item no: 1 subject: heritage studies of lawson core

PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 1 SUBJECT: HERITAGE STUDIES OF LAWSON CORE VILLAGE FILE NO: C05659 Recommendations: 1. That Council note this report and the preliminary draft heritage listings for the

Lawson Core Village Area and Great Western Highway Precincts subject to impact from Highway widening enclosed separately for the information of Councillors.

2. That the preliminary draft heritage listings for Lawson remain confidential and not

released to the public as it is contrary to the public interest until the public exhibition of the relevant draft Local Environmental Plan (LEP) amendment.

Report by Group Manager, City Sustainability: Purpose of the Report At its meeting on 31 May 2005 Council considered a Notice of Motion regarding the heritage studies for the Lawson Core Village Area and resolved:

"That Council receive the report, at its next meeting, which has arisen from the recommendation of Council, 2 December 2003, Item 4 recommendation, as printed below:

That upon receipt of the final heritage study by Biosis Research, Natural and

Cultural Heritage consultants (Biosis) for the core village Area of Lawson, Council receive a separate report that confirms those elements to be incorporated in the amendment to Schedule 7 of DLEP 2002 for Lawson taking into account the findings of both the Biosis study and the Ian Jack Study."

The purpose of this report is to address the Notice of Motion. Background The Notice of Motion refers to a report considered by Council on 2 December 2003 presenting the findings of the Heritage Assessment for Lawson Urban Conservation Area by Professor Ian Jack. By extension, at its meeting of 27 January 2004, Council considered a further report dealing with the heritage amendment to the, then, DLEP 2002 (now DLEP 2005).

PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE Item 1 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

In response, Council resolved, pursuant to s.54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act), to prepare a draft local environmental plan to amend Schedule 7 (Heritage) and to make consequential changes to maps supporting DLEP 2005 to incorporate, amongst other things, the heritage review of: a) the core village area of Lawson; and b) that land associated with the proposed widening of the Great Western Highway in

the vicinity of the Lawson town centre. The relevance of the resolution of 27 January 2004 is that it provided the legal mechanism and public consultation processes to amend Council's heritage schedule to reflect the reconciled findings of the studies by Biosis and Professor Jack. In accordance with the requirements of the Act, Council's decision to prepare the heritage LEP was notified to the NSW Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR). As required, that notification advised of the reasons for the amendment, the nature and coverage of the proposed LEP amendment and Council's opinion that a local environmental study was not required in this case given the specific subject matter of the amendment and the extent of heritage studies undertaken to support the amendment. Pursuant to the Act, prior to preparing the draft amendment, Council requires notification from DIPNR acknowledging and endorsing Council's decision, advising of the Director General's requirements for the content of the amendment and advising whether, having considered Council's opinion, a local environmental study is required as well as the coverage of any required local environmental study. It should be noted that notification from DIPNR in relation to the heritage amendment has not been forthcoming. Rather, DIPNR advised that as the heritage amendment to DLEP 2005 relates to a plan that is not yet gazetted and given the demands for other LEP amendments across the state, amendments to DLEP 2005 will not be processed until DLEP 2005 is gazetted (the only exception to this has been in relation to the LEP amendment for the Katoomba Cultural Precinct given its state significant status). This, in turn, has meant that the processes under the Act (such as consultation with public authorities under s62 of the Act, public exhibition etc) could not formally proceed until the Director General's endorsement and notification has been received. Notwithstanding, the action to undertake an initial reconciliation of the BIOSIS and Jack studies and prepare the draft amendment has been progressed to enable s62 consultation with government authorities and, in particular the Heritage Office, to proceed once DIPNR's notification is received. This work has identified some areas of concern regarding the proposed listings and/or the extent of justification for the listing of individual items. The key implication here is that, until consultation with the Heritage Office has occurred, the final listings of individual heritage items and heritage conservation areas to be incorporated into the draft amendment for public exhibition cannot be finalised or confirmed.


Preliminary draft listings for Lawson Based on consideration of the findings of both the BIOSIS and Jack studies, a preliminary draft confidential list of potential items and heritage conservation areas within the relevant study areas has been prepared. It is provided separately to Councillors on a confidential basis and is not proposed to be submitted to the meeting. Release of the confidential list would pre-empt the statutory planning process and may place individuals in a position of disadvantage with respect to whether a property is identified as being of heritage significance or otherwise. It should be noted that the final listing for inclusion in the draft amendment may change following formal consultation with the Heritage Office pursuant to s62 of the Act. It is for this reason that the draft list is confidential until that consultation has occurred. It is as part of the public exhibition of the draft amendment that individuals or interested parties may have the opportunity to lodge submissions to Council on the listing of specific items. The studies prepared by BIOSIS and Professor Jack would also be exhibited as supporting information when the draft amendment is exhibited. It should be noted that, pursuant to Council's previous resolutions, a full report presenting the draft amendment and discussing the outcomes of the studies and the effects of formal listing of heritage items and conservation areas for Lawson will be presented to Council prior to public exhibition. The intention for that report will be to seek Council's adoption of the draft amendment for the purpose of public exhibition. The timing of that report will be dependent on the gazettal of DLEP 2005. In this regard, gazettal of DLEP 2005 is expected in the next few weeks. Council staff are currently preparing the necessary documentation to forward the preliminary listings to the Heritage Office and other relevant government agencies to enable s62 consultations to commence as soon as Council is advised of a gazettal date for DLEP 2005. In this regard it should be noted that, in accordance with Council's resolution of 27 January 2004, it is intended that the draft amendment will cover proposed listings for not only Lawson but also for the core village areas of Hazelbrook, Springwood and Blaxland.


ITEM NO: 2 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS CULTURAL CENTRE AND KATOOMBA

LIBRARY FILE NO: C03199 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes the report, and that with all matters of significance

having been resolved, and that with the adoption of the recommendations set out below in this report, the General Manager and the Mayor will be in a position to sign the Development Deed on behalf of the Council.

2. That Council notes the Developer’s willingness to include the Cultural Centre

enhancements and Library and accepts the Developer’s offer to construct the Library and Cultural Centre enhancements as part of the Cultural Centre project for an amount of $2,647,217.

3. That Council supports the vigorous pursuit of additional Federal government

funding for the Cultural Centre enhancements once the Deed has been signed and the construction commencement date is more certain.

4. That Council in its role as the prospective Cultural Centre stratum lot owner,

agrees to the approach for the commercial centre identification and signage outlined in item 8 of the report that will form part of the Development Deed.

5. That Council as the prospective owner of the stratum lot for the Cultural Centre

agrees in principle to join with the stratum owner of the commercial lot to seek to have Council as the regulatory authority regulate the unallocated public car parking spaces within the development as a public car park.

6. That Council accepts the responsibility and cost of recording and displaying any

heritage items relating to the former Froma House. 7. That Council notes the revised projected recurrent operating costs for the Cultural

Centre and Library and the implications for future financial years. Report by General Manager: Introduction This report brings to a conclusion the successful negotiation between the State Government, Council and the Stevens Group to construct a Cultural Centre and Library in conjunction with a commercial development providing an underground car park with 327 car parking spaces on the TAFE East site.


This project is the most significant outcome from the Katoomba Revitalisation Outcomes Report in 1999 as a result of the whole of government community planning process. The project has been supported by the State Government through making the TAFE East site available for a combined Cultural facility and commercial development together with funding in the order of $6.4 million for capital costs of the Cultural Centre, $0.6 million for the interpretive display and $1 million for the Civic Centre. Council has also been successful in attracting $0.5million in Federal Government funding for the interpretive centre. The project now includes the enhanced larger Cultural Centre in keeping with the original project objectives together with inclusion of the new Library with links through the Civic Centre site to Katoomba Street. This will serve to reinforce and support the existing businesses in the main street. Council is providing $6.1 million to the overall project made up of $3 million towards the Cultural Centre project, $1 million to the Civic Centre and $2.1 towards the new Library. The overall project, including the commercial component, on completion will see a financial injection of over $40 million into Katoomba to reinforce and sustain its role as a regional cultural and economic centre. Whilst the planning and negotiations for this successful outcome that meets as many of the stakeholders interests as possible has taken over four years, the significance and importance of the project to the community on completion can not be overstated. 1. Purpose of the report The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the successful conclusion to negotiations with the developer to include enhancements to the Cultural Centre and the new Library into the project. It brings to an end comprehensive and exhaustive negotiations between the Developer, State Government and Council that have taken place since the Council received reports to the Ordinary Meeting of the 14 December 2004, one of which was a confidential report. This report is to be read in conjunction with the Confidential Report item number C1 to this same meeting that contains issues of commercial in confidence and privileged legal advice to Council. In the reports of 14 December 2004 it was envisaged that the Development Deed would be ready for signing in February 2005. The Council, and in particular the Developer, have since raised key issues of concern that have needed to be revisited and resolved before final agreement could be reached. The major contributing factor to this has been the direct result of the complicated and unfamiliar nature of the arrangement, resulting from a project that has a number of different parties having differing objectives but not irreconcilable differences.


2. Issues to be canvassed in this report Issues that can be discussed in detail will be raised in this report, while those that relate to commercial in confidence or privileged legal advice will be more fully explored in the confidential report. The issues set out below will be considered in this report; Inclusion of the Cultural Centre enhancements Inclusion of the Library Federal funding for the enhancements Allocation of Council’s three (3) million dollars toward the Cultural Centre project Council’s funding allocation for the Library /Civic Centre Signage Heritage Car parking Cultural Centre and Library recurrent operating costs

3. Inclusion of the Cultural Centre enhancements and Library Cultural Centre Enhancements In the 14 December 2004 report to the Council, it was identified that negotiations were in place with the Developer in regard to the Cultural Centre enhancements prepared by Hassell Architects. The purpose of these negotiations was to firstly agree a price, and secondly to incorporate the enhancements into the Development Deed as part of the Cultural Centre component to be constructed by the Developer. Councillors will recall that the enhancements were proposed to address issues that were raised at the cultural interest group briefing session organised by Council. An offer has been made by the Stevens Group to construct the Cultural Centre enhancements for $606,814. This figure has been checked by Council’s quantity surveyor Currie and Brown, and whilst it is slightly higher than their calculation it is considered to be close enough to confirm that the quality and value for money is acceptable. It will be recommended that Council accept the offer made by the Stevens Group to build the Cultural Centre enhancements. A copy of the final Detailed Schematic Design for the Cultural Centre including the Cultural Centre enhancements and Library is found as Enclosure 1 and can be viewed on Council’s website or at the Libraries. Library Also at its 14 December 2004 meeting, the Council confirmed its intention to include the Library as part of the Cultural Centre development. Hassell Architects have since completed the detailed schematic design and schedule of finishes to the same standard as the Cultural Centre. Council’s quantity surveyors have costed the works. Negotiations have taken place with the Stevens Group to include the Library in the development and agreement has been reached and details will be considered in relation to the discussion on the Development Deed in the confidential report. The developer has made an offer to design and construct the Library (less fit out by Council) for $2,040,403.


This compares favourably with our quantity surveyor Currie and Browns costings and is lower but is close enough to confirm the quality and value for money. It also compares favourably with the cost estimate that Council considered in the report to the ordinary meeting of the 9 March 2004 when Council resolved to move forward with the Library on the Cultural Centre site. This report recommends that Council accept the financial offer made by the Stevens Group to include the Library as part of the Cultural Centre. The combined cost estimate for the enhancements to the original Cultural Centre and the new Library submitted by the developer of $2,647,217 is slightly lower than that submitted by Council’s quantity surveyor. This outcome should give council confidence that it is getting value for money based on the standard of construction and level of finish identified in the Detailed Schematic Designs prepared by Hassell Architects. A copy of the Library report and resolution of 9 March 2004 together with the Cultural Centre and Library report and resolution of the meeting of 14 December 2004 are enclosed separately for Councillors (enclosure 2). 4. Federal funding for the Cultural Centre enhancements At the 14 December 2004 meeting, Council was advised of the potential to gain an additional $500,000 from the Federal Government towards the Cultural Centre enhancements. Unfortunately the timing of the signing of the Development Deed and the timeframe for construction has precluded Council from the most recent round of funding. Council is currently in negotiations to retain the original funding grant of $500,000 due to that program closing down. Council is confident in retaining the initial $500,000 grant. The federal funding agencies have also indicated that once the Deed is signed and the construction commencement dates are more certain, then Council can apply for funding in future rounds. Council needs to understand, however, that if the Council is unsuccessful for any reason in obtaining those funds, then it would either have to fund the enhancements itself or scale them back accordingly. A decision on this aspect can be made some time into the future. 5. Allocation of Council’s 3 million dollars towards the Cultural Centre Council at its meeting of 9 March 2004 on the Cultural Centre resolved to contribute $3,000,000 to the overall Cultural Centre project (excluding the Cultural Centre enhancements and Library dealt with separately in this report) which forms a significant contribution to support the State Government’s financial commitment to Katoomba’s revitalisation. Currently Council’s 3 million dollars has been allocated to the project elements set out below. It should be emphasised that the allocation is notional and may change as the project progresses and the potential for other funding is realised. • $225, 000 to the capital cost of the construction of the Cultural Centre • $1,100,000 to construct the linkages from Katoomba Street via Carrington Square and

the rear of the Carrington Shops and from Katoomba Street via Froma Lane to the Cultural Centre site


• $500,000 for the Cultural Centre furniture and fittings. • $275,000 towards public art • $500,000 Council contingency • $400,000 escalation after April 2005 Council’s source of funds was outlined in the Cultural Centre Council report dated the 9 March 2004 and can be found at (enclosure 3). 6. Council’s funding allocation for the Library and Civic Centre Council determined the funding allocation for this aspect of the project at its meeting of the 9 of March 2004 in a separate report to the Cultural Centre. Whilst that report is provided for Council’s detailed information at (enclosure 2), it is summarised below for convenience. • Construction of new library (based on concept design) $2,200,000 • Library fitout $ 800,000 • Convert existing library to new public hall

Convert existing hall to walkway and retail space Construct new retail space Improved landscaping upper level $1,100,000 Total $4,100,000

Council’s source of funding for this aspect of the project was outlined and agreed in the report and resolution of the 9 March 2004 for the Library and Civic Centre and is provided at enclosure 2 for Councillors. In summary the additional cost to provide the new Library after taking into account the State Government grant of $1 million and Council’s committed matching funding of $1 million, is $2.1 million which is to be funded from loan borrowings. The Developer has agreed to contribute to the cost of construction of the linkage through the Civic Centre. This matter is addressed in the Confidential Report. 7. Car Parking Arrangements A total of 327 car parking spaces have been provided for the combined Cultural Centre/Library and commercial components. Of these 22 spaces form part of the Councils stratum lot for the purpose of compensating for the parking on the current lot 2 and providing for staff parking associated with the Cultural Centre and Library. These car parking spaces will be reserved and not subject to any time limits. The Developer is also reserving a small number of spaces for the centre management and this will be detailed in the Building Management Statement that is referred to in the Confidential Report. The remainder of the spaces will be available for general public car parking. It is intended that an agreement will be made between Council as a stratum owner of the stratum lot (the Cultural Centre/Library) and the owner of the retail stratum lot and Council as the regulatory authority of the other part to allow the car park to be regulated as a public car park under section 650(6) of the Local Government Act. This arrangement would allow parking time limits to be enforced.


8. Signage Signage has been a major issue of concern for both Council and the Developer. The Technical Brief that sets the scope and objectives for the project emphasised the need for the development to, among other things, encourage an integrated form of development that represents a high standard of architectural quality. Throughout the concept design phase, Council has emphasised the need for general signage (and in particular commercial signage) to respect the Cultural Centre destination and design characteristics. The Detailed Schematic Design identified areas on the external walls of the building that were deemed appropriate for the various elements and uses of the building. The Council’s draft LEP for the site continued that theme along with the need for high quality integrated signage for both the cultural and commercial uses. The combining of commercial and cultural uses is not all that common and creates some challenges to do it well. Council and the developer have been in discussion in recent time to come to some agreement on the way forward that both can live with. The developer is keen to ensure that the commercial centre has an identification along with the major retailer along Parke Street. The Detailed Schematic Design indicates a space below the podium level, above the entry to the commercial arcade along Parke Street, for the major retailer. The Developer has indicated that they are accepting of this. This then leaves the issue of the overall commercial centre identification location. This issue has been given a lot of serious consideration in order to achieve the desired design outcomes and meet the different stakeholder needs. The developer’s preferred location is above the car park entry from Parke Street in the south-western corner. This area has been designated as a possible public art site. After significant debate, agreement has been reached between the developer and Council officers (acting on behalf of Council as owner) to put a proposal to Council that will allow the integration of the centre identification located below the Cultural Centre podium above the carpark entry. The identification would have to be designed together with any art-work above it to ensure that it is both integrated and compatible. Council will be responsible for commissioning the artwork. The Developer would, subject to their acceptance of the design, contribute to the signage. It should be noted that the commercial centre identification is different and separate from the Cultural Centre identification. The Cultural Centre identification will be located above the podium level and situated elsewhere on the building. An elevation plan depicting the location of the commercial signage and commercial signage to Parke Street can be found at (enclosure 4) for Councillors. A recommendation will be made to accept the negotiated way forward. The final description of how this is reflected is contained in the Development Deed and covered in the Confidential Report.


9. Heritage The Developer late in the negotiations raised concern about how the heritage issues would be determined particularly relating to the possibility that the footings of former Froma House may remain beneath the bitumen car park on the site. The developer concerns were two fold. Firstly the potential time delays should the footings be encountered and secondly the cost associated with complying with any Heritage Office requirements. Council has been in discussions with the Heritage Office and the likely ramifications of the footings being on the site would be that they would have to be excavated under permit, appropriately stored and the presence of the item recorded and represented on the site with the footings displayed appropriately. This is a common approach and would fit in well with the Cultural Centre use. Agreement has been reached with the Developer that allows for an extension of time to address heritage issues, for the Developer to be responsible for the cost of excavation and storage and for Council to be responsible for the cost of any display or interpretation. This is considered to be a fair and reasonable compromise. The approach to the heritage issue is dealt with in the Development Deed referred to in the Confidential Report. 10. Cultural Centre and Library Recurrent Costs Cultural Centre Council considered the source and impact of the additional capital funding in the Cultural Centre report of 9 March 2004. The details can be found in enclosure 3 to this report under clause 8.2. At that time it was estimated that Councils operating budget would incur an expenditure of $183,318 per annum. It was envisaged that this impact would be in the 2005/06 year, it is now estimated that the impact will not be until at the earliest 2007/08 and more likely 2008/09. Council also considered in 9 March 2004 Cultural Centre report in clause 9.1 the Cultural Centre operations (recurrent costs). Given that the means to raise the necessary capital to construct the facility have been identified, it is most important from a financial perspective that Council ensures it can afford this impact on its operational budget. Council in March 2004 determined that this could be achieved but in doing so Council would need to identify permanent reductions in expenses and/or sustainable sources of additional income to offset this impact. Given the time that has elapsed since the March 2004 report and the most recent projected completion dates for the project, the recurrent costs for the Cultural Centre have been reviewed in association with our consultant, The Australia Street Company. The following projections are now estimated:


A copy of the revised recurrent costs estimates is provided for Councillors information at enclosure 5.

Pending the Five Year Business Plan and Sensitivity Analysis Council would be advised to consider up to $325,000 as an annual subsidy for the Pre-Opening and Establishment phases. Given the revised figure based on the opening year being 2010/11 the following revised table sets out the anticipated operating costs per annum:

Nature Source Amount $

Comment

Cost of Capital Finance

Table in Section 8.2 above Cultural Centre 9 March 2004 report

183,318 Could be reduced if land sales possible – discussed in textual comments below.

Cultural Centre Subsidy (loss)

Revised documents costs report

325,000 Discussed above.

Annual contribution in respect to management of the common property of the whole complex

Provision for share of security, cleaning, maintenance, promotion, outgoings, etc. in respect to common property

100,000

This amount is the most correct estimate. The building management statement is currently being finalised and at this point in time it would appear that Council’s share of costs will be approximately 25%. Information will be sought from consultants to verify the actual costs.

Summary Income and Expenses for the Cultural Centre

Pre-Opening

2009/10

Opening Year

2010/11

Operating Year 1

2011/12

Operating Year 2

2012/13

Operating Year 3

2013/14

Income $172,000 $438,900 $435,114 $461,180 $630,080

Expenditure $471,535 $747,388 $739,794 $768,636 $929,234

Council Subsidy

$299,535 308,488 $304,680 $307,456 $299,154


Nature Source Amount

$ Comment

Sub-total 608,318

Depreciation

Estimated value for depreciation purposes of $10.1 Million

202,000 2% pa depreciation allowed.

TOTAL 810,318 This amount compares favourably with the Cultural Centre report considered by Council on the 9 March 2004 given the proposed opening date and the time available to Council to consider its overall financial decisions between now and 2009/10. Library The means to raise the necessary capital to construct the Library facility were identified and approved at the 9 March 2004 meeting. It was identified in the Library report that an annual amount for loan repayment of $204,370 would be required. The question of affordability for other ongoing recurrent costs was also considered. The identified net impacts of the Library component (excluding operating and staffing that had already been taken into account in the business case) are as follows: Nature Source Amount

$ Comment

Cost of Capital Finance

Library Report 9 March 2004

204,370 Assume an error in table of 9 March Library report (shows 214,370)

Sub-total 204,370

Depreciation

Estimated value for depreciation purposes of $2.9 Million

58,000 2% pa depreciation allowed.

TOTAL 262,370

The combined impact on the annual operating expenses for the Cultural Centre and Library will be in the order of $1,072,370 (810,318 + 262,370) or excluding depreciation $812,370. Council has provided for the funding of the project capital in its financial planning capital expenditure forecasts. The analysis above however demonstrates that the new facilities will impact on the Council’s ongoing operating budget, and there will be a need to identify permanent reductions in expenses and/or sustainable sources of additional income to accommodate the increases. The timing of the project will see pre-opening expenses hitting the operating budgets in 2009-2010 and the Council therefore has a 3-year window of opportunity to seriously review its cost structures. It will require a strong sense of commitment by the Council and management together in order to identify services that can be provided more effectively and efficiently than at present


Conclusion This report concludes the successful negotiations between the State Government, Council and the Stevens Group to deliver the Cultural Centre and new Library on the TAFE East site. Significant outstanding issues have been considered and dealt with in this report. Importantly for Council the developer, Stevens Group have agreed to include the Cultural Centre enhancements and the Library into their offer to construct the cultural facilities within a cost frame acceptable to Council’s estimates. Council has been alerted to the complications with the Federal Government funding for the enhancements due to the timing of the signing of the Deed and the need to monitor this funding option and make decisions at the appropriate time. The other issues that have been canvassed in this report include the car parking arrangements, Council’s recurrent costs, signage and heritage. Several recommendations have been made requiring Council to adopt a position that will inform the Confidential Report on this matter. The position has now been reached after protracted negotiations, and subject to the Council approval of the recommendations contained in this report and the Confidential Report, for the Development Deed to be signed. While at times this has been a frustrating process, the end result will be a significant addition to the cultural and commercial infrastructure of the Blue Mountains. It will provide a strengthening of the Blue Mountains position as a regional commercial centre and provide much needed facilities for the community.


ITEM NO: 3 SUBJECT: ITEM C1 IN CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PAPER – BLUE

MOUNTAINS CULTURAL CENTRE AND LIBRARY– STAKEHOLDER DEVELOPMENT DEED

FILE NO: C03199 Recommendations: 1. That Item C1 in the Business Paper be deferred for consideration until all other

business of this meeting has been concluded. 2. That Council close part of the Council Meeting for consideration of Item C1 in the

Business Paper – Blue Mountains Cultural Centre – Stakeholder Development Deed pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) and (d)) of the Local Government Act 1993, as the report contains, and discussion is likely to contain:

• information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting or proposes to conduct business;

• commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it or of a trade secret; and

• advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

Report by General Manager: This matter has been listed in the Confidential Business Paper because, in my opinion, consideration of the matter is likely to take place in a meeting which has been closed to the public in accordance with the provisions of Section 10A of the Local Government Act 1993. The matter to be dealt with relates to negotiations with Council, State Government, the Developer and major retailer, relating to the State Government tender process, development options, the Development Deed and costings for the Project. Section 10A of the Act requires that any proposal to close part of a meeting to the public be notified in the agenda, and a resolution to close part of a meeting to the public be passed setting out reasons for doing so. In this case, the reason for closing that part of the meeting to consider Item C1 in the Confidential Business Paper is that the report contains, and discussion is likely to involve, information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting business or may in the future and; contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; and contains legal advice subject to legal privilege.

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 4 SUBJECT: PROVISION OF PAPER SHREDDERS TO COUNCILLORS FILE NO: C01521 Pt 2 Recommendations: 1. That the report be received and noted. 2. That the Council’s Policy made pursuant to section 252 of the Local Government

Act be amended to include the provision of paper shredders to the Mayor and Councillors, on request, for home office use.

3. That the Council is of the opinion that the amendments to the Policy are not

substantial and therefore does not require the giving of public notice. Report by Executive Officer: Introduction Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 31 May 2005, resolved as follows:

“That a report come to the next Council Meeting, detailing the cost of providing paper shredders to Councillors for their home office, as part of its policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors.”

(Min No. 174) Report The cost of providing Councillors with paper shredders varies between $45 and $290 per item. These range from personal shredders to medium range business shredders. Recommended good quality paper shredders for home office use would be approximately $100, which would equate to $1200 should all Councillors require a paper shredder. The expenditure would fall within the draft Budget for 2005/06 allocation for office equipment for Councillors being $5,000. Section 252 (3) of the Local Government Act prevents a council from paying any expenses or providing any facilities otherwise than in accordance with its adopted policy. Council’s current policy allows for the provision of numerous items of furniture and equipment for a Councillor’s home office if requested including desk, chair, shelving, cabinet, computer, printer, telephone, and fax. It should be noted that the furniture and equipment provided remains the property of the Council, and is returned to the Council once a Councillor leaves civic office. It has been normal practice for Council’s administration in providing the equipment listed to Councillors, to evaluate and determine the most appropriate make and model of equipment from the range available at the time in accordance with Council’s purchasing procedures and which represent the best value for money.

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT Item 4 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

Paper shredders are not listed in the Expenses and Facilities Policy and therefore at present cannot be automatically provided to Councillors on request. However, the provision of a paper shredder for home-office use is an item of equipment that could reasonably be included within the Policy, by amendment, as it is consistent with the objectives of the Policy. Councillors receive documents both of a confidential nature and which for privacy reasons need to be properly stored, secured and disposed of once not required. Sections 253 and 254 of the Local Government Act, 1993 provide that before making any substantial amendments to its policy the Council must give at least 28 days' public notice of the proposed amendments. The inclusion of paper shredders in the Policy is consistent with the objectives of the provision of other home-office equipment for Councillors. It would only add another relatively low cost and minor home office equipment to an existing significant list of facilities being provided to Councillors. It would be reasonable to conclude that the change to the Policy would not be substantial and therefore not require public exhibition. Of course Council will need to form its own view on the matter. Given the nature and purpose of use of the equipment it is recommended that paper shredders be included in the list of items to be made available to Councillors on request for home office use.

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 5 SUBJECT: FINALISATION OF MANAGEMENT PLAN, ESTIMATES &

CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM AND MAKING RATES FOR 2005-2006

FILE NO: C07486 Recommendations (by separate resolution - A then B): A. ADOPTION OF MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ESTIMATES 1. That after considering community submissions, Council adopts the Draft 2005-

2006 Management Plan and Estimates, incorporating the Capital Works Program and Fees and Charges, subject to the amendments proposed in ‘this report’, including those recommended under Section C “Sports and Aquatic Centre Fees”, being:

(a) That the spectator fee be set at $2.00 (excl GST) for both carnivals and for

supervising parents/guardians. (b) That Council note that the proposed reduction in this fee will result in a loss

of revenue of around $2,300. (c) That outdoor membership passes are transferable between Glenbrook Swim

Centre, Lawson Swim Centre and Blackheath Pool Only for the corresponding season. (Note: The current arrangement where Springwood Membership passes allow use of all pools and Katoomba passes allowing entry to the other outdoor pools (Lawson, Blackheath and Glenbrook) will remain.)

(d) That the winter season and 10 month membership pass fees be added to the fees and charges schedule as outlined above.

(e) That the Waterslide Fee at Springwood remains in place. (f) That the Council notes that the recommendations above will require an

additional $22,000 in reductions to other parts of the budget. 2. That the expenditure in the Estimates and Capital Works Program for the year

2005-2006, incorporating the amendments proposed in this report, be approved and the necessary money to meet that expenditure be voted.

3. That the rate of interest on overdue rates and charges for the 2005-2006 financial

year be set at 9% per annum. 4. That approval be given to:

(a) the raising of all loan funds, as proposed in the “Statement of Revenue Policy” of the Draft Management Plan and as also detailed in Part B - Section 6 of this report, from the most appropriate lender on terms and conditions considered to be the most advantageous to Council as determined by the General Manager; and


(b) the affixing of Council’s Common Seal to all relevant loan documents.

B. MAKING OF RATES AND CHARGES That whereas the Council has: (a) prepared a Draft Management Plan for the year 2005-2006 in accordance with

Sections 402, 403 and 404 of the Local Government Act, 1993 and has given public notice of the Draft Management Plan in accordance with Section 405 of that Act; and

(b) declared all rateable land in the area subject to the ordinary rate to be within one

or other of the categories specified in Section 514 of the Local Government Act, 1993 and within sub-categories permitted within those categories and adopted by Council on 29 April 1997 and amended on 25 June 2003 by the inclusion of Sun Valley in sub-category “K”;

(c) adopted the Management Plan and Estimates in accordance with Section 406 of the

Local Government Act, 1993 after taking into consideration public submissions thereon;

(d) applied to the Minister for Local Government for approval under section 508(2) of

the Local Government Act to vary Council’s general income by 7.15%; and (e) requested that the Minister for Local Government amend the Local Government

(Rates and Charges) Regulation to permit Council to impose an Annual Charge for Environmental Works and Services.

IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED 1. That an ordinary rate of the amounts specified in Schedule A attached hereto on the

land value of all rateable land in the area in the categories and sub-categories described respectively in the Schedule be now made for the year 2005-2006 and that the minimum amounts of the ordinary rate as specified in Schedule A attached hereto be levied in respect of each separate parcel.

2. That the Council is of the opinion that: (a) all rateable land categorised as “business” within the centre of activity

known as rating sub-category “Springwood”, and


(b) all rateable land categorised as “residential” contained within the centre of

population known as rating sub-category “K”, incorporating the townships of Faulconbridge, Winmalee, Springwood, Yellow Rock, Valley Heights, Sun Valley and Hawkesbury Heights, benefits or will benefit from the Springwood Town Centre Improvements commenced in 1994-1995; or contributes or will contribute to the need for such improvements; or has or will have access to such improvements; it is hereby resolved that a Springwood Town Centre Improvements Special Rate of 0.000095 cents in the dollar be made and levied on all rateable land detailed above for the purposes of repaying money, to the sum of $700,000 borrowed to contribute to the cost of the said improvements.

3. That annual charges for the year 2005-2006 under Section 496 of the Local

Government Act, 1993 for the provision of Domestic Waste Management Services for each parcel of rateable land in the area be as follows:

$ 87.00 per annum, Vacant land with road access $182.00 per annum, Occupied Residential (140 L bin) $ 217.00 per annum, Occupied Residential (240 L bin)

The above fees are charged on the basis of each property serviced multiplied by the number of services provided.

4. That as the Council is of the opinion that all rateable land in the Blue Mountains

area benefits from expenditure incurred in the provision of Emergency Services, all properties having access to such services on an ongoing basis and in recognised emergency situations, that the annual charge for the year 2005-2006 under section 501 of the Local Government Act, 1993 for the provision of Emergency Services is $36.00 for each parcel of rateable land in the area.

5. That as the Council is of the opinion that all rateable land in the Blue Mountains

area benefits from expenditure incurred in the provision of Environmental Works and Services, that subject to the Minister for Local Government providing Council with an instrument of approval under section 508(2) of the Local Government Act to vary Council’s general income by 7.15% AND making necessary amendments to the Local Government (Rates and Charges) Regulation to permit Council to impose an Annual Charge for Environmental Works and Services, the annual charge for the year 2005-2006 under section 501 of the Local Government Act, 1993 for the provision of Environmental Works and Services is $34.00 for each parcel of rateable land in the area.


Report by General Manager: Introduction At the meeting held on 19 April 2005 Council resolved (Minute No. 98):

“1. That subject to any amendments arising from Council’s consideration of items at this meeting, Council approves the Draft 2005-2006 Management Plan incorporating the Draft 2005-2006 Revenue Policy for placement on Public Exhibition.

2. That, at Blackheath Swim Centre, the proposed total payable

concession/child fee for 2005/2006 be $2.50 ($2.27, plus $0.23 GST). 3. That the proposed 2005/6 fee for spectators (Swimming Carnivals) be $1.00

plus GST.” The public exhibition period extended from 22 April 2005 to 19 May 2005. The Draft Plan and Estimates were advertised with the public being able to view the document at Council’s Katoomba and Springwood offices, all libraries and the Council’s website. Copies were also available on request. Two public information evenings were arranged in Katoomba and Springwood. A total of 17 written submissions have been received. Under the provisions of Section 406 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council is now required to consider all written submissions made within the public exhibition period and then, prior to 30 June 2005, adopt a Final Plan and Estimates. Following adoption of a Management Plan and Estimates, Council must then by formal resolution make and levy the rates for 2005-2006. This must be done prior to 31 July 2005. However, having regard to the need to print and envelope rate notices for approximately 36,000 rateable assessments, it is important that the resolution making the rates be passed as soon as possible after the adoption of the Management Plan and Estimates, preferably at the same meeting. The recommendations are ordered to enable Council to consider the various components of this process in sequential order.


A. MANAGEMENT PLAN The 17 submissions received covered a wide range of issues. Copies of all submissions have previously been made available to Councillors and a briefing was held on the submissions and draft responses.

A list of the submissions with proposed responses to the issues raised is provided in Schedule 1.

B. REVENUE POLICY AND ESTIMATES (BUDGET) 1. Significant Estimates Issues A number of significant financial challenges confronted the preparation of the Draft 2005-2006 Estimates. The main challenges were that costs (and employment costs) are continuing to rise faster than our income, levels of service are rising and recent and new capital expenditure is increasing these pressures. A number of measures were taken to constrain expenditure in preparing the Estimates. One of these was setting very tight parameters in relation to budget increases – for example: restricting growth in employment costs to a maximum dollar increase of 2% and no increase in full time equivalent positions, restricting growth in other expenditure combined to 1% unless for asset maintenance when up to 3% was allowed. Where factors made it impossible to achieve these restrictions greater scrutiny was given to ensure higher increases were unavoidable. The net Estimates result for 2005-2006 was a “balanced budget” after allowing for a then provision of $500,000 to go towards restoring Working Capital to more acceptable levels. However, that was prepared on the basis of Council approving the introduction of a Three Group Structure from 1 July 2005 in line with the recommendations in the report to the Council Meeting of 31 May 2005. While Council has resolved to support a Three Group Structure, other than the fact that one Group is to be the Environmental and Customer Services Group, the balance of the organisational structure is yet to be determined and approved. Working on an expectation that this will be able occur and be in place by no later than 1 October 2005, the expected savings from management and support staff salary savings have to be reduced by $125,000 (25%). This means that the reduction of $125,000 will need to be found elsewhere in the budget. The draft Estimates recommended for approval have also been prepared on the expectation that the Environmental Levy will proceed (either as a ‘flat charge’ or as part of the rates). However, at the time of finalising this report the Minister for Local Government had not indicated whether there would be an amendment to the necessary Regulation to permit it to be levied as a flat rate Annual Charge or whether he had approved Council’s Special Variation to permit the necessary funds to be raised above the general rate pegging limit.


However, if such approvals were forthcoming, it has been presumed that Council would wish to proceed with the Environmental levy on the basis of the flat rate Annual Charge, being its previously express preference. Should the Council not wish to proceed with an Environmental Levy at all then some additional funds will need to be found for urgent and important environmental works or for there to be to be service level or Capital Works reductions to enable them to proceed. They comprise:

• Closure / remediation of former Lawson and Blackheath Waste Disposal Depots (WDD)

$300,000

• Stormwater Management $250,000Total $550,000

The site remediation of the former WDD’s closed in 1989 to address key site contamination problems remaining. Restoration of the previous landfill site will enhance the amenity of the site and ensure that there is no further degradation of the adjoining bushland or aquatic systems. A plan of management for the site has identified geotechnical instability, downstream contamination, landfill gas emissions and other issues. Remediation is necessary to fulfill EPA requirements for a Closure Plan under section 76 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Key works include, but are not limited to - Slope stabilisation, leachate management and capping and controlling other environmental emissions. Stormwater management/drainage is a crucial area of Council business. Inadequate stormwater management is resulting in damage to other infrastructure such as undercutting, flooding causing property damage, direct damage to the environment such as head cuts, safety issues relating to head cuts and flooding, spread of weeds. While Council is currently spending $950,000 on stormwater management/drainage with a further $48,000 form external sources, it is still in bad shape and considered well underfunded. Additional funding should still be allocated to this area even if the Environmental Levy does not proceed. In summary, the Council will need to allocate additional savings in the current budget of:

• Delay to Three Group structure $125,000 • Higher fuel expenses $55,000 • Recommended changes to pool fees (detailed in Section C) $22,000

$202,000

In the event that the Environment Levy does not proceed, that amount of $202,000 will need to be increased by:

• Landfill remediation $300,000 • Stormwater management $250,000

$550,000 Plus amount of other savings $202,000 $752,000


Clearly, management will need to give careful consideration as how to find such a significant amount.

In the event of any subsequent changes to the budget arising from the Council’s decisions on this matter or any other factors that would involve reductions to levels of service, or a significant staff impact, such changes would be reported back to the Council for final decision. 1.1 Income • The increase in general purpose income of 7.15% for which Council has made

application to the Minister for Local Government has been applied on the basis of 3.5% increase to total rates and applicable annual charges (excluding Domestic Waste and Environmental Levy Annual Charges), with the balance of 3.65% to introduce a flat rate Annual Charge of $34.00 for Environmental Works and Services. Note: At the time of finalising this report the Council had not been advised of whether the Minister has approved the increase of 7.15% or made the necessary amendment to the Local Government (Rates and Charges) Regulation to permit the introduction of a flat rate Annual Charge for Environmental Works and Services.

• The rating sub-categorisation system adopted with the 1997-1998 Management Plan,

and amended in 2002-2003 when Sun Valley became a separately identified locality, has been retained for the 2005-2006 financial year. As a condition of levying rates on a differential basis throughout the City the Council must identify and sub-categorise each residential property according to a ‘centre of population’. Council conducted a detailed review of the characteristics of each town and village within the city in compiling the 1997-1998 rate structure and obtained legal advice which resulted in the existing sub-categorisation. As indicated, this was amended slightly in 2002-2003 when Sun Valley became a separate locality.

• Council implemented a two tiered domestic waste management charge in 1997-1998,

designed to reflect the levels of cost that are associated with varying degrees of service delivery. This fee structure is considered to be the most effective method of charging for domestic waste management and is designed to fully recover all costs incurred. The actual fees proposed are:

$ 87.00 per annum, Vacant land with road access $182.00 per annum, Occupied Residential (140 L bin) $ 217.00 per annum, Occupied Residential (240 L bin)

The above fees are charged on the basis of each property serviced multiplied by the number of services provided. It is noted that the proposed occupied residential charge above has increased by $23 (or 11.9%) on the current year’s charge. There were a number of reasons for this increase, the most significant being the increase in recycling contract costs. Council has also introduced a new fee for a 140 litre bin.


• Council had resolved on 19 April 2005 that a report comes to it about the potential

for removing the Waterslide fee at the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre. Council also resolved that the report should include information on the revenue generated from the Aquatic Centre and the costs associated with operating the waterslide. To address this matter and having regard to the significance of Council’s net expenditure (ratepayer subsidy) on providing and operating aquatic facilities, Council’s request has been addressed in a separate section of this report below (Please refer to Section C - FITNESS & AQUATIC CENTRE FEES).

1.2 Environment Levy At the meeting of the 19 April 2005, Council resolved to proceed with an application to the Minister for Local Government for a Special Variation of 7.3%, comprising 3.5% increase to permissible income and 3.8% for the Environment Levy. As calculations were refined, the percentages reduced slightly requiring a Special Variation of only 7.15%, 3.65% of which related to the Environment Levy. The Environment Levy would represent an increase of $1.2 million per year to Council’s general Estimates, dedicated to the Environment Levy Program of Works. Levied as an Annual Charge of $34.00 on all assessments, the Environment Levy would represent an equitable contribution by all ratepayers as the benefit of the works and services funded by the environmental levy extend to the whole community, and beyond. Council has complied with the Department of Local Government requirements to demonstrate that adequate communication and consultation on the matter, including the impact upon its ratepayers, has been carried out. In accordance with Council’s resolution of the 19 April 2005, the proposed Special Variation has been exhibited as part of the Draft Management Plan Exhibition during April and May 2005. A total of 6 submissions relating to the proposed Environment Levy were received in response to Council’s Draft Management Plan 2005/06. The majority of these submissions were in support of the proposed Environment Levy. Two additional public meetings were held for the purposes of the Draft Management Plan, at which the proposed rates and charges were presented. Considering the submissions received in response to the Draft Management Plan, the balance of community opinion remains unchanged from that presented in the Council reports of 19th April and 31 May 2005. Council is aware that the impetus to consider an Environment Levy comes from the strategic policy direction set by the community in the 25-year Vision and the Map for Action, which is strongly focused on achieving a more sustainable future for the Blue Mountains, and Council’s priority of asset management. It is also a practical response to the need to devote additional resources to environmental management without reducing resources for other activities and services, and to continue the work begun by the Urban Runoff Control Program (URCP).


With resources extremely limited, an Environment Levy is considered as a positive and responsible approach for Council to address the current environmental risks and the future challenges that have been identified through the City Strategy and the current Management Plan priority of asset management. It does need to be said that while there have been some strong voices raised against the Environment Levy, this has not been reflected in the submissions to the exhibited Draft Management Plan, nor in the reported media responses. If anything, there seems to be a mood of resigned and unenthusiastic acceptance, subject to certain conditions. While Ministerial approval is still pending, Council is effectively now required to make a final decision to introduce an Environment Levy, commencing 1 July 2005, recognising that, given the State Government priorities at present, the opportunity to apply for a Special Variation for this purpose may not present itself again. Council’ attention has been drawn to two projects in section 1 “Significant Estimates Issues” above which will need to be given very serious funding consideration if the Environmental Level does not proceed. Schedule 2 to this report contains details of the recommended Rates and Annual Charges on the basis of the Minister approving the increase in general income by 7.15% for which Council has applied and making necessary the amendments to the Local Government (Rates and Charges) Regulation to permit Council to impose an Annual Charge for Environmental Works and Service. If Ministerial approval is not received or the necessary amendments not made then revised schedules will have to be prepared. 1.3 Capital Works Program The remaining three years of the four-year program (Management Plan 2004-2008 period) provide new projects to the value of approximately $7.8 Million including anticipated grants to the value of approximately $2.6 Million. In addition, there are a number of projects that will be carried over from 2004-2005, which will be the subject of a separate report after the financial year concludes. Any 2004-2005 works not commenced at 30 June 2005 are a separate matter that will be carefully reviewed on the basis of both priority for funding and capacity to deliver. In preparing the 2005-2006 Capital Works Program the focus was on ensuring asset management and maintenance of Council’s various assets. Special attention is drawn to the fact that while the Draft 2005-2006 Capital Works Program is fully funded, the indicative Capital Works Programs projected for future years are subject to funding availability at the time and Council so resolving to allocate the funds in the relevant year. Schedule 3 details proposed amendments to the Draft Capital Works Program. Council’s resolution of 31 May 2005 concerning giving consideration to including the capital works at the Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre has been addressed in Section D below.


2. Amendments to Draft Estimates When the Draft Estimates were being prepared not all new properties that had become rateable during the current financial year had been added to Council’s rating database. 3. Accrual of Interest on Overdue Rates and Charges In accordance with Section 566(3) of the Local Government Act 1993, the Minister for Local Government has specified that the maximum rate of interest on overdue rates and charges for 2005-2006 will be 9% per annum. As Council competes with other businesses for ratepayers’ cash to meet the payment of rates, the rate of interest on overdue rates needs to be as close as possible to commercial consumer credit rates in order to encourage payment. It is necessary for Council to formally set the rate of interest for 2005-2006. 4. Loan Borrowing Program Council proposes to borrow a total of $4,578,000 in new loans during 2005-2006 to assist in funding the Capital Works Program (both the 2005-2006 Program and works to be carried over from 2004-2005). All loan borrowings are subject to annual approval from the Department of Local Government. The Department assembles submissions from all councils in NSW and then determines the overall availability of loan funding. Therefore, the proposed loan borrowing program is subject to the appropriate approval from the Department of Local Government. A financial projection has been developed which shows likely levels of operating income and expenditure over a five year period and highlights the impact of the loan borrowing program. The projected level of debt servicing for Council is within current Local Government Departmental benchmarks and guidelines. 5. Proposed amendments to the Management Plan strategic part - Volume 1 - are in Schedule 4. C. FITNESS & AQUATIC CENTRE FEES This section addresses a number of Sports & Aquatic Fees issues that have been investigated since the Draft Management Plan went on Public Exhibition, including the separate fees for use of the waterslide at Springwood. 1. Reduction of Spectator Fee (Carnivals) The current spectator fee is applied only to patrons attending a pre-booked swimming carnival or swimming club race night.


Summary of revenues for 2004/05 YTD

Visits Current Fee Exc GST

Proposed Fee Exc GST

Current Revenue

Modified Revenue

Variance

Katoomba 555 $1.36 $1.00 $755 $555 $200 Lawson 949 $1.36 $1.00 $1,291 $949 $342 Springwood 243 $1.90 $1.00 $462 $243 $219 Glenbrook 6914 $1.36 $1.00 $9,403 $6,914 $2,489 Total 8661 $11,911 $8,661 $3,250

Issues

• The reduction of the spectator fee for carnivals will result in a revenue reduction of $3,250.

• The reduction of the spectator fee for carnivals will not address the major community complaint of parents paying to supervise their children during general operating hours as recently raised in the Gazette and separately to centre management.

Parents Supervising Children Council currently charges non-swimming or spectating adults the full adult entry fee. This is not common in the industry. It has not been possible to locate another centre charging full entry fees to all non-swimming adults, however some centres levy restricted entry fees to adults supervising children, as listed below. Industry Summary

Centre Spectator Fee Application Canterbury Aquatic Centre $1.90 Supervising adult Sutherland Aquatic Centre $1.30 Non swimming adult Ripples $2.00 Supervising adult Hurstville Aquatic Centre $1.50 Non swimming adult Stanhope Leisure Centre $2.00 Supervising adult Sydney Aquatic Centre $3.00 Non swimming adult Cook & Phillip Park $2.50 Non swimming adult Lane Cove Aquatic $1.60 Non swimming adult Hawkesbury Oasis $1.00 Non swimming adult

The application of the spectator fee to supervising parents as well as spectators of swim events could be considered, and set out below is a schedule of suggested fees:. Parent Spectators

Visits Current Fee Exc GST


Current Revenue

Modified Revenue

Variance

Katoomba 3041 $3.82 $2.00 $11,617 $6,082 $5,535 Lawson 981 $3.45 $2.00 $3,385 $1,962 $1,423 Springwood 4564 $4.27 $2.00 $19,488 $9,128 $10,360 Glenbrook 2666 $3.45 $2.00 $9,198 $5,332 $3,866 Total $21,184


Assumptions

(a) 20% of visiting adults are accompanying children to the centre . There is no justifiable rationale for setting two different spectator fees. Application of a $2.00 excl. GST spectator fee to the current swim events would result in additional revenue of $5,412 The application of a $2.00 spectator fee to spectators of events as well as supervising parents could result in a revenue decrease of $15,772. However, this option will address the major complaint from parents/guardians in relation to the spectator fee and is likely to provide greater incentive to increase visitation by parents with children. Increased visitation would reduce any revenue losses experienced as a result of lowering the spectator fee.

Recommendation That the spectator fee be set at $2.00 (excl GST) for both carnivals and for supervising parents/guardians.

2. Blackheath Concession Rate Reduction The reduction of the concession entry fee at Blackheath from the proposed $3.00 to $2.50 incl. GST will result in a predicted revenue reduction of $2,300. Visits Current

Fee Exc GST


Predicted Revenue

Modified Revenue

Variance

Blackheath 5000 $2.73 $2.27 $13,650 $11,350 $2,300

Recommendation That Council note that the proposed reduction in this fee will result in a loss of revenue of around $2,300.

3. Transferable Passes Across All Outdoor Sites (inc Katoomba Outdoor)

The transferability of passes will create the following challenges at the Katoomba Sports & Aquatic Centre (KSAC)

• Access control • Membership Revenue losses • Casual Entry fee disputes.

Access Control It will not be possible to administer access to only the Katoomba Outdoor pool as the centre currently has no access control turnstile system. The only option currently available would be to band swimmers entitled to access the indoor facilities at a cost of approximately $4,500 per year. This option will alienate current customers as regular swimmers do not enjoy swimming with a wrist band.


Membership Revenue Losses There is currently a difference in the 6 month membership fee for the Katoomba Sports and Aquatic Centre and the Outdoor Pools. It is probable that up to 80% of people currently members of Katoomba will choose to purchase a cheaper pass from another outdoor pool if they will also have access to the Katoomba centre. This is likely to result in decreased revenue as outlined below.

80% KSAC Members

Current Fee Exc GST

Outdoor fee Exc GST

Current Revenue

Modified Revenue

Variance

159 $208.18 $150.00 $33,100 $23,850 $9,250 Casual Entry Fee Disputes If memberships are transferable across the outdoor sites including the Katoomba outdoor it implies the Katoomba outdoor pool is a facility in itself. The outdoor facilities enjoy a casual entry fee of $3.80 (2004/05), whereas Katoomba swim entry is $4.20 (2004/05). If the Katoomba outdoor pool is packaged with the outdoor facilities there will be requests for the outdoor casual entry fees to apply to the Katoomba outdoor pool. Visits Current Fee

Exc GST Outdoor fee Exc GST

Current Revenue

Modified Revenue

Variance

Adult 15207 $3.81 $3.45 $57,939 $52,464 $5,475 Concession 18518 $2.72 $2.36 $50,369 $43,702 $666 Family 1087 $10.90 $10.00 $11,848 $10,870 $978 $7,119

Recommendation That outdoor membership passes are transferable between Glenbrook Swim Centre, Lawson Swim Centre and Blackheath Pool Only for the corresponding season. Note: The current arrangement where Springwood Membership passes allow use of all pools and Katoomba passes allowing entry to the other outdoor pools (Lawson, Blackheath and Glenbrook) will remain.

