Ordinary

 

Meeting Notice and Agenda

 

An Ordinary Meeting of the Bega Valley Shire Council will be held at Council Chambers, Biamanga Room Bega Valley Commemorative Civic Centre Bega on
Wednesday, 29 May 2019 commencing at 2.00 pm to consider and resolve
on the matters set out in the attached Agenda.

 

 

 

To:

Cr Kristy McBain, Mayor

Cr Mitchell Nadin, Deputy Mayor

Cr Tony Allen

Cr Robyn Bain

Cr Jo Dodds

Cr Russell Fitzpatrick

Cr Cathy Griff

Cr Sharon Tapscott

Cr Liz Seckold

Copy:

General Manager, Ms Leanne Barnes

Director, Assets and Operations, Mr Anthony McMahon

Director,  Community, Environment and Planning, Dr Alice Howe

Director, Business and Governance, Mr Graham Stubbs

Executive Manager People and Governance, Ms Nina Churchward

Coordinator Communications and Events

Minute Secretary

 

 

 


Live Streaming of Council Meetings

Council meetings are recorded and live streamed to the Internet for public viewing.  By entering the Chambers during an open session of Council, you consent to your attendance and participation being recorded.

The recording will be archived and made available on Council’s website www.begavalley.nsw.gov.au. All care is taken to maintain your privacy; however as a visitor of the public gallery, your presence may be recorded.

Publishing of Agendas And Minutes

The Agendas for Council Meetings and Council Reports for each meeting will be available to the public on Council’s website as close as possible to 5.00 pm on the Thursday prior to each Ordinary Meeting.  A hard copy is also made available at the Bega Administration Building reception desk and on the day of the meeting, in the Council Chambers.

The Minutes of Council Meetings are available on Council's Website as close as possible to 5.00 pm on the Monday after the Meeting.

1.      Please be aware that the recommendations in the Council Meeting Agenda are recommendations to the Council for consideration.  They are not the resolutions (decisions) of Council.

2.      Background for reports is provided by staff to the General Manager for  presentation to Council.

3.      The Council may adopt these recommendations, amend the recommendations, determine a completely different course of action, or it may decline to pursue any course of action.

4.      The decision of the Council becomes the resolution of the Council, and is recorded in the Minutes of that meeting.

5.      The Minutes of each Council meeting are published in draft format, and are confirmed by Councillors, with amendments  if necessary, at the next available Council Meeting.

If you require any further information or clarification regarding a report to Counci, please contact Council’s Executive Assistant who can provide you with the appropriate contact details

Phone (6499 2104) or email execassist@begavalley.nsw.gov.au.

 


Ethical Decision Making and Conflicts of Interest

A guiding checklist for Councillors, officers and community committees

Ethical decision making

·      Is the decision or conduct legal?

·      Is it consistent with Government policy, Council’s objectives and Code of Conduct?

·      What will the outcome be for you, your colleagues, the Council, anyone else?

·      Does it raise a conflict of interest?

·      Do you stand to gain personally at public expense?

·      Can the decision be justified in terms of public interest?

·      Would it withstand public scrutiny?

Conflict of interest

A conflict of interest is a clash between private interest and public duty. There are two types of conflict:

·         Pecuniary – regulated by the Local Government Act 1993 and Office of Local Government

·         Non-pecuniary – regulated by Codes of Conduct and policy. ICAC, Ombudsman, Office of Local Government (advice only).  If declaring a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest, Councillors can choose to either disclose and vote, disclose and not vote or leave the Chamber.

The test for conflict of interest

·         Is it likely I could be influenced by personal interest in carrying out my public duty?

·         Would a fair and reasonable person believe I could be so influenced?

·         Conflict of interest is closely tied to the layperson’s definition of ‘corruption’ – using public office for private gain.

·         Important to consider public perceptions of whether you have a conflict of interest.

Identifying problems

1st       Do I have private interests affected by a matter I am officially involved in?

2nd     Is my official role one of influence or perceived influence over the matter?

3rd      Do my private interests conflict with my official role?

Local Government Act 1993 and Model Code of Conduct

For more detailed definitions refer to Sections 442, 448 and 459 or the Local Government Act 1993 and Model Code of Conduct, Part 4 – conflictions of interest.

Agency advice     

Whilst seeking advice is generally useful, the ultimate decision rests with the person concerned.Officers of the following agencies are available during office hours to discuss the obligations placed on Councillors, officers and community committee members by various pieces of legislation, regulation and codes.

Contact

Phone

Email

Website

Bega Valley Shire Council

(02) 6499 2222

council@begavalley.nsw.gov.au

www.begavalley.nsw.gov.au

ICAC

8281 5999

Toll Free 1800 463 909

icac@icac.nsw.gov.au

www.icac.nsw.gov.au

Office of Local Government

(02) 4428 4100

olg@olg.nsw.gov.au

http://www.olg.nsw.gov.au/

NSW Ombudsman

(02) 8286 1000

Toll Free 1800 451 524

nswombo@ombo.nsw.gov.au

www.ombo.nsw.gov.au

 

Disclosure of pecuniary interests / non-pecuniary interests

Under the provisions of Section 451(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 (pecuniary interests) and Part 4 of the Model Code of Conduct prescribed by the Local Government (Discipline) Regulation (conflict of interests) it is necessary for you to disclose the nature of the interest when making a disclosure of a pecuniary interest or a non-pecuniary conflict of interest at a meeting. 

The following form should be completed and handed to the General Manager as soon as practible once the interest is identified.  Declarations are made at Item 3 of the Agenda: Declarations -  Pecuniary, Non-Pecuniary and Political Donation Disclosures, and prior to each Item being discussed:

Council meeting held on __________(day) / ___________(month) /____________(year)

Item no & subject

 

Pecuniary Interest

 

   In my opinion, my interest is pecuniary and I am therefore required to take the action specified in section 451(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 and or any other action required by the Chief Executive Officer.

Significant Non-pecuniary conflict of interest

   – In my opinion, my interest is non-pecuniary but significant. I am unable to remove the source of conflict. I am therefore required to treat the interest as if it were pecuniary and take the action specified in section 451(2) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Non-pecuniary conflict of interest

   In my opinion, my interest is non-pecuniary and less than significant. I therefore make this declaration as I am required to do pursuant to clause 4.17 of Council’s Code of Conduct. However, I intend to continue to be involved with the matter.

Nature of interest

Be specific and include information such as :

·         The names of any person or organization with which you have a relationship

·         The nature of your relationship with the person or organization

·         The reason(s) why you consider the situation may (or may be perceived to) give rise to a conflict between your personal interests and your public duty as a Councillor.

If Pecuniary

  Leave chamber

If Non-pecuniary  (tick one)

 Disclose & vote        Disclose & not vote          Leave chamber

Reason for action proposed

Clause 4.17 of Council’s Code of Conduct provides that if you determine that a non-pecuniary conflict of interest is less than significant and does not require further action, you must provide an explanation of why you  consider that conflict does not require further action in the circumstances

Print Name

 

I disclose the above interest and acknowledge that I will take appropriate action as I have indicated above.

Signed

 

NB:  Please complete a separate form for each Item on the Council Agenda on which you are declaring an interest.


Council

29 May 2019

 

Agenda

Statement of Commencement of Live Streaming

Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners of Bega Valley Shire

1       Apologies and requests for leave of absence

 

2       Confirmation Of Minutes

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting and Closed session held on 8 May 2019 as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed.

3       Declarations

Pecuniary, Non-Pecuniary and Political Donation Disclosures to be declared and tabled.  Declarations also to be prior to discussion on each item.

4       Deputations (by prior arrangement)

4.1                Deputations received prior to the publication of the business paper.................................... 9

 

5       Petitions

 

6       Mayoral Minutes

6.1                Emergency Services Levy increase............................................................................................. 11

 

7       Urgent Business

 

8       Adjournment to Standing Committees

There are no reports to Standing Committees.

9       Staff Reports – Planning and Environment

 

9.1                Amendment to Development Control Plan 2013 - Specific Sites at Wolumla .................... 16

10     Staff Reports – Community, Culture and Leisure

 

Nil Reports

11   Staff Reports –Economic Development and Business Growth

 

11.1              EOI 30/19 Lease of lower level of Tathra Wharf....................................................................... 28

12     Staff Reports – Infrastructure Waste and Water

 

12.1              RFT 01/19 Timber, RFT 02/19 Steel and RFT 03/19 Concrete and Civil - Tathra Headland Walkway              38

12.2              RFT 26/19 Tathra to Kalaru Bike Track Bridges.......................................................................... 44

12.3              Community Project Proposals...................................................................................................... 48

12.4              Hanscombe Creek and Johnston Creek Bridges, Garfields Road, Numbugga....................... 55

12.5              Lake Street Shared Path Merimbula........................................................................................... 61

12.6              Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee......................................................................................... 115

13   Staff Reports – Governance and Strategy

 

13.1              Candelo Town Hall/Cafe building............................................................................................... 118

14     Staff Reports – Finance

 

14.1              Certificate of Investment............................................................................................................ 124

15     Adoption of Reports from Standing Committees

There were no reports to Standing Committees.

 

16     Councillor Reports

 

17     Rescission/alteration Motions

 

18     Notices of Motion

 

19     Questions On Notice

19.1              Cr Nadin Question on Notice - Native Title.............................................................................. 129

19.2              Cr Nadin Question on Notice - Sediment breach at Back Lake, Merimbula....................... 132

 

20     Questions for the Next Meeting

 

21     Confidential Business 

 

Representations by members of the public regarding closure of part of meeting

Adjournment Into Closed Session, exclusion of the media and public......................... 132

              

Statement of Cessation of Live Streaming for the period of the Closed Session.

Statement of Re-Commencement of Live Streaming

22     Adoption of reports from Closed Session

23     Resolutions to declassify reports considered in closed session


Council

29 May 2019

 

 

Deputations (by prior arrangement)

 

29 May 2019

 

4.1              Deputations received prior to the publication of the business paper.................. 9


Council 29 May 2019

Item 4.1

 

4.1Deputations received prior to the publication of the business paper     

 

 

 

General Manager  

 

Requests to address Council (prior to publication)

The following requests to address Council have been received prior to the publication of the Business Paper, regarding:

Community Project Proposals

·    Ms Jasmine Ventura

 

Attachments

Nil

  


Council

29 May 2019

 

 

Mayoral Minutes

 

29 May 2019

 

6.1              Emergency Services Levy increase..................................................................... 11


Council 29 May 2019

Item 6.1

 

6.1Emergency Services Levy increase        

 

Cr McBain, Mayor   

 

 

Officer’s Recommendation

A.  That Council Notes:

a.   That last December, the NSW Government enacted laws to provide better workers compensation coverage for firefighters who are diagnosed with one of twelve specific work-related cancers

b.  That in many areas of NSW, fire services are made up of elected officials and employees of local government, and the local government sector strongly support this expanded workers’ compensation scheme

c.   That as a result of these changes, the State Government has decided to implement the new scheme by charging the local government sector an increased Emergency Services Levy, without consultation

d.  That the expected increase in costs to local government will be $19m in the first year alone, and there is little or no time to enshrine this charge in Councils 2019/2020 budgets

e.  That Local Government NSW has long advocated for the Emergency Services Levy to be significantly modified to ensure it is transparent, equitable and accountable.

B: That Council support Local Government NSW’s calls for:

a.   the NSW Government to cover the initial additional $19m increase to the local government sector for the first year and

b.  the NSW Government to work with NSW local government sector to redesign the funding mechanism for the scheme to ensure fairness into the future.

