maitland city council ordinary agenda 25 …...sep 25, 2001 · capital works program is submitted...

MAITLAND CITY COUNCIL

ORDINARY AGENDA

25 SEPTEMBER 2001

David Evans General Manager

COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 25 SEPTEMBER 2001

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO 1 INVOCATION.............................................................................................. 1

2 APOLOGIES ............................................................................................... 1

3 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST ......................................... 1

4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING....................... 1

5 BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES...................................................... 1

6 MAYORAL MINUTES ................................................................................. 2

6.1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TRAGEDY............................... 2

6.2 PROPOSED RENAMING OF SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE ....... 3

7 PUBLIC ACCESS ....................................................................................... 5

8 WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS AND ACCEPTANCE OF LATE ITEMS OF BUSINESS .................................................................................................. 5

9 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION....................................................................... 6

9.1 MAITLAND CITY LIBRARY......................................................... 6

9.2 STATUS REPORT ON CONSTRUCTION WORKS .................... 9

9.3 MAITLAND ART GALLERY ...................................................... 16

9.4 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - AUGUST 2001 .................. 17

9.5 CENTRAL MAITLAND AREA IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME - BUDGET ......................................................... 20

9.6 MASTERS GAMES - RUTHERFORD AERODROME ............... 24

10 MAITLAND YOUTH COUNCIL ................................................................. 25

11 OFFICERS REPORTS .............................................................................. 26

11.1 GENERAL MANAGER............................................................... 26

11.1.1 DIRECT RETURN FLIGHTS: AUCKLAND TO NEWCASTLE... 26

11.1.2 DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS RETURNS............................... 29

11.1.3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGERS AUSTRALIA CONFERENCE - SYDNEY......................................................... 30


Page (ii)

11.2 COMMUNITY AND CORPORATE GROUP............................... 33

11.2.1 CORPORATE TELECROSS ...................................................... 33

11.2.2 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT ASSISTANCE SCHEME........ 35

11.2.3 HUNTER AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME - YOUTH PROJECT. 37

11.2.4 HUNTER AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME - LOCAL RANKING COMMITTEE.............................................................................. 39

11.2.5 INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY 2001 - ACCESS EXPO............................................................... 43

11.2.6 SECTION 356 DONATION......................................................... 45

11.2.7 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION OF NSW - COUNTRY TOUR....................................................................... 47

11.3 BUSINESS AND FINANCE GROUP ......................................... 48

11.3.1 STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS HELD AS AT 31 AUGUST 2001 ........................................................................................... 48

11.3.2 APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE - MAITLAND REPERTORY SOCIETY ............................................................ 50

11.3.3 AFFIXING OF COMMON SEAL - WORKERS COMPENSATION ...................................................................... 51

11.4 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT GROUP............................... 53

11.4.1 REQUEST FOR THE MODIFICATION OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL LOTS 151 AND 152 BOLWARRA PARK DRIVE, BOLWARRA HEIGHTS .............................................................. 53

11.4.2 SCHOOLS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM ................................... 55

11.4.3 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP 1993 TO PROHIBIT FURTHER SUBDIVISION OF LAND WITHIN BOLWARRA PARK ESTATE........................................................................... 57

11.4.4 REZONING OF PROPOSED LOT 813 IN A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 504, DP 1005954 THORNTON ROAD THORNTON.......... 66

11.4.5 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1993 .............................................................................. 73

11.4.6 RZ01004 - DRAFT AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP ALTERATION OF ACQUISITION CLAUSE & VARIOUS REZONINGS .............................................................................. 80


Page (iii)

11.4.7 SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN CARPARKING - MORPETH.................................................................................. 86

11.5 ASSET PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT GROUP .................. 90

11.5.1 NEW ENGLAND HIGHWAY - MELBEE STREET LANEWAY.... 90

11.5.2 ROAD SAFETY BLACK SPOT PROGRAM ............................... 92

11.5.3 WOODBERRY SKATEBOARD FACILITY - POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCES ................................................................ 94

12 REFERRED COMMITTEE REPORTS ...................................................... 97

13 NOTICE OF MOTION/RESCISSION......................................................... 97

14 URGENT BUSINESS ................................................................................ 97

15 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ............................................................. 97

16 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE................................................................. 98

16.1 OFFICERS REPORTS ............................................................... 98

16.1.1 MAITLAND GAOL MASTERPLAN ............................................. 98

16.1.2 PLANT REPLACEMENT ............................................................ 99

16.2 MAYOR'S REPORTS................................................................100

16.2.1 PERFORMANCE REVIEW........................................................100

16.2.2 REMUNERATION - MANAGEMENT.........................................101

17 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ...102

18 CLOSURE................................................................................................102


Page 1

1 INVOCATION

2 APOLOGIES

3 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

• The minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 28 August 2001 be confirmed.

5 BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES


Page 2

6 MAYORAL MINUTES

6.1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TRAGEDY

FILE NO: 35/16

Author: Clr Peter Blackmore Mayor

Tuesday 11 September 2001 witnessed acts of terrorism being inflicted on the United States of America. As we now know, loss of life through these acts have impacted on many countries around the world, including Australia. In disbelief and shock, people from Maitland and throughout the world looked on as the horror unfolded live on television. We witnessed Rescuers become victims and the many thousands of people who had commenced the day with enthusiasm, never returning to their families. As a mark of respect to the victims and their families, the rescuers and the people of the United States of America, flags in the city have been flown at half mast since the tragedy. A Civic/Community Remembrance Church Service was held and Condolence Sheets have been prepared and distributed throughout the city.

RECOMMENDATION. THAT Council

1: Convey the condolences, thoughts and prayers of the citizens of Maitland to the Mayor and citizens of New York and Washington

2: Stand and observe a minutes silence as a matter of respect to the communities of the United States of America and other nations who have been impacted on by this horrific event.

3: Ask the community of Maitland to continue their prayers and requests for World Peace.


Page 3

6.2 PROPOSED RENAMING OF SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE

FILE NO: P16387

Author: Clr Peter Blackmore Mayor

At the Council meeting held Tuesday, 27 March 2001, Council resolved to support a Mayoral Minute :-

“THAT discussions be held with the Executive of the Maitland Senior Citizens Association Inc and Walsh family members regarding the proposal to rename the Senior Citizens Centre the “Ron and Hazel Walsh Senior Citizens Centre.”

Council contacted the Walsh family members first seeking their views and received a favourable verbal response on Monday 6 August and then sought the thoughts of the Executive of the Maitland Senior Citizens Association on 20 August 2001. Media reports indicated opposition to the proposal by the Senior Citizens members and a formal response from the Executive was forwarded to the General Manager dated 10 September 2001 signed by the President of the Maitland Senior Citizens & Pensioners, Mrs Heather Sams. The response in part states “At our last General Meeting on 30th August, in regards to the question of the name change, our members voted overwhelmingly in favour of no change whatsoever.” The Association has suggested that a plaque be placed either in the foyer or the court yard in honour of both the late Ron & Hazel Walsh. Based on the suggestion from the Association, I would therefore make the following recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION THAT Council proceed to erect a plaque in honour of Ron & Hazel Walsh in the courtyard of the Senior Citizens Centre as suggested.


(CONT.)

Page 4


Page 5

7 PUBLIC ACCESS

8 WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS AND ACCEPTANCE OF LATE ITEMS OF BUSINESS


Page 6

9 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

9.1 MAITLAND CITY LIBRARY

FILE NO: 35/61

Responsible Officer: Henry Wilson Group Manager Community & Corporate

Author: Jean McBride City Librarian

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report contains relevant statistical and performance data for Council. Besides being a valuable management tool, it is a performance reporting mechanism to the general community.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the information contained in this Report be noted.

REPORT See attachments to report.


MAITLAND CITY LIBRARY (CONT.)

Page 7

Statistics Aug-00 City East Ruth Thorn TOTAL Items circulated at City

and branches 15052 8089 1105 3207 27453New Borrowers 161 37 15 47 260Total Borrowers 15065 6684 1082 1520 24351

Items added to the collection 936 361 131 305 1733

Information searches 0 0No. of visitors to the

City Library and Branches 10501 5339 838 2819 19497

Statistics Aug-01 City East Ruth Thorn TOTAL Items circulated at City and branches 16755 7808 1148 3333 29044

New Borrowers 165 63 4 34 266Total Borrowers 16,655 7240 1146 1849 26890

Items added to the collection 1252 463 265 424 2404

Information searches 473 310 63 137 983No. of visitors to the

City Library and Branches 10143 4762 871 2759 18535


MAITLAND CITY LIBRARY (CONT.)

Page 8

Income Aug 00

City

$ East

$ Ruth

$ Thorn

$ TOTAL

$ Photocopying 976.22 312.18 18.73 64.73 1,371.86

Interlibrary Loans 35.64 0.00 0.00 5.00 40.64Fees and Charges 1,217.11 342.41 53.00 131.83 1,744.35

Income from Internet training 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00Children's Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Community Room bookings 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Income from Equipment hire 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Email /Phone usage 184.63 51.53 0.00 69.00 305.16Merchandising 70.95 8.00 0.00 2.00 80.95

TOTAL $2,584.55 $714.12 $71.73 $272.56 $3,642.96 Income Aug 01

City

$ East

$ Ruth

$ Thorn

$ TOTAL

$ Photocopying 1,128.46 324.36 13.68 77.22 1,543.72

Interlibrary Loans 24.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 25.00Fees and Charges 1,303.45 359.62 52.20 200.36 1,915.63

Income from Internet training 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Children's Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Community Room bookings 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Income from Equipment hire 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Email /Phone usage 176.80 32.45 0.00 18.00 227.25Merchandising 84.04 23.00 0.00 8.00 115.04

TOTAL $2,716.75 $740.43 $65.88 $303.58 $3,826.64


Page 9

9.2 STATUS REPORT ON CONSTRUCTION WORKS

FILE NO: 122/814

Responsible Officer: Wayne Cone Group Manager Operations

Author: Ian Wakem Civil & Building Works Manager

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A report on the status of major construction works and projects within the 2001/2002 Capital Works Program is submitted for Council’s information.


REPORT The status of the construction projects within the 2001/2002 Rolling Works Program, as of 13th September 2001, is as follows. A copy of the works program for the period July 2001 to June 2002 is attached to this report as Attachment 1. 1. Drainage Construction

1.1 Lee and Nicholson Streets intersection, Maitland

An old stormwater pipeline has been replaced with a box culvert across this intersection to improve drainage in the immediate vicinity. The work commenced on 20th August and was completed on 24th August at a cost of $10,200.

1.2 Clarence Street, Tenambit A large stormwater pipeline is to be constructed from Maize Street, under Clarence Street, then following the existing open drain towards the golf course. The work is scheduled to commence on 29th October and is expected to take three to four weeks to complete. The estimated cost is $62,400.


STATUS REPORT ON CONSTRUCTION WORKS (CONT.)

Page 10

2. Footpath Construction

2.1 Bruce Street, East Maitland A new concrete footpath has been constructed on the northern side of Bruce Street between Blaxland Street and Quarry Street. The work commenced on 8th August and was completed on 3rd September. The cost of the works was $33,900.

2.2 Greenhills Avenue, Woodberry

A new concrete footpath is presently being constructed on the south side of Greenhills Avenue between house No.12 and house No.32. The work commenced on 20th August and should be completed by 24th September. The cost of the works was $10,050.

2.3 Regent Street, Maitland

The construction of the balance of concrete footpath between Benhome and Ledsam Streets, commenced on 10th September. The project is expected to be completed by 28th September at a cost of $9,620.

3. ‘Urban Local Roads’ Reconstruction

3.1 Maize Street, Tenambit Work, with the exception of the pavement linemarking, is complete on the reconstruction and road widening of the section of Maize Street between Byng Street and Goldingham Street. The project commenced on in June and was bitumen sealed on 6th September. The approximate cost was $193,000.

3.2 Aberglasslyn Road, Rutherford

The construction of a roundabout on the intersection of Aberglasslyn Road and Alexandra Avenue commenced on 10th September. The project is expected to take 9 weeks to complete at an approximate cost of $260,000.

4. New Works - Urban

4.1 Denton Close, Windella

A turning area at the end of Denton Close was constructed in early September with the bitumen seal applied on the 13th September. The cost of the works was $5,800.



Page 11

5. Rehabilitation - Rural

5.1 Maitland Vale Road at Melville Ford Road

The first of three sections of Maitland Vale Road to be rehabilitated this financial year was completed with the bitumen sealing on 13th September. Work is progressing on the second section which is scheduled for completion by early October. The final section, being at the intersection of Dickenson Road is currently scheduled for October/November this year. The total estimated cost of the three sections is $403,000.

6. Urban Rehabilitation

Preparation works for the stabilisation of the following streets is now complete: - Swallow Ave, Rutherford - Ibis Pde, Woodberry - Hawk St, Woodberry - Taree St, Telarah - Marlborough St, Rutherford - Nelson Cl, Rutherford - Mountbatten Cl, Rutherford - Perth Ave, East Maitland The actual stabilisation works will be undertaken in early October. The total cost of these projects is estimated at $162,800.

7. Urban Reseals

Preparation works for the resealing of a large number of residential streets this summer has commenced. The actual bitumen sealing will start in October. The total value of this year’s urban reseal program is $880,000.

8. Rural Reconstruction

8.1 Ravensfield Lane, Bishops Bridge Approximately 100 metres of Ravensfield Lane has been rehabilitated and bitumen sealed. The project commenced on 20th August and was completed on 13th September at a cost of approximately $29,000.

8.2 Anambah Road, Anambah Approximately 420 metres of Anambah Road in the vicinity of the Gosforth Quarry is being widened, rehabilitated and bitumen sealed. The project commenced on 3rd September and is expected to be completed by 21st September at a cost of approximately $60,000.



Page 12

9. Traffic Facilities

9.1 Alcohol Free Zones Signage

Work on the erection of the signage commenced on 15th August and was completed on 26th August. The cost of the project was $7,000.

10. Council Initiatives

10.1 Telarah Wetlands Improvements

This project includes the construction of a small carpark, a walking track, a raised boardwalk and mass planting. Work commenced on 2nd April and was completed on 18th August. The cost of the works was $25,000.

11. Section 94 Projects

11.1 Morpeth Courthouse Repairs

During the current renovations of the Morpeth Courthouse, further structural damage to the building was discovered, thus slowing the progress of the works. It is expected, however, that all repairs will be completed by late October. Estimated cost is $90,000.

12. CBD Improvements

12.1 Entry Feature Signage - Painting

Painting to the front of all entry walls has been completed. Following finalisation of the structural work to the rear of the walls, the painting will also be finalised.

13. Additional Works

13.1 Victoria Street Tennis Court Clubhouse

Major structural flaws were found in the roof of this building, necessitating the emergency reconstruction of the roof. Although the roof reconstruction is complete, repairs to sections of the ceiling are still pending. An application for natural disasters grant funding has been lodged. Estimated cost is $30,000, which is the subject of a Natural Disaster Grant Application.

13.2 Oakhampton Cemetery Heritage Fence

A fence is currently being erected at the Oakhampton Cemetery. The work commenced on 14th August. All that remains to complete the project is the erection and painting of the gates. Estimated cost is $6,000.



