maitland city council ordinary meeting …...2006/03/14 · north star cruises australia, wa...

MAITLAND CITY COUNCIL

ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA

14 MARCH, 2006

ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA 14 MARCH, 2006

Page (i)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO 1 INVOCATION.............................................................................................. 1

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

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

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

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

6 MAYORAL MINUTE.................................................................................... 1

7 PUBLIC ACCESS ....................................................................................... 1

8 WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS AND ACCEPTANCE OF LATE ITEMS OF BUSINESS .................................................................................................. 1

9 OFFICERS REPORTS ................................................................................ 2

9.1 GENERAL MANAGER................................................................. 2

9.1.1 AUSTRALIAN TOURISM AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE............ 2

9.1.2 MAITLAND TOURISM AUDIT ...................................................... 5

9.1.3 MATILAND CITY TOURISM BRANDING..................................... 7

9.2 SERVICE PLANNING AND REGULATION............................... 12

9.2.1 PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION DRAFT REPORT - CONSERVATION OF AUSTRALIA'S HISTORIC HERITAGE PLACES ..................................................................................... 12

9.2.2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP 1993 TO PERMIT A REFRESHMENT ROOM AT 35 PATERSON ROAD, BOLWARRA................................................................... 23

9.2.3 CENTRAL MAITLAND PLANNING INVESTIGATIONS ............. 37

9.2.4 CHANGES TO LOCAL ENVIORNMENTAL PLANNING PROCESSES ............................................................................. 39

9.2.5 PROPOSED REZONING - ST HELENA FRENCH THEMED TOURIST VILLAGE.................................................................... 57

9.2.6 DRIVER TESTING PARKING ZONE OPPOSITE MOTOR REGISTRY, GARNETT ROAD, EAST MAITLAND .................... 62


Page (ii)

9.2.7 RUTHERFORD SHOPPING CENTRE MALL AND CAR PARK IMPROVEMENTS ...................................................................... 67

9.3 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION........................................... 80

9.3.1 REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE - HUNTER MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE ............................................................ 80

9.3.2 INQUIRY INTO FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY OF NSW .......... 82

10 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION..................................................................... 85

10.1 STATUS REPORT ON CONSTRUCTION WORKS .................. 85

10.2 COUNCIL’S HOMEPAGE STATISTICS .................................... 91

11 NOTICE OF MOTION/RESCISSION......................................................... 92

11.1 POLICY - PRE-SCHOOLS - NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY CLR RAY FAIRWEATHER ................................................................ 92

12 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ............................................................. 94

13 URGENT BUSINESS ................................................................................ 94

14 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE................................................................. 94

15 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE .... 94

16 CLOSURE................................................................................................. 94


PRESENT

1 INVOCATION

2 APOLOGIES

3 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

• The minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 28 February 2006 be confirmed.

5 BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES

6 MAYORAL MINUTE

7 PUBLIC ACCESS

8 WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS AND ACCEPTANCE OF LATE ITEMS OF BUSINESS

Page 1


9 OFFICERS REPORTS

9.1 GENERAL MANAGER

9.1.1 AUSTRALIAN TOURISM AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE

File No: 139/6

Responsible Officer: David Evans General Manager

Author: Roger Stephan Executive Manager Economic Development and Marketing

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the recently announced results of the 2005 Australian Tourism Awards.

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

REPORT The National Tourism Alliance (NTA) was formed to establish unity within the Australian Tourism Industry by providing a single voice to Federal Government on issues of common interest. Membership is open to national industry associations and state tourism industry councils whose NTA members represent over 45,000 or 95% of tourism businesses in Australia. The Australian Tourism Awards, as organised by the National Alliance of Tourism, recognise and promote excellence in tourism and are the pinnacle of achievement for the tourism industry in our nation. For 2005, finalists were drawn from State and Territory Tourism Awards winners across twenty seven categories with winners ultimately being announced at an Awards Dinner held on 24th February 2006 at the Gold Coast Convention Centre, Queensland. The Maitland local government area was represented in three of the twenty seven Award categories. Our finalists were: Hunter Valley Steamfest: Significant Regional Festivals and Events Maitland Gaol: Cultural and Heritage Tourism Northern Highlands Travel: Significant Tour and Transport Operators

Page 2


AUSTRALIAN TOURISM AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE (Cont.)

In the end Maitland and our wider Region were unsuccessful in gaining National Titles on the night. Indeed New South Wales as a whole faired relatively poorly with a single victory on the night. It is to be hoped that our State will be more successful in the 2006 Awards to be announced in Sydney in February 2006. Category Winners: Major Tourist Attractions Significant Tourist Attractions

Sovereign Hill, VIC Questacon, ACT

Major Festival & Special Events Significant Regional Festivals & Events

Clipsal 500 Adelaide, SA Hahn Premium Hamilton Island Race Week, QLD

Ecotourism Heritage & Cultural Tourism

Kingfisher Bay Resort and Village, QLD Immigration Museum, VIC

Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Tourism General Tourism Services

Kooljaman at Cape Leveque, WA Central Australian Tourism Industry Assoc, NT

Meetings & Business Tourism Tourism Retailing

Perth Convention Exhibition Centre, WA Australia Zoo, QLD

Tour & Transport Operators - Major Tour & Transport Operators - Significant

Kangaroo Island SeaLink, SA Gordon River Cruises, TAS

Adventure Tourism Destination Promotion

North Star Cruises Australia, WA Murraylands Tourism Marketing, SA

Tourism Product Marketing Media

National Capital Educational Tourism Project, ACT

NSW Caravan & Camping Holiday and Touring Guide 2005, NSW

Tourism Education & Training Tourism Restaurants & Catering Services

Victoria University, VIC Spirit House Restaurant & Cooking School, QLD

Tourism Wineries Tourist & Caravan Parks

Yering Station, VIC Cairns Coconut Caravan Resort, QLD

Backpacker Accommodation Hosted Accommodation

The Greenhouse Backpacker, VIC Seppeltsfield Vineyard Cottage, SA

Unique Accommodation Standard Accommodation

Kooljaman at Cape Levique, WA Ashmore Palms Holiday Village, QLD

Page 3


AUSTRALIAN TOURISM AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE (Cont.)

Major Tourist Attractions Significant Tourist Attractions

Deluxe Accommodation Luxury Accommodation

Novotel Atrium Darwin, NT Crown Towers, VIC

New Tourism Development

The Henry Jones Art Hotel, TAS

CONLCUSION While the final results of the Australian Tourism Awards were disappointing, it should nevertheless be recorded that – for a City of only 62,000 residents – national finalist status in three out of twenty seven categories was an outstanding achievement by any measure. The staff of Northern Highlands Travel, Hunter Valley Steamfest and the Maitland Gaol are therefore to be congratulated for the successes they have achieved and for their wider contribution to the profile and economies of Maitland and the Hunter Valley.

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

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

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

Page 4


Page 5

9.1.2 MAITLAND TOURISM AUDIT

File No: 139/6



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide Council with the final draft of the audit of tourism infrastructure and support funded under the NSW State Government’s Developing Regional Resources Program and to foreshadow development and implementation of a strategic plan to implement identified action areas within the document.

OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION THAT:

1. The audit report be received; and

2. A report be provided to a future meeting of Council on implementation strategies to address areas of weakness and opportunity identified within the report.

REPORT The NSW State Government in conjunction with Maitland City Council funded a major consultancy investigation into the nature, context and likely future directions of the tourism industry within and for Maitland City. This investigation – the Maitland City Tourism Audit 2005 – has now been received and is a very comprehensive report comprising assessment of:

• The location, presentation and perception of Maitland City from a market perspective

• The attractions, activities and experiences on offer in Maitland City and the surrounding area

• The accommodation base

• The support infrastructure

• The markets attracted to Maitland City and the surrounding Hunter Region and visitation patterns and characteristics

• Opportunities and constraints


MAITLAND TOURISM AUDIT (Cont.)