4. Glenbrook Winter Season Pass and 10 Month Pass A winter season pass and 10 month pass need to be included in the fees and charges. The summer season pass fees are on exhibition as: Adult $173.80 Child/Concession $104.30 Family $442.30 Proposed winter season (4 months) pass are based on a 25% per month premium as there is an increase in the operating costs for this period. Adult $144.80 Child/Concession $86.90 Family $368.60


Proposed 10 month pass (summer + winter) fees are based on the same fee per month as the summer season and are at a discounted rate. Adult $289.00 Child/Concession $173.80 Family $737.10

Recommendation That the winter season and 10 month membership pass fees be added to the fees and charges schedule as outlined above.

5. Waterslide Fees – Springwood This information is provided in response to the resolution adopted by Council on 19 April 2005 stating that:

“a report comes to Council about the potential for removing the Waterslide fee at the Lower Blue Mountains Aquatic Centre. This report should include information on the revenue generated from the Aquatic Centre and the costs associated with operating the waterslide”.

The cost to use the waterslide is $2.10 (inc GST) per person per Waterslide session. Session times are 4pm -6pm on school days as well as 10am – 12pm, and 2pm – 4pm on Saturdays, Sundays, Public Holidays and School Holidays. The fee is payable per session. The Draft 2005-2006 Management Plan increases the fee by 20 cents to $2.30 per session. Access to the slide is included in the benefits of the Full Centre and Wet Area Only Membership. To comply with the Royal Lifesaving Society’s “Guidelines for Safe Pool Operation” an additional staff member is required when the slide is operational. Projected Revenue 2004/05 The projected 2004/05 revenue from the waterslide fee is approximately $86,000. This is made up of fee receipts from casual users ($40,000) and a percentage of membership fees ($46,000) given that access to the slide is covered by full Centre and Wet Area membership. Estimated Operating Costs The slide is operational for approximately 870 hours per year. An average employment expense was calculated multiplying operational hours by the average hourly rate of $22. This totals $19,140 per year. Other expenses include such items as annual pump maintenance, waxing the slide, and infrastructure minor maintenance. Replacement and lifecycle costing has not been included. For the purposes of simplifying this report, an operating cost of the water slide is calculated at $20,000 per year.


Duty of Care The purchase of the waterslide fee and issue of a wristband allows the operator to check the competency level of the swimmer. This “contract to use” ensures Council’s Duty of Care in the operation of the slide. Without the slide fee a height restriction would be needed as the slide “dumps” children into 1.2m of water. The height restriction would need to be set at 1.4m. This would have the effect of restricting use to many children who are competent swimmers, but under1.4m in height. Implications of removing the fee Loss of $86,000 in external revenue ($40,000 casual, $46,000 membership). In

fairness, membership fees would need to be reduced if Water Slide fees were removed, with a resultant loss of $46,000 in external revenue and a requirement to refund a portion of membership fee for the remainder of the life of the membership.

Operating costs of $20,000 remain the same The fee for the use of the inflatable (eg “Ollie”, a large floating octopus temporarily

used at all other Centres) would be inconsistent and also need to be removed. Similar operating expenses exist for this recreational activity in the order of $20,000.

Restricting some children who may be competent swimmers but less than 1.4m in height.

Recommendation That the Waterslide Fee at Springwood remain in place.

6. Conclusion and Summary of Fitness & Aquatic Fee Recommendations Council’s current net ratepayer subsidy to operate all pools is $744,868 per year. The “Blue Mountains Fitness and Aquatic Centre Fees and Charges and Rate Payer Subsidy” report, adopted at Council’s Ordinary meeting of 19 April 2005 indicated that without any increases to service levels, a further subsidy of $549,466 was needed to continue to operate the pools. Leaving the operational issues aside, the cumulative effect of the adopted changes to the fee structure reported to Council on 19 April is estimated to be net decrease in overall revenue for Council’s Fitness and Aquatic Centres of around $22,000. If the Waterslide fee were also to be removed this would result in a further revenue net loss of $66,000. Consequently, a further ratepayer subsidy of $88,000 would be required for the ongoing operation of Council’s Fitness and Aquatic Centres. Given the above information it is recommended that:

(a) That the spectator fee be set at $2.00 (excl GST) for both carnivals and for supervising parents/guardians.

(b) That Council note that the proposed reduction in this fee will result in a loss of revenue of around $2,300.


(c) That outdoor membership passes are transferable between Glenbrook Swim Centre,

Lawson Swim Centre and Blackheath Pool Only for the corresponding season. Note: The current arrangement where Springwood Membership passes allow use of all pools and Katoomba passes allowing entry to the other outdoor pools (Lawson, Blackheath and Glenbrook) will remain.

(d) That the winter season and 10 month membership pass fees be added to the fees and charges schedule as outlined above.

(e) That the Waterslide Fee at Springwood remains in place. (f) That the Council notes that the recommendations above will require an additional

$22,000 in reductions to other parts of the budget. D. GLENBROOK VISITOR INFORMATION CENTRE PROJECT – NEW

PROJECT FOR CONSIDERATION At the Council meeting of 31 May 2005, Council resolved:

“1. That Option 4 outlined in the Business Plan for the Glenbrook Visitor

Information Centre be adopted and the actions highlighted in the Business Plan be implemented as soon as funding is confirmed.

2. That Council consider the inclusion of the amount of $214,000 for the

upfront capital cost of implementing the adopted Business Plan in the Ministerial application for 2005/2006 borrowings as part of finalisation of the 2005/2006 Management Plan process.”

(Minute No. 170, 31 May 2005)

This nomination for Capital Works funding for 2005-2006 followed the Council resolution and has now been evaluated using the Triple Bottom Line Assessment process. The Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project scored strongly against the financial criteria with a return envisaged as a result of the investment. Due to the relative size of the funds requested, no single project could be removed to allow inclusion of this project. Instead, a number of projects would need to be removed from the 2005-2006 Program.

The projects listed below ranked lower than the Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project in terms of the Triple Bottom Line Assessment process. However, they collectively only amount to only $95,000:

• Disability Access to Community Buildings - $20,000 • BM Sports Council Minor Capital Works - $20,000 • Unisex Toilet at Warrimoo Oval - $15,000 • Libraries Refurbishment - $10,000 • Play Equipment Replacement and Softfall Replacement - $30,000.


For the $214,000 to be available, further projects would also have to be removed. The next projects that follow on from the Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project in terms of their ranking include the following (i.e. these projects ranked higher than the Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project):

• Pitt Park Field Upgrade - Stage 2 - $265,000 • New Footpaths - $125,000.

The draft Capital Works Program has been publicly exhibited. The impact of including the Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project would be to remove a significant number of projects that may have solicited community submissions had that been known at the time of exhibition. It is therefore recommended that the Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project be deferred for consideration for inclusion in the 2006-2007 Capital Works Program.

E. UPDATED MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ESTIMATES DOCUMENTATION Councillors have previously been supplied with copies of the Draft 2005-2006 Management Plan and Estimates (incorporating the Capital Works Program, Estimates and Fees and Charges). This report recommends that those documents be adopted with the amendments outlined in this report and listed in the attached Schedules. Following adoption with what amendments the Council wishes to make, the final adopted versions of all the documents will be produced and made available to Councillors and interested members of the public.


Attachment

Schedule 1

Submissions

Sub No Issue Proposed Response by BMCC

1 a. Lawson tip - refers to 1997-1998 budget decision of $250,000 plus $250,000 every year after that until Lawson and Blackheath tip remedial works completed. What work has been done?

a. This money was set aside for the first and second year, but was then redirected to other Council projects after this. Thus no remedial works at Lawson and Blackheath have been done to date.

b. Comments on weed control to start at seed source, shared responsibility by local councils to look after the catchment area. Opposes the Environmental levy as concerns on how the money will be spent (not to be used on administration).

b. Council appreciates the need to deal with weeds at the source, which is reflected in the work of the Environmental Management Branch and the Green Team, including on the ground weed removal and bush regeneration; assistance with land management practices for larger landholders; support for Landcare groups; industry training, including nurseries, earthmovers and landscapers); sustainable living workshop for residents and on-going community education. The work outlined in the proposed Environment Levy Program of Works will address environmental impacts that originate in the Blue Mountains Local Government Area. Therefore, Council has a responsibility to manage these impacts so as not to compromise the values of its own bushland reserves or surrounding national park estate, Warragamba and Blue Mountains Special Areas (drinking water catchments) and the World Heritage Area. A small portion of the levy funding is allocated to Levy administration and management because the Levy-funded projects are additional to Council's existing Environmental Management Program and Estimates. As such, additional administration and management of these projects is required, for example, contract and budget management and reporting on the levy expenditure and projects to Council and the community.


Attachment

Schedule 1


c. How did council arrive at the amounts to be spent under Environmental levy?

c. Council is seeking to raise a total of $1.2 million per year from the proposed Environment Levy. Whilst recognising that an infinite amount could be spent on environmental remediation and protection, this amount was calculated on the basis of a) a reasonable expectation of ratepayer's capacity to pay and b) the minimum budget required to implement the projects listed in the proposed Environment Levy Program of Works in order to address the more serious environmental threats currently facing the Blue Mountains. The budget allocated to the particular projects listed in the proposed Program of Works was determined by the priority of the environmental threat to the Blue Mountains environment, the cost of the labour and technologies required to address the issue effectively and considering the cost of not addressing the issue until a future time. The works are consistent with the priorities identified by the community and adopted by Council in the 25 year Strategy - Towards a more Sustainable Future and the accompanying Map for Action.

2 a. Supports Environmental levy proposal - considers it essential to ensure progress of "Towards a More Sustainable Blue Mountains" (Map for Action 2000-2025). b. Encourages Council in Management Plan Quarterly Reports to include expenditure of levy, including program on particular projects.

a. The works are consistent with the priorities identified by the community and adopted by Council in the 25 year Strategy - Towards a more Sustainable Future and the accompanying Map for Action. b. Council is committed to reporting on the levy expenditure and the progress of levy-funded projects and is in the process of identifying the best mechanisms to achieve this. In addition to the Community Newsletter and Management Plan reporting, it is intended to include levy communication in Council's State of the City reporting and on an Environment Levy website.


Attachment

Schedule 1


3 Requests Stage 2 of redevelopment of Mt Wilson Village Hall restored to 2005-2006 Capital Works Program, based on issues that hall does not comply with current licensing requirements (i.e. wheelchair access and inadequate toilet facilities). Stage 1 was completed mid 2003. Submit that Stage 2 be reinstated - suggest as a staged project over 2 or 3 years.

Improvements to Mt Wilson Hall was submitted to the Capital Works Evaluation Committee for inclusion in the current Capital Works Program, however, this particular project did not score as well as other competing projects for funding. This project will be re-submitted in the 2006-2007 capital works nominations for evaluation again.

4 Proposes Council sell assets, such as used computers and office furniture etc, to Blue Mountains residents and community organisations (as an access and equity issue), as these have been "primarily funded through community financial input”.

Little office furniture has been discarded in recent years. However, when it is, Council seeks to get the best return if it is in a condition where a net financial return might be possible. This is done via public auction for probity reasons. In respect to computer equipment, Council currently disposes of surplus equipment by trading it back to the manufacturer. This approach eliminates the risk of varied return from auction and removes Council from the retail seller position and hence any ‘perceived’ obligation for providing post sales support. Computer equipment is traded-in in an "as is" condition and always without an operating system or application software. Disposal of computer equipment, obsolete office furniture and similar assets is not a core function of Council so the cost of the time involved in the process is an important factor as are probity issues.


Attachment

Schedule 1


5 Two letters opposing entry fees and charges for Blackheath Pool, because: a. Setting of fees falls within bounds of Blackheath Memorial Parks & Gardens Management Plan promised in April 2003. b. Setting of fees falls within BPAG terms of reference (and has not yet been considered). c. Request excision of fees & charges for Blackheath Pool from Revenue Policy, pending tabling of DMP for Blackheath Memorial Park as promised in April 2003. d. One letter also requests an extension of time - until after a BPAG meeting to make a MP submission.

a. The draft Fees and Charges for Council Fitness and Aquatic Centres were adopted by Council for the purpose of public exhibition following a detailed review of current/projected expenditures and revenue. The draft Fees and Charges were set to a level consistent with similar facilities in other Local Government Areas and to ensure equity. Included in the adopted report to Council at its meeting on 15 February 2005 was the following: "At its meeting on 25 November 2003, the Council resolved as follows: That Council, in short-listing option five (5) [new pool option] does so on the basis that it will introduce fees and charges for the Blackheath Pool in line with and consistent with, Council's other funded and operated swimming pools with (sic) the Blue Mountains LGA". b. The Terms of Reference for the Blackheath Pool Advisory Group (BPAG), adopted at the meeting of 15 July 2004 do not make reference to setting of fees. c. Council resolved to complete a Plan of Management on 3 December 2002 (minute 540). This plan was put on hold due to the delays in the pool construction. Council’s planning resources were redirected to the Summerhayes Park, Bullaburra Village Green, Lapstone Tunnel Gully Reserve Plans of Management and committed to Knapsack Reserve and Warrimoo Oval for 2005-2006. d. Council has a statutory obligation to prepare a draft Management Plan, place it on public exhibition for 28 days, consider all written submissions and adopt a final version by 30 June. The Draft Plan was on exhibition from 22 April to 19 May 2005. Copies of the Draft Plan were made available during the period in the libraries, Council offices and on the Council’s website. The exhibition was advertised in the Gazette on 20 and 27 April and 11 May 2005.


Attachment

Schedule 1


6 Petitioners want Blackheath Pool to remain as a family pool, so day users of park & pool don't have to pay an entry fee each time they re-enter pool. Comments: That cost of pool has been met from rates & preference is for this to continue. Council should find different ways to pay for the pool rather than entry fees, e.g. profit from caravan park.

The draft Fees and Charges for Council Fitness and Aquatic Centres were adopted by Council for the purpose of public exhibition following a detailed review of current/projected expenditures and revenue. The Draft Fees and Charges were set to a level consistent with similar facilities in other Local Government Areas and to ensure equity.

7 Specific comments about: a. Additions to 6/8 Station St, Katoomba – requests project to proceed in 2005-2006 even if WSAAS grant is not received. b. Proposes Council to sell off its resources locally, e.g. computers, access buses, furniture etc.

a. Council has not yet formally been notified of the outcome of WSAAS grant application for around $60,000. The Minister responsible will make an announcement in the coming weeks. If the grant is unsuccessful, Council will proceed with the project by transferring $60,000 from the draft 2005-2006 Noble Street - Remediation and redevelopment Capital Works Project to the 6-8 Station Street project. The Noble Street remediation and redevelopment work has almost been completed during 2004-2005. b. Little office furniture has been discarded in recent years. However, when it is Council’s seeks to get the best return if it is in a condition where a net financial return might be possible. This is done via public auction for probity reasons. In respect to computer equipment, Council currently disposes of surplus equipment by trading it back to the manufacturer. This approach eliminates the risk of varied return from auction and removes Council from the retail seller position and hence any ‘perceived’ obligation for providing post sales support. Computer equipment is traded-in in an "as is" condition and always without an operating system or application software. Disposal of computer equipment, obsolete office furniture and similar assets is not a core function of Council so the cost of the time involved in the process is an important factor as are probity issues.


Attachment

Schedule 1


c. The restructure - seeking clarity on impact of changes affecting Council staff in the "community services section".

c. Council is currently considering options as to how best to structure the Community Development Team within City Solutions to continue and improve Council's commitment to the community sector. This needs to be done in consideration of other priorities including the sustainable management of our City's built assets. The importance of the work undertaken by the Aged and Disability Services position and the broader Community Development Team is well understood and there are no plans to detract significantly from this work. The creation of permanent positions such as the recently adopted Aboriginal Community Development Officer seek to increase Council's capacity to respond to and advocate for our community's needs.

Comments about: 1. Vision & Key Directions. Comments that funding should be directed to these as at present it appears to be going to roads and sporting facilities over community needs.

1. The submission notes - "putting the Vision and Key Directions at the beginning is good but it is hard to see how these are acted upon when the dollars are in a separate policy. It appears that despite the rhetoric of the Vision and Key Directions the dollars are primarily going to roads and sporting facilities..." To address this issue Council will present available summary financial information in the Strategic section of the 2005-2006 Management Plan against each Principal Activity. Council staff will also review the way in which financial information is being presented in the 2006-2007 Management Plan to address community concerns regarding transparency and understanding of where money is being expended. The percentage of the 2005-2006 budget allocated to roads, bridges, footpaths and drainage is 11.5% ($9,610,719) and to parks and recreation 3.5% ($2,893,243). Council assesses and reviews capital works submissions annually, and as such proposals are required to be re-submitted each year. Further, Council resolves in June each year to commit only to the immediately following year’s program of work. As such allocations included in each four year program, for financial years subsequent to year 1, can only be regarded as provisional, and may be over-ridden by new proposals which are determined through the assessment process to have greater merit.


Attachment

Schedule 1


2. Requires definition of what Council means by “sustainability”.

There is enormous demand on Council’s capital funding each year with submissions made, being far in excess of the funding available. Each submission is subjected to a rigorous and objective assessment process, and draft programs are submitted to Council for consideration and resolve. 2. An explanation of what Council means by the term "sustainability" will be included in the section "A More Sustainable City of Blue Mountains" in the 2005-2006 Management Plan.

3. In support of the smaller bins and the Environment Levy. Places importance on public information of how much the levy raises and exactly how it is spent.

3. Council is seeking to raise a total of $1.2 million per year from the proposed Environment Levy. This amount was calculated on the basis of a) a reasonable expectation of ratepayer's capacity to pay and b) the minimum budget required to implement the projects listed in the proposed Environment Levy Program of Works in order to address the more serious environmental threats currently facing the Blue Mountains. Council is committed to reporting on the levy expenditure and the progress of levy-funded projects and is in the process of identifying the best mechanisms to achieve this based on the feedback from community consultation on the Environment Levy. In addition to the Community Newsletter and Management Plan reporting, it is intended to include levy communication in Council's State of the City reporting and on an Environment Levy website.

4. The Vision should say "acknowledges the traditional owners the Darug and Gundungurra Nations." 5. It is difficult to understand what the priorities listed on pages 15 to 17 really mean in terms of tangible outcomes.

4. The 2005-2006 Management Plan will include a statement acknowledging the traditional owners, the Darug and Gundungarra Nations. 5. Wording of priorities to be checked and reviewed to ensure they are clearly and concisely written and understandable.


Attachment

Schedule 1


6. Considers "the BM Brand Strategy" makes community sound like a product. Calling the public "customers" changes the idea that instead of being the people to whom Council is responsible, they become customers purchasing a product. States that Council is not a business, it is a public service/public entity. 7. Proposes engaging community earlier in the Management Plan process 8. Following on from 7 above, considers Council needs to update its Consultation Policy.

6. Blue Mountains Tourism has developed and adopted a new Regional Branding for the Blue Mountains, Lithgow and Oberon areas. This Regional Brand does have the intent of improving the marketing of the region to attract increased visitation by tourists. To clarify the relationship of this action to the local community it is proposed that the statement referred to on p 29 of the draft document be reworded from "Support the implementation of the Blue Mountains Brand Strategy" to "Support implementation of the Regional Tourism Plan and the Regional Blue Mountains Brand Strategy to encourage increased visitation and economic benefit to the local community". 7. Council works closely with community and other interest groups and input into the Management Plan comes through this interaction throughout the year. Council intends to continue the public information evenings while the draft Management Plan is on exhibition. 8. Council adopted a Consultation Policy and matrix in December 2004 and resolved to review the Policy after 12 months.

8 Opposes proposed Blackheath Pool fees: 1. Setting of fees falls within bounds of Blackheath Memorial Parks & Gardens Management Plan promised in April 2003. 2. Setting of fees falls within BPAG terms of reference (and has not yet been considered). Request excision of fees & charges for Blackheath Pool, pending tabling of DMP for Blackheath Memorial Park as promised in April 2003.

1. The Draft Fees and Charges for Council Fitness and Aquatic Centres were adopted by Council for the purpose of public exhibition following a detailed review of current/projected expenditures and revenue. The draft Fees and Charges were set to a level consistent with similar facilities in other Local Government Areas and to ensure equity. 2. The Terms of Reference for the Blackheath Pool Advisory Group (BPAG), adopted at the meeting of 15 July 2004 do not make reference to setting of fees.


Attachment

Schedule 1


9 Request to complete the construction of tennis courts and clubhouse in 2005-2006.

The draft Capital Works Program has $177, 723 as approved deferred works. Some of this money can be used to complete the design and construction drawings and to lodge the Development Application as requested in the submission from the Tennis Committee.

10 a. General comments on the sources of financing the CWP and financial viability when extensive loans are raised and assets sold.

a. Debt financing by local government is a sound means of financing needed community facilities and ensures that the full cost of the facility is not borne by present day ratepayers, but rather by future ratepayers and users who will benefit from the facility. Debt is therefore generally viewed as a method of more fairly spreading capital cost to deliver intergenerational equity. Debt financing should only be used only for clearly identifiable capital projects when the benefit received extends to or beyond the life of the loan, which is the case with Council’s Capital Works Program (CWP). Debt finance is not used to meet operational shortfalls. Loan financing of CWP projects over the next 10 years will result in a manageable debt service ratio of 6-8%, which is well below the industry benchmark ratio of 10% for councils of a rural/urban nature. Debt financing is also the preferred source of capital financing where user charges are to be levied for the use of a facility or where debt repayments are self-funding from entrepreneurial income. The situation is different in respect to CWP funding from land sales. It is not a sustainable source of CWP funding and brings with it a number of problems. While the 2005-2006 CWP does have funding from land sales, in subsequent years such funding is only being used for a very limited number of projects where funding decisions have already been made. Council has recently made a policy decision to establish a Property Investment Fund and only portion of the investment ‘return’ from that fund will be available for works.


Attachment

Schedule 1


b. Comments on whether the Environment levy funded programs duplicate or absorb responsibilities of other authorities

b. In regards to concerns about duplication of responsibilities: There are a number of imperatives for council to undertake water quality monitoring and environmental risk assessment: i) The protection of the natural environment is one of Council's principal activities. Beyond the need to meet State and Federal legislative requirements relating to the protection of the environment, it is also consistent with Council's policy direction and community priority of achieving a more sustainable future for the Blue Mountains. ii) Whilst the Sydney Catchment Authority (SCA) and the Catchment Management Authority have the primary responsibility for the implementation of the Hawkesbury-Lower Nepean and Warragamba Catchment Blueprints, it is local councils that will make a significant contribution to meeting the Blueprint targets. iii) Due to the size of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system and the area managed by the SCA, it is only possible for SCA to undertake water quality monitoring at one or two sites within the Blue Mountains Local Government Area. As such, Council undertakes a more extensive and comprehensive water quality monitoring program in order to provide sufficient data to indicate both in-stream and catchment health of the City and therefore a more appropriate management response from Council or other appropriate authority. The work outlined in the proposed Environment Levy Program of Works will address environmental impacts that originate in the Blue Mountains Local Government Area. Therefore, Council has a responsibility to manage these impacts so as not to compromise the values of its own bushland reserves or surrounding national park estate, Warragamba and Blue Mountains Special Areas (drinking water catchments) and the World Heritage Area. Comments regarding the separation of rates funded works and levy funded works noted - the levy is only going to fund extra/additional works and it is intended to regularly report on such expenditure.


Attachment

Schedule 1


c. Environmental Assessments – proposes Bush Fire Risk Mitigation/hazard reduction responsibility of NSW Rural Fire Brigade d. Comments on incorporation of community feedback into Strategic Waste Action Plan (SWAP) e. Questions on the funding and completion of the proposed Glenbrook Theatre capital works

c. Bushfire risk management within the City of Blue Mountains is achieved through a multi-agency cooperative approach that is facilitated by the Blue Mountains Bush Fire Management Committee. As agreed to at this committee, and as subsequently included in the Blue Mountains Bush Fire Risk Management Plan, Council is responsible for undertaking environmental assessments on both privately owned lands and land vested in Council’s care and control. Environmental assessment of hazard reduction works is the responsibility of the relevant land managers (such as NPWS, SCA, Council), and as it is not reasonable to expect private landowners to undertake their own assessments Council has assumed this responsibility on their behalf. The NSW Rural Fire Service has a role in coordinating and implementing planned hazard reduction works, however it remains the role of the land managers to assess and approve proposed works. d. The feedback from the workshops held for the Blaxland WMF EIS has been reviewed. This feedback will be incorporated where appropriate, however it was very specific to landfill management issues of noise, traffic, odour etc. While important, it has limited use for incorporation into the Strategic Waste Action Plan. It is valuable to the ongoing management of that specific site. Some of the feedback regarding resource recovery initiatives will be used as it has broader implications for the Blue Mountains LGA. The SWAP process is not intending to be isolated from the Blaxland landfill issue. Rather, staff are trying to be clear that feedback relating to the SWAP can not impact upon the development application process of the Blaxland WMF at this stage. e. Glenbrook Theatre 1) Council anticipate the licensing works to commence August 2005 and take three weeks to complete. The access works will be complete by September 2006. Works expected to take 6 to 8 weeks to complete. 2) Funds are from loans as state din the submission.


Attachment

Schedule 1


f. Maintenance of Walking Tracks – comments on joint funding with NSW Parks and Wildlife Service

3) The estimated for the total project is approximately $300,000.00. Council expects to complete the Licensing works and seating upgrade by September 2005. Council is committed to complete the Disability access works by November 2006. Until Council gets the report from the engineer and then gets an estimate of costs Council cannot advise the estimated cost of licensing and seating upgrade works. The available funds for this project during 2004-2005 $121,000.00 (Carry over funds), 2005-2006 $ 91,000.00, 2006-2007 $120,000.00, giving a grand total of $330,000.00. f. Blue Mountains City Council has almost 100 km of walking tracks on land that council manages and the funding sourced from the Environment Levy is for these tracks.