Page 13

13.3 Visitors Centre Display Cabinets

Work is almost complete on the construction of several display cabinets at the Visitors Centre. The project will be completed within the next fortnight at an estimated cost of $25,000.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct financial impact upon Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no specific policy implications for Council.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are no statutory implications under the Local Government Act 1993 with this matter.



Page 14



Page 15


Page 16

9.3 MAITLAND ART GALLERY

FILE NO: 35/61


Author: Margaret Sivyer Art Gallery Director

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report contains relevant statistical and performance data for Council. Besides being a valuable management tool, it is a performance reporting mechanism to the general community.


REPORT Attendance Figures figures for Maitland Art Gallery for the month of August were: 2001 2000

August 1,119 815

Year to date 8,067 5,300


Page 17

9.4 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - AUGUST 2001

FILE NO: 35/53

Responsible Officer: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Business & Finance

Author: Phil Freeman Expenditure Accountant

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report contains relevant performance data for Council. Besides being a valuable management tool, it is a performance reporting mechanism to the general community.


REPORT The Financial Report indicates that Council’s financial position is sound. The Statement of Financial Performance shows a surplus at the end of August 2001 of $16,736,000. Please note that this includes Council’s rates and annual charges, which are levied, and shown as revenue, in July each year. See attachments to this report.


MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - AUGUST 2001 (CONT.)

Page 18


Page 19


Page 20

9.5 CENTRAL MAITLAND AREA IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME - BUDGET

FILE NO: 103/4

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager Planning and Environment

Author: Leanne Harris Environmental Strategist

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the Council with an update on the Central Maitland Area Improvement Programme and in particular provides an overview of the overall budget position for the 5 year works programme. Work on several key projects has been completed or is now well underway. In addition works are about to commence on the refurbishment programme for the Heritage Mall. This project will continue through, in stages, until mid next year. Through the detailed design phases of the various projects, more detailed cost estimates are now becoming available. The overall broad budget allocations for the five year programme have therefore been reviewed in light of this additional information. Details of this are presented for the information of the Councillors.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The contents of this report be received and noted

REPORT As last reported to Council in May 2001, various works for the Central Maitland Area Improvement Programme have been completed or are currently underway. The overall capital works programme is focussed on the following broad categories:

Landscaping Street Lighting Signage Mall Improvements Enhancement of River Environment Car Parking Improvements Pedestrian Linkages Works to High Street

The work programme and overall priorities have been overseen and agreed to by the City Centre Reference Group.


CENTRAL MAITLAND AREA IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME - BUDGET (CONT.)

Page 21

Current key projects include: Landscaping: To complement the landscaping projects completed along Allan Walsh Drive and Ken Tubman Drive work is about to commence on landscaping the roundabouts at Church Street and Ken Tubman Drive. The design includes installation of sand stone edging and plantings consistent with those being implemented for the ‘gateway’ entry features to the City – a mix of star jasmine as a ground cover and Gymea lilies with poplar trees where possible. Signage: Construction on the City ‘gateway’ signs is nearing completion. Refurbishment of Heritage Mall: Detailed designs for the Mall refurbishment project have now been completed. A staged works programme is planned with Stage One due to proceed over October and November of this year. This will include the installation of new furniture, upgraded paving and landscaping. Larger projects to create the eastern and western river links will take place early in the new year. The work programme has been designed to ensure that there is minimal disruption to the busy Christmas trading period and daily operations will be managed to ensure that inconvenience to both traders and shoppers is also minimal. Improvements to Car Parking In conjunction with the Maitland Signage Strategy, Council staff have completed a review and audit of existing traffic directional and car parking signs within the City Centre. As a result designs are currently underway to completely update the traffic directional signage, specifically to ensure that this is consistent with, and supports the highway loop signage to be installed by the Roads and Traffic Authority. In addition, designs are also being completed, for large, clear car parking signs, to highlight and direct traffic to existing car parking areas. Whilst these measures will not actually create additional car parking spaces, they should assist in better utilisation of existing car parks, particularly for visitors who are unfamiliar with the City, and to ensure smoother traffic flows. Whilst there is no definite indication from the RTA as to when the highway signage will be installed, Council has received confirmation that the signs have been approved and will be funded by the RTA. CMAIP BUDGET In conjunction with the implementation of the special construction rate and establishment of the City Centre Reference Group, Council set up broad budget allocations to cover the range of projects for the overall works programme. These allocations were made on the basis of estimates only, with the understanding that



Page 22

they would be reviewed by the City Centre Reference Group, in light of agreed priorities. Now that detailed designs are becoming available for some projects, a much more specific estimate can be made for the cost of individual works. The table below indicates the original budget and how it now needs to be revised following the work undertaken to date and the detailed designs and estimates now being completed. Total costs for works to the Mall are now estimated to cost approximately $975,000. The original broad estimate for the refurbishment of the Heritage Mall was $900,000. It should be noted that the Reference Group have already agreed to significant cost savings to ensure that the budget is as close to that originally proposed as possible, without impacting upon the overall end result or effectiveness of the refurbishment plans. The overall funding categories have been reviewed to allow for the additional costs proposed for the mall and to cover the actual construction costs for landscaping and the entry feature signs. To date, the landscaping projects have cost slightly less than originally budgeted for, whilst the gateway entry signs are costing slightly more. Some flexibility in the budget categories is important to ensure that the projects are completed successfully. It is considered essential however, to retain a reasonable spread of funding across the CBD in accordance with the overall intention of the Central Maitland Area Improvement Plan and the original budget presented to and agreed by the Reference Group.

Central Maitland Area Improvement Programme

Overall Funding Categories Original Amended

27th Feb 2001

(Council)

Proposed September

2001

Landscaping $725,000 $340,000 $305,000 Street Lighting $350,000 $280,000 $260,000 Pedestrian Linkages $525,000 $225,000 $200,000 Improvements to Existing Car Parking

$150,000 $150,000 $135,000

Improvements / Refurbishment of Mall

$900,000 $900,000 $975,000

Signage and Furniture $150,000 $185,000 $220,000 Enhancement of River Environment $700,000 $700,000 $685,000 Improvements to High Street* - $720,000 $720,000

TOTAL $3.5 million $3.5 million $3.5 million * Gateway features identified as part of the Heritage Mall Analysis including ‘Cathedral Square’ and ‘Western Entry’

The Mall refurbishment design includes significant works on the actual river bank, as well as additional street lighting projects. The City Centre Reference Group agreed that these would be more appropriately funded from the river enhancement and street lighting budgets respectively. Adequate funds are available in both of these budget centres to cover the costs of the works.



Page 23

In conjunction with the paving works proposed for the mall (new banding), approximately $30,000 worth of paving repairs have been identified as being required. It is logical for these to happen concurrently with the new banding, however given they are a maintenance issue for Council, it is more appropriate for these to be funded separately by Council, from its asset planning and management budget rather than the construction rate. The Heritage Mall refurbishment plan also identifies approximately $75,000 worth of ‘recoverable’ costs. These costs are associated with the initial purchase of market stalls, café furniture and umbrellas, which can all be leased back to the traders to ultimately recoup the initial outlay required. The appropriate funding mechanism for these items is currently being investigated and will be the subject of a further report to Council.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no specific financial implications for Council. Overall funding for the project is $700,000 per annum over a five year period and the project is now in its second year. The overall broad budget allocations are based on the total funds already committed over the five year period.



CONCLUSION Works on the Central Maitland Area Improvement Programme are proceeding in a number of key areas. As a result of detailed design documentation and further review by the City Centre Reference Group more accurate costings of the various projects are becoming apparent. This report provides the Council with an update on the overall budget allocations in light of these more detailed costings.


Page 24

9.6 MASTERS GAMES - RUTHERFORD AERODROME

FILE NO: P21595

Responsible Officer: David Evans General Manager

Author: David Evans General Manager

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides information on events at the forthcoming ‘Masters Games’, which will occur or be based at the Rutherford Aerodrome.


REPORT At its meeting held on 24 April 2001, Council adopted a Notice of Motion put forward by Clr Brian Burke that:- “Maitland City Council (resolve to) contact the organisers of the Masters Games for details of flying activities anticipated at the Royal Newcastle Aero Club.” Initial contact was made with the nominated contact person for the sport of ‘Hang-gliding’, the venue for which was nominated in the registration documentation as Royal Newcastle Aero Club, Rutherford. In the category of Hang-gliding, the registration documents identified events including:-

− Hang-gliding − Paragliding − Weightshift Microlighting

At this point, limited detail was available as to the magnitude of these events. However, the advice given was that the use of the Rutherford Aerodrome/RNAC would be limited to Weightshift Microlighting. On this basis it was determined that further information would be sought closer to the event. Contact has again and more recently been made with the event organisers, and it is now advised that there will not be any Masters Games events occurring at, nor based at, Rutherford Aerodrome. I have asked that this advice be confirmed in writing. However, on the basis of the advice given, I believe it unlikely at this point that the circumstances will change.


MASTERS GAMES - RUTHERFORD AERODROME (CONT.)

Page 25

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct financial impact upon Council's adopted budget or forward estimates.


STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are not statutory implications under the Local Government Act 1993 with this matter.

10 MAITLAND YOUTH COUNCIL


Page 26

11 OFFICERS REPORTS

11.1 GENERAL MANAGER

11.1.1 DIRECT RETURN FLIGHTS: AUCKLAND TO NEWCASTLE

FILE NO: 35/5/1


Author: Roger Stephan Economic Development Co-ordinator

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to inform Council of recent developments in regard to international flights to and from Newcastle Airport and to seek approval of requested participation by the Mayor in the first return flight to and from Auckland, New Zealand, to take place on 12 November 2001.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

THAT: 1. The report in regard to Council’s participation in the marketing

campaign associated with direct flights between New Zealand and Newcastle be received and noted.

2. The Mayor be authorised to represent the City on the inaugural flight in November this year.

3. Costs associated with all aspects of Council’s participation in the New Zealand marketing be met from the current tourism marketing and promotions allocation.

BACKGROUND On Wednesday 5 September 2001 the Hon. Richard Face, Minister for Gaming and Racing, and Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development formally announced in Parliament the success of a long term project to secure direct international flights to and from Newcastle Airport. Minister Face’s announcement in relation to the commencement in November 2001 of Freedom Air flights between Newcastle and Auckland, New Zealand, is the culmination of a protracted campaign to enhance the international profile of and access to the Hunter and its tourism and business opportunities and will see access to extremely low cost (from $399 return) flights between the two centres of benefit to both inbound visitors and to residents and business within the Hunter.


DIRECT RETURN FLIGHTS: AUCKLAND TO NEWCASTLE (CONT.)

Page 27

Maitland’s Contribution At a meeting held in Minister Face’s office in August of this year, an overview was provided of the Freedom Air proposal and various measures (terminal improvements, etc.) were outlined as necessary preconditions to the proposal being brought to fruition. A vital component of the package of enabling measures developed in consultation with Freedom Air was contribution by the Lower Hunter Councils, State and Federal Government to co-operative marketing activities in the New Zealand market. These marketing activities were to have a number of objectives including raising of general awareness of the Hunter and, in particular, communication of the diverse range of experiences and locations our region has to offer. Following consideration of the campaign and confirmation of its management by the Hunter Regional Tourism Organisation, this in principle support was provided. Contributions by the various Councils include: • Newcastle and Port Stephens - $25,000 each • Maitland, Lake Macquarie, Singleton and Cessnock - $10,000 each Council’s contribution is to be sourced from the tourism marketing and promotion allocation. Action From This Date On Council is represented on the HRTO Marketing Group which is to develop and oversee implementation of the Hunter’s component of the marketing plan. Council’s other contribution is to be a more ceremonial participation in both the first return flight to be conducted on 12 November 2001 and a subsequent Auckland-based two day public relations initiative targeted at the North Island market. This participation is at the direct request of the working group co-ordinated by Minister Face with the Mayor asked to act as spokesperson for the City.

CONCLUSION Direct international flights out of Newcastle Airport are an exciting development with potentially long term gains to our region. Council’s contribution is consistent with the long term strategy of both the Hunter Regional Tourism Organisation and the thrust of Council’s own tourism and economic development planning. Any changes to the Freedom Air proposal consequent upon recent international events will be communicated to Council. As Freedom Air is a (profitable) subsidiary of Air New Zealand there is some potential for a flow on effect to the Newcastle service. Such flow on will be evident prior to the expenditure of significant funds.


DIRECT RETURN FLIGHTS: AUCKLAND TO NEWCASTLE (CONT.)

Page 28

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Activities associated with the direct flights marketing campaign will be sourced from within current allocations.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS There are no direct policy implications arising from this matter.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There no direct statutory implications arising from this matter.


Page 29

11.1.2 DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS RETURNS

FILE NO: 35/1/3 & 35/1/2


Author: Henry Wilson Group Manager Community & Corporate

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the annual disclosure of interest returns required from Councillors and designated officers.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the Disclosure of Interest Returns, as tabled, be noted.

REPORT Section 449 (3) of the Local Government Act, 1993, requires Councillors or designated persons holding that position at 30 June in any year must complete and lodge with the General Manager within 3 months after that date a return on the prescribed form providing disclosure of interests. All such returns for Councillors and designated persons have been received and are tabled as required by the Act.



STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 have been met.


Page 30

11.1.3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGERS AUSTRALIA CONFERENCE - SYDNEY

FILE NO: 32/2


Author: David Evans General Manager

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides an overview of the presentations from the Local Government Managers Australia State Conference held at the Sydney Convention Centre in August, 2001.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the report be received and noted.

REPORT The State Conference of Local Government Managers Australia (LGMA) was held at the Sydney Convention Centre from 8-11 August, 2001. The conference was attended by the Mayor Clr Blackmore, Clr Galea and Clr Humphery, accompanied by the General Manager and Group Manager Business & Finance. The theme of the conference – “It’s Magic: Management Innovation in the New Century” saw a focus on new management theory, shared management experiences, and the issues of local government reform within NSW. Key points by the keynote speakers at the conference included: ➤ The Hon Harry Woods, Minister for Local Government:

− the government’s vision for local government in NSW is for cost effective and efficient service to ratepayers;

− Voluntary Structural Reform (VSR) needs to continue at a reasonable pace – this will avoid the angst and concern associated with other approaches to local government reform

➤ Margot Cairnes, International Leadership expert:-

− author of “Approaching the Corporate Heart” − leaders need to provide meaning and purpose which sustains people

and their individual efforts; − what most people see as leadership are the ‘tools’ of leadership. The

reality is more about the leaders themselves, their workplace relationships, their spirit, their heart and their courage;

− leadership is very personal. It’s about deciding to make a difference – persisting, managing the flack, giving credit and support, and taking time out to recharge the batteries so you can go the distance.


LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGERS AUSTRALIA CONFERENCE - SYDNEY (CONT.)

Page 31

➤ Sandy Holloway, CEO of SOCOG:-

− the success of the Sydney Olympics was due to the relationships and alliances formed with all stakeholders;

− alliances however are not dependant on everybody agreeing on everything all the time;

− it is far better to have the problem of managing an alliance than to have no alliance at all;

− avoid the “silo” mentality: think about linkages to and implications for other programs and activities.

− staff are everything. As is the format of conferences these days, there were a number of interactive panel sessions and concurrent sessions where contemporary local government issues were presented and/or discussed. One of the most active of these sessions was the panel session on voluntary structural reform in NSW, where the differing views ranged from observation that VSR is dead and that the State Government needs to act, to beliefs that if VSR is interpreted as amalgamation of councils, then this is not the answer for local government in NSW. The consensus on the VSR issue is that it is not and should not be seen simply, as the amalgamation of councils on a voluntary basis. Rather, VSR is broader in that it is about reform in the way councils provide service to their communities, and should begin in the first instance with councils looking at what it is they want to do, and then follow with an assessment of the various ways in which things can be done. VSR will be further discussed through and from the presentation the Council is seeking from HROC on the progress of VSR in the Hunter. Other concurrent sessions addressed the financial “health” of councils, key performance indicators and related reporting, legal issues, the implications of the new privacy legislation and recent trends in senior management roles within councils. On a somewhat lighter note but none the less with a serious message, Dr Sally Feelgood presented on ensuring a balanced lifestyle as senior managers, and healthy personal relationships, all of course in the interests of succeeding as local government professionals. Overall the conference was informative and presented a range of high quality speakers covering topics current to the local government agenda in NSW. The high point of the conference for our council’s representatives was however, the conference dinner at which we were presented with the “Gold Award for Progress in Staff Development” as a part of the NSW Local Government Management Excellence Awards. The Award was presented for our “New Horizons Program” which forms part of the Council’s overall Staff Development Program.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The costs of conference attendance were met from the appropriate allocations within the Council’s adopted management plan.


LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGERS AUSTRALIA CONFERENCE - SYDNEY (CONT.)

Page 32




Page 33

11.2 COMMUNITY AND CORPORATE GROUP

11.2.1 CORPORATE TELECROSS

FILE NO: 29/8


Author: Judy Jaeger Community Services Co-ordinator

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides information regarding the Hunter Valley Telecross service and introduces the concept of Council’s participation in Corporate Telecross.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council support staff involvement and participate in Corporate Telecross.

REPORT The Telecross Service is a free service funded by the Australian Red Cross New South Wales and the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care through the Home and Community Care (HACC) program. The programme assists the elderly and medically dependent that live alone and aims to assist clients maintain their independence and improve their quality of life. The nature of the Telecross service lends itself to corporate participation. During the ten (10) years that Hunter Valley Telecross has operated in the Maitland Local Government area, a number of local businesses have supported the service by allowing their employees to make a morning phone call to Telecross clients. Volunteers are rostered on for a month at a time and make a brief phone call between 8.00am and 9.00am to a client to make sure that they are safe and well. If the call is not answered, a second call is made. If there is still no response Red Cross initiates an emergency procedure and arranges assistance as required. Many employees are able to spare five (5) minutes in the morning between 8.00am and 9.00am. The Telecross Co-ordinator can visit the place of employment to train employees, who may then be rostered to make a brief phone call each morning for a month.


CORPORATE TELECROSS (CONT.)

Page 34

The Australian Red Cross is seeking support from Maitland City Council to participate in Corporate Telecross. Other Council’s within the Hunter, such as Cessnock City Council allow six (6) volunteers to participate in the service every weekday morning. A memo has been sent to Council staff seeking support and involvement in this proposal.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications with this proposal.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This initiative aligns with Council’s Community and Social Plan.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are no statutory implications in relation to this report.


Page 35

11.2.2 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT ASSISTANCE SCHEME

FILE NO: 139/35



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Legal Aid New South Wales administers the Women’s Domestic Violence Court Assistance Scheme, which is fully funded by the State Government. Council auspices the Maitland program and has been offered additional annual recurrent funding of $4,740 for the 2001-2004 funding period. Legal Aid New South Wales requires that two (2) copies of the Service Agreement be signed under common seal.

OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION

THAT: 1. The additional recurrent funding of $4,740 from Legal Aid New South

Wales for the operation of the Maitland Women’s Domestic Violence Court Assistance Scheme in 2001-2004 be accepted.

2. Authority be given to affix the Common Seal of Council to two (2) copies of the 2001-2002 Service Agreement for Maitland Women’s Domestic Violence Court Assistance Scheme.

REPORT Legal Aid New South Wales provides funding for the provision of court assistance services to women victims of domestic violence who are involved in court proceedings. Council agreed to auspice the Maitland program several years ago to ensure that it would continue to provide a very important service within the local community. Council is offered an additional recurrent amount of $4,740 to increase staff hours to service the scheme. The total grant for the scheme is $51,975 (inclusive of GST). Legal Aid New South Wales requires that two (2) copies of the Service Agreement be signed under seal.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no impact on Council finances. The project is fully funded by Legal Aid New South Wales.


DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT ASSISTANCE SCHEME (CONT.)

Page 36

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This project aligns with Council’s community service policies.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are no statutory implications in relation to this matter.


Page 37

11.2.3 HUNTER AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME - YOUTH PROJECT

FILE NO: 29/8



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There has been an offer from the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning to fund a Special Projects Officer for one (1) year under Hunter Area Assistance Scheme funding. The purpose of the grant is to develop and implement plans and strategies that address issues identified within Maitland’s Community Crime Prevention Plan that specifically relate to young people and to implement strategies identified within the Youth Study. The grant submission was lodged in November 2000 as a joint project with Maitland Youth Enterprise Inc.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council decline the offer of (1) year funding under the Hunter Area Assistance Scheme for a Special Projects Officer and recommend to the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning that the offer of the grant be made to Maitland Youth Enterprise Inc.

REPORT In November 2000, an application was lodged with the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning under the Hunter Area Assistance Scheme to employ a Special Projects Officer. The application was a joint initiative between Maitland City Council and Maitland Youth Enterprise Inc. to develop and implement plans and strategies that address issues that would arise from Maitland’s Community Crime Prevention Plan and specifically relate to young people and to implement strategies identified within the Youth Study. At the time of the submission, neither the Community Crime Prevention Plan nor the Youth Study were completed or adopted by Council. Council has recently been advised that Dr Andrew Refshauge MP, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning has approved the grant application as a one (1) year funded project and a letter of offer has been sent to Council. Following consultation with the Hunter Area Assistant Scheme Project Officer, Council needs to seriously consider whether it should accept the grant. Council has recently resolved to transfer the auspice of the Youth Worker position from Council to Maitland Youth Enterprise Inc. and dissolve the partnership between the two (2) organisations. Acceptance of this grant would be in conflict with Council’s early recommendations with regard to joint projects with Maitland Youth Enterprise Inc. Therefore, it is recommended that Council not accept the grant


HUNTER AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME - YOUTH PROJECT (CONT.)

Page 38

offered by the Department but recommend that it be offered to Maitland Youth Enterprise Inc. It should be acknowledged that, some ten (10) months later, the project outcomes are neither reasonable nor achievable, as circumstances have changed significantly.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are significant financial implications as there was no provision for establishment costs contained within the application. If accepted, Council would need to fund establishment costs such as travel, information technology, office equipment, telephone and administrative costs.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS There are no policy implications contained within this report.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are no statutory implications contained within this report.


Page 39

11.2.4 HUNTER AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME - LOCAL RANKING COMMITTEE

FILE NO: 29/13

Responsible Officer: Henry Wilson Group Manager Community and Corporate

Author: Robert Kerr Community Project Officer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Report provides an overview of the Area Assistance Scheme, the role of Council and the Local Ranking Committee (LRC). Since 2000, the Scheme has seen some significant changes, and in response, the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning has advised Council to call for new LRC membership.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT

1. Council support the aims and objectives of the Scheme

2. Council undertake those roles described within the Role of Councils below.

3. Council nominate two Councillors to serve on the Local Ranking Committee.

REPORT AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME 2002 The Area Assistance Scheme provides grants to local councils and non-government organisations for projects that improve community infrastructure. The Scheme focuses on areas that are experiencing significant social and economic stress and change. It currently operates in Western Sydney, Macarthur, Hunter, Central Coast, Illawarra and North Coast regions. The Scheme is a partnership between the NSW government, local councils and the community and actively involves the community in developing and managing community projects and in making funding recommendations to the Minister. The Scheme gives priority to programs that deliver real change to vulnerable communities.


HUNTER AREA ASSISTANCE SCHEME - LOCAL RANKING COMMITTEE (CONT.)

Page 40

The scheme focuses on the following 3 outcomes: 1. Connecting communities through partnerships 2. Building community leadership and capacity, and 3. Promoting safe communities The Area Assistance Scheme is one of the NSW Government contributions to creating sustainable communities, promoting a fair and inclusive society and strengthening communities. THE ROLE OF COUNCILS Local councils are key to the successful implementation of the Area Assistance Scheme in their area. The role of councils include: • Develop social and community plans that inform AAS planning; • Co-ordinate local planning processes; • Participate on Local Ranking Committees and Regional Advisory Committees; • Sponsor and participate in processes that promote community development; • Publicise the Scheme • Assist project sponsors to develop projects to meet the three outcome areas of

the Scheme; and • Assist in the monitoring, support and review of AAS projects. LOCAL RANKING COMMITTEES A Local Ranking Committee (LRC) meets in each local government area within the AAS region to: • provide advice to the Regional Advisory Committee on local needs and issues; • assess applications against the AAS assessment criteria; and • rank applications for their local area as low, medium or high priority. Membership and Tenure The LRC has up to eight members, as follows: • the chairperson; • two representatives of the local council; • four community representatives that are able to represent the diverse views of

the local community; • the Community Project Officer (non-voting member). Each member of the committee will serve a two-year term with one-half of the total membership nominated every year. Members shall not serve for more than four years continuously.



Page 41

While the role of councils in the LRC is an important one, the LRC is not a council committee. This must be stressed as local councils are often applicants in the AAS process and council applications are considered as part of the local ranking process. To ensure fairness and probity in this process, local councils must not dominate or be perceived to dominate the LRC either in their membership or participation. Selection and appointment The Community Project Officer is responsible for advertising and distributing information about LRC vacancies through community and inter-agency networks within the local government area. A selection committee, comprising the department’s AAS Regional Coordinator, the Community Project Officer and an independent member, assesses applications against the following criteria: • living or working within the local government area; • an understanding of community issues and services; • commitment to act in accordance with the AAS policy and procedure

guidelines; • commitment to access and equity principles; • general acceptance by the communities they represent. Chairperson The Regional Director of the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning appoints a chairperson for each LRC who, in addition to the above criteria, meets the following criteria: • does not derive financial or membership benefit from any of the applicants or

their sponsor organisations; • understands AAS policy and procedures; • is able to lead the committee to operate within the AAS assessment, probity,

confidentiality and access and equity guidelines; • has adequate skills in facilitating meetings. Executive support The Community Project Officer is responsible for providing executive support to the LRC. A package of information about funding proposals is provided to members prior to meetings. In addition, information is provided on priority areas for the region and specific issues and needs in the local government area.




Page 42




Page 43

11.2.5 INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY 2001 - ACCESS EXPO

FILE NO: 29/19

Responsible Officer: Henry Wilson Group Manager, Community and Corporate

Author: Mary Dallow Disabilities Project Officer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In October 1992 the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution declaring that 3 December each year will be the International Day of People with a DisAbility. This report identifies a proposal for Council’s participation in the International Day of People with a DisAbility 2001.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT:

1. Through the Maitland Access Advisory Panel, that Council support the proposal to host an Access Expo.

2. Council waive the hire fees for the Town Hall on Friday 30th November, 2001 for the Expo.

REPORT International Day of people with a DisAbility is unique among community awareness days, as it unites disability organisations, individuals with disabilities, businesses, Federal, State and local governments and the community. The Day is a collaborative effort to celebrate and acknowledge the experience and expertise of people with disabilities. The challenge each year is to make International Day bigger and better. In line with Maitland Councils proactive stand in recognising and promoting the needs of people with a disability, the Access expo provides council with an important opportunity to highlight to the wider community issues of access for people with disabilities. After consultation with a number of individuals, organisations and the Maitland Access Advisory Panel, it is proposed to:

1. Host an Access expo 2. Launch revised edition of “Practical Guide for People With Special Needs &

their Carers”


INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY 2001 - ACCESS EXPO (CONT.)

Page 44

Plans for the day include: • Displays of equipment and information by local businesses and

service providers. • Workshops on equality of access in the built environment eg Building

and Facilities, Parks & Gardens have yet to be confirmed. • Entertainment will be provided by South St School, Marnie Cringle

(violinist) and Darcy Martin (tenor). We are hopeful of securing a performance by the dance group Living Proof, although this has yet to be confirmed.

• Refreshments will be provided, at a reasonable cost, by CWA who will work from the Town Hall and the Supper Room will be set up as a café.

• Proceeds from the day will be donated to South St Public School to assist in the purchase of an accessible vehicle

International Day is an opportunity to make a positive contribution to the lives of 3.6 million Australians who have disabilities, and to unite with the 500 million people with disabilities worldwide.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS This proposal aligns with Council’s community services policies.



Page 45

11.2.6 SECTION 356 DONATION

FILE NO: 10/5



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents to Council a recommendation for financial assistance under Section 356 of the Local Government Act, 1993 for Martin Kelly to attend the Canadian Open Judo Championships in the United States.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council grant the amount of $500.00 to Martin Kelly to attend the Canadian Open Judo Championships in the United States in October 2001.

REPORT Martin Kelly has been selected in the Australian team to attend the USA and Canadian Open Judo championships to be held in Las Vegas, USA on the 13 & 14 October and Montreal, Canada on the 15-17 October respectively. These two tournaments constitute the final selection procedure for the 2002 Commonwealth Games team, and as such are of paramount importance. Mr Kelly is currently ranked number 1 in his weight division in Australia and a top three placing at either of USA or Canadian Championships will ensure his selection in the 2002 Commonwealth Games team. Athletes to attend such a Championship incur considerable costs. These include air travel, accommodation and tournament costs. Whilst the Australian Judo Federation has approved a grant of $1640 to attend, this still leaves a shortfall of some $1500. Martin Kelly proudly represents the Maitland area and Australian when competing in international competition.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The recommended allocation for assistance under Section 356 is within the provisions of the 2001/2002 budget.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This application aligns with Council’s Section 356 Donations policy


SECTION 356 DONATION (CONT.)

Page 46

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Council’s Section 356 Donations Policy is consistent with the requirements of this section of the Local Government Act, 1993.


Page 47

11.2.7 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION OF NSW - COUNTRY TOUR

FILE NO: 35/8


Author: Henry Wilson Group Manager Community & Corporate

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report details the forthcoming Local Government Association of NSW Country Tour.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Councillors confirm their availability to attend the conference at Cessnock City Council on 10 October 2001 with the General Manager.

REPORT The Local Government Association of NSW Country Tour will be touring the State from Wednesday, 10 to Friday 12 October 2001. The 2001 tour will be hosted by Cessnock, Dubbo, Mudgee, Bathurst, Wingecarribee, Wagga Wagga, Queanbeyan, and Shoalhaven councils. All councils are invited to attend these meetings and to contact host councils as soon as convenient to confirm their attendance for planning arrangements to be completed. It is envisaged that Councillors from Maitland City Council will visit Cessnock City Council on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 at 8.30am to 10.30am. The Association strongly recommends all councillors to attend these sessions as a means of interacting with other councillors and the opportunity to explore issues of current interest.





Page 48

11.3 BUSINESS AND FINANCE GROUP

11.3.1 STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS HELD AS AT 31 AUGUST 2001

FILE NO: 82/2


Author: Jon Dundas Manager Revenue & Information Technology

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation 1993, Section 19(3)(b) requires Council to report on its investments.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the report be received and noted.

REPORT Inv. No.

Institution Int. Rate

Date Invested

Term (Days)

Maturity Date

Amount $

947 Bank West 5.01% 4/06/01 91 3/09/01 1,700,000.00948 Maitland Mutual

Bld Soc.** 6.10% 11/06/01 92 11/09/01 1,500,000.00

951 Illawarra Mutual Bld. Soc.

5.20% 29/06/01 90 27/09/01 1,400,000.00

953 Maitland Mutual Bld Soc.

5.25% 3/07/01 90 1/10/01 1,700,000.00

956 Illawarra Mutual Bld. Soc.

5.21% 10/07/01 70 18/09/01 1,000,000.00

958 Suncorp Metway 5.14% 16/07/01 91 15/10/01 500,000.00967 Local Govt

Financial Services – 11am

4.90% 20/08/01 ## When required

800,000.00

968 Local Govt Financial Services – 11am

4.90% 24/08/01 ## When required

400,000.00


4.90% 30/08/01 ## When required

500,000.00


4.90% 31/08/01 ## When required

300,000.00


STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS HELD AS AT 31 AUGUST 2001 (CONT.)

Page 49

Inv. No.

Institution Int. Rate

Date Invested

Term (Days)

Maturity Date

Amount $

971 Macquarie Diversified Treasury Fund++

6.12% 31/08/01 ## When required

2,500,000.00

972 Deutsche Cash Plus Fund++

5.18% 31/08/01 ## When required

2,500,000.00

TOTAL $14,800,000.00** Subordinated note – interest rate reviewed on the 11th of each quarter. ++ Investments held by Funds Managers. As investments are managed on a daily basis, interest rates have been calculated on a % per annum. ## These funds are not held on a fixed term. The funds are redeemed as and when required. As a Comparison:

Investments held as at the end of last month (i.e. 31-07-01) were $11,900,000.00

Investments held this time last year (i.e. 31-08-00) were $14,007,323.30



STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The above sums have been invested in accordance with:

• Section 625 of the Local Government Act, 1993 • The Regulations pertaining to the Local Government Act, 1993 • Council’s Investment Policies.


Page 50

11.3.2 APPLICATION FOR ASSISTANCE - MAITLAND REPERTORY SOCIETY

FILE NO: P17392


Author: Jon Dundas Manager Revenue & Information Technology

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An application for assistance under Section 356 has been received from Maitland Repertory Society. The application is for an amount of $986.45 being the amount of the CBD Construction Rate. The Maitland Repertory Society is a non-profit organisation and fulfils the requirements of Council’s policy.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT a donation equivalent to the CBD Construction Rate be made available to the Maitland Repertory Society under Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993 under Section 356.

REPORT A letter has been received from the Maitland Repertory Society requesting a donation under Section 356 of the Local Government Act, 1993. The letter referred to the rating of the Maitland Repertory Society for the CBD Construction Rate at 244 High Street, Maitland. The CBD Construction Rate on the Maitland Repertory Society for 2001/2002 is $986.45. The Maitland Repertory Society performs a number of shows during the year with income received from performances being used to cover costs of production. The organisation was granted a donation in the last financial year due to the non-profit nature of their business. The Maitland Repertory Society fulfils Council’s policy requirements.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This donation will be an addition to the budget.


STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The matter is being dealt with under Section 356 of the Local Government Act, 1993.


Page 51

11.3.3 AFFIXING OF COMMON SEAL - WORKERS COMPENSATION

FILE NO: 81/4


Author: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Business & Finance

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report seeks Council permission to affix the Common Seal to its Workers Compensation Application.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council affix the Common Seal to the Workers Compensation Application to join STATECOVER.

REPORT Jardine Lloyd Thompson Pty Ltd have been working closely with the Local Government Shires Association in securing the necessary licences to provide Councils with an industry focused alternative to the current “same price same deal” workers compensation options available in the NSW market. This has been achieved and basically means that Local Government Workers Compensation will stand alone from General Workers Compensation. To continue to do what has been done in the past will only achieve an average workers compensation premium rate of about 5% of wages in contrast to other jurisdictions where the average rate is around 3%. By participating in this initiative, Council will be taking the first step in putting the framework in place that will provide an industry specific OH & S programme focusing on local government and the particular prevention, injury management and rehabilitation needs of our industry. The change to STATECOVER requires the Common Seal of Council to be affixed to the policy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Once fully implemented, there should be some savings to Council on Workers Compensation Premiums.



AFFIXING OF COMMON SEAL - WORKERS COMPENSATION (CONT.)

Page 52

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS This is necessary under the Workers Compensation Act 1987.


Page 53

11.4 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT GROUP

11.4.1 REQUEST FOR THE MODIFICATION OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL LOTS 151 AND 152 BOLWARRA PARK DRIVE, BOLWARRA HEIGHTS

FILE NO: PA 000608

ATTACHMENTS: (2) SUBMISSION SITE PLAN

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager Planning and Environment

Author: David Simm Manager Environmental Programs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is presented for Council to consider whether to support an application by the property owners D and L Haggarty who are intending on seeking leave of the Land and Environment Court to modify the consent granted by that Court in March 2001. The matters under consideration relate to the design of the entrance road serving the allotment to be created and to a condition requiring the removal of an existing transpiration bed. In order to facilitate this process through the Courts the applicants are seeking Councils support in this matter.


1. Council:

(a) agree to the retention of the existing transpiration bed on-site subject to appropriate remediation, as determined by Council’s Manager Environmental Programs

(b) raise no objection to the proposed minor variation to the location of the driveway to enable retention of existing trees on the site.

2. The Land and Environment Court be advised accordingly of Council’s decision.

REPORT Council will recall this matter which was determined by the Land and Environment Court following an appeal by the applicant to refusal of the application by Council. A request has now been received that seeks Councils support to modify the consent in respect to the design of the drive entry and the necessity to remove the


REQUEST FOR THE MODIFICATION OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL LOTS 151 AND 152 BOLWARRA PARK DRIVE,BOLWARRA HEIGHTS (CONT.)

Page 54

existing transpiration area, the contents of which are to be disposed of to an approved facility and the area rehabilitated. The alteration to the drive entrance design is proposed on the basis that it will allow for the retention of a number of established trees. This proposal would be in accordance with Councils Tree Preservation Order and the principles of the draft Greening Plan. The second issue relates to a condition that requires the removal of the existing transpiration area and its contents after the connection of properties to the reticulated sewer system of the Hunter Water Corporation. This connection has now been carried out in compliance with the Corporations approval. The applicant is requesting a modification to this condition which in affect allows the contents of the material to be appropriately remediated and reused on site. The cost of landfill disposal is suggested as the driver to this variation. As stated in their correspondence it is quite normal to leave a transpiration area in situ following its decommissioning. The process of remediation as outlined follows normally acceptable principles adopted when seeking to rehabilitate an area of previous contamination. The cost of disposal as outlined in the applicants letter reflects the cost of land filling waste material. Waste avoidance through reuse is a principle of good waste management and is supported provided no environmental concerns are present. It is therefore concluded that the objectives of the condition, that is, improved environmental performance of sewage management on this site can be satisfactorily achieved by the connection of the property to the reticulated sewer system and the remediation and reuse of the clay and ash contents of the transpiration area.





Page 55

11.4.2 SCHOOLS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM

FILE NO: 55/5

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager Planning & Environment

Author: Tim Crosdale Trainee Environmental Health & Building Surveyor

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Maitland City Council has co-ordinated Maitland Schools Environment Program since 1997. The program is a Council initiative that aims to promote the encouragement of environmental education and on ground action in schools. There have been some modifications to the existing program to promote regional consistency in response to State wide curriculum changes. The program is currently under review to ensure that it meets the changing needs of schools. School projects are assessed by a panel of three (3) persons. This report requests the nomination of one (1) Councillor to participate in the assessment for the 2001 Awards. The assessment will be undertaken in the week beginning 22nd October 2001 for the duration of three (3) days. Councillor Galea was involved in the assessment for the 2000 Schools Environment Program.


1. This report be received and noted as an update for the 2001 Schools Environment Program.

2. One (1) Councillor be nominated to take part in the assessment for the awards.

REPORT The Maitland Schools Environment Program is now in it’s fifth year. The program has been a major initiative of Council providing an important vehicle for supporting and recognising the implementation of environmental initiatives that benefit the school and the wider community. The program has been revised to promote regional consistency and to coincide with the Department of Education’s introduction of an ‘Environmental Education Policy’. Further revision of the program is being undertaken to ensure that the


2001 SCHOOLS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM (CONT.)

Page 56

program meets the changing needs of local schools. This modification and development of the existing program will assist Council in the following areas:

• The promotion and encouragement of student participation; • Recognising the work of schools; • Strengthening partnerships between schools, the local community, local

business and Maitland City Council; and • To increase the awareness of environmental issues.

Eleven schools (primary & secondary) are participating in this year’s Program with each school is to be individually assessed. The assessment process provides a positive feedback mechanism for the schools and an opportunity to gather information to showcase the achievements of the schools in the environmental education field. Council provides a nominal amount of resources to all schools in the program with the most outstanding primary and secondary school receiving a perpetual trophy. The assessment panel for this year’s awards will consist of:

• one Councillor; (to be nominated) • one Council Officer; and • one member of a local Landcare group.

There needs to be a Councillor nominated to the assessment panel. The assessment will take place in the week beginning 22nd October for approximately 3 days. It is important that members of the assessment panel are available to attend each day. The Schools Environment Program culminates in an Awards evening to be held at Mansfield House on Wednesday 14th November at 6:30pm. The evening is an opportunity to showcase and recognise the environmental achievements of each of the schools and to provide a forum for networking between schools for them to share ideas and experiences.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Costs associated with this program are contained within the current budgetary allocation.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS There are no policy implications arising from this report.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are no statutory implications arising from this report.


Page 57

11.4.3 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP 1993 TO PROHIBIT FURTHER SUBDIVISION OF LAND WITHIN BOLWARRA PARK ESTATE.

FILE NO: RZ01005 ATTACHMENTS: (2) AUTHORITY AND PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

LEP MAP

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: ALISON MCGAFFIN MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

AUTHOR: GREG CLAYDEN TOWN PLANNER

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On 24 April 2001, Council resolved to prepare “…a draft Local Environmental Plan to rezone the Rural Residential lots within Bolwarra Park Drive Estate from 1(c) Rural Small Holdings to 1(b) Secondary Rural Land”. Taking into account the intent of Council’s resolution is to prohibit further subdivision, a draft LEP was prepared following advice from Council’s Solicitor and exhibited. The exhibited draft LEP differed from the Council resolution for the reasons discussed in the following report. The draft Plan was exhibited for a period of 28 days and all residents within the estate were notified and provided with relevant material. A total of 69 public submissions have been received with 55 submissions in favour of the draft Plan and 14 against. The origin and content of the various public submissions will be discussed later in this report under the heading “Exhibition”. Submissions have also been received from the RTA, the Department of Land and Water Conservation and the Hunter Water Corporation. This report considers the issues raised in the submissions. As a result of the submission from the owner of 54 Riverview Road, Bolwarra, a change to the exhibited draft LEP is proposed which involves the exclusion of that property from the draft Plan. It is the recommendation of this report that the draft LEP be referred to the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning for gazettal.

OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION THAT:

1. The draft Local Environmental Plan for all land within the Bolwarra Park Estate excluding Lot 29 DP 243055 (Public Reserve) and Lot 461 DP 808822, 54 Riverview Road, Bolwarra be referred to the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning with a request for the Minister to make the plan.


ALL LAND WITHIN BOLWARRA PARK ESTATE EXCLUDING LOT 29 DP 243055 (PUBLIC RESERVE) AND LOT 461 DP 808822 - 54 RIVERVIEW ROAD, BOLWARRA. (CONT)

Page 58

REPORT The subject land is located to the west of Tocal/Maitland Vale Road and is bounded by the North Coast Railway and vacant Residential land to the south. Given the intent of Council’s resolution is to prohibit further subdivision of the lots within the estate, it was subsequently considered that a prohibition clause inserted into the LEP would be a more suitable legal means of preventing further subdivision in the estate in lieu of changing the zoning of the land to 1(b) Secondary Rural Land. The reasoning behind this change was to prevent the use of State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 in respect of the 40 hectare standard contained within Clause 11 of the LEP and relevant to the 1(b) Zone. Legal advice was sought as to whether a prohibition clause was the most appropriate means to ensure the subject land cannot be further subdivided. On the basis of this advice, Council staff have formed the view that a prohibition clause is the most appropriate mechanism and that such an amendment to the Local Environmental Plan, 1993 is within Council’s plan making powers. Parliamentary Counsel has also provided Council with an opinion that the draft Plan can legally be made. The prohibition clause to be inserted into the LEP is as follows: 11A Where is subdivision prohibited in Zone 1 (c)? Despite any other provision in this plan, the Council must not grant consent

to the subdivision of so much of the land within Zone 1 (c) at Bolwarra Heights as is shown edged heavy black on the map marked “Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 (Amendment No )”.

Exhibition The proposal was exhibited for 28 days until Monday 9 July 2001 at Council’s Administration Building and Maitland City Library. All 50 property owners within the estate were notified of the draft Plan and were given details of the exhibition period. Details provided to the property owners and included in the exhibition were a copy of the LEP amendment, map and relevant supporting material. A total of 69 public submissions were received during the exhibition period. The draft Plan was also forwarded to the RTA, the Department of Land and Water Conservation, and the Hunter Water Corporation for comment and submissions from each of these authorities have been received. All submissions received are included with this report as Attachment “1” and summarised below with comment provided:



Page 59

Authority Submissions Three (3) submissions were received from authorities during the exhibition period. The Department of Land and Water Conservation and the Roads and Traffic Authority raise no objections to the proposal and are satisfied with the wording and content of the draft Plan. The Hunter Water Corporation supports the draft Plan and indicates the following: Hunter Water has reviewed the proposed LEP amendment and understands that the intention of the amendment is to prevent any further subdivision within the Zone 1(c) land of the Bolwarra Park Estate. Hunter Water acknowledges that a substantial amount of the Bolwarra Park Estate is unsewered and that Hunter Water would be reluctant to see further subdivision proceed in the area until a permanent sewerage scheme that meets HWC policy and standards is presented to the Corporation. At this stage, Hunter Water raises no objection to the draft LEP amendment. Public Submissions A total of 69 public submissions have been received with 55 submissions in favour of the draft Plan to prohibit further subdivision and 14 against the proposal. Of the submissions received in favour of the draft Plan, 39 submissions, which include 10 duplicate submissions from partners or other family members have been received from property owners within the estate, with the remaining 16 submissions coming from other Maitland residents. Of the 14 submissions received against the draft Plan, 13 are from owners of the land in the locality though, again, 8 are duplicates from partners or other family members. One (1) submission against the draft LEP is from a consultant town planner. Given the self explanatory nature of the submissions supporting the draft LEP it is not considered necessary to provide comment on the issues raised. A summary of the main matters raised is provided below: Submissions in Favour of the Draft LEP – Common Themes & Issues

It is in the best interest of the community as a whole to preserve the environment created by Bolwarra Park Estate residents. Two (2) acre (.8 Ha) allotments predominate in the locality. Subdivision of these lots into smaller lots will cause:



Page 60

i. a loss through habitat destruction of native fauna that use this area as part

of the riparian zone and consequent loss of biodiversity; ii. more traffic problems on inadequate roads; iii. an increase in noise levels; iv. an increase in demand for services; v. a substantial change to the character and amenity of the locality; and vi. a devaluation of property values.

“When we purchased our land we did so on the understanding that the number of blocks would not increase. We support the new local environmental plan that maintains this estate in its original and intended form.” Further subdivision of these lots will result in “increased neighbourhood friction”. “We support the draft amendment as is; we believe it to be essential that Council act to restore the confidence of the residents, and ensure that their lifestyles and living arrangements will not be eroded by the Land and Environment Court.”

Submissions Against the draft LEP

“I wish to advise Council that I do not support the LEP as it is too intrusive and restrictive on existing and future residents.” “To introduce a plan to prevent the subdivision of land to which the … plan applies denies me my right to subdivide my property should I so desire. Further subdivisions will not substantially change the character and amenity of the locality … new homeowners invariably plant more trees to enhance the environment in which they live, thereby attracting more bird life and maintaining the rural residential environment.”

Comment Three (3) of the five (5) submissions received from property owners included comments the same or similar to those reproduced above. Contrary to the views expressed, however, further subdivision of many of the lots within the estate would change the character and amenity of the locality by increasing the density of dwellings and affecting the landscape character of the area. The Bolwarra Park Estate is rather unique in the Maitland context with most lots having an area of 8,000m2 approximately. Given these larger lot sizes, many residents have taken the opportunity to plant trees and shrubs, often in dense plantings, around their homes. The erection of additional dwellings and associated structures like sheds, garages and swimming pools generally results in the removal of trees which can lead to habitat loss for fauna and can detrimentally affect visual amenity.



Page 61

“The cost to ratepayers to implement the LEP is not warranted, especially as it is only satisfying a minority of residents in the area. I would like the Council to call a Public Hearing to communicate with all the residents about their true concerns for this area.” A Public Hearing “….would provide all parties with the opportunity to present their arguments to Council in a legitimate forum.” “Council has not formally consulted with the owners of the 40 properties which have not been subdivided, to obtain a legitimate justification for the proposed back zoning.”

Comment Of the submissions received, only two (2) request Council to hold a Public Hearing. As indicated earlier, all fifty (50) property owners in the estate were notified of the draft Plan and given adequate information to form a view as to whether to support the draft Plan or not. Twenty nine (29) property owners support the plan amendment, five (5) do not and sixteen (16) owners have not responded, but presumably raise no objection to the draft Plan. Consultation with the estate’s property owners has been quite adequate and there is not considered to be a need for a Public Hearing.

The proposal is inconsistent with the provisions of the Hunter Regional Environmental Plan (HREP 1989). HREP 1989 requires Council’s to prepare LEP’s which do not decrease residential densities. Clause 9 supports the view that rural residential areas are to be considered to be ‘residential’ rather than rural in land use planning terms for the purposes of the REP. Therefore the proposal to ‘back zone’ the subject land is not in accordance with the provisions of Clause 9(2)(a) ie. ‘should not increase minimum lot sizes’ and Clause 9(2)(c) ‘reduction in permissible residential density’.

Comment The draft Plan is not considered to be inconsistent with the provisions of the HREP, 1989. The submission does not draw a distinction between the need for Council as specified in Clause 9(1) to consider certain matters when preparing a draft Local Environmental Plan for the development of land for “residential purposes” compared to the requirements of Clause 9(2) which specifies Council must not reduce permissible residential densities in “residential areas”. Written advice from the Department of Urban Affairs to Council in relation to Council’s Settlement Strategy and Rural Strategy indicates that the Department considers Rural Residential development as a “hybrid” form of development, neither clearly defined as rural or residential in character.



Page 62

“The LEP process is an expensive and time consuming exercise, and should only be considered where other more cost effective and flexible planning mechanisms are considered to be inappropriate. In my opinion the Estate has the capacity for increased development and this can be realised without detrimental impact to existing amenity. The most appropriate mechanism is via a DCP. Council has adopted DCP’s for most of the 1(c) zones and these have proved most effective in managing development. I believe the DCP is the appropriate planning tool for this situation”.

Comment Development Control Plans (DCP’s) are generally useful planning tools and can provide detailed guidelines to a proponent. DCP’s, however, are guideline documents only and lack the legislative power of a prohibition clause within an LEP. If Council wishes to prohibit subdivision of land within the estate an LEP amendment is the most appropriate legal mechanism available.

The draft Plan is inconsistent with the objects of the EP & A Act, 1979 which are to encourage:

• the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment (i);

• the promotion and coordination of the orderly and economic use and development of the land (ii).

Comment It is not considered the draft Plan is inconsistent with the objects of the Act.

“Prior to Council’s decision to resolve to prepare a draft LEP, no information was presented to Council which provided support for the proposal….Council should have [had] before it a comprehensive submission or planner’s report which outlines all of the relevant issues associated with the subject matter … There is a clear lack of transparency in the process.”

Comment Council’s resolution to prepare a draft LEP followed a decision made by the Land and Environment Court on 8 March 2001 to uphold an appeal against Council’s decision to refuse a two lot subdivision application at No. 59 Bolwarra Park Drive. That application galvanised community opposition to further subdivision in the area and this has been borne out by the response from the majority of property owners in the estate who fully support the draft Plan.



Page 63

“The draft LEP is inconsistent with Council’s draft Settlement Strategy and draft Rural Residential Strategy. There is nothing in Council’s draft settlement strategies to support the proposed DLEP. In fact the Rural Residential Strategy seeks to increase urban density through reduction in lot size in rural residential estates (2000m2 lots). vis:

there is demand for lot sizes smaller than the current 5,500 average lot size in the current 1(c) zone and no reason in terms of land capability in areas serviceable with reticulated sewer, why higher lot densities should not be encouraged in the interests of achieving more compact urban form. (Page 31).”

Comment The Rural Residential Strategy does seek to increase urban density through reduction in lot sizes for new rural residential estates in “areas serviceable with reticulated sewer”. As indicated earlier, the Hunter Water Corporation supports the draft Plan as it is not possible, at this stage, to provide a permanent sewerage connection to most of the land within the estate.

“The draft LEP does not include the public reserve which is, like all of the other lots, zoned 1(c). Council at some time in the future may elect to develop this land which has the capacity to be subdivided into four allotments. Given that Council resolved to include all the lands in the Estate in the LEP, I am of the opinion that the draft LEP is void due to the inconsistency between the resolution of the Council and the substance of the draft LEP.”

Comment The public reserve located on the western side of Bolwarra Park Drive largely functions as an overland flow path for stormwater drainage generated in the catchment. The shape of the land and its proximity to the North Coast rail line are considerable physical restrictions which would make subdivision for the purpose of additional dwellings difficult. Given that the intent of Council’s resolution to change the zoning of the land to 1(b) Secondary Rural Land was to prevent further subdivisions in the estate, the draft LEP, as exhibited, is not considered to be void or substantively inconsistent with Council’s resolution.

“The proposal to prevent an application for possible future subdivision of Lot 46, is ...very unfair to owners of the land, as Council has allowed subdivision of all land immediately adjacent and across the road into 1 acre (approx) lots over a number of years.



Page 64

We can see the benefits for many of the other lots in the proposal, and if the lots all around Lot 46 were still 2 acre (approx) lots, we would support a proposal to include our lot, however this has not happened. We now live with one acre lots all around and a resulting loss of some of the rural environment we originally bought to enjoy in 1972. We suggest that the boundary line of the proposed LEP be amended to exclude Lot 46 on the south east corner of the proposal (and also possibly other adjacent lots with access to Tocal Road). This amended proposal should not limit the intent proposed for other landowners of existing 2 acre blocks in the estate.”

Comment The above is an extract from a submission from the owner of No. 38 Tocal Road. Viewed in isolation it may appear that the landowner has a case to exclude their land from the draft LEP. However, this particular case is not substantially different from that put by four of the other landowners in the estate. Additionally this particular parcel of land fronts Tocal Road, a classified road, and a subdivision with the subsequent erection of a further dwelling would amount to ribbon development. New accesses on a classified road are generally undesirable.

We acquired our land in 1979 and when we excised existing Lot 462 from our property we had a total of three (3) lots surveyed at the time. The survey indicates that there is a suitable flood-free dwelling site located near the southern boundary of Lot 461. Lot 461 contains our existing dwelling but has an area of 4.142 hectares (10.23 acres). With such a large land area we believe our property should be excluded from the draft LEP.

Comment The above comments are paraphrased extracts from two (2) submissions submitted by the owners of Lot 461 DP 808822, No. 54 Riverview Road. As indicated in the submission, this particular property, with an area of 4.142 hectares, is quite different in size and character to others in the estate. There is additional flood free land on the property which would be of sufficient size to support a detached dwelling which would not have a significant effect on the locality. Access to this site, however, is not available from Riverview Road through the existing property due to the slope of the land and the need to negotiate a watercourse which is also affected by flooding from the nearby Hunter River in a 1:20 year event. Council’s Development Engineer has calculated that an access driveway located at the highest access point would be 2.5 metres below the 5% AEP (Annual Exceedence Probability) event.



Page 65

Consequently, to develop this parcel, access would need to be gained from the residentially zoned parcel of land to the south which is in different ownership. There is an existing subdivision approval (DA 970577) over this land but the consent does not extend to the land adjoining Lot 461 largely due to Aboriginal Archaeological issues. No resolution of these issues is yet apparent. Nevertheless, despite unresolved issues regarding access, servicing, rail noise and Aboriginal archaeology, it is considered that this particular lot should be excluded from the draft LEP. The unresolved issues could then be considered in any subdivision application submitted.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS Once gazetted, the draft LEP will prohibit further subdivision of the land specified.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The statutory process for preparing an amendment to Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 is detailed in Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

CONCLUSION The draft Local Environmental Plan affecting all land within the Bolwarra Park Estate excluding Lot 29 DP 243055 (Public Reserve) and Lot 461 DP 808822, 54 Riverview Road, has been publicly exhibited and a total of 69 submissions have been received, largely from residents within the estate. It is clear that the majority of residents within the estate support the draft plan which, when gazetted, will prohibit further subdivision of the land affected. Issues raised in the submissions received from authorities and residents have been addressed in the body of the report. The only changes to the draft Plan as exhibited are those recommended in the Parliamentary Counsel opinion and the exclusion of Lot 461, DP 808822 from the draft plan. The recommendation of this report is that the draft Plan be referred to the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning for gazettal.


Page 66

11.4.4 REZONING OF PROPOSED LOT 813 IN A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 504, DP 1005954 THORNTON ROAD THORNTON.

FILE NO: 01002 ATTACHMENTS: (3) LOCALITY PLAN

PROPOSED SUBDIVISION LAYOUT

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: ALISON MCGAFFIN ` MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

AUTHOR: BELINDA SMITH TOWN PLANNER

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On 20 March 2001, Council received a submission requesting that Council resolve to amend Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 to rezone proposed lot 813, presently part of lot 504 in DP 1005954, from 7(c) Environmental Protection General to 4(b) Light Industrial under the provisions of the Maitland Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1993. The proposal to rezone this land is at the request of Hunter Land Pty Ltd who owns the land and the industrial estate in which it is located.

The subject site has become isolated from the remaining 7(c) zoned land within the estate as a result of road construction for stage 8 of the Thornton Industrial Estate. As a consequence the site is relatively small at approximately 3000 sqm at the south-western corner of the intersection of Thornton Road and the new access road to stage 8.

On the basis of a preliminary assessment, it is considered that the rezoning proposal has planning merit and that Council should proceed to prepare and exhibit a draft LEP to facilitate the proposed rezoning.

OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION THAT:

1. Council resolve to prepare a draft local environmental plan pursuant to Section 54(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to rezone proposed lot 813, in a subdivision of lot 504, DP 1005954, from 7(c) Environmental Protection General to 4(b) Light Industrial;

2. The draft local environmental plan be placed on public exhibition pursuant to section 66 for a period of twenty-eight (28) days;


REZONING OF PROPOSED LOT 813 IN A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 504, DP 1005954 PROPOSED LOT 813, THORNTON ROAD THORNTON (CONT)

Page 67

3. Should no objections be received by Council during the public exhibition period and should no issues be raised by relevant statutory authorities which would preclude adoption of the plan, that the matter be referred to the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning with a request that the Minister make the plan.

REPORT The subject land is located within the Thornton Industrial Estate at the south-western corner of the intersection of Thornton Road and the new road constructed as part of stage 8 of the estate. (Refer to Attachment A). The land is currently zoned 7(c) Environmental Protection General under the provisions of Maitland LEP 1993 and comprises an area of approximately 3012 sqm. This land is presently vacant grassland that previously formed land at the edge of a natural swamp system located to the south of the Great Northern Railway and west of Thornton Road. The adjoining Thornton Industrial Estate is zoned 4(b) Light Industrial and is occupied by various industrial workshops and activities. The proposal to rezone the land is the result of its isolation from the surrounding 7(c) zoned land by the construction of a new road for the next stages of the industrial estate. The location and construction of a secondary road into the industrial estate from Thornton Road is in accordance with the road layout determined in DCP No. 28 Glenwood Rural Residential and Industrial Estate Thornton. However, as a result of required vehicular sight lines and detailed surveys, the location of the new road had to be provided further north than originally anticipated in the DCP No. 28. The location of this road in DCP No. 28 was indicative only and in accordance with the DCP ‘may be varied in the course of detailed subdivision planning’. This detailed planning has resulted in the road being repositioned such that it has traversed the 7(c) zone and as a consequence has separated a small parcel of land from the balance of the 7(c) zone and this forms the subject site of the rezoning proposal. The site is located on the rise of Thornton Road and therefore is not subject to the 1:100 year flood level. However the adjoining 7(c) land falls naturally away from this site into a low-lying swamp that is subject to flooding. This 7(c) land drains naturally into the Woodberry Wetlands (SEPP 14 wetlands) but does not form part of the wetlands system. The site’s ability to form part of an environmental buffer to the SEPP 14 Wetlands at Woodberry is limited due to its small size of 3012 sqm, its present isolation from the surrounding low lying swamp area and its location on the high side of the road that has resulted in its purpose as part of a continuous environmental buffer being undermined. The site is traversed by a 4m wide sewer easement that runs north-south across the site and has resulted in disruption to the land and its vegetation in recent months due to construction works.



Page 68

The site is visually prominent from Thornton Road due to the elevated position and visibility from the railway bridge at Thornton. A landscape plan has been provided as an indication of planting proposed on the land as part of its future industrial development. The surrounding land use is predominately industrial with residential uses across the railway line to the north of the site. Established industrial development occupies the adjoining 4(b) Light Industrial land to the south and west. This industrial land is bound to the west by the existing Bloomfield coal haulage railway line.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Environmental Protection The subject site was zoned 7(c) Environmental Protection General in 1996 as part of the overall rezoning of the land between Thornton Road, New England Highway and the Northern Railway Line. The boundaries to the zones created within this large site were based on a general understanding of the land occupied by the natural low lying swamp and its natural boundaries. However, as previously discussed the land the subject of this rezoning is not low lying swamp land, or land that is subject to flooding due to its elevated position above the 1 in 100 year flood level. This land has no particular or unique vegetation located on it and is not a habitat link. The rezoning of the subject site at only 3000sqm, located on the edge of the 7(c) zone and forming an elevated land mass isolated from the low lying swamp, will not undermine or impact on the value or operation of the environmental protection zone as it presently exists.

Archaeology Archaeological investigations were undertaken as part of the previous rezoning of the land in 1995. This investigation did not highlight any items of aboriginal or European archaeological heritage on the subject site although an archaeological site was found on part of the lands now within the 7(c) zone which presently remains protected in situ on the land.

Visual Assessment The site is considered to have visual importance at this locality given the elevated position of the site as viewed from the Thornton Road Railway Bridge and the adjacent residential and rural lands to the north and north-east of the site. The land however will form a continuation of the established industrial land use that adjoins it as part of this industrial estate. The site’s location on the northern slope of the ridge features a backdrop of industrial buildings and activities that are currently established in the industrial estate along this ridgeline. This backdrop of large structures and urban form will extend to include this site as part of the established appearance of the industrial estate.



Page 69

Given the small size of the site at 3000sqm and the limitations placed on it by two street setbacks and the sewer easement, any construction on this site will be of a smaller scale. Therefore providing opportunities for extensive landscaping and lower scaled buildings that will not be visually prominent.

Contamination The Thornton Industrial Estate has been the subject of various forms of contamination as a result of its historic use for mining and landfill. The subject site has had investigations carried out over it as part of the Stage 8 subdivision. These investigations have indicated the subject site is clear of any known contaminants.

Wetland Drainage The subject site does not form part of the low-lying swamp on wetland system. Its natural drainage into the swamp to the north will continue as part of the constructed drainage system for stage 8 of the industrial estate.

CONSULTATION WITH PUBLIC AGENCIES

Mineral Resources

Have been consulted, however Council is yet to receive comments. This authority will again be contacted through the public exhibition period.

Environment Protection Authority


National Parks and Wildlife Service

Advise, “A preliminary review of the NPWS data base did not reveal any species protected under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 recorded for the site and that the resultant road appears to have effectively severed any links with the remainder of the 7(c) zoned lands. Council should be assured that no environmental values for which the site was included in the 7(c) zone remain, prior to making a decision on the rezoning. Development of the subject site as parkland or retention of open space for the entrance of the industrial estate may be another option for Council to consider.” “Should the rezoning application be approved, to ensure that no recent discoveries have been recorded for the subject site, a search of the Aboriginal Sites register should be undertaken. Consultation with the Mindaribba Local Aboriginal Land Council should also be undertaken to ensure the interests of the local Aboriginal community are taken into account.”



Page 70

Given the isolated location of the site, its size and elevated nature above and separate from the low lying swamp lands Council can be satisfied that its environmental value to the 7(c ) zone is negligible. However, Council may wish to consider retention of part of this site as an open space buffer or as an interpretational site for the natural swamp environment adjoining. Furthermore, Mindaribba Local Aboriginal Land Council have been advised of the proposed rezoning and Council is awaiting their comments.

Energy Australia


Hunter Water Corporation


RTA

Advise “Considerable traffic congestion (level of service E or less) is experienced on the New England Highway in vicinity of Thornton Road and Weakleys Drive during peak periods. Traffic conditions are expected to deteriorate further given Council’s recent development approval of stage 8 of the Thornton Industrial Estate and due to the absence of cost effective interim traffic relief options. This situation is not expected to improve significantly until the proposed grade-separated interchange project at Weakleys Drive is constructed or an alternate traffic relief option is implemented. Project planning is proceeding, however the Federal Government has yet to provide funding for construction….The RTA therefore objects to the proposed rezoning of the subject site for traffic generating uses until appropriate traffic relief is provided for the New England Highway to alleviate current network capacity issues.” The potential traffic generation associated with this lot of 3000sqm was considered as part of the subdivision assessment for stage 8 of the industrial estate. The rezoning of this land from 7(c) to 4(b) will not create any additional traffic impacts as this lot was considered as part of the overall stages development for industrial purposes.

Mindaribba Local Aboriginal Land Council


Land and Water Conservation




Page 71

Mine Subsidence Board

Advise that they have no objections to the proposed rezoning.

Hunter Catchment Management Trust


Consultation with Council Departments

Internal referrals were provided to departments within Council. No concerns were raised with the proposed rezoning, as they had been previously addressed at the subdivision stage.

Relevant Planning Instruments and Directions

State Environmental Planning Policies Council has considered the rezoning proposal in relation to State Environmental Planning Policies and is satisfied that no policies are directly relevant in this instance. The land affected by the 7(c) zone in this vicinity does provide a drainage connection to the Woodberry Wetlands that are listed under SEPP 14, however this site does not form part of these wetlands.

Section 117 Directions Council has considered the rezoning proposal in relation to the specific directions of the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning that apply to the Hunter Region and is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with these directions.

Hunter Regional Environmental Plan (HREP) 1989 The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the HREP 1989, as the rezoning will not threaten the size or operation of the natural swamp system. The following specific provisions in the HREP were considered: Part 8 Conservation and Recreation, Division 1 – Natural Areas – a draft local environmental plan should not alter or remove existing environmental protection zonings, or controls within them, without undertaking a detailed analysis which confirms that there will be no adverse environmental effects from such action. In this regard the proposed rezoning of 3000 sqm from 7(c) to 4(b) will not create any adverse environmental effects as the subject land does not form part of the natural swamp system around which the 7(c) zone was created. The land the subject of this rezoning is located on the edge of this zone; it has been isolated by the construction of a road and provides no habitat or vegetation contribution to the 7(c) zone. Therefore its removal from the environmental protection zone will not generate any adverse environmental effects.



Page 72

Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 The subject land is currently zoned 7(c) Environmental Protection General under Maitland LEP 1993 and is proposed to be rezoned to 4(b) Light Industrial. The provisions of both 7(c) and 4(b) zones have been included in Annexure B. The proposed zone will, with consent from the Council, allow a range of uses, which were not permissible in the 7(c) zone. However, all new development applications will be required to satisfy the objectives of the zone.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct policy implications for Council.


CONCLUSION The subject land is located in an environmentally sensitive area however the circumstances that have created this isolated lot and the nature of the land clearly indicates that it is currently inappropriately zoned as 7(c) Environmental Protection General. Given the small size of the land, at 3012sqm, the proposal is considered to be a minor rezoning and specific in its nature as an isolated parcel of land that provides no direct contribution to the adjoining 7(c) Environmental Protection General zone. It is therefore recommended that Council proceed to prepare and exhibit a draft LEP for the land in support of a 4(b) Light Industrial zone.


Page 73

11.4.5 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1993

FILE NO: 103/2

Responsible Officer: Alison McGaffin Manager Development Services

Author: Belinda Smith Town Planner

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has had two separate approaches over the last six months for dwelling entitlements on land as a consequence of simple and minor boundary adjustments. In both cases, the applicant has claimed that a dwelling entitlement should arise as a consequence of Council’s consent to a subdivision (being a boundary adjustment). Both applicants suggest that a dwelling entitlement is permissible in accordance with Clause 13 of the LEP on the basis that the lot created through the boundary adjustment will “comprise an allotment the subdivision of which was approved by Council after 14th April 1972”. This interpretation is contrary to the intent of both Clause 8, which provides for boundary adjustments, and Clause 13 as it has been consistently applied and used by Council in relation to dwelling entitlements. This argument indicates that clarification of the intent and application of Clause 8 and Clause 13 is required to remove all doubt that a subdivision for a boundary adjustment does not trigger a dwelling entitlement on land where a dwelling entitlement did not previously exist. Therefore an amendment to the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 is proposed to add additional wording to Clause 8 and Clause 13 of the Maitland LEP 1993 to remove all doubt regarding the intent and interpretation of these clauses and their use in regard to dwelling entitlements. It is recommended that Council proceed to prepare a draft local environmental plan and place the draft on exhibition.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION

THAT: 1. Council resolve to prepare and exhibit a draft local environmental plan

pursuant to Section 54 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to amend Clauses 8 and 13 of the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 as set out in this report.


AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1993 (CONT.)

Page 74

2. Should no objections be received by Council during the public exhibition period and should no issues be raised by relevant statutory authorities which would preclude adoption of the plan that the matter be referred to the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning with a request that the Minister make the plan.

REPORT In recent months Council has received two requests for dwelling entitlements based on previous Council consents to undertake minor boundary adjustment on rural land. The first request consisted of a change to a boundary as a result of an incorrect fence line and an amendment to the boundary line corrected this discrepancy. The second consists of a change to a common boundary between two consolidated lots for the purpose of achieving a dwelling entitlement. Both examples relate to land that does not have a current dwelling entitlement. The applicants have advised Council that they consider that a dwelling entitlement can be achieved on the land via a boundary adjustment, as this will constitute a subdivision approved by Council in accordance with Clause 13(3) (a) of the Maitland LEP. In this regard, the applicants claim that the lot created through the boundary adjustment will “comprise an allotment the subdivision of which was approved by Council after 14th April 1972” and, as such, a dwelling entitlement on the land may be granted in accordance with Clause 13(3)(a) of the LEP. Clause 13 states: “13. What are the requirements with respect to the erection of dwelling

houses in rural zones? 1) In this clause: Separate parcel means an allotment of land in existence on 1st January

1991 or the aggregation of two or more adjoining or adjacent allotments of land if they were in common ownership on 1 January 1991.

Established cropping enterprise means an agricultural activity which uses an area of prime agricultural land for the cultivation of crops such as lucerne, corn, or fodder.

Established horticultural enterprise means an agricultural activity, which uses an area of prime agricultural land for commercial vegetable production.



Page 75

2) The Council may consent to the erection of a dwelling house on: a) a separate parcel in Zone l(a) where: i) the separate parcel has a minimum area of 40 hectares; or ii) the separate parcel contains an established cropping establishment

which has a cultivated area in excess of 15 hectares and which has been in operation for a minimum period of 2 years immediately prior to the application being made; or

iii) the separate parcel contains an established horticultural enterprise which has a cultivated area in excess of 8 hectares and which has been in operation for a minimum period of 2 years immediately prior to the application being made; or

b) a separate parcel in Zone l(b) where the separate parcel has a minimum area of 4000m2.

3) Not withstanding subclause (2), Council may consent to the erection of a dwelling house on land in Zone 1(a), 1(b) or 1(c) if: a) the land comprises an allotment the subdivision of which was approved

by Council after 14th April 1972; or b) the dwelling house is to replace an existing habitable dwelling house.” In accordance with the above clause Council may generally consider granting consent to the erection of a dwelling house on a separate parcel where the separate parcel has a minimum area of 40 ha. A ‘separate parcel’ however relates to ownership of land on the 1 January 1991 and the existence of a dwelling house on the land would constitute the dwelling entitlement for that ‘separate parcel’. In the current examples, the applicants argue that Council may consent to a dwelling entitlement on the created lots because the boundary adjustment constitutes a subdivision in accordance with Clause 13(3)(a). This clause states that Council may consent to a dwelling house provided ‘the land comprises an allotment the subdivision of which was approved by Council after 14th April 1972’. Therefore, the applicants claim that a boundary adjustment between any two (2) allotments would constitute a subdivision and if Council grants consent to that subdivision a dwelling entitlement is created. “Subdivision” is not defined in the Maitland LEP 1993 but is referred to in Clause 8 of the LEP in regard to what controls apply and states: “8. What subdivision controls apply? 1) Land to which this plan applies shall not be subdivided except with the

consent of the Council. 2) Nothing in this plan shall prevent the Council from granting consent to a

subdivision for any of the following: a) widening or opening of a public road; b) making an adjustment to a boundary between allotments, being an

adjustment that does not involve creating any additional allotment; c) rectifying an encroachment upon an allotment;



Page 76

d) creating a public reserve; e) consolidating allotments; or

f) excising from an allotment land which is, or is intended to be, used for public purposes, including drainage purposes, bushfire brigade or other rescue service purposes or public conveniences.”

In granting consent to a boundary adjustment between two (2) lots, the applicants are arguing that a subdivision has taken place with the consent of Council after the 14 April 1972. It would then follow that an entitlement for a ‘dwelling house’ would be achievable for these sites, under clause 13(3)(a). This is not the intent of Clause 8 and it has not been implemented or used in this manner by Council staff. The intent of Clause 8 is to provide certainty to minor surveying matters such as building encroachments, widening of roads, adjusting boundaries to meet fence alignments and provide for the creation of lots for public purposes. Clause 8 was not intended to operate contrary to the restrictions under Clause 13, by providing for a dwelling entitlement through the adjustment of a boundary. In this regard, one of the applicants confirms the intent of Clause 8 as implemented and used by Council staff as they state “…..this Clause was specifically included in the Local Environmental Plan to cater for boundary adjustments consolidation of parcels of land etc., without getting involved in any area requirements, building entitlements or zoning requirements.” This statement indicates the applicant is aware of the clear intent of Clause 8 as a provision for minor development such as boundary adjustments and not as a means to facilitate dwelling entitlements on land the subject of these minor developments. Yet as a means of achieving a dwelling entitlement, the applicant is seeking to use Clause 8 for this purpose. Should Council accept this interpretation of the wording in Clause 8, a dwelling entitlement could be achieved on any rural allotment within the City of Maitland through a simple boundary adjustment. As a boundary adjustment would be considered under Clause 8, nothing in the LEP ‘shall prevent Council from granting consent’ and dwelling entitlements could be created, by default, across the rural environs of the City of Maitland. Council cannot support this interpretation of Clause 8, as it would completely undermine the provisions of the LEP in regard to the protection and productivity of rural land in Maitland. Given that both applicants are vigorously pursuing this interpretation of Clause 8, it is important that this clause be reviewed and amended to remove any possible doubt concerning the clause’s intent. An amendment to the LEP is therefore required to amend the wording of Clause 8 and Clause 13 to clearly define their role and intent.



Page 77

SEPP 60 – Exempt and Complying Development that identifies boundary adjustments as exempt developments in areas that are not Environmentally Sensitive, further reinforces the traditional approach of Council, as follows: “Boundary adjustments 3 An adjustment to the boundary of an allotment that:

(a) will not result in any building contravening the deemed to satisfy provisions of the Building Code of Australia, and

(b) will not create any additional allotments or dwelling entitlements, and (c) will not change the area of any allotment by more than 10 %, and (d) will retain all services within the existing allotments.”

The above provisions are again intended to provide assurance to those wishing to undertake simple boundary adjustments and acknowledge their low environmental impact. However, it clearly specifies that these boundary adjustments do not provide an indirect means of achieving a dwelling entitlement. In consideration of the above, it is clear that any amendment to the Maitland LEP 1993 needs to remove doubt associated with the use and implementation of Clause 8 and Clause 13 within the LEP. Any additional wording must ensure that the current anomaly between the two clauses does not create un-intended consequences in the form of additional dwelling entitlements. In this regard, it is recommended that additional wording be added to both Clause 13 and Clause 8 that clarifies the intent of each clause. Such that the use of Clause 8 for minor subdivisions does not comprise an allotment as described in Clause 13(3)(a) of the Maitland LEP 1993 for the purposes of a dwelling entitlement. The addition of appropriate wording will clearly indicate the intent of Clause 8 as providing no restrictions to minor subdivisions, without providing an avenue for dwelling entitlements. This is in accordance with Council’s implementation of this clause since its inception in 1993. The addition of appropriate wording for Clause 13 will clearly define the creation of allotments under Clause 8(2) as not providing for dwelling entitlements as referred to in this clause. The addition of this wording to both clauses will remove any doubt associated with their use for the purpose of achieving a dwelling entitlement. The amendment to Clause 8 of the LEP is recommended as follows: “8. What subdivision controls apply? 1) Land to which this plan applies shall not be subdivided except with the

consent of the Council. 2) Nothing in this plan shall prevent the Council from granting consent to a

subdivision for any of the following: a) widening or opening of a public road; b) making an adjustment to a boundary between allotments, being an

adjustment that does not involve creating any additional allotment;



Page 78

c) rectifying an encroachment upon an allotment; d) creating a public reserve; e) consolidating allotments; or

f) excising from an allotment land which is, or is intended to be, used for public purposes, including drainage purposes, bushfire brigade or other rescue service purposes or public conveniences.

3) A subdivision consented to by the Council for any of the purposes set out in clause 8(2)(a) to (d) inclusive and (f) shall not be taken to create an allotment of land in zone 1(a), 1(b) or 1(c) to which the provisions of clause 13(3)(a) shall be capable of applying.”

The amendment to Clause 13 of the LEP is recommended as follows: “13. What are the requirements with respect to the erection of dwelling

houses in rural zones? 1) In this clause: Separate parcel means an allotment of land in existence on 1st January

1991 or the aggregation of two or more adjoining or adjacent allotments of land if they were in common ownership on 1 January 1991.

Established cropping enterprise means an agricultural activity which uses an area of prime agricultural land for the cultivation of crops such as lucerne, corn, or fodder.

Established horticultural enterprise means an agricultural activity, which uses an area of prime agricultural land for commercial vegetable production.

2) The Council may consent to the erection of a dwelling house on: a) a separate parcel in Zone l(a) where:

i) the separate parcel has a minimum area of 40 hectares; or ii) the separate parcel contains an established cropping

establishment which has a cultivated area in excess of 15 hectares and which has been in operation for a minimum period of 2 years immediately prior to the application being made; or

iii) the separate parcel contains an established horticultural enterprise which has a cultivated area in excess of 8 hectares and which has been in operation for a minimum period of 2 years immediately prior to the application being made; or

b) a separate parcel in Zone l(b) where the separate parcel has a minimum area of 4000m2.

3) Not withstanding subclause (2), Council may consent to the erection of a dwelling house on land in Zone 1(a), 1(b) or 1(c) if: a) the land comprises an allotment (other than an allotment created by a subdivision consented to by the Council under clause 8(2)(a) to (d) inclusive and (f)) the subdivision of which was approved by Council after 14th April 1972; or

b) the dwelling house is to replace an existing habitable dwelling house.”



Page 79

In summary, to clarify the doubt raised in regard to the interpretation and use of Clause 8 and Clause 13 of the LEP, as they relate to one another, an amendment to the Maitland LEP 1993 is recommended to take the form of a draft local environmental plan that will be placed on exhibition in accordance with the provisions of the EP&A Act 1979.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS The amendment of Maitland LEP 1993 in the manner proposed will remove doubt from the intent and application of Clause 8 in the LEP as it relates to Clause 13, without limiting the Council’s ability to consider and determine minor applications for boundary adjustments.


CONCLUSION The applicant’s interpretation of Clause 8 as it relates to Clause 13 requires clarification to remove doubt associated with the use and implementation of both clauses. It is therefore recommended that Council proceed with an amendment to the LEP to clearly define the intent of Clause 8 and Clause 13 of the Maitland LEP 1993.


Page 80

11.4.6 RZ01004 - DRAFT AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP ALTERATION OF ACQUISITION CLAUSE & VARIOUS REZONINGS

FILE NO: RZ01004

ATTACHMENTS: (2) EXISTING ZONE BOUNDARY - COBURN CIRCUIT DRAFT LEP

Responsible Officer: Peter Cameron Co-ordinator City Strategy

Author: Carolyn Maginnity Strategic Planner

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On 30th January 2001, Council resolved to prepare an amendment to the Maitland LEP to: (a) amend the current provisions for the acquisition of land zoned 6(a) Public

Recreation and 6(c) Proposed Recreation; and (b) rezone a number of properties located in various parts of the city that are

inappropriately zoned 6(a) and correct a number of mapping anomalies (where parts of properties have been incorrectly zoned 6(a) Public Recreation.

An amendment was subsequently prepared and a copy of the draft LEP is attached. The following public authorities either own or have a direct interest in some of the land to be rezoned and were, therefore, invited to comment on the draft Plan:

• Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC) • Hunter Water Corporation (HWC) • Department of Public Works and Services (DPWS) • Hunter Catchment Management Trust (HCMT)

Submissions have been received from DPWS, HCMT and DLWC and as a result of these submissions and further investigation by Council officers, it is now proposed that some minor amendments be made to the draft plan in the manner outlined in this report.


1. In accordance with Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council resolve to amend the draft LEP in the manner outlined in this report.


RZ01004 - DRAFT AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP ALTERATION OF ACQUISITION CLAUSE & VARIOUS REZONINGS (CONT.)

Page 81

2. In accordance with Section 64 of the Act, the amended draft LEP be submitted to the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning with a request for a Section 65 Certificate to be issued, certifying that the draft plan may be publicly exhibited.

3. The proposed rezoning of land in Victoria Street, East Maitland (Sheet 21 of 21) be excluded from the draft LEP, pending further consultation with the State Rail Authority and the Mindaribba Aboriginal Land Council.

4. In response to submissions received from the Hunter Catchment Management Trust and the Department of Land and Water Conservation the current 6(a) zoning of properties in Mt Pleasant Street, East Maitland be retained and that these properties be excluded from the draft LEP.

BACKGROUND Council’s decision to prepare the draft plan was prompted by recognition that there is a considerable amount of land zoned 6(a) Public Recreation that is privately owned and which is not now required for public recreation purposes. Under the existing acquisition provisions, Council must acquire land zoned 6(a) or 6(c) on request. This may result in the acquisition of land that has limited use to the community or the acquisition of land ahead of demand. This, in turn, can limit Council’s ability to provide and maintain quality well-maintained recreation areas, in line with community demand and Council’s open space and recreational priorities. It also impacts on other areas of Council’s operations, in particular asset management, public facilities planning, accounting and indemnity. The plan seeks to amend the existing acquisition provisions to allow Council time in which to assess whether it requires land for which an acquisition notice has been received and if necessary, negotiate rezoning of the land to allow more appropriate uses. The following government authorities have been consulted in relation to the draft plan:

• Department of Land and Water Conservation • Hunter Water Corporation • Department of Public Works and Services • Hunter Catchment Management Trust

COMMENTS FROM GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES Hunter Water Corporation / Department of Public Works & Services Hunter Water and the Public Works Department have raised no objection to the proposal.



Page 82

Hunter Catchment Management Trust The Hunter Catchment Management Trust, whilst having no objections to the proposal generally, have provided the following comments in relation to the proposed rezoning of land in Mount Pleasant Street, Maitland (Sheet 3 of 21):-

“The land is part of the Mt Pleasant Street flood control structure, which is a component of the Maitland Flood Mitigation Scheme. The flood control structure is comprised of the road and a graded and grassed spillway on the southern side currently used as playing fields. The structure will be subject to high velocity flood flows in times of major flood and maintenance of the grass cover is required to protect the spillway from scour damage and possible collapse. The proposed change of zoning, which would permit interference with the spillway structure and may allow structures such as fence posts, rural buildings or vine crops which could concentrate or divert flood flows, would appear to be inappropriate”.

Department of Land & Water Conservation The Department of Land & Water Conservation has raised concerns in relation to the following proposed rezonings of Crown land:-

• Maize Street, East Maitland (Sheet 13 of 21) occupied by the Maitland Radio Club - proposed to be rezoned 5(a) Special Uses – (Radio Club);

• Lot 201, DP755237 Metford Road, East Maitland (Sheet 19 of 21) leased by the Maitland Pistol Club - proposed to be rezoned 6(b) Private Recreation; and

• Lots 377 & 404 DP755237 Park Street, East Maitland (Sheet 20 0f 21) occupied by the Scouts – proposed to be rezoned 6(b) Private Recreation.

The Department has advised that these particular parcels of land adjoin large tracts of 6(a) zoned land (either Crown recreation reserves for which Council is the appointed manager, or Council-owned recreation reserves (ie. Cooks Square Park). The Department considers that piecemeal rezoning in these cases is inappropriate and the current zoning should be retained. The following comments have been provided in relation to the proposed rezoning of Pt Lot 31 & Pt Lot 32 DP758374 Victoria Street, East Maitland (Sheet 21):-

“this land adjoins the Jubilee Health & Fitness Centre (no. 61 Victoria Street) and the rezoning should be in line with a “business” or “industrial” zone that permits expansion of or compliments the use of the adjoining facility”. The proposed 5(a) zone may, however, be appropriate if Council or the State Rail Authority were to acquire the land for carparking in association with the existing railway station under the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991”.



Page 83

DLWC has also raised concern about the rezoning of properties in Mt Pleasant Street stating that:-

“…a change in zoning to 1(a) Prime Rural Land is considered inappropriate and the current 6(a) Public Recreation zoning should be retained given the current usage of the land for a flood mitigation structure and playing fields”.

COMMENT Maize Street, East Maitland (Radio Club), Metford Road, East Maitland (Pistol Club) & Park Street, East Maitland (Scouts) DLWC’s justification for retention of the existing 6(a) zone in these cases is supported. Furthermore, rezoning of the land occupied by the Pistol Club and the Scouts to 6(b) Private Recreation is not considered appropriate, given that the land is Crown land and not privately owned. Victoria Street, East Maitland The subject land is used for commuter carparking in association with the adjoining Victoria Street railway station. It is understood that the land has been formally constructed as a carpark since about 1986 and was used for carparking on an informal basis prior to that time. The land is the subject of an Aboriginal Land Claim (ALC 4477) by Mindaribba Aboriginal Land Council. DLWC’s suggestion that the land should be rezoned to a “business” or “industrial” zone is not supported. Introduction of a commercial type zone in this locality would not be appropriate. Retention of the existing 6(a) zone is not considered desirable either as Council may, at some time in the future, be asked to acquire the land. The State Rail Authority (SRA) have not been formally consulted, however, SRA staff have indicated verbally that it is unlikely the Authority would be interested in acquiring the land. Given the above, the most appropriate course of action at this point in time would be to exclude the above parcel from the draft LEP, pending further consultation with both the SRA and the MALC. Mt Pleasant Street, Maitland The subject land is currently owned by the Department of Public Works & Services, however, the land is to be transferred to DLWC in the near future. Council maintains the existing playing fields. Both HCMT and DLWC have raised concern that under the proposed Rural 1(a) zoning, development such as viticulture, fencing and the like could be carried out on the subject land without the consent of Council and that such development would compromise the effectiveness of the flood control structure. Whilst this is unlikely to occur, given the current ownership of the land by Public Works and impending ownership by DLWC, the existing 6(a) zone probably most accurately reflects the dual use of the land for recreation and flood mitigation.



Page 84

It is recommended, therefore, that the current 6(a) Public Recreation zone be retained and that the Mt Pleasant Street properties be excluded from the draft LEP.

FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO DRAFT PLAN Coburn Circuit, Metford (Sheet 2 of 21) The draft Plan proposes, amongst other things, to correct a mapping anomaly whereby the rear portion of several residential properties in Coburn Circuit, Metford was inadvertently rezoned to 6(a) Public Recreation. The anomaly occurred when Council changed from a manual mapping system to a computerised mapping system. The draft Plan proposes to re-align the zone boundary to rezone the rear portions of Lots 8402 and 8403 DP848936 Coburn Circuit from 6(a) to 2(a) Residential. Since the amendment was prepared, it has been brought to Council’s attention that several of the adjoining and nearby properties are also affected by the anomaly (ie. Lots 8108, 8109, 8110 & 8146 in DP 844997, Lots 8404, 8405 & 8406 in DP848936 and Lots 1 & 2 in DP849873). A plan showing the extent of the existing 6(a) zone boundary is attached. Some of the above lots are vacant and in the process of being purchased from Landcom. Re-alignment of the zone boundary will obviate the need for purchasers to obtain Council’s consent for the erection of a dwelling on these lots. It is recommended, therefore, that Sheet 2 of 21 of the draft LEP be amended to include rezoning of the rear portion of the above properties from 6(a) Public Recreation to 2(a) Residential Zone. Lot 457 Chelmsford Drive, Metford (Sheet 18 of 21) It is proposed to rezone Lot 457 Chelmsford Drive, Metford to 5(a) Special Uses -(Public Buildings). The land is owned and occupied by the Mindaribba Aboriginal Land Council. It is considered that the term “Public Building” may be misleading and that it may be more appropriate to refer to the use as a “Community Facility”. It is recommended, therefore, that Sheet 18 0f 21 of the draft Plan be amended to refer to the proposed zone as 5(a) Special uses – (Community Facility)

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Long term, the draft LEP aims to reduce Council’s financial risk by providing a legal mechanism for negotiation with landowners. 6(a) and 6(c) zoned land is potentially a major financial burden for Council, not only in terms of its acquisition but in its long term management and embellishment, as well as from a public liability perspective.



Page 85

The most significant implication of the draft plan, therefore, is that it will enable Council to program and prioritise land acquisitions on a logical basis, providing not only a more co-ordinated approach to open space and recreation planning but more efficient financial management and budgeting. The amendments to the draft LEP identified in this report generally relate to land that is already in public ownership and are unlikely, therefore, to have any significant implications for Council in terms of its financial liability.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no policy implications for Council. If gazetted, the draft LEP will alter the provisions of Maitland LEP 1993 in relation to acquisition.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Amending the draft LEP in the manner outlined, to accommodate the concerns of relevant government authorities, should enable a S.65 certificate to be issued by DUAP, allowing Council to proceed with public exhibition of the draft Plan.


Page 86

11.4.7 SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN CARPARKING - MORPETH

FILE NO: 103/41/6

ATTACHMENTS: (1) DRAFT SECTION 94 PLAN MAP OF AREA TO WHICH PLAN APPLIES

Responsible Officer: Peter Cameron Co-ordinator City Strategy

Author: Carolyn Maginnity Strategic Planner

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In December last year, Council resolved to prepare and exhibit a draft Section 94 Contributions Plan for the provision of car parking in Morpeth. A draft Plan has since been prepared and was placed on public exhibition from 9th July to 20th August 2001. The primary purpose of the draft Plan is to enable Council to levy a monetary contribution in lieu of the provision of off-street car parking in Morpeth, where it is considered impractical or undesirable to provide car parking on the site of a proposed development. The draft Plan proposes to introduce a contribution of $2340 per car parking space. In accordance with Section 31 of the EP&A Regulation, the aim of this report is for Council to consider any submissions made in relation to the draft Plan and determine whether to:

(a) approve the plan in the form in which it was publicly exhibited; (b) approve the plan with such alterations as the Council thinks fit; or (c) decide not to proceed with the plan.


1. The draft Section 94 Contributions Plan for the provision of car parking in Morpeth be approved in the form in which it was publicly exhibited.

2. In accordance with Section 31(2) of the EP&A Regulation 2000, Council give public notice of its decision to approve the Plan in a local newspaper.

BACKGROUND Application of the Plan The draft Plan applies to all land zoned 3(a) General Business within the township of Morpeth. A map of the area to which the Plan applies is included in the


SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN CARPARKING - MORPETH (CONT.)

Page 87

attachment to this report. The Plan applies to all new commercial, retail or tourist developments that require the submission of a development application to Council. Nexus Under Section 94, the power to levy a contribution relies on there being a clear link (nexus) between the development being levied and the demand for the public facility for which the levy is required. The draft Plan acknowledges that an increase in commercial activity in Morpeth over recent times has created a significant demand for car parking, particularly on weekends, when tourist activity is at its peak. Based on past trends, it is estimated that over the next 10 years an additional 4000m2 of gross floor area may be developed for business use within the business area, with retail and food outlets accounting for about two-thirds of this growth. This anticipated increase equates to a future demand for an additional 140 car parking spaces to be provided in Morpeth by 2011. Proposed Car Parking Facilities The location, estimated cost and proposed timing for the provision of car parking facilities are summarised in the Works Schedule at Table 1. To facilitate the provision of car parking facilities within a reasonable time, it is proposed to provide car parking in stages. The estimated timing of works is based on anticipated demand and the likely level of funding available from S94 contributions and other sources. Monitoring will occur on a regular basis over the life of the Plan to ensure that the timing of works is consistent with the rate of development and receipt of income. The Works Schedule notes Council’s intention to proceed with the construction of a public car park for approximately 70 vehicles, as soon as adequate funds are available and a suitable site has been secured. Contribution Rates Table 2 in Part A of the Plan provides a summary of the contribution rates. The formula used to determine the contributions is as follows: Contribution per space = (A x B + D) x AF where:

A – is the average area of a car space, including the space itself plus half the area of the access aisle. The average area of a car space has been assessed as 25m2. B – is the cost of acquiring land per square metre (including valuation and conveyancing charges). The average cost of acquiring available land at Morpeth has been assessed as $42.00/m2.



Page 88

D – is the construction cost per space. The construction cost per space, including necessary site investigations and road improvement works, has been assessed as $1625/space. AF – is the apportionment factor. The apportionment factor has been assessed as 87.5%.

The land acquisition costs in Morpeth are expected to vary between $6 per square metre for rural flood-prone land and $77 per square metre for vacant residential land. The average land cost, therefore, amounts to about $42 per square metre or $1050 per car parking space. The average construction cost per car space has been estimated at about $1625. The total cost per car space, therefore, amounts to $2675. Apportionment Apportionment is a process which seeks to ensure that new development is only charged for the actual portion of demand that it creates. In accordance with DUAP guidelines, contribution plans should clearly demonstrate that apportionment has been undertaken in arriving at the final contribution. Under the draft Plan, contribution rates have been set at 87.5% of the actual costs of land acquisition and construction. This apportionment factor acknowledges that demand for car parking already exists within the business centre and that the provision of public car parking provides a broader benefit to the community than individual privately owned and operated car parks.

SUBMISSIONS The draft contributions plan was publicly exhibited for a 6 week period from 9th July to 20th August 2001. A notice was placed in the Council News section of the Maitland Mercury on Monday 9th July and Monday 23rd July 2001. In addition, individual letters were sent to all owners of 3(a) General Business zoned land in Morpeth. Whilst a number of verbal enquiries were received, Council received no written submissions in relation to the draft Plan.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The draft Plan proposes to introduce a developer contribution rate of $2,340 per car parking space, which represents 87.5% of the total estimated cost per space of providing the required car parking facilities. The remaining 12.5% will need to be met through some other funding source e.g. Council’s general revenue fund. Council may choose to commence construction of the required car parking facilities before all contributions have been collected, so as to meet existing demand and ensure that the facilities are provided within a “reasonable” time. Should Council proceed with the provision of car parking facilities at Queens Wharf, for example, the costs associated with the acquisition and construction of the car park can be recouped through Section 94 funds levied under the draft Plan.



Page 89

POLICY IMPLICATIONS The draft Plan will form Council’s policy for the assessment, collection, spending and administration of contributions levied in lieu of the provision of off-street car parking in Morpeth.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The draft Plan has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Part 4 of the EP&A Regulation 2000. The draft Plan is also consistent with the guidelines set out in the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning’s Section 94 Contributions Plans Manual - Second Edition.


Page 90

11.5 ASSET PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT GROUP

11.5.1 NEW ENGLAND HIGHWAY - MELBEE STREET LANEWAY

FILE NO: 140/5

ATTACHMENTS: (1) LOCALITY PLAN

Responsible Officer: Warwick Randall Group Manager, Asset Planning and Management

Author: Richard Minter Manager Consulting

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council, over a period of several years, have received complaints regarding a laneway between the New England Highway and Melbee Street, Rutherford. As a result of these complaints, it is proposed that Council investigate the option of closing the laneway by undertaking a public consultation process with residents in the surrounding area.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council undertake a public consultation process regarding the closure of the western laneway between the New England Highway and Melbee Street, Rutherford, and report back to Council on the outcome of the consultation process.

REPORT Maitland City Council currently has two laneways that run between the New England Highway and Melbee Street, Rutherford (refer Attachment 1 for locality plan). The laneway that is the subject of this report is the western laneway marked as "A" on the attached plan. Council, over a significant period of time, has received complaints from property owners adjacent to the laneway regarding anti-social behaviour, property damage, theft of property from backyards and break and enter. Most of these incidences occur throughout the early hours of the morning, often by patrons leaving the Maitland City Bowling Club. Council officers have held meetings with the affected property owners, Maitland City Bowling Club and the Police regarding the situation and in an attempt to find a resolution to the problem. The adjacent property owners have requested that the laneway be closed.


NEW ENGLAND HIGHWAY - MELBEE STREET LANEWAY (CONT.)

Page 91

Whilst the laneway is used to access the Rutherford area, Council has identified through planning instruments such as the Bicycle Plan, that the main linkage between Telarah and Rutherford is via the eastern laneway. As a result, given the close proximity of the two laneways, and the currently poor condition of the western laneway, there is little merit in retaining the western laneway. To move toward a resolution of this problem, it is proposed that a public consultation process covering the area surrounding the two laneways, be undertaken based on a proposal to close the western laneway. Following the completion of this public consultation process, a report will be brought back to Council to determine if a formal closure of the western laneway is to be pursued.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Given the nature of the parcel of land in question, Council would only consider the closure of the laneway if two or more of the adjacent property owners were willing to buy the land associated with the laneway. As a part of this, all application fees and legal costs associated with the closure would also be borne by the appropriate adjacent property owners.




Page 92

11.5.2 ROAD SAFETY BLACK SPOT PROGRAM

FILE NO: 140/16

Responsible Officer: Warwick Randall Group Manager, Asset Planning and Management

Author: Richard Minter Manager Consulting

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Maitland City Council has received $300,000 under the Road Safety Black Spot Program for the installation of traffic calming facilities in High Street, Maitland, between Abbott Street and Ken Tubman Drive. In response to a notice of motion at the August, 2001 Council meeting, this report details the proposed course of action with regard to this project.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council receive and note the report.

REPORT Maitland City Council has received $300,000 under the Road Safety Black Spot Program for the installation of traffic calming facilities in High Street, Maitland, between Abbott Street and Ken Tubman Drive. At the Council Meeting of 28th August, 2001, the following Notice of Motion was adopted: THAT: 1. The General Manager, Mr. Evans provide to all Councillors a copy of

Council's resolution nominating and supporting High Street, Maitland from Abbott Street to Ken Tubman Drive as Council's priority for Black Spot funding;

2. All Councillors be provided with a plan of all calming devices to be installed in High Street;

3. High Street businesses who will be affected and the general public are

made aware of the proposed calming devices to be installed between Abbott Street and Ken Tubman Drive. This can be done through inserting information and a copy of the plan in Council's advertising section in the local newspaper;

4. A report to the next meeting of Council on the number of car parking

spaces lost in High Street, as a result of installing calming devices; 5. Maitland Chamber of Commerce be invited to comment on the proposal.


ROAD SAFETY BLACK SPOT PROGRAM (CONT.)

Page 93

Note: It has been calculated from past experience that a car parking space in Central Maitland costs $15,000 per space. In regard to the Notice of Motion, the following is noted: • Councillors have been provided with a copy of Council's resolution

nominating and supporting the High Street, Maitland project as Council's priority for Black Spot Funding.

• Initial planning for traffic calming devices and locations has commenced.

As a part of this process, it will be determined how many parking spaces, if any, will be lost as a result of the installation of traffic calming devices. Details will be provided to Councillors when this information is available.

• Following the completion of the planning phase, public consultation and

formal engineering design will be undertaken. Public consultation will include local businesses, Maitland Chamber of Commerce, bus transport companies and emergency services. Final designs will be completed by early November with details provided to Councillors.

• Tenders for the construction of the traffic calming facilities will be called in

mid January, with the successful tender to be awarded at the February Council meeting.

• Construction will commence early March and should be completed by early

June. It is noted that the $15,000 cost of parking per space is the assessed cost of construction of off-street parking. There is an overall surplus of on-street parking in this area.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The project is being funded under the Road Safety Black Spot Program with total project costs to be contained within the grant funding received.




Page 94

11.5.3 WOODBERRY SKATEBOARD FACILITY - POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCES

FILE NO: 101/16

Responsible Officer: Warwick Randall Group Manager Asset Planning and Management

Author: David Bortfeld Recreation Planning Coordinator

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report deals with the possible funding sources for the extension of the Woodberry Skateboard facility. The skateboard facility currently on offer within Woodberry was funded through Section 94 allocations and a Sport and Recreation Grant. To extend the facility opportunities for funding are limited to Council revenue, community sponsorship and possibly the Safer Communities Development Fund offered through the Attorney’s General Department. It is recommended that council pursue all three avenues currently on offer.


Council pursue additional funding for the extension of the Woodberry Skateboard facility as identified in this report

REPORT This report deals with the Notice of Motion presented to Council on the 28th August 2001. The Notice of Motion requested information on possible funding sources for the extension of the Woodberry Skate Board Facility. The existing facility was funded through Section 94 contributions and a Sport and Recreation Grant. In order to extend the facility to cater for the increased use it is estimated an additional $16 to $20,000 is required. These additional funds would enable council to double the features currently on offer. Funding sources for this type of infrastructure are limited. Below are the avenues currently under investigation. Section 94 There is currently no funding available within this source.


WOODBERRY SKATEBOARD FACILITY - POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCES (CONT.)

Page 95

Grants There are numerous grant-funding programmes available for community and Government activities. Only a few offer the ability to develop infrastructure of this type. • Department of Sport and Recreation – Capital Assistance Program

Council has already received a Grant under this program for this facility. It is

unlikely that a second grant will be offered. This grant program also requires 50% funding from an outside source.

• Safer communities Development Fund – Attorney General's Department This program offers 100% funding for projects implementing safer

communities strategies. There have been grants awarded for skateboard facilities in the past. It is anticipated that this program will be advertised in the very near future.

Community Activities Community support and sponsorship of infrastructure is one avenue that has not been explored in the Woodberry area. This style of project has been very successful with an example being the Largs Skateboard facility. This project only required 1/5 of the total value of the works, with the remainder being contributed by business and community groups. There may be opportunities to further developed this facility using this style of support. One essential aspect of this program is that there needs to be a community group driving the works. At this stage a potential group has not been identified. There may be avenues to utilise the services of the Woodberry Recreation Group or a local service group. Council Revenue Funding options within the current budget could include availability of funding through "carry overs" and through a quarterly budget review.

CONCLUSION It is recommended that council implement the following strategies in the pursuit of extending the Woodberry skateboard facility: 1. Apply for funding under the Safer Communities Development Fund when

available. 2. Identify an appropriate community group or business sponsor to champion

the development of a community project. 3. Meet any shortfall in project costs through carry over funding or a quarterly

budget review.


WOODBERRY SKATEBOARD FACILITY - POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCES (CONT.)

Page 96

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There may be financial implications on the current budget depending on successful funding sources. These will not be known until those funding sources are explored.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct policy impact upon Council



Page 97

12 REFERRED COMMITTEE REPORTS

13 NOTICE OF MOTION/RESCISSION

14 URGENT BUSINESS

15 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE


Page 98

16 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

16.1 OFFICERS REPORTS

16.1.1 MAITLAND GAOL MASTERPLAN

FILE NO: 60/11


Author: Roger Stephan Economic Development Co-ordinator

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to update Council on progress to date in development of the Maitland Gaol Masterplan.

OFFICERS' RECOMMENDATION THAT Council move into Confidential Session to discuss this item under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993 Section 10A(2), as follows:

(c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business

(d)(ii) commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed: confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council


Page 99

16.1.2 PLANT REPLACEMENT

FILE NO: 137/886-887-888

Responsible Officer: Wayne Cone Group Manager Operations

Author: Steven Hodges Fleet & Depot Operations Manager

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In accordance with the 2001/02 Plant Replacement Programme adopted by Council on 24 April, 2001, quotations were called for the replacement of three (3) agricultural tractors (File No.137/886), one (1) narrow width agricultural tractor (File No.137/887) and one (1) 2 to 3 tonne vibratory roller (File No.137/888).

This matter is reported to Council in accordance with Council’s policy for plant replacement, as the actual costs exceed the estimated costs by more than ten percent (10%).

This report deals with the machines due for replacement, and provides details on the reasons for the replacement and the cost.

After evaluation of the change over costs for Plant No.4007, an out front mower, it has been determined that the proposed replacement is not possible within Council’s plant replacement budget.

A revision of the plant replacement program, and discussions with staff, has presented an opportunity for Council to replace two (2) machines, (Plant No.4007, an out front mower, and Plant No.77 a tractor used with a rear mounted PTO driven road broom) with one tractor. This tractor could be used for operating the road broom and a rear mounted mower on a shared basis.


(c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business


Page 100

16.2 MAYOR'S REPORTS

16.2.1 PERFORMANCE REVIEW

FILE NO: E10430

Responsible Officer: Clr Peter Blackmore Mayor

Author: Clr Peter Blackmore, Clr Tony Keating, Clr Brian Burke, Clr Vicki Galea Councillors

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The performance review panel in a format following that used previously, met with the General Manager on Tuesday 4 September 2001, to conduct the annual performance review of the General Manager. This report presents the outcomes of the review for discussion and endorsement by the Council.


(a) personnel matters concerning particular individuals


Page 101

16.2.2 REMUNERATION - MANAGEMENT

FILE NO: E10430

Responsible Officer: Tony Houlcroft Manager Human Resources

Author: Tony Houlcroft Manager Human Resources

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The contract for the position of General Manager requires that the level of remuneration be reviewed annually. Relevant information has therefore been obtained and is provided to assist Council in carrying out the review.


(a) personnel matters concerning particular individuals


Page 102

17 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

18 CLOSURE

maitland city council ordinary agenda 25 …...sep 25, 2001 · capital works program is submitted...

Documents