Page 6

The audit report is now being analysed with a view to the development of a strategic plan to address identified opportunity action areas. This strategic plan will be forwarded to Council following its completion along with an indication of timeframes for its implementation.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Costs associated with development of the Tourism Audit were met on a dollar for dollar basis by Council and the State Government.




Page 7

9.1.3 MATILAND CITY TOURISM BRANDING

File No: 139/6



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to inform Council of a proposed change to the tourism branding of the Maitland local government area.

OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION THAT:

1. The change in Maitland City tourism branding from “Hunter River Country” to “Maitland, Hunter Valley” be endorsed

2. An update report on the progress of local and wider tourism branding and marketing be provided to a future meeting of Council

REPORT Maitland City’s current “Hunter River Country” tourism branding was introduced n 2001 as the combined result of a review of the operation and effectiveness of the former Maitland Tourism Forum and a belief – general amongst the tourism industry within the City – that a major alteration in strategic direction and leadership was required to take tourism within Maitland to the next stage in its development. Why Hunter River Country? The decision to move from the former branding – “Heritage Centre of New South Wales” – to Hunter River Country arose out of a series of meetings held in 2000 and 2001 and from findings derived from a major survey of tourism operators which dealt, amongst other issues, with our tourism strengths as a City and the contribution of our current branding to the viability of the industry. In the survey tourism operators overwhelmingly expressed the view that our strengths / attractions in tourism went beyond “heritage” and included features such as our scenic environment, our location within the Hunter, the river as a geographical and historical “shaper” of our community, the diverse lifestyle opportunities we offer, our hinterland, proximity to wine country and the potential for experiential as opposed to passive visitor activities. Operators were particularly concerned by the perception


MATILAND CITY TOURISM BRANDING (Cont.)

Page 8

that “heritage” as a tag was limiting and had appeal to a relatively narrow sector of the possible visitor market. By expanding our focus to “Hunter River Country” it was felt that a great range of possibilities could be opened up and considerable industry enthusiasm generated without – importantly – abandoning a focus on those aspects of architectural heritage that had previously been promoted. Indeed it was suggested that the new approach might provide opportunities in natural and social heritage that had previously not been fully explored. Tourism strategic plan As a result of the change in branding a new strategic framework was established with the following focus areas: Major focus areas within the plan are: 1. Building of recognition of the “Hunter River Country” brand through

comprehensive marketing and promotion activities 2. Enhanced participation in Hunter Regional Tourism Organisation Tourism NSW

marketing initiatives under the Hunter River Country banner 3. Development and implementation of strategies to identify and address

deficiencies in accommodation and facility provision 4. Provision of increased support to major events such as Hunter Valley Steamfest

and the Morpeth Jazz Festival through implementation of an events strategy 5. Development of stronger tourism industry networks and development of

materials, training and resources to encourage, monitor and advise on the delivery of the best possible tourism services

6. Development and implementation of mechanisms to measure and evaluate

tourism trends, visitor and employment numbers 7. Enhanced input to wider Council and City strategies to promote awareness of

the impact of facilities and services on visitor perceptions of the City / length of stay / expenditure

8. Development and implementation of strategies to communicate to the

community the contribution of tourism to the City and its development. Current Situation The change in positioning from “Heritage Centre of New South Wales” to “Hunter River Country” was an exciting development that facilitated significant growth in our tourism industry and its contribution to the wider community. This was particularly the case given that it coincided with Council’s assumption of control of major tourism



Page 9

events and the resultant increased capacity of those events to generate visitor numbers and tourist expenditure. In 2006, however, it is timely to consider a change. Principally this change relates to regional tourism initiatives promoted by both Hunter Tourism and Tourism NSW and which impact on likely local tourism strategy. These initiatives have – as previously reported to Council – the following key objectives and recommendations: Objectives: • To provide a new strategic marketing direction for the Hunter Region,

enabling the Region to both effectively target and communicate to visitors, and to identify product development opportunities in line with market needs

• To identify ways to attract new and/or growing markets (intrastate markets, interstate markets, international markets, business tourism, cruise tourism, events) and examine potential linkages both within the Hunter Region and with neighbouring Regions

• To prioritise infrastructure and development opportunities that will have maximum short to medium term impact for the Region

• To improve the conversion process through information distribution and visitor services

• To ensure that the right structures are in place to deliver the Plan’s new business model

Recommendations: • Establish 5 Product Zones to increase tourism business by promoting their

cluster of experiences to targeted consumer segments • Focus on Newcastle Airport as a key opportunity to build interstate visitation • Adopt a standardised and integrated regional approach to distribution and

sales through the “Hunter Tourism Exchange” • Restructure Hunter Tourism including the Board and operational structure For Maitland the principal impact of the Plan is the move away from our local government area as a discrete area for broad regional marketing and its incorporation in a broader product zone. Product Zones: The new tourism product zones are intended as geographical areas “containing proximate destinations offering similar or complementary consumer experiences” and are to be used for marketing and product development purposes not “constrained by political Local Government Area boundaries”. Four product zones are recommended with a fifth – Lake Macquarie – being given the option of maintaining its current marketing links with Newcastle, amalgamating with Newcastle, standing alone or joining with the Central Coast.



Page 10

The four zones are:

• Newcastle • Barrington Tops (the non-wine areas of Dungog and Gloucester Shires) • Upper Hunter Country (the current Upper Hunter tourism area along with the

majority – i.e. the non-wine areas – of Singleton and Muswellbrook), and • Australia’s Hunter Valley.

Australia’s Hunter Valley: Australia’s Hunter Valley is essentially an expansion of Hunter Valley Wine Country to include the wine areas of Singleton, Muswellbrook and Dungog and all of the Maitland local government area. The intent of Australia’s Hunter Valley is to expand the Wine Country experience to help it “reinvent and reposition and move upwards on the product life cycle”. Benefits – aside from this reinvigoration – include brand strength for the less well known wine areas and the opportunity for Maitland to create a new profile based on its individual character and the contribution of that principally “heritage” and cultural character to a wider Hunter Valley experience. Our Marketing Future The September 2004 report to Council on Tourism Marketing stated the following:

There is no doubt that Wine Country tourism is suffering from over-expenditure on accommodation and a failure to expand its tourism appeal beyond the wine experience, “weekend escape” market niche. It is debatable as to whether the new product zone will effectively address this failing, nevertheless there are attractions in terms of advertising spend and in the appropriation of the “Australia’s” appellation for Sydney, interstate and international marketing. Perhaps the most significant issue for Council, however, relates to dilution of a separate, marketable identity in terms of its overall marketing as a city (marketing beyond simple tourism marketing) and as an events destination. The market appeal of “heritage” has already been identified as being of questionable value.

Nevertheless, it should be restated that the principle of a product zone is supported for marketing beyond our region. It is the position of this report, however, that the Hunter River Country tourism branding should be retained for overall city and events marketing with buy-in to “Australia’s Hunter Valley” to be utilised for strategic, one-off marketing campaigns of quantifiable value. This marketing could be conducted within the context of “Hunter River Country – part of Australia’s Hunter Valley”.