11 Various comments. In support of the Environment levy. a. Request to complete 6/8 Station St capital works 2005-2006 b. Fees: BM Aquatic Centres – reduced fees proposed to concession card holders during low usage times

a. Council has not yet formally been notified of the outcome of WSAAS grant application for around $60,000. The Minister responsible will make an announcement in the coming weeks. If the grant is unsuccessful, Council will proceed with the project by transferring $60,000 from the draft 2005-2006 Noble Street - Remediation and redevelopment Capital Works Project to the 6-8 Station Street project. The Noble Street remediation and redevelopment work has almost been completed during 2004-2005. b. Swimming pools - The draft Fees and Charges for Council Fitness and Aquatic Centres were adopted by Council for the purpose of public exhibition following a detailed review of current/projected expenditures and revenue. The draft Fees and Charges were set to a level consistent with similar facilities in other Local Government Areas. Off-peak passes are available at a significantly reduced rate for entry to Springwood and Katoomba Centres between 11am-2pm.


Attachment

Schedule 1


Community halls/facilities – proposes fee waiver category for un-funded groups c. Proposal to commence work on Lawson Golf Course in 2005-2006 in consultation with community d. Proposes sale of excess Council equipment locally

Community buildings - Council currently has a "not for profit category" for community groups. This category is subsidised by Council. There is also a "special event" category for "not for profit" groups/residents only. The hire fee is heavily subsidised by Council: 3rd - 7th day (less 50%) 8th day plus (less 75%). Establishing a "criteria" for fee waiver would be difficult and raises questions around "access and equity" for all the community. Unfunded community groups/residents are encouraged to seek assistance both financially and with Public Liability Insurance from larger funded community groups for their community events. Groups/residents are also encouraged to seek financial assistance from the General Manager and Councillors who regularly cover the hire cost for special community events. c. Council has formed an integrated planning and implementation framework for the mid mountains (Lawson) to formally address the likely impact of the proposed works surrounding Lawson. d. Little office furniture has been discarded in recent years. However, when it is Council’s seeks to get the best return if it is in a condition where a net financial return might be possible. This is done via public auction for probity reasons. In respect to computer equipment, Council currently disposes of surplus equipment by trading it back to the manufacturer. This approach eliminates the risk of varied return from auction and removes Council from the retail seller position and hence any ‘perceived’ obligation for providing post sales support. Computer equipment is traded-in in an "as is" condition and always without an operating system or application software.


Attachment

Schedule 1


Disposal of computer equipment, obsolete office furniture and similar assets is not a core function of Council so the cost of the time involved in the process is an important factor as are probity issues.

e. Comments on the Management Plan consultation process f. Management Plan document – seeking clarity, detailed cost details and explanations g. Requests acknowledgement of traditional custodianship

e. Council chose to advertise the exhibition through the Council News section in the local BM Gazette because most households in the LGA receive the paper free. Community organisations are strongly recommended to weekly view this section of the paper as it contains news, public information, exhibitions, listings of development applications, positions vacant etc. Council advertised for three weeks in this section in the BM Gazette and the Council Business & information Centres and libraries posted on the notice boards a notice of the exhibition. The Draft Plan was also available on the Council website under Matters on Exhibition and the General Manager personally wrote to a number of umbrella community organisations (including BM Community Interagency) advising them personally of the exhibition. In regards to how submissions contribute to the decision process - Council considers all submissions and any of them may result in changes in the Management Plan depending on the issue. f. Suggestions for more detail and clarity are acknowledged and will be considered in the preparation of Draft 2006-2007 Plan. g. The 2005-2006 Management Plan will include a statement acknowledging the traditional owners, the Darug and Gundungarra Nations.


Attachment

Schedule 1


12 Opposes fee increases at Springwood Aquatic Centre

The draft Fees and Charges for Council Fitness and Aquatic Centres were adopted by Council for the purpose of public exhibition following a detailed review of current/projected expenditures and revenue. The draft Fees and Charges were set to a level consistent with similar facilities in other Local Government Areas. Included in the adopted report to Council at its meeting on 15 February 2005 was the following: "At its meeting on 25 November 2003, the Council resolved as follows: That Council, in short-listing option five (5) [new pool option] does so on the basis that it will introduce fees and charges for the Blackheath Pool in line with and consistent with, Council's other funded and operated swimming pools with (sic) the Blue Mountains LGA”.

13 Comments and suggestions for sources of revenue e.g. sporting ovals

The submission accurately describes Council's financial position and the application of fees and charges. Council will be working with the Blue Mountains Sports Council to define an equitable process for the potential future application of fees for sporting use.

14 Request to remove reference to 4 Station St as Council’s Commercial Property.

Council’s property at 4 Station Street Katoomba was leased commercially at approximately $15,400 pa until October 2002. Council resolved to call expressions of interest and proposals from community groups in relation to occupation of the property and in November 2002 agreed to give the Blue Mountains Community Legal Centre exclusive use. Council then undertook extensive refurbishment to facilitate their occupation. While the Community Legal Centre’s proposal to occupy the building contained an offer to pay $800 rental per month, Council’s Community Buildings Policy provided for 100% rental subsidy and the decision to allow their occupation was not dependant on this offer nor has it been collected. While page 18 in the Draft Plan is not dependant upon tenancy agreements nor rental subsidies, given the above circumstances, it would be appropriate to not list it as a Commercial Property in the Management Plan.


Attachment

Schedule 1


15 Opposes increases in the rental of footpaths for public dining fee

It is acknowledged that the use of the footpath for dining can add character, ambience and streetscape. The footpath is a Council resource that is being used by a business for commercial purposes. The fee attempts to get some return from that resource. The fee is relatively inexpensive when compared to actual rental space for business. A business with a 5 metre frontage will have to pay $750 pa ($150 X 5 metres). This equates to less than $15 per week. Placing a fee on the use of the footpath is consistent with the approach taken by other councils. The use of the footpath is discretionary. Business can be successful without footpath dining. To have an uncontrolled footpath environment will lead to pedestrian inconvenience and potential public liability issues for Council and the operator. Council incurs costs in administration including chasing up outstanding insurance details and surveillance costs.

16 Opposes increases in the rental of footpaths for public dining fee

SEE ABOVE

17 Comments in support of the Environment Levy

Council is seeking to raise a total of $1.2 million per year from the proposed Environment Levy. This amount will be dedicated to an extra program of works to address the problems of environmental degradation in the Blue Mountains. Council has resolved to proceed with an application for the special variation (Environment Levy) as an increase to General Income should Council not get approval to levy a flat rate. Council is committed to reporting on the levy expenditure and the progress of levy-funded projects and is in the process of identifying the best mechanisms to achieve this based on the feedback from community consultation on the Environment Levy. In addition to the Community Newsletter and Management Plan reporting, it is intended to include levy communication in Council's State of the City reporting and on an Environment Levy website.


Attachment

Schedule 2

Rates & Annual Charges

Ad Valorem Minimum 2004/2005 Ad Valorem Minimum 2005/2006

Sub-Category Amount per $ Amount Notional Yield Amount per $ Amount @ 3.5%Notional Income @

3.5%

Residential A 0.00632000 $351.30 $111,977 0.00542785 $363.60 $116,323(incorporates townships of Mount Irvine and Mount Wilson)Residential B 0.00632000 $351.30 $59,403 0.00527910 $363.60 $63,093(incorporates township of Mount Tomah)Residential C 0.00886700 $643.20 $16,900 0.00615114 $665.71 $17,490(incorporates township of Bell)Residential D 0.00886700 $643.20 $488,925 0.00460087 $665.71 $509,844(incorporates township of Mount Victoria)Residential E 0.00886700 $643.20 $2,347,397 0.00479738 $665.71 $2,460,030(incorporates township of Blackheath)Residential F 0.00886700 $643.20 $281,085 0.00409435 $665.71 $291,400(incorporates township of Medlow Bath)Residential G 0.00682000 $643.20 $5,152,589 0.00392425 $665.71 $5,416,948(incorporates townships of Katoomba and Leura)Residential H 0.00682000 $643.20 $2,419,744 0.00385913 $665.71 $2,537,814(incorporates township of Wentworth Falls)Residential I 0.00886700 $643.20 $3,501,785 0.00472648 $665.71 $3,638,546(incorporates townships of Bullaburra, Lawson, Hazelbrook and Woodford)Residential J 0.00682000 $643.20 $167,534 0.00432083 $665.71 $174,629(incorporates township of Linden)Residential K 0.00682000 $643.20 $7,160,000 0.00449460 $665.71 $7,473,348(incorporates townships of Faulconbridge, Winmalee, Springwood, Yellow Rock, Sun Valley and Valley Heights)Residential L 0.00632000 $643.20 $6,675,123 0.00407687 $665.71 $6,960,166(incorporates townships of Warrimoo, Blaxland, Mount Riverview, Glenbrook and Lapstone)Residential M 0.00632000 $643.20 $27,429 0.00421909 $665.71 $27,577(incorporates township of Megalong)Residential Rural 0.00632000 $351.30 $375,830 0.00411622 $363.60 $392,067

0.00461200 $643.20 $198,724 0.00345577 $665.71 $210,0800.01600000 $643.20 $0 0.00000000 $0.00 $0

Category

Ordinary Residential

FarmlandMining

Advalorem Calculation and Notional Income

2004/2005 2005/2006


Attachment

Schedule 2

Rates & Annual Charges

Ad Valorem Minimum 2004/2005 Ad Valorem Minimum 2005/2006

Sub-Category Amount per $ Amount Notional Yield Amount per $ Amount @ 3.5%Notional Income @

3.5%

Business Statutory 0.01010000 $0.00 $38,693 0.00930622 $0.00 $38,275Business General 0.01010000 $643.20 $954,058 0.00633726 $665.71 $1,001,332Business Industrial Katoomba 0.01059000 $643.20 $100,388 0.00624960 $665.71 $104,811Business Industrial Springwood 0.01059000 $643.20 $17,920 0.00673362 $665.71 $19,380Business Katoomba 0.01059000 $643.20 $430,530 0.00711189 $665.71 $445,512Business Leura 0.01059000 $643.20 $100,771 0.00609777 $665.71 $107,506Business Wentworth Falls 0.01059000 $643.20 $75,608 0.00727071 $665.71 $78,255Business Springwood 0.01059000 $643.20 $220,204 0.00835664 $665.71 $234,564Business Industrial Valley Heights 0.01059000 $643.20 $11,072 0.00617238 $665.71 $9,485Business Industrial Lawson 0.01325000 $643.20 $108,221 0.00796699 $665.71 $113,604Business Blackheath 0.01325000 $643.20 $65,198 0.00846185 $665.71 $68,823Business Lawson 0.01325000 $643.20 $27,017 0.01096304 $665.71 $27,962Business Hazelbrook 0.01325000 $643.20 $23,213 0.00870480 $665.71 $24,025Business Industrial Blaxland 0.01325000 $643.20 $22,897 0.00770282 $665.71 $21,087Business Blaxland 0.01325000 $643.20 $63,175 0.00902026 $665.71 $68,842Business Glenbrook 0.01325000 $643.20 $43,479 0.00983398 $665.71 $45,000

$31,286,889 $32,697,821Ad Valorem Amount

per $ Minimum Amount 2004/2005Ad Valorem

Amount per $ Minimum Amount 2005/2006Springwood Special Rate 0.00009500 $0.00 $99,783 0.00006240 $0.00 $103,816

$99,783 $103,816Total Yield $31,386,672 Total Yield $32,801,636

Yield Increase $1,414,964

Charge Amount 2004/2005 Assessments Charge Amount 2005/2006Emergency Services $34.80 $1,217,617 $36.00 $1,266,897Environment Levy N/A N/A $34.00 $1,198,398Domestic Waste - Occupied (240L Bin) $194.00 $6,014,776 $217.00 $6,214,125Domestic Waste - Occupied (140L Bin) N/A N/A $182.00 $182,000Domestic Waste - Vacant $77.00 $236,544 $87.00 $261,000Non-Rateable Domestic Waste $161.00 $47,978 $157.00 $48,458

$7,516,915 35,247 $9,170,878

Grand Total $41,972,514

Category

Business

Name of Special Rate

Name of Annual Charge

Advalorem Calculation and Notional Income

2004/2005 2005/2006


Attachment

Schedule 3

Changes Recommended to the Draft Capital Works Program

1. 57/156079 Lawson Community Hall & Youth Hall Combine Community Hall and RFS projects. Current Draft reads:

Capital Works Project Title Year 2 2005/06

Year 3 2006/07

Year 4 2007/08

Lawson Community Hall and Youth Hall Lawson Hall $60,000 Existing RFS Building $60,000 $90,000

Change to:

Capital Works Project Title Year 2 2005/06

Year 3 2006/07

Year 4 2007/08

Lawson Community Hall & RFS Site $120,000 $90,000

Reason: This is a single project which refurbishes the existing RFS Building for Community Hall purposes after the RFS has relocated.

2. 289769 Lawson RFS Brigade Building Change the project 289769 title from “Lawson RFS Brigade Building” to “RFS Brigade Buildings”.

Reason: RTA timeframes and land issues mean that new RFS Building in Lawson may not proceed in 2005-2006. If so, the construction of another RFS Building may be brought forward. Advice is still awaited from the RFS as to its expenditure priorities. 3. Lawson Landfill Remediation / Closure project – correction to funding

estimates Current Draft reads: 2005-06 – $320,000 (loans $260,000, gate fees $60,000) 2006-07 - $850,000 (loans 790,000, gate fees $60,000) 2007-08 - $480,000 (loans $420,000, gate fees $60,000) Change to: 2005-06 – $300,000 (loans $300,000) 2006-07 - $1,000,000 (loans $1,000,000) 2007-08 - $400,000 (loans $400,000)


Attachment

Schedule 3

Reason: Initial draft Budget incorrect – additional $50,000 Budget. In addition, changes to the project funding per year are based on EMT decision on how to best fund project. All works will be funded by loans which will be repaid from the Environment Levy. 4. Approved Deferred Works - W915 Lawson Town Centre Move funding from under ‘Assets Sales & Other’ to ‘Grants/Contributions’. No change to the dollar amount. Reason: Correcting error. Funding was under wrong category. 5. Approved Deferred Works – W014 Winmalee Tennis Courts Move funding from under ‘Assets Sales & Other’ to ‘Grants/Contributions’. No change to the dollar amount. Reason: Correcting error. Funding was under wrong category. 6. Mid Mountains SES Base – correction to funding estimates

Current Draft reads: 2005-06 – $195,000 (grants/contrib $115,000, emergency svs levy $80,000) 2006-07 - $165,000 (grants/contrib $115,000, emergency svs levy $50,000)

Change to: 2005-06 – $375,000 (grants/contrib $220,000, emergency svs levy $80,000, asset sales $75,000) 2006-07 - $220,000 (grants/contrib $220,000) Reason: The original project estimates were incorrect. The proposed sale of the existing SES site will partly fund the new building. The additional funding will be sourced externally or project will not proceed. 7. 75/855293 6-8 Station Street Katoomba - Add $60,000 to funding under ‘Loans’ category (comes from the “Noble Street – remediation and redevelopment” project). - Delete $60,000 funding from under Grants/Contributions.


Attachment

Schedule 3

Reason: Council has not yet formally been notified of the outcome of WSAAS grant application for around $60,000 for the 6-8 Station St project. Council intends to proceed with this project by transferring $60,000 from the 2005-2006 Noble Street - remediation and redevelopment project. The Noble Street remediation and redevelopment work has almost been completed during 2004-2005.The Station St project is also subject to community submission. 8. Noble Street – remediation and redevelopment Reduce funding under ‘Loans’ category by $90,000 ($30,000 to Pitt Park & $60,000 to Station St works). Total budget reduced to $110,000. Reason: As the grant funding towards 6-8 Station Street works is yet undecided, additional funding will be made available from the Noble St Park asbestos remediation project due to the work being undertaken for less than originally anticipated. The Noble Street remediation and redevelopment work has almost been completed during 2004-2005. Pitt Park improved cost estimates. 9. HC001 Road Network Resurfacing Reduce project cost under Grants/Contributions by $9,542. Reduces total project cost to $1,608,458. Reason: At the time of setting the 2005-2006 budget Council was unable to ascertain the exact amount being allocated to Council for Roads to Recovery Program. Preliminary advise was that Council would be receiving a similar level of funding as 2004-2005 so the budget was set for 2005-2006 at $600,000. As Council now has been advised the exact amount to be provided, it is necessary to reduce the Roads Resurfacing Program in 2005-2006 by $9,542 to align the expenditure with the grant income. 10. Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project – new project for consideration See section D of report. It is recommended that the Glenbrook Visitor Information Centre project be deferred for consideration for inclusion in the 2006-2007 Capital Works Program.

11. Pitt Park Add $30,000 under loans (from Noble St project). Reason: Improved cost estimates.


Attachment

Schedule 4

Changes Recommended to the Draft Management Plan Volume 1 Document

Page

Number Amendment

Inside cover

Add acknowledgment of the traditional owners of the Mountains. (Response to submission)

6 Add explanation of ‘sustainability’ to ‘A More Sustainable City of Blue Mountains’ section. (Response to submission)

18 Remove reference to 4 Station St Katoomba as a Commercial Property (Response to submission)

Although the status of the property is not dependant upon tenancy agreements or rental subsidies, given the current circumstances of BM Community Legal Centre occupying the property, it would be appropriate to not list it as a Commercial Property in the Management Plan.

24 Looking after Environment

Add new milestone “Commence Plan of Management for Mount York”. (Staff amendment)

24 2nd milestone under Asset Works

Delete word “Install” and replace with word “De-Commission”. Final sentence to read: “De-commission underground fuel tanks at Katoomba and Springwood Council Depots in compliance with environmental legislation”. (Staff amendment)

30 5th milestone under Using Land for Living Delete words “Natural Assets including”. Final sentence to read: “Complete Asset Management Plan for Fire Trails”. (Staff amendment)

30 2nd milestone under Asset Works

Instead of “Relocate existing…” the sentence should read “Commence relocation of existing Blaxland Waste Management Facility gatehouse and weighbridge to improve access and create a resource recycling centre”. (Staff amendment)

36 1st milestone under Working and Learning

Delete: “Implement and promote the following cultural initiatives: Cultural partnerships program, City of the Arts Trust Advisory Committee, Katoomba Artspace Program, Local and regional cultural directories, Provision of cultural events e-notices, Artstart program – encouraging creativity and development of art projects for young people.

Add instead: “Implement and promote cultural initiatives that enhance the City’s status as a centre for culture and creativity.” “Administer and coordinate cultural grant and partnership programs to promote existing and support new cultural initiatives.” (Staff amendment)

QUALITY LOCAL GOVERNMENT Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 6 SUBJECT: SCHEDULE OF INVESTED MONIES FILE NO: C00694 Recommendation: That the Schedule of Invested Monies as at 31 May 2005 be received. Report by Group Manager, Corporate Policy: This report is submitted for the purposes of financial accountability and in satisfaction of the Financial Regulations under the Local Government Act, 1993. The Schedule of Council’s Invested Monies as at 31 May 2005 is attached for information. Interest returns on Council's investments are below budget due to lower than anticipated cash position for this part of the financial year.

QUALITY LOCAL GOVERNMENT Item 6 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

Attachment

BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL

SCHEDULE OF INVESTED MONIES

Report prepared to 31 May 2005

Institution and Fund Return

for Month

Return Year to

Date

Current Fixed Rate

Investment Value

Commonwealth Bank of Australia * 5.64% 5.46% 1,793,576 National Australia Bank – Offset * 5.48% 5.48% 2,508,450 National Australia Bank – Call a/c N/a N/a Variable 0 Macquarie Bank – Diversified Treasury 6.14% 6.22 Variable 25,084 Deutsche Bank – Cash Plus Fund 6.77% 6.53% Variable 14,196 UBS Cash-Plus 6.13% 6.18% Variable 13,038 Macquarie Financial Services 7.4189% Variable 500,000 CBA Series 12 ** 6.7533% Variable 500,000 CBA Series 18** 6.73% Variable 500,000 Grange Securities ** 6.995% Variable 503,050 Grange Securities ** 6.9386% Variable 500,000 Grange Securities ** 7.3267% Variable 1,000,000 Grange Securities ** 7.3267% Variable 500,000 Total 8,357,394 UBSWA Bank Bill Index 6.21% 5.60%

* These investments are in a loan offset facility with a 0.15% p.a. differential. This equates to a net

debt service cost of $1,500 per $1 million placed in this facility, or a total of $13,500 p.a. based on the current level of funds invested.

** Interest paid quarterly Interest Income to date - Budget vs Actual

Financial Year to Date Budgeted Return $682,572 Council’s Actual Return $636,221

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


ITEM NO: 7 SUBJECT: LAND ACQUISITION IN KATOOMBA BY THE ROADS AND

TRAFFIC AUTHORITY FILE NO: C01698 Recommendations: 1. That Council concur with the Roads and traffic Authority’s (RTA’s) proposal to

compulsorily acquire part of Crown Reserve R81547 at the corner of the Great Western Highway and Woodland Road, Katoomba in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in this report.

2. That the Valuer General be appointed to determine compensation for the subject

part of Crown Reserve R81547 pursuant to the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act, 1991.

3. That Council declines the RTA’s request for a temporary lease over Council land at

189-191 Great Western Highway, Katoomba being Lot 10 in DP 804749 and at 6 Orient Street, Katoomba being Lot 2 in DP 500674 and ask the RTA to review its offer to purchase the land, and continue its negotiations with Council for the purchase of the said land by agreement.

4. That should the continued negotiations on the fair market value of Council land

being acquired by the RTA be successful, the outcome be reported back to Council for its final decision.

5. That should the continued negotiations on the fair market value of the Council land

being acquired by the RTA be unsuccessful, Council express its disappointment at the RTA’s inability to commence negotiations when requested by Council in May 2000 and that given the RTA’s current time critical situation, Council is in position of having no alternative other than to agree to the compulsory acquisition process being pursued.

6. That the RTA be requested to allow the K@2mba Men’s Shed project to proceed in

the old Trotters Pavilion located at 6 Orient Street, Katoomba (Lot 2 in DP 500674) if they obtain ownership of that entire site.

Report by Group Manager, Corporate Policy: This report deals with the proposed acquisition by the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) of both Crown Land (one parcel) and Council Land (two parcels) for road widening and highway improvement purposes along the Katoomba Showground boundary with the Great Western Highway and at the corners of the Great Western Highway with Woodland Road and Orient Street, Katoomba.


As set out on the following location plan, the Crown Land is located at the corner of the Great Western Highway with Woodland Road, Katoomba and runs along the southern end of the Katoomba Showground boundary with the highway towards Orient Street. One of the parcels of Council Land is at the corner of the Great Western Highway and Orient Street Katoomba and the other parcel, which adjoins, fronts Orient Street.

Locality Plan

This report supports the RTA’s request for Council’s consent to the compulsory acquisition of the strip of Crown Land. However, the RTA’s acquisition will affect the current on-site parking arrangements and the existing toilet blocks. It is therefore imperative for the RTA to reinstate the parking area and relocate and rebuild the toilet blocks to Council’s satisfaction. In terms of the Council Land, the report outlines the current status of the negotiation process with the RTA and advises Council of a significant disparity in the assessments of compensation between the RTA’s and Council’s Valuers. Efforts have been made to resolve the difference in expert opinions and at this point it is obvious that further time will be required. The RTA has requested a short-term lease of the Council Land to enable occupation from October 2005 onwards with a condition of the lease that the RTA would compulsorily acquire the land should an agreement not be reached for the compensation payable to Council. In this regard, the report does not support the RTA’s request for a lease, but rather recommends Council decline the temporary lease as requested by the RTA and ask the RTA to either conclude the land purchase negotiations or commence the compulsory acquisition as soon as possible.


The report also recommends that the RTA be requested to allow the K@2mba Men’s Shed project to proceed in the old Trotters Pavilion located on part of Council’s land at 6 Orient Street, Katoomba (Lot 2 in DP 500674) if they obtain ownership of that entire site. Background In early 2000, as staff were exploring various development options for Council land at the corner of the Great Western Highway and Orient Street, Katoomba, the RTA’s final proposal for the widening and reconstruction of the Great Western Highway in Katoomba indicated a need to acquire that Council land. By way of a letter dated 28 April 2000 Council sought to commence negotiations with the RTA. However, the RTA in its letter of 24 May 2000 advised “the Authority is not yet in a position to commence negotiations to acquire Council land”. The RTA further advised in its letter of 13 July 2000 that “based on the current concept designs at this location the whole of Council’s land would be required for road works”. Accordingly, Council staff ceased the process of ascertaining the highest and best use of the land to realise an income from the site for Council. Four and a half years later, the RTA in September 2004 sought to commence the negotiations for the acquisition of Council Land at the corner of the Great Western Highway and Orient Street, Katoomba and of the strip of Crown Land being part of the Katoomba Showground at the corner of the Great Western Highway and Woodland Road, Katoomba. Acquisition of Crown Land The subject strip of Crown Land is known as part of Crown Reserve R81547 and Council is the Reserve Trustee of the land. The total area of land affected by the RTA’s proposal is in the order of 3,500 m2 immediately abutting on the Great Western Highway and Woodland Road. Due to the fact that the future development potential of the subject strip of Crown Land is limited, the RTA has sought Council’s consent to the compulsory acquisition of Council’s interest in the land. Under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act, 1991 the Valuer General will determine compensation pursuant to the acquisition. Council staff supports this request, subject to the RTA: carrying out the necessary works to improve the vehicular entrance to the

Showground approximately 200 metres north of the corner of Great Western Highway and Woodland Road;

working with Council staff to provide a car park/loop road with level land in the vicinity of the existing overflow parking to make efficient use of the remaining land;

formalising the existing parking area located near the Showground’s vehicular entrance and provide safe pedestrian access to the grandstand and sport field;

replacing the existing toilet blocks at a suitable location within the Showground to Council’s satisfaction;


replacing the existing fence along the Great Western Highway with a black palisade

fence, similar to current fencing in areas adjacent to the highway; and reinstating new trees within the Showground precinct to compensate for the loss of a

number of significant and mature trees due to the road works. Acquisition of Council land The RTA proposes to acquire the whole of Council land at 189-191 Great Western Highway, Katoomba (Lot 10 in DP 804749) and part of the adjoining land at 6 Orient Street, Katoomba (Lot 2 in DP500674). Both sites are classified as Operational Land and zoned Village Housing and Accessible Housing under the Draft LEP 2005. Council’s land has been identified as being suitable for Multi-Unit Housing due to its size and proximity to services and transport. The RTA’s proposal would reduce the total area of the two sites from 4,007 m2 to 1,721 m2 meaning that the impact of the RTA’s proposal onto the viability of the site for future multi-dwelling housing development would be significant, from a development potential of 18 reduced to 6 medium density units (i.e. a loss of 11 units). Almost the entire residue land has slopes in excess of 20%. This would limit design solutions and requires cut and fill to provide level areas for private outdoor spaces and car parking. This would also raise the cost of the site works when compared to development on the land before acquisition. For the reason outlined above, it had been suggested that the RTA should consider an acquisition of the whole site (including 189-191 Great Western Highway and 6 Orient Street, Katoomba), as it would avoid unnecessary arguments to the impact of the partial acquisition on the development potential of the residue site. A whole acquisition would provide for Council being adequately and fairly compensated for the loss of its land. Portion of the Council land (part of 6 Orient Street) contains a building know as the Trotters Pavilion in which the K@2mba Men’s Shed project is proposed to be located. The K@2mba Men’s Shed is a not for profit community development initiative as a part of the broader Wentworth Area Health Service K@2mba programme. On 14 December 2004 Council resolved:

“1. That Council support the Katoomba Men’s Shed in establishing the K@2mba Men’s Shed Project at the Trotters Pavilion, 189-191 Great Western Highway, Katoomba at no cost to Council subject to the terms and conditions outlined in this Mayoral Minute.

2. That Council consent to the lodgement of the Land Use Application for the

proposed use of the building as a community art-room and craft workshop.”


The conditions were:

“ Council to provide its support to the project subject to Katoomba Men’s Shed:

obtaining approval for the proposed use of the building by the K@2mba Men’s Shed project;

repairing and/or upgrading the building to meet the Building Code Australia requirements and occupational health and safety standards.

agreeing to meet all on-going maintenance and outgoings associated with the use of the building;

being responsible for the risks and insurance covers associated with public liabilities, workers compensation and occupational health and safety issues; and

acknowledging Council’s rights to serve a notice of termination within a reasonable period of time and to terminate the agreement should Council decide to use or redevelop the site for other purposes.”

Having regard to the last condition outlined above and the current state of negotiations with the RTA, it is proposed that the Wentworth Area Health Service be given notice that it is possible the RTA could obtain ownership of the site in the very near future. It is also proposed that a request be made to the RTA for them to allow the K@2mba Men’s Shed project to proceed at this location if they obtain ownership.

At this point in time, the RTA has not agreed to acquire the whole site and in its letter of 11 March 2005 made an offer for a partial purchase of Council land on the following terms and conditions: Purchase price of $375,000 inclusive of GST Vacant possession to be given on completion The RTA and its contractors to have right of entry for road works and property

adjustments from the date of exchange contracts Prior to or during road works the RTA or its agents without cost to Council to

adjust any existing fencing, services, public utilities and restore access to the new road boundary where necessary.

Council’s Valuer is of the opinion that the RTA’s offer is well below the fair and reasonable market value for the land. In accordance with his assessments, the fair market value for the whole site (i.e. 4,007 m2) is in the order of $1.5 million and for the partial acquisition (i.e. 2,286 m2) is in the order of $1 million. This represents a significant disparity in the assessments of compensation between the RTA’s and Council’s Valuers. This necessitated a ‘round-table’ conference between the RTA’s Valuer, the RTA’s Acquisition Manager, Council’s Valuer and Council’s Manager, Corporate Property management on 3 May 2005. The meeting was concluded with the following actions:

Both Valuers were to review their assessments and meet again to discuss whether an agreement could be reached.

Should the negotiations be unsuccessful, the RTA would commence action to compulsorily acquire the land.


In the meantime, the RTA would write to Council seeking a possible short-

term lease for an early occupation of the land pending completion of the RTA’s acquisition actions.

As Council has been acting in good faith since April 2000 with a reasonable, responsive and cooperative approach at all times, the RTA’s request for a short-term lease is not supported as this could further potentially delay (having regard to previous experience) the conclusion of the negotiations and compensation payment to Council. Conclusion The RTA as part of its proposed works to upgrade the Great Western Highway at Katoomba seeks Council’s consent to the compulsory acquisition of the strip of Crown Land at the corner of the Great Western Highway and Woodland Road, Katoomba. Due to the limited development potential of this strip of land, the RTA’s proposal in this regard is supported subject to the terms and conditions outlined in this report. The RTA also seeks to negotiate the purchase of Council land at the corner of the Great Western Highway and Orient Street, Katoomba. Due to a significant disparity in the assessments of compensation, the RTA’s and Council’s Valuers are currently in the process of reviewing their valuations and will meet to discuss a possible agreement that represents a fair and reasonable market value of Council. In the meantime, the RTA has requested a short-term lease to enable occupation of the site from October 2005. It is envisaged that once the lease is in placed, similar to the RTA’s acquisition of Council land in Faulconbridge in 2000, which is still not completed, the need to settle the negotiations between the RTA and Council would become less critical. This would facilitate a delay in Council receiving compensation for the land. It is recommended that Council declines the temporary lease as requested by the RTA and ask the RTA to either conclude the land purchase negotiations or commence the compulsory acquisition as soon as possible.


ITEM NO: 8 SUBJECT: PROPOSED LEASE TO TELSTRA – RIDGE STREET,

WOODFORD FILE NO: C07508 Recommendations: 1. That Council grant a lease to Telstra Corporation Limited of Lots 10 & 11 in

Deposited Plan 9917 for an annual rental of $14,000 per annum plus GST under the terms and conditions set out in this report.

2. That Council grant an access licence to Telstra Corporation Limited over Lot

12,13 and 14 in Deposited Plan 9917 for an annual rental of $8,000 per annum plus GST under the terms and conditions set out in this report.

3. That the Common Seal of Council be affixed to the necessary documents. Report by Group Manager, Corporate Policy: This report informs Council of a request by the agents of the Telstra Corporation Limited to grant a lease of a portion of the telecommunications site at Ridge Street, Woodford. Background Lots 10 to 14 in Deposited Plan 9917, being 39 – 47 Ridge Street, Woodford are owned by Council and classified as Operational Land. Council originally used the site as a quarry. The zoning is Residential Bushland Conservation under LEP 1991 and the land fronts an unformed road. The fact that the road is unformed and would be difficult and costly to form is the reason that land has not been sold previously for residential purposes. Following is a plan showing the location of the land:


In July 1995 Vodafone entered the site without Council approval and erected a telecommunication tower. They entered the site under the widespread powers of the now repealed Commonwealth Government Telecommunications Act 1991. Optus and Hutchinson who have co-located on the tower also occupy the site. Each company must access the site across three other blocks of land (Lots 12-14 in Deposited Plan 9917). The use of this land by the Telecommunication companies precludes the land being used for residential purposes. Report The company representing Telsta Corporation Limited have indicated that Telstra wants to co-locate on the Woodford Telecommunications tower built by Vodafone in 1995 and now owned by Crown Castle. The company will locate its aerial on the tower in agreement with the other companies and will build a cabinet to house their equipment. A 2400mm fence will be erected to secure the equipment. Telstra Corporation has agreed to pay $14,000 indexed to CPI per annum (plus GST) for the lease of the site. They will also pay $8,000 (plus GST) per annum for access. The company have requested two consecutive leases for five years each and two five-year options. These terms and conditions are comparable with that paid by the other three companies. Conclusion Given that three other Telecommunication companies already occupy the site and that Telstra have agreed to pay the market rental for the occupation of the site it is recommended that Council agree to grant the lease and licence.


ITEM NO: 9 SUBJECT: ROAD CLOSURE – LOT 1 DEPOSITED PLAN 1053184,

YILEENA AVENUE, LAWSON FILE NO: R10/0026 Recommendations: 1. That Council agree to the sale of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 1053184 for $19,000 in

accordance with the terms and conditions as set out in this report. 2. That the common Seal of Council be affixed to the necessary documents. Report by Group Manager, Corporate Policy: This report recommends the sale of the portion of Yileena Avenue, Lawson to the adjoining owner. Background In September 2000 the owner of 5-7 Orient Street, Lawson requested permission to purchase back an area of land that had previously been dedicated for road widening. The road widening never proceeded. At its meeting on 30 January 2001, Council considered a report that discussed the road closing proposal and the subsequent investigations and resolved:

“1. That Council consent to the road closing application by the owner of Lot 102 DP 569888 in respect of that part of Yileena Avenue illustrated on the plan attached to the General Manager’s report.

2. That a further report come back to Council at the appropriate time on the

price to be paid for that part of Yileena Avenue sought to be closed and purchased by the owners of Lot 102 DP 569888.

3. That the Common Seal of Council be affixed to the necessary documents.”


Following is a plan showing the location of the section of closed road:

SITE MAP

Report Council made application on behalf of the owner of Lot 102 DP 569888 being 5-7 Orient Street, Lawson to the Department of Lands for the closing of a portion (155.3m2) of Yileena Ave, Lawson. The portion of road was closed by Notice in the Government Gazette on 9th July 2004. The owner of the adjoining property was notified that the land to be acquired was to be consolidated with Lot 102 DP 569888 and that they would have to prepare a plan of consolidation. As set out in Councils adopted Corporate Property Policy, a valuation and survey were prepared. A registered independent valuer valued the land at $19,000. Conclusion This road closure has been completed. As this matter has proceeded along the guidelines adopted by Council in the Corporate Property Policy and Guidelines and the valuation has been prepared, it is now appropriate for Council to finalise this matter by way of transfer to the adjoining owners.


ITEM NO: 10 SUBJECT: PROPOSED LEASE TO SPRINGWOOD SOCCER & SPORTS

CLUB, SUMMERHAYES PARK FILE NO: H00777 Recommendations: 1. That Council give notice under Section 47 of Local Government Act 1993 that it

proposes to grant a lease of a portion of Part Lot 2 Deposited Plan 220070 and portion of Part Lot 6 Deposited Plan 661403 being the clubroom building (approximately 1700 square metres) of Summerhayes Park, Hawkesbury Road, Winmalee, to Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc.

2. That should Council receive a submission by way of objection to the proposal, the

matter be referred to the Minister for Local Government for consent and a further report on the Ministers decision be submitted to Council.

3. That should there be no objection received, Council lease a portion of Part Lot 2

deposited Plan 220070 and portion of Part Lot 6 Deposited Plan 661403 being the clubroom building (approximately 1700 square metres) of Summerhayes Park, Hawkesbury Road, Winmalee to Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc. for a period of 5 years with a 5 year option in accordance with Section 46 and 46A of the Local Government Act 1993 and the terms and conditions set out in this report

4. That the Common Seal of Council be affixed to the necessary documents relating to

this matter. Report by Group Manager, Corporate Policy and Group Manager, City Solutions: This report addresses a request by Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc. to renew its lease over the clubhouse at Summerhayes Park and recommends that the Council give notice under Section 47 of Local Government Act 1993 of its intention to grant a lease. Background Springwood Soccer and Sports Club leased 4,680 square metres of Summerhayes Park from Council in 1979 in order to build a sporting clubhouse. The building was constructed in 1980 with funds from Grant from NSW Department of Sport & Recreation $25,000 Loan from Rural Bank over 15 Yrs $25,000 Direct Cash Contribution $16,027 TOTAL $66,027


Report Part Lot 2 Deposited Plan 220070 and part of Part Lot 6 Deposited Plan 661403 is owned by Council in Fee Simple, is classified under the Local Government Act 1993 as Community Land and is subject to a Plan of Management (POM) adopted by Council 23 November 2004 (Minute 503). The POM allows for leases and licences of clubhouses and attached facilities subject to:

• Compliance with the core objectives and the vision for Summerhayes Park; • Councils Community Facilities Policy and any other adopted policy; • Public Input; • Options for use by other groups; and • Measures to protect residential amenity,

The area proposed to be leased by the Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc. has erected on it a building of brick construction with single pitch corrugated roof, gutters and downpipes. Access is via side door or French doors across the front. The building contains an open plan room and toilets. There is a storage area provided under the building accessed via a roller door on the side of the building. In 2004 Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc had 92 Soccer Teams, 32 netball Teams (18 winter and 14 twilight competition), 3 Federation Soccer Teams and 2 Darts Teams making this the biggest sporting club in the Blue Mountains Local Government Area. The club provides opportunities for girls, boys, men and women to play soccer through its affiliations with the Nepean Soccer Association and for netball through the Penrith District Netball Association who play their competition games at Jamison Park, Penrith. The Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc has financed many projects at Summerhayes Park itself, including the recent soccer field floodlights upgrade to Australian Standard AS 2560 for night practice. Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc provides a vital service to the Blue Mountains Community in terms of its provision of sport and recreation facilities in partnership with Blue Mountains City Council. Lease Conditions Springwood Soccer and Sporting Club Inc. committee have agreed to the following proposed Terms and Conditions:- Lessee: Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc. Premises: Winmalee Soccer Clubhouse Use: Sports Club Rooms Rental: Nominal until altered by Council Policy and with twelve

months notice to the Club or at commencement of five year option, whichever occurred earlier

Term: Five Years Option: Five Years Commencement: Outgoings: Lessee Maintenance Lessee Increase: Not Applicable


Reviews: Not Applicable Insurance: Lessee Legal Fees: Lessee At the present time Council has not determined a policy on “User Pays” of Sporting facilities, therefore it is not equitable to charge a fee on this facility until a policy is in place. However this lease should indicate that if Council adopts such a system in the future it would be payable with 12 months notice to the Club or at the time of the commencement of the five year option, which ever occurred earlier. Section 47 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires Council to give notice of any proposal to lease Community Land by way of a Notice exhibited on the land, a notice to adjoining lands owners and published notice in the local paper. If a person makes a submission by way of objection to the proposal, the council must not grant the lease except with the consent of the Minister, who will then request the Director if Planning to furnish a report concerning the application.

Conclusion The Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc provides a vital service to the Blue Mountains, providing sporting opportunities to a broad section of our community. The Club had also successfully held a lease on the clubroom building for 25 years. The Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc has contributed substantially to the development of the sporting facilities at Summerhayes Park, improving the quality of life of the community. Council adopted a Plan of Management for Summerhayes Park in 2004 that allows for a lease to be granted over the clubrooms. Negotiations have taken place with Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc and the proposed lease terms and conditions are considered fair and reasonable. It is therefore recommended that Council give notice of its intention to lease the Clubrooms at Summerhayes Park to the Springwood Soccer & Sports Club Inc for five years in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in this report.

LAND USE MANAGEMENT Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 11 SUBJECT: SECTION 96 APPLICATION TO MODIFY DEVELOPMENT

CONSENT NO. S04/0034 FOR A ONE INTO TWO LOT SUBDIVISION AT LOT 1 DP 801786, NOS. 32-34 GREAT WESTERN HIGHWAY, VALLEY HEIGHTS

FILE NO: S04/0034 Recommendation:

That the Section 96 amendment application to modify Development Consent No. S04/0034 for a one into two lot subdivision at Lot 1 DP 801786, Nos. 32-34 Great Western Highway, Valley Heights be determined pursuant to Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 by the granting of consent subject to the amended conditions shown as Attachment 1 to this Report. Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Reason for report This application is referred to Council for determination as it

relates to Council owned property. Applicant

J Wyndham Prince Pty Ltd

Owner

Blue Mountains City Council

Application lodged

10 February 2005

Property address

Lot 1 DP 801786, Nos. 32-34 Great Western Highway, Valley Heights

LAND USE MANAGEMENT Item 11 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

PENINSULA THE

RD

VALLEY

WYO

THE

RD

EY

D

320320320320320320320320320

2-42-42-42-42-42-42-42-42-4666666666

111111111111111111

26-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-27

7-97-97-97-97-97-97-97-97-9 7-97-97-97-97-97-97-97-97-9

26-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-2726-27

555555555

333333333 111111111 222222222

28-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-30

444444444

32-3432-3432-3432-3432-3432-3432-3432-3432-34

10A10A10A10A10A10A10A10A10A

353535353535353535

121212121212121212

37-3837-3837-3837-3837-3837-3837-3837-3837-38

141414141414141414

393939393939393939

202020202020202020

404040404040404040

242424242424242424

181818181818181818

242424242424242424

222222222222222222

212121212121212121

414141414141414141424242424242424242

242424242424242424

262626262626262626

262626262626262626

282828282828282828

252525252525252525

323232323232323232

43A43A43A43A43A43A43A43A43A

343434343434343434

7-177-177-177-177-177-177-177-177-17

888888888

10A10A10A10A10A10A10A10A10A

232323232323232323

252525252525252525

666666666

363636363636363636

212121212121212121

383838383838383838

191919191919191919

272727272727272727

171717171717171717

292929292929292929

151515151515151515

313131313131313131333333333333333333

8-108-108-108-108-108-108-108-108-10

292929292929292929

353535353535353535373737373737373737

101010101010101010

27A27A27A27A27A27A27A27A27A

202020202020202020

77777777728-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-3028-30

46P46P46P46P46P46P46P46P46P

363636363636363636222222222222222222

27B27B27B27B27B27B27B27B27B 434343434343434343

313131313131313131

0-240-240-240-240-240-240-240-240-24

17B17B17B17B17B17B17B17B17B

Background Blue Mountains City Council acquired the subject land from the State Rail Authority in 1999 with the intention of developing it as an aquatic centre. The proposed centre did not proceed with the subject site now considered surplus to Council needs. Council's Property Section had unsuccessfully attempted to sell the land, however the site’s partial Environmental Protection zoning, proposed under draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 (DLEP 2002), appears to have been a significant contributing factor in purchaser uncertainty. Therefore, a subdivision was designed to separate the two sections of the site; one for future development and one to remain in the care and control of Council. This subdivision was approved by Council at its meeting of 12 October 2004. The current Section 96 application seeks to vary a number of the conditions of consent.

Site description

The subject land is irregular in shape and has a total site area of approximately 9,808m2. The site has two frontages, one to the Great Western Highway of 58 metres and one to Peninsula Road of 119 metres. Sites with a variety of commercial and industrial uses adjoin the subject site to the west and north-west. Whilst single occupancy residential dwellings are primarily located to the east and north-east of the site.

Subject site


There are no structures on the land, however its southern

portion has been substantially cleared and is dominated by grass and weeds. Its northern portion contains significant areas of native bushland, which is identified as Shale/Sandstone Transitional Forest, an endangered ecological community. Whilst some of this bushland is degraded and includes informal walking tracks, the bushland generally is in good condition. The site is relatively level with a gentle to moderate slope that falls from the western (side) boundary to the eastern (side) boundary. The steepest section of the site is located along its western boundary.

Proposal

The approved subdivision was for 1 into 2 lots, with proposed lot 1 being occupied by the Shale Sandstone Transitional Forest, and proposed lot 2 being developable land. The current Section 96 application seeks to amend the following Conditions of Consent. i. Vary Condition No. 4 – Fauna Habitat Protection ii. Delete Condition No. 5 – Deny access from lot 2 iii. Delete Condition No. 12 – Erosion and Sedimentation measures The approved subdivision layout plan is included as Attachment 2 to this Report.

Development controls

Zoned Residential 2(a1) under Local Environmental Plan

No. 4 Partially zoned Employment Enterprise and partially zoned

Environmental Protection under draft Local Environmental Plan 2002

Integrated Development – Rural Fires Act.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan—Hawkesbury –

Nepean River SREP 20 Development Control Plan—Better Living

Notification

The proposed modification was not re-notified as there was deemed to be no new and significant potential for adverse impact on adjoining properties. This is in accordance with the provisions of Council’s Community Consultation DCP 35.


Issues Assessment issues:

1. Conditions of Consent 2. Statutory Considerations 3. Likely Impact 4. Resident Issues

Discussion of Issues 1. Conditions of Consent Condition No. 4 Condition No. 4 aimed to protect the endangered ecological community by prohibiting development or bush fire hazard reduction in an identified area between a “protection fence” on proposed lot 2 and the proposed lot boundary. The identified area is triangular in shape and located along the northern boundary of proposed lot 2. It has a maximum width of approximately 12 metres. The applicant is seeking to amend this condition by amending the first dot point prohibiting development and bush fire hazard reduction in the identified area. This was sought as the likely Asset Protection Zones (APZ) required for the bushfire prone land would unnecessarily hinder the potential for future residential development. Further, the applicant submits that the potential intrusion of an APZ into the identified area would not have a significant impact on the ecological community. It is agreed that the potential protrusion of an Outer Protection Zone, limited to undergrowth management, would not have a significant impact on the ecological community. However, it is considered inappropriate to allow either development or an Inner Protection Zone (IPZ) in the identified area. Therefore, the deletion of the prohibition on development or bush fire hazard reduction is not supported; rather it is proposed to allow an exception for approved undergrowth management for the purposes of an Outer Protection Zone. It is also proposed to include an additional requirement for the required Weed and Vegetation Management Plan to be expanded to include appropriate management of undergrowth. Therefore the existing Condition No. 8 will require amendment. Condition No. 5 Condition No. 5 requires that a “Restriction as to Use” be placed on the subdivision plan that prohibits direct access from lot 2 to the Great Western Highway. This is consistent with the requirements of LEP 4 and DLEP 2002 in relation to sites abutting a Regional Transport Corridor. The condition was primarily intended as an alert to future owners that these requirements exist.


It is noted, however, that the DLEP allows variation from these requirements with the approval of the Roads and Traffic Authority, and that Condition No. 5 may work to hinder future owners from appropriately pursuing this variation. Therefore, it is agreed that this condition could be appropriately deleted. The aim of this condition may be met by appropriate conditions on any subsequent development application relating to the site. Condition No. 12 This condition required the preparation of a sediment and erosion control plan and the restoration of disturbed areas. As no on site work is associated with the subdivision, apart from the erection of the protection fence, it is considered that deletion of the condition would not result in significant environmental impact. Therefore, it is agreed that this condition could be deleted. 2. Statutory Considerations The proposed modification does not alter the permissibility of the approved subdivision, nor its assessment against the requirements and provisions the relevant Acts, environmental planning instruments and development control plans. Proposed lot 1 shall be entirely zoned Environmental Protection under DLEP 2002 and will be retained in the care and control of Council. Proposed lot 2 will primarily be zoned Employment Enterprise with a strip of Environmental Protection along its proposed northern boundary. The proposed modification does not result in significant impacts on any threatened species, populations or endangered ecological communities as listed under the New South Wales Threatened Species Conservation Act (1995) or the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999). 3. Likely Impact The subject site is in a location that is identified as being a transition area between the industrial uses to the west and the residential uses to the east and north. The surrounding allotments vary significantly in size and character. The subject site is located in a substantially developed area on a local road which serves as a link between the Great Western Highway and the surrounding properties. The streetscape around the subject site has a particularly strong industrial/commercial character to the west and a strong residential/bushland character to the north and east. The site is well located to promote the development of high quality mixed residential and business uses. The proposed modification does not adversely impact on the character of the site whilst improving its potential for development. The bushland vegetation provides an effective buffer between the area to be developed and the surrounding residential areas.


Conclusion The proposed modification is considered to result in a development that is substantially the same development as that approved. The relevant matters identified under Section 79C of the Act have been considered and the modified subdivision will ensure the long term protection of an ecologically endangered vegetation on the site whilst maintaining the site’s development potential. Accordingly, the application to modify the development consent is recommended for approval subject to the imposition of appropriate amended conditions of consent.


Attachment 1—Conditions of development consent

Confirmation of development plans

1. To confirm and clarify the terms of consent, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the plans prepared by J Wyndham Prince Pty Ltd, numbered 7410/P1 and dated 28 May 2004, and accompanying supportive documentation, except as otherwise provided or modified by the conditions of this consent.

Lapsing of consent 2. Pursuant to Section 95(2) of the Environmental Planning

and Assessment Act 1979, this consent will lapse two (2) years from 12 October 2004 unless works are physically commenced on the land to which the consent relates before the expiration of the two (2) years.

Rural Fire Act 88B Instrument

3. To ensure the appropriate future development of proposed lot 2, an instrument setting out Terms of Restriction on the use of land intended to be created, pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act, 1919 shall be submitted in a form acceptable to Councill indicating the following:

• No residential building envelope is to be located within a minimum 10m setback from the Great Western Highway frontage.

Fauna Habitat Protection 88B Instrument (Amended 21 June 2005)

4. To protect the endangered ecological community on proposed lot 1, an instrument setting out Terms of Restriction on the use of land intended to be created, pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act, 1919 shall be submitted in a form acceptable to Council indicating the following: No development or bush fire hazard reduction (with

the exception of approved understorey management for the purposes of an Outer Protection Zone) is permitted between the “protection fence” indicated in red on the approved plan, and the north eastern boundary between lot 1 and lot 2, such that it will adversely impact on the endangered ecological community.

A Council approved Vegetation and Weed

Management Plan is to be in place prior to release of the Subdivision Certificate.

The 88B Instrument shall also contain a provision that it may not be extinguished or altered except by Blue Mountains City Council.



Deny Access from Lot 2 88B Instrument (Deleted 21 June 2005)

5. To minimise visual impact on the Highway streetscape, an instrument setting out Terms of Restriction on the use of land intended to be created, pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act, 1919 shall be submitted in a form acceptable to Council indicating that vehicle access to and from proposed Lot 2 directly via its frontage to the Great Western Highway is denied. Access to proposed Lot 2 is to be made available via the battleaxe access to Peninsula Road. The 88B Instrument shall also contain a provision that it may not be extinguished or altered except by Blue Mountains City Council.

On-Site detention 88b instrument

6. To minimise the downstream impact of future development on the site, an instrument setting out Terms of Restrictions on the use of land intended to be created, pursuant to Section 88 B of the Conveyancing Act, 1919 shall be submitted in a form acceptable to Council indicating the following:

a. All future development on proposed lot 2 shall incorporate on-site stormwater detention systems that restrict post-development discharge rates to pre-development discharge rates for storms up to and including the 1 in 100 year Return Period.

b. The proprietor/s of proposed lot 2 shall keep clear,

maintain all pits, pipelines, trench barriers and other structures comprising any on-site detention system to be built.

c. The 88B Instrument may not be extinguished or

altered without prior approval being obtained from Blue Mountains City Council.

The wording of the instrument shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to release of the Subdivision Certificate.

Land Classification 7. The property described as proposed lot 1 on the approved

plan must be held and used for a public purpose. It is to be reclassified by Council to “Community Land” within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1993 within a period of 12 months of the date of registration of the subdivision plan with the Land Titles Office.



Weed removal (Amended 21 June 2005)

8. All noxious weeds are to be removed from the site to the satisfaction of Council prior to release of the Subdivision Certificate. To ensure that noxious weeds are removed and environmental weeds are controlled in a sensitive manner that avoids adverse impact on the endangered ecological community, a detailed Vegetation and Weed Management Plan is to be provided to Blue Mountains City Council for approval. Details in the Plan shall include but not be limited to the following: Types of weeds to be removed; Method and timing of removal; Ongoing management details, including monitoring

and maintenance requirements; and Details of any proposed site rehabilitation works,

including rubbish removal, track rehabilitation, bush regeneration and any appropriate planting of cleared areas.

Extent and appropriate management of the understorey in the identified No Development Zone for the purposes of maintaining an Outer Protection Zone.

Blue Mountains City Council shall inspect the site to ensure compliance with the condition.

Protection fencing

9. To minimise the potential for adverse impact on the identified endangered ecological community, an appropriate protection fence is to be erected and located as generally indicated in red on the approved plans. The details of the final location, its type and finished colour shall be subject to the approval of Blue Mountains City Council. The subject fence shall be erected prior to release of the Subdivision Certificate.



Weed management and vegetation regeneration bond. Prior to release the Subdivision Certificate

10. A Cash Bond/Bank Guarantee of $ 5,000.00 shall be lodged with Council as a weed management and vegetation regeneration bond prior to the release of the Subdivision Certificate. This bond shall be held to ensure that weed removal and regeneration of the endangered ecological community is established and maintained in accordance with the approved Vegetation and Weed Management Plan. Fifty percent (50%) of the bond shall be refunded where the approved weed management and vegetation regeneration measures have been satisfactorily instigated. The balance of the bond shall be refunded 2 years after the approved weed management and vegetation regeneration measures have been instigated. Each refund shall be subject to an satisfactory inspection by Blue Mountains City Council’s Environmental Landscape Officer to ensure that effective, regular weed management and vegetation regeneration has been undertaken within the endangered ecological community. It is the responsibility of the applicant to notify Council in relation to the refunding of the bond at the end of the 2 year period.

Public Authority Certificates

11. To ensure satisfactory effluent disposal and utility services are provided to proposed lot 2, you are required to submit to Council prior to release of subdivision certificate, certification from: a. Sydney Water indicating that reticulated water and

sewer has been made available. b. Integral Energy indicating that satisfactory

arrangements have been made for the provision of electricity supply.

c. An approved telecommunications service provider

stating that satisfactory arrangements have been made for telephone services.



Erosion & Sediment measures (Deleted 21 June 2005)

12. The applicant shall engage a qualified person to prepare a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the principles outlined in the “Managing Urban Stormwater Soils & Construction” manual by the Department of Housing dated August 1998. The applicant shall ensure sedimentation and erosion control measures are installed prior to commencement of construction and also maintained at all times during construction in accordance with the plan. Prior to release of Subdivision Certificate all disturbed areas are to be stabilised and all redundant sediment & erosion control structures are to be removed to Council’s satisfaction.

Advice House numbering 13. To ensure appropriate definition of the allotments, the

following property numbering shall apply to the proposed lots:

Lot 1 — 19 Peninsula Road Valley Heights Lot 2 — 32-34 Great Western Highway Valley

Heights


Attachment 2—Plan

(Available at Council Offices and Libraries)


ITEM NO: 12 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. X04/1484 FOR A SENIORS

LIVING DEVELOPMENT OF THIRTEEN DWELLINGS AT LOT B DP 391940, NO. 33 FALLS ROAD, WENTWORTH FALLS

FILE NO: X04/1484 Recommendation: That development application No. X04/1484 for a Seniors Living development comprising thirteen units at Lot B DP 391940, No. 33 Falls Road Wentworth Falls be determined pursuant to Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 by refusing consent to the application for the following reasons: 1. The development is inconsistent with State Environmental Planning Policy – Senior

Living in terms of site analysis and standards, streetscape, privacy and solar access.

2. The development is inconsistent with Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 in terms of setbacks, site disturbance and soft pervious landscaped areas.

3. The development is contrary to Section 79C(b) of the Environmental Planning an Assessment Act as it is likely to result in an adverse impact on the neighbourhood amenity and streetscape of the surrounding area.

4. The development is inconsistent with the surrounding area in terms of overall scale and design.

5. The development does not appropriately consider the environmental characteristics of the site and does not provide reasonable internal amenity and safety.

6. The development is considered to be not in the public interest. Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Reason for report The application is referred to Council for determination as it

has a value in excess of $1,000,000. Applicant/Owner

Alpall Pty Ltd

Application lodged

15 October 2004

Property address

Lot B DP 391940, No. 33 Falls Road Wentworth Falls


DO

UG

HER

TY

FALL

S

RD

AVE

ST

CASC

ADE

AVE

DELUNGRAPL

OX

AVER

888888888 101010101010101010

1-71-71-71-71-71-71-71-71-7 999999999

37-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-39

37-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-3937-39

353535353535353535

333333333333333333

252525252525252525

222222222 444444444

-9-9-9-9-95-95-95-9-95-95-95-95-95-95-95-95-95-9

888888888 101010101010101010

5-95-95-95-95-95-95-95-95-9

57-5957-5957-5957-5957-5957-5957-5957-5957-59

20-3020-3020-3020-3020-3020-3020-3020-3020-30

232323232323232323

212121212121212121

181818181818181818

161616161616161616333333333

141414141414141414

121212121212121212

121212121212121212

19A19A19A19A19A19A19A19A19A

141414141414141414111111111111111111

19B19B19B19B19B19B19B19B19B

191919191919191919

131313131313131313

236236236236236236236236236

999999999

238238238238238238238238238

616161616161616161

555555555555555555

444444444 6-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-86-8 333333333333333333

313131313131313131101010101010101010

999999999

888888888

666666666

444444444

222222222

292929292929292929272727272727272727272727272727272727

232323232323232323

232323232323232323212121212121212121

555555555333333333

52-5852-5852-5852-5852-5852-5852-5852-5852-58

191919191919191919191919191919191919

191919191919191919

171717171717171717

7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A7A

47-5347-5347-5347-5347-5347-5347-5347-5347-53

111111111111111111

204204204204204204204204204

206206206206206206206206206

777777777

8-448-448-448-448-448-448-448-448-44

18A18A18A18A18A18A18A18A18A

43-4543-4543-4543-4543-4543-4543-4543-4543-45

AAAAAA

230 234230 234230-234230 234230-234230 234230 234230-234230 234

Background The proposed application was initially lodged with Council on

15 October 2004. The applicant was advised of a number of issues in relation to the proposed development by letter dated 8 December 2004 and by a subsequent letter dated 21 December 2004. The issues raised are summarised as follows: Inadequate site analysis, including overshadowing; Stormwater detail; Car parking arrangements; Extent of cut and fill; and Inconsistency with streetscape.

The time for submission of an amended proposal was extended until 21 January 2005, with additional information subsequently submitted and assessed. A meeting was then held with the applicant on 11 April 2005 in which issues with the amended proposal were discussed, many of which remained the same as summarised above. The applicant then nominated to lodge a “deemed refusal” appeal with the Land and Environment Court.

Subject site


Site description The subject land is located on the western side of Falls Road,

approximately 230 metres south of its intersection with the Great Western Highway. The site is generally square in shape, with a 59.7 metres frontage to Falls Road and 66.7 metres side lengths. The land covers a total area of approximately 3974m2. A moderate slope runs from the north western (rear) corner of the site to its south eastern (front) corner, resulting in a fall of approximately 10 metres over 87 metres or an average grade of 1:9. The land has been previously cleared and developed with a single occupancy dwelling, ancillary structures and an established garden on site. Development in the immediate vicinity primarily consists of a range of single occupancy dwellings to the north and west, medium density development to the south, and Wilson Park to the east. The Wentworth Falls Village shopping centre is located approximately 330 metres to the north east of the site.

Proposal

The proposed development is summarised as follows: Demolition of existing single storey detached dwelling,

ancillary structures and established gardens. Development of 13 aged units configured as follows:

o Seven (7) x 2 bedroom units o Six (6) x 3 bedroom units

A copy of the plans showing the site area and extent of the development proposed are provided as Attachment 1 to this Report.

Development controls

Residential 2(b2) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4 Proposed ‘Living-General’ (LG) under Draft Local

Environmental Plan 2002 Accessible Housing Area under Draft Local

Environmental Plan 2002 State Environmental Planning Policy – Seniors Living

2004 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.20 –

‘Hawkesbury-Nepean River’ Notification

The application was advertised in the Blue Mountains Gazette in addition to written notification being sent to thirteen (13) adjoining and nearby properties. Notification was for a 14 day period between the 8 December 2004 and 22 December 2004. Nine (9) submissions were received as a result of this notification process.


Issues Resident issues:

The development is not in character with the area The site is in a high fire risk area Adverse ecological impact in relation to site water runoff

affecting Jamison Valley Creek Sloped courtyards inappropriate for aged citizens Excessive amounts of cut and fill due to slope of site High elevations adjacent to boundaries Predominantly two storey development The development is too dense The design of the buildings are poor The development is not site responsive If approved this development represents the fourth unit

development in a row adjoining each other and amounts to overdevelopment

The development removes most of the existing vegetation – detrimental to streetscape

Inconsistencies of floor plan / elevation drawings Loss of privacy – southern boundary – seniors foot level is

higher than the boundary fence – overlooking issue into development to the south

The development does not comply with the SEPP – design requirements and development standards

The development is out of scale with surrounding sites - overdevelopment

The development is not suited to ‘Senior Living’ or persons over 55 years of age

The development will result in a loss of amenity Drainage / Flooding of the public walkway to the south of

the site Overshadowing – units to the south

Assessment issues: 1. State Environmental Planning Policy – Seniors Living 2. Integrated development 3. Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 4. Likely Impact of the Development

Discussion of Issues The State Environmental Planning Policy – “Seniors Living” applies to land within New South Wales that is zoned primarily for urban purposes on which development for dwelling-houses are permitted. The subject site is identified for this purpose in terms of Local Environmental Plan 4 (LEP4), however, this Policy prevails over the provisions of LEP4 to the extent of any inconsistency that exist.


Therefore the development application has been assessed against the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy – Seniors Living, Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002, and Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 with the following issues emerging for consideration. 1. State Environmental Planning Policy – ‘Senior Living’ The proposed development is permissible on the subject site, under the provisions of the State Environmental Planning Policy - Seniors Living with specific areas of non-compliance identified and discussed below. Clause 28 – Site Analysis Clause 28 of the SEPP states that a consent authority must not consent to a development application until it is satisfied that the site analysis prepared is in accordance with provisions relating to specified information about the site and specified information about the site surrounds. In this regard, it is considered that the proposed development does not adequately address the following elements: The site and site analysis plans do not provide the level of detail required about the

location and use of surrounding buildings. No detail is provided in respect to height, specific location, balconies and pedestrian / vehicle access points

Adjoining properties to the west appear to be adversely affected in terms of outlook to park views

Solar access to adjoining properties (particularly the unit development to the south) is considered to be adversely impacted by the proposed development. The submitted shadow diagrams do not sufficiently address this issue

Inadequate detail has been provided in relation to built form and character. The site analysis does not detail the architectural character and elements of surrounding development

The SEPP requires that these matters should be addressed showing how the proposed development compliments and considers the surrounding area. The SEPP does not only rely on development standards to be met, but it also places an emphasis on achieving good design by understanding the site’s setting and surrounding character. It is considered that the applicant’s omissions do not enable Council to be satisfied as to the suitability of the proposal. Clause 31 – Neighbourhood amenity and streetscape The applicant states that “the proposal is responsive to the site topography and is configured to minimise cut and fill”. However, the proposal modifies significant areas of the site in order to create appropriate building platforms and driveway grades, particularly to the northern and western areas. The extent of site modification and the overall slope of the site results in substantial subfloor areas and numerous units that have substantially different floor levels to finished courtyard levels.


The finished floor level of unit 1, which fronts the southern portion of Falls Road, is built approximately 4.5 metres above the natural ground level. This is a result of the site dropping steeply in this area, with the units fronting Falls Road being primarily 2 storey in character with large areas of blank wall facing the street. Additionally, the southern building is located at a level well above the Falls Road level. As a comparison, the town houses directly to the south of the site are single storey in scale and character. Hard surfaces, specifically the driveways and car park access points cover approximately 18 metres or 30% of the site frontage, which exceeds the maximum outlined in the “Senior Living Policy – Urban design guidelines for infill development”. The scale and character of the proposed development is substantially different to that of the surrounding development. The SEPP seeks new development to achieve high standards of design outcomes that will improve the site and the area as a whole. It is considered that this development does not achieve this requirement. Clause 32 – Visual and acoustic privacy The proposed development results in an inappropriate level of potential adverse visual and acoustic impact to adjoining properties. The finished level of the rear verandahs of a number of units are built such that they are well above the finished ground level, with unit 1 being approximately 2.5 metres above it. Each block of units has at least one unit that is potentially affected in this way whilst the properties to the south of the site are also potentially significantly affected by overlooking from units 1, 12 and 13. Clause 33 – Solar Access and Design for Climate Shadow diagrams provided in support of the application do not adequately address the impact that the proposal will have on adjoining neighbours and futures residents. Distances and locations of courtyard / living areas of adjacent development (particularly to the south) have not been provided by the applicant. The submitted shadow diagrams do not account for required internal and boundary fencing, finished levels of private open spaces or structures on adjoining properties. Concern is raised in relation to the extent of overshadowing that will occur upon construction of the proposal and the adverse amenity impact that this will create for adjoining properties as well as for future residents of the development. Clause 52 – Siting Standards The site is generally over the 1:10 gradient meaning that at least 50% or 7 units must have a continuous accessible path of travel to a road or internal driveway. Whilst this appears to be achieved in the proposed development, it is generally from an inappropriate level of site disturbance.


Clause 81 – Self-contained dwellings The proposed development meets the minimum requirements for building height, density, landscape area and private open space such that they cannot be used as reasons to refuse the development. However, it is noted that the private open spaces provided for units 1-3, 6, 7, 12 and 13 are minimum widths that appear to be significantly overshadowed. Additionally, the access from living areas to the private open spaces is not considered accessible, specifically in relation to units 1, 3, 12 and 13. The “Senior Living Policy – Urban design guidelines for infill development” recommends approaches to improve amenity by increasing the portion of the site that is landscaped as follows: increase areas between driveways, boundary fences and new dwellings; provide pedestrian paths; provide additional private open spaces above minimum requirements; provide communal open space; increase front, rear and side setbacks; and provide small landscaped areas between driveways, garages, entries, pedestrian paths,

etc. Whilst the proposed development does exceed some of the minimum requirements outlined in the policy, they are located in areas of the site that does not improve amenity or result in a better utilisation of space. The SEPP requires 16 resident car parking spaces and 2 visitor car parking spaces provided on site. Twenty five (25) car parking spaces are provided using a “stacked” arrangement (one garage and a space outside the garage). Whilst this exceeds the numerical requirements, the 25 spaces pose a manoeuvrability issue within the site. Most of the garages and visitor spaces require a reversing manoeuvre into the path of other internal traffic in what is a very confined space. Such a situation is not supported, especially when considering the proposed development is to provided facilities for people with a disability as well as aged persons. A separate driveway is also proposed for units 1 and 2, and another separate driveway for units 4 and 5. These driveways have direct access from Falls Road and require resident/visitors to reverse out of the driveways when leaving the site, which raises a significant safety issue given that Falls Road is a busy connector road to the surrounding area. 2. Integrated Development Pursuant to Section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the development required approvals from the following approval bodies. NSW Rural Fire Service The site is bushfire prone and involves a development of a type which is defined as “Special Fire Protection Purpose” under the Rural Fires Act 1997. The NSW Rural Fire Service has issued its concurrence in accordance with Section 100B of the Act, subject to its general terms of approval.


Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources The site is within 40 metres of an existing watercourse, which is to the south. A permit, in accordance with part 3A of the Rivers and Foreshore Act 1948, has been obtained from the Department subject to general terms of approval. Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20: Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment The subject site is located within the Glenbrook Creek/Erskine Creek sub-catchment. In assessing this application, the general and specific planning considerations as set out in Clause 5 and 6 of SREP 20 need to be addressed. The development application is not accompanied by documentation relating to drainage or water quality and quantity. However, it is considered that the site is capable of being connected and serviced by an existing reticulated sewer system, and could satisfy the requirements using a combination of on site detention facilities, rainwater tanks, sedimentation pits within the development and suitable soil and erosion controls in place during construction. 3. Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 (DLEP 2002) is currently with the relevant Minister for gazettal and once it has been gazetted, the Council will be seeking full exemption from the SEPP Seniors Living policy. The gazetted LEP would then become the primary document against which future Accessible Housing developments are assessed. In this regard, the provisions in the DLEP will guide the long term character of Accessible Housing in the City of Blue Mountains. DLEP 2002 proposes to zone the subject site Living General – Accessible Housing, with the proposed use permissible with consent. However, the suitability of such development depends on how a proposal satisfies specified criteria as well as how it responds to the constraints of the site and the context of the surrounding area. The objectives of the Living General zone are aimed at ensuring residential development maintains and improves the residential character in a manner that minimises impact on the existing amenity and environmental quality of the area. Development should be consistent with the scale of adjoining development. A comparative assessment of the proposed development against the basic provisions in the DLEP is summarised below: Clause Provision Proposed Complies

1 Maximum 8m building height

Maximum 6.5m to eaves

Proposed maximum height 7.5 metres

Proposed 6.5 metres at eaves

Yes

Yes

2 20% average setback of adjoining allotments, that is 15m.

Proposed setback 9m No


Clause Provision Proposed Complies

3 Maximum width 80%, that is 47.8m.

Proposed width 78%, that is 46.2m

Yes

Maximum site coverage 40%, that is 1589m2.

Minimum 40% soft pervious landscaped area.

Proposed site coverage 1160m2.

Proposed soft pervious landscaped area 39%

Yes

No

4 Maximum FSR 0.4:1 Proposed FSR 0.29:1 Yes

The proposed development primarily complies with the locality requirements of the subject site, with the variation in proposed soft pervious landscaped area considered to be insignificant. However, the proposed variation in setback requirements is a concern. The subject site is located in a Visually Significant Streetscape, where Falls Road is a historic road that forms a major link to the residential as well as tourist areas on the southern side of Wentworth Falls. The general setbacks of dwellings in the area are larger thus allowing greater spatial separation than the proposed development achieves. The adverse visual impact from this lack of separation is increased as a result of the development’s scale and presentation to Falls Road. The development does not adequately address the street and includes significant areas of blank wall. This scale and presentation results in an overall development that is contrary to the character of the surrounding area. 4. Likely Impact of the Development The proposed development includes substantial earth works across the site to allow access and car parking matters to be addressed. The required excavation depth is approximately 1.5 metres to the north western (rear) courtyard and 1 metre to the north eastern (front) courtyard. The extent of earth excavation is considered to result in a development that is not site responsive and that inappropriately modifies the site. The site transformation would effectively make this development an aberration in comparison with existing properties and potential future development in the locality. The proposed development does not provide adequate energy efficiency at the micro level with many of the courtyard areas being poorly designed to receive adequate solar penetration. The submitted solar diagram does not address solar access into the private open space or living area of each unit. This includes the impact of overshadowing from the adjoining northern property as well as from the internal and boundary fences during winter months. Also, the submitted shadow diagram does not consider the additional overshadowing that would be created by changes in the finished ground levels. The overall proposal does not result in a development that would encourage use of its outdoor areas or that provides good circulation and casual surveillance of common areas.

Fundamentally, the design, scale and density of the proposed development does not accord with the basic characteristics of the surrounding area.


Conclusion The development application is considered to represent an overdevelopment of the site and is not site responsive in approach. The scale of development and design would be inconsistent with the predominant character of the area. The proposed levels of cut and fill and hard surface areas are inappropriate. Slopes are excessive, accesses are difficult and the resultant bulk and scale of the development introduce a built form that is unsympathetic to the immediate surroundings. The development is recommended for refusal for the reasons outlined in the Recommendation to this Report.


Attachment 1—Plans

(Available at Council Offices and Libraries)


ITEM NO: 13 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION PAPER FROM THE NEW SOUTH WALES FOOD

AUTHORITY FILE NO: C02066 Recommendations: 1. That the report be received and noted. 2. That Council indicates support, in principle, for the recommendations in the “Food

Regulation Partnership - An Exposure Draft” and advises the New South Wales Food Authority accordingly.

3. That Council expresses the opinion that training of food handlers to a similar

standard to that engendered by the Responsible Service of Alcohol training should be part of the recommendations of this Report.

4. That the progress of NSW Food Regulation Partnership be monitored and a further

Report be submitted to Council prior to the end of 2005 outlining the implications for Council of the implementation of the strategy.

Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Summary The New South Wales Food Authority (NSWFA) has developed, in consultation with local government and other stakeholders, a document entitled “Food Regulation Partnership - An Exposure Draft” and comments were invited by the 15 June 2005. The discussion paper discusses the practical working relationship between the NSWFA and councils in a broad range of functions associated with food safety within the community. This report, which provides a synopsis of the more pertinent aspects of the 69 page discussion paper, recommends “in principle” support for the twenty eight (28) recommendations in the discussion paper whilst at the same time recognising that many of the detailed operational issues require further consultation. Upon completion of this third and final discussion paper, a Report will be submitted to Parliament by the NSWFA regarding the future arrangements for the inspection of all food businesses throughout the state.


Background The period 2001-2005 has seen unprecedented changes in the food regulatory landscape. National food laws were introduced for the first time since Federation in 2001-2003. At a State level, a new Food Act and Regulations were introduced in 2004 including increased enforcement tools for authorised officers and councils. In addition, a new State government agency, the New South Wales Food Authority (NSWFA) commenced in April 2004 with the primary aim of ensuring that the state has a single agency focused on food safety in a similar manner to the establishment of the Environment Protection Authority for pollution matters in the early 1990s. The NSWFA, in consultation with a range of stakeholders including councils, has developed a document called “Food Regulation Partnership - An Exposure Draft”. This discussion paper represents the last opportunity to provide comment prior to the submission of a report to Parliament by the NSWFA in July 2005. Prior to the current discussion paper, in November 2003, an initial document was published entitled “Towards a Strong Food Regulation Partnership”. In October 2004, a second discussion paper called “ NSW Food Regulation Partnership – Issues and Options” was published followed by a series of thirteen workshops across the state in November and December 2004. Submissions were invited on the discussion paper by the end of December 2004. Based on the submissions made by 52 councils and other stakeholders, in addition to verbal comments made at the workshops, the current discussion paper has been developed. Blue Mountains City Council has over many years carried out an active food premises inspection program in addition to providing an informative educational component on Council’s web site. Food premises are inspected annually with appropriate re-inspections undertaken in a timely manner. The inspection program seeks to ensure that a very high standard is maintained in order to protect community health and ensure that the areas reputation as a tourist destination is not jeopardised by unfavourable publicity from a potential or real food poisoning incident. Council’s approach to food premises surveillance has both an educational and regulatory focus with legal action being undertaken as appropriate (in recent years about 10-12 times per year) in addition to the use of penalty infringement notices since their introduction in early December 2004. Contents of Discussion Paper The discussion paper contains twenty eight (28) recommendations and, in recognition of the significant role provided over many years by local councils in carrying out inspections of food premises and a range of associated activities, focuses on formalising the current loose working arrangement between councils and the relevant state agency (formerly the NSW Health Department).


The discussion paper focuses on three key areas as follows: Clearly defining roles between councils and the Food Authority; Providing support and system coordination for councils; and Ensuring a secure funding base for councils.

Defining roles This aspect is intended to prevent duplication between councils and the NSWFA in carrying out inspections and/or investigation of complaints or other associated activities. In addition and in recognition that not all councils will have the same level of resources and ability for various reasons to carry out inspections and the like, councils, by early January 2006 and annually thereafter, are required to indicate to the NSWFA their proposed level of participation in either Category A, B or C food regulatory activities which escalate in the level of involvement. A brief explanation of the above categories is as follows:

Category A: Minimal base role only which would include ‘building approvals’ for new food premises, emergency response situations, food recalls

Category B: ‘Category A’ plus for food service and retail businesses:

Premises inspections; Taking food samples as appropriate; Investigating complaints (including single-cases of food

borne illness); and Enforcement action.

Category C: ‘Categories A and B’ plus any other role negotiated directly between

Council and the NSWFA. These activities could include but are not limited to inspections of food manufacturers and investigating multiple cases of food borne illness.

Blue Mountains City Council is currently involved in approximately Category B activities which include but are not limited to routine inspections of food businesses, investigation of complaints, the taking of food samples, enforcement action in the form of notices, orders, and legal action, the approval of plans for new businesses, food recalls and the like. The discussion paper outlines the proposed arrangements for those councils that either do not want or are unable to participate or alternatively that their staff resources alter significantly or those circumstances in which there may be a perceived or actual conflict of interest.


Support and Systems Coordination The discussion paper proposes a support and assistance program for local government, which would include the following: Tools in the form of templates and interpretive guides, training, technical advice,

support with prosecutions, a grants programs to fund special projects and promotion of careers in food surveillance in order to ensure a sufficient workforce of available skilled officers.

The development of recommended protocols and guidelines. Reporting arrangements whereby councils would provide simple summaries about

their activities with the format and timetable of the reporting yet to be determined. Ensuring a Secure Funding Base The intention is to provide a stronger mechanism for councils to recover costs from business for appropriate inspection and other services. At the same time, there is discussion of full cost recovery by councils for providing inspections whilst recognising that some councils may wish to continue some level of general revenue subsidy to lessen the financial impact on some businesses. It is also recognised that some councils may see inspections of food premises in their local area as part of a community service obligation. The discussion paper indicates that the secure funding base would be achieved by: The publication of a schedule of recommended maximum inspection fees, which

reflect full cost recovery. Providing an opportunity for councils to charge an annual administration fee up to a

specified maximum to recover the indirect costs of providing food regulatory services. Establishing a fee for those circumstances in which a council serves an Improvement

notice on a business in a similar manner to that which currently exists under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act.

Enabling a penalty infringement notice to be served for the non-payment of inspection and administration fees.

It should be noted that the funding initiatives are, in part, contingent upon a funding submission by the NSWFA to State Treasury in September/October 2005 being successful. Currently Blue Mountains City Council generates income from the routine inspections of food premises. This income is generated by charging an inspection and reinspection fee (if appropriate) in addition to income from Penalty Infringements Notices (since December 2004) and from any legal action. The discussion paper indicates as a guide that the NSWFA’s current hourly rate for food premises inspections is $225 and indicates further that the consequent inspection fee for a large business which may take four hours to complete will be $900 and even more if a council decides to charge an optional administration fee. These amounts, which are based on full cost recovery, are far in excess of Blue Mountains City Council’s current fee structure, which ranges from $88 to $242 with a re-inspection fee costing $88.


The previously mentioned proposed optional administration fee which is intended to cover councils’ costs in dealing with complaint handling, enforcement action, food recalls, emergency incidents and other administrative tasks for which Council does not generate an income, has the potential, if agreed to by Council, to be extremely unpopular with business operators. The proposed annual administration fee in the Discussion Paper would range from nil for a low risk business to $2,000 for a high risk business with most businesses being subject to a $250 fee. Other initiatives Other recommendations in the discussion paper include: A proposal to mandate in legislation a minimum involvement role for all councils,

subject to exemptions being available. Incorporation of a council’s planned level of involvement (Category A or B or C) in

their Management Plan. An opportunity for a council to move from Category A, B or C by agreement if staff

resources or other circumstances change. A proposal to standardise the frequency of inspections of food premises (currently

conducted annually by Blue Mountains City Council). Councils being encouraged to provide food handler training programs. Disclosure by Council within 3 months of situations which may involve a potential

conflict of interest arising from a premises or business being owned or operated by Council or operated by a Councillor or staff member or by a member of their family or other comparable situation.

Opportunities for some councils to undertake additional tasks, subject to a service level agreement

Establishment by the NSWFA of compatible information technology systems between councils and the NSWFA.

Recommendations of discussion paper The twenty eight (28) recommendations in the discussion paper are as follows with the brief comments inserted in italics after each recommendation for the purpose of providing some rationale for the specific recommendation.

Recommendation 1 A minimal mandatory role for all councils should be adopted which includes responsibility for: Food premises approval; Emergency response; and Urgent food recalls.


Council involvement in food recalls should only be mandatory where: There is a need for recalled product to be removed from sale very urgently and

more quickly than the affected manufacturer/distributor’s food recall program can reasonably be expected to achieve; or

There is a very low level of confidence that the affected manufacturer/distributor’s food recall program will be effective.

Comments: Currently the Food Act 2003 and the previous editions in 1989 and 1908 have never contained a mandatory provision for any council to carry out routine inspections of food businesses or any other associated activity. This recommendation aims to set a basic minimum role for a council. At the present time Blue Mountains City Council, like all other councils, is notified of all food recalls but this notification arrangement is currently the extent of Council’s “watching brief” on this issue. This recommendation foreshadows a potential variation to Council’s role in the circumstances outlined above. Recommendation 2 Councils should be exempt from fulfilling the following aspects of the base role where they demonstrate exceptional circumstances: Emergency responses initiated by the NSW Food Authority; and Urgent food recalls.

Exemptions would be at the discretion of the Director-General of the NSW Food Authority and taking into consideration: The merit of a written application made by councils; and Advice of the Local Government Consultative Committee.

Comments: Recommendation 2 is self explanatory to cover those circumstances in which a council may seek a mutually agreed exemption from part of the minimum role based whatever reasons would see appropriate. This may include but not be limited to the lack of staff resources, the remoteness of the area, etc. Recommendation 3 Councils should choose what level of food regulatory work they will undertake from 1 of 3 categories: Category A: Minimal base role only.


Category B: ‘Category A’ plus:

For food service and retail businesses: Premises inspections; Investigating complaints (including single-cases of food

borne illness); and Enforcement action.

Category C: ‘Categories A and B’ plus

Any other role negotiated directly between Council and the NSW Food Authority.

This aspect is referred to in the body of the report in that a council should be considering at this stage the particular level of participation in which the council wishes to be involved with the NSWFA. A formal decision will be required in the first half of 2006. Categories A, B and C are escalating levels of involvement. It is therefore recommended that a further progress report be submitted to Council prior to the end of 2005. Recommendation 4 The remit of Category B councils should be the food service and retail sectors (excepting those premises for which Food Safety Schemes establish mandatory food safety program requirements. Comments: Concurrent with this discussion paper, the NSWFA, again in consultation with relevant stakeholders and as part of a national approach, has been developing a database of generic businesses and allocating the businesses to a particular risk priority.

This approach is still in a draft form and is known as the Priority Classification System (PCS). When completed, all food businesses will be divided into four classifications from P1 to P4, with P1 being the highest risk and P4 being the lowest risk. All P1 and some P2 classified businesses will be required to develop and implement mandatory food safety programs. It is probably that P1 type businesses will included in Category C type activities. Councils which opt for Category B activities will be confined to inspections of businesses in the retail and service components, as distinct from the food manufacturing aspect which will probably be subject to a more regimented system requiring each business to have in place a documented food safety plan. The term ”manufacturing” is very broad and can range from a large business with many employees to a single operator perhaps making a single food item (for example biscuits) at home. It is this level of detail which needs to be resolved.


Recommendation 5 Councils should be required to nominate their planned level of food regulatory work (i.e. Category A, B or C) in their Annual Management Plan and provide a copy of that plan to the NSW Food Authority. Where a change to their level of involvement in food regulatory work is planned, councils should give at least 3 months notice to the NSW Food Authority. Comments: It is recognised by all stakeholders that a council’s ability to provide an inspection service and meet certain agreed deadline is in proportion to staff resources, which can fluctuate depending on a variety of circumstances including market forces. This recommendation has been included to cover such a contingency. Recommendation 6 Where unforseen circumstances limit a council’s capacity to fulfil agreed roles, councils should: Notify the NSW Food Authority; and Seek agreement with the NSW Food Authority on what level of support the

Authority will provide.

Comments: The comments applicable to recommendation 6 should be read in conjunction with those from recommendation 5.

Recommendation 7

Councils should have the opportunity to provide statutory audit of food safety programs. This should be subject to the same terms and conditions as other third party audit providers. Comments: The terms “statutory audit” and “food safety programs” have specific meanings within the Food Act (State based legislation) and the Food Standards Code (the national food laws which include the Food Safety Standards). The commencement of the Food Act 2003 from February 2004 contained provision for a private person / individual to be accredited by the NSWFA for the purposes of auditing higher risk businesses such as a manufacturer.


In future, if an accredited food safety auditor audits a business, the local council will not inspect the business. This recommendation has been included to ensure that those councils which opt to carry out additional work in the form of Category C activities which are likely to be perceived high risk manufacturing businesses or a hospital or caterer or long day care centre will not be excluded from the opportunity to carry out such work, provided the staff have the requisite experience and qualifications. Recommendation 8 Category B and C councils should be encouraged, but not required, to provide value-added services, such as food handler training. Comments: This recommendation is self explanatory however the national food laws (Food Safety Standards) require everyone working in a food business to have “appropriate skills and knowledge in food safety and food hygiene in accordance with their work activities”. Attendance at a recognised course is not mandatory as distinct from the liquor industry in NSW where the attainment of a certificate for the Responsible Service of Alcohol is mandatory. Clearly this represents an inconsistency in that whilst councils can and do provide some training subject to resources and time, no competency benchmarks have been developed and enshrined in legislation to compel attendance by food handlers at a training course. Notwithstanding this, this recommendation continues to be a positive measure. Recommendation 9 The current arrangements for appointment of authorised officers by councils (s114, Food Act 2003) should remain unchanged. Comments: In the early consultation period to the production of the discussion paper there had been some concern expressed regarding inconsistencies in inspection results across the state. Whilst this has been identified as a potential issue by the NSWFA, it has been decided to maintain the status quo and address perceived inconsistencies with training and a range of other initiatives Recommendation 10 Within 3 months of implementation of this model councils should be required to: Disclose all possible conflicts of interest to the NSW Food Authority; and Nominate how, for each instance, those potential conflicts will be managed.


For those conflicts that councils do not believe they can manage; councils should seek agreement with the NSW Food Authority on what level of support the Authority will provide. Thereafter, councils should, in a timely manner, keep the NSW Food Authority updated about changes. Circumstances where declaration of possible conflicts should be required are: Council is the landlord of a food premise; Council is the operator of a food business; Councillor and/or their immediate family (parent, sibling, child) is the operator

of, or a food handler in, a food business; Authorised Officer and/or their immediate family (parent, sibling, child) is the

operator of, or a food handler in, a food business; Where there is a perception of lack of objectivity due to breakdown in the

relationship between Council and a food business; and/or Other like circumstances.

Comments: The extensive list of situations which may give rise to a potential conflict of interest, if only on the basis of premises owned or operated by a Council, is of some significance in that if it falls to another agency to carry out such inspections for transparency reasons, this workload is substantial. This recommendation has been included to enable the NSWFA or an adjoining council to inspect a particular business in which for the reason/s outlined, a potential conflict of interest may occur. At a local level, these situations do occur from time to time.

Recommendation 11

The NSW Food Authority should explore establishing contractual arrangements with councils interested in providing food regulatory services in the unincorporated area. Comments: In some parts of the state, food premises exist which are not covered by a local council. It is proposed that on a fee for service basis the NSWFA or a council willing to provide such services, generally in remote areas will carry out these inspections. This will not impact on Blue Mountains City Council. Recommendation 12 The NSW Government should amend the Food Act 2003 to: Mandate a base role in food regulation for councils; Provide for exemptions from the base role; Define optional (Category B) roles for councils;


Define the remit of Category B councils; and Provide for managing conflicts of interest.

Comments: This recommendation is included to previously mentioned items in legislation.

Recommendation 13 The NSW Food Authority should establish service agreements with councils willing and able to undertake roles in food regulation in addition to Category B. Comments: This recommendation is self-explanatory.

Recommendation 14

The NSW Food Authority should continue establishing formal communication and consultation arrangements with councils by: Maintaining a dedicated Local Government Liaison Coordinator within the

NSW Food Authority’s organisational structure; Convening regional forums/network groups; Establishing a state-wide liaison group for council Environmental Health

Officers (EHO); and Publishing a regular newsletter for council EHOs.

Recommendation 15 The NSW Food Authority should provide a formal program of activities to support and assist council roles in food regulation. The support and assistance program should include: Tools; Professional development program; Technical advice; Prosecution support; Special projects grants program; and Promotion careers in food surveillance.

Comments: Recommendations 14 and 15 are part of a package of providing training and support and system coordination for local councils.


Recommendation 16 The NSW Food Authority and Local Government should develop and adopt a set of mandatory protocols under the Food Act 2003, s111. Initially, mandatory protocols for the following matters should be adopted: Emergency response and urgent food recalls; Complaint referral and feedback; Investigating single-case food borne illness complaints; and Submitting samples for analysis.

Thereafter, additional mandatory protocols may be adopted, following consultation with Local Government. Comments: This recommendation is self-explanatory other than to explain that since the beginning of the NSWFA in April 2004, all alleged food poisoning incidents irrespective of the size have been referred to the NSWFA for investigation and tabulating. It is recognised that many alleged single cases of food poisoning are unsubstantiated and the investigation is best dealt with by a local council and it is proposed to transfer this responsibility back to the council. Recommendation 17 The NSW Food Authority and Local Government should explore implementation of an IT solution to facilitate the two-way communication required by mandatory protocols. Comments: A self-explanatory recommendation designed for better communication and reporting. The difficulty for the NSWFA is that councils across the State use a wide variety of IT systems, which are not compatible. Recommendation 18 The NSW Food Authority and Local Government should develop a set of advisory guidelines. Comments: This initiative is proposed to include the various Codes required to supplement legislation. These codes/guidelines could include but not be limited to temporary and mobile food premises which some councils have developed in isolation with the result that the current requirements may vary slightly from area to area.


Recommendation 19 Councils should: Provide data about their food regulatory activities to the NSW Food Authority.

The format and timetable for providing such data should be determined by the NSW Food Authority, after consultation with councils, under the Food Act 2003, s113.

The NSW Food Authority should: Prepare a summary report for councils about statewide food regulatory

activities, based on data provided by councils, at the end of each reporting period.

Comments: This requirement should not unduly impact on Blue Mountains City Council in that the data required for annual reporting purposes is reasonably readily available.

Recommendation 20 A Local Government Consultative Committee should be established by statute as the formal means for consultation between the NSW Food Authority and Local Government stakeholders. The Committee should be drawn from: Elected representatives (Councillors); Council management (General Managers); and Council environmental health professionals.

The Committee would provide policy direction for the NSW Food Regulation Partnership model. Comments: A self-explanatory recommendation. Recommendation 21 The State Government should publish a schedule of recommended maximum inspection fees which: Reflects full cost recovery for inspection services; and Can be used by ‘Category B and C’ councils to guide their own decision

making about inspection fee amounts.


Comments: The consultation process highlighted on occasions a wide variation in the inspection fees charged by councils for similar inspection services. Very few councils, including Blue Mountains City Council, operate on a full cost recovery system preferring to partly subsidise the inspection process from the general rate revenue based on a community service expectations. This report contains information regarding the full cost recovery fees charged by the NSWFA. Council’s recent involvement with the proposed fees for footpath dining provides some indication of the financial sensitivity in the market place. The use of a State Government recommended fee structure would negate any suggestion that Council was being unfair in determining inspection fees for local businesses. Recommendation 22 Enforcement agencies should be entitled to make an annual administration charge to recover the indirect costs of providing food regulatory services. The State Government should publish a schedule of recommended maximum annual administration charges which: Reflects cost recovery; and Can be used by councils to guide their decision-making about inspection fee

amounts.

Comments: This recommendation has already been discussed in the body of this Report. Recommendation 23 Non-payment of service and administration fees should be prescribed as an offence for which authorised officers can issue Penalty Infringement Notices. Comments: This recommendation is likely to be a popular introduction for all councils who on occasions struggle to chase up inspection fees which individually may be relatively small but collectively can be significant, particularly in the present financial climate in which councils, for various reasons, can ill afford to ‘write off’ fees and charges.

The difficulty for councils is whether the pursuing of outstanding relatively small amounts through the courts is a cost effective solution. This recommendation, if successful, will alleviate many of the problems by transferring the responsibility to the expertise and powers of Infringement Processing Bureau on councils’ behalf.


At the present time Blue Mountains City Council has approximately $17K owing in long term outstanding fees. The service of a penalty infringement notice would provide an alternative tool to the current cumbersome debt recovery strategy in which relatively small amounts are involved.

Comparable arrangements currently exist under the Protection Of the Environment Operations Act for the non payment of the prescribed fee of $320 for notices.

Recommendation 24 Enforcement agencies should be entitled to charge a prescribed fee where an improvement notice is issued. Comments: An improvement (or clean up) notice can be served by a council requiring an immediate (minimum 24 hours) clean up of the business. Non-compliance can lead to the service of a Prohibition Order to close the business. These initiatives were introduced in the Food Act from February 2004 and have been used by Blue Mountains City Council officers. These inspections and associated administrative processes can be time consuming and it is proposed to introduce a fee consistent with that applied to similar situations under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act, which Council has been implementing since July 1999. Recommendation 25 Recurrent funding should be provided by NSW Treasury to finance support and assistance by the NSW Food Authority for councils. Recommendation 26 Funding should be provided by NSW Treasury for the following transition initiatives: A stakeholder communication program; A purpose-built website for councils’ EHOs; and The IT solution identified at Recommendation 17.

Recommendation 27 The NSW Food Authority should, within its current budget for food testing, establish arrangements by which councils can submit samples for analysis. Recommendation 28 The NSW Food Authority should define situations where councils could be recompensed from the Authority’s emergency funds.


Comments: Recommendations 25-28 are self-explanatory.

Conclusion As indicated in the summary, Blue Mountains City Council officers have participated in the workshops in November /December 2004 and have continued to monitor the development of the Partnership Project and are generally supportive of the direction taken by the NSWFA, subject to the specific details of the implementation being the subject of further consultation. The discussion paper and recommendations should not be seen as the State Government off loading functions to local government but rather in a more positive sense formalising an loose arrangement which had existed for many years between local government and the NSW Health Department whilst at the same time provide the necessary funding, training and enforcement options for councils. Blue Mountains City Council has established over the last 10-15 years an enviable reputation for setting a high standard in terms of enforcing the food laws within the local government area. This discussion paper outlines a blueprint for at least the next 10-15 years and, if endorsed by Council, creates an opportunity to continue to provide a high level of regulatory service without the involvement of other agencies. Should the inspection services be provided by an agency other than Council, it could be expected that fees would be levied on a full cost recovery basis. Currently, the level of Council fees imposed acknowledges a public good component that effectively discounts the cost to the food proprietor. Further, Council would have little control of food related matters should Council eventually opt for a lesser involvement. Should Council proceed with the level of involvement similar to that presently undertaken, it is likely that the only circumstances in which Council would need to involve another agency (apart from terrorism or an emergency) would be in those situations which require transparency in “potential conflict of interest” incident/s. The only disappointing aspect of the discussion paper is the lack of reference to the establishment of benchmarks for all food handlers having “skills and knowledge in food safety and food hygiene”. Unless a separate initiative is being developed by the NSWFA, an opportunity has been lost to formalise the training requirements (currently no formal requirements exist) in an effort to improve the academic and practical understanding of food safety in the industry.

FACILITATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 14 SUBJECT: MOUNTAINS YOUTH REACH PROJECT FILE NO: C06389 Recommendations: 1. That Council acknowledge the important contribution of the State Government

through the NSW Attorney General’s Department towards the funding of the first and second year of the Mountain Youth Reach Project.

2. That Council request the support of the State Member for funding a third year of

the Mountain Youth Reach Project through the NSW Attorney General’s Department.

3. That Council acknowledge the role of Sydney West Area Health Service in

delivering this important project in the Blue Mountains. 4. That the Common Seal of Council be affixed to the necessary documents relating to

the funding of the Mountain Youth Reach Project. Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Background This report provides Council with an update on the implementation and progress of the Mountain Youth Reach Project and strategies for continued funding of this project. The Mountains Youth Reach Project (MYRP) is a mobile youth health outreach service that was developed as a response to the high priority given to issues and concerns about young people at risk through alcohol and other drug use (AOD) and other related matters identified in the Blue Mountains Crime Prevention and Community Safety Plan. The NSW Attorney General endorsed the plan in 2002 as a “Safer Community Compact”. Council received one year funding for the period October 2003 - September 2004, from the NSW Attorney General’s Crime Prevention Division to implement the first year of the MYRP. The crime prevention issues that the project addresses are:

• Alcohol and other drugs (AOD) use and abuse in a harm minimisation model; • Property damage, graffiti and vandalism; • Violence to and from young people; • Sexual health and sexual assault issues; • Referrals to agencies that engage with young people exhibiting risky behaviours;

and • Domestic violence in the home forcing young people to be out on the streets.

FACILITATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Item 14 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

Description of Project The MYRP provides a mobile outreach service in the Glenbrook / Blaxland / Springwood and Katoomba areas on Friday and Saturday nights. The service operates in the evening when most other youth services are closed. The target population for this project is young people under the age of 18 who are participating in risky behaviour related to AOD use in public places in the Blue Mountains. Blue Mountains City Council (BMCC) entered into an agreement with Wentworth Area Health Service (WAHS) to deliver the project. WAHS was contracted to employ all staff of the project. One permanent part-time worker was employed and all other workers were employed on a casual basis. A committee of representatives from BMCC, WAHS, the Police and local Youth Services was established to provide advice and direction to the project. In its 20 months of operating the MYRP has provided a range of important services including:

• Initial contact with young people affected by AOD, or otherwise exhibiting risky behaviour;

• Brief intervention and education of the target group; • Crisis intervention, support and advocacy; • Harm minimisation activities and education; • Referrals to appropriate services; and • Effective liaison between Police, Youth Services and young people.

Client Contact In the 12-month period between October 2003 and September 2004 the MYRP had contact with 2942 young people. Of these contacts 1634 (56%) were new contacts, and the other 1308 (44%) were repeat contacts, that is, individuals who were seen on more than one occasion. The gender division of contact with young people were young men 66% and young women 34%. This ratio has remained fairly consistent throughout the project and therefore it can be seen that young men are more likely to be out in public spaces at night than young women in the Mountains. The vast majority of contacts were with young people aged 11 – 18 years. Of all contacts, 20.3% were with 11 – 14 year olds, 36.3% were with 15 – 16 year olds and 33.5% were with 17 – 18 year olds. This indicates that the MYRP has been reaching the target group identified for the project. There is no doubt that the MYRP has gained good access to the target group and has been able to engage with young people who are participating in risky behaviour in public places at night.


Activities The “at risk” nature of the target group for this project required the MYRP to deal with various crisis situations. These have included:

• The MYRP staff utilising crisis management skills to remove a young woman from the train tracks, and liaising with State Rail staff and the Police to transport her to a place of safety for the night;

• Young people disclosing they had been evicted from home, which resulted in the MYRP staff giving information on accommodation availability and Centrelink benefits, as well as brief counselling and the option of transport to a refuge;

• The service responding to a domestic violence situation where crisis counselling was given as well as an offer of transport to a place of safety;

• The Police being notified on numerous occasions when young people’s behaviours were assessed as placing them at serious risk, such as engaging in fights and trespassing; and

• Staff responding to a young woman who was receiving unwanted advances from an older male by transporting the young woman home and providing support and counselling.

Another major focus of the project has been to establish links between health services and other agencies. Some examples of these have been:

• Implementing a joint WAHS and Police alcohol awareness project targeting harm reduction and secondary supply of alcohol to minors;

• Organising regular under 18’s barbecues with other services to offer health information and resources to a group of young people who are traditionally difficult to access;

• Offering pizza and video nights in conjunction with Winmalee Youth Service to promote the MYRP to young people in Winmalee;

• Organising bands competitions, hip hop nights etc with Springwood Youth Project, Winmalee Youth Service and Mountains Youth Resource Organisation;

• Conducting open dialogue and exchange of relevant information with State Rail station managers, staff, and State Rail transit officers to improve service delivery to young people on stations, and establish strategies for lessening risky situations;

• Working with Blue Mountains Centrelink (on management, social work and youth outreach levels) to try and establish a greater understanding of each other’s services in order to offer a better quality of service to young people;

• Visiting various bottle shops to respond to concerns regarding under 18 year olds trying to obtain alcohol; and

• Establishing a partnership with Juvenile Justice to develop better outcomes for young people who were joint clients.

A major objective of the project is to improve access for young people to services, as such the MYRP plays an integral role in developing referral pathways for the target group. Project staff are able to engage with the target group and develop meaningful dialogue in a setting in which young people feel comfortable. MYRP staff are able to facilitate referrals to appropriate services. Referrals include Centrelink, Katoomba Youth Refuge, Open House and drug and alcohol counselling.


Second year funding Council applied for second year funding in October 2004. Advice has only just been received that Council was successful in receiving this funding for the Mountain Youth Reach Project from the NSW Attorney General’s Department. A decision in regard to second year funding from the Department was expected in October or November 2004. Wentworth Area Health Service (now part of Sydney West Area Health Service) has continued to operate MYRP since first year funding from the Attorney General’s Department was expended in September 2004 in anticipation of second year funding and in recognition that the project was successfully reaching the target group and providing a very effective service. This recently announced funding is for the period October 2004 - September 2005. The long delay in notification regarding second year funding and the ongoing uncertainty that this has caused has adversely impacted on the project. Whilst the recent announcement from the Attorney Generals Department has extended the MYRP to September 2005, the project now needs certainty as to the possibility of third year funding. This is required to plan for the third year or if unsuccessful, wind down the project. Conclusion The MYRP has been extremely successful in making contact with and addressing the needs of young people at risk identified in the Blue Mountains Crime Prevention and Safety Plan. During the last 20 months of operation, the MYRP has succeeded in making contact with a large number of young people, many of whom would be classified as being at risk. A very large number of young people accessing the service had serious substance use issues. Some were aware of services and had utilised them in the last twelve months, others reported a worrying lack of knowledge of services that were available to them. Since October 2004 the MYRP has focused on improving the links between young people and services and creating referral pathways. Given the strong correlation between crime and alcohol and other drug use among young people, the uptake of services by young people should lead to a decrease in young people at risk, and in the incidence of crimes committed by young people affected by substance use. In any case, the project’s presence has given information and support to a large number of young people who would not otherwise be accessing mainstream services. It is recommended that Council acknowledge the State Local Member and Attorney General, for the State Government’s support of this important local project into it’s second year. To facilitate the planning of year three of this important project it is recommended that Council request the support of the State Member for funding a third year of the Mountain Youth Reach Project through the NSW Attorney General’s Department. The MYRP second year funding will be expended in September 2005, therefore Council requires advice in regard to third year funding as soon as possible.


ITEM NO: 15 SUBJECT: WITHDRAWAL OF FUNDING OF THE BLUE MOUNTAINS

COMMUNITY SERVICES SETTLEMENT SCHEME FILE NO: C02957 Pt2 Recommendations: 1. That Council acknowledge the achievements of the Blue Mountains Community

Services Settlement Scheme auspiced by the Mountains Community Resource Network over the past 13 years.

2. That Council consider the impact of the withdrawal of funding of this important

project and on Council’s ability to provide access to services and support to the Blue Mountains Culturally and Linguistically Diverse communities .

3. That Council request the assistance of the Federal Member for Macquarie in

expressing Council’s concern to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, on the withdrawal of funding of the Blue Mountains Community Services Settlement Scheme and the future provision of settlement services in the Blue Mountains.

Report by Group Manager, City Solutions Introduction The Blue Mountains Community Settlement Services Scheme (BMCSSS) auspiced by the Mountains Community Resource Network (MCRN) has been funded by the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA) since 1992. DIMIA has recently announced that the BMCSSS funding has been completely cut. This will mean the project will cease to operate effective from the end of June 2005 and Blue Mountains will have no funded migrant settlement services accommodated locally. DIMIA have indicated that the Nepean Migrant Access project will now be responsible for delivering services to the Blue Mountains, however the Nepean service has not received extra funding to facilitate this additional responsibility. Blue Mountains Community Settlement Services Scheme The BMCSSS project workers and MCRN have vast experience in delivering effective community settlement services, appropriate to the experience of migrants in the Blue Mountains. The MCRN is recognised by Council and the local community for its proven record in delivering and administering programs that meet priority community needs.


The project workers have provided a much needed point of contact for migrants moving to the Blue Mountains. The Blue Mountains does not have a high concentration of any particular cultural group which impacts in further isolating those migrants and refugees who have moved into the area. The BMCSSS workers have played a vital role in connecting migrants to services and the local community. BMCSSS played a vital role in ensuring that urban fringe areas like the Blue Mountains were welcoming to newly arrived migrants and refugees and those moving from areas where they originally settled. Refer to attachment 1 for a brief summary of selected BMCSSS achievements. Partnership with Blue Mountains City Council Council adopted an Access and Equity policy in January 2000. To assist the implementation of that policy Council formed an Access and Equity Working Group. This Working Group coordinates many of Council’s Access and Equity initiatives. Part of the Working Group’s brief is to improve access to Council’s services and facilities by people from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) communities in the Blue Mountains. Council does not have a Multicultural Officer and has relied heavily on the Blue Mountains Community Services Settlement Scheme to provide advice to Council’s Access and Equity Working Group to improve access to Council services by CALD communities. The BMCSSS workers have assisted in providing training to Council staff ensuring that it included issues specific to the Blue Mountains. The scheme has provided information for all new citizens at Council’s citizenship ceremonies. Council has referred clients to the project workers on many occasions. BMCSSS has provided advice to Council on how to increase awareness of cultural diversity within the Blue Mountains. The BMCSSS workers have assisted in ensuring that migrant communities were represented in Council consultations and have been involved in Council’s Community Planning and the development of “ Towards a More Sustainable Blue Mountains: A 25 Year Vision for the City”. Blue Mountains City Council signed the Refugee Welcome Zone Declaration in April 2004. Council’s Access and Equity Working Group recognises that there is now a greater need for local caseworkers especially to assist newly arrived refugees and migrants who are particularly socially isolated. With the withdrawal of funding of the BMCSSS there will be increased pressure on Council to provide settlement services previously provided by the project to newly arrived migrants and refugees. Council is unable to provide additional resources to fill the gap in the important role in the local community created by the withdrawal of funding of the BMCSSS.


Recommendations It is recommended that Council acknowledge the achievements of the BMCSSS over the last 13 years. It is recommended that Council request the assistance of the Federal Member for Macquarie in raising Council’s concern regarding the withdrawal of funding of the BMCSSS and the impact that this will have on the local community.


Attachment 1

Achievements of the Migrant Project 1992 to 2005

Mountains Community Resource Network Inc. Brief overview: In 1991 Mountains Community Resource Network researched the needs of Mountains residents from non-English speaking backgrounds, and produced the “Its not such an Anglo Community Report”. Nepean Migrant Access provided an outreach service one day per week to the Mountains. In 1992 MCRN received funding for a 20 hour part-time migrant worker under the grant in aid scheme, after a delegation of migrant residents to Canberra. This became fulltime in 1994. This project is now referred to as Blue Mountains Community Services Settlement Scheme, reflecting a change in focus to settlement in the first five years of arrival. The project has been the only service focused on supporting migrant individuals and families and raising awareness of migration issues with organisations and government departments in the Mountains. It has had significant input into a range of local and regional policy developments aimed at assisting people to fully participate in community life. In June of 2005 MCRN was informed that the project would no longer be funded. Overall Achievements of the Migrant project:

• Migrants and refugees in the Mountains are more visible and have a stronger sense of identity

• Community organisations have a greater understanding of their access and equity obligations

• BMCC, TAFE, schools and community organisation have had training in cultural awareness leading to greater acknowledgement and commitment to supporting migrants

• The local Blue Mountains community has had access to a rich range of cultural events and experiences through Carnivale, Connecting Cultures and World music concerts

• There is documented analysis of the demographics of the BM migrant communities and identification of the consequences of systemic social exclusion and isolation.

• Hundreds of migrants and refugee families living in our community have had the benefits of casework and intensive support

• Blue Mountains has a comprehensive library of resources on migrant issues Some highlights of the project’s work:

• Establishment of the Blue Mountains Migrant Residents Association and continued support to local migrants to organise annual Carnivale Concerts and Connecting Cultures events. These activities have attracted up to 400 people to events. In 1996 the project ran over 30 events in two weeks to celebrate our cultural diversity.

• Convening the Mountains Multicultural Interagency which attracted both regional services to come to the Mountains and resourced local services

• Collaboration with BMCC on Access and Equity strategies leading to for example Council holding an annual Harmony Day Morning Tea to welcome new migrants.

• Developing new residents kits with neighbourhood centres • Research on needs of local migrants: older people from non-English speaking backgrounds,

culturally diverse young people from migrant families, women, people in nursing homes; Filipino community needs

• Partnership with BM TAFE to hold BM Employment and Training Forum in 2000 • Immigration advice service assisted many people with visa difficulties • “Under Different Stars” – a Spanish speaking bi-lingual report in partnership with BM

Women’s Health Centre


Attachment 1

Impact of loss of funding:

• There will no longer be a dedicated project to assist migrants with personal difficulties, community capacity building or cultural events. Casework will cease to exist for migrants in the Mountains.

• Mainstream organisations will be expected to do this work, regardless of the lack of resources and current obligations.


ITEM NO: 16 SUBJECT: COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE / DONATIONS -

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

Organisation Amount

Blaxland Public School P&C $450 Mid Mountains Netball Club $75 Blackheath & Mt Victoria RSL Sub-Branch $100 Blue Mountains Family Support $100 Blue Mountains East Timorese Sisters Project $500 Winter Magic Festival Inc $500 Glenbrook & District Historical Society Inc $100 Glenbrook Swimming Club $150 Blue Mountains Water Polo $200 Mt Riverview Neighbourhood Watch $100 Lower Blue Mountains Family Support Service $180 Lower Blue Mountains Junior Concert Band $180 Glenbrook Preschool Kindergarten $180 Glenbrook District Guides $180 Blue Mountains Creative Art Centre $150 Report by General Manager: On 11 July 2000 Council adopted a revised Policy for Councillors’ Minor Local Projects allocations for the provision of community assistance/donations. The following recommendations for donation, which appear to fall within the ambit of the Policy, have been received and are submitted for approval.


Minor Local Projects

Recommending Councillor

Organisation Purpose Amount

Cr K Frappell Blaxland Public School P&C

Towards purchase of computers for school use $450

Cr C Van der Kley Mid Mountains Netball Club

To assist with purchase of trophies $75

Cr T Hamilton Blackheath & Mt Victoria RSL Sub-Branch

To assist with ANZAC Day Ceremony $100

Cr K O’Grady Blue Mountains Family Support General program funding $100

Cr K O’Grady Blue Mountains East Timorese Sisters Project

Assistance with research and travel costs for 27 June trip to East Timor

$500

Cr K O’Grady Winter Magic Festival Inc Contribution to essential street cleaning and waste costs as per events plan

$500

Cr F Creed Glenbrook & District Historical Society Inc Printing of newsletter $100

Cr F Creed Glenbrook Swimming Club Administration costs $150 Cr F Creed Blue Mountains Water Polo Equipment costs $200

Cr F Creed Mt Riverview Neighbourhood Watch Administration costs $100

Cr F Creed Lower Blue Mountains Family Support Service Equipment costs $180

Cr F Creed Lower Blue Mountains Junior Concert Band Purchase of instruments $180

Cr F Creed Glenbrook Preschool Kindergarten Equipment purchase $180

Cr F Creed Glenbrook District Guides Repairs to hall $180

Cr F Creed Blue Mountains Creative Art Centre Administration costs $150

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 17 SUBJECT: APPLICATIONS FOR CONTINUED USE OF COMMUNITY

BUILDINGS BY COMMUNITY GROUPS FILE NO: C02907 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That Council gives approval for the continued use of Council's community

buildings by the community services groups mentioned in this report and for Agreements to be implemented / renewed in accordance with the Community Buildings Policy.

Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Background In accordance with the Community Buildings Policy, adopted 19 February 2002, "non-profit organisations wishing to establish or continue to use all or part of a community building must apply for such use on a four-year basis and within six months of the Local Government election on the prescribed form". Refer to Attachment 1. Annual Statement of Community Benefit. Council's Premises Review Panel, which comprises of Councillors, representatives from community service organisations and relevant Council staff, met on 19 April 2005 to review the Annual Statements of Community Benefit and make recommendations to Council for occupation of the premises. Applications for exclusive use of all, or part of a community building by a community service group was assessed by the Panel against the following criteria: The group provides services, activities and/or meeting places, which address

community needs. The premises will be used as a place from which community services activities

and/or meetings can take place. The organisation promotes the development of voluntary, special interest and/or

mutual support associations and networks between these associations, interests and activities to meet community needs.

Access and Equity principles are implemented by the organisation. The organisation works in partnership with community organisations and with

other government and non-government agencies to meet identified community needs.

The organisation promotes leisure and cultural activities, which enrich the quality of life of local residents.

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Item 17 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

In accordance with the Community Building Policy, "in general, existing non-profit groups who occupy all or part of a community building and who provide services to the community will continue to have occupation". Under Section 4 of the Community Buildings Policy: Use of Community Buildings by Community Service Organisations, tenanted community groups are responsible for: - All outgoings excepting building insurance and Council rates. Minor maintenance to a maximum of $300 for any one item once Council's annual

allocated minor maintenance vote, which is allocated in budget for community buildings, has been exhausted.

Conclusion The following groups have met the requirements of the Community Buildings Policy. The groups have been recommended for approval by the Premises Review Panel for continued use of the premises they currently occupy and for Agreements to be implemented / renewed. Australian Red Cross - Blue Mountains Branch Blackheath Area Neighbourhood Centre Blue Mountains Community Legal Centre Blue Mountains Developmental Youth Recreation Service Blue Mountains Vietnam Veterans & Associated Forces Home Care Service NSW - Blue Mountains Branch Glenbrook Pre-School Kindergarten Katoomba Children's Cottage Katoomba / Leura Pre-School Kindergarten Lapstone Pre-School Kindergarten Mountains Community Resource Network Mountains Youth Resource Organisation Springwood Pre-School Kindergarten Upper Mountains Youth Centre Wentworth Falls Pre-school Kindergarten Winmalee Pre-school

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Item 17 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

Attachment 1

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY BENEFIT

NAME OF FACILITY: ________________________________________________

STREET ADDRESS: ________________________________________________

POSTAL ADDRESS: ________________________________________________

ORGANISATION: ________________________________________________

ABN NUMBER: ________________ TELEPHONE: _______________________

FACSIMILE: ________________ E-MAIL: _______________________

CONTACT NAMES: ________________________________________________

1. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE ORGANISATION Please attach 2. DOES THE ORGANISATION HAVE AN ACCESS AND EQUITY POLICY

Yes No If so, please attach. 3. EXPLAIN BRIEFLY WHAT STEPS YOU HAVE TAKEN TO IMPLEMENT THIS POLICY ______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

4. WHAT ARE THE TARGET GROUPS FOR YOUR SERVICE ______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

5. WHAT IS YOUR SERVICE CATCHMENT AREA ______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

6. HOW DOES THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT BY THE PROVISION OF YOUR SERVICE ______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

7. PLEASE ATTACH THE MOST RECENT AUDITED STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 18 SUBJECT: NEW APPOINTMENTS TO THE MID MOUNTAINS COMMUNITY

CENTRE COMMITTEE FILE NO: H00135 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That Council appoint Mr. Mick Barrett and Mr. Harry Berwick as members of the

Mid Mountains Community Centre Committee. Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: The Mid Mountains Community Centre Committee, in committee minutes dated April 6th and correspondence dated May 13th, have requested Council to give consideration to appointing to the committee: Mr. Mick Barrett who will represent the Mid Mountains Neighbourhood Centre

which operates from the Mid Mountains Community Centre Mr. Harry Berwick who will represent the Lawson Primary School. The school is a

primary user of the Mavis Wood Hall, which forms part of the Mid Mountains Community Centre.

The nominees Mr. Mick Barrett is a resident of the Blue Mountains and has worked in the community sector for approximately twenty (20) years. Mr. Barrett brings with him years of experience in community management both working with and for community based committees. Mr. Barrett has recently been appointed Co-ordinator of the Mid Mountains Neighbourhood Centre. Mr. Harry Berwick, also resides in the Blue Mountains and began his teaching career with the Dept of Education in 1977. During his career Mr. Berwick gained appointments as Assistant Principal, Student Welfare Consultant and Principal in 1999. At the beginning of this year Mr. Berwick was appointed Principal of the Lawson Public School. Mr. Berwick also has experience in working with community-based committees, having been a member of Katoomba Neighbourhood Centre Management Committee and the 2Blue FM Management Committee.

TRANSPORTATION & ROADS Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 19 SUBJECT: LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE FILE NO: C00534 Recommendation: That Council receive and note this report and advise the RTA of the Local Traffic Committee’s assessment. Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Attached to this Report are the Minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Local Traffic Committee held on 25 May 2005. The recommendations of the Committee are now submitted to Council for approval.

TRANSPORTATION & ROADS Item 19 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

Attachment

EXTRAORDINARY LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MEETING

25 MAY 2005

Attendance: The meeting was held at the Lawson Police Station on Wednesday 25 May 2005 at 3.00pm. The attendees were:

Mr. John Derum Representative for the Hon. Bob Debus MP Mr Glenn Sherlock BMCC Chair Ms Lyn Van Putten RTA Sgt. Andrew Spencer Police Snr. Const. David Cogno Police Snr. Const. D. Adams Police Ms Janina Olmos-New BMCC Minutes

Great Western Highway, Mount Victoria. Truck Parking Opposite Caltex Service Station

Background

The Great Western Highway is a classified road under the care and control of the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA). Issues regarding the Highway may be addressed by the Local Traffic Committee (LTC) and the RTA advised for their action.

This matter was discussed at the LTC meeting of 26 October 2004 and it was considered that parking restrictions were not appropriate at his location. Instead, Council officers and the Caltex Management would draft and implement a code of conduct for the heavy vehicle drivers using the area to reinforce their awareness of the residents and reduce noise and rubbish.

An extra-ordinary meeting was called on the 25 May 2005 to re-assess the matter of the truck parking opposite the Caltex Service station at Mt Victoria. This has resulted from a request made by the Mayor of Blue Mountains City Council and further representations having been made by the office of the Minister for Roads, The Hon. Michael Costa to the RTA.

The issue that was addressed at the meeting is the parking of heavy vehicles opposite the Caltex Service Station on the southern side of the Highway. The parking occurs when drivers use the facilities offered at the Caltex Service station including toilets, showers, food and rest.


Attachment

The Caltex service station has a 24 hour operating permit and consequently is used throughout the day and night as a rest stop for truck drivers heading east and west to refuel and rest. The restaurant section of the service station does not open between midnight and 5.00am, but food and beverages are still available for purchase during this time.

The Local Traffic Committee supports the use of this facility by heavy vehicle drivers to stop and rest. Safety programs for heavy vehicle drivers have stressed the requirement that long hauls need to be broken up by rest stops. Both the RTA and Police commented that truck drivers who do stop at this location are being responsible in their driving actions and consequently, resulted in a decrease of heavy vehicle accidents along the Highway.

While the safety improvements can be assessed and measured it is also appreciated that there are residents along this section of the Highway that are affected by the parking of trucks on the southern side, particularly at night. The Police advised that they have records of complaints from the time before the current upgrade of the service station facility was done. While it has been an issue, there has been an operational service station at this location for a number of years and that as a consequence residents could expect that vehicles would park at this location from time to time.

The committee put forward and discussed three possible options to improve the amenity for residents at night. These options were assessed regarding benefits and detriments.

1. Provision of ‘No Stopping’ restriction on the western side of the Highway for a distance of approximately 500m along between Fairy Dell Road (eastern end) and the front of the service station.

This action was not supported because it is not primarily a safety or traffic management issue. The RTA further advised that this action is not considered appropriate and if completed the issue would not be resolved and likely return to the Police and Council in the future as complaints from other affected parties.

The Police advised that it would be difficult to enforce due to the limited available patrols. This action would also result in the displacement of heavy vehicle parking along the highway. Trucks would likely park further west on the Great Western Highway at an unsafe location.

It was agreed that while certain residents may benefit, other residents would not due to the trucks moving along to another location. It would also result in the existing residences permanently losing the parking outside their homes.

2. Restricting truck parking during night hours only on the southern side of the Great Western Highway between Fairy Dell Road and the front of the service station.

The manager of the service station has advised that they would accept restricted parking hours on the southern side of the highway during the night hours. His advice has been that their business is not high during that time and thus would not be adversely affected if implemented.


Attachment

This action would result in the residents benefiting during the night hours only. Outside of the restricted hours, parking would still be available along the section of road and residents would have parking outside their residences.

Unfortunately, the enforcement of the night hour restrictions would still be difficult for the Police due to the limited patrol. Heavy vehicles may be displaced to other locations with new complaints.

3. No change. Continue with the existing conditions.

The result of this will be that some residents will continue to forward complaints to the RTA, Council and Police.

However, no heavy vehicles will be displaced to other unsafe locations resulting in fresh complaints from newly affected residents. Additionally the Police would not be required to commit to enforce restrictions that they cannot resource.

Council officers are continuing to work with the service station management to promote a voluntary code of conduct with truck drivers to reduce noise and keep the area clean of rubbish.

Conclusion

Any changes made to restrict or prevent parking on the western side of the Great Western Highway between the service station and Fairy Dell Road would result in a displacement of the perceived issue from it’s current location to another location. In addition, the Police has advised that they would not be able to suitably enforce parking restrictions.

The use of the facilities at this location is supported by the Local Traffic Committee due to the benefit that it has achieved in reducing the number of heavy vehicle accidents attributed to fatigue. Safety on the Great Western Highway is an ongoing concern that would be detrimentally affected by the introduction of restrictions to parking outside this location. The heavy vehicle drivers should be able to use the facility at all available times.

Recommendation

That existing parking conditions on the southern side of the Great Western Highway are maintained.

NOTICE OF MOTION Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 20 SUBJECT: STATUS OF COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS SINCE MARCH 2004 FILE NO: C01185 By Councillor P McInnes:

“That Council receive a report which provides a list (including the date) of resolutions of Council, passed since March 2004, which have not yet been acted upon, and/or where action has commenced but is incomplete, provides an explanation as to its current status.”

NOTICE OF MOTION Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 21 SUBJECT: RUBBISH DUMPING AT BLAXLAND FILE NO: C02711 By Councillors K Frappell and D Myles:

“That a report come back to Council addressing actions which might prevent the dumping of rubbish at the clothing bins located within and directly adjacent to the north-western car park at Blaxland, nearest the intersection of Hope and View Streets, with such report to include the option of having the four commercial clothing bins removed from the site.”

Background: There is a longstanding, continuing practice of dumping rubbish at the four clothing bins located within and directly adjacent to the north-western car park at Blaxland, nearest the intersection of Hope and View Streets.

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

ITEM NO: 22 SUBJECT: PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE, 21/6/2005 FILE NO: C00680 Recommendation: That the Precis of Selected Correspondence be received and appropriate letters forwarded where necessary. 1. 25/5/2005 – 11 Petitioners from Blackheath Seeking Council’s attention to the condition of road access to homes in Carter Lane

and Hargraves Street, Blackheath. Noting that driveways have become badly eroded and that the roads are extremely degraded due to the dirt surface and steep grades, resulting in dangerous conditions for pedestrians, residents and drivers who use the roads.

2. 26/5/2005 – 14 Petitioners from Katoomba Opposing a land use application for 94 Waratah Street, Katoomba to modify the

approved hours of operation of the educational establishment for courses in Psychotherapy.

3. 26/5/2005 – The Hon Bob Debus MP, Member for Blue Mountains Welcoming Council’s support for a strengthened National Packaging Covenant,

and noting Council’s suggestion that there be national container deposit legislation (CDL) along the lines of the South Australian scheme. Advising that the Government is committed to reducing the waste burden on the environment and finding ways to make industry take more responsibility for their products when they become waste.

4. 27/5/2005 – Resident of Blackheath Thanking Council staff for recent road sealing work carried out in front of their

property in Carysfort Street, Blackheath, and also for the road sealing to the end of Cleopatra Street.

5. 30/5/2005 – Kerry Bartlett MP, Member for Macquarie Regarding the proposal by the Japanese Fisheries Agency to embark on a new

whaling program in the Southern Ocean, and advising that he hopes Council can join him in opposing this new program and enlist support from the local area. One suggestion is a petition located at Council Offices to be forwarded to Sanda City, Japan, Council’s Sister City.

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Item 22 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/6/05

6. 6/6/2005 – J Murphy, John Wycliffe Christian School Thanking a Council staff member for their assistance with a Personal Interest

Project on the issues relating to ‘P-Plate Culture’ and how to address them. 7. 6/6/2005 – 15 Petitioners Opposing the development application to construct a 20 metre Telstra

telecommunications antenna and shed adjacent the Linden Water Reservoir off Numantia Road, Linden.

8. 8/6/2005 – Resident of Blaxland Thanking Council staff for inspecting the area outside their residence in Meredith

Street, Blaxland for resurfacing, and for the subsequent repair of the eroded part of the road.

9. 8/6/2005 – Senator the Hon Robert Hill, Minister for Defence Concerning Council’s request for the naming of a future Royal Australian Navy

(RAN) warship HMAS KATOOMBA. Advising that many requests are received from throughout Australia to perpetuate the names of former RAN warships that have served our country with distinction, and that Council’s request has been forwarded to the Chief of Navy for future consideration. Also noting that the RAN’s agreement to consider this proposal should not be seen as an indication that the name will be selected, as the number of appropriate names far exceeds the number of future ships available to carry them.

10. 9/6/2005 – Resident of Lawson Thanking a Council staff member for the prompt repair to the hinge on the lid of

their garbage bin. 11. 10/6/2005 – Kerry Bartlett MP, Member for Macquarie Advising that he has received correspondence from the Minister for Defence,

Senator the Hon Robert Hill, acknowledging Council’s interest in naming a future warship HMAS KATOOMBA, and indicating that Senator Hill has passed Council’s correspondence on to the Chief of Navy. Also, assuring Council of his full support for having a future warship named HMAS KATOOMBA.

item no: 1 subject: heritage studies of lawson core

Documents