

Team for application in priority catchments and sites. • Maintain the urban/noxious weeds removal programs. • Maintain the limited support for the biological control trials. Noxious Weeds Declarations The Action Plan recommends nominations for new inclusions on the Noxious Weeds list based upon the priority weeds and upon the level of control that the Council can implement on its own land, through its on-ground weed control programs. A total of 23 new listings are recommended for Noxious Weeds, 11 for the lowest control category, W4g, which prohibits the distribution or propagation of weeds, 2 for W4c, which additionally requires that weeds be prevented from spreading to adjoining properties, 3 for W3, which requires that the weed be prevented from spreading and its numbers and distribution reduced, and 4 for the highest control category, W1, which requires notification of presence of the weed and suppression and destruction of the weed. CONSULTATION The Discussion Paper and the approaches in the Draft Strategy have been finalized after a review of the issues and options with members of the local weeds committee which includes the National Parks and Wildlife Service, the Sydney Catchment Authority and the Department of Land and Water Conservation. A meeting was also held on 28 November 2000 to seek input on the main points of the strategy. The meeting was attended by 20 community members consisting primarily of environmental groups and members of the bush regeneration industry. To tap into the high degree of knowledge in the general community, as well as allowing those in the community who may be impacted upon by the strategy an opportunity to comment, it is recommended that the strategy be placed on public exhibition for four weeks. Submissions received will be reviewed for possible incorporation into the strategy before it is presented to Council for final adoption.


CONCLUSION Weeds are one of the greatest threats to the biodiversity of the Blue Mountains LGA and Council puts a lot of resources into controlling them. Council weed control works have been prioritised using methodologies that have not been made explicit to the general community. The Weed Management Strategy aims to make transparent how these decisions have been made as well has introduce new concepts and areas for weed control focus.


ITEM NO: 9 SUBJECT: FEASIBILITY OF EXPANDING WEEDS PROGRAMS FILE NO: C05069 Recommendations: 1. That the Council continue to support the work of the current weeds teams and explore

options for expanding these weed management programs in the 2002/2003 budget. 2. That the NSW Government Urban Runoff Control Program Task Force be requested

to agree that the interest generated by transfer of the URCP grant funds to Blue Mountains City Council for the implementation of bush regeneration and landscaping contracts to June 2003, be available for the purpose of contributing towards the funding of the ongoing maintenance of the URCP contract sites after June 2003.

Report by Group Manager, BM City Services: SUMMARY On its meeting of19 December 2000 (Minute No. 580), Council resolved:

“That a report comes back to Council on the feasibility of establishing a second environmental weeds team as well as expanding the noxious weed program by providing additional funds in the coming budget.”

This report provides a response to that resolution. It describes the current structure and organisation of the weeds teams, identifies costs and recommends a revised structure based upon an expansion of the weeds teams to meet the terms of the resolution, and describes how that expanded weeds team would strategically serve the draft Weed Management Strategy. The improvements that can be achieved with the additional resources include increased private property inspections, increased grant funding, an acceleration of eradication programs for identified priority weeds, an ability to maintain additional bush regeneration areas, and improved response times for customer service requests. The cost of funding the expanded team is approximately $160,000 in year one, dropping to approximately $100,000 per annum after that time, reflecting the one off capital purchase of vehicles to serve the new teams. However, the report concludes that it is not feasible to expand the weeds program at this time given the financial constraints facing the Council and the other priorities that must be met.


The report also briefly reviews but rejects the option of financing the expansion of the weeds teams by reallocating the current Environmental Management Branch budget, as that approach would necessitate discontinuance of other environmental protection programs and structural adjustment of the Environmental Management staff to align with the different emphasis on program delivery. The report also foreshadows the implications for the Council of the transfer of the responsibility for the maintenance of the bush regeneration sites funded under the Urban Runoff Control Program until mid 2003. Maintenance of these areas will have to factored into the forward planning of Council’s weed management programs. 1. THE RECOMMENDED STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF AN EXPANDED

WEEDS PROGRAM The separate report to this Council meeting on the Draft Weed Management Strategy, describes the current weed management issues and the weed control programs in some detail. The recommendations for the structure and function of an expanded weeds team have been derived from the priority issues and actions contained in the Weeds Management Strategy. The Weed Management Strategy identifies the need to:

• increase the level of private property inspection to complement the work programs on priority weeds and sites;

• increase the proportion of target weeding for the priority species; and • maintain a comprehensive bush regeneration capacity within the Environmental

Weeds Team for application to priority catchments and sites. In response to these priorities the recommended structure for an expanded weeds team would increase the existing team of 7 permanent staff and two temporary staff employed for the peak spring/summer season, to a team of 10 permanent staff and two temporary staff, comprising: • a full time private property Weeds Inspector to complement the part time weeds

inspectors; and • two environmental weeds teams of three rather then the existing single environmental

weeds team of four. If an expanded weeds team were used to implement key Weeds Strategy components, the following outcomes could be expected: • Increased private property inspections by 1,500 annually, thereby targeting weed species

that are re-infesting clean or improving areas on public land; • Increases in annual grant funding for noxious weed control programs by up to $10,000 per

annum; • A significant acceleration of progress in the eradication of identified priority weeds (as set

out in Table 8 of the Weed Management Strategy); • Maintenance of 2-3 bush regeneration sites in addition to maintenance of the Urban

Runoff Control Program contract sites from handover in 2003; • Halving of the response time to customer service requests from the current backlog of 200

outstanding Customer Service Response and up to 3-4 months response time.


2. FEASIBILITY OF EXPANDING THE WEEDS TEAMS Over the last 3 years the Council has funded weed control programs to a level of nearly $1.5 million and the State Government has funded bush regeneration to a level in excess of $3 million. The draft budget for the 2001/02 financial year provides for $457,000 in order to maintain the service level for weed control programs at the 2000/01 levels. The cost of the expansion of the weeds teams and programs as recommended in this report is approximately $100,000 per annum and a one off expenditure of $60,000 for vehicles. The weeds budget is broken down thus for each option:

There is a separate report before Council on the budget proposed for 2001/02. That report provides the financial rationale for the total budget expenditure. The following comment on the financial factors influencing the recommendations in this report has been provided by the Assets and Corporate Services Group.

Assets and Corporate Services Comment on Budget Issues

“The 2001/2002 draft budget has been compiled within a framework of increasing costs that are not being met by a corresponding increase in revenue. Rate pegging for 2001/2002 has been capped at 2.8% and there are a number of cost factors that have had a negative impact on Council's finances. In addition, there have been statutory wage/salary and benefit increases over which Council has little control. The draft budget already includes significant expenditure on items such as the development of cultural initiatives, LEP 2000 Policy Development, the construction of the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre, Council’s $1 million contribution toward the Katoomba Civic Centre Refurbishment, and the ongoing implementation of the Information Technology Strategy.”

This report therefore concludes that for the 2001/2002 financial year the Council will continue to support the weed programs at current levels. Options for expanding the weed management programs will be reconsidered in the course of preparing the budget for 2002/2003. Given the limits upon providing additional funds for the weeds programs from the corporate budget, consideration was also given to funding the weeds expansion from within the Environmental Management Branch budget.

Budget 2001/02 Grant & user fees Employment Operating/ capital

Total

Option 1 Status quo (67,077) 342,257 188,500 463,680 Option 2 Expanded program (70,655) 433,200 260,650 623,195 Net cost difference 159,515


Funding of an expanded weeds team that meets the terms of the Council resolution from within the current proposed Environmental Management budget would be substantially met from employment costs. There are few opportunities for budget savings from the general operating costs. Staff redeployment from within the existing Environmental Management team to staff the expanded weeds team is not an option because of the very different skill set. A restructure of the environmental management functions and organisation would be required, necessitating the discontinuation of a number of environmental protection programs and corresponding changes to the staff structure and makeup. The strategic refocus of the Environmental Management branch is not recommended given the priority accorded to environmental protection programs by the Council and the community. 3. THE URBAN RUNOFF CONTROL PROGRAM BUSH REGENERATION

CONTRACTS AND A PROPOSED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. The NSW Government Urban Runoff Control Program (URCP) is currently funding bush regeneration contracts in 14 areas throughout the City, totaling 216 ha. Council has given a commitment to structure its long-term weed programs in consideration of the need to sustain the gains made by the URCP. The URCP State Government Task Force has given a commitment to ‘Help BMCC, NPWS and other government agencies to develop a long term management plan for the maintenance and expansion of professional and community- based bush regeneration programs. In pursuit of this approach BMCC is being requested by the URCP to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Task Force to provide a level of commitment to the maintenance and implementation of all grant funded projects implemented under the URCP. A detailed analysis of the maintenance requirements of the URCP contracts and the implications of these approaches will only be known once the contracts are much closer to completion in 2003. At this stage it is estimated that it will cost between $70,000 and $85,000 to maintain the contract sites by using the Council’s environmental weeds team. Those costs reduce to approximately $30,000 to $45,000 a year for the following three years. The range of the estimates also reflects different targets, extending from securing ongoing improvements in the bushland at the contract sites, to maintaining the outcomes achieved by URCP funded contracts. An expansion of the Bushcare Program could reduce these costs by a small amount. The current URCP maintenance contracts require the contractors to work with the Bushcare Groups to ensure that the Groups issues are being taken into account and the Groups are being supported and encouraged in their efforts.


If Council is unable to secure additional funding to expand weeds programs by July 2003, Council will need to restructure the weed management programs to enable the Environmental Weeds Team to meet the core maintenance requirements for the URCP bush regeneration sites. The MOU proposals by the URCP Task Force will be separately reported to Council once the outcomes of the current deliberations on the Weed Management Strategy and this report on the scale of the weed control programs has been determined. The MOU will be an evolutionary document given that Council may be successful in gaining additional funding for these programs from other sources. However, fundamental elements of the bush regeneration programs must be based on funding sources that are secure for substantial periods. Bush regeneration requires ongoing maintenance and funding for periods of 3-5 years is the only effective basis for planning the core sites and extent of sites that will be incorporated into bush regeneration programs. At the moment grant programs do not offer a satisfactory means of gaining a forward commitment for contributions to recurrent expenditure such as that necessary to maintain the bush regeneration sites from the handover. The Government has instead been increasingly placing the onus upon local government to generate their own funds for environmental protection programs, particularly for recurrent expenditure and for the monitoring and planning programs that the funding programs are increasingly dependent upon. By maintaining a good monitoring and forward planning program for bushland management Council will position itself to maximise access to external grant programs for the purpose of supporting these sites from July 2003. The Council has had notable success over the last 3 months in winning grants to support complimentary restoration works in natural areas within the URCP catchments and for target weeding programs across the City largely because of the quality of the submissions made for the proposals and the ability to monitor and report on the implementation of those programs. (In excess of $180,000 worth of grants have been won over the last 3 months for: creek line and bushland restoration, Upper Kedumba River South Katoomba; $65,000 for upgrade to Vale Street wetland, South Katoomba; $30,000 for Weed Education Officers to implement weed control on private land in priority areas.) At the meeting of 10 April 2001, Council resolved to accept the transfer of the grant funds required to implement the URCP bush regeneration and landscaping contracts until completion in June 2003. One of the conditions of the transfer was that the interest on the funds accrue to the URCP accounts within the BMCC budget. This interest will provide some additional funds beyond that required to complete the contracts, which could provide some funding for maintenance after handover of these sites to Council in June 2003. It is therefore recommended that URCP Task Force be requested to make these funds available for the purpose of contributing to the ongoing maintenance of the URCP contract sites.


CONCLUSION It is not possible to fund the expansion of the weeds team as foreshadowed at this time. Council will maintain the very substantial weeds programs as contained in the budget for 2001/02 and will continue to pursue alternative means of complementing this funding from alternative sources. The Draft Weeds Management Strategy describes the criteria for establishing the priorities and planning implementation programs. Council will maintain its prior commitment to placing a priority on maintaining the URCP sites as part of the forward programming of the weeds programs. The extent to which this occurs will be dependent upon the funding available and the progress in the other priority bushland protection programs.


ITEM NO: 10 SUBJECT: TRAIL BIKE RIDING ON COUNCIL RESERVES AND IN THE

NATIONAL PARK FILE NO: H01068 Recommendation: That the information be noted. Report by Group Manager, BM City Services: PURPOSE This report provides a response to the following Notice of Motion of 13 March 2001 (Minute No. 103) regarding the extent of trail bike riding in Council reserves and the National Park and how this activity can be prevented.

“That Council receive an urgent report on the extent of trail bike riding in Council reserves and the National Park and that this report addresses how this activity can be prevented and what the applic able legislation requires.”

BACKGROUND Trail bike riding (ie. motorised bikes) is one of a number of recreational activities (including dirt jump bike riding, rock sports and horse riding) undertaken in the Blue Mountains with potentially significant impacts on natural values. There has been significant recent attention given to rock sports and dirt jump bike riding, both of which have been the subject of separate Council reports. These separate reports have highlighted the need for an overall Nature Based Recreation Strategy. This strategy would provide a coordinated management response to nature based recreation activities, recognising the breadth of expectations, values and management responsibilities both internally and external to Council. CURRENT POSITION Extent of Trail Bike Riding Whilst the extent of trail bike riding within Council Reserves and the National Park is difficult to quantify, it is estimated to be substantial.


Following discussions with the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) it is apparent that trail bike riding is predominately associated with areas within the National Park, or Crown / Council bushland reserves adjoining urban areas. Trail bike riding within other Council reserves is minimal. The extent of trail bike riding on private lands is unknown, but is known to occur. It is apparent that almost all major fire trails and walking tracks extending from urban areas into the National Park have some use by trail bikes. The following table list areas identified as a result of consultation with NPWS. It should be noted that list is by no means meant to be comprehensive.

Location Suburb Victoria Falls Road Mt Victoria Ridgewell Road Blackheath Hat Hill Road, Blackheath Blackheath Aerodrome Blackheath Rutland Road (Nth Katoomba Airstrip),

Medlow Bath

Cascades Water Supply Catchment Area Medlow Bath North Katoomba (Semi-established circuit – unauthorised)

Katoomba

North Leura Leura Mount Hay Rd (Various Tracks) Leura Somme Avenue Wentworth Falls Andersons, Murphys, Ingar Fire Trails (off Tableland Road)

Wentworth Falls

North Lawson Park Lawson South Lawson Park Lawson Frederica Pass Lawson Queens Road/Lawson Ridge Lawson Terrace Falls Rd Hazelbrook Off Oaklands Rd Hazelbrook Woodford Water Supply Catchment Area Woodford Linden Ridge/Dawes Ridge Linden Springwood/Shaws Ridge Springwood Long Angle Creek/Cripple Creek Warrimoo/Blaxland Elizabeth Lookout Lapstone

Major impacts associated with the activity include noise, accelerated erosion, sensitive vegetation impacts (eg. hanging swamps) and safety risks (both for participants and other users (eg. bushwalkers). Control of Trail Bike Riding and Applicable Legis lation The Australian Road Rules provide a National system of road rules for Australia. Under these rules various pieces of legislation (eg. Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1998, Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Act 1997, etc) can be applied to deal with the licensing, registration and insurance of vehicles (including trail bikes). The road rules and associated legislation are primarily applied by the Police and apply specifically to areas that meet the meaning of a road as specified within the rules. Fines vary but can be up to around $1260 for driving and riding an unregistered/uninsured vehicle and $329 for being an unlicensed driver/rider (personal communication with NSW Police Force, May 2001).

PROTECTION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Ite m 10 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

For vehicles using access-barred tracks within a National Park, NPWS officers have the power to issue fines to drivers/riders under Clause 6.2 of the National Parks Act (Penalty $300). Council officers may issue penalty notices under the Crown Lands Act and the Local Government Act for disobeying a direction about bringing vehicles onto public land or acting contrary to a sign. Penalties range from $66 up to $220. Various other acts may also apply including those which govern the use of public and private lands or protect amenity and environmental damage. Enforcement officers may also have specific powers relating to impoundment, questioning and the gathering of evidence. Consultation was undertaken with the NSW Police Service, the National Parks and Wildlife Service and local government bodies regarding ways of controlling inappropriate use of trail bikes on public and private lands. Councils contacted included: q Baulkham Hills Shire Council q Gosford City Council q Sutherland Shire Council q Wollongong City Council q Wyong Shire Council It was identified that the main problem in controlling inappropriate trail bike riding was that enforcement officers are not equipped to chase or catch the offenders. The police previously had a trail bike squad that was based in Penrith. However, this was disbanded some two years ago. All of the Councils contacted expressed frustration in that there was very little that could be practicably done to prevent trail bike riding in inappropriate areas. Locking gates and installing signage has had limited impact in many cases. The NPWS expressed similar frustrations. The URCP and Department of Land and Water Conservation are currently investigating the use of cabling to restrict access where appropriate. Council has used signage and access restriction for Crown and Council managed land in the Blue Mountains Local Government Area. Again, the effectiveness of this approach has been limited. Often, if the signage is prohibitive, it is defaced or removed. If it is informative, or advisory, signs tend to remain untouched. During the consultation it was pointed out that there should be a recognition of trail bike riding as a recreational need and that this should be supported by land managers where appropriate.


CONCLUSION The overall extent of trail bike riding in the Blue Mountains is considered to be substantial. However, it seems to be restricted largely to Crown lands and the National Park. Major impacts associated with the activity include disruption to noise amenity, accelerated erosion, sensitive vegetation impacts (e.g. hanging swamps) and safety risks for both participants and other users (e.g. bushwalkers). Appropriate signage and restriction of access are the primary means of control being employed at present. However, the effectiveness of this approach is limited. Without dedicated resources, including both time and equipment, to chase and catch offenders, land managers will continue to have trouble to prevent inappropriate use of trail bikes in the Blue Mountains. It may be appropriate to lobby the Police Service for re-establishment of the Trail Bike Squad to cover Western Sydney and the Blue Mountains. Other options for consideration include direct consultation with users to facilitate a process of restricting the activity to a small number of suitable sites. This may not yield significant improvements because of the informal nature of such use. It would be essential for all land managers and the NPWS and DLWC in particular to be heavily involved if initiatives to manage this problem are to have any success. A working party of land managers and enforcement agencies together with users representatives may provide a way forward. Other non-regulatory approaches should also be investigated as part of any strategy. Council’s resources are currently being directed to addressing the dirt bike jump strategy that was recently reported to Council. Following that, the rock sports issues are scheduled for attention. The opportunity to spend significant time on the trail bikes issues will be dependent upon how these two priority issues of recreation management unfold once the community consultation and user consultation input is available.

LAND USE MANAGEMENT Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 11 SUBJECT: DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN NO. 21 – ADVERTISING

AND INFORMATION SIGNAGE FILE NO: C00448 Recommendations: 1. That Council publicly exhibit draft Development Control Plan No. 21 –Advertising and

Information Signage (as amended), in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations.

2. That it be Council’s intention that, upon adoption of Development Control Plan No. 21

– Advertising and Information Signage, the existing Policies on A-Frame / Sandwich Board Signs and Signs in Public Places be repealed.

Report by Group Manager, Health and Development: Background Council, at its meeting of 13 March 2001, considered a Report (Item 9) relating to draft Development Control Plan No. 21 – Advertising and Information Signage and resolved:

“1. That Council publicly exhibit draft Development Control Plan No. 21 – Advertising and Information Signage, in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations.

2. That it be Council’s intention that, upon adoption of Development Control

Plan No. 21 – Advertising and Information Signage, the existing Policies on A-Frame/Sandwich Board Signs and Signs in Place Places be repealed.”

Subsequent to that meeting, the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning announced the making of State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 64 Advertising and Signage. The public exhibition of draft DCP 21 was defe rred pending investigation into the impacts of SEPP 64. The purpose of this report is to identify the main implications of the SEPP and to highlight the amendments which are proposed to draft Development Control Plan No. 21 – Advertising and Information Signage in response to SEPP 64. Summary of SEPP 64 – Advertising and Signage SEPP 64, gazetted on 16 March 2001, introduced uniform controls and comprehensive provisions which aim to ensure signage is appropriately designed and located throughout the State of NSW and to regulate signage (but not content) under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

LAND USE MANAGEMENT Item 11 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

The objectives of the SEPP are to ensure that signage (including advertising) is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, provides effective communication in suitable locations and is of a high quality design and finish. The SEPP also contains provisions for regulating the duration of consent for the display of certain advertisements. The types of advertising signage regulated by the SEPP predominantly include large advertisements, for example, those greater that 20m2 in area or higher than 8 metres. It also regulates advertisements on bridges, advertisements on rural land, roof and sky advertisements, wall advertisements, freestanding advertisements, building wrap advertisements and special promotional advertisements. The provisions of the SEPP also stipulate that the display of such advertisements is prohibited in certain locations, including environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or conservation areas, residential areas, areas of open space, waterways, scenic protection areas, national parks and nature reserves. As a consequence of the SEPP 64 provisions it is considered necessary to amend the previously adopted draft Development Control Plan No. 21 – Advertising and Information Signage to ensure consistency between the two documents, whilst emphasising the specific requirements for advertising and signage within the Blue Mountains local government area. Amendments to draft Development Control Plan No. 21 – Advertising and Information Signage A number of minor amendments are proposed to draft DCP 21. A copy of the previous DCP issued to Councillors and the current DCP, as amended, has been distributed to Councillors separately. A summary of these matters are as follows. a) The objectives of draft DCP 21 have been amended to be consistent with the

objectives of SEPP 64. b) The definitions have been amended to ensure consistency with SEPP 64, particularly

with reference to the definition of Business Identification Sign and Building Identification Sign. The definition of Advertising Sign has also been amended to reflect the SEPP definition to provide consistency and clarity.

c) Part 2 of the draft DCP - Area Specific Guidelines, has been amended to provide

consistent assessment criteria as specified in Schedule 1 of SEPP 64. The assessment criteria includes the character of the area, special areas, views and vistas, streetscape, setting or landscape, site and building, associated devices and logos, illumination, safety and the specific objectives of the draft DCP.

d) Table 1, outlining the requirements for various signage types, has been amended for

consistency with SEPP 64.


Provision for specific types of advertising and signage: Inflatable devices and Bunting Clause 6 of the draft DCP proposes that bunting and large inflatable signs, such as those used for commercial promotions and the like, be considered as an unacceptable form of advertising and signage and therefore generally not be supported. A concern has been raised however, since the previous Report was presented to Council, regarding the appropriateness of controlling ‘party type’ balloons and the like as a form of promotion and/or advertising. It is considered that the temporary display of ‘party type’ balloons and the like is outside the scope of the draft DCP and Council’s reasonable regulatory control. As such, their use is not proposed to be covered under the Plan. Conclusion The draft DCP is considered to provide appropriate guidelines and controls for future signage proposals whilst recognising the need for well designed and located advertising signage in the City. It is expected that the DCP will provide appropriate criteria that can ensure that all new signage proposals are compatible with the area in which they are proposed to be located. It is also considered that the DCP is consistent with the state -wide provisions for advertising and signage as contained within SEPP 64. It is recommended that Council exhibit the amended draft Development Control Plan for comment, after which a further Report will be prepared for Council consideration.


ITEM NO: 12 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. X01/0237 FOR ADDITIONS TO

THE DWELLING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF A WORKSHED & CARPORT, AT LOT 18 SECTION 6 DP 2410, NO. 19 STEPHEN STREET, KATOOMBA

FILE NO: X01/0237 Recommendations: 1. That the Development Application No. X01/0237 for additions to the dwelling, and

construction of a workshed and carport at Lot 18 Section 6 DP 2410, No. 19 Stephen Street, Katoomba be determined pursuant to S.80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 by the granting of consent subject to conditions shown in Attachment 1 to this report.

2. That Construction Certificate No. X01/0237 be issued. Report by Group Manager, Health and Development: Reason for report This matter is reported to Council in accordance with Council’s

resolution of 26 September 2000 (Minute No. 397) which requires that applications relating to properties owned by staff, having delegations to determine land use applications, be determined by Council.

Applicant

Mr I McKenzie and Mrs W McKenzie

Owner

Mr I McKenzie and Mrs W McKenzie

Application lodged

28 February 2001

Property address

Lot 18, Sec. 6, DP 2410, No 19 Stephen Street, Katoomba


Site description

The subject land has a width of 20.24 metres, a length of 50 metres, and a total area of 1012 square metres. The land is located on the corner of Stephe n and Warwick Streets and slopes gently downhill to Stephen Street. The property is situated in a well established area of Katoomba and is surrounded by older style dwellings. The existing fibrous cement clad dwelling is single storey and relatively small in size. There is an existing freestanding fibrous cement garage located at the side of the dwelling with an existing gravel drive to Stephen Street. The land has an established garden with several large mature radiata pine trees to the rear of the property.

Proposal

The applicant proposes to carry out the following works:- § An addition to the rear of the dwelling comprising a

bedroom, study, family room, rumpus room, laundry and verandah.

§ An addition to the front of the dwelling comprising an

extension of the existing dining room and a verandah. § A single carport attached to the front of the existing

garage, within the 8 metre building setback. § A covered walkway linking the existing garage to the

proposed rear addition. § A freestanding workshop/she d to the rear of the property.

§ Relocate an existing metal garden shed from the side of

the dwelling to the rear of the property.

Subject Site


§ Cover the existing fibrous cement external wall sheeting

with painted timber weatherboards to match the new addition.

Plans showing the site area and extent of the proposed works are provided in Attachment 2 to this report.

Development controls

Zoning - LEP 4 Residential 2(A1) DLEP 1997 Living Development Cont rol Plans - DCP No. 5 Echo Point Precinct DCP No. 26 Building in Bushfire Prone Areas DCP No. 30 Smart Design DCP No. 34 Energy Efficient Residential Development State Environmental Planning Policy 58 – Protecting Sydney’s Water Supply. The proposal is not exempt or complying development for the purposes of Development Control Plan 33.

Notification

The application was notified to adjoining and nearby property owners for a period of 14 days, from 7 March 2001 to 21 March 2001. One submission was received raising no objections to the development.

Issues

Assessment issues – + Environmental Planning Instruments + Variation to Policy – Building Line

Compliance Table:

LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN NO. 4 Clause Standard Proposed Compliance cl. 39 Height of buildings – maximum 2

storeys Single Storey Yes

cl. 40 Utility services Connect to sewer, town water, power and phone

Yes


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN NO. 5

cl 6.6 Height of buildings – maximum 2 storeys

Single story Yes


Page 4 Non-combustible roofing Corrugated steel Yes

Page 5 Enclose subfloor Subfloor of additions to dwelling and shed enclosed by fibrous cement sheeting.

Yes


cl. 6.6 8 metre front building setback 1.7 metres for carport, 7.7 metres for steps/landing associated with front verandah

No


cl 2.0 Minimum 3.5 star energy efficiency rating

3.5 stars Yes

Discussion of Issues The application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and for compliance with Local Environmental Plan No. 4, Development Control Plan 5 – Echo Pint Precinct (DCP 5) Development Control Plan 10 – Town Character Guidelines (DCP 10), Development Control Plan 26 – Building in Bushfire Prone Areas (DCP 26), Development Control Plan 30 – Smart Design (DCP 30) and Development Control Plan 34 - Energy Efficient Residential Development (DCP 34). The application has also been assessed for compliance with the Building Code of Australia – Housing Provisions. The proposed development complies with the relevant planning instruments, with the exception of the 8 metre front building setback required by Clause 6.6 of DCP 30. The proposed building alignment is 1.7 metres for the new carport, and 7.7 metres for the front verandah. The applicant has submitted a written request supporting the reduced front building setback for the following reasons:-

“The existing single garage is set back approximately 7.7 metres from the front boundary. Site constraints restrict off-street parking for a second vehicle to the area immediately in front of the garage. A carport erected in the area forward of the garage will afford adequate protection.


Although the subject property is located on a street corner there is no vehicular access from the side street to the property. An approximate drop of 1 metre below street level and the presence of mature pines trees prevent reasonable access along this side boundary.

The driveway to the adjoining property, 21 Stephen Street, is located on the far side boundary and as such visual access will not be reduced or impeded as a result of the proposed location of the carport.

The design of the proposed carport is architecturally consistent with the existing garage and the dwelling. The front boundary of the property is well vegetated with mature shrubs and trees and it is proposed to grow a native climber (Hardenbergia) on the side of the carport adjacent to the boundary. As such it is considered that the carport as proposed will not significantly impact on the existing streetscape.

The steps and landing leading to the front verandah will encroach into the 8 metre setback by 1 metre. An alternative location for the steps is not considered viable. The overall size is minor and as described above, the front of the property is well screened by existing vegetation and therefore the steps will not be visually obtrusive.”

The character of the neighbourhood is established by early to mid 20th century dwellings of varying building setbacks, many erected closer to the front boundary than the present requirement of 8 metres. The rear yard of the property contains several large mature radiata pines which constrain the siting of a carport and providing access in this location. The sharp fall of the land below Warwick Street and presence of a retaining wall erected between the property boundary and the Warwick Street carriageway would necessitate significant filling to establish a driveway access. This could potentially impact upon the direction of surface water drainage flow and the root systems of the radiata pines. The siting of a carport in front of the existing garage utilises the existing driveway access and is considered the most appropriate location given the site conditions. Alternate locations on the Stephen Street frontage behind the 8 metre setback are not possible. The design of the carport is consistent with the style and character of the dwelling. It has a height of 2.6 metres which is lower than the existing garage and the width of 3.4 metres does not exceed that of the existing garage. Partial screening would be afforded by the existing established landscaping within the front yard. The applicant proposes to plant a native climber (Hardenbergia) on the side of the carport facing the adjoining property to the south, 21 Stephen Street, which would in time cover the lattice side of the carport. An existing 1.5 metre timber paling boundary fence also provides some screening. The dwelling on 21 Stephen Street is located several metres away from the side boundary and the views, solar access and privacy of this property would not be adversely impacted upon. The owner of this property has not objected to the proposal. Encroachment into the 8 metre setback of the small landing and steps to the front verandah will be unobtrusive and screened by the established vegetation in the front yard.


The additions to the rear of the dwelling are consistent in design with the existing dwelling and no vegetation is required to be removed. The proposed workshed is located under the radiata pines, but is supported on a raised platform floor on posts, approximately 500 mm above ground level, to maintain the existing ground levels and minimise interference to the root systems of the trees. Report by External Consultant In accordance with Council’s procedures, the application has been reviewed externally. This was undertaken by Mr Karl Berzins of Berzins Environmental Planning who has submitted a report dated 11 May 2001 which states in part: “In conclusion the proposed development will improve the residential amenity of the

subject land and not detract from the streetscape or environmental attributes of the locality.

I concur with the assessment report prepared by Council officers and would

recommend the application for Council’s approval.” Conclusion The combined Development/Construction Certificate Application for additions to the dwelling, and the erection of a carport and workshed, has been assessed in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The proposed works and encroachment on the building line will not have a detrimental effect on the streetscape or the enjoyment of adjoining properties and are recommended for conditional approval.


Attachment 1 - Conditions of Development Consent

Confirmation of relevant plans

1. To confirm and clarify the terms of consent, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the plans drawn by I McKenzie numbered 1, 6 and 7 dated 2 November 2000 and numbered 2 to 5 dated 11 February 2001 and accompanying supportive documentation, except as otherwise provided or modified by the conditions of this consent.

Period of development consent

2. Substantial physical commencement of construction is required within a two year period from . Should this not occur, the development consent will lapse.

Builders details 3. Prior to any works commencing on the site, a certified copy of the owner / builder permit is required to be submitted for Council records.

Site management 4. To safeguard the local amenity, reduce noise nuisance

and to prevent environmental pollution during the construction period: a) Site and building works (including the delivery of

materials to and from the property) shall be carried out Monday to Friday between 7am-6pm and on Saturdays between 8am-3pm. Alteration to these hours may be possible for safety reasons but only on the approval of Council.

b) Stockpiles of topsoil, sand, aggregate, spoil or other material shall be stored clear of any drainage path or easement, natural watercourse, footpath, kerb or road surface and shall have measures in place to prevent the movement of such material off site.

c) Building operations such as brickcutting, washing tools, concreting and bricklaying shall be undertaken on the building block. The pollutants from these building operations shall be contained on site.

d) Builders waste must not be burnt or buried on site. All waste (including felled trees) must be contained and removed to a Waste Disposal Depot.

Erosion & sediment

controls 5. To preserve the unique environment of the Blue

Mountains and to contain soil and sediment on the property, controls in accordance with Council’s Erosion & Sediment Control policy are to be implemented prior to clearing of the site and the commencement of site works. This will need to include the installation of a sediment fence with returned ends across the low side of the site so that all water flows through. These shall be maintained at no less than 70% capacity at all times.



Drains, gutters, roadways etc., shall be kept clean and

free of sediment. Soil erosion fences shall remain and must be maintained until all disturbed areas are restored by turfing, paving or revegetation.

Plans on site 6. A copy of the stamped and approved plans,

development consent and the construction certificate are to be on the site at all times.

Dust control 7. The techniques adopted for stripping out and for

demolition are to minimise the release of dust into the atmosphere. + Before commencing work, any existing

accumulations of dust are to be collected, placed in suitable containers and removed. Selection of appropriate collection techniques, such as vacuuming or hosing down, shall take account of the nature of the dust and the type of hazard it presents (eg., explosive, respiratory etc).

+ Dust generated during stripping or during the breaking down of the building fabric to removable sized pieces shall be kept damp until it is removed from the site or can be otherwise contained. The use of excess water for this purpose is to be avoided.

It should be borne in mind, that in certain environments and under certain stimuli, deposits of combustible dust on beams, machinery and other surfaces may be subject to flash fires, and suspensions of combustible dusts in the air can cause them to explode violently (see NFPA Handbook).

Removal of hazardous

waste 8. Removal of dangerous or hazardous materials shall be

carried out in accordance with the provisions of all applicable State legislation and with any relevant recommendations published by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (Worksafe Australia). + Only competent persons, or competent and

registered persons shall carry out removal. + Removal of asbestos or materials containing

asbestos fibres, shall be in accordance with the NOHSC code of practice.



Removal of material 9. All demolished material and excess spoil from the site

shall be disposed of at a location and in a manner acceptable to Council. No material is to be burnt on site.

Stormwater drainage 10. To ensure rainwater is drained clear of the building and

adjoining property, roof water shall be connected to stormwater drainage lines discharging to the street gutter in Stephen Street. It is recommended that the drainage system be installed at the same time as the footings. It must, however, be operational as soon as the roof is clad.

Surface drainage 11. To prevent surface water from entering the building:

+ the floor level shall be a minimum of 500mm above finished ground level; and

+ seepage and surface waters shall be collected and diverted clear of the building site by a subsurface / surface drainage system. Note: Care is to be taken to ensure that no run off is diverted to adjoining properties.

Materials & colours 12. To have regard of the amenity of the area, the materials

and colours to be used are: a) External walls: Weatherboard painte d Haymes

“Windstream” (pale blue colour) b) Roof: Corrugated Colorbond steel “Gull

Grey” Any variation to the above materials / colours will require the prior approval of Council.

Construction

inspections

13. To ensure structural integrity, the maintenance of minimum health standards, the management of the buildings surrounds and the protection of the environment, compliance certificates are to be issued at significant stages throughout the construction period. These stages are: a) Pier holes/pad footings before filling with concrete. b) Trenches complete with reinforcing and prior to

filling with concrete. c) Floor frame, dampcourse, antcapping, foundation

walls before floor material is laid. d) Framing when external wall and roof cladding is in

place and prior to internal linings. e) Wet area flashing prior to tiling or covering.



f) Stormwater drainage between building and

discharge point prior to covering. g) Completion of the development and sign off to all

conditions of the consent prior to occupation and use.

At each inspection, erosion and sediment control measures and site management will be inspected.

Sub floor 14. To protect the building from ember and fire attack,

subfloor areas must be enclosed with masonry or other solid non-combustible material. Lattice work is unsuitable.

Sarking 15. In the event of a bushfire, to assist in the prevention of

ember entry to the roof area, fire grade sarking should be used (flammability index not greater than five) under all roofing.

Openings 16. Any opening including vents on walls etc., should be

sealed with maximum 2mm wire mesh. The opening of a chimney flue or air handling equipment can remain unprotected as long as ceiling access holes are large enough to provide fire fighting access to the roof cavity and command a clear view of the entire roof space.

Roofing 17. To minimise risk of loss of property from bushfire:

+ the roof / wall junction should be constructed so that the eaves or the gaps between rafters are effectively sealed.

+ ridge capping must be sealed. Doors 18. To eliminate the possibility of embers entering the

building in a bushf ire situation, all external doors are to be fitted with draught seals.

Smoke alarms 19. An automatic fire detection and alarm system is to be

installed in accordance with: + Australian Standard 1670; or + Australian Standard 3786 or listed SSL Register of

Accredited Product. The detector units are to be connected to the 240 volt power supply, have suitable battery backup and be located on or near the ceiling in the following locations:

a) Between each area containing bedrooms and the remainder of the dwelling including any hallway associated with the bedrooms; or



b) in each bedroom; and

c) in any storey not containing bedrooms. Prior to occupation or use, the owner / applicant must submit to the Principal Certifying Authority a copy of the smoke detector installation details and certificates (issued by the Electrician).


Attachment 2


ITEM NO: 13 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. X01/0061 FOR A TWO STOREY

BRICK DWELLING ON LOT 46 SECTION 3 DP 8540, NO. 20 BEAUFORT AVENUE, MOUNT VICTORIA

FILE NO: X01/0061 Recommendations: 1. That Development Application No. X01/0061 for a two storey brick dwelling on Lot 4,

Section 3 DP 8540 , No. 20 Beaufort Avenue, Mount Victoria be determined pursuant to S.80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 by the granting of consent subject to conditions shown in Attachment 1 to this report.

2. That Construction Certificate No. X01/0061 be issued. Report by Group Manager, Health and Development: Reason for report A portion of the proposed development, including a deck and

section at the rear of the dwelling, encroaches into the Environmental Protection zone at the back of the property.

Applicant/Owner

Mrs B J Sutton

Application lodged

18 January 2001

Property address

Lot 46, Section 3, DP 8540, No 20 Beaufort Avenue, Mount Victoria

Site description

The subject land is located on the southern side of Beaufort Avenue, Mt Victoria and comprises an allotment having a total area of approximately 910 square metres. The property dimensions are approximately 60.0 metres in length and 15.2 metres in width. The front 47% of the property is zoned Residential Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) while the rear 53% is zoned Environmental Protection under LEP 1991. The entire property is also designated as a Protected Area – Escarpment Area under LEP 1991. The property is constrained by the narrow width of the lot and the Environmental Protection Zone at the rear. The land slopes gently to the front and steeply to the rear of the property with the proposed dwelling being located on the ridge line in a similar fashion to neighbouring properties.


Development History

Combined Development / Building Application No. 270/86 was approved by Council on 1 May 1986 for construction of a single storey dwelling on the property. An amendment to the approval was subsequently granted by Council on 28 July 1988. Construction of the building commenced and proceeded up to floor frame stage, however work subsequently ceased on the building and it remains in the same condition.

Proposal This application proposed the construction of a new two (2) storey dwelling utilising the existing brick fender walls previously constructed. The new dwelling will incorporate split level floors at both ground and first floor levels. It would incorporate a kitchen, lounge, dining and laundry at ground floor level and three (3) bedrooms and a bathroom at first floor level. It is proposed to essentially utilise the existing building footprint and fender walls although a number of courses of brickwork are to be removed to reduce the overall height of the new building. It is also proposed to construct an attached deck to the rear and an attached garage to the front of the building. A copy of the plans forms Attachment 2 to this Report.