Experience in regard to wider regional, intrastate and interstate marketing in the months following writing of the above has indeed pointed to the value of co-operative



Page 11

marketing under one label. It has also highlighted, however, the difficulties inherent in maintaining a local identity given the size and strength of our wine neighbour to the south and south west. These latter difficulties have principally, but not exclusively, centred on the brand power of the term “Hunter Valley” and a lack of geographical certainty about where “Hunter River Country” is. Leading on from consideration of these issues has come the view that, if our role in our wider tourism product zone (or “destination” as it is now termed) is to work we need to unambiguously contextualise it. It is therefore recommended that our local-government-area-specific tourism branding for all activities (events and otherwise) be conducted under the name “Maitland, Hunter Valley” and within the wider framework of “Hunter Valley” promotion and marketing. Singleton has acted in a similar fashion rebadging itself from “Hunter Heartland” to “Singleton, Hunter Valley”. Maitland, Hunter Valley In some ways the new branding of Maitland will be similar to the past in that it will have as foci our built heritage, community precincts and stories. Unlike the past, however, the sell will be directed towards experience of natural, built and social heritage rather than the viewing of it and it will highlight the richness and diversity of local food and beverage provision and the range of shopping experiences we offer. Unambiguously the sell will be couched in terms of youth and enjoyment. Collateral in regard to such a marketing approach is currently being developed and will first launched in our new Visitors Guide in the second quarter of this year. Strategic buy-in to wider Hunter Valley destinational marketing will still be carried out when a quantifiable benefit can be ascertained. Individual and events promotional activities that are Maitland specific may also be carried out in other markets. CONCLUSION As stated above the adoption of the Hunter River Country branding was the right thing to do at the time. It is now considered that a return to a Maitland-centric branding regime is appropriate given the broader frameworks now in place. Such a move has been subject to detailed briefing of and endorsement by the Hunter River Country Tourism Advisory Group and is now recommended to Council.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Costs associated with rebrandiing activities will be met from within current allocations




Page 12

9.2 SERVICE PLANNING AND REGULATION

9.2.1 PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION DRAFT REPORT - CONSERVATION OF AUSTRALIA'S HISTORIC HERITAGE PLACES

File No: 96/2

Attachments: Submission to the Draft Report – March, 2006 Submission to the Productivity Commission into the Conservation of Australia’s Heritage Places – July, 2005

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager, Service Planning and Regulation

Author: Clare James Heritage Officer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following amendments to the Commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999 an enquiry was launched by the Australian Government Productivity Commission into the policy framework and incentives for the conservation of Australia’ s historic built heritage places, with a report to be presented by April, 2006. A submission was made by Maitland City Council in July, 2005 for consideration by the Productivity Commission. A second submission has been prepared in response to the Draft Report.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the submission as attached responding to the Draft Report on the Conservation of Australia’s Historic Heritage Places be forwarded to the Australian Government Productivity Commission for consideration.

REPORT The scope of the enquiry into the Conservation of Australia’s Historic Places encompassed a broad range of issues including: 1. The main pressures on the conservation of historic heritage places; 2. The economic, social and environmental benefits and costs of the

conservation of historic heritage places in Australia;


PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION DRAFT REPORT - CONSERVATION OF AUSTRALIA'S HISTORIC HERITAGE PLACES (Cont.)

3. The current relative roles and contributions to the conservation of historic heritage places of the Commonwealth and the state and territory governments, heritage owners (private, corporate and government), community groups and any other relevant stakeholders;

4. The positive and/or negative impacts of regulatory, taxation and institutional

arrangements on the conservation of historic heritage places, and other impediments and incentives that affect outcomes;

5. Emerging technological, economic, demographic, environmental and social

trends that offer potential new approaches to the conservation of historic heritage places; and

6. Possible policy and programme approaches for managing the conservation of

Australia’s historic heritage places and competing objectives and interests. A submission was made in response to these issues in July, 2005 which stated that an over-riding consideration in the provision of effective heritage management was the availability of resources both within Council and the Community, in addition to access to funding streams. The second submission prepared in response to the findings of the enquiry questions the key recommendations regarding the introduction of negotiated conservation agreements. This process would result in privately owned properties being statutorily listed only after a conservation agreement had been negotiated with the owner. The agreements would cover the management and heritage funding of the item. Concerns are raised that Council would not have resources to negotiate, monitor and update conservation agreements. Sourcing to support these agreements would also be an major issue for Council. It was generally considered that tying conservation agreements to individual property ownership and legislative protection would not provide for the long term recognition of a site’s heritage value which is inconsistent with typical community expectations that these values are protected and will be for future generations. Suggestions are provided that financial support should rather co-exist with the listing of the property, with owners having the opportunity to access funding at such time when they are in a position to commit to a project. There are existing incentive programs in place including Council’s Local Heritage Fund, although it is recognised that increased financial support would increase their effectiveness.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no financial implications for Council.

Page 13



POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no immediate policy implications for Council, however if instigated has the potential to require substantial change to Council’s existing heritage management policies.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no immediate statutory implications for Council, however if instigated would have profound implications for the system of statutory heritage listing and protection.

Page 14



Officers Reports

Productivity Commission Draft Report - Conservation of Australia's Historic

Heritage Places

Submission to the Draft Report – March, 2006

Meeting Date: 14 March 2006

Attachment No : 1

Number of Pages : 4

Page 15



Page 16



Page 17



Page 18



Page 19



Officers Reports

Productivity Commission Draft Report - Conservation of Australia's Historic

Heritage Places

Submission to the Productivity Commission into the Conservation of

Australia’s Heritage Places – July, 2005


Attachment No : 2

Number of Pages : 2

Page 20



Page 21



Page 22


Page 23

9.2.2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP 1993 TO PERMIT A REFRESHMENT ROOM AT 35 PATERSON ROAD, BOLWARRA

File No: RZ05-001

Attachments (3): Draft LEP Map Plan of Proposed Development Submissions

Responsible Officer: Monica Gibson City Strategist

Author: Debbie Gordon Project Planner

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council considered a report at their Ordinary Meeting of 10 May 2005 to amend Maitland LEP 1993 to allow the use of 35 Paterson Road Bolwarra as a refreshment room. The subject site is zoned 2(a) Residential under the current planning provisions which prohibits the use of the site for this purpose. The site is currently known as ‘Maddies of Bolwarra’ and operates as a restaurant, tourist accommodation and function centre. It was resolved to prepare a draft Local Environmental Plan pursuant to Section 54(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and place the draft LEP on public exhibition. Two submissions were received during the exhibition process raising concerns with the current operations. The matter is now referred back to Council for consideration.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT:

Pursuant to Section 68(4) of the Act, the Local Environmental Plan for 35 Paterson Road Bolwarra be submitted to the Department of Planning, with a request that the Minister makes the Plan.

REPORT The site is identified as Lot 4010 DP 1023182 No.35 Paterson Road, Bolwarra, and is located on the southern side of Paterson Road directly opposite the Bolwarra Wetlands. A copy of the draft LEP map identifying the location of the site is provided in Attachment 1. The site is located within the Bolwarra Heritage Conservation Area and the Declared Floodplain. The site is known as ‘Maddies of Bolwarra’ and operates as a restaurant, tourist accommodation (bed and breakfast), and function centre for small groups.


PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP 1993 TO PERMIT A REFRESHMENT ROOM AT 35 PATERSON ROAD, BOLWARRA (Cont.)

Page 24

It is proposed that the LEP amendment will formalise some existing uses of the site and will include the use of the existing rotunda structure for restaurant seating and the provision of a car park along the western boundary of the site. Works required will include the demolition of an existing garage to accommodate the access and car parking. Development approval will be sought by the owners at a later stage for the works and the use, should the LEP amendment be successful. A plan of the development identifying the proposed parking area and the existing structures on site is provided in Attachment 2. The current use and operation of the site as a restaurant does not appear to have a significant impact on the surrounding locality or its character. There is a shortage of on-site parking presently available and as such on-street parking is extensively used. The submissions received during the public exhibition process raised concerns with the potential for an increase in the number of patrons using the facility, increased traffic movements, and increased noise as a result of the proposed expansion of the restaurant. The LEP amendment seeks to permit the usage of the existing rotunda for restaurant dining, which is currently operating without consent, and provide for additional parking on site. It is proposed to seek approval for the current use, not expand beyond the current operations. The site has limited potential for further future expansion due to its size and location.

BACKGROUND Council has previously considered and approved a Development Application for Tourist Accommodation, a Tea Room, and Additions to the Dwelling (2 September 1993) which allowed the establishment and operation of the restaurant within the dwelling-house. This development approval predates the gazettal of the current LEP 1993 which now prohibits the use in the residential zone. The use of the building is therefore considered to have “existing uses” in accordance with the terms of the consent. However, irrespective of the proposed change in zoning provisions, the existing use may be expanded or enlarged or intensified with development consent, and may also change to another use not permitted in the zone. Council has also previously approved a boundary adjustment (16 May 2000) to extend the rear boundary to increase the site area. The additional allotment area created by this boundary adjustment does not have existing use rights. As such, the refreshment room and any ancillary development such as car parking cannot extend past this boundary without amending the planning provisions applying to the site. Maitland LEP 1993 defines “refreshment room” as a “restaurant, café, tea room, eating house or the like”. The proposed amendment will allow the use of the site to continue to operate as a restaurant but will restrict any future change of use of the site to one only permitted within the current zoning. The proposed amendment to the LEP 1993 is considered a much clearer way of regulating the current and future uses on the site.



Page 25

The existing rotunda erected on the site has not had Council approval and as such Council cannot issue an approval for the construction retrospectively. The continued use of the outdoor dining area will however be considered in conjunction with the Development Application for the proposed intensification and expansion of the use of the site.

EXHIBITION The proposed LEP amendment was exhibited for 28 days from Monday 24 October 2005 through until Monday 21 November 2005. Two submissions were received by Council raising concerns with the proposal. A copy of the submissions received and the response from the applicant to the matters raised are provided in Attachment 3. The matters raised are addressed as follows: 1. Effect of the additional use of the site as a refreshment room The site was approved by Council for use as a refreshment room and tourist accommodation in 1993. The planning provisions applying to the site have since changed which have the effect of now prohibiting such uses in residential areas. The site may continue to operate or seek development approval to expand or intensify, or to change to an alternative use, under existing use right provisions contained within the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. This however applies only to the original parcel of land, comprising approximately the front half of the site. The LEP amendment is necessary to allow the use of the rear portion of the site for a restaurant and ancillary uses, which includes the use of the existing rotunda for dining and the construction of a parking area on site. No further expansion or intensification of the current use is proposed. Future expansion is considered to be restricted due to the size, nature and location of the site (heritage conservation area) and limitations on providing car parking on site. The proposed LEP amendment is considered to be a more appropriate method of regulating the future development potential of the site rather than the reliance on existing use rights. 2. Lack of existing car parking for the venue Development Consent 93-259 for the tea room required the provision of seven (7) car parking spaces on site. The restaurant expansion to include dining within the existing rotunda proposes to construct 14 car spaces on site, which will alleviate on street parking for general restaurant use. The number of parking spaces and the location of the parking area will be considered with the Development Application, but is considered capable of being provided on site. The proposed LEP amendment is intended to formalise the current use of the site and is not expected to encourage the further expansion of the facilities. Any expansion will be subject to development consent and merits assessment. 3. Effect of the proposed third river crossing on traffic and parking in the area Access to the third river crossing is proposed at the Flat Road intersection, to the north of the subject site. It is recognised that on street parking may occur on rare occasions but this option may be severely restricted due to road adjustments for the proposed third river crossing.



Page 26

4. Noise impacts As the restaurant is currently operating, including the use of the outdoor dining area, there is not expected to be any increase in patronage of the facility as a result of the LEP amendment to formalise the current arrangements. The provision of parking on site will reduce the noise impacts of patrons walking to their vehicles along the street frontage. Any noise associated with functions held at the facility will continue to be subject to the Department of Environment and Conservation Environmental Noise Control Guidelines, which regulates noise levels against background noise levels for specific times during the day and night.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications in this instance.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS There are no Policy implications in this instance.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The LEP amendment has been prepared and exhibited in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. If supported by Council, the DLEP will be forwarded to the Department of Planning for referral to the Minister for gazettal. There are no statutory implications if the proposed DLEP does not proceed. The proposed LEP amendment is considered to be the more appropriate method for Council to continue to regulate the current and future uses of the site rather than relying on the existing use provisions within the Act.

CONCLUSION It is recommended that the proposal to amend Maitland LEP 1993 to permit a refreshment room on the whole of the site be supported by Council, to enable a Development Application to be lodged and considered for the use of the existing rotunda for restaurant dining and the construction of a car park at the rear of the site.



Page 27

Officers Reports

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LEP 1993 TO PERMIT A

REFRESHMENT ROOM AT 35 PATERSON ROAD, BOLWARRA

Draft LEP Map


Attachment No : 1

Number of Pages : 1



Page 28



Page 29

Officers Reports



Plan of Proposed Development


Attachment No : 2

Number of Pages : 1



Page 30



Page 31

Officers Reports



Submissions


Attachment No : 3

Number of Pages : 5



Page 32



Page 33



Page 34



Page 35



Page 36


Page 37

9.2.3 CENTRAL MAITLAND PLANNING INVESTIGATIONS

File No: 103/4

Responsible Officer: Leanne Harris Manager Strategic Services

Author: Monica Gibson City Strategist

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report to inform Council of a successful funding application for the Central Maitland Structure Plan.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the allocation of $75,000 (+GST) for the Central Maitland Structure Plan be accepted from the Department of Planning.

REPORT In December 2005, Council resolved to review and consolidate planning policies and guidelines for the Central Maitland area, as well as seeking funding from the Department of Planning for more detailed investigations of constraints and opportunities. The Department of Planning has notified Council that the expression of interest for funding has been successful and an allocation of $75,000 has been granted for development of a Central Maitland Structure Plan. This work will take into consideration the investigations undertaken by the Department of Planning as part of the draft Lower Hunter Regional Strategy, which identified Maitland as a major centre for increased opportunities for residential, commercial and retail development. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to be signed by Council to confirm the project brief and payment staging. This project is scheduled to commence immediately, using the resources of the Strategic Services division, and external technical advice where necessary.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The grant funding is not dependant upon matching Council funds. It is expected that the project can be completed within the grant allocation, however should any additional costs be incurred during the project, they can be met from existing allocations in the 2005/ 2006 Management Plan.



CENTRAL MAITLAND PLANNING INVESTIGATIONS (Cont.)

Page 38



Page 39

9.2.4 CHANGES TO LOCAL ENVIORNMENTAL PLANNING PROCESSES

File No: 103/2

Attachments: Department of Planning Circular

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager Service Planning & Regulation

Author: Leanne Harris Manager Strategic Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides Council with an outline of the new procedures that have been implemented by the Department of Planning relating to the preparation of Local Environmental Plans (LEPs). As of the 22nd February 2006, the Department revoked all existing delegations to all NSW Councils in respect of Sections 65(1) and 69(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The previous delegations allowed Council to, under certain circumstances, resolve to prepare a draft LEP and notify the Department of its intentions to do so, exhibit the draft Plan and once satisfied with it forward the draft LEP to the Minister with a request that the LEP then be made. In place of this system, the Department has established a local environmental plan review panel, which will formally review initial requests to prepare an LEP and then potentially be involved throughout the process. The Department has also issued a new Instrument of Delegation, which will only operate in respect of an individual draft LEP on receipt by Council of a “Written Authorisation to Exercise Delegation”, which will specify any terms or conditions under which the Instrument can be utilised for the specific draft LEP. Importantly, the new process applies to both new LEP proposals and those that are currently in the system. There are no specific savings and transitional provisions for draft LEPs currently under preparation and Council officers will be seeking the required ‘Written Authorisation of Delegation’ to proceed with these where appropriate. Steps in the process that have been validly undertaken will not however need to be undertaken again.

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

REPORT On the 16th February Council received notification from the NSW Department of Planning of a Planning Circular providing advice on changes to procedures for the preparation of Draft Local Environmental Plans. These new procedures took effect


Changes to Local Environmental Planning Processes (Cont.)

Page 40

on 22nd February 2006 and a copy of the relevant Circular is provided as an Attachment to this report. Prior to the 22nd February, Council could resolve to prepare a draft LEP and then under Section 54 (4) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act would notify the Department of its intention to do so. Under the Instrument of Delegation (dated 14th February 1997), which delegated the Director General’s functions under Section 65(1) and Section 69 of the EP&A Act, Council could proceed with the preparation, exhibition and following referral of the Draft LEP to the Minister, provided the draft plan met certain broad requirements such as:

• LEPs for rural residential or urban development only being in accordance with endorsed strategies

• Consistency with specific Ministerial Directions, State Policies and Regional Plans

• There being no unresolved objections by public authorities or bodies etc

All existing delegations have now been revoked and a new Instrument of Delegation has been issued (refer to Attachment). In effect this new Instrument only operates in respect of an individual draft LEP, subject to the receipt by Council of a “Written Authorisation to Exercise Delegation” for that particular draft LEP. In conjunction with this, the Department has established a panel review process with a view to ‘streamline the LEP making system’. This panel will review notifications from Councils under Section 54(4) of their intention to prepare a draft LEP and will provide specific advice to Councils, the Director General and / or the Minister about the Draft LEP. Draft LEPs will be reviewed against relevant sets of evaluation criteria and the panel will then decide whether Section 65 and 69 functions are to be delegated to Councils and what conditions would apply to the exercising of such delegations. The Council will be provided with written notification of the panel’s deliberations and whether the proposed LEP can proceed under a ‘Written Authorisation to Exercise Delegation”. Options will include no delegation, delegation subject to conditions or full delegation. The panel will also consider and make recommendation on whether a Council should be directed, pursuant to Section 74(2)(b) of the Act, to prepare and have regard to an environmental study prior to preparing its draft LEP, any specification as to the form, content and preparation of the study and/or any other general issues to be considered when preparing the draft LEP. It should be noted that the preparation of an environmental study will be the Council’s responsibility. Whereas Council has previously relied upon documentation and specialist studies submitted with a rezoning application to make an assessment of a site’s suitability for a particular future land use, if directed to prepare an environmental study, Council will need to directly commission and oversee such specialist reports and the preparation of the study. Council can recoup the cost of such studies from the applicant and has made specific provision within the draft 2006/07 management plan for such fees, however such requirements are likely to have a significant impact upon Council resources.



Page 41

Importantly there are no savings or transitional arrangements with the new system. Whilst there will be no requirement to repeat steps in the process for draft LEPs that have currently progressed to a certain extent within the system (eg Thornton North, Aberglasslyn and Gillieston Heights to name a few), Council will require a “Written Authorisation to Exercise Delegation” to proceed on an individual basis for each one. Council is currently seeking the required authorisations from the Department for all draft LEPs that are currently under preparation. The documentation from the Department states that the objectives of the new system are to:

• Move to a more thorough upfront assessment of LEP proposals as soon as the Department is notified of a Council’s decision to prepare a draft LEP

• Strengthen the strategic and policy consideration of the LEP proposals • Provide a consistent framework across Councils and the Department to

evaluate the context and justification for an LEP and the outcomes it is intended to produce

• Reduce the number of draft LEPs in the system The documentation also makes it clear that Council should avoid ‘spot rezonings’ and other amendments to existing plans such as reclassification of land from community to operational, matters that are inconsistent with the draft Regional Strategy and other house-keeping matters, indicating that these will only be considered where there is a compelling reason and where they can be comprehensively justified.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct financial impact upon Council's adopted budget or forward estimates. The matter does however have the potential to have a significant impact upon the existing resources of the Strategic Services division of Council, particularly in respect of the preparation and management of environmental studies to support draft LEPs.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter introduces specific new policy and processes for the preparation of all future draft LEPs.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS This matter explains new statutory requirements for the preparation of Draft Local Environmental Plans.



Page 42

Officers Reports

Changes to the Local Environmental Planning System

Department of Planning Circular


Attachment No : 1

Number of Pages : 14



Page 43



Page 44



Page 45



Page 46



Page 47



Page 48



Page 49



Page 50



Page 51



Page 52



Page 53



Page 54



Page 55



Page 56


Page 57

9.2.5 PROPOSED REZONING - ST HELENA FRENCH THEMED TOURIST VILLAGE

File No: DA043580

Attachments: Letter from Dept of Planning

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager, Service Planning & Regulation

Author: Monica Gibson City Strategist

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the recent decision by the Department of Planning to allow the continuation of investigations for the preparation of a draft local environmental plan (draft LEP) for a French themed village and tourist facilities at St Helena Close Lochinvar. Specific matters have been raised by the Department to be addressed by the draft LEP.


1. Council note the correspondence from the Department of Planning allowing the preparation of a draft Local Environmental Plan for a French themed village at St Helena Close, Lochinvar

2. Investigations commence immediately on the preparation of the draft LEP.

REPORT On 13 September 2005, Council resolved to write to the Department of Planning to request a review of a previous decision that halted the preparation of a draft LEP for the St Helena French Themed Village. Following discussions with the Department, it was agreed that an independent review of the urban form and structure of the proposal was required to determine the suitability of a separate village at the fringe of the Lochinvar area. In late December 2005, an urban design review was completed by Annand Alcock Urban Design (AAUD), which concluded that the tourist village has an appropriate urban form and is not inconsistent with the future urban surroundings. Some suggestions for improvements to connectivity between the French Themed village and the future urban areas of Lochinvar were made in the AAUD report. Notification was received from the Department of Planning in February 2006 informing Council that investigations could continue for the preparation of a draft LEP to permit the French Themed Village. A number of matters to be investigated and addressed were included in the response from the Department, including


PROPOSED REZONING - ST HELENA FRENCH THEMED TOURIST VILLAGE (Cont.)

Page 58

• Demonstrated consistency with the findings of the AAUD report • Consistency with the draft Lower Hunter Regional Strategy • Consistency with the findings of the Lochinvar Structure Plan • Provision of reticulated water and sewer and other identified regional

infrastructure • Comments from government agencies • Consistency with Ministerial Directions under Section 117 of the EPA Act.

Brad, do you want any comment on these matters and how they might be addressed? These matters will need to be satisfied prior to the exhibition of a draft LEP. Since the revocation of all delegated functions for the preparation and assessment of draft LEPs by the Minister for Planning, Council will be unable to authorise the exhibition of a draft LEP and the decision to exhibition the plan will be made by the Department of Planning. An initial meeting has been held with the applicant to review the contents of the Department’s letter and to commence investigations on the issues raised.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The urban design review was part funded by Council, using existing allocations for strategic project support. However, the progression of the LEP investigations has no direct financial impact upon Council's adopted budget or forward estimates, with further rezoning fees to be collected.


STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The preparation of a local environmental plan is controlled by Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Procedures are in place to ensure that statutory requirements are met.



Page 59

Officers Reports

ST HELENA TOURIST VILLAGE

Letter from Dept of Planning


Attachment No : 1

Number of Pages : 2



Page 60



Page 61


Page 62

9.2.6 DRIVER TESTING PARKING ZONE OPPOSITE MOTOR REGISTRY, GARNETT ROAD, EAST MAITLAND

File No: 222/706

Attachments: Locality Plan

Responsible Officer: Chris James Manager Assets and Infrastructure Planning

Author: Scott Henderson Infrastructure Planning Engineer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Local Traffic Committee, at the 2 March 2006 meeting determined that the current 1-hour restricted parking zone immediately opposite the RTA Motor Registry Office in Garnett Road (East Maitland) be converted into “RTA Driver Testing Vehicles Only” zone. The matter has been referred to Council for consideration at the request of Councillor Fairweather and Councillor Keating.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the current 1 hour restricted parking zone immediately opposite the RTA Motor Registry Office in Garnett Road (East Maitland) be converted into “RTA Driver Testing Vehicles Only” zone.

REPORT Purpose The purpose of this report is to submit for Council’s consideration the Local Traffic Committee Item 2006-16 of 2 March 2006, where the Committee decided that the current 1 hour restricted parking zone immediately opposite the RTA Motor Registry Office in Garnett Road (East Maitland) be converted into “RTA Driver Testing Vehicles Only” zone. Councillor Fairweather and Councillor Keating have advised the General Manager on 2 March 2006 that they request Council consider the matter.

BACKGROUND The neighbouring developments to the Motor Registry include a church, library and specialty shop complex all of which have off-road car parking. The motor registry has nine (9) parking spaces on –site, which includes one parking bay reserved for disabled persons. Unrestricted on- road car parking is available east and west of the registry, with one (1) hour parking restriction immediately in front of and across the road (refer to Attachment ‘A’ Parking Plan). These 1-hour parking restrictions were instigated at the request of the Registry Services Manager Maitland in 5 May 2005, due to parking difficulties. The manager indicated that that the registry customers (approximately


DRIVER TESTING PARKING ZONE OPPOSITE MOTOR REGISTRY, GARNETT ROAD, EAST MAITLAND (Cont.)

Page 63

430 per day) had to compete with on-road parking with staff of new businesses in Mitchell Drive. Council received a letter from Registry Services Manager Maitland, dated 27 January 2006, requesting consideration of three (3) additional parking spaces allocated for driver test applicants. This would then allow a total of six (6) spaces for driver test applicants i.e. 3 spaces for those returning from their driving test and 3 spaces for those who have arrived and are waiting to be taken for their driver test. The manager also noted that Maitland handles the driver tests for Heavy Vehicle applicants and the additional parking spaces will allow two (2) heavy vehicles to be parked awaiting the applicants driving test. Reasons sighted in the letter for requiring the 3 additional parking spaces on Garnett Road included:

1. The continued increase in population in the Maitland area has steadily increased the demand for driver tests at Maitland;

2. The Maitland Registry will now significantly increase the availability of driver tests as Maitland will be recognised as the principal driver-testing centre in the Lower Hunter;

3. Driver tests run on a strict appointment basis all day; 4. The importance of young drivers not having to ‘search’ for a vacant parking

space arriving or returning from their test, which can add to their nervous state or cause cancellations of driver tests;

5. In terms of the Registry’s Safe Work Method Statements, being able to provide the testing officer a direct walk to the test applicant vehicles in an appropriately sign posted area.

Note that the letter of request from the Registry was an attachment to the Local Traffic Committee report for their information. The item was listed on Council’s Local Traffic Committee agenda and discussed at the meeting held on 2 March 2006, Item number 2006-16. It was acknowledged during the meeting that whilst the expansion of services (i.e. significantly increased availability of driver tests as Maitland will be recognised as the principal driver-testing centre) is still forthcoming, there was other available parking in Garnett Road, and therefore was considered not an unreasonable request. As a result, the Committee determined that the current 1 hour restricted parking zone immediately opposite the RTA Motor Registry Office in Garnett Road (East Maitland) be converted into “RTA Driver Testing Vehicles Only” zone. Attachment 1 shows the existing and proposed signage within the area.

CONCLUSION Whilst the expansion of services of the RTA Motor Registry as a principal driving centre in the Lower Hunter is likely to be a gradual process, the competition for parking is creating an impact on the service the registry undertakes. Driver applicants should be located within a short distance of the registry, and parking on-road before and after the service is typical of this the test service the RTA Motor Registry provides. The request for three (3) additional parking spaces is considered reasonable.



Page 64


POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no specific policy implications for Council. Under the terms of Council delegation the determination of the Local Traffic Committee will be null and void except that the determination shall be deemed to be now a recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee to the Council.




Page 65

Officers Reports

Driver Testing Parking Zone Opposite Motor Registry, Garnett Road, East

Maitland

Locality Plan


Attachment No : 1

Number of Pages : 1



Page 66


Page 67

9.2.7 RUTHERFORD SHOPPING CENTRE MALL AND CAR PARK IMPROVEMENTS

File No: PA024229

Attachment Concept Plans for Proposed Improvements to the Centre Car Park and Mall, Rutherford Shopping Centre


Author: Chris James Manager assets & Infrastructure planning

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to present to Council the proposed improvements to the Rutherford Shopping Centre Car Park and Mall and recommend that the proposal be placed on public exhibition and discussions commence with the Rutherford Shopping Centre property owners and retailers.


1. Council note the improvements proposed for the Rutherford Shopping Centre as detailed in this report

2. The proposal be placed on public exhibition

3. Rutherford Shopping Centre property owners and retailers be consulted regarding the proposed improvements

4. A further report be brought back to Council on the outcome of the consultation

REPORT The sale of Council land for the expansion of the Rutherford Shopping Centre included as a part of the contract, an agreement for the construction of additional works within the existing Centre comprising

• Relocation of existing playground • Upgrade of landscaping • Upgrade of the existing Mall • Upgrading of the car park


Rutherford Shopping Centre Mall and Car Park Improvements (Cont.)

Page 68

Funding in the amount of $675,000 has been allocated for the works. Under the agreement the funding is apportioned between the works, with approximately $200,000 to be spent on the car park and the remaining $475,000 on the Mall. The agreement did not detail the precise scope of the works. However based on the principals in the agreement and in discussion with the relevant parties Council has prepared a proposal for improvements to the Centre car park and mall (Attachment 1). In developing the concept plans a wide range of issues were considered. These issues and proposed treatments are summarised on the plans. In summary the key components of the proposal are

• New car park layout with asphalt pavement • Resurfacing of the Mall concrete pavements • Replacement of the existing Mall roof sheeting with transparent material • New coordinated furniture seating and waste bins • Provision of new or upgraded lighting • Mall entry signage • Sail shades in the over the southern end of the Mall • Provision of $75,000 for the construction of a new children’s playground

between the Library and the Community Centre The car park layout is the subject of discussions with the developer and agreement is still to be finalised. The cost of the works is very preliminary however initial estimates are Mall Improvements – Approximate cost $425,000 Car Park – Approximate cost $300,000 TOTAL $725,000 Available Funds $675,000 It should be noted that while there is a potential funding shortfall, costs cannot be accurately determined until the detailed design is completed. Furthermore it should be noted that the total cost of the works does include the optional items of: Painting and Repair of Individual shops by owners - $15,000 Erection of new Danpalon roof structure on the northern end of the Mall - $75,000 Accordingly for the purposes of public consultation it is considered that the scope of works proposed is reasonable and it is recommended that the concept be placed on public exhibition and discussions commence with the Mall property owners.




Page 69





Page 70

Officers Reports

RUTHERFORD SHOPPING CENTRE MALL AND CAR PARK

IMPROVEMENTS

Concept Plans for Proposed Improvements to the Centre Car Park and Mall, Rutherford Shopping Centre


Attachment No : 1

Number of Pages : 9



Page 71



Page 72



Page 73



Page 74



Page 75



Page 76



Page 77



Page 78



Page 79


Page 80

9.3 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION

9.3.1 REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE - HUNTER MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE

File No: 10/5

Responsible Officer: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance & Administration

Author: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance & Administration

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A presentation was made to Council by representatives from the Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI). The presentation outlined the various ways that Council and its staff can assist this important research institute within the Hunter. A letter has been received from the Hunter Medical Research Institute requesting Maitland City Council be:

Advocating Hunter Medical Research Institute • •

•

Promoting the staff of Maitland City Council to contribute to the Hunter Medical Research Institute Council consider direct sponsorship of a research project of $10,000. This would yield additional support and grant funding for the Hunter Medical Research Institute.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council:

1. Advocate the Hunter Medical Research Institute within the community.

2. Promote with the staff the benefit of contributing to the Hunter Medical Research Institute.

3. Council consider a contribution of $2,500 as part of the 2006/07 Management Plan. This contribution will be ongoing for four (4) years.

REPORT The Hunter Medical Research Institute see the most important role for Maitland City Council is one of advocacy. The message of the role of Hunter Medical Research Institute is one that needs to be communicated to the community to enable the community to be part of this important research institute. The promotion of the Hunter Medical Research Institute through Council publications and newsletters could


REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE - HUNTER MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE (Cont.)

raise awareness of the Institute, recruit research volunteers and encourage Maitland people into research careers. Another way to assist is for the Council to encourage workplace giving through its staff. Any contribution from staff is tax deductible and will enable the Institute to obtain further grants and other funding for medical research. And thirdly a contribution from Maitland City Council for direct sponsorship of a research project. The Hunter Medical Research Institute have suggested an amount of $10,000, which Council could finance over four (4) years and would fund a pilot project in an established research group. This funding would support further applications for other grant funding. CONCLUSION That Council consider a contribution of $10,000 to Hunter Medical Research Institute over four (4) years, at $2,500 per year, commencing with the 2006/07 Management Plan.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This would be considered as part of the 2006/07 Management Plan and ongoing Management Plans up to 2009/10.



Page 81


Page 82

9.3.2 INQUIRY INTO FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY OF NSW

File No: 91/3

Responsible Officer: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance & Administration

Author: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance & Administration

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The first findings of the Independent Inquiry into the Financial Sustainability of NSW Local Government were released on Friday, 3 March 2006. A copy of the report is held in Council’s office or can be downloaded from the inquiry website www.lgi.org.au.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT

1. The information contained in this Report be noted.

2. Council make a submission prior to 29 March 2006.

REPORT The first report of the Independent Inquiry into the Financial Sustainability of NSW Local Government. This is an interim report with the final report to be presented in May 2006. There is an opportunity for Council to make a submission on the interim report but the closing date is 29 March 2006. The Inquiry was commissioned to provide an independent assessment of the financial state of the local government authorities within NSW. The range in diversity of Council’s within the State is one of the main factors that prohibits comparing Councils. “Councils in NSW differ significantly in terms of population, area, and economic structure. For example, councils like Blacktown, Parramatta or Newcastle are major cities in their own right whereas large area rural councils, like Balranald or Bourke Shire are almost entirely characterised by agricultural activity. Remote councils such as Central Darling Shire are sparsely inhabited within an average of only 5 people within 100 square km whereas Waverley Council in urban Sydney has a population density of about 6,700 people per square km. The area of Councils varies considerably from under 6 square km (Hunters Hill Council) to almost 53,511 square km (Central Darling Shire Council) with an average


INQUIRY INTO FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY OF NSW (Cont.)

Page 83

area size of 4,660 square km. However about 25 per cent of all Council areas are smaller than 200 square km. Populations within Councils also vary greatly – from less than 1,400 (Urana) to almost 280,000 (Blacktown Council). Average population size is 44,277. NSW population growth and demographic predictions for the next 30 years show some interesting trends for Council regions. For example while currently only having a small portion of the total NSW population today, South Eastern and Illawarra, and Richmond Tweed populations are expected to increase their regional populations by over 30 per cent in the next 30 years. Mid-North Coast and the Hunter are expected to increase their populations by over 20 per cent in the next 30 years. With the exception of some large rural centres, the Far West region and small rural populations are expected to continue to decline. These varied population changes pose challenges for the councils supporting them. Infrastructure Assets For some time the capacity of Councils to maintain existing infrastructure and fund future infrastructure needs has been a concern. It has been argued that due to increases in demand for other services, maintenance of infrastructure services has been deferred creating a backlog of maintenance and accelerating decline in infrastructure condition. This is exacerbated by the fact that a large portion of council infrastructure is reaching the end of its usable life. Additional it is generally agreed that insufficient funding has been set aside for renewal of infrastructure because capital revenue (in the form of grants and contributions) is being used in place of external borrowings to fund operating deficits. Infrastructure management practices vary extensively across Councils. In some cases Councils have insufficient knowledge of the extent and condition of their infrastructure. This may be due to a lack of expertise, inadequate funds and the absence of consistent methodologies to audit infrastructure. Only 20 per cent of Councils have implemented ‘best practice’ asset management systems for planning, acquiring, operating, maintaining, disposing and renewing or enhancing infrastructure management. (Roorda 2006)” The above extract shows that there are vast differences in population and incomes of Councils. To address those Councils in one package is very difficult. The final report in May will provide interesting reading as to how Local Government as a whole will address the financial position of Local Government.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no specific financial implications for Council.




Page 84



10 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

10.1 STATUS REPORT ON CONSTRUCTION WORKS

File No: 122/814

Responsible Officer: Wayne Cone Group Manager City Works & Services

Author: Richard Minter Manager Projects & Emergency Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A report on the status of major construction works and projects within the 2005/2006 Capital Works Programs is submitted for Council’s information.

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

REPORT EMERGENCY SERVICES 1. Emergency Management The latest District Emergency Management meeting was held on 1st March,

2006. The meeting discussed issues such as retirement village evacuation plans, infectious disease planning, emergency risk management and emergency information co-ordination.

2. Emergency Risk Management The Emergency Risk Management (ERM) project currently underway in

conjunction with Dungog, Cessnock and Port Stephens Councils has progressed to final draft document stage. A review of the documentation has commenced and is due for completion by the end of March. The Councils will then need to determine the best method of publishing and publicising the findings and determining the next stage of the project.

PROJECTS 1. Major Building Maintenance An allocation of $400,000 has been made in the 2005 / 2006 budget for major

building maintenance to Council’s community and recreation buildings.

Page 85



Projects that have been completed include East Maitland Swimming Pool roof, Fieldsend Oval roof, Metford Child Care Centre, Norm Chapman Oval, King Edward Park, Smythe Oval, St Ethels Brass & Pipe Band and Kookaburra Korner Child Care Centre. Works are underway on Maitland Library.

2. Woodberry Family Centre

A total of almost $1.1m of grant funding has been received for the construction of a Family Centre at Woodberry that will include childcare facilities, meeting rooms, amenities and consultation rooms with development application approved. Funding arrangements for the project with the Department of Community Services (DOCS) will not be know until March.

3. Depot Administration Building An allocation of $1.37m is available in the 2005 / 2006 Management Plan for

the construction of a new Administration Building and internal road resurfacing works at the Metford Road Works Depot. Construction of the Administration Building by RT Parker Pty Ltd has reached practical completion. Installation of work stations is due to commence in mid March with carpark works to commence in April.

4. Kyle Street / Gardiner Street Reconstruction Reconstruction of approximately 300m of the southern end of Gardiner Street

is underway with various subcontractors. Drainage and subsoil works are underway with pavement works to commence shortly.

A tender has been awarded for the balance of works in Gardiner Street and

Kyle Street to C&W Constructions Pty Ltd. Initial traffic management planning has commenced for these works with works to commence on site in late March.

5. Maitland Regional Art Gallery – Stage 2 Council, in conjunction with its quantity surveyors Rider Hunt, have finalised

the scope of works for the Stage 2 Art Gallery project. Tenders for the design of the project have been called from the shortlisted architectural firms with tenders to close in late March.

6. Floodlight Upgrading

An allocation of $200,000 has been made in the 2005 / 2006 Management Plan for the upgrading of floodlights to Council sporting facilities. Replacement of a pole at Beryl Humble Sporting Fields has been completed. Footings for the remainder of the program are underway with poles to be installed in March and April.

Page 86



7. Maitland Park Improvements A number of projects for Maitland Park are proposed for 2005 / 2006. These

include BBQ and table facilities, cricket nets, seating and a storage facility with a total budget of $71,000. Installation of the BBQ’s, tables and seats has been completed. The cricket nets and storage facility have not commenced but are due to be completed by June 2006.

8. Coronation Oval Allocations totalling $179,000 have been made for a range of improvement

works at Coronation Oval. The works involve an awning, canteen upgrades, cricket nets, fencing, goal posts, storage shed and landscaping. The awning, canteen, cricket nets, and storage shed projects are all complete. Fencing and goal posts are underway and due for completion in February. The bank landscaping project is underway and due to be completed by March 2006.

9. Morpeth Columbarium An allocation of $20,000 was made in the current budget for the expansion of

the Morpeth Cemetery Columbarium. Design of the new columbarium has been completed with construction underway. Footings, brickwork and landscaping have been completed. Supply of sandstone header has delayed completion until March.

10. Somerset Park Sportsground Design for the construction of the new Somerset Park Sportsground has been

completed. A tender has been awarded to Keller Civil Engineers for the construction of the sportsground. Site clearing works have commenced. The total project budget is $975,000.

11. Sportsground Fencing An allocation of $100,000 has been made in the 2005 / 2006 Management

Plan for the installation of new fencing at sportsgrounds across the local government area. All materials have been received with approximately half of the projects complete. Works are due to be completed by April.

CIVIL WORKS The status of the construction projects within the 2005/2006 Rolling Works Program, as of 5 March 2006, is as follows. 1. Bridge Replacement/Refurbishment

Program complete.

Page 87



2. Carpark Refurbishment

Program complete. 3. Drainage Construction

3.1 George Street, East Maitland A stormwater pipeline is presently being installed along George Street from Lawes Street to Day Street. Work on the project commenced in early March and should be completed in early April, weather permitting. The estimated cost of the project is $278,000.

4. Footpath Construction

4.1 Frewin Avenue, Woodberry A concrete footpath has been constructed along the northern side of Frewin Avenue from Tahlee Avenue to Kingstown Road. Work on the project was completed in late February at an approximate cost of $12,030.

5. Footpath Construction – Access Priority Program

5.1 Melaleuca Drive, Metford A concrete footpath is being constructed along the eastern side of Melaleuca Drive from Acacia Place to Metford Public School. Work on the project is scheduled for completion in early April at an approximate cost of $40,000.

6. Urban Local Roads

6.1 Metford Road, East Maitland The reconstruction of Metford Road, from Chelmsford Road to the Council Works Depot, is progressing with the installation of concrete kerb and guttering along the eastern side of the road nearing completion. Rehabilitation of the road pavement will continue over the next few weeks with final asphalt sealing of the road surface programmed for mid April. The estimated cost of the project is $358,000.

6.2 Wollombi Road, Rutherford

Subsoil drainage pipelines have been installed in readiness for the stabilisation of the road pavement on the western carriageway of Wollombi Road, from Neville Street to Green Street. A flush bitumen seal will be applied to the road surface in early April. The project is estimated to cost $142,000.

Page 88



7. Roads to Recovery

7.1 Aberglasslyn Road, Rutherford Work has commenced on the reconstruction of the section of Aberglasslyn Road from Alexandra Avenue to Fullford Cove. The project, scheduled for completion in late April, is estimated to cost $433,300.

8. Reseal - Rural Roads

Program complete. 9. Reseal - Urban Roads

The following roads have been resealed: - Lawson St, East Maitland - Porter Av, Phillip St, Lane 2, East Maitland - Princess St, Morpeth - Wallace St, Sparke St, Edye St, South Maitland - Freeman Dr, Dunnering Cl, Harper Cl, Briggs Cl, Lochinvar - Close St, Morpeth - Swan St, Morpeth - Bonar St, Maitland - Lantry Cl, Raworth - Eurimbla St, Thornton - Gibbon, Griffin, Hoddle, Owen Cls, Thornton - Tahlee Av, Woodberry - Cambewarra Av, Thornton - Freewin Av, Woodberry - James St, Horseshoe Bend - Bull St, Maitland - Olive St, Bourke St, Maitland - Smith St, Maitland - Dalveen Rd, Bolwarra - Ledsam St, Telarah - Taree Av, Telarah - Dee St, Rutherford - Glenroy St, Thornton - Haussman Dr, Thornton - Hunter St, Plaistowe St, Horseshoe Bend - Morgan St, Albert St, Radford St, Horseshoe Bend - Breton Cl, Houston Av, Tenambit - Cochrane St, Tenambit - Pont Cl, Tenambit - Steam St, Maitland - Edward St, Tenambit - Alyce Cl, Largs

Page 89



- Fry St, Maitland - Little Hunter, St. Andrews, Denman Sts, Maitland - Largs Av, Largs - Alexandra Av, Rutherford - Cumberland St, East Maitland - High St, East Maitland - Flinders St, East Maitland - Flinders St, East Maitland - George St, East Maitland - Guide Ln, East Maitland - Cabarita Cl, Bolwarra Heights - Speares Ln, East Maitland - Garwood St, Belmar St, Rutherford - Elgin St, Maitland - Broughton St, Barnett St, Rutherford - Scott St, Rutherford - Rose St, South Maitland - Aberglasslyn Rd, Rutherford - Melaleuca Dr, Ironbark St, Cedar Cl, Toona Pl, Angophora Pl, Acaia Pl,

Metford - Clayton Cr, Quinton Cl, Rutherford

The remaining 15 urban reseals will be undertaken in March. The total value of the 2005/06 urban reseal program is $872,000.

10. Reseal - State Roads

Several reseals have been undertaken on Main Road No.104 (Raymond Terrace Road), as part of Maitland City Council’s Single invitation Contract with the RTA. The resealing works were undertaken at an approximate cost of $200,000.

11. Traffic Facilities

11.1 High Street & Ken Tubman Drive, Maitland Several new bus shelters have been installed in Maitland CBD, The approximate cost of the works was $104,000.

Page 90


Page 91

10.2 COUNCIL’S HOMEPAGE STATISTICS

File No: 31/15

Responsible Officer: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance and Administration

Author: Adam McCarthy Helpdesk Support Officer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides statistics about Council’s web site. The statistics contained in the report allows Council to identify the type of services being accessed or used by the public and other organisations.

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

REPORT December

2005 January

2006 February

2006 No. of visits to the MCC

website 11,509 15,093 16,295

Council Information

Positions Vacant

Positions Vacant

Positions Vacant

Council Information

Council Information

Planning Planning Planning City

Information City

Information City

Information

Top Five web pages with highest no. of visitors (not

homepage)

Community & Recreation

Community & Recreation Library

No. of rates paid electronically (depends on

instalment dates) 156 46 280

No. of Property Certificates paid electronically 10 5 1


11 NOTICE OF MOTION/RESCISSION

11.1 POLICY - PRE-SCHOOLS - NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY CLR RAY FAIRWEATHER

File No: 133/1


Clr Ray Fairweather has indicated his/her intention to move the following Notice of Motion at the next Ordinary Council of Council on 14 March 2006, as follows: THAT the General Manager formulate a policy for council on Pre-School requirements for inclusion in the guidelines pertaining to new residential subdivisions. The Policy should take into account: • the number of Pre-School places required based on estimated population of

new subdivision (ie Thornton North); • location for Pre-School in that subdivision, taking into account the road network

and width roads; • resident living areas and impacts on those residents. Note Councillors would be aware of the concerns of residents who find after building their homes, that a pre-school can be developed alongside of their residence. It would be much better to identify location of a future pre-school facility so that any prospective home purchaser will be aware of the situation beforehand. The main concerns are traffic, noise, safety and narrow streets.

COMMENT BY GROUP MANAGER SERVICE PLANNING & REGULATION Child care facilities are permissible with development consent in residential and commercial zones in Maitland. This is consistent with state and federal government policies regarding access and availability of these important community services. It is therefore important that child care facilities remain a permissible use within residential zones in the Maitland Local Environmental Plan.

Page 92

Child care facilities can include pre-schools, long day care, occasional/ holiday care, after school care and respite care. Each facility has different impacts on the adjoining land, as a result of operating hours, types of activities (indoor v outdoor), traffic movements and the appearance of the centre.


POLICY - PRE-SCHOOLS - NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS (Cont.)

In Maitland, most child care facilities are privately owned and operated, and have been established to satisfy the demand for child care. As such, the provision of child care facilities is an economic market where the number of facilities will be determined based on financial decisions of supply and demand. As part of master planning for new release areas, there are general guidelines on the siting of child care centres and appropriate locations for these centres can be encouraged through subdivision planning and design. Reservation of specific sites in new residential areas for child care facilities may raise the obligation for Council to acquire land for this purpose. It also does not guarantee that a child care facility will be constructed, or that local residents will be satisfied, as has been demonstrated with future school sites in the Ashtonfield/ Ashton Grove examples. However, there are a number of actions that Council can take to reduce the potential negative effects of child care facilities in residential area. This includes notification on property certificates (149 certificates) that child care facilities are permissible in residential areas, new guidelines on the siting of child care facilities (consistent with the local amenity, road hierarchy) and a review of car parking requirements.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS Changes to Section 149 property certificates and new development control provisions to guide the siting and location of child care centres in new urban release areas will be a new policy of Council.


Page 93


12 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

13 URGENT BUSINESS

14 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

No reports

15 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

16 CLOSURE

Page 94

maitland city council ordinary meeting …...2006/03/14 · north star cruises australia, wa...

Documents