C. That the General Manager liaise with Local Government NSW to provide information on:

a.   The impact on Bega Valley Shire Council budgets and

b.  Council advocacy actions undertaken.

D: That Bega Valley Shire Council, through the Mayor:

a.   Write to the NSW Premier, NSW Interim Opposition Leader, NSW Minister for Customer Services, NSW Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Local Government, Shadow Minister for Local Government, and local State Government Member/s to:

i. call upon the NSW Government to fund the 12 months of this extra cost rather than requiring Councils to find the funds at short notice when budgets have already been allocated.

ii. explain how this sudden increase will impact Council services / the local community.

iii. highlight that Councils were not warned of the increased cost until May 2019, despite the new laws being passed in November 2018.

iv. explain that the poor planning and implementation of the increase is inconsistent with the NSW Government’s commitment to work in partnership with the sector.

vi. ask the NSW Government to work with local government sector to redesign the implementation of the scheme to ensure it is fairer for Councils and communities into the future.

b. Provide a copy of the letter to Local Government NSW.

 

 

Background

Each year, the NSW Government collects payments from Councils and insurers to fund emergency services agencies in NSW, with Councils required to pay 11.7 per cent of the budget required by NSW Emergency Services. These charges are embedded in Council rates and insurance premiums.

From 1 July 2019 the NSW Government plans to collect an additional $160m (in 2019/20) from NSW Councils, communities and those paying insurance premiums to provide better workers’ compensation coverage for volunteer and career firefighters who are diagnosed with one of 12 specific work-related cancers.

Councils were sent bills with a letter from Revenue NSW in May 2019, saying NSW Council contributions will increase by $19m in 2019/20. The letter also foreshadowed increases in the following year, but not the amount.

Bega Valley Shire Council received an invoice from Revenue NSW for $762,000 for its emergency services levy contribution. This is $143,000 more than last year’s levy (a 23% increase). This will mean Council will need to find additional funds and/or cut planned projects or services.

The local government sector, including Bega Valley Shire Council supports career and volunteer firefighters in NSW – as it does all emergency services workers and volunteers. Indeed, many NSW local government employees and Councillors are volunteers. We also support the Bill passed in November 2018 to address what was a workers’ compensation shortfall.

However, the local government sector was at no point advised it would be required to cover the cost via significant increases to the emergency services levy, or what this cost would be.

Proportional to Council’s revenue, the extra $143,000 Bega Valley Shire Council is being asked to pay, is a large amount and the impact of this unplanned cost will certainly be felt by the community.  This increase equates to over 13% of the general rate increase for our Shire.

Local Government NSW is calling upon the NSW Government to fund the first 12 months of this extra cost and work with the local government sector to ensure the implementation of the funding mechanism is fairer into the future.

 

 

 

Attachments

Nil

 

  

 


Council

29 May 2019

 

 

Staff Reports –Planning And Environment

 

29 May 2019

  

9.1              Amendment to Development Control Plan 2013 - Specific Sites at Wolumla ... 16


Council 29 May 2019

Item 9.1

 

9.1Amendment to Development Control Plan 2013 - Specific Sites at Wolumla       

 

This report recommends that an amendment to Bega Valley Development Control Plan 2013 for three sites at Wolumla, be placed on public exhibition.

 

Director Community Environment and Planning   

 

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.      That the proposed amendment to Section 7 of Bega Valley Development Control Plan 2013 (Attachment 1) be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

2.    That each affected land owner is notified of the proposed amendment.

3.    That a further report be provided to Council if there are any substantial changes to the Development Control Plan 2013 arising from public exhibition of the Plan.

4.    That, if no substantial changes arise from public exhibition, these amendments to the Development Control Plan 2013 be adopted after the close of the public exhibition period.

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek a resolution from Council to place an amendment to Bega Valley Development Control Plan (BVDCP 2013) on public exhibition.

The proposed amendment would require the preparation of a Master Plan detailing the concept lot design, servicing arrangements and traffic requirements for the future subdivision of three sites at Wolumla. These properties were part of the recent Wolumla Deferred Matters Planning Proposal, considered at the Council meeting of 31 October 2018, which established new zones and minimum lot sizes for each of these sites.

It is recommended these requirements are included as part of site-specific requirements under Section 7 of the BVDCP 2013.

Background

Council at its meeting of 31 October 2018 considered a report on the Wolumla Deferred Matters Planning Proposal (Attachment 2) and resolved the following;

1.    That Council adopt the amendments to Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013 (Amendment 31) as detailed in this report.

2.    That the Minister for Planning be advised of Council’s decision and requested to make the Plan

3.    That Council officers inform those who made a submission during the exhibition period of Council’s resolution

4.   That Council note the submission from Garret Barry Planning Services dated October 2018 that a further Planning Proposal is to be submitted to Council in regards to the minimum lot size for the E3 and E 4 land within Site.

The Planning Proposal was forwarded to the Minister for Planning and the land has now been rezoned under the Bega Valley Local Environmental Plan 2013, as described on page 2 of Attachment 2.

The Council officer’s report to the 31 October 2018 Council meeting, outlined the submissions received during exhibition of the Planning Proposal. The NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) submission objected to the Planning Proposal and required a Traffic Study be prepared prior to the Planning Proposal proceeding.

Following discussions between the Department of Planning, RMS and Council, the RMS withdrew its objection subject to Council agreeing to prepare a site-specific Chapter within BVDCP 2013, to guide the future development of the subject sites and associated traffic management.  Additionally, Council officers consider the Master Plan process should include a servicing strategy for the land.

The proposed amendment would allow for individual Master Plans to be prepared for each of the sites, however any individual Master Plan would need to take into consideration the cumulative impact from the other sites.

Community Engagement

Consultation Planned

The proposed amendment to BVDCP 2013 would be placed on exhibition for a period of 28 days in accordance with public exhibition requirements per the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. This consultation will include notification to each of the affected landholders.

 

Attachments

1.          Draft Amendment BVDCP 2013

2.          Council Report - 31 October 2018

 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 9.1 - Attachment 1

Draft Amendment BVDCP 2013

 


 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 9.1 - Attachment 2

Council Report - 31 October 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 

 


Council

29 May 2019

 

 

Staff Reports – Economic Develoment and Business Growth

 

29 May 2019

  

11.1            EOI 30/19 Lease of lower level of Tathra Wharf................................................ 28


Council 29 May 2019

Item 11.1

 

11.1. EOI 30/19 Lease of lower level of Tathra Wharf     

 

This report details the results of the Expression of Interest (EOI 30/19) process recently carried out to lease the lower level of  the Tathra Wharf.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.      That Council receive and note this report and Confidential Report attached.

2.      That Council note the Expression of Interest (EOI) process for lease of the lower level of Tathra Wharf has now closed.

3.      That Council consider the Council officers’ recommendation as detailed in the attached Confidential Report.

4.      That Council authorise the General Manager and Mayor to enter into negotiations in order to execute the necessary lease documentation to provide tenure to the successful applicant.

5.      That Council authorise the General Manager and Mayor to enter into negotiations with the second applicant, should the successful applicant decide not to accept Council’s conditions, in relation to lease responsibilities.

 

Executive Summary

The current lease for occupation of the lower level of Tathra Wharf Building is due to expire on 31 August 2019 and in keeping with our good governance processes, Council officers carried out an open and transparent Expression of Interest (EOI) process seeking suitable tenants to operate the lower level of the Tathra Wharf Building following expiration of the current lease.

This report details the results of the EOI process conducted between 8 April 2019 and 8 May 2019 and seeks Council’s approval to enter into a lease with the successful applicant.

Background

Council is the appointed Crown Land Manager of Tathra Wharf Reserve (R180056) for access, heritage purposes and public recreation.  The lower level of the Tathra Wharf Building is currently occupied by the Wharf Local via formal Council Resolution on 21 November 2012 (copy attached).  Following Council’s Resolution, a formal Lease was entered into with the Wharf Local on 1 September 2013 for a period of three years.  The Lease included an option to renew for a further three year period, which will expire on 31 August 2019.

Under the Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW) (CLM Act) Councils that are appointed to manage dedicated or reserved Crown Land, can manage that land as if it were Public Land under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) (LG Act).  Generally, Council Crown Land Managers will manage land as if it were Community Land.  Under the LG Act, a plan of management must be adopted for all Community Land.  The plan categorises the land and governs its use and management.  Compliant plans of management must be in place within three years of the CLM Act commencing, to ensure the Crown Land is lawfully used and occupied.

Prior to the adoption of a compliant plan of management over Crown Land, Council is able to renew existing leases for a term not exceeding 21 years, providing there is no change to the use and also grant new leases for a term not exceeding 21 years, if there was a lease in force over the land immediately before the repeal of the Crown Lands Act 1989 (NSW) and there are no permitted uses for the land under the new lease that are additional to those permitted under the previous lease.  In order to maintain transparency and avoid any suggestion of impropriety, Council has conducted a formal EOI process calling for suitably qualified commercial entities, incorporated community organisations and interested parties to operate the lower level of the Tathra Wharf Building.

The EOI 30/19 process was conducted by Council officers between 8 April 2019 and 8 May 2019.  The EOI document was available on Council’s e-Tendering portal.  A total of three (3) EOI’s were received and evaluated against the set criteria by a Tender Evaluation Panel comprising: Council’s Economic Development Manager; Procurement and Contracts Coordinator; and Property and Facilities Coordinator.  Two (2) of the three (3) submissions were considered conforming and are attached as Confidential Attachments for the information of Councillors.  The third submission was deemed non-conforming as it related to marketing the property on Council’s behalf for rental purposes, not to operate it as prescribed in the EOI.

Options

The options available to Council are:

1.    Accept the recommendation provided by Council officers in the attached Report and resolve accordingly.

2.    Decline to accept the EOI submissions received and advise submitters of Council’s decision.

3.    Maintain vacant possession of the property for Council purposes.  Note, this option will require the identification of funds to undertake necessary planning for the use of the building and ongoing maintenance and operational budgets.

4.    Other options, as raised and resolved by Councillors.

Community Engagement

Consultation undertaken

Council officers completed an EOI process via public tender between 8 April 2019 and 8 May 2019.  The tender was available on Council’s e-Tendering portal and publicly advertised on Council’s website and Facebook page.

Consultation Planned

Council officers will liaise with third party applicants who submitted EOI submissions to advise Council’s decision and formalise use/occupation of the premises over the coming weeks.

Council consideration of input

To ensure the continued use and occupation of the Reserve is appropriate for the lease, Council officers will consider:

·    Compliance with the legislation, related policies and guidelines;

·    Compatibility with the Reserve purpose;

·    Native Title rights;

·    Aboriginal land claims;

·    Market value and providing a proper return to the public for use of the Public Land.

Financial and resource considerations

Council’s Management of Leases and Licenses Procedure provides that:

•     All lessees/licensees shall be responsible for the payment of all outgoings on the property; including (but not limited to): Council rates and charges (if applicable); land tax; water; electricity; gas; telephone; and any other operating costs associated with their respective activities.

Council officer time has been required to conduct the EOI process as well as ongoing management of a lease during its term.

An updated market rental assessment will need to be commissioned by Council to determine a rental figure prior to entering into any new Lease Agreement for the site.

Legal /Policy

A lease enables exclusive use over a particular piece of land or building for a specified term and purpose.  A lease is considered the best form of agreement if longer-term security of tenure is an important factor to the user of the land – such as where commercial use is proposed and major financial outlay is required.