Development controls

Zoning – Local Environmental Plan 1991 Residential Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) Environmental Protection – (53%) Escarpment Area – (47%)

Subject Site


Notification

The application was notified to adjoining property owners in accordance with Council’s Community Consultation Policy. Four (4) submissions were received as a result of the Community Consultation Process, including two (2) from the same property owner, all objecting to the proposed development. The submissions objected to the proposed dwelling on the basis of height, privacy, colours, views and overshadowing.

Issues

Assessment issues – § Environmental Planning Instruments § Community Issues

o Height o Privacy o Colours o Views o Overshadowing.

Compliance Table:

LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN NO. 1991 Clause Standard Proposed Compliance cl. 10.2 All weather access. There is existing vehi cle access on the

site which will be sealed with asphalt. Yes

cl. 10.4 External surfaces appropriate for site characteristics.

Bagged brickwork and metal roof. The proposed colours will be discussed later in the report.

Yes

cl. 10.5 Environmental Impact. There will be minimal clearing and the application can be conditioned in regard to erosion and sedimentation controls.

Yes

cl. 10.6 Height restriction – maximum 2 storeys, 8 metres to ridge, 6.5 metres to eave.

2 storeys, maximum height of 7.990 metres to ridge and 6.1 metres to eaves.

Yes

cl. 10.8 Connection to services. Water and power are available to the site. The site is located within Sydney Water’s subsidised backlog area and a pumpout effluent system is proposed.

Yes

cl. 10.9 40% of the notional development area of the lot which would allow up to 171 square metres of site cover.

165 square metres. Yes

cl. 11.4 Escarpment area, single storey construction required if building protrudes above the vegetation canopy of the immediate locality or the height of adjacent buildings.

2 storeys proposed however the ridge height will be below the vegetation canopy of the immediate locality.

Yes



Clause Standard Proposed Compliance cl. 6.6 8 metre front building setback. 14 metres Yes

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN NO. 34 Clause Standard Proposed Compliance cl. 2.0 Minimum 3.5 star energy efficiency

rating. 3.5 stars Yes

Discussion of Issues 1. Statutory Considerations The application was assessed against the relevant provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and for compliance with Local Environmental Plan 1991 (LEP 1991), Development Control Plan 10 – Town Character Guidelines (DCP 10), Development Control Plan 26 – Building in Bushfire Prone Areas (DCP 26), Development Control Plan 30 – Smart Design (DCP 30) and Development Control Plan 34 – Energy Efficiency in Residential Development (DCP 34). The application has also been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia. The proposed development was found to generally comply with the relevant planning instruments however the rear deck, and approximately a 1.8 metre section at the rear of the building, encroach into the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The EP Zone boundary is located approximately 28 metres in from the front boundary of the property. The building and deck will encroach by up to approximately 7 metres into the EP Zone. Clause 20 of Local Environmental Plan 1991—Development in Adjoining Zones, permits development to extend onto land on which that development would, in the absence of clause 20, be prohibited provided that:

“(a) the development is permissible on the land from which it is extended; (b) the development is carried out within 20m of the zone boundary; and (c) the Council is satisfied that the objectives of the zone within which the

development would otherwise be prohibited are not prejudiced.” In terms of assessing the encroachment, it needs to be acknowledged that the previous consent has been commenced and the base area of the dwelling has already been constructed. The area where the deck is proposed to be located has previously been filled level. The area contains no native vegetation and is covered with a mown exotic lawn which previously formed part of the curtilage of the adjoining dwelling. No additional clearing is required for the deck.

Council’s Environmental Scientist, has assessed the proposal and advises that the area adjacent to and including the area where the deck is proposed to be located, has been modified to an extent that it is no longer environmentally significant.


In view of the highly modified nature of the area, the location of the base construction of the building and the minor extent of encroachment, it is considered that the extension of the development into the Environmental Protection zone will not prejudice the objectives of this zone. The property is also located within the outer catchment area of Warragamba Dam and is subject to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 58. There is an existing septic tank installed at the rear which, while approved as part of the previous dwelling on the land, has never been used. Consent for this system was granted in 1986. Although approved previously the site is now considered too small for onsite disposal of waste. The applicant has therefore agreed to modify the existing tank/system to a pump out system. The application has been referred to Council’s Effluent Services Section, and to the Sydney Catchment Authority and no objections have been raised to the use of a pump out effluent removal system. Works will be required to the road constructed in Beaufort Avenue however, to ensure the property can be serviced by an effluent removal tanker. This can be conditioned into any consent.

2. Community Issues Height The proposal is to essentially use the existing building footprint in the construction of a new dwelling together with the addition of a garage, entry and verandah at the front and a deck at the rear. It is proposed to remove three (3) courses of the existing foundation wall on the eastern side of the building to reduce its overall height. The floor of the dwelling will also be stepped in the centre, between the lounge and dining rooms further reducing the bulk of the building. The building would comply with the 8.0 metre height restriction under Clause 10.6 of LEP 1991, with the highest point of the ridge measuring approximately 7.990 metres above natural ground level. This ridge height will also be below the vegetation canopy of the immediate locality and therefore complies with the height restric tions applicable in the Protected Area - Escarpment Area. The eaves would be 6.1 metres above natural ground level which complies with the LEP standard of 6.5m. Privacy An objection has been raised regarding privacy in relation to the two small windows on the eastern elevation to bedrooms 2 and 3. Both these rooms have a larger window in the north and south elevations respectively and as a result of the submission, the applicant has agreed to use frosted glass in the small windows in the east elevation. It is considered that this alteration will satisfactorily address any privacy concerns.


Colour

The colours initially proposed to be used for the dwelling were:

Bagged walls: Dark Grey Roof and hoods: Colorbond ‘Mountain Blue’ Barge and Fascia: Colorbond ‘Ebony’ or ‘Torres Blue’

The submissions raise objections to the ‘blue’ component of the colour scheme proposed. The use of blue/grey tones was raised with the applicant who subsequently submitted an alternate scheme utilising purple/mauve tones. Notwithstanding, the initial colours proposed are dark and will blend in with the blue hues of the eucalypts in the bushland setting. The use of blue/grey colours are colours are gaining in popularity for areas zoned under LEP 1991 due to their ability to complement the bushland setting of the mountains. While different from the greens and browns traditionally used in bushland environment, it is considered that the proposed colour scheme is appropriate for the characteristics of the site and locality.

Views The subject property and those adjacent are highly exposed particularly from the rear and enjoy panoramic views over the Kanimbla Valley. The front of the subject property is generally well screened from the street, however vegetation to the rear is sparse due to previous clearing on the site. One submission raised concerns relating to the appearance of the building from “Sunset Rock”, which is a lookout at the end of Beaufort Avenue and from Kanimbla Valley generally. An inspection carried out from Sunset Rock indicates the proposed building is unlikely to be seen from the lookout. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposed dwelling will not adversely impact upon the views to or from the adjoining properties to the valley at the rear. Overshadowing Concern has been raised in submissions regarding potential overshadowing from the proposed building. The subject land has a north / south orientation with the closest adjoining building being similarly located. While some overshadowing will occur to the rear yard area of the property immediately to the east, is will be limited to the afternoon and will be similar to that caused by the building itself in the morning on this land. The building on land to the west is located well away from the adjoining boundary with the land between heavily vegetated. Conclusion The Development Application for the erection of the dwelling has been considered in accordance with the relevant provision of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Given the narrow width and the environmental constraints on the site, it is considered the design of the proposed dwelling, by utilising the existing building footprint, has endeavoured to meet the needs of the applicant and to take into consideration the impacts on the surrounding area and neighbour concerns.


The proposed encroachment onto the Environmental Protection Area is not considered to have any significant environmental impacts due to the extent of existing works and it is recommended that the application be approved subject to the conditions shown in Attachment 1.



Consent 1. Blue Mountains City Council issues its consent, subject

to conditions stated hereunder, in accordance with Section 80A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. Substantial physical commencement of construction is required within 2 years from the date the consent is issued. To confirm and clarify the terms of consent, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the plans prepared by Mountaincraft Design numbered 1/1 dated January 2001 and accompanying supportive documentation, except as otherwise provided or modified by the conditions of this consent.

Engineers certificate 2. A certificate from a registered Structural Engineer attesting to the adequacy of the existing structure to support the anticipated loads is to be submitted prior to construction commencing.

Structural details 3. To ensure that the design is structurally sound, details

prepared by a registered Structural Engineer are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of the:

a) reinforced concrete floor slab on the ground. (Details are to make specific reference to Australian Standard 2870 and soil classification for the site.)

b) retaining walls. c) Wall and roof framing / bracing.

Certification shall refer to the appropriate codes or other criteria relied upon by the Structural Engineer.

Excavations 4. All excavations are to be guarded and protected to

prevent them from being dangerous to the public and surrounding properties.

Building Code of

Australia

5. All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

Home building

insurance

6. It is the responsibility of property owners to ensure that Home Owners Warranty insurance has been obtained in accordance with the Home Building Act 1989. Prior to any works commencing on the site, a copy of the Home Warranty Insurance Certificate for the property is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority. Information on this insurance scheme can be obtained from the Department of Fair Trading.



Signage 7. To ensure that the site is easily identifiable for deliveries

and provides information on the person responsible for the site, a sign displaying the following information is to be erected: § The statement “Unauthorised access to the site is

not permitted”. § The names of the builder or another person

responsible for the site along with an out of hours contact number.

§ Lot or Street number. Site management 8. To safeguard the local amenity, reduce noise nuisance

and to prevent environmental pollution during the construction period: a) Site and building works (including the delivery of

materials to and from the property) shall be carried out Monday to Friday between 7am-6pm and on Saturdays between 8am-3pm. Alteration to these hours may be possible for safety reasons but only on the approval of Council.

b) Stockpiles of topsoil, sand, aggregate, spoil or other material shall be stored clear of any drainage path or easement, natural watercourse, footpath, kerb or road surface and shall have measures in place to prevent the movement of such material off site.

c) Building operations such as brickcutting, washing tools, concreting and bricklaying shall be undertaken on the building block. The pollutants from these building operations shall be contained on site.

d) Builders waste must not be burnt or buried on site. All waste (including felled trees) must be contained and removed to a Waste Disposal Depot.

Erosion & sediment

controls

9. To preserve the unique environment of the Blue Mountains and to contain soil and sediment on the property, controls in accordance with Council’s Erosion & Sediment Control policy are to be implemented prior to clearing of the site vegetation and the commencement of site works. This will include: a) The installation of a sediment fence with returned

ends across the low side of the site so that all water flows through. These shall be maintained at no less than 70% capacity at all times. Drains, gutters, roadways etc., shall be kept clean and free of sediment.



b) To prevent the movement of soil off site, a single

entry/exit point to the property shall be constructed of 40mm blue metal aggregate or recycled concrete to a depth of 150mm. The length must be at least 5 metres with the width a t least 3 metres.

Soil erosion fences shall remain and must be maintained until all disturbed areas are restored by turfing, paving, revegetation.

Workers amenities 10. Before work starts, toilet facilities must be provided for

construction personnel on the site on the basis of 1 toilet for every 20 workers. Amenities are to be installed and operated in an environmentally responsible and sanitary manner. Toilets cannot remain on site for any longer than 12 months, without the further approval of Council.

Plans on site 11. A copy of the stamped and approved plans,

development consent and the construction certificate are to be on the site at all times.

Windows 12. The two small windows on the eastern elevation to

bedrooms 2 and 3 shall be provided w ith frosted glass. Stormwater drainage 13. To control rainwater runoff, roof water shall be

connected to stormwater drainage lines discharging to tank and thence to: a) the street gutter. It is recommended that the drainage system be installed at the same time as the footings/slab. It must, however, be operational as soon as the roof is clad.

Materials & colours 14. To have regard of the amenity of the area, the materials

and colours to be used are to be consistent with those submitted with the application - ie: a) External walls: Dark Grey b) Roof: Colorbond - Mountain Blue c) Driveway finish: Dark earth tone. Any outbuildings or other ancillary structures including rainwater tanks are to be finished in colours and materials of muted bushland tones and low reflective quality to blend with the surroundings. Any variation to the above materials / colours will require the prior approval of Council.



Construction

inspections

15. To ensure structural integrity, the maintenance of minimum health standards, the management of the buildings surrounds and the protection of the environment, compliance certificates are to be issued at significant stages throughout the construction period. These stages are: a) Slab base if no piers required and prior to placement

of the membrane. b) Floor frame, dampcourse, antcapping, foundation

walls before floor material is laid. c) Framing when external wall and roof cladding is in

place and prior to internal linings. d) Wet area flashing prior to tiling or covering. e) Stormwater drainage between building and

discharge point (drainage pipes, soakage pits and the like) prior to covering.

f) Completion of the development and sign off to all conditions of the consent including landscaping, prior to occupation and use.

At each inspection, erosion and sediment control measures and site management will be inspected.

Inspections (human

waste treatment device)

16. To ensure the maintenance of minimum health standards and the protection of the environment, inspections are required at significant stages throughout the construction period. These stages are: a) on completion of the treatment system / tanks before

any backfilling. b) the house drains before they are covered. Service points on the treatment system / tanks and drainage lines are to be left open for inspection, the day before the inspection, the tanks must be filled with water. To ensure satisfactory jointing, drainage lines must also be water tested prior to Council’s inspection. The approved installer and the licensed plumber / drainer are to be present at the inspection. At each inspection, erosion and sediment control measures and site management will be inspected.

Sub floor 17. To protec t the building from ember and fire attack,

subfloor areas must be enclosed with masonry or other solid non-combustible material.

Sarking 18. In the event of a bushfire, to assist in the prevention of

ember entry to the roof area, fire grade sarking should be used (flammability index not greater than five) under all roofing.



Openings 19. Any opening including vents on walls etc., should be

sealed with maximum 2mm wire mesh. The opening of a chimney flue or air handling equipment can remain unprotected as long as ceiling access holes are large enough to provide fire fighting access to the roof cavity and command a clear view of the entire roof space.

Roofing 20. To minimise risk of loss of property from bushfire:

§ the roof / wall junction should be constructed so that the eaves or the gaps between rafters are effectively sealed.

§ ridge capping must be sealed. Doors 21. To eliminate the possibility of embers entering the

building in a bushfire situation, all external doors are to be fitted with draught seals.

Decks and balconies 22. To prevent the spread of fire and the entry of wind

blown embers in the event of a bushfire: § Bearers and joists for decks, balconies and the like

shall not be continuous with those of the main building unless they are made of a non-combustible material, such as metal.

§ Areas beneath any combustible deck which are less than 600mm above the finished ground surface must be enclosed.

Insulation 23. Fire resistant mineral wool roof insulation is necessary

to reduce the impact of radiant heat on the building in bushfire situations. For non-masonry cladding, insulation should also be placed between wall studs in addition to breather type sarking on the outside of studs. This arrangement also increases the energy efficiency of the building.

Windows / doors 24. To improve the protection of the building in the event of

a bushfire: § Glazed windows and doors on the south and west

elevations (ie. the fire prone sides) must be protected by metal gauze screens or alternatively the use of fire resistant glazing such as glass bricks, tempered or wired glass.

§ Window frames are to be of metal or wood (not plastic).

§ External timber doors are to be of solid core timber and fitted with draught seals.



Fire protection zone 25. To improve the protection of property in the event of a

bushfire, a fire protection zone of 15 metres, consisting of a 10 metre fuel free inner zone and a 5 metre fuel reduced outer zone in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan No. 26, Building in a Bushfire Prone Area is required on the rear elevation (ie., the fire prone side). This work is to be completed prior to the occupation of any building on the site. The fuel protection zone is to be maintained on a permanent basis.

Internal hose / openings 26. To improve the protection of the property in the event

of bushfire: § an internal tap and hose of sufficient length to reach

all parts of the building including the roof void must be installed.

§ All service openings should be adequately sealed. Special purpose vents used in kitchens, toilets and bathrooms must be screened to prevent embers from gaining access to wall cavity. Chimneys and fireplaces must be made spark-proof.

Independent water

supply

27. An independent static water supply is to be provided, in addition to any domestic supply for bushfire protection. Requirements are as follows: a) An on site water reservoir of at least 10,000 litres

dedicated to bushfire fighting in addition to any domestic supply requirements.

b) If tanks are used then they must be fitted with a 38mm diameter outlet.

c) A sprinkler system consisting of heads located at regular intervals throughout the rear yard area and wall wetting sprinklers on the western elevation of the building.

d) A petrol or diesel pump enclosed in a non-combustible housing.

e) The tank is to be located within the existing cleared area of the site.

Driveway / access 28. To ensure adequate access, good site distance and

balance in the site design, the driveway: a) must be a minimum of 2.9 metres wide. b) must be sealed. Any construction works are to be completed to Council’s adopted standards prior to occupation of the building.



Screen planting 29. To improve the streetscape, screen planting is required

between the development and street alignment. The plants chosen should be in keeping with the character of the streetscape / village and contain a variety of advanced species found in the locality.

Earthworks 30. Excavated and filled areas are to be graded and drained

in a manner that will not be detrimental to adjoining properties or the environment. All disturbed areas are to be topsoiled and turfed or spraygrassed. Where batters exceed a ratio of 3 horizontal to 1 vertical, retaining walls or terracing is required.

Protection of vegetation 31. To preserve the natural site features and limit site

disturbance, ground covers and trees outside driveway areas and 3 metres or more from the outermost projection of the building are to be retained. Remaining vegetation must be protected by suitable guards / barriers to prevent damage as a result of the construction phase. (This does not apply to trees and vegetation required to be removed in identified Fire Protection Zones.) NOTE: The Eucalypt tree adjacent to the drive is to be retained as shown in red on the approved plans unless the written agreement of Council is obtained for its removal.

Services 32. To ensure the development incorporates adequate

sanitary disposal, the development is to be serviced by a pump out effluent removal system. As such, the existing bio-system shall be removed.

Sydney Catchment

Authority Conditions of Concurrence

33. 1. There is to be no on-site disposal of effluent. 2. AAA rated water conservation devices are to be

installed in the dwelling to minimise the volume of wastewater produced.

3. Erosion and sedimentation controls are to be installed prior to any construction activity and are to be maintained until the project is completed.



Approval to operate 34. Owners must obtain an approval to operate the sewage

system from Council prior to occupation. This approval can only be issued after Council is satisfied the installation has been completed in accordance with the approved system design.

Standards 35. All house sewer and plumbing work is to be carried out

in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Water Services) Regulation 1999. The following matters relating to the design and operation of the system are to be addressed: a) Toilet and bathroom fittings are to be connected by a

single pipe system. b) The installation is to incorporate a 3/6 dual flush

system. c) Manually ope rated cisterns are to be installed. d) The maximum vertical drop in the soil line from the

pan is 2.25 metres. e) The flushing systems fitted with internal overflows

shall not be connected to any toilet pan. f) The horizontal length of pipe between the outlet of

the pan and the junction with another waste to the main drain line or the outlet of the pan to the inlet of the septic tank is not to exceed 3 metres.

g) The elevated pipe line is to be adequately supported. h) All wastes from the building are to be treated in the

septic tank unless otherwise approved by Council. Location of tank 36. To ensure structural integrity of adjoining buildings and

property along with the installation itself, the waste treatment device should not be located within 1.5 metres of any building or site boundary, nor over easements or vehicle access ways.

Size of tank 37. The capacity of the septic tank must be 2350 litres to

ensure that the installation is adequate for the waste generated.

Sydney Water

agreement

38. The property owner is required to sign an agreement for the removal of effluent with Sydney Water.



Pump out 39. To ensure the effective operation of the system:

a) The holding well shall have a minimum holding capacity of 4500 litres.

b) A minimum 1m3 of concrete is to be introduced around the outside of the holding well to secure its position in the ground.

c) The suction line must be 50mm diameter, Class 12 pressure pipe with airtight glued joints.

d) The last 1.5 metres of the suction line and upstand must be a galvanised iron pipe terminating with a 50mm gate valve and “Camlok” fitting.

e) The upstand is to be set in concrete at the base to stabilise all joints near to the service outlet.

f) The tanker connection point / service outlet shall extend 200mm beyond the front boundary fence. Clear access for the pump-out tanker and access to the service fitting must be maintained at all times.

g) The embankment of the north western side of the existing driveway adjoining Beaufort Avenue shall be cut back to provide a turning area for a small effluent removal tanker as indicated in red on the approved plan. The area shall be stabilised and sealed and include all works to make the construction effective. Design plans and specifications of the engineering works are to be submitted to Council for approval prior to the commencement of that stage of works.


Attachment 2

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 14 SUBJECT: PROPOSED SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT BETWEEN NSW

RURAL FIRE SERVICE AND COUNCIL FILE NO: C01010 Recommendations: 1. That Council endorse in principle, the draft Service Level Agreement and Schedules

dated 18 May 2001. 2. That the Mayor and General Manager be provided with delegated authority to sign the

necessary final documentation following the outcome of further consideration and resolution in respect of:

§ Provision of reciprocal insurance cover § Finalisation of Delegations § Property / Licence details § Minor text changes or similar including any the result of negotiations with NSW

Rural Fire Service. 3. That the Council indicates its intention to provide the necessary delegations to the

NSW RFS to undertake responsibilities provided under the Service Level Agreement. 4. That the Councillor representative on the Liaison Committee be the same person who

is Council’s representative on the Blue Mountains Bushfire Management Committee. Report by Group Manager, Health and Development: Introduction The purpose of this Report is to outline the proposed Service Level Agreement (SLA) between NSW Rural Fire Service (the RFS) and Council for the provision of local emergency services. The endorsement by Council for a draft SLA for the Blue Mountains is sought. The Agreement is scheduled to come into effect on 1 July 2001, while the RFS have requested Council’s endorsement of a draft document by 1 June 2001. Background The Council, through its Emer gency Management Program and in conjunction with relevant State authorities, has responsibilities for a number of emergency responses that include storm damage, structural fires and bush fires, motor vehicle accidents, search and rescue support and other emergencies that affect the community.

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Item 14 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

The management and coordination of the Council’s services are through:

§ Operation of Emergency Services Centre § 24 Rural Fire Brigades § Blue Mountains State Emergency Service § The Fire Control Officer as the nominated Council Officer with responsibility to

deliver a number of provisions under the State Emergency Rescue Management Act. These roles are currently coordinated through Council’s Manager, Emergency Services who also has the role of Fire Control Officer and reports to the Commissioner of the RFS under the Rural Fires Act. In a response to the dual roles of the RFS and Councils in meeting administrative and operational responsibilities the State Government on 5 February 2001 made changes to the Rural Fires Act. The most prominent of the legislative changes is that Council’s Emergency Services staff are to transfer to State employment from 1 July 2001 and that the responsibilities of the RFS are to be provided back to Council through a ‘Service Level Agreement’. There is also potential under the SLA for certain additional local authority responsibilities under the Act and associated legislation to be undertaken by the RFS on Council’s behalf. This can include land management responsibilities over Council lands, provision of bushfire advice over land use applications / policies and the coordination of Blue Mountains State Emergency Services / Local Emergency Management Officer (LEMO) roles. The drafting of the SLA documentation has been in essence undertaken by representatives of RFS and Local Government and Shires Association (LGSA). Individual Councils have had very limited opportunities to influence the form or contents of the documentation. It also needs to be acknowledged that due to the complexity of the issues, draft documentation has only been made progressively available over the last 1-2 months. Form of Service Level Agreements The SLAs (copy forwarded to Councillors under separate cover) are proposed to comprise the following elements: § Covering document including:

• Description of parties • Interpretations • Term of Agreement • Liaison Committee to monitor performance • Arrangements in respect to land / buildings and maintaining fire fighting

equipment • Financing and insurances • Provision of an Annual Report • Review, modification and termination of the Agreement


§ Series of Schedules containing detailed data, functions and responsibilities,

comprising: • Schedule 1 – Responsibilities to remain with Council under Rural Fires Act • Schedule 2 – Land and Buildings (ie Emergency Services Centre and Brigade

Stations) to be made available to the RFS to provide services • Schedule 3 – Services to be provided by the RFS incorporating:

♦ Part 1 – Duties imposed on the Service under the Rural Fires Act ♦ Part 2 – Duties imposed on Council under the Rural Fires Act which

are to be exercised by NSW Rural Fire Services ♦ Part 3 – Responsibilities conferred on the RFS by Service Standards ♦ Part 4 – Other services to be provided to the Council but not

identified in the Rural Fires Act. • Schedule 4 – Recognised fire fighting equipment • Schedule 5 – Services to be delivered by Council to the RFS • Schedule 6 and 7 – Reciprocal insurance cover to be provided by Council and

the RFS during the operation of the SLA. Discussion of Issues Introduction While the Rural Fires legislation has been amended to facilitate the introduction of ‘Service Level Agreements’, the Council is not obliged to sign such a document. However, with the transfer of current emergency services staff from 1 July 2001, the remaining functions would need to be fully met by Council, rather than utilising the resources of the RFS. There is also discretion for the Council to negotiate a number of key aspects under the SLA, including:

§ Functions that the RFS will perform for Council § Support Council will continue to provide to the RFS § Provision of funding and level of services sought § Monitoring of the Agreement and operation of the Liaison Committee.

A number of matters however, have been built into the SLA as previously negotiated by the RFS and LGSA. It is for this reason and the limited time available that the principles pursued by staff have been to capture the existing operating environment rather than pursue major changes. It also needs to be acknowledged that the current range and level of services is considered to be appropriate. Term of Agreement While the model SLA includes a three year term (cl.3), it is considered that in this initial or ‘interim’ phase, that one year would be more appropriate. This will allow the SLA to be monitored after 1 July 2001 and any issues to be addressed in a longer term Agreement.


Liaison Committee There have been discussions with the RFS on the status, most appropriate role and composition of the Liaison Committee. The SLA proposes a composition made up of elected members and officers of Council, a local volunteer, Fire Control Officer and a member of the District Service Staff. A number of relatively minor changes are proposed from the Service’s original approach to provide for: § Identification of the Committee as one under the SLA to avoid any confusion with a

Council Committee under the Local Government Act § Clarifying its role as monitoring the performance of the Agreement rather than setting

Council’s policy § Council’s participation being through the same Councillor as on the Bushfire Management

Committee to provide consistency, General Manager and Group Manager responsible for the roles under the Agreement. This representation is considered appropriate provided the focus of the Committee is limited to monitoring performance.

§ The review of the SLA (cl.13) being through representatives of the Commissioner and Council with an initial review being commenced six months after the establishment of the Agreement.

Land and Buildings To facilitate the operation of the SLA, it is necessary to provide access to the Council’s current Emergency Services Centre (referred to as the Fire Control Centre in the Agreement) / Brigade buildings. The RFS are seeking a licence in respect of each of the premises (Schedule 2). While there are certain difficulties as:

§ A number of the properties are owned by the Crown / State Authorities § The Fire Control Centre has three separate tenancies (RFS, SES and NSW Brigades

Communication Centre) together with common areas appropriate arrangements have been drafted with the assistance of Council’s Solicitor, that can protect Council’s interest. The current schedule may need some refining however before the SLA is finalised. The one exception is the Jenolan Brigade whose station is in Oberon but which has for a number of years, been an operational part of the Blue Mountains District. This has been addressed by deleting the Brigade Station from the property Schedule only and indicating that Oberon Council are to ensure appropriate arrangements are in place. The cost of other support services are limited and assist the overall emergency cover of the Blue Mountains.


Provision of Services As this initial SLA is principally attempting to capture existing services and indicating whether they are to be supplied by the RFS or Council, there are only limited changes to the current arrangements. The details are captured in Schedules 3 and 5 of the Agreement. The following matters in terms of services, need to be noted: § Part 1 of Schedule 3 details responsibilities conferred on the RFS under legislation and are

not open to change under the SLA. § Part 2 of Schedule 3 details functions / responsibilities placed on Council under the Rural

Fires Act which can be passed to the RFS by agreement. A number of matters are proposed for transfer as they closely relate to operational considerations and include formation / disbanding of Brigades, territory of Brigades, maintenance of membership registers, declaration / notification of local bushfire danger periods and such administrative matters as approving Brigade constitutions and implementing disciplinary action. There are several matters which Council could transfer to the RFS but which are proposed to be retained. These include the re view of incidence of bushfire hazards on private lands, and issuing / reporting of fire permits. The rationale in retaining these functions are that following Council’s most recent Organisational Review, they were considered to better relate to the environmental management functions undertaken within the BM City Services Group. The integration of this type of fire management, weed management and bush care is considered to have merit. Part 3 of Schedule 3 details relevant RFS Service Standards and are not matters for change under the SLA. § Part 4 of Schedule 3 is of importance as it describes services that while not identified in

the Rural Fires Act, could be performed by the RFS on behalf of Council.

The principal matters currently contained in this Part are the provision of rezoning / Development Application assessment advice, input to policy development and administrative support to Blue Mountains State Emergency Service, the LEMO role and some support to Council as land manager.

§ Schedule 5 essentially documents the continuing level of support services that Council will provide the RFS in the Blue Mountains District. This includes services in respect of financial management, mechanics, IT, property, human resources and records. There would be no additional costs for these services beyond those in the current budget.


Delegations To facilitate the changed working relationships under the SLA, new delegations will be necessary for the RFS to undertake tasks on behalf of Council. This raises a number of legal considerations as the staff will no longer be under the employment of Council. It is proposed that ‘Annexure A’ to the Agreement will include such details however some further work is needed on the legal drafting of these provisions and whether it would be more appropriate to place them in a separate document. Insurance The SLA will create changed working relations between the RFS and Council. This will in essence, involve the RFS undertaking certain tasks on behalf of Council for which they will need to cover liabilities, while Council will need to ensure insurance for the premises and reciprocal services it provides back to the RFS. While the insurance appears capable of resolution, this is currently subject to further works. Financing As the SLA is viewed at this stage as maintaining the current level of service delivery, albeit through different working relations, it should not significantly alter the level of financing by Council or the RFS. The principle changes would be: § Full staffing costs to be met directly by RFS. This alters the current arrangement where

the salaries of the majority of staff are covered at least in part, by RFS grants. § Increase in Council’s contribution to the RFS from 12.3 % to 13.3 % of the cost of its

service delivery for the Blue Mountains Rural Fire District, which would be met through the Emergency Services levy. The overall levy however, ought not to change for ratepayers as there would be a corresponding reduction in the direct allocation of funds to Council’s ‘Emergency Services Program’. This in turn, would in effect, reflect the saving in staff costs.

§ The Service Level Agreement itself would only involve an annual payment of $1.00 by

the RFS to Council (cl.8). This links to the GST and taxation considerations (cl.15) and that service levels / commits are not proposed to change.

§ Transfer of Council’s direct funding under the ‘Emergency Management Program’ other

than that relating to the SES for expenditure by the Fire Control Officer in accordance with a Business Plan and financial delegations that would be endorsed by Council.


Dispute Resolution There are a number of provisions that relate to potential dispute arrangements under the SLA: § In the event of Council and the RFS being unable to resolve a dispute other than the

amount of the Council’s financial contribution, a mechanism (cl.12) is provided on mediation that escalate s through the respective Ministers and ultimately to the Premier.

§ Where the RFS Commissioner and Council cannot agree on Council’s financial

contribution to the model SLA provides that Minister administering the Rural Fires Act should determine Council’s contribution. This however, is considered to potentially place Council in a difficult position if a significant increase were to be proposed and if it could not recoup such additional costs due to rate capping. As such, an additional provision is proposed to be included that should the additional amount be above the rate capping limit, that it be referred to the Minister for Local Government to provide Council with the ability to recoup the monies without an adverse impact on other programs.

While there is uncertainty in forecasting Council’s contribution to the RFS, even under the current arrangements, the proposed approach is considered prudent if agreement can be reached.

Other considerations It needs to be acknowledged that while the preparation of the Service Level Agreement has proceeded well at the local level, there are some wide ranging concerns at other Councils with the process due to: § Very limited opportunities for direct input by individual Councils § Timeframe has permitted only a short period to address the issues § Potential implications of the more limited role of local government and as such whether a

total transfer of the emergency service roles would be preferable. The type of issues raised in terms of the latter point include:

§ Whether a Council can be part of the Liaison Committee as it is constituted outside the Local Government Act.

It is considered however, that as the SLA now specifically addresses this matter at cl.4.6 providing for an advisory function, that the Committee has a legitimate role.

§ There are no assurances in the SLA regarding the level of resourcing and/or staffing

to be maintained throughout the period of the Agreement. The RFS could also change the level of service by the division of resources.

§ It is considered that this is a potential risk however, the comments previously on

safeguarding the Council on changes to its contribution, an initial one year agreement and monitoring provide an acceptable base.


§ Whether a Council can delegate financial responsibility to a non Council employee

and the loss of control over expenditure. The form of delegations is being finalised however this matter is one that Council has the authority to provide to a Fire Control Officer. In terms of accountability, it is proposed that the SLA incorporate the provision of an agreed ‘Business Plan’ for the Blue Mountains District and financial reporting.

§ Whether it would be preferable for a Council to have the discretion to also transfer

equipment to the RFS. This matter does not appear to have been resolved in the RFS / LGSA negotiations on the SLA. However it is a matter that ought to be discussed during the initial Agreement period as there appears an anomaly with the transfer of staff while Councils still maintain equipment that is generally specified by the RFS and then needs to be maintained to its standards.

§ Concern that the RFS could amend its requirements over the standards of Council provided accommodation and a preference for rental leases / transfer of buildings.

§ Due to the general standard of accommodation in Blue Mountains, it is not expected that major issues will arise. The question of transferring assets links to the same issues as detailed under the previous point.

§ That with appropriate amendments to the Local Government Act, staff transferring

to the RFS should have the ability to retain delegations to undertake regulatory functions such as issuing permits and notices. While these amendments would have merit, the proposed responsibilities at this Council provide for the regulatory functions to be maintained.

§ It is understood that at least one metropolitan Council is proposing to decline to enter into a Draft SLA, is to seek the transfer of all equipment to the RFS and only make buildings available subject to a lease agreement or acquisition by RFS.

§ As indicated previously, the long term transfer of the complete emergency services functions together with the assets is an option that ought to be explored. However the current draft SLA and timeframe do not make this a feasible option if a smooth transfer is to occur from 1 July 2001.

Conclusion While it needs to be acknowledged that the approach to SLAs and the adopted timeframe has not been ideal, considerable work has been undertaken in the Blue Mountains to achieve a draft SLA which will, in essence, ensure the current level of service to the community is maintained. The associated documentation also assists in clarifying the often closely related responsibilities between the RFS and Council.


The circulated draft SLA is recommended for endorsement by Council subject to limited additional work to finalise matters such as insurance, delegations and property details. It is proposed that the Mayor and General Manager be delegated authority to sign the necessary documentation once these matters are fully addressed. There should be no adverse financial or workload impacts on the Council although careful monitoring of the Agreement will be necessary and longer term arrangements are considered necessary for 1 July 2002. It is also recommended that Council’s representation on the proposed Liaison Committee be the Councillor who sits on the Bushfire Management Committee, together with the General Manager and reporting Group Manager.

FACILITATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 15 SUBJECT: COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE/DONATIONS - RECOMMENDATIONS

BY COUNCILLORS FILE NO: C00944 Recommendation: That Council approve the following donations from the Councillors’ Minor Local Projects Vote:

Organisation Amount St Martin’s Anglican Church $200 Walk for Heart Exercise for All $100 Report by Acting General Manager: On 11 July 2000 Council adopted a revised Policy for Councillors’ Minor Local Projects allocations for the provision of community assistance/donations. The following recommendations for donation, which appear to fall within the ambit of the Policy, have been received and are submitted for approval.

Minor Local Projects

Recommending Councillor

Organisation Purpose Amount

Cr J Egan St Martin’s Anglican Church

For removal of graffiti $200

Cr C Gaul Walk for Heart Exercise for All

Contribution to public liability insurance to cover Heart Week event at Catalina - 29 April

$100

PROMOTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & SUPPORTING TOURISM Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 16 SUBJECT: TENDER – 2001/2002 BLUE MOUNTAINS HOLIDAY BOOK AND

POCKET GUIDE FILE NO: C05334. C05349 Recommendations: 1. That Council accepts the tenders submitted by Thomas Marsden Advertising for Art

and Design of the 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Holiday Book and 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Pocket Guide.

2. That Council accepts the tenders sub mitted by Offset Alpine for the Printing of the

2001/2002 Blue Mountains Holiday Book and 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Pocket Guide.

3. That for the art, design and printing of the Blue Mountains Holiday Book and Blue

Mountains Pocket Guide for the 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 years, Council authorise the Blue Mountains Tourism Authority, with the approval of Council’s General Manager, to exercise its discretion to extend the contract/s with either or both of the above companies.

Report by Acting General Manager: Background: At its meeting on 27 March 2001, Council considered a report regarding a tender for the production of the 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Holiday Book and resolved the following:

“1. That under Clause 19(1) (b) of the Local Government (Tendering) Regulation 1999 Council decline to accept the tender submitted; and

2. That under Clause 19(3) (b) of the Local Government (Tendering) Regulation

1999 Council resolve to invite fresh tenders for the design and printing of the 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Holiday Book and Pocket Guide.”

It should be noted that the original tender process was based on a total Project Management approach to the publishing of the Holiday Book and Pocket Guide. Given the lack of adequate response to that type of tender, Council reverted to its previous year’s approach whereby the Blue Mountains Tourism Authority (BMTA) project managed the publications. Accordingly new tenders were called for the production of the 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Holiday Book and the Blue Mountains Pocket Guide. Tenderers were able to submit a tender to Artwork and Design only (referred to as Part A), Printing only (referred to as Part B) or a combination of Artwork/Design and Printing (referred to as a Combined Tender) and were required to submit a separate tender for each publication.

PROMOTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & SUPPORTING TOURISM Item 16 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

Report Tenders for the 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Holiday Book and 2001/2002 Blue Mountains Pocket Guide closed on 1 May 2001. As a result a total of eighteen (18) tenders were lodged for each publication after 45 sets of specifications were sent out. Three (3) tenders for each publication were lodged after the closing time and were therefore not eligible for consideration by the Assessment Panel. Two (2) tenders for each publication did not submit all the necessary information and documentation as required in the tender specification and therefore a full and proper assessment of those tenders could not be made. Accordingly these 2 tenders were deemed ineligible for consideration. The thirteen (13) eligible tenders consisted of three (3) tenders for Part A only (Art and Design), one (1) tender for Part B (Printing only) and nine (9) combined tenders. Full details of all tenders are available on file for further reference. Evaluation Criteria Assessment of each eligible Tender was based on the ability of the Tenderer to meet the requirements of the Specification Document, the Selection Criteria and the provision of essential information requested in the tender documentation. As mentioned, thirteen (13) tenders received met the requirements and a weighted attribute evaluation method was then used for all tenders. The selection criteria and the weighting attributable to each is shown in the Table below. ITEM ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTING 1. Previous experience in producing similar publications and

print run of a superior quality, as demonstrated in labeled samples and other information submitted

17%

2. Ability of Applicant to produce/co-ordinate/manage the design, artwork and/or printing of the project

15%

3 Accessibility of Applicant for meetings, proof checking, press checks

8%

4. Demonstrated creative ability and experience of staff assigned to the project

15%

5. Demonstrated operational ability to meet the scope and outcomes of the contract e.g. equipment

10%

6. Demonstrated ability to meet the required production timeline identified by the applicant(s) in their critical path

10%

7. The price 15% 8. Mockup showing conceptual ideas, design and layout 10% The Tender Assessment Panel consisted of the BMTA Manager for Tourism, Promotions Manager, and the Executive Officer of Council.


It should be noted that as the final size of the publication is dependent on the number of co-operative partners (advertisers) secured the Specification Document asked tenderers to submit a price based on a set number of pages for the publication, with a plus/minus variance for additional/less pages. It should also be noted that the price structure provides the capacity for additional charging given the flexibility to meet advertising demands. Assessment Matrix: Enclosed separately for Councillors’ information is the assessment of each tender for both publications under the evaluation criteria listed above. The Tender Assessment Panel considered the ranking of the tenders for Artwork and Design only in combination with the ranking of the tender for print only and compared these with the rankings for the combined Artwork/Design and Printing tenders. It is worth noting that of the nine (9) combined tenders, five (5) nominated Offset Alpine as their printer. The top three rankings based on Art/Design and Printing for each publication were: TENDERER COMBINED PRICE TOTAL WEIGHTED

ATTRIBUTE Blue Mountains Holiday Book Thomas Marsden Advertising (Part A only) Offset Alpine Printing (Part B only) Combined Total A & B (Separate Tenderers*)

$26,291.00 $87,178.30 $113,469.30

78%

Cartoscope (Combined tender – Part A & B)

$127,108.30 74.5%

Green Advertising (Combined tender – Part A & B)

$114,312.00 73.5%

Ossher & Turnbull Designs (Part A only) Offset Alpine Printing (Part B only) Combined Total A & B (Separate Ten derers*)

$32,618.30 $87,178.30 $119,796.60

73.5%

Blue Mountains Pocket Guide

Thomas Marsden Advertising (Part A only) Offset Alpine Printing (Part B only) Combined Total A & B (Separate Tenderers*)

$ 8,837.00 $38,047.90 $46,884.90

77.5%

Cartoscope (Combined tender – Part A & B)

$55,630.30 75%

Millicent Publications (Combined tender – Part A & B)

$56,572.70 75%

Note: * To enable a proper comparison between all the eligible tenders including those that submitted a tender for only one of the two components ie Part A - Art/Design or Part B – Printing, all the separate Part A tenderers were assessed with the inclusion of the separate Part B tenderer.


Conclusion: As can be seen from the Table the separate tenderers for each component of the work provided the highest weighted score for both the Holiday Book and Pocket Guide. Accordingly following full consideration of the eligible tenders submitted the Tender Assessment Panel recommends the engagement of Thomas Marsden Advertising for Artwork and Design and Offset Alpine for Printing to produce both the Holiday Book and the Pocket Guide. The recommendations are made on the basis of the Total Weighted Attribute from the tender assessment process encompassing: • Proven experience in producing publications of similar quality and creative design • Price comparable when taking into account the other criteria, in particular demonstrated

creative ability and experience in producing publications of a superior quality • Both companies are based in western Sydney providing ease of access for all checking

and liaison with BMTA and with each other • Capability and experience of both companies to manage the project. It should be noted that both the above companies were involved in last year’s publication of the Blue Mountains Holiday Book and their performance was good. The tender contract is for a period of one year, with the option to extend for a further 2 years at BMTA’s sole discretion. The recommendations make provision for this option to be exercised with the approval of Council’s General Manager. Statement by the Tender Review Committee The Tender Review Committee has reviewed the Tender procedures and is satisfied as to the fairness of the process. Comment from Acting Group Manager, Assets and Corporate Services Funding for this project will be met from the sale of Co-Operative Advertising to tourism industry partners and the BMTA Marketing Budget.

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 17 SUBJECT: PRICING POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR THE MANAGEMENT

OF COMMUNITY BUILDINGS FILE NO: C02907 Recommendation: That the contents of this report be received and noted. Report by Acting Group Manager, Assets & Corporate Services: Introduction Council adopted the ‘Pricing Policy and Procedures for the Management of Community Buildings’ at its meeting of 27 June 2000 following a public exhibition for a period of six weeks , from 16 February to 28 March 2000. The adopted Pricing Policy provides the mechanism via which community facilities are to be managed to balance the various objectives and services provided by Council with the Blue Mountains community as the whole. However, the Policy will continue to be finetuned and therefore should not be considered as the ultimate solution. The progress of the implementation of the Policy was reported to Council on 10 October 2000. At the meeting, Council acknowledged various issues relating to community perception, commitment and input to the process by community organisations. Council requested that any difficulties arising during the implementation of the Policy be reported back to Council. This report deals with the components of the Community Building Pricing Policy which relate to arrangements for government funded community organisations such as neighbourhood centres, youth centres and children’s services currently occupying Council owned buildings, in particular: • The progress of the development of leases and licences for community organizations; • Issues of concern raised by community organizations at a workshop held by Council

on 9 April 2001. • The ongoing review process for the policy. Background At its meeting on 10 October 2000, Council considered the progress report regarding the implementation of the adopted ‘Pricing Policy and Procedures for the Management of Community Buildings’ and subsequently resolved, vide Minute No.449, as follows:

“1. That the contents of the report of the Council officers and the report of the Blue Mountains Community Interagency be noted and received.

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Item 17 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

2. That Council acknowledges the significant work done by the community sector

organisations though the Community Interagency in preparing their report, in particular their positive suggestions for improving the Policy contained in the document received by Councillors from the Community Interagency.

3. That Council does not intend to financially disadvantage any community sector

organisations or community groups through the implementation of the Policy. 4. That the Council acknowledge feelings of uncertainty and perceived unfairness

around the wording of the pricing policy. 5. That the full Council receive recommendations for amendments to the Policy in

2001 after negotiations between the Blue Mountains City Council and the Community Interagency around the Community Interagency proposals and other arising concerns.

6. That any difficulties arising during the implementation of the Policy be

reported back to Council.” A number of activities relating to the implementation process have been undertaken to date:

• Workshops with community sector organisations • Workshops with Section 377 Management Committees • Attendance at Section 377 Management Committee meetings • Development and revision of hiring procedures for public halls • Development of standard lease/licence formats • Review and Identification of leases/licences, groups and timeframes • Negotiation with ‘pilot’ groups • Identification of process for subsidy determination • Establishment of “Around the Hall” newsletters.

Item 3 of Council’s resolution above states that Council does not intend to financially disadvantage any community sector organizations or community groups through the implementation process. This has been the guiding principle for Council staff in the process of implementing the Community Buildings Pricing Policy. The objectives are:

• Better management and usage of public buildings • Ensuring acceptable building standards • Developing transparent responsibilities and accountabilities • Ensuring long term sustainability • Ensuring that income generated from the building is spent on it, • Funds granted by Government for rental should be used for rental.


Outcomes of Implementation Process In the process of implementing the policy, Council staff have come across both positive and negative issues that are summarised as follows:

• It is a time consuming process to develop individual agreements tailored to individual groups’ particular circumstances.

• The negotiation process involves many players with a wide variety of knowledge and skills.

• The complexity that requires substantial time and resources to solve. • There is a strong resistance by some community organisations to the Policy and

consequence reluctance to develop any license agreement within the current policy framework

• A user-friendly format for a license agreement, or memorandum of understanding, has been developed in conjunction with community organizations. This has replaced the former practice of developing commercial leases with a range of onerous conditions for the lessee. It has been necessary to develop a formal lease for one organization, as a formal lease was required for that group to secure a long-term loan for building works. In this case the terms of the lease included the benefits provided to community organizations by the Pricing Policy.

• Agreements have been developed with two children’s services, two youth services, one mountains wide organization, and one home and community care service.

• The agreements have provided clarity around maintenance responsibilities, insurance requirements, legal obligations and the assistance Council provides.

• Through the license negotiation process, a number of long standing issues for each organization have been resolved.

• Each license has resulted in mutually agreeable and beneficial financial arrangements being developed within the framework of the Policy.

• The negotiation process engages many people both within Council and in the community and enables an exchange of information as well as sharing of views. This dialogue has resulted in a learning process and improved relationship for both Council staff and community organizations.

Working Party To action Item 5 of Council’s resolution dated 10 October 2000, the then General Manager agreed to the proposals put forward by Community Interagency representatives to commence the process for reviewing the Policy by:

• Establishing a working party to review the policy over a six-month period; • Considering the document prepared by Community Interagency representatives and

distributed to Councillors prior to the Council meeting of 10 October 2000; • Comparing the document with Council’s adopted policy; • Looking for areas of agreement; and • Reporting outcomes to Council


Consequently the following agencies were invited to participate in the working party:

• Blue Mountains Community Interagency • Children’s Services Network, and • Youth Services Network

Responses with nominees have been received from the Youth Services Network and the Children’s Services Network. The Blue Mountains Community Interagency requested to have a workshop on the implementation of the Pricing Policy before forwarding a nomination for the working party. Workshop on 9 April 2001 The sixteen (16) organizations identified in the Council report of 10 October 2001 as requiring a new lease or licence were invited to attend the workshop. Of the sixteen, six have already entered into a newly negotiated licence/lease with Council. Eight (8) organizations responded who are all members of the Blue Mountains Community Interagency and were represented at the workshop, only one of which had entered into a newly negotiated license. A second organization had commenced the negotiation process. None of the other groups attending had had experience in negotiating a new agreement with Council, based on the Pricing Policy. Attached to this report is a copy of a letter from the Blue Mountains Community Interagency detailing their position on the issues. Issues raised at the workshop and recorded on the whiteboard during the workshop are included in Attachment 1. The following provides a summary of the issues discussed at the workshop: Structure of Council There were concerns regarding Council’s philosophy, structure and Management Plan. It was expressed that Council must have a role in contributing to social development by adopting a holistic approach in dealing with the provisions of community services in the Blue Mountains and that the current structure of the Council does not provide the mechanism to address these concerns. Consequently, the participating community groups requested a public workshop with Councillors and senior management to develop principles that addressed their concerns. As the issue appeared to be strategic, it was considered inappropriate to deal with such an issue at the Community Building Pricing Policy workshop, the community groups were advised to forward their written submission and request to Council for consideration. Partnership A definition of the term “partnership” was requested at the workshop as it was used frequently within the adopted Pricing Policy. Council officers provided the following definition of partnership:

• Understanding and transparency • Clarity and certainty • Sharing and support • Consultation and communication


Partnership aims at achieving the legal, financial, functional/physic al/social objectives of all parties involved. However, the issue of whether Council fully understand what community groups do was raised and that whether Council has considered the community benefit (from community perspective) provided when dealing with its property asset management strategies. Council Property staff have been working in consultation with various groups within the organisation as well as community groups to develop a partnership approach with community service organizations. In the context of the Pricing Policy, Council staff have been trying to work with community services groups to determine ways to:

• Encourage community services and recognize their contributions to the Blue Mountains community at large

• Effect better management and use of community buildings “Core” Services Some workshop participants considered that community services should be seen as “core” Council services. As mentioned in Council’s report dated 10 October 2000, the terms “core” and “expected” Services, whilst generating considerable debate, have not impeded the implementation of the Pricing Policy, nor have they resulted in any disadvantage to any group. The recognition of community services as “core” or “expected” is therefore considered more relevant to the social planning process than the Community Buildings Pricing Policy. Role of Working Party Some community groups felt that there needed to be clarification of the role of working party for reviewing the Pricing Policy. As outlined earlier, the role of the working party is to review the adopted policy, compare it with the Interagency’s submission in October 2000, ascertain areas for improvement and then report its findings to Council for consideration. This could include a process for community input to the implementation process. Building Maintenance Concerns were raised in respect of the impact of maintenance cost on funded groups, the questionable quality of some maintenance works and the unknown costs of minor maintenance. The licenses recently entered into with community organizations contain provisions that assign Council the responsibility for all cyclic maintenance, condition based maintenance, major maintenance and all minor maintenance costs above $300. There was general support by the attending Comm unity groups for the statement made by one participant that “ What we want is to pay no rent, for Council to look after the building, and for us to be left to get on with our work”. Licence/Lease Negotiation Council received requests from Blackheath and Katoomba Neighbourhood Centres and Mountains Community Resource Network to put on hold all licence and lease negotiations. Council can only agree to defer licence/lease negotiations if the relevant group requested it. Some licence and lease processes were in their final stages with the result that any delay on Council’s part could disadvantage the group concerned, especially if they relied on a formal lease/licence for securing their financial subsidies. In addition, a number of organisations had expressed a desire to enter into negotiations for a new lease or licence using the pricing Policy as a framework for the negotiations. Accordingly, it would be inappropriate to delay these lease or licence negotiations.


Conclusion Although the implementation of the adopted Community Buildings Pricing Policy with individual groups has not encountered any difficulties in establishing the appropriate agreements with these groups, there is concern among a number of groups affiliated with the Blue Mountains Community Interagency regarding Council’s ‘big picture’ philosophy, community objectives, structure and Management Plan. At the workshop on 9 April 2001, the eight participating community organisations who are all members of the Blue Mountains Community Interagency resolved not to participate in a working party to review the Pricing Policy until having a public workshop with Councillors and senior management concerning the above issues. This represents an impediment to the process of implementing and reviewing the policy. It is therefore considered appropriate that negotiations for licences and leases be continued on needs basis and the review of the policy be deferred until the establishment of the working party.


Attachment 1

Workshop on Pricing Policy for Community Organizations

9 April 2001. Issues raised by particip ants and listed on whiteboard Structure of council – issues of dealing across departments Partnership – an understanding integral to philosophy Why can’t community services be “core” services? Clarification of working party role Maintenance:

Condition of building (before and after) Impact on ongoing costs to groups Quality Unknown costs

Lack of understanding of what groups group do Community input needs to better clarified Community Benefit in relation to property not community Council’s contribution to social development Council is not just property Policy not just implementation Outcome: The groups represented had no problem with the formation of a working party, but there was the need to deal with the bigger picture first. The wanted a meeting with Councillors and Executive Management to deal with the bigger picture issues and establish the principles for the working party before proceeding. Participants: 17 people from 8 organisations attended –8 workers, 9 committee members. 5 council staff from Social & Cultural Planning, Property and Area Management. Note: 16 organisations directly affected by the policy were invited. Only one of the six organizations who have negotiated a lease or licence attended the workshop. Some bigger picture issues mentioned by the participants: § Partnership, what does it man? § How do you describe Community benefit § Economic rationalist agenda § Recognition of Social development and obligations of Council § Financial implications for organizations and the responsibility of Council for

supporting groups - “ What we want is to pay no rent, for Council to look after the building, and for us to be left to get on with our work”

§ All groups should get 100% subsidy. § How do you put a $ value around the goodwill of the community? § Inequity of spending on community needs as opposed to other areas. § Structure of Council


Attachment 2

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Item 1 7 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

Attachment 2


ITEM NO: 18 SUBJECT: MOUNT WILSON COMMUNITY HALL - PART LOT 25 DP 751645, 34

THE AVENUE, MOUNT WILSON FILE NO: H00149 Recommendations: 1. That the Heritage Conservation Management Plan for the Mount Wilson Hall be

received and endorsed. 2. That Council only carry out the necessary works for Stage 1 of Option 1 as outlined in

this report to enable the reopening of the Hall for use by the public as soon as practicable.

3. That a Management Plan be prepared for the Mount Wilson community hall in

accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993. Report by Group Manager, Assets & Corporate Services: Introduction The Mount Wilson Community Hall was built in 1951 on land that was given to Council in 1957. By Minute No. 941 of 13 August 1957, Council vested the care, control and management of the hall in a local committee. The Mount Wilson village community has been using the hall as a focal place for community activities, functions and meetings since that time. During fire emergencies the hall has also been used by the emergency services and as a place of refuge for residents, volunteers and soldiers. Following a snowfall in May 2000, it was found that the hall had major structural problems and the public safety could be put at risk should its use be continued. Amongst the options considered were either to replace or to repair the hall. Both options require an injection of significant funds. In order to ascertain the availability of alternate funding sources, Council in August 2000 resolved to support the Mount Wilson Management Committee and the Mount Wilson Progress Association in approaching the State Government for a grant sufficient to fund 50% of the cost of the new building. Council subsequently received representations from the National Trust, the Heritage Office, the Mount Wilson Historical Society and other stakeholders giving their support to preserving the Mount Wilson hall. The matter had been put on hold pending the outcome of further consultation, investigation and meetings with different groups in the Mount Wilson community. This report provides Council with an update of the recent findings together with options for its consideration.


Background The Mount Wilson hall had been programmed for maintenance and upgrade works in order to meet legislative requirements and to provide disabled access together with associated disabled facilities. Quotations had been obtained from prospective contractors for the upgrade works to the Hall. These proposed works were to be funded under the Capital Works Programme. During the site inspections, which occurred following a snowfall in May, it became evident that there was a sag in the roof structure. Upon investigation it was discovered that the current roof is now structurally unsound and that a roof replacement is urgently required. Council’s staff were further advised of a number of defects and deficiencies with the building, including: • Long history of white ant damage • Sub-floor open to fire hazard • Defective roof structures • Defective and leaning walls • Dry and rotten windows • Cold building due to no insulation and no sun • Toilets and kitchen poorly located • Possible asbestos lining. The current structural defects were confirmed by an independent Civil and Structural Engineer, who noted in his report “The damage is serious and a catastrophic collapse is possible under further snow or wind events”. This opinion was also confirmed by an independent Building Consultant that the “structure is at risk of collapse” and “that total demolition and reconstruction, economically is more viable than rectification”. In the interests of public safety the Hall was subsequently closed pending rectification of the structural issues. Council at its meeting of 22 August 2000 considered a report on this matter and resolved:

“1. That Council support in principle the replacement of the existing Mount Wilson Community Hall with a newly designed building suitable for multi-use purposes, including use by emergency services and as a refuge for residents in fire emergencies, subject to a 50:50 partnership between the State Government and Council for the funding of the project.

2. That Council support the Mount Wilson Hall Management Committee and the

Mount Wilson Progress Association in approaching the State Government for a grant sufficient to fund 50% of the cost of a new building.

3. That should the approach to State Government not be successful within a

reasonable timeframe, the matter be reported back to Council together with alternative options.”

Council then received letters from a number of interested parties including the National Trust and Heritage Office raising their concerns with the above resolution. Council has also received a report by Hughes Trueman Pty Ltd regarding their assessment of the Hall. Common issues ra ised from these submissions are that the hall is historically significant and repairable, therefore the hall should not be demolished.


At its meeting of 26 September 2000 Council further considered this matter and amended the resolution of 22 August 2000 by the addition of the following:

“4. That a public meeting be called providing the opportunity for residents input and consultation.

5. That a report be provided from the Heritage Adviser. 6. That advice is sought from the NSW Heritage Office.”

In response to the submissions received from various parties and to council’s resolution above, a public meeting was arranged on Sunday 29 October 2000 to provide the opportunity for residents’ input and consultation as per the above resolution of the Council. More than 65 people attended the meeting and a number of issues were discussed throughout. The information received from this public meeting was collated and forwarded to Council’s Heritage Advisor for consideration. Enquiries have been made with the NSW Heritage Office concerning the potential of obtaining grant funding to assist with the restoration of the hall, however the Heritage Office has advised that grant funding for this project is not currently available. Petition At the public meeting of 29 October 2000, Council received a petition with 60 signatories from local residents supporting the demolition of the existing hall and building a new hall. Council has recently received further petitions from residents seeking Council’s support for the construction of a new hall on a block of land adjoining the north-eastern boundary of the existing hall site and for fund raising activities for this purpose. It is understood that the land in question will be secured by the community and dedicated to Council for the purposes of the new hall. Council has also received 35 petitions supporting the repair and conservation of the existing hall. Heritage Study A heritage conservation management report has been prepared by an independent Heritage Adviser and distributed to Councillors under separate cover. The report raises the issue that although Mount Wilson Hall is not formally listed on the Register of the National Estate, National Trust or State Heritage Register, it has been listed in LEP 1991 as an individual item and as part of the Mount Wilson Conservation Area, therefore any proposed development, demolition or work on external facades of the building must be referred to the Heritage Council. The report addresses both primary and secondary significances of the Mount Wilson Hall. It is of high local historical and social significance as a building built by and for the community of Mount Wilson to provide a focus for social activity within the village. It contains a number of memorials to local identities important in the history of the Mount Wilson community. Different parts of the building have different levels of significance, depending on the time they were built or whether they were attached to the original structure at a later stage. Overall, the report concludes that Mount Wilson Hall should be conserved and that there are opportunities for extension of the hall along the south-eastern section of the land.


Usage The recent discussions with representatives of the Mount Wilson Historical Society and Mount Wilson Hall Management Committee have revealed that on average the hall was used around 15 times a year for the following groups and activities: • Historical Society: 3 meetings per annum • Progress Association: 4 meetings per annum • Management Committee: 4 meetings per annum • Weddings: 2 events per annum • Funeral: 2 events per annum It could be argued that the hall may be used more regularly if its standard were improved, however, taking into consideration the special characteristics of Mount Wilson village, any substantial increase in the use of the hall in the foreseeable future is not expected. Land Classification Council at its meeting of 21 June 1994 resolved to classify the land that accommodates the Mount Wilson Hall, Lot 25 DP 751645, as Operational Land under the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993. However, due to the court cases and the ruling of the Court of Appeal of 3 December 1999 in North Cronulla Precinct Committee v. Sutherland Shire Council together with the existing use of the hall, the subject land is considered to be deemed Community land . No demolition or other work that alters the structure or external aspects of the building or site can be carried out on Community land unless they are authorised by a Plan of Management. Internal works, repair and maintenance works that w ill not alter the use of the existing building are permissible. Options There are three main options for the Mt Wilson hall, which are detailed in the following: Option 1: To fully repair the building, replace the roof, align the walls and upgrade the

existing building.

Description CostStage 1

Repair & replace roof, tie rods & wall realignment $40,200Abestos removal $19,800Re-line walls and ceilings & insulation $15,000

Sub-total $75,000Stage 2

Flooring, floor structure & piers $27,500Licensing Requirements & Disabled Access $67,000New storage/shelter & others (painting, cladding, etc.) $15,500

Sub-total $110,000Contingencies $15,000

Total Capital Cost $200,000Present Value of Maintenance Cost $32,540

Present Value of total project life cost $232,540Equivalent Annual Cost (if amortise over the life of the building at 7.5% pa.)

$17,922


The advantage of this option is that works can be carried out in two stages. Stage 1 involves essential works to ensure public safety and reopening the hall for public use as soon as possible. Stage 2 includes important works that could be deferred due to limited funds available. In this option, future extension of the building can be carried out along the south-eastern section of the la nd as suggested by the heritage report.

Option 2: To replace the building/hall.

Description CostDemolition & Land Clearing $20,000Construction of New Building & associated costs $250,000

Total Capital cost $270,000Present Value of Maintenance Cost $13,016


$21,813

The new building offers an opportunity to incorporate features to

accommodate emergency services uses, such as a refuge for residents in fire emergencies and to facilitate energy savings through out the building’s life. Before this option can be progressed, a plan of management must be developed authorising the demolition of the existing hall and construction of a new hall. In addition, approval must be obtained from the Heritage Office.

Option 3: To partially repair the existing building and build a new one on a nearby site.

Description CostRepair & replace roof, tie rods & wall realignment $40,200Abestos removal $19,800Re-line walls and ceilings $10,500Flooring, floor structure & piers & others $30,000

Sub-total $100,500Present Value of Maintenance Cost of Existing Hall $19,524Equivalent Annual Cost (if amortise over the life of the existing building at 7.5% pa.)

$9,251

Construction of new building & associated costs 250000Present value of maintenance cost of new building $13,016Equivalent Annual Cost (if amortise over the life of the existing building at 7.5% pa.)

$20,271


$29,522

This option requires Council to only undertake essential works for the existing building in order that it can be conserved in accordance with the heritage report. However, the use of the existing hall will be scaled down to mainly cater for heritage display and exhibition. In addition, a new hall, as suggested in the recent petitions, will be constructed upon land (transferred to Council by the Community) adjoining the north-eastern boundary of the site. This new building will be fully functional as described in Option 2.


Assessment of Options The Mount Wilson Hall is listed in Council’s Heritage Inventory and subject to the heritage approval process. The Heritage Conservation report recommends that the hall should be conserved for the community. The land is deemed Community land and no demolition or other works that alter the structure or external aspects of the building or site can be carried out unless they are authorised by a Plan of Management. The original budget for the upgrading of the hall was $30,000. It is anticipated that by deferring some of the less urgent condition based maintenance work, a further $70,000 can be allocated from the Community Buildings budget for the project. This provides total funding of $100,000 for the project, leaving a short fall of $100,000 for Option 1, $183,000 for Option 2, and $283,000 for Option 3. Alternative funding sources have not been identified other than the potential of community fund raising activities. To date, Council has not received a written advice from the Mount Wilson Hall Management Committee and the Progress Association regarding the results of their approach to the State Government for a grant sufficient to fund 50% of the cost of a new building. It is understood that funds are not available from the state Government at this time, as previously expected. The current available funding is only sufficient for Council to carry out the first stage of works as identified in Option 1. This will enable the reopening of the hall for use by the public as soon as practicable. Other works entailed within Stage 2 of Option 1 will be carried out over a period of time subject to availability of funds in the Capital Works Programme. This is considered the only viable option. Option 2 is contrary to the heritage report’s recommendation and has the added complexity of the additional approval processes. It is therefore not recommended. The petitions requesting Council’s support for the construction of a new hall on the adjoining land as described in Option 3 is also not supported at this time, because a viable funding source has not been identified. Conclusion The Mount Wilson Hall is listed in Council’s Heritage Inventory and therefore should be preserved, if viable. Council has limited funds for this project and facility has relatively low usage. It is therefore recommended that the first stage of works as identified in Option 1 be carried out to enable the reopening of the hall for use by the public as soon as practicable. Other works entailed within Stage 2 of Option 1 will be carried out over a period of time subject to availability of funds in the Capital Works Programme.


Attachment


ITEM NO: 19 SUBJECT: PROPOSED LOWER BLUE MOUNTAINS AQUATIC CENTRE -

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR FILE NO: H01091 Recommendations: 1. That Council, in accordance with Clause 19(1)(b) of the Local Government

(Tendering) Regulation 1999 Part 4, decline to accept any of the tenders for the Design and Construction Tender for the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre (Contract # TS 14/00) on the basis that the prices exceed the Council approved budget.

2. That Council, in accordance with Clause 19(3)(e) of the Local Government

(Tendering) Regulation 1999 Part 4, authorise the General manager to enter into negotiations with Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd to design and construct the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre up to the funding limit indicated in this report, on the basis that retendering is not likely to produce a more competitive result than already achieved.

3. That Council, failing successful negotiations with Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd and

in accordance with Clause 19(3)(e) of the Local Government (Tendering) Regulation 1999 Part 4, authorise the General manager to enter into negotiations with Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd to design and construct the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre up to the funding limit indicated in this report.

4. That a report be presented to Council at the conclusion of the negotiations detailing

the outcome of the negotiations and any financial provisions necessary, and that the target date for this report be for the Council meeting o f 26 June 2001.

Report by Group Manager, BM City Services: This report recommends that Council not accept any of the tenders submitted on 6 March 2001, for the design and construction work associated with the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre. The report also recommends that negotiations commence with suitable organisations with a view to entering into a contract for the Design and Construction of the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre within the budget limitations. None of the tenders could provide all of the facilities requested for the available budget. Some of the submissions were close to the budget and specification and warrant further investigation. Some alternative facilities were offered.


Introduction At its meeting on 11 July 2000, Council resolved (Minute No. 295):

“1. That Council notes the outcome of the negotiations with the Department of Land and Water Conservation and approves the commencement of the project to provide an all year 25 metre x 19 metre swimming pool and leisure/program/turbo pool in Buttenshaw Park, Springwood.

2. That Council follows a combined Design and Construct approach to

procurement of the project and endorses th e project schedule attached to the report.”

The last recommendation above meant inviting expressions of interest from the whole industry, then assessing them down to a suitable number for select tender invitations. At its meeting of 5 December 2000, Council resolved (Minute No. 542):

“1. That Council endorses the select tender list of contractors below who are considered to be the best suited contractors for the design and construction work for the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre;

Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd

Cordukes Limited Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd

2. That Council invite tenders for the design and construction contract for the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre from the select tender list.”

Council will recall that the design and construction contract approach would allow the contractors to explore different approaches to meeting the basic design concept and facilities as nominated by Council. The design and construct approach also involves a value for money assessment rather than a heavy reliance on the cost. This is reflected in the assessment criteria. The cost and inclusions were specified, it was then left to the tenderers to offer Council the best value proposal that met the criteria. After this round of tenders it was found that none of the submissions fulfilled all of the requirements of Council, nevertheless, a discussion of the assessment of the tenders is useful in understanding exactly how close the market is to being able to deliver the project. The assessment also is valuable in helping direct Council in deciding the next step in the process. Report Tenders were received until 2.00pm, Tuesday 6 March, 2001. A total of 4 tenders were received, including one late submission. Two alternatives were also submitted by two of the tenderers. Full details of all submissions are available on file for further reference.


All four tenders were evaluated using the evaluation criteria detailed in Attachment 1 of this report. None of the submissions represented an offer that Council could accept and meet the specifications at the same time. This means that none were eligible for award of the contract as a direct result of this tender round. Recognising that the main aim was to assess the value for money proposed by the tenderers, the evaluation was completed on all of the submissions, regardless of eligibility. Two types of comparative analysis were done. One comparison based on the assessment criteria (including quality of design, capability of contractor, experience, play equipt., etc), and another comparison based on a ‘fully adjusted price’ only. Tender Opening A late Tender was received from Fyntray Construction Pty Ltd. This Tender was received at 2:15pm Tuesday 6 March, 2001, in the Tender Assessment Room on the Ground Floor on Council Headquarters. At the time of receipt of the late tender, no other tender prices had been revealed. The only tender opened was Cordukes Pty Ltd to reveal the company name as it had failed to endorse the sealed envelop with their company name and the name of the project tendered. Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd, Cordukes Limited and Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd were all lodged before the time for closing. The Apparent Tender Prices on opening were as follows (excl GST):

Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd $5,591,376 Cordukes Limited $6,989,797 (Option A) Cordukes Limited $5,990,890 - Alternative (Option B) Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd $7,130,000 (Option A) Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd $5,520,000 - Alternative (Option B) Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd $5,870,992

(These are unmodified prices as written on the tender documents) In the tender specification (sections 1.2.2 and 4.8), budget requirements were set at $5,600,000 including 10% contingency – this means a tender price of $5,090,900 should have been the maximum limit. It can be seen from the apparent tender prices above, that none conform to the budget requirements of the tender documents. Tender Assessment Commentary The tenders were of a high quality. Issues such as addressing the nature of the site as a public park, the orientation of windows and vents of the building to best utilise light and breeze, and environmental impact have been well considered. The tenderers have been conscious of the funding constraints and have provided information and designs that seek to meet the needs of the brief, including the budget. In doing this, the assessment has been complicated, as each tenderer has sought to achieve savings by different methods, some by water space, some by filtration systems, some by omission of certain components of the facility. Many different options were given for filtration and purification systems, play equipment, and facility finishes. This was expected. Quite some latitude had been given to the tenderers to exercise their competitive advantage and generate innovative solutions. Bringing this back to enable a value for money comparison considering all the intricacies of such a large facility is complicated.


The specification did outline some of the details in facilities that are preferred; it was structured to indicate the highest priority items while still guiding the contractors in areas of fine detail. The submissions reflect this prioritisation as far more liberty was taken with the fine details like filtration systems, than things like whether or not to inc lude a program pool. The main aim of the process was not to arrive at a final design immediately, but to allow Council to work with the successful tenderer who represented the best value for Council, and build on and develop their submitted proposal. Bein g a design and construct tender always meant that there would be changes to the submitted design as it would have been an extremely fortuitous for a tenderer to achieve exactly the right design without development with Council and community input. In fact, the design development phase was included in the specification and the anticipated project program. This meant that in assessing the tenders and to make them comparable with each other, a decision was made to modify prices based on the main facilities whe re they were not included in the tender and not to correct items that were indicated in the specification as ‘preferred’ rather than high priority / main facilities. The following is a comment on the main differences between the specified requirements and the submissions, with respect to omissions and water space only. Fine details such as filtration systems, purification systems, and environmental management systems will not be discussed at length in this report. For example some pool consultants recommend sand filters over Diatomaceous Earth filtration systems, some like Ultra Violet purification over Ozone methods. The Council specification did not nominate these things as essentials, however preferences were nominated. This allowed the contractors the freedom to offer potential cost savings, and allowed Council officers to make value judgements on the benefits compared to cost in the assessment. Some of the things considered in drafting the specification was uniformity of this facility with others operated by BMCC, this has implications for staff expertise, equipment maintenance and supplies. Operating costs would obviously be less for a facility where there is the potential to use the same equipment and materials and where arrangements can be made to bulk buy or have maintenance agreements for machinery of the same type.


(See also the submission comparison checks shown in Attachment 3 of this report.) Various people were consulted to assist in evaluating various benefits of the submissions. Some important input was provided by the Manager BM Sports and Aquatic Centre who was able to help with advice about functionality of certain facilities. The more expensive options of Cordukes Pty Ltd (Option A) and Gledhill Construction Pty Ltd’s proposals conform to most of the inclusions in the brief. Although Cordukes’ tender does not include all of the loose furnishings in the brief, these two options far exceed Council’s budget. Nevertheless they have been assessed with the other tenders submitted. The alternative option of Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd (Option B) is a greatly reduced option. Water temperature differentiation is not possible as the leisure pool, the turbo pool, and the main 25m lap pool are all one body of water. There is no program pool and the water space has been greatly reduced. Other features of the brief have been excluded such as sauna, spa, dry area café and controlled-entry to multifunction room. This configuration is not considered to provide a facility able to meet the needs of the community and it is therefore doubtful that financial targets would be achieved that allow viability. This submission included a building with a low profile to the roadway and a very original and innovative leaf motif integrated throughout the centre. The play equipment proposed is also very interesting and innovative.


The cheaper option of Cordukes Pty Ltd (Option B) offers a 25m x 25m lap pool, in lieu of a 25 x 19m lap pool and a separate program pool (as specified). The intention in this proposal is that programs can be held in the larger 25m x 25m pool by roping off 6m for this use. This option does not allow for temperature differentiation in the water as commonly required for rehabilitation programs. Councils Manager BM Sports and Aquatic Centre at the time of assessment advised that this would not function as well as a separate program pool. The leisure pool has also been extended, Councils Manager BM Sports and Aquatic Centre also advised that this water space would not operate properly as program water space either. Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd’s tender price does not include a multifunction room which is required as part of this tender and Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd’s tender price includes a gymnasium (which was also priced separately as requested), but was not required as part of the tender price. Fyntrays submission is most notable for including items surplus to the tender specification in their price, such as the gymnasium, a steam room, and a cool room, and coin operated lockers. Comparative Analysis Two types of comparisons were done. Firstly, a normal evaluation of the tenders according to the scoring criteria. In this case prices were only modified to correct for major items required by the specification. The relative assessment of other elements was scored respectively. Attachment 1 outlines this evaluation. This produces a relative ranking of the submissions by the tender panel. Average Total Values were as follows:

Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd 5.34 Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd 5.32

Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd (A) 4.27 Cordukes Limited (A) 4.06

The top two scores are very close and indicate that either of these two would be able to provide a suitable facility. A secondary comparison was done to provide a clearer comparison of equal facility components, all tender prices and inclusions were analysed and adjusted to estimate each contractors price for a tender in line with the basic specification (i.e. price to provide the requirements of the Tender Documents including all of the specification). The adjusted price figures, which were calculated from price information given to Council by the tenderers, can be more easily used for ‘Fully Adjusted’ comparison purposes. Adjusted price figures (not including 10% contingency) are as follows;


The following ARE NOT tender prices, they may be considered ‘Fully Adjusted’ comparisons:

Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd $5,737,990 Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd $6,265,781 Cordukes Limited (Option A) $6,989,797 Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd (Option A) $7,273,000

See Attachment 2 for details of how these figures were calculated. Note that this analysis does not consider the quality of the design, experience, capability etc. The alternative cheaper options have not been listed here since upgrading them to meet the specification would basically make them the same as the option A prices. Remembering that in the tender specification, budget requirements were set at $5,600,000 including 10% contingency – this means a tender price of $5,090,900 should have been the maximum limit. This means that, at this time, Council cannot afford any of the submissions and still get all the facilities it has specified. It can be seen from the comparisons that Abigroup and Fyntray top both of the assessment methods – though in a different order for each. Abigroup ranks first in the published assessment criteria, and Fyntray ranks first in the adjusted price analysis considering all of the specification. Relevant implications including legal comment Legal advice was sought regarding the consideration of Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd’s tender. Final advice was not received until the evaluation of the tenders was almost complete. Council was advised that the tender was considered invalid under the Local Government (Tendering) Regulation 1999, Part 4 Clause 18(2):

“A council must not consider a tender that is not submitted to the council by the deadline for the closing of tenders.……….”.

The effect of this is that Council cannot consider awarding the contract to Fyntray Construction Pty Ltd at this point. This has little real impact, as none of the tenders can be accepted (based on meeting the entire specification) anyway. In considering a way forward, please note that the Local Government Tendering Regulation Part 4 - C lause 19(1) reads:

“After considering the tenders submitted for a proposed contract, the council must either: (a) accept the tender that, having regard to all the circumstances, appears to it to

be the most advantageous, or (b) decline to accept any of the tenders.”


And also clause 19 (3) and (4) reads;:

“(3) A council that decides not to accept any of the tenders for a proposed contract or receives no tenders for the proposed contract must, by resolution, do one of the following:

(a) postpone or cancel the proposal for the contract, (b) invite, in accordance with clause 8, 9 or 10, fresh tenders based on the same or

different details, (c) invite, in accordance with clause 9, fresh applications from persons interested

in tendering for the proposed contract, (d) invite, in accordance with clause 10, fresh applications from persons

interested in tendering for contracts of the same kind as the proposed contract, (e) enter into negotiations with any person (whether or not the person was a

tenderer) with a view to entering into a contract, (f) carry out the requirements of the proposed contract itself.

(4) If a council resolves to enter into negotiations as referred to in subclause (3) (e), the resolution must state the reasons for declining to invite fresh tenders or applications as referred to in subclause (3) (b) (d).”

Next Step This report recommends not accepting any tenders under the Local Government Tendering Regulation Part 4 - Clause 19(1) (b) since no tender met all the requirements of the specification, and entering into negotiations with appropriate parties under Part 4 - C lause 19(3) (e). From previous community consultation it is understood that the community interest is for a high quality facility to be built as soon as possible for a price it can afford. Re-tendering or drafting a new contract specification would certainly delay this. The market has already been tested significantly. It must also be recognised that the tenderers invest significant resources in preparing submissions for design and construct tenders, another round of tenders would cost them, and may result in lack of interest. Costs that the contractors incur are likely to be passed on to Council. It is considered that there would be no benefit in re-tendering the same project. The current round of invitation for tenders has been approached in good faith by all parties, and has achieved excellent submissions and competition from the industry. It has provided Council with a good test of the market, and gives Council a good benchmark on which to base negotiations. The most advantageous way forward for Council is to build on these submissions and negotiate with the preferred companies to achieve a satisfactory facility for the funding available. This may be achievable noting that the submitted prices are closer to the target budget. It must be recognised that this round of tenders has resulted in submissions much closer to meeting Councils requirements than in the past for the project based at Valley Heights.

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Item 19 - Ordinary Meeting, 22 /5/01

Negotiation with the tenderer(s) that represents the best value, gives Council the opportunity of exploring ways of delivering the project to the community. This may be achieved through modification of the tenderers proposed design, or the tenderers choice of materials, or some other method that evolves through the process of negotiation. If this project is to proceed, the negotiation option is the most advantageous way forward. It is hoped that such negotiations will result in a satisfactory conclusion. Financial capabilities have been independently checked in detail for any defaults. Australian Corporate Reporting (ACR) indicates that Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd has an excellent financial capacity to undertake the project. Fyntray were not given a rating as the owners declined to disclose information to ACR. This does not mean that Fyntray do not have a suitable financial capacity, it simply means that we do not know what their financial capacity is. Council can manage any possible risk by ensuring that, any agreements negotiated include a monetary security amount suitable to cover any default (at least $800,000). Conclusion Based on the fact that no tenders conformed to all of the requirements of the Tender Documents, including the budget requirements and the facility inclusion requirements, it is recommended that none of the tenders submitted on 6th March 2001 for the Design and Construction of the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre be accepted. There are a number of options open to Council at this point. The project could be cancelled. Or the Council may decide that it prefers to allocate more funding to the project, possibly to meet one of the submissions adjusted prices – the most eligible submission at this point is Abigroup necessitating an extra vote of $1,174,881. If the decision is to negotiate with a suitable organisation, two questions remain; which organisation, and to what funding limit. After considering both the results of the normal evaluation process and the value for money assessment the Tender Assessment Process it is recommended that Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd be given first chance at negotiations. Abigroup topped the rankings in the published assessment criteria for the tender. It is also recommended that Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd be given a chance at negotiations if no agreement can be reached with Abigroup. Fyntray scored first in the adjusted price analysis considering all aspects of the tender specification. Therefore it is recommended that negotiations commence with the companies stated in the recommendations, with a view to engaging them as a Design and Construct Contractor for the design and construction of the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre. Details of the proposed funding for the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre are still been finalised and will be advised following the outcome of the proposed negotiations. Statement by Tender Review Committee The Tender Review Committee has reviewed the process and is satisfied as to the fairness of the process.


Attachment 1

Tender Assessment Process: Each submission was assessed using an analysis spreadsheet relating to selection criteria set out in the Tender Specification. The selection criteria used is shown in the table below:

LOWER BLUE MOUNTAINS AQUATIC CENTRE

TENDER ASSESSMENT PROCESS

CRITERIA DESCRIPTION WEIGHTING

FACTOR

Cost a) Total Capital Cost to the Client 15 b) Annualised Energy Costs 5 Design Including but not limited to Design Proposal, including

proposal initiatives to satisfy aims & objectives. Design information & technical data. Suitability of materials and equipment for commercial building applications and being fit for purpose.

30

Interactive Play Equipment/Pool Hall Innovative play equipment inclusions and other appearance inclusions in the Pool Hall to give attractive appearance 10 Experience History of Tenderer and proposed consultants &

subcontractors on similar projects 10

Capability Financial resources, programming, strategy and

administration of the Tenderer and proposed consultants and subcontractors

10

Management Project Delivery Program, Environmental Protection, and

Safety 10

Quality Quality of product and impact or maintenance & longevity 10 The Assessment Process involves allocating an assessment value to each of the criteria for each Tenderer. This “value” is multiplied by the “weighting” allocated to each of the criteria giving an assessment number. The Assessment numbers are then added to give each Tender a Total Value. Three Council Officers, including one independent, assessed the Tenders. An average of these total values is taken for each Tender revealing the most suitable Tender.


Attachment 1

Average Total Values were as follows:

Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd 5.34 Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd 5.32

Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd (A) 4.27 Cordukes Limited (A) 4.06

The top two scores are very close and indicate that either of these two would be able to provide a suitable facility. The tender assessment considered these rankings in conjunction with the value for money assessment.


Attachment 2

Fully Adjusted Comparison Figures. Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd Tendered Price $5,591,376 Extra adjustment ( i.e. Items not included in submission) Acrylic Floor Coating as per spec. in place of paint tendered +$13,420 Multifunction Room +$175,000 Detention Tank +$19,800 Acoustic Ceiling +$90,560 UV Treatment +$87,000 Substation +$115,000 Authorities Contributions +$28,000 Removal of Demolition Materials +$30,000 Recycled Rubber Flooring +$30,000 Heat Pumps +$65,625 PC items not included +$20,000 Deduction adjustment (i.e. Items in submission over the spec) Nil Total $6,265,781 Play Equipment allowed for in the Tender Price ($35,400) ___________________________________________________________________

Cordukes Pty Ltd Tendered Price $6,989,797 Extras adjustment (i.e. Items not included in submission) Nil Nil Deduction adjustment ( i.e. Items in submission over the spec) Nil Nil Total $6,989,797 Play Equipment allowed for in the Tender Price ($12,000) ___________________________________________________________________


Attachment 2

Gledhill Constructions Pty Ltd Tendered Price $7,130,000 Extra adjustment (i.e. Items not included in submission) Substation +$115,000 (approx.) Authorities Contributions +$28,000 (approx.) Deduction adjustment (i.e. Items in submission over the spec) Nil Nil Total $7,273,000 Play Equipment allowed for in the Tender Price ($131,000) ___________________________________________________________________ Fyntray Constructions Pty Ltd Tendered Price $5,870,992 Extra adjustment (i.e. Items not included in submission) Acrylic Floor Coating as per spec. in place of tiles tendered +$44,000 Deduction adjustment (i.e. Items in submission over the spec) Steam Room -$17,500 Elec trically operated Turnstiles -$16,000 Coin Operated Lockers -$20,342 Gymnasium -$123,160 Total $5,737,990 Play Equipment allowed for in the Tender Price (approx. $52,000)


Attachment 3

TRANSPORTATION & ROADS Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 20 SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF KERB BLISTERS AND PEDESTRIAN

REFUGES AT CLARENCE STREET AND LOVEL STREET INTERSECTION, KATOOMBA-LEURA. CONTRACT NO. TS 03/01

FILE NO: C05081 Recommendations: 1. That Council accepts the tender submitted by North Shore Paving Co. Pty Ltd for the

construction of the proposed Intersection Works at Clarence Street and Lovel Street Katoomba-Leura, Contract No. TS 03/01).

2. That the Common Seal of Council be affixed to the Contract Documents. Report by Group Manager, BM City Services: This report recommends acceptance of a tender for the construction of the proposed Intersection Works at Clarence Street and Lovel Street Katoomba-Leura, under the Capital Works Program. Background The intersection work was initiated by Council’s Client Services Branch and was approved by Council at its meeting held on 24 October 2000 (Minute No. 468) following public consultation and Local Traffic Committee consultation. The proposed works will improve traffic safety at this location by slowing traffic and providing a safer point for pedestrians to cross. The construction consists of kerb blisters, refuge medians, landscaping, line marking, and delineation of No Stopping zones. Discussion Tenders were invited for the construction of the above project. Tenders were received up to 6 March 2001 and the following tenders were submitted: - TENDERER NORTH SHORE PAVING CO. PTY LTD Conforming JK WILLIAMS CONTRACTING PTY LTD Invalid due to late submission The conforming tender submitted was scrutinised for errors and or discrepancies.

TRANSPORTATION & ROADS Item 20 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

The tenderer was assessed using a weighted attributed evaluation method relating to selection criteria specified in the brief and in accordance with Local Government Tendering Regulation 1999.

ITEM ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTING 1 Relevant experience with similar projects 10%

2 Performance on previous projects 5%

3 Traffic / Pedestrian Management plan 5%

4 Risk Management System 10%

5 Price 70%

TOTAL 100%

Assessment was based on the abilit y of the contractor to meet the requirements of the brief, selection attributes and in providing the essential documents requested in the brief. A copy of individual Tender assessment, based on the evaluation criteria listed above, is available on file for Councillors information.

ITEM TENDERER TOTAL WEIGHTED ATTRIBUTE

1 NORTH SHORE PAVING CO. PTY LTD 3.58 As there was only one conforming tender, the unit rates for various items of work from North Shore Paving Co. Pty. Ltd. were compared with those of three other contractors on recently received tenders to ascertain the acceptability and reasonableness of the rates quoted for this project by North Shore Paving Co. Pty Ltd. In order to arrive at a Rating for the Price, the unit rates from these same three contractors were compared for several trades common to these recent projects. Based on this comparison the Tender Evaluation Panel was able to ascertain that the rates shown were fair and equitable and do not disadvantage the Council. This analysis is available on file. References for the recommended Contractor were checked by the selection panel and found to be satisfactory. The Contractor’s financial status was also checked using Australian Securities & Investments Commission current extracts and found satisfactory. These are available on file. The assessment confirmed that the tender of North Shore Paving Co. Pty Ltd had a weighted attribute of 3.58 out of 5.


Conclusion Tender submitte d by North Shore Paving Co. Pty Ltd meets the requirements of the Specification. Verbal references obtained indicate that North Shore Paving Co. Pty Ltd is a reliable and experienced contractor with sufficient resources and appropriate management skills. The tender of North Shore Paving Co. Pty Ltd is acceptable for the work involved. Comment by Tender Review Committee The Tender Review Committee has reviewed the tender procedure and is satisfied as to the fairness of the process. Comment by Acting Group Manager, Assets and Corporate Services: Funding for this proposed contract is available in the March adjusted 2000/2001 Capital Works Program.

TRANSPORTATION & ROADS Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 21 SUBJECT: LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE FILE NO: C00534 Recommendations: 1. That the recommendations as contained in the report of the Local Traffic Committee

meeting held on the 8 May 2001 be noted and approved by Council. 2. That the Regional Director – Sydney Region, Roads and Traffic Authority, Blacktown,

and the Superintendent of Police, Blue Mountains Area Command and the Local Member’s Representative, be notified of Council’s approval.

Report by Group Manager, BM City Services: Attached to these recommendations is the Report of the meeting of the Local Traffic Committee held on 8 May 2001. The recommendations in this report are now submitted to Council for approval.


Attachment

LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MEETING

8 May 2001 at 10.00am in the Council Chamber

Those present were: Sgt Michael Adams Blue Mountains Area Traffic Police S/C Victor Girgenti Blue Mountains Area Traffic Police Ms Joy Anderson for the Hon Bob Debus, MP Mr Mark Bunch Manager, Technical Services, B MCC Mr Dean Russell Roads and Traffic Authority Clr Terri Hamilton BMCC Councillor, Ward 1 Mr Graham Green Investigations Engineer, BMCC Mr Tony Lack Traffic and Administrative Coordinator, BMCC The meeting commenced at 10.15am. Matters arising out of previous meetings: 2001-19 Light Traffic Thoroughfare Restriction on Cliff Drive, between Leura and

Katoomba Background A request from the Blue Mountains State Electorate Council to the Minister for Roads was referred to the LTC for attention at its meeting on 20 February 2001. The request is to designate Cliff Drive from Jersey Road, Leura, to Echo Point, Katoomba, as one restricted to light vehicles, emergency vehicles and neighbourhood traffic only AND that an appropriate weight limit be introduced. At the Ordinary Meeting on 13 March 2001, Council adopted a motion that the “motion adopted unanimously at the Katoomba and Echo Point Implementation Advisory Taskforce regarding the restriction of Cliff Drive from Jersey Road, Leura, to Echo Point, Katoomba, to light vehicles, be referred to the Traffic Section for inclusion in a report for the next meeting of the Local Traffic Committee.” The rationale provided by the Taskforce states that the road is becoming unsafe as tourist coaches and motor cars try to avoid one another on the narrow bends. The alternative route for large buses is via Katoomba and the Great Western Highway. The Committee noted that if a Light Traffic Thoroughfare were imposed, it would be extremely difficult to enforce upon tourist bus operators who would claim that the Leura Cascades area was their destination and therefore the restriction would not apply to them.


Attachment

It was noted that matters arising out of the increasing tourist traffic in the Echo Point area were being addressed in a Tourism Management Plan currently being prepared by the Strategic Planning Group. There may be avenues other than imposing a Light Traffic Thoroughfare by which the use of this section of Cliff Drive by large tourist buses could be effectively reduced. Recommendation That Council note that the Traffic Section of Council will confer with the Strategic Planning Group during the preparation of the Tourism Management Plan so as to form a strategy that will consider alternative options, including a route between Leura and Echo Point via Grose Street, Railway Parade, the Great Western Highway and Katoomba. 2000-21 Temporary closure of Springwood Commuter Car Park

Prankfest 2001 – Upper Mountains Youth Services Saturday 12 May 2001

This Event Request was withdrawn and therefore was not reported to Council for adoption. 2001-23 Temporary Road Closure – Govetts Leap Road from the Great Western

Highway to Wentworth Street, Blackheath - Blue Mountains Food & Wine Festival Saturday 19 May 2001

Background An application has been received from the Blackheath and District Chamber of Commerce for the use of Govetts Leap Road from the Great Western Highway to Wentworth Street, Blackheath on 19 May 2001 from 8.00am to 6.00pm. Associated with the road closure is the use of the Car Park between the rear of the Victory Theatre and Govetts Leap Road from 6.00am to 6.00pm. The purpose of the closures is to provide a venue for a Food & Wine Festival and other Chamber of Commerce activities between 10.00am and 4.00pm. The Applicant has provided a Traffic Management Plan. At the traffic signals on the Great Western Highway, there is no right turn signal, no right turn arrow or right turn filter lane road-marking at the Govetts Leap Road intersection. It was therefore not expected that the traffic signals would require any re-phasing during the temporary road closure. In the Event Application received on 6 March 2001, the Blackheath Chamber of Commerce did not provide a Traffic Management Plan. Following a review of the application by the Local Traffic Committee on 20 March, the Organiser was requested by facsimile on 26 March to submit a Traffic Management Plan together with confirmation of the necessary notifications and approvals for the event. The requested information was not duly received and a further facsimile was forwarded to the Organiser on 27 April, listing the fifteen items of information typically required in a Traffic Management Plan. An acknowledgement was finally received from the Organiser on 30 April 2001. The Committee noted that the next meeting of Council will be after the planned date of the closure and expressed concern at the late and inadequate details provided by the Organisers to Council, Police and the RTA.


Attachment

It was noted that the proposed temporary closure of Govetts Leap Road between the Great Western Highway and Wentworth Street would remove the only signalled access to the Highway from the Blackheath town centre and the National Park entrance at Govetts Leap. Saturday traffic would have to make hazardous unsignalled right hand turns on and off the Great Western Highway to reac h its destination. The Committee did not recommend the temporary closure. Recognising that this annual event is of importance and benefit to the community, the Committee suggested alternatives to the temporary closure of Govetts Leap Road. It was suggested that for the purpose of conducting the Blackheath Wine & Food Festival, the Organiser could make application to Council for the temporary closure of:-

1. Wentworth Street, Blackheath, between the east side of Park Avenue and the west side of Govetts Leap Road and between the east side of Govetts Leap Road and the west side of Leichhardt Street from 8.00am to 6.00pm on Saturday 19 May 2001, subject to the provision of a Traffic Management Plan approved by the RTA Traffic Management Centre, the Blue Mountains Traffic Police and the Traffic Section of Council and

2. the Car Park between Govetts Leap Road and the rear of the Victory Theatre from

6.00am to 6.00pm on Saturday 19 May 2001,

or alternatively, for the temporary closure of the whole of the Car Park between Sutton Lane and Govetts Leap Road, which would not require application for the temporary closure of any roads.

Recommendation That Council do not approve of the application for the temporary closure of Govetts Leap Road because of the potential hazard to traffic on the Great Western Highway having to make unsignaled right hand turns when accessing the Blackheath Town Centre. 2001-27 Children’s Crossing and signage at Katoomba Primary School, Merriwa

Street, Katoomba Background In response to a request from Councillor Hamilton, a Council Officer attended a meeting on site on 20 March 2001 with the Principal and concerned parents regarding the hazard presented to children at the Children’s Crossing by motorists ignoring the signs and by vehicles stopping to set down children, contrary to signs. A Children’s Crossing is activated only during the times when flags are displayed. The Principal said that he had never been asked to accept responsibility for putting out the flags and was not prepared to undertake it himself or delegate the task to his staff or pupils. Consequently, it appears that the flags are not consistently being placed at the appropriate times and the Children’s Crossing is not being properly activated for the safety of children.


Attachment

In view of this situation, parents requested more police enforcement of the “No Stopping” zones and substitution of a wombat crossing, similar to the one in Ada Street on the other side of the School. (A wombat crossing is a Children’s Crossing installed at a marked pedestrian crossing.) At the meeting on 20 March 2001, the Committee considered the request for a wombat crossing. The normal warrant for a pedestrian crossing is reduced if it is used predominantly by children at the entrance to a Primary School. It was noted that if a pedestrian crossing was installed, the present “No Stopping” signs would apply at all times, not only during the limited school times currently stated. This would permanently remove kerbside parking outside private properties opposite the School. Council’s Traffic Section later contacted the occupiers of these private properties to assess response to the installation of a marked pedestrian crossing w ith 24 hour ‘No Stopping’ signs. The proprietor of a Podiatry Practice at 17-19 Merriwa Street has made a written statement protesting against the introduction of a 24hr ‘No Stopping’ zone outside her premises on the grounds that her clients are usually disabled and/or elderly and would be unable to readily access the premises if kerbside parking was not available for at least most of the day. This would result in undue hardship in conducting the podiatry practice. The Committee expressed concern that the Children’s Crossing was not being properly activated because there was no undertaking from the former Principal of the School to place the flags at the appropriate times. Council’s Traffic Section staff agreed to meet with the new Principal to request the usual signed undertaking to display the flags at the appropriate times. Traffic Police will be requested to enforce the “No Stopping” restrictions. It was suggested that a Five Minute Parking zone be established to provide space close to the school entrance for private vehicles to stop while transferring children. This would be located outside the School between the existing school bus zone and the “No Stopping” zone and would be in effect only during the Children’s Crossing time periods from 8.00am to 9.00am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm on school days. The existing school bus zone would be moved further along the School frontage towards Ada Street to maximize the length of the Five Minute Parking zone. Recommendation That Council approves of the introduction of a Five Minute Parking Zone from 8.00am to 9.00am and 2.30pm to 3.30pm on school days and the relocation of the School Bus Zone further along the School frontage on the northern side of Merriwa Street, Katoomba.


Attachment

New Items submitted at Meeting on 8 May 2001. 2001-28 Minibus Zones in Park Street and Ross Street, Glenbrook Background A request was received from the Glenbrook Satellite Community Safety Council for the establishment of Minibus Parking Zones. At present, “No Parking” applies to a 28 metre length of Park Street and a 40 metre length of Ross Street outside the Glenbrook Public School on school days only at specified times. At other times, the community safety council requests that the spaces be designated as Minibus Parking Zones. Recommendation That Council approves of a six month trial of temporary Minibus Zones in Ross Street and Park Street, Glenbrook, outside the Public School, with signage as detaile d in Attachment 2. 2001-29 STOP signage at intersection of Ross Street and Burfitt Parade,

Glenbrook Background At a site inspection with a representative of the Glenbrook Satellite Community Safety Council, it was suggested that Stop signs were necessary in Ross Street, Glenbrook, at the intersection with Burfitt Parade. This is because the preferred route for pedestrians walking to and from the Railway station entrance is across Burfitt Parade at a traffic calming hump located east of the Ross Street intersection. The Stop signs will restrain traffic flowing out of Ross Street from conflicting with pedestrians crossing Burfitt Parade. Recommendation That Council approves of the installation of Stop signs in Ross Street, Glenbrook, at the intersection with Burfitt Parade, to restrain traffic flowing out of Ross Street from conflicting with pedestrians crossing Burfitt Parade outside the Railway Station entrance. 2001-29 Temporary Road Closures – Katoomba Street and Bathurst Road,

Katoomba. Temporary Car Park closures – Studleigh Place and part Pioneer Place, Katoomba. 2001 Winter Magic Festival, Saturday, 23 June 2001

Background An Event application for the annual Winter Magic Festival including a request for temporary road closures was received on 9 April 2001. The Traffic Management Plan is for the temporary closure of Katoomba Street and a section of Bathurst Road from 8.00am to 12 midnight. Associated with the closure is the Studleigh Place Car Park and a section of the Car Park adjacent to Jewels Supermarket.


Attachment

An additional request for the temporary closure of Pryor Place from Katoomba Street to the eastern side of the Pioneer Place, and the temporary closure of the whole of the Pioneer Place Car Park north of Pryor Place and the Arcade was received on 17 May 2001.

The Traffic Management Plan gives details of alternative traffic routes, provision of emergency access through closures, arrangements for resident and shopkeeper access, signage, public transport services and publicity. To maintain normal traffic movements in College Lane, and in Pryor Place between College Lane and Parke Street, and in Pioneer Place between Pryor Place and Waratah Street, traffic marshals will direct traffic through the Event area.

Recommendation That Council approves of the following temporary closures on Saturday 23 June 2001 from 8.00am extending until 12.00 midnight (or until such time as may be required by the Police Blue Mountains Area Command) for the purpose of staging the annual Winter Magic Festival:-

1. Katoomba Street from the southern side of Bathurst Road to the northern side of Waratah Street

2. Pryor Place between Katoomba Street and the eastern boundary of Pioneer Place.

3. The Studleigh Place Carpark at 152-154 Katoomba Street. 4. That section of the Pioneer Place Car Park bounded by Jewels Arcade, the Video

Store, Parke Street and the rear of properties numbered 93 to 103 Katoomba Street, subject to there being no interruption to normal traffic movements in College Lane, in Pryor Place between College Lane and Parke Street and in Pioneer Place between Pryor Place and Waratah Street.

2001-31 Temporary road closure – Woodville Road, Glenbrook, from Lennox

Street to Pee l Street. Local Street Party on Sunday 27 May 2001 from 1.00pm to 4.00pm

Background An application has been received from the organizers of a local annual street party for the use of a 60 metre length of the Woodville Road road reserve between Lennox and Peel Streets, Glenbrook, on Sunday 27 May 2001 from 1.00pm to 4.00pm. A Traffic Management Plan, a list of signatures of approval from adjoining residents and copies of letters to police, fire and ambulance services have been provided. Recommendation That Council approves the temporary closure of Woodville Road between Lennox and Peel Streets, Glenbrook, on Sunday 27 May 2001 from 1.00pm to 4.00pm for the purpose of holding a local Street Party, subject to compliance with the Application and Traffic Management Plan detailed in Attachment 3.


Attachment

2001-32 Control of traffic in Victoria Street, Katoomba Background The North Katoomba Residents Action Group has drawn attention to speeding and frequency of heavy vehicles on the local feeder route between the Great Western Highway and industrial premises in North Katoomba, including Council’s Depot. Victoria Street is an integral part of the route. The residents have expressed concern about traffic noise and safety of residents and pedestrians including children and have requested action to control traffic frequency and speed in Victoria Street. The residents asked to attend the Local Traffic Committee meeting for a ten minute presentation to members. The presentation was supported with a written Proposal dated 8 May 2001. The Proposal listed seven suggestions for investigation. Recommendation That Council notes the concerns of residents and approves of the actions of the Traffic Section in continuing to investigate and report progress to the North Katoomba Residents Action Group on:-

a. Traffic calming strategies appropriate to local feeder roads. b. Police surveillance and enforcement of 50km/h speed limit c. Provision of adequate hazard warning signage, 50km/h speed limit. d. Improvements to roadside infrastructure e. Additional alternative routes for heavy vehicles.

Other items tabled for the attention of the Local Traffic Committee: Provision of a Pedestrian Crossing on Great Western Highway opposite Neate Park Skate Facility, Blackheath The Committee undertook to refer this matter to the Transport Corridor Manager and the Council’s Traffic Section for liaison with the Roads & Traffic Authority. Obstruction of Cascade Street, Lawson It was reported that a gate had been erected across Cascade Street/Park Street, Lawson, in the industrial area. The matter to be referred to Enforcement Officers for investigation.


Attachment

Intersection of Green Parade with Great Western Highway at Valley Heights It was suggested that a “No Right Turn – Buses excepted” restriction sign be placed at the intersection to avoid conflict with Highway traffic near the intersection. Council’s Traffic Section will liaise with the RTA in implementing this suggestion. Traffic signal phasing at Station Street/Great Western Highway, Wentworth Falls It was noted that the phasing of right hand turn arrows for westbound traffic turning into Station Street was causing long delays when eastbound traffic was heavy. The RTA will check the sequencing and phasing of these signals. The meeting closed at 12.15 pm

NOTICE OF MOTION Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 22 SUBJECT: PROVISION OF FULL HERITAGE REPORTS TO COUNCILLORS FILE NO: C00466 By Councillors A Henson, S Burridge and H Kozelj:

“That Councillors receive a full copy of heritage reports on items before Council for determination.”

Note by Councillors Henson, Burridge and Kozelj: With the recent listing of World Heritage it is more important than ever that we are fully informed on all matters relating to the cultural and built heritage within our City. While it is understood that the Blue Mountains listing was for its outstanding universal natural values, outstanding biodiversity of its plant and animal communities and the beauty of its natural landscapes, the face (built environment) of our City is the first thing visitors see. It is important that Councillors are provided with full heritage reports to assist us in our determination on matters before Council. Councillors should be given the opportunity to more thoroughly assess matters of cultural and heritage conservation. This request involves the provision of a few pages of information to every Councillor every few months. The practice of having this information at the Katoomba Office in the Councillors’ Room has been very unsatisfactory for Councillors from the Lower Mountains who may only have the opportunity to as sess this information prior to attending a Council Meeting.


ITEM NO: 23 SUBJECT: FORMATION OF A LOCAL COMPANION ANIMAL ADVISORY

COMMITTEE FILE NO: C02886 By Councillors A Henson, H Kozelj and S Burridge:

“That a report comes to Council on the feasibility of forming a Local Companion Animal Advisory Committee in the Blue Mountains to assist Council with responsible companion animal management.”

Note by Councillors Henson, Kozelj and Burridge: The Springwood District Dog Training Club Inc have requested Council to consider the formation of a Local Companion Animal Advisory Committee to help our community grow further in its responsible companion animal management. Throughout the community consultation stages for the Companion Animal Act it was suggested that councils establish a Local Companion Animals Advisory Committee. Council put out a questionnaire at the Blue Mountains 1999 Companion Animal Day and it was felt there was some consideration by the Council to establish such a committee. The advisory committee would consist of volunteers from various relevant organisations who would work together towards better companion animal management in the Blue Mountains. Springwood and Blue Mountains Dog Training Club have already worked successfully with Council, which eventuated in successful Companion Animal Days in Glenbrook and Katoomba. It is clear from articles in the Gazette that more needs to be done in educating the public on the responsibilities of companion animal ownership.


ITEM NO: 24 SUBJECT: PROVISION OF OVERHEAD BRIDGE, LINDEN FILE NO: R12/0021 By Councillor A Henson:

“That Council, on behalf of the Linden Citizens’ Association, writes to the Hon Bob Debus, Member for Blue Mountains requesting him to obtain support from the RTA, and to Mr Kerry Bartlett, Member for Macquarie, requesting him to obtain an increase in funding for the provision of an overhead bridge to give the people of Linden safe pedestrian access across the Great Western Highway to access the Station.”

Note by Councillor Henson: There have been two unresolved issues for the residents of Linden in relation to the upgrading of the Great Western Highway through Linden:

• The ‘return’ of the vehicle right hand turn on the Great Western Highway to access Linden Railway Station

• Safe pedestrian access over the Great Western Highway to access Linden Railway Station.

A recent meeting took place with the RTA, Council staff, and representatives from the Linden Citizens’ Association, Councillor Van der Kley and myself. At that meeting, the residents accepted the independent safety audits that determined it would not be safe to provide a right hand vehicle turning bay across the Highway and ha ve agreed to stop lobbying for this facility. However, residents feel that this has further highlighted the need for a pedestrian bridge. The RTA is to be commended for its work with the residents and the great engineering work that is being undertaken at Linden. However, on pedestrian access the pure fact that it is too dangerous for cars to cross at this point makes it clearly too dangerous for people to cross, especially for children and older people.


ITEM NO: 25 SUBJECT: OVERVIEW PROCESSES FOR COUNCILLORS TO REVIEW

SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS IN EXISTING DEVELOPED AREAS FILE NO: C00188 By Councillors Henson, Burridge and Kozelj:

“That Council implements more stringent overview processes for Councillors to review subdivision applications in existing developed areas.”

Note by Councillors Henson, Burridge and Kozelj: Currently, Councillors only receive notification via the Councillor Bulletin that subdivision applications have been lodged. These applications are generally for 1 into 2, 3, 4 or more lots. Council was made aware of community concern in a letter to the General Manager dated January 1999 indicating there appears to be a trend where residents are approached by developers to subdivide their blocks for residential developments or SEPP 5 applications. The City has major existing drainage problems, there are no footpaths in local streets, there is a backlog of kerb and guttering to be done, many roads need repair, and maintenance is not at a level appropriate for the City of the Arts, a City within a National Park and in a region World Heritage listed. It is well recognised that the Council itself does not have the resources or the financial ability to address all the problems facing the City due to the unusual urban and spread out nature of our City. Any further impact in our local streets, without the above being addressed first, should be more stringently assessed. The elected body needs to look more carefully at the situation and, unless it can be shown that these resubdivisions within existing subdivisions do not aggravate the situation further for existing residents, we may well need to look at amending our planning instruments. This Notice of Motion is not to stop resubdivision if appropriate. However, currently the elected body has very little knowledge of the impact on the infrastructure and the quality of life of our current residents. Councillors need to be fully briefed and be provided with all the relevant information.


ITEM NO: 26 SUBJECT: PROVISION OF MATURE NATIVE TREES – KATOOMBA STREET, KATOOMBA FILE NO: By Councillors H Kozelj and A Henson:

“1. That Council be requested, as a matter of urgency, to replant new suitable mature trees in existing garden beds on Katoomba Street, between Birdwood Avenue and Edward Street, Katoomba.

2. That Council maintain these trees in accordance with appropriate landscaping

guidelines.

3. That tree selection shall be based on appropriate landscaping and environment guidelines.”

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 27 SUBJECT: PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE, 22/5/2001 FILE NO: C00680 Recommendation: That the Precis of Selected Correspondence be received and appropriate letters forwarded where necessary. 1. 17/4/2001 - Carmel Dal Ponte, Head of Branch Banking, NSW Northern,

Westpac Banking Corporation

Reading as follows:

“Thank you for your letter dated 27 March 2001 regarding the changes to our representation in Katoomba. We appreciate the time you have taken to highlight the opportunities which are currently available within the CBD. The transfer of the Katoomba operation to Leura will ensure that our customers will continue to have access to high quality over the counter banking services on a sustainable basis whilst also offering full ATM services in the Katoomba CBD precinct. This decision was not taken lightly, with a great deal of time put into analysing customer data, business levels, & the local area market. I would also like to confirm that we are unable to effectively create a full branch operation in premises smaller than 120 m2 due to our current design, security, and Occupational Health and Safety standards. It is for these reasons we are not considering re-creating full branch services in the Katoomba CBD. Again, thank you for bringing these opportunities to our attention.”

2. 27/4/2001 - Lyn Hetherington, Honorary Secretary, and Members of Springwood

Red Cross Thanking Counc il for removing branches from a tree in Buckland Park, Springwood,

the branches having been used by vandals to gain access to the roof of the Red Cross Hall, resulting in a large number of broken tiles.

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Item 27 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

3. 4/5/2001 - 25 Petitioners from Katoomba Reading as follows:

“As a resident and ratepayer of the vicinity of Lett St, Katoomba, I write to urge the Council to develop and implement a comprehensive tree planting strategy for the footpath of Lett St, from Wilson St to Clarence St. Lett Street’s width, and gentle slope, offers an ideal opportunity to create a streetscape of beauty and value to its residents, Council, and the people of Katoomba. The development of Peter Carroll Oval would also be enhanced by the beautification of Lett St. The planting might also be viewed by Council as some solace for those of us in the immediate vicinity who were/are unsettled by the Peter Carroll plans, and the process of their development.”

4. 4/5/2001 - Alex Gooding, Executive Director, Western Sydney Regional

Organisation of Councils (WSROC)

Expressing WSROC’s disappointment and regret at the recent decision to dissolve the Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment Management Trust and providing details of a recent resolution of the WSROC Board at its meeting on 19 April 2001: 1) That Ms Susan Kemp, Assistant Director-General and Mr Axel Tennie,

Regional Director, Sydney-South Coast Region of the Department of Land and Water Conservation be thanked for their presentation;

2) That WSROC write to the Minister for Land and Water Conservation, the Hon. Richard Amery, MP, to express concern at the suddenness of the decision to abolish the Trust and the lack of consultation with WSROC, its member Councils and th e wider community regarding this decision;

3) That the Minister be urged to reconsider the decision or at least to postpone it so that there can be a public review of the Trust’s performance;

4) That assurances be sought from the Minister regarding the commitments made by the Trust to fund projects, in particular those involving WSROC and its member Councils;

5) That a meeting be sought with the Minister to discuss these matters; and

6) That member Councils and other regional organisations be urged to express

their concerns to the Minister regarding these issues.

WSROC is concerned with the future model to be used for managing the catchment in the absence of the Trust. The Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC) has not provided much detail about proposed future structures, however the Minister for Land and Water Conservation, the Hon Richard Amery, has indicated that the Trust-established Local Government Reference Group (LGRG) will be maintained.

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Item 27 - Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

Membership of the LGRG consists of a Councillor and staff member from each Council in the catchment. At this stage there is no community or industry representation on this group. Whilst the Minister has indicated that the LGRG will continue, its future role is unclear. A sub-committee, of which WSROC is a member, has been established to review the LGRG’s Terms of Reference. The Minister has further indicated that the Trust-established Hawkesbury Nepean Forum, whose brief it is to advise the government on flows in the River system, will also be maintained but the exact makeup of this committee has not yet been released.

WSROC believes it is crucial that local government plays a key role in the future management of the catchment. Furthermore, DLWC should focus on future natural resource management of the Hawkesbury-Nepean Rivers. The contributions made to different projects in the past by many individual staff members of the Trust, who are to be absorbed within the functions of the DLWC, should be maintained in addition to the role of co-ordination of projects across the catchment and the creation of co-operative, regionally focused projects and outcomes.

5. 7/5/2001 - Terry McCormack, Executive Officer, Westpool

Reading as follows:

“I advise that at the Board Meeting held on 30 April 2001 it was resolved that I write to each General Manager to clearly outline the position of Westpool as a result of the recent financial collapse of the HIH Insurance Group. HIH or CE Heath as it was previously known were the Underwriters for the Public Liability and Professional Indemnity Insurance for the years 1998/89 to 1994/95 inclusive. The cover was from $1M to $50M. At the Board meeting, discussion took place on the issue of any costs or awards that would have, in the normal course of events been the responsibility of HIH. The Board resolved as follows:-

It was resolved that the concept of mutuality in relation to Westpool and the acceptance of liability for excess layer insurance be confirmed subject to such action not being prejudicial to the future recovery of funds from HIH (in liquidation).

I might also mention that as a result of the recent HIH collapse and the award in the case of Blue Mountains City Council ats Ryan, Westpool has written to the Minister for Local Government and the Attorney General asking for urgent action by the Government to minimise the impacts of these issues particularly on Local Government.”

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Item 27 - Ordinary Mee ting, 22/5/01

6. 11/5/2001 – Office of the Leader of the Opposition Referring to Council’s letter of 30 April 2001 conveying resolutions in relation to

National Competition Policy and advising that the NSW Government expects to receive $155.9 million from the Commonwealth in 2000-2001, projected to rise to $241 million in 2001-2002, but that the State Treasurer, the Hon Michael Egan, refuses to forward the payments to Councils because he believes it has been the State who has incurred the costs of implementing the competition policies.

7. 14/5/2001 - Thelma Murphy, Springwood Complimenting a staff member on the map prepared showing reserves in the

Springwood area where bushcare work on a regular basis occurs, as well the flyer which details days and hours on which the volunteer groups meet and work on these reserves.

8. 15/5/2001 - Pam Crafoord, Secretary, Braemar Management Committee Thanking Council’s Parks and Gardens staff for the recent plantings in Braemar House

gardens.

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE (1/5/01) Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 28 SUBJECT: POSSIBLE REZONING - 25 THE MALL, WARRIMOO FILE NO: A62174 Question by Councillor A Henson (1/5/01):

“When will the report come back to Council on a possible rezoning for 15 The Mall, Warrimoo, in order to maximise the amount of land kept for environmental protection and to more realistically indicate what land is available for development.”

Note by Councillor Henson: The request for help on the issue of a possible rezoning came to me from the Warrimoo Residents’ Action Group on 6 December 2000 and was submitted as a Notice of Motion to Council on 19 December 2000. It was unanimously supported (Minute No. 579). Much information had come to light during the case of appeal before the Land and Environment Court. This information reflected the great environmental sensitivity of the land and how permanent and prescriptive protection of said land from over-development was imperative. The outcome of the appeal was that the appeal was dismissed (The Honourable Justice Dennis A Cowdroy OAM), as follows:

“Orders 64 Having taken into consideration all the relevant matters required by

s79C(1) of the EP&A Act, it is the decision of the Court that the present proposal is unacceptable and that the appeal should not be upheld.”

Residents are now anxious to hear how Council is intending to protect this sensitive valley before another inappropriate application is submitted. Response by Group Manager Health and Development: The report was originally planned to be presented after the decision of the Land and Environment Court was delivered to the Council, however as recently advised in a Councillor Information Bulletin, the applicant / landowner has appealed to the Court of Appeal regarding the dec ision of the Land and Environment Court. Until the grounds of that appeal are documented, it is considered inappropriate to finalise a report on the question of rezoning. The matter is not due to be before the Court until some time around the end of June , when the applicant is required to outline the grounds for the appeal. It is then expected that a report can be submitted to Council.

QUESTION WITH NOTICE Ordinary Meeting, 22/5/01

ITEM NO: 29 SUBJECT: CALL FOR A CONTAINER DEPOSIT LEVY (CDL) FILE NO: C00295 Question by Councillor A Henson (22/5/01):

“1. What was the outcome of the WSROC submission to the Environment Protection Authority’s Container Deposit Levy (CDL) Review?

2. Has Council been involved in determining the best approach to CDL yet?”

Note by Councillor Henson: The financial and resource strain placed on councils through the kerbside recycling structure has been identified as being unfair to local government. It has been suggested that the responsibility for recycling should lie both with the product producer and the consumer. A CDL firmly places the responsibility and cost of recycling on these two groups. It has been identified that the introduction of CDL will lead to more responsible product choice by consumers and more responsible container choice by producers. It has been stated that CDL also has benefits such as reducing litter and raising recycling levels. With continued budget restraints it is important that Blue Mountains City Council finds or supports ways to reduce expenditure leaving us in a better financial position to service our City.