In accordance with Council’s Management of Leases and Licenses Procedure, a lease may be granted by:

·    Invitations for expressions of interest.

The purpose of the lease must be compatible with:

·    The land classification under Section 26 of the LG Act.

·    The permitted use under Council’s Local Environmental Plan.

Council’s preferred maximum lease term is 20 years.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

All of the EOI’s received were evaluated based on the following criteria:

ECONOMIC ACTIVITY – 30%:

Demonstrates how the activity will generate local economic activity and support for local business. (10%)

Demonstrates how the activity will attract external visitation to the area. (10%)

Demonstrates how the activity will enhance the enjoyment for reserve users. (10%)

OTHER BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY – 30%:

Demonstrates what the level of community participation will be. (15%)

Demonstrates what other benefits the community will receive from this activity. (15%)

EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS – 20%:

Demonstrated previous experience in the proposed activity. (10%)

Evidence of appropriate accreditations and/or qualifications supplied. (10%)

SUSTAINABILITY – 20%:

Is the activity self-sustaining? (10%)

If not, how likely is it that the activity will continue without ongoing external support? (10%)

Economic

Two of the proposals received provide a level of economic activity or benefit to Council and the community both of which had similar proposed uses. It has been noted by Council’s Economic Development Manager that Tathra’s economy is primarily focussed on tourism and not having a key public tourism asset activated, from a visitation perspective on public holidays in peak tourism time, detracts from the overall visitation experience. Further discussion regarding this issue with the preferred operator will occur when negotiating lease terms.

Risk

There are no adverse risks in allowing the building to be occupied as long as the use is authorised by way of a formal Lease Agreement which contains appropriate indemnity and insurance clauses.

Council officers will be required to undertake a Native Title assessment and send notification to NTS Corp regarding a proposed new lease as it may affect Native Title interests in the reserve.  When exercising powers provided by the transitional arrangements under the CLM Act, Council Crown Land Managers must obtain written advice from a qualified Native Title Manager that the proposed lease complies with the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). 

Confidential Information

The Confidential Attachment to this report is considered confidential on the following basis:

·    Section 10A of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) states which parts of a meeting may be closed to the public with part 2(c) stating:

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

                And part 2(d) stating:

                        (d)  commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:

                        (i)  prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it, or

                        (ii)  confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council, or

                        (iii)  reveal a trade secret

·    Section 10D of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) states grounds for closing part of meeting to be specified:

(1)  The grounds on which part of a meeting is closed must be stated in the decision to close that part of the meeting and must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

                (2)  The grounds must specify the following:

                        (a)  the relevant provision of section 10A (2),

                        (b)  the matter that is to be discussed during the closed part of the meeting,

(c)  the reasons why the part of the meeting is being closed, including (if the matter concerned is a matter other than a personnel matter concerning particular individuals, the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer or a trade secret) an explanation of the way in which discussion of the matter in an open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

Attachments

1.          Council report and minutes regarding Tathra Wharf Lease dated 21 November 2012

2.            Confidential report in relation to EOI for lease of lower level of Tathra Wharf (Confidential)

3.            EOI 30/19 lease of lower level of Tathra Wharf submission 1 (Confidential)

4.            EOI 30/19 lease of lower level of Tathra Wharf submission 2 (Confidential)

5.            EOI 30/19 lease of lower level of Tathra Wharf submission 3 (Confidential)

 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 11.1 - Attachment 1

Council report and minutes regarding Tathra Wharf Lease dated 21 November 2012

 


 


 


 

  

 


Council

29 May 2019

 

 

Staff Reports – Infrastructure Waste And Water

 

29 May 2019

  

12.1            RFT 01/19 Timber, RFT 02/19 Steel and RFT 03/19 Concrete and Civil - Tathra Headland Walkway............................................................................................................................. 38

12.2            RFT 26/19 Tathra to Kalaru Bike Track Bridges.................................................. 44

12.3            Community Project Proposals............................................................................. 48

12.4            Hanscombe Creek and Johnston Creek Bridges, Garfields Road, Numbugga.... 55

12.5            Lake Street Shared Path Merimbula................................................................... 61

12.6            Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee............................................................... 115


Council 29 May 2019

Item 12.1

 

12.1. RFT 01/19 Timber, RFT 02/19 Steel and RFT 03/19 Concrete and Civil - Tathra Headland Walkway     

 

This report details the outcome of evaluation of tenders: RFTs 01/19 Timber; 02/19 Steel; and 03/19 Concrete and Civil packages for the Tathra Headland Walkway.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.    That Council accept the recommendations as outlined in the confidential attachment.

2.    (insert recommendation from memo following adoption of item 1.)

 

Executive Summary

Following detailed design during 2018, Council invited tenders for three (3) ‘trade’ packages for the Tathra Headland Walkway in the first quarter 2019, being:

·    RFT 01/19 Timber: construction of hardwood timber frames and decking;

·    RFT 02/19 Steel: supply, fabricate and erect structural steel and steel balustrades; and

·    RFT 03/19 Concrete and Civil: construct civil works and form, reinforce, pour and finish concrete.

Four tender submissions were received for each of the three packages.

Background

From 2010 to 2015, Council investigated various options for the Tathra Headland, including reinstatement of vehicle access to the historic Tathra Wharf (known as the Tathra Ring Road), particularly for buses. Local engineering and environmental consultants TEC and NGH assisted Council with the assessment. Due to cost and potential environmental impact, no vehicular road options were considered feasible.

Consequently, Council resolved on 25 February 2015 (Item 17.1):

1.      That Council receive a report on the feasibility of constructing a 100 m walking track adjacent to the Tathra Wharf up to the Tathra Headland and Tathra Memorial Gardens within the footprint of the original Tathra Ring Road.

2.      That Council undertake community consultation in relation to the proposal.

3.      That a report be provided to Council if further funds are required to conduct the feasibility report.

Following community consultation, including with the Tathra Headland Walkway Action Group (THWAG) and the Bega Local Aboriginal Land Council (BLALC), and receipt of the Feasibility Report Council determined:

·    12 August 2015 (Item 9.1): the project be considered in the Community Strategic Plan;

·    14 December 2016 (Item 19.2): planning work be prioritised for funding in the 2017/2018 Financial Year against scheduled asset renewals and adopted plans for asset upgrades and new works;

·    22 February 2017 (Item 10.1): funding be allocated for planning and design of the Tathra Headland Path. The report also noted that the walkway project has strong interest and support in the community.

·    Thompson Berrill Landscape Architects were appointed in April 2017 and Council subsequently endorsed the concept design on 28 June 2017 (Item 10.1).

The detailed design has been further developed with assistance from THWAG, Tathra Lions and Council’s Aboriginal Liaison Officer.

With assistance from THWAG, NSW Government Restart NSW funding of $1.219m was secured in July 2018 for the walkway scope.

The project scope has been subsequently expanded to cover necessary inclusions, which are not included in the Restart NSW funding, such as:

·    disabled accessible ramp and associated civil works on Wharf Street adjacent to the Wharf;

·    further detailed survey and geotechnical assessment and subsequent demolition of overhanging cliff rock;

·    clearing of burnt and damaged items and replacement of the Lions Lookout destroyed in the recent Tathra and District bushfire.

Council invited tenders from suitably qualified contractors for the Tathra Headland Walkway project being:

·    RFT 01/19 Timber: construction of hardwood timber frames and decking;

·    RFT 02/19 Steel: supply, fabrication and erection of steel walkway and balustrades; and

·    RFT 03/19 Concrete and Civil: construction of concrete footings and paths as well as civil works.

Tenders were advertised online via VendorPanel and in the Sydney Morning Herald from 5 February 2019 and local newspapers from 6 February 2019.

At the close of the tender period at 12.00pm on 8 May 2019, the documentation had been downloaded over two dozen times for each RFT, with four submissions received for each.

Applicants were asked to provide:

·    Lump sum price breakdown

·    Rates for Variations

·    Schedule of key contract staff

·    Schedule of proposed site establishment

·    Schedule of machinery, plant and equipment

·    Schedule of consultants, subcontractors and major suppliers

·    Recognition of local outcomes

·    Support of indigenous participation

·    Tender program

·    Traffic and pedestrian management plan

·    Community Consultation and Liaison Plan

·    Schedule of Waste Management – Reusable and Recyclable Materials

·    Schedule of principal supply items

·    Schedule of Technical Information

·    Schedule of Vendor Drawings

·    Schedule of Work Health and Safety

·    Schedule of quality assurance

·    Schedule of Environmental Management

·    Schedule of similar projects and Tenderer’s References

·    Schedule of Tenderer’s Financial Position

·    Schedule of Tenderer’s Current Workload

·    Schedule of additional information

The submissions were assessed against the following evaluation criteria:

Evaluation Criteria

Criteria

Weighting

Price

75%

Non- price

25%

Total

100%

Community Engagement

Consultation undertaken

The Tathra Headland Walking Path project has strong support within the community and has been the subject of specific community consultation that was reported to the Council meeting of 12 August 2015. The outcome was Council acknowledging the merit of the project and listing it as a ‘Headline Project’ at the time. In early 2017 there was further consultation regarding the project, the outcome being allocation by Council of funding toward the design work presented as part of this report.

The continued involvement of THWAG and Tathra Lions in particular, is noted. It should also be noted Council recently received a petition in relation to reinstatement of the Tathra Ring Road.

Consultation Planned

Continuing liaison, both formal and informal, is programmed for the project particularly with THWAG and Tathra Lions.

Financial and resource considerations

The Tathra Headland Walkway project is funded by the NSW Government’s Restart NSW.

Funding source

 

Amount

NSW Government Restart NSW Funding RNSW1181 Tathra Headland Wharf Access

$

1,219,000

Legal /Policy

The tender process complied with the Local Government Act 1993.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The Tathra Headland Walkway project relates to the following strategic actions in the Community Strategic Plan:

·    Facilities and services: Our facilities and services are strategically planned, designed and maintained to meet the community needs.

·    Enhancing visitor experiences: Providing opportunities for local residents and visitors to experience the unique social, cultural and natural attractions of the region. Connected communities – the walkway is part of the ...” network of accessible foot and bike paths”

·    Healthy people:  the Walkway provides a “good quality recreation facility”

·    Sustainable Living: “resource recovery”– the walkway will reuse recovered Hardwood bridge timbers

The Walkway is also part of Council’s four year Capital Works Delivery Plan.

Disability Inclusion

The Walkway has been designed as accessible with 1:14 grade to the Whale Watching and Lions lookouts and ambulant disabled accessible 1:11 elsewhere.

Asset

The site for the Tathra Headland Walkway is Council managed Crown Land, including:

·    Lot 7010 DP 1071330

·    Lot 7015 DP 1506602

·    Lot 7012 DP 1071331

The site is suitably zoned RE1 Public Recreation CLEP 2013 and covered under the NSW Coastal Management SEPP (refer Appendix A CLEP 2013 Zoning Plan).

Environmental / Sustainability

The proposed walking track will have low impact on the area, by replacing and upgrading the existing track with a safer and more accessible solution. Built structures will cause minimal disturbance to the site.

‘Minor Works Review of Environmental Factors Tathra Headland Walking Path June 2017’ has been prepared by specialist consultants NGH.

Economic

The delivery of the project will create a destination in-itself, able to be enjoyed by locals and visitors alike. There are clear links in this project with the NSW Heritage listed Tathra Wharf and emerging opportunities for local tours from Merimbula, Eden and further afield.

A key objective of the project is to make the proposed main viewing platform compliant with accessibility standards and become a recognised feature in the developing accessible tourism market. Promoting land based whale watching opportunities from the proposed viewing platform, has emerged as a key feature of the project.

Risk

The detailed planning carried out and the package approach taken by Council, combined with the pre-works already achieved on site and Principal supply of high cost items including recycled hardwood from Council’s bridge yard stocks, has reduced overall financial risk.

Social / Cultural

Assessments of both European and Aboriginal Heritage have been carried out; in particular:

·    Aboriginal Heritage Due Diligence Assessment NGH June 2017

·    Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (including AHIMS 62-6-95) Dibden September 2017; and

·    Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit C0003582 obtained 28 September 2018.

Following onsite consultation with Council’s Aboriginal Liaison Officer further site management and procedures are being applied.

Confidential Information

The Confidential attachments to this report are considered confidential on the following basis:

·    Section 10A of the Local Government Act states which parts of a meeting may be closed to the public with part 2(c) stating:

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

                And part 2(d) stating:

                        (d)  commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:

                        (i)  prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it, or

                        (ii)  confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council, or

                        (iii)  reveal a trade secret

Section 10D of the Local Government Act states grounds for closing part of meeting to be specified:

(1) The grounds on which part of a meeting is closed must be stated in the decision to close that part of the meeting and must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

 

(2) The Grounds must specify the following:

                        (a)  the relevant provision of section 10A (2),

                        (b)  the matter that is to be discussed during the closed part of the meeting,

(c)  the reasons why the part of the meeting is being closed, including (if the matter concerned is a matter other than a personnel matter concerning particular individuals, the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer or a trade secret) an explanation of the way in which discussion of the matter in an open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration, therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act 1993 if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

In addition to the relevant Act references above, the following also applies:

·    Section 14 of Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 No 52

                More specifically sub section 2 which states:

(2)  The public interest considerations listed in the Table to this section are the only other considerations that may be taken into account under this Act as public interest considerations against disclosure for the purpose of determining whether there is an overriding public interest against disclosure of government information.

                        Part 4 of the table referred to above states:

(4)  Business interests of agencies and other persons

There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information if disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to have one or more of the following effects:

                        (a)  undermine competitive neutrality in connection with any functions of an                                                                       agency in respect of which it competes with any person or otherwise place an                                                            agency at a competitive advantage or disadvantage in any market,

                        (b)  reveal commercial-in-confidence provisions of a government contract,

                        (c)  diminish the competitive commercial value of any information to any person,

                (d)  prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial                                      interests,

                (e)  prejudice the conduct, effectiveness or integrity of any research by revealing its                                         purpose, conduct or results (whether or not commenced and whether or not                                                         completed).

 

Attachments

1.            Confidential memorandum to Councillors (Confidential)  


Council 29 May 2019

Item 12.2

 

12.2. RFT 26/19 Tathra to Kalaru Bike Track Bridges     

 

This report details the outcome of evaluation of Tender RFT 26/19 for the Tathra to Kalaru Bike Track Bridges and recommends award to the preferred tenderer.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.      That Council accept the recommendations as outlined in the Confidential attachment.

2.      That Council accept the tender from <insert> in relation to contract for the works described in Tender RFT 26/19, in the amount of $<insert> (including GST), subject to variations, provisional sums and prime cost items as per the Tender Panel recommendations.

3.      That authority is delegated to the General Manager to execute all necessary documentation.

4.      That other tenderers be advised of Council’s decision.

 

Executive Summary

The NSW State Government funded Tathra to Kalaru Bike Path project is currently under staged construction. This tender relates to the construction of two bridges and associated abutments.

Background

On 22 September 2017, Council was the recipient of $3m in funding under the NSW State Government 2017-18 Active Transport Program, for the design and construction of a 4.6km bike track between Tathra and Kalaru. The project represents the first stage in creating a cycling network between Bega and Tathra.

Council invited tenders from suitably qualified contractors to carry out bridge construction as part of the Tathra to Kalaru Bike Path project. Tenders were advertised online via VendorPanel and in the Sydney Morning Herald on 16 April 2019 and local newspapers from 17 April 2019.

At the close of the tender period at 12.00pm on 15 May 2019, four submissions had been received from the following companies:

·    Guideline South Coast Pty Ltd;

·    John Michelin and Son Pty Ltd;

·    RD Miller Pty Ltd; and

·    South East Civil and Crane.

Applicants were asked to provide:

·    Lump sum price breakdown

·    Schedule of key contract staff

·    Schedule of proposed site establishment

·    Schedule of machinery, plant and equipment

·    Schedule of consultants, subcontractors and major suppliers

·    Recognition of local outcomes

·    Tender program

·    Traffic and pedestrian management plan

·    Schedule of principal supply items

·    Schedule of Work Health and Safety

·    Schedule of quality assurance

·    Schedule of Environmental Management

·    Schedule of similar projects and Tenderer’s References

·    Schedule of Tenderer’s Current Workload

·    Schedule of additional information

The submissions were assessed against the following evaluation criteria:

Evaluation Criteria

Criteria

Weighting

Price

60%

Project Delivery and Functionality

20%

Similar Project Experience

15%

Recognition of Local Outcomes

5%

Total

100%

Community Engagement

Consultation undertaken

Various communication strategies have been carried out to consult with the public regarding the overall project. These include: public exhibition; a letter-drop to residents in the immediate vicinity of the planned works; and extensive information on Council’s website and Facebook page.

Consultation Planned

The successful Contractor will undertake a construction impacts consultation to mitigate any disruption to traffic and residents during the construction phase.

Financial and resource considerations

The additional asset of the Bike Track will have an increased maintenance cost to Council into the future. Information from the project team will be provided to Council’s Assets Team to be incorporated into future budgets.

Funding source

 

Amount

NSW Government 2017-18 Active Transport Program: Tathra to Kalaru Bike Track

$

3,000,000

Legal /Policy

The tender process complied with the Local Government Act 1993.

The project must be delivered in accordance with the NSW Government 2017-18 Active Transport Program Funding Deed and must meet the NSW Government Walking and Cycling Program Guidelines 2018-19 for Shared Pathways.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

The project aligns with the Vision, Goals and Short Term Priority proposals of the Bega Valley Bike Plan.

Environmental / Sustainability

A Review of Environmental Factors (REF) has been prepared for the project in accordance with the requirements of Section 111 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Section 228 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 specifying a ‘duty to consider environmental impact’, has been prepared by suitably qualified and experienced personnel.

Economic

The proposed bike path has the potential to:

·    Provide an economic impact through jobs creation

·    Result in a possible increase in visitor numbers to the area.

Risk

The bike path has been designed with consideration to Cycling Aspects of Austroads Guides.

A Stage 2 Concept Design Road Safety Audit of the path has been undertaken by an accredited Level 3 Road Safety Auditor.

Social / Cultural

The proposed bike path has the potential to:

·    Provide significant social and health benefits for the region

·    Provide a safe and accessible route for cyclists and pedestrians

Confidential Information

The Confidential Attachments to this report are considered confidential on the following basis:

·    Section 10A of the Local Government Act states which parts of a meeting may be closed to the public with part 2(c) stating:

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

                And part 2(d) stating:

                        (d)  commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:

                        (i)  prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it, or

                        (ii)  confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council, or

                        (iii)  reveal a trade secret

·    Section 10D of the Local Government Act states grounds for closing part of meeting to be specified:

 (1)  The grounds on which part of a meeting is closed must be stated in the decision to close that part of the meeting and must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

                (2)  The grounds must specify the following:

                        (a)  the relevant provision of section 10A (2),

                        (b)  the matter that is to be discussed during the closed part of the meeting,

(c)  the reasons why the part of the meeting is being closed, including (if the matter concerned is a matter other than a personnel matter concerning particular individuals, the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer or a trade secret) an explanation of the way in which discussion of the matter in an open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

Although the above relates more explicitly to the discussion of closed business, it also forms part of the basis of justification as to why information relied upon in informing the public decisions made by Council are kept confidential. To consider this confidential material in open Council would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest as it would potentially disclose private business information provided by tenderers in a confidential tender process and would also impact Council’s position in relation to its consideration therefore impacting the tender process. This meets the requirements of Sect 10 D of the Local Government Act if Council were to close the meeting to discuss the details of individual tenderers.

In addition to the relevant Act references above, the following also applies:

·    Section 14 of Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 No 52

                More specifically sub section 2 which states:

(2)  The public interest considerations listed in the Table to this section are the only other considerations that may be taken into account under this Act as public interest considerations against disclosure for the purpose of determining whether there is an overriding public interest against disclosure of government information.

                        Part 4 of the table referred to above states:

                        (4)  Business interests of agencies and other persons

        There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information if   disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to have one or more of the following effects:

                        (a)  undermine competitive neutrality in connection with any functions of an                                                                       agency in respect of which it competes with any person or otherwise place an                                                            agency at a competitive advantage or disadvantage in any market,

                (b)  reveal commercial-in-confidence provisions of a government contract,

                (c)  diminish the competitive commercial value of any information to any person,

                (d)  prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial                                      interests,

                (e)  prejudice the conduct, effectiveness or integrity of any research by revealing its                                         purpose, conduct or results (whether or not commenced and whether or not                                                         completed).

 

Attachments

1.            2019.05.29 confidential attachment to rft 26/19 tathra kalaru bike track bridges memorandum to councillors (Confidential)  


Council 29 May 2019

Item 12.3

 

12.3. Community Project Proposals     

 

This report provides a summary of Community Project Proposals received between 21 February 2019 and 3 May 2019 for Council's information and consideration.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.       That Council note the report and the attached Community Project Proposal summary and information included in the hard copies of proposals distributed to Councillors.

2        That the proposal for a Shared Walkway at Wallaga Lake Heights, be provided in principle support for the Bermagui Forum to source grant funding to undertake detailed concept plan development including options analysis (for further approval) and leading into detailed documentation.

3        That the proposal for a Memorial Seat at Payne’s Island Wallaga Lake is supported by Council, subject to working through land tenure approvals and requirements relevant to the use of the site.

4.      That the proposal for a Picket Fence around the Memorial at Bemboka Bicentennial Park be supported, with Council contribution by way of installation of the fence.

5.      That the proposal for the onsite caretaker at Colombo Park Bemboka be further developed by the applicant and reviewed by Council officers, particularly regarding formalising risk management, procedures and other operational considerations.

6.      That the proposal for storage shed upgrade at Colombo Park Bemboka be supported, noting that no funding will be provided by Council.

7.      That the proposal for the Colombo Park Bemboka Public Toilet upgrade be provided in principle support, with any funding contribution to be considered and prioritised with other public amenity asset renewals.

8.      That the proposal for the Cobargo Apex Park upgrade be provided in principle support, with exception to the reuse of the noncompliant existing slide, subject to works being complementary to the recently adopted Rural Village Playground Plan for the site, and available funding.

9       That the current proposal for the George Brown Memorial Sportsground Pavilion second storey addition not be supported, and that the applicant consider developing alternative options to meet user needs i.e. single storey extension.

10     That the Bermagui Multi-purpose Outdoor Sporting and Recreation Facility is given in principle support by Council to enable the applicant to progress with more detailed external funding applications and planning approvals.

 

Executive Summary

The community plays an important role in helping Bega Valley Shire Council (BVSC) identify and deliver new and/or improved community facilities. The Community Project Proposal (CPP) process seeks to provide a consistent framework for Council to receive and consider a wide range of projects proposed by the community. These projects can range from minor asset renewal to major new works which have not been identified in Asset Management Plans or capital works programs. Council officers have reviewed the proposals and a Summary and Assessment Sheet is attached. A hard copy of all proposals has been distributed to all Councillors.

Background

Council is ultimately responsible for all works on BVSC managed land including: compliance; maintenance; upkeep; and safety. Regardless of the project size, all works proposed for BVSC managed land need to be considered in the context of: funding; procurement; risk management; work health and safety; environmental considerations; approvals; compliance; and ongoing maintenance and renewal. It is also important to consider how the proposed projects can link and add value to other planned Council works. 

An important part of the CPP Procedure involves reporting proposals to Council; particularly where projects are complex, will result in changed use or amenity and/or will require resourcing and support from Council. Those proposals that are straight forward, not requesting funding from Council and/or are directly related to planned works, are often reviewed and approved by Council officers. This enables groups to proceed with their proposed works in a timely manner.

The level of information included in the proposal needs to be relevant to the scale and complexity of the project but at a minimum, be sufficient to allow the merits and issues of proposal/s to be understood by officers and Councillors. Thorough proposals will clearly show the merit of the project, outline what is being requested and identify potential issues and how they have been addressed. The initial assessment by Council officers seeks to minimise wasted effort (or expense) on proposals that may not obtain approval due to funding, planning or other reasons.

The period between 21 February 2019 and 3 May 2019 was busy for project proposal submissions, with seven (7) submissions received. All these as well as two (2) previously submitted project proposals are addressed in this report. They are:

·    Shared Pathway (2.5m) from Wallaga Lake Heights to Barraga Bay consisting of new section, upgraded existing sections and new pathway bridge – Bermagui Community Forum (BCF)

·    Memorial Seat for parents at Payne’s Island Wallaga Lake – Marnie-Ruth Dunstan

·    Bemboka Bicentennial Park fencing of Memorial – Bemboka ANZAC Committee.

·    Caretaker at Colombo Park Bemboka including slab and connection to OSM - Bemboka Lions Club

·    Demolition of existing shed and extension of canteen building for storage for soccer and archery club at Bemboka Colombo Park - Bemboka Lions Club, Bega Valley Archers and Bemboka Braves Soccer Club

·    Complete upgrade of existing Public Toilet block, including addition of disability toilet facilities and accessible pathways - Bemboka Lions Club

·    Addition of a musical instrument, dry creek bed, decking around tree and extension of path at Cobargo Apex Park - Cobargo Park Community Group

·    Construction of second storey of George Brown Memorial building including steps, lifts, toilets, cool room, kitchen, canteen/servery, officials’ room, functions room and spectator area – Eden Rugby League Football Club Inc.

·    Upgrade of the Bermagui outdoor netball courts from grass to synthetic surface for use as a multipurpose outdoor sporting and recreational facility as well as seating, picnic facilities and score board – Bermagui and District Netball Association.

A proposal previously submitted was for a memorial seat at Murunna Point in Bermagui.  The area is known to be culturally sensitive and officers have been liaising with the applicant to consider an alternative suitable location. A new site was proposed for the memorial seat at Payne’s Island, Wallaga Lake. While a small project, it demonstrates the need to consider the many different aspects of undertaking works on public land.

The second previously submitted community project proposal was for a large and ambitious shared pathway project in Bermagui, submitted by the Bermagui Community Forum. This project was the subject of a presentation and workshop with Councillors prior to being reported to Council for consideration. The Councillor Workshop was held on Wednesday 20 March 2019 and a copy of the presentation is included with the community project proposal submission.

There is increasing interest in ambitious projects proposed by community groups. There have been initial enquiries from the Merimbula Chamber of Commerce for a similar pathway project to link Merimbula/Mirador/Tura Beach. A copy of early correspondence in relation to this project has been provided to Councillors. Councillors should be mindful of the amount and scale of projects that Council is supporting, as similar types of projects can result in competing bids for the same external grant funding as well as Council resources to deliver those projects. Considering major projects in isolation can lead to problems, as it is likely that at a point resources and projects will need to be prioritised. 

Future proposals will continue to be presented on a quarterly basis to Council for consideration.

Proposal Consideration and Assessment

Attached to this report is a summary and assessment of the Project Proposals received including comments and recommendations. The assessment provides a rating against the following project items:

·    Asset Renewal. Is it renewing an existing asset or an upgrade? Is the work linking to a required renewal from asset register?

·    Provision/Use/Value. Is the project relevant to current community needs? Will the facilities be well used? Will the community be getting good value? Is the opportunity cost to other projects and groups fair and acceptable?

·    Links to other plans and works. Are the works linked to adopted Strategic Plans, Facility Management Plans or asset renewals or planned maintenance programs?

·    Project Scale. How large is the project?

·    Project Approval Complexity. Will the project require Environmental and Heritage approvals? Cultural Heritage approvals? Crown Land approvals? Council Development Application approval?

·    Requested BVSC Funding. Are funds requested from Council? Are related funds allocated in budgets for asset renewals or maintenance? Is there good value in the funding level requested?

·    Likely BVSC Involvement. Is labour or material required to assist the project? Are resources such as grant submission assistance required? Is direction required in the approvals processes?

·    Ongoing Operations. What will be the cost to Council to maintain the asset?

Community Engagement

In developing the Community Project Proposal Procedure, consultation was undertaken with - Council's Access Committee, the S355 Sportsground Committee and a workshop involving representatives of service organisations from across the Shire.

The Project Proposal Form includes a section on stakeholder engagement in which the applicant can identify the consultation they have undertaken and feedback they have received in the development of their proposal. Some proposals will require further community consultation as the project develops.

The Community Project Proposal Procedure and Application Form are available on Council’s website.

Financial and resource considerations

·     The level of resourcing and contribution sought from Council is an important aspect for consideration. Council has not budgeted funds to support community project proposals; however, some proposals may align with the BVSC maintenance programs, scheduled asset renewals or grant programs.

·     Council resources are limited and favouring any one project over another is likely to affect or defer the delivery of other planned and programmed works. That is not to say a BVSC contribution is not possible. This is particularly the case where a project links to asset renewals and maintenance programs and the BVSC contribution represents ‘good value’. However, this needs to be subject to funding being available.

·     Committees, community groups and volunteers often seek funding and grant opportunities to support their project proposal. The first step is gaining Council support for works on Council managed land. This also helps to see the project scope is clear and complete and the resources identified are sufficient to complete the works. 

It is difficult for officers to support projects that will lead to over provision or over servicing, even if a funding contribution is not being requested from Council.Project costs and amounts requested from BVSC are included in the attached Summary Sheet.

Legal /Policy

Council’s Procedure 4.01.3 Community Project Proposals is published on the Council website.

Works on public land can trigger legislative requirements related to environment and heritage, access and Building Code compliance, planning and development approvals and in some instances, approvals from the land owner or manager.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

Relevant Delivery Program 2017 – 2021 Goals are:

Goal 2: We are an active, healthy community with access to good quality recreation and sporting facilities, and medical health care.

Goal 12: Our Council is financially sustainable, and services and facilities meet community need.

Operational / Asset Management Plan

Council’s annual Operational Plan is developed alongside a Resourcing Strategy which outlines how actions and activities will be financed, assets managed, and services delivered.

Asset management Capital Works Programs are primarily based on asset renewal (e.g. replacing existing aging assets). A large majority of projects proposed by the community relate to new works or significant upgrades of existing assets and as such are not included in Capital Works Programs. Individually most projects have merit, reflect current community interests and deserve consideration. However, Council needs to be aware that continuing to expand its asset inventory comes at a future cost in terms of both ongoing operations and future asset renewals.

The Project Summary Sheet comments identify if the project is a direct renewal of an existing asset, an upgrade of an existing asset or is developing a new asset. 

Environmental / Sustainability

The Project Proposal Form triggers consideration of potential environmental and heritage issues and possible approvals or compliance that may be required.

Risk

A key aspect of the Community Project Proposal Procedure and process is aimed at mitigating risk. Examples of the risks that need consideration in relation to any project are:

·    The costs and considerations surrounding BVSC’s ongoing asset management/liability.

·    Project oversight and the need to gain relevant approvals and compliance.

·    The costs and expectations associated with the ongoing operations, maintenance future renewal of any new asset.

·    Possible shortfalls in proposal cost estimates.

·    Potential expectations that BVSC will cover any potential project shortfalls.

Social / Cultural

The community has an important role in helping Council identify and deliver facility renewals and improvements. The proposals often reflect current community interest and can reflect changing needs, demographics and trends. Council recognises and values the important role and contribution of committees, community groups and volunteers in the management, operation and maintenance of Council infrastructure and facilities. Council’s role is to provide guidance and support to the community to ensure projects are well thought through, assets will be well used and the future management of them will represent good value to the broader community in the long term.

Options

The challenge in considering project proposals is to give them the consideration they deserve, consider risks and work out where they fit with other planned and programmed works, particularly if the proposal requests a contribution from Council. Council has an option to fund all requests, however this will come at the expense of other required and planned asset renewal and Capital Works Programs.  Project management time is also an important consideration as promoting or adding a project to current workloads will have effect on other planned and programmed projects.

Realistically, Council does not have the resources to meet all requests in terms of capital funding, project management or ongoing asset management.  An important benefit of the Project Proposal process is that Council can consider these aspects, what is a reasonable provision of assets and provide relevant direction and support which then better enables the community groups to develop their project and look to the most realistic methods for delivery of well utilised assets into the future.

 

Attachments

1.          Community Project Proposal Summary Sheet  

 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 12.3 - Attachment 1

Community Project Proposal Summary Sheet

 


Council 29 May 2019

Item 12.4

 

12.4. Hanscombe Creek and Johnston Creek Bridges, Garfields Road, Numbugga     

 

This report provides an update on discussions with private landowners regarding the Council Resolution to handover responsibility of the assets (Hanscombes Creek Bridge and Johnston Creek Bridge) from Council to private landowners, discusses options and provides a recommended course of action.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.   That Council cease operational activity on Garfields Road where the road is contained within private ownership

2.   That Council handover responsibility of the Johnston Creek Bridge and Hanscombes Creek Bridge from Council to private landowners by:

a.   Discontinuing maintenance on the private Section of Garfields Road between the driveways of Lots 221 and 222 in DP 1038247 and the western driveway of Lot 7 in DP819196.

b.  Gifting Johnston Creek Bridge and Hanscombes Creek Bridge to the owner of Lot 7 in DP819196.

c.   Installing signage on Garfields Road to designate the transition from public to private road.

 

Executive Summary

This report provides an update on discussions with private landowners regarding the Council Resolution to handover responsibility of the assets (Hanscombes Creek Bridge and Johnston Creek Bridge) from Council to private landowners, discusses options and provides a recommended course of action.

Background

Sections of the Garfields Road formation are located on private property and are not contained within a road reserve. These boundary alignments date from the late 1800s to the early 1900s and bear little relationship to the existing location of the road and bridge infrastructure within current property boundaries.

Johnston Creek Bridge and Hanscombes Creek Bridge were identified on Council’s Bridge Renewal Program. As part of due diligence for the Bridge Renewal Program delivery, Council officers checked old plans and survey documents.  It was identified that, of the two bridges, only Johnston Creek Bridge was historically located entirely in the road reserve, as indicated in the road survey plan R10936.1603, dated 1914.  It is considered unlikely the existing bridge is the same structure as that shown in the 1914 road survey.  It is also considered the existing bridge may have been built downstream from the original bridge, outside the road reserve.  A boundary definition survey by a registered surveyor would be required to confirm these findings.The Johnston Creek Bridge provides access to two properties (highlighted in red and blue outline in Attachment 3) that can also be accessed from the Snowy Mountains Highway via the eastern section of Garfields Road and Hanscombes Creek Bridge. 

The Hanscombes Creek Bridge approaches are not within a road reserve and the bridge itself is located wholly upon private land, this being Lot 7 DP 819196.

At the Council meeting of 13 December 2017, Council considered a report on the Scheduled Maintenance of Hanscombes Creek Bridge and Johnston Creek Bridge, Garfields Road.  Council resolved:

1.    Handover responsibility of the assets from Council to private landowners, which would include:

a.    Discontinue maintenance on the private Section of Garfields Road between the driveways of Lots 221 and 222 in DP 1038247 and the western driveway of Lot 7 in DP819196.

b.    Dispose of Johnston Creek Bridge, by dissembling and abandoning.

c.     Gift Hanscombes Creek Bridge to the owner of Lot 7 in DP819196.

d.    Close the section of Garfields Road, from the private section to west of Johnston Creek Bridge and dispose to adjoining landowner.

2.    Re-allocate the funding to other priority projects in the 2019 Timber Bridge Renewal Programme.

3.    That the motion carried to the Ordinary Meeting be:

That the recommendation of the Closed Session be noted and that discussion with private landowners be undertaken by Council staff.

Council officers have met with the affected landowners and received their correspondence objecting to the Council Resolution (refer Attachments 1 and 2).

The recommendation included in this report provides the lowest ongoing financial impact to Council, however it should be noted it does result in a reduced level of Council funded services. The key reason the recommendation has been made is that continued funding of the assets, this report relates to, is not considered a priority expenditure of public funds in a constrained resource/financial environment.

Options

The issue of tenure needs to be resolved, should Council wish to continue with operational activities on Garfields Road (bridge works and road grading). There are three potential main courses of action as follows:

1.    Change tenure through a road opening and closure to continue to maintain services as is;

2.    Change tenure for parts of the road to provide modified responsibilities between landowners and Council;

3.    Stop operational works on land that is privately owned.

Under the first course of action, a change to the road tenure through a process of road opening and closing would be required, which incurs legal costs and cadastral surveying. The estimate for a change in road tenure is estimated to be $50,000 depending on the availability of surveys and negotiations with the landowner. In this scenario, once the tenure is completed, Council can continue maintenance and renewal operations on both the Johnston Creek Bridge and Hanscombes Creek Bridge (renewal estimates of $300,000) along with regular road grading. This course of action addresses the tenure issue for Council and the concerns raised by the landowners for Council to provide and maintain an all-weather, heavy vehicle, access to the landowners.

The second course of action involves the complete cessation of operational works on land that is privately owned. This course of action is to cease operational activity on both bridges and gift each structure to the landowner of Lot 7 DP 819196 on the basis the assets are currently on their land. Each end of Garfields Road would require clear delineation from public to private road in the form of signage. This course of action also includes the cessation of grading activities on the section of Garfields Road in private ownership. This course of action addresses the tenure issue for Council and ensures an all-weather, heavy vehicle, access to the landowners’ property (in the current configuration). It does not address the landowners’ concerns that Council would no longer be responsible for both bridges which are critical to internal access for the property owners within their property.

The third course of action is to maintain Johnston Creek Bridge and gift Hanscombes Creek Bridge to the landowner of Lot 7 DP 819196. Renewal estimates of Johnston Creek Bridge are $150,000. Road tenure would need to be addressed in this option for the road between the Snowy Mountains Highway to and including Johnston Creek Bridge. The cost of road tenure changes is expected to be less than that described in the first course of action. It also addresses the tenure issue for Council and ensures access is maintained to the landowners via Johnston Creek Bridge. It addresses the landowners’ concerns that Council provide and maintain an all-weather, heavy vehicle, access to the landowners. While the correspondence does not specifically state the access should be via both Johnston Creek Bridge and Hanscombes Creek Bridge, it was clearly articulated at the on-site discussions with Council’s officers.

In addition to the third course of action above, a further option is to dispose of the existing Johnston Creek Bridge and replace it with a causeway and new approaches on the correct road alignment (requiring cadastral surveying). This option would provide longer life of the Council asset while maintaining access to the landowners. However, it would be subject to minor flooding. This upgrade is estimated at $200,000 (subject to approvals and geotechnical conditions). This option addresses the tenure issue for Council and ensures access is maintained to the landowners via the Johnston Creek causeway. It addresses the landowners’ concerns that Council provide and maintain a heavy vehicle access to their properties. It does not provide an all-weather access.

Community Engagement

Consultation undertaken

Community engagement has been undertaken with the affected landowners.

Financial and resource considerations

A budget of $300,000 had been allocated for the scheduled renewal works for both the Johnston Creek and Hanscombes Creek Bridges on Garfields Road.  These works were deferred pending the resolution of road tenure on Garfields Road.

Lifecycle costs for keeping and maintaining the two bridges on Garfields Road include the yearly maintenance grade of the road (approximately $2,000 per year) and the annual bridge renewal and maintenance costs (approximately $21,000) totalling around $23,000 per year. 

Should maintenance be continued on the section of Garfields Road that is contained on private land, ownership of the land needs to be transferred to Council. There is a cost associated with this, including possible compensation (to be negotiated with the property owner), survey costs and associated legal fees (approximately $50,000).

Legal /Policy

Johnston Creek Bridge and Hanscombes Creek Bridge approaches are not within the road reserve designated as Garfields Road. This tenure issue impacts on Council’s operations as it is undertaking activities on private land. It is necessary to determine a course of action to address potential risk Council puts itself at, under the Civil Liability Act 2002 if no action is taken to address road tenure on Garfields Road.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

On 26 July 2017, Council undertook traffic counts at both the east and west ends of Garfields Road over a seven day period. The result revealed approximately 10 vehicles a day using Garfields Road adjustment for seasonal variation. The traffic volume is indicative of the use by the two landowners utilising this access to their properties.

Appropriate routine maintenance works have recently been undertaken for both the Johnston Creek and Hanscombes Creek bridges.

Risk

Both the Johnston Creek and Hanscombes Creek bridges generate risk for Council in that as best can be determined without a boundary definition survey, are both located on private property with no formal land tenure arrangement in place to protect the asset.  If the issue around tenure is unresolved, Council may be at risk of public liability action from the landowner if an incident were to occur with a Council asset being located on private land.

Council is also currently undertaking operational works on land that is privately owned with no formal agreements in place.

Social / Cultural

Both the Johnston Creek and Hanscombes Creek Bridges are, as best can be determined without a boundary definition survey, both located on private property with no formal land tenure arrangement in place to protect the asset. This issue of tenure needs to be resolved should operational activities continue to be undertaken by Council on Garfields Road. If this tenure is not addressed, Council will be continuing to undertake operational works on private land and may be at risk of public liability action from the landowner, if an incident were to occur with a Council asset being held by private ownership.

The concerns from the property owners have been considered with alterative options presented in this report.

Confidential Information

The Confidential Attachment to this report is considered confidential on the following basis:

·    Section 10A of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) states which parts of a meeting may be closed to the public with part 2(a) stating:

(a)  the report contains personnel matters concerning particular individuals

·    Section 10D of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) states grounds for closing part of meeting to be specified:

(1)  The grounds on which part of a meeting is closed must be stated in the decision to close that part of the meeting and must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

                (2)  The grounds must specify the following:

                        (a)  the relevant provision of section 10A (2),

                        (b)  the matter that is to be discussed during the closed part of the meeting,

(c)  the reasons why the part of the meeting is being closed, including (if the matter concerned is a matter other than a personnel matter concerning particular individuals, the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer or a trade secret) an explanation of the way in which discussion of the matter in an open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

Government Information( Public Access) Act 2009 (GIPA)

The confidential attachment to this report is considered confidential on the following basis:

·    Section 14 of Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 No 52 applies.

                More specifically sub section 2 which states:

(2)  The public interest considerations listed in the Table to this section are the only other considerations that may be taken into account under this Act as public interest considerations against disclosure for the purpose of determining whether there is an overriding public interest against disclosure of government information.

                Part 3 of the table referred to above states:

                (3)  Individual rights, judicial processes and natural justice

                                There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information if                                   disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to have one or                                   more of the following effects:

(a)  reveal an individual’s personal information

                Part 4 of the table referred to above states:

                (4)  Business interests of agencies and other persons

There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information if disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to have one or more of the following effects:

(a)  undermine competitive neutrality in connection with any functions of an agency in respect of which it competes with any person or otherwise place an agency at a competitive advantage or disadvantage in any market,

(b)  reveal commercial-in-confidence provisions of a government contract,

(c)  diminish the competitive commercial value of any information to any person,

(d)  prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests,

(e)  prejudice the conduct, effectiveness or integrity of any research by revealing its purpose, conduct or results (whether or not commenced and whether or not completed).

Attachments

1.            Attachment 1  (Confidential)

2.            Attachment 2  (Confidential)

3.          Attachment 3 

 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 12.4 - Attachment 3

Attachment 3

 


Council 29 May 2019

Item 12.5

 

12.5. Lake Street Shared Path Merimbula     

 

This report has been prepared to provide an update to Council on the progress of Lake Street, Merimbula Shared Path, further to the Resolution of Council made on the 13 June 2018 and to seek Council direction on the way forward.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.    That Council note the contents of the report and the current status of the project.

2.      That Council note the funding is insufficient to deliver the Option G scope of work in its entirety.

3.      That Council note the current estimated project funding shortfall is $1.74m.

4.      That Council note that all opportunities for ‘value engineering’ have been exhausted.

5.      That Council note that to further reduce the length of the path would reduce the functional use of the path and fail to deliver the scope and objectives of the project.

6.      That Council note that Council officers cannot proceed to tender or further progress the project under NSW Local Government Tender Guidelines until direction is received on options for funding the project shortfall.

7.      That Council note that six (6) options have been explored for Council’s consideration. These have been grouped into two categories:

         a) Obtain additional funds; or

         b) Modify scope of work.

8.      That Council note that current Option G design does not provide an accessible link from Rotary Park to Bar Beach and that additional time and funds are recommended to complete the preconstruction activities.

9.      That Council note that community feedback has identified the current Bar Beach configuration does not meet expectations and a Master Plan for the area would help prioritise future works and bring amenity of the facilities in line with Community Strategic Plan.

10.   That Council work with the local member, RMS and Active Transport program to identify  potential funding sources for the shortfall.

 

Executive Summary

Following Council’s Resolution of 13 June 2018 (Item 12.8) to adopt Option G, Council officers have proceeded to:

·    Undertake additional geotechnical and survey works;

·    Develop the detailed design and technical specifications;

·    Undertake necessary fieldwork and assessments for the Review of Environmental Factors;

·    Engage with local community interest groups including Bureau of Accessible Tourism (BOAT) and Friends of Bar Beach;

·    Prepare a Pre-Tender Estimate (PTE) for the value of construction contract; and

·    Develop tender and contract documentation ready for contractor procurement.

In addition to above, Council officers have undertaken an exhaustive ‘value engineering’ exercise to incorporate all opportunities to reduce costs of the project, whilst still meeting project objectives.

Table 1 Budgetary Summary (GST exclusive)

Item

Description

Amount

A

RMS Active Transport funding

$2.0m

B

Estimated value of construction contract (Option G)

$3.14m

C

Forecast expenditure to award of contract

$0.4m

D

Estimated value of contractor supervision and admin

$0.2m

E

Funding shortfall (A-(B+C+D))

$1.74m

Table 1 provides a cost overview of the project. Given a Pre Tender Estimate (PTE) of $3.14m, as well as other projects costs, there is an approximate $1.74m shortfall in funding available to deliver Option G.

NSW Local Government Tender Guidelines stipulate that Council cannot proceed to invite tenders until it has capacity to fund the project.

Council officers have reviewed the options available to Council and can be categorised into two main options. The options are:

Option 1 - Obtain additional funding and proceed as planned, including:

A.     Apply for additional funds to RMS Active Transport;

B.     Borrow funds from a lending institution;

C.     Relocate funding in Capital Works Program.

Option 2 - Modify scope and/or project objectives:

A.     Construct the Friends of Bar Beach Proposal;

B.     Proceed with original Option A and convert Lake Street to a one-way configuration;

C.     Cancel the project and return funding or seek approval to reallocate to another project such as Tathra to Bega Bike Track program.

Council officers consider that available funding is insufficient to deliver the Option G scope of work and to issue a tender to the market at this time would contravene NSW Local Government Tender Guidelines.

Council officers also recommend that should Council seek to secure further project funding an additional $225,000 should be secured to undertake:

·    Preconstruction activities for the link paths connecting Option G to Rotary Park and Bar Beach in preparation for a funding application with Crown Reserves Improvement Fund; and

·    Master planning of the Bar Beach Precinct.

The table attached to this report identify options to change the scope of the project or source additional funding. One option is to secure an additional $2.0m in funding by borrowing from Local Government lending authority, TCorp, on a 10 year term. Additionally, there is the option to apply for the same value of funding through the  RMS Active Transport program. Each of the options are further discussed in the attachment to this report.

Background

Seven options of various lengths and configurations were developed by the Project Team during the preliminary definition stage of the project. Four options were developed further to concept design and were assessed for various considerations including:

·    Amenity to the Merimbula Wharf and Bar Beach;

·    Environmental and heritage impact;

·    Implications for traffic flow and local residents;

·    Socioeconomic consideration; and

·    Construction cost.

Table 2 provides a summary of options considered and estimated construction cost.

Table 2 Option summary (*costs from MDA cost estimate 4 June 2018)

Option | Description

Start - Finish

Est. Construction Cost (excl. GST)*

Option A | One Way Road with separate path on existing sealed road

Rotary Park – Merimbula Wharf

$0.89m

Option B | Elevated steel and timber boardwalk maintaining two way movement on Lake Street

Rotary Park – Merimbula Wharf

$4.68m

Option C | Hybrid of A and B. Elevated boardwalk Rotary – Bar Beach (Two Way) and path on ground (one way) Bar Beach to Wharf

Rotary Park – Merimbula Wharf

$3.10m

Option G | Modified Option B elevated boardwalk (Two Way) stopping at Bar Beach

Main Street – King Street (Bar Beach)

$2.86m

 

A report to Council on 11 April 2018 (Item 12.4) recommended that Option A be endorsed as the preferred option and approval be provided to commence the development phase. The recommended option was declined in favour of Option G on 13 June 2018 (Item 12.8)

 

Project History

Date

Description

8 June 2016

Council resolved to support the Community Project Proposal – Lake Street Walk Proposal from the BOAT

22 September 2017

Council were recipients of $2m in funding under the NSW State Government 2017-18 Active Transport Program for the design and construction of a 1.7km shared use path from Main Street to Merimbula Wharf along Lake Street in Merimbula

13 June 2018

Council resolved on the Motion of Crs McBain and Nadin the following:

1      That Council proceed with the delivery of Option G – being similar to delivery of Option B with a reduced path length from Rotary Park to Bar Beach and maintain the existing two-way road configuration along Lake Street subject to approval of a variation of scope to the existing Funding Deed with NSW State Government; and

2.     That should the Variation to the existing Funding Deed not be approved, Council delegate the Mayor and General Manager to develop an option acceptable to the NSW State Government for a final report back to Council in August.

26 September 2018

A memorandum was provided to Councillors that outlined the current project status. Key points including:

·    Council officers submitted a formal Variation to RMS on 18 June 2018 requesting a variation to scope, based upon the Council Resolution to proceed with Option G and to roll the funding into the 2019/20 financial year.

·    Transport for NSW advised on 4 September 2018 the scope change has been approved and funding for 18/19 for $1.4m confirmed with funding for 2019/20 is yet to be confirmed.

·    The design of Option G for the Lake Street – Shared Path is progressing well but is dependent upon the outcome of the geotechnical, heritage and ecological investigations which are currently being commissioned and undertaken. These will inform the design and impact upon both the cost and timing aspects of the project

May 2019

Design has progressed with geotechnical, heritage and ecological investigations completed and the tender and contract documentation prepared.

A detailed pre-tender construction estimate based on detailed design of Option G has been completed with an estimated total construction cost of $3.14m and a total project cost of $3.74m.

Option G Detailed Scope

1.      Site establishments and environmental controls

2.      Removal of trees and vegetation along path alignment

3.      Removal of overhead power pole stay

4.      Elevated Timber Board Walk

a)      Footing excavation and pour pier footings

b)     Install substructure and bracing

c)      Install superstructure and stainless-steel handrail/barriers

5.      Path on ground

a)      Grubbing and stockpile topsoil

b)     Stormwater

c)      Retaining wall

d)     Import fill and boxing out for concrete path

e)     Concrete path

f)      Spread top soil and stabilise batter

g)      Galvanised handrail where required

Figure 1 Option G Schematic (DEC 2018)

Cost estimate

MDA Australia, a practicing quantity surveyor firm, have been commissioned to provide a Pre Tender Evaluation (PTE) for the value of contract sum. This estimate was based on the 80% design as developed by TBLD and based on the Option G (two way version) for the shared path alignment and timber boardwalk.

Table 3 Cost estimate summary (MDA April 2019)

Item

Description

Estimated Cost

1

Demolition and Site Preparation

$31,300.00

2

Groundworks

$93,385.00

3

Trail Type 1: Concrete Path

$248,155.00

4

Trail Type 2: Low Boardwalk

$1,955,180.00

5

Trail Type 3: High Boardwalk

$220,300.00

6

Line Marking and Signage

$5,000.00

7

External Services

$30,000.00

8

Net Construction Cost

$2,583,320.00

9

Preliminaries and Oh&P (15%)

$400,900.00

10

Total Construction Cost

$2,984,220.00

11

Contingency (5%)

$149,211.00

12

Total Estimated Cost - Stage 2 (Excl. GST)

$3,133,431.00

Current Project Expenditure

The current project expenditure to date is $169,275 with a further $57,723 in funds committed bringing a total project commitment of $226,999.

This project expenditure has included the following:

·    Design and Documentation costs for Thompson Berrill Landscape Design;

·    Detailed Survey and Geotechnical investigations;

·    Aboriginal Due Diligence Assessment ;

·    Review of Environmental Factors; and

·    Project Management and Supervision.

Four claims have been made to RMS to reimburse project expenditure in accordance with the funding deed totalling $171,998 to date.

Forecast expenditure to award of contract

The forecast expenditure to award the contract to the successful contractor is $400,000. This includes all costs incurred since the inception of the project in 2017 when funding was awarded through the RMS Active Transport scheme. It includes all work during the definition (or options) stage and development phase, such as:

·    Options development and assessment;

·    Field work such as engineering survey and geotechnical investigations;

·    Detailed design development and structural engineering;

·    Development of technical specifications, contract and tender documents;

·    Environmental, traffic and heritage assessments and Review of Environmental Factors;

·    Regular meetings with community interest groups;

·    Project management and supervision.

Value Engineering

During the development of the engineering design, the following considerations were identified as areas where substantial savings could be gained.

 

Value Engineering

Consideration

Description / Commentary

Shared path alignment

The alignment of the path is wholly within the road reserve. By not entering into Crown Reserve, issues associated with interfacing with Crown Lands and Native Title claims are avoided.

The alignment has been confined to the existing batter of the road formation. This mitigates impacts on local environment and eliminates the requirement to undertake further assessment of Aboriginal Heritage.

Length of path

The length of path has been reduced to connect the top of Bar Beach to the intersection of Main Street and Lake Street.

Whilst it is acknowledged this is a substantial reduction in the original scope of the project, it is considered this is the minimum length of path that still delivers on the original ‘Rotary Park to Merimbula Wharf Accessible Path’ vision for the project.

Maximising use of concrete on ground

Where the surface profile allows, concrete on ground has been opted for in lieu of a timber board walk.

The cost of extending the road formation by constructing retaining walls and importing fill was eliminated as cost prohibitive with the exemption of approximately 200m adjacent to the Bar Beach bus stop.

Cast insitu footing detail

Cast insitu concrete footings were opted for in lieu of screw or driven piles for ease of construction.

Concrete footings also have a greater durability performance therefore minimising ‘whole-of-life’ costs. They are also a better solution for reconstruction work in a post bushfire scenario.

Use of treated pine

H4 treated pine has been specified for the elevated board walk. H4 timber is for use in outside, in-ground applications and is approximately half the cost of hard wood timber with similar durability performance.

Polycarbonate was also assessed to be more expensive and did not meet aesthetic outcomes of timber.

Additionally, treated pine is a softwood and is more workable than hardwood. This substantially reduces construction durations.

FRP Mini mesh

FRP mini mesh has been specified as it provides better rider comfort and is a cheaper option than that of timber decking. It also has a greater durability performance.

FRP mini mesh comes in large panels. The width of the path and spacing of the piers have been designed to ensure any onsite cutting of the panels are kept to a minimum.

Galvanised handrail

Stainless steel handrails have been specified for the timber boardwalk. Where the path type changes to concrete path a proprietary galvanised steel hand rail has been specified.

Whilst not as aesthetically pleasing as continuous stainless steel throughout, this represents a significant saving for the project.

Traffic Control during construction

Council officers note that an allowance for traffic control for 9 months has been included in the cost build up. It is noted costs for traffic control could be minimised if Lake Street was temporality changed to a one-way street for the duration of construction work.

Procurement Protocols

Council is required to follow the NSW Local Government Tender Guidelines when procuring contractors to undertake construction works. These Guidelines are prepared by the Director General of the Department of Premier and Cabinet. Section 23A, Clause 1.2 (Standards of Behaviour and Ethical Principles) states:

‘Councils must not invite (or submit) tenders without a firm intention and capacity to proceed with a contract, including having funds available.’

Given that an estimated funding shortfall of $1.74m has been identified, it is not possible under the NSW Local Government Guidelines to invite tenders for the construction contract. It is therefore incumbent on Council to review options available and provide direction on how to proceed.

Option Review

Given that Council cannot proceed to invite tenders for the construction contract with Option G in its current form, Council officers have explored six (6) options for Council’s consideration. These have been grouped into two categories:

·    Option 1: Obtain addition funds

·    Option 2: Modify scope of work

The tables attached to this report provide the details of each option considered. It includes a list of pros and cons.

It should be noted that Council officers have approached this exercise without bias and have left all options open for consideration, even if they are likely to be unpopular. Options to partially build the elevated walk portion of the shared path have not been considered, as Council officers do not believe this is a feasible option.

Missing Links

It is important to note Option G, in its current form, does not provide an all access link from Rotary Park to Bar Beach. Should Council endorse the option to obtain additional funds (Option 1), consideration should be given to funding the design and development of the subsequent stages or ‘missing links’.

A construction cost estimate for these ‘missing links’ has not been developed, as the designs have not been sufficiently developed. A key cost and time consideration for both these stages is the proposed alignment departs from the Council Road Reserve and into Crown Land. This means that both stages require an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit from Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) prior to commencing construction, as well as liaison with NTS Corp, as the land is subject to a Native Title claim.

It is estimated the design and development cost would be $203,500 (including GST and 10% contingency). The proposed design and development work would entail:

·    Design of connection Pathway, Wyeebo Street to the Bar Beach Kiosk

·    Design of connection Pathway Main Street intersection to Rotary Park

·    Design of modifications to carparks at either end to provide wheel chair and pram accessibility.

·    Commence Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (ACHAR) and required consultation to obtain Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP).

·    Undertake native title and heritage status search and submission of referral notice to NTS Corp.

Undertaking the design and commencing the approval pathway will mean these important connecting elements can be packaged into ‘shovel-ready’ projects. This will improve the likelihood of a successful funding application to funding programs such as the Crown Reserves Improvement Fund.

Friends of Bar Beach Proposal

Over the course of the past six months, Council officers have had three (3) meetings with representatives from the Friends of Bar Beach community group. This group comprises several local residents who have a keen interest in the outcomes of the project. On one occasion, an alternative project proposal was presented to Council officers. Whilst the proposal incorporates some of the elements contained in Option G, the key difference is it omits the timber board walk connecting to the intersection of Lake Street and Main Street. Key details of this proposal include:

·    Maintain informal overflow parking by retained grassed verge on western side of Lake Street;

·    Providing accessibility path from intersection of Wyeebo Street to existing bus stop (similar to current concrete path section of Option G);

·    Link path connecting the Bar Beach Kiosk to Wyeebo Street;

·    Additional table and chairs at the top level carpark at Bar Beach;

·    Minor planting and landscaping.

The proposal was developed acknowledging current funding restraints and was focused on providing improved safety outcomes and amenity of the overflow parking area and the pedestrians accessing Bar Beach from Short Point Caravan park via Wyeebo Street during peak tourist periods.

It should be noted the proposal has the path located on Crown Land and would be subject to Crown Land consent and Native Title claim and requires an AHIP prior to commencing any works.

The Friends of Bar Beach proposal has been included as Option 2A in the Option Assessment Table and a schematic has been provided in the attachments.

Bar Beach Master Plan

Feedback garnered from local community groups such as Friends of Bar Beach and BOAT has been that the current car parking configuration and general arrangement of amenities at Bar Beach do not meet the expectations of local residents and tourists, especially during the peak holiday season.

Coastal accessibility Master Plans have recently been completed for Bruce Steer Pool, Short Point and Pambula Surf Club. The Master Plans are important tools that can be used by Council to prioritise projects, incorporate community input and ensure they align with overall objectives outlined in the Community Strategic Plan (CSP). It is estimated it would cost $25,000 to complete a Master Plan for Bar Beach.

It is proposed that, should Council resolve to apply for additional funding (Option 1) to complete Option G, that consideration also be giving to setting aside $25,000 to fund the completion of a Master Plan for Bar Beach.

Options

Council officers’ recommended strategy, should Council elect to continue with delivering option G, is to use a combination of options. This maintains flexibility to change, pending third party outcomes. The recommended strategy in this case is to:

1.      Apply for a loan of $2.00m (i.e. $1.74m shortfall plus $20k missing links and $25k Bar Beach Master Plan) on a 10 year term (Option A2)

2.      Apply for additional funds from RMS Active Transport (Option A1)

3.      Proceed, as planned, and issue Request for Tender (RFT) for the construction of Option G.

4.      Should the application for additional funds be successful, return funding from the loan and pay interest incurred.

From Council officers’ perspective, the likelihood of securing retrospective grant funding once Council has committed to funding the shortfall through borrowings, is low.

Financial and resource considerations

This project is currently funded by the NSW Government Transport Roads and Maritime Services, Active Transport Program (2017-18 and 2018-19) with no Council contribution committed noting this report is reiterating the projected funding shortfall.

Funding source

 

Amount

NSW Active Transport Program - P.0031321: Design and construct a 1.7km shared use path from Main Street to Merimbula Wharf, along Lake Street, Merimbula

$

2,000,000

Conclusion

Council officers have proceeded to develop the Option G design, obtain relevant approvals and prepared contract documentation ready for tender. The pre-tender estimate completed by a third party cost estimator came in at $3.14m. This is significantly above the funding ($2m) secured for the design and delivery of the project.

Council officers have explored opportunities to reduce costs, however believe there are no further elements that can be modified, whilst still meeting the objectives of the project. As such, Council officers have explored options which have been grouped into two categories:

·    Option 1: Obtain addition funds

·    Option 2: Modify scope of work

Council officers are now seeking further direction from Council based on the options presented in this report. Should Council elect to persist with delivery of option G it is recommended Council obtain additional funds to deliver the project in its current form. This would require borrowing $2.0m in funds. It could also involve applying to RMS Active Transport (funding body) for the same amount. Should the application be successful, the loan can be returned less any money already spent retuned with interest.

The additional funds, when available, can be added to the existing funding. This will allow Council officers to issue the Request for Tender (RFT) for the construction of Option G. The funds can also be used to undertake design and planning work for the ‘Missing Links’ and for preparation of the Bar Beach Master Plan. As outlined borrowing funds comes at significant opportunity cost.

 

Attachments

1.          Option Review for Lake Street Shared Path Merimbula

2.          MDA Australia Cost Estimate Report April 2019

3.          Thompson Berrill Landscape Design Extracted Design Drawings April 2019

4.          Friends of Bar Beach Schematic Plan Proposal


Council

29 May 2019

Item 12.5 - Attachment 1

Option Review for Lake Street Shared Path Merimbula

 


 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 12.5 - Attachment 2

MDA Australia Cost Estimate Report April 2019

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 12.5 - Attachment 3

Thompson Berrill Landscape Design Extracted Design Drawings April 2019

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 12.5 - Attachment 4

Friends of Bar Beach Schematic Plan Proposal

 


Council 29 May 2019

Item 12.6

 

12.6. Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee     

 

This report recommends Council adopt the recommendations of the Bega Valley Local Traffic Committee from the meeting held on 1 May 2019.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

 

Officers Recommendation

To construct two accessible carparking spaces on the existing Tathra Surf Club Carpark to facilitate disabled drivers with access to the All-Inclusive Play Space and other areas.

 

Executive Summary

The Local Traffic Committee is primarily a technical review committee and is not a Committee of Council. Local Traffic Committees operate under delegation from NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) who are responsible for traffic control on all New South Wales roads. Their role is to advise Council on traffic control matters that relate to prescribed traffic control devices or traffic control facilities for which Council has delegated authority.

It is a requirement for Council to formally adopt the recommendation from this Committee prior to action being taken. The recommendation was supported unanimously by the Committee.

The recommendation in this report is a direct reflection of the recommendation from the Local Traffic Committee.

Plans identifying the location this recommendation relates to, is attached.

Background

Council have received a request for the approval of 2 accessible parking spaces along with a shared zone in association with the “All-inclusive play space” currently under construction, adjoining the Tathra Surf Club.

 

Attachments

1.          Accessible Carparking Detail - Lot Stafford Playground

 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 12.6 - Attachment 1

Accessible Carparking Detail - Lot Stafford Playground

 

 

 


Council

29 May 2019

 

Staff Reports –  Governance And Strategy

 

29 May 2019

  

13.1            Candelo Town Hall/Cafe building..................................................................... 118


Council 29 May 2019

Item 13.1

 

13.1. Candelo Town Hall/Cafe building     

 

The current lessee of Candelo Town Hall Café is in breach of the conditions of the Lease Agreement and Council approval is being sought to terminate the lease and make an application to Crown Lands and Department of Premier and Cabinet to modify the Town Hall/Café building for future use by the community.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

 

Officers Recommendation

1.      That Council receive and note the report.

2.      That Council approve the termination of the current Lease pursuant to section 39(c) of the Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) and proceed with debt recovery action for the rental arrears owing. 

3.      That Council make an application to Crown Lands and Department of Premier and Cabinet for approval to modify the Town Hall/Café building for future use by the community.

4.      That Council authorise the General Manager and Mayor to execute the necessary documentation to formalise the above course of action.

 

Executive Summary

The current lessee of Candelo Town Hall Café is in breach of the conditions of the formal Lease Agreement for a number of reasons and Council officers are seeking approval to terminate the remaining tenure.

Council officers are also seeking direction on how to proceed with the future of the Candelo Town Hall Café, in light of a number of options available which have been detailed in this report.

Background

The Candelo Town Hall Café and Hall are located within the same building which sits on a Council Managed Crown Reserve being R180039.  The general care and maintenance of the hall facility and the management of facility bookings sits with the Candelo Town Hall Committee under the delegation of Council.  Tenure of the Candelo Town Hall Café was granted to the current lessee by formal Council Resolution on 21 February 2018.

Council officers conducted a public Expression of Interest (EOI) process in early 2014 seeking applications from prospective tenants to occupy the café space under an exclusive retail lease.  Only one formal submission was received in response to that EOI, with a lease granted to Mr Ross Morgan by formal Council Resolution on 25 June 2014.  The lease to Mr Morgan was commenced on 28 November 2014 for a period of five years, with an option to renew for a further period of five years.  Following a formal assignment process, Mr Morgan sold the business and the remaining tenure was assigned to the current lessee via formal Council Resolution on 21 February 2018.

In November 2018 Council officers received notification from the current lessee that she had sold the business and sought Council approval to assign the remaining Lease term to a new occupier.  Prior to progressing an assignment of the remaining Lease term, Council officers requested the current lessee provide evidence of the proposed assignee’s qualifications, skills and experience necessary to operate a café business as well as evidence of assignee’s financial capacity to meet the monthly rental commitment and general operation of the café.  This information was provided to Council upon request, however did not meet all the requirements i.e. no evidence to support prior experience operating a café or financial capacity to meet the rental commitments and operational needs was provided.

In accordance with the terms of the Lease, the current lessee is not permitted to assign or part with possession of the premises without the consent of Council and the Minister.  Given the clear breach of the Lease terms and limited tenure remaining, Council officers contacted Crown Lands for advice on how to progress the request for assignment.  The current Lease is due to expire on 27 November 2019 however the Lease does contain an option for further tenure of 5 years. 

Due to the changes in Crown Land legislation, Crown Lands have advised they are liaising with the Council Crown Land Manager Unit for clarification and way forward.  Despite ongoing follow up, confirmation on whether Council is able to assign the remaining Lease tenure plus the 5 year option period to the new café occupier, without the need of progressing a further EOI process has not been able to be obtained from Crown Lands to date.

Over the last few months since the business has changed hands, the financial commitments have not been met and as at 8 May 2019 arrears are as follows:

·    Rent – $1,378.83;

·    Grease Trap Service - $458.53;

·    Rates - $1,601.13 with another instalment amount of $386.00 due 31/05/2019;

·    Water - $425.75.

In accordance with the terms of the Lease, Council may end the Lease if rent or any other money owing under the Lease is in arrears for one month, whether formally demanded or not.  Furthermore, Council has received further advice the current occupier has now closed the café.  As the current lessee has breached the terms of the Lease by assigning the Lease without consent and has arrears well in excess of one month, it is suggested Council terminate the remaining Lease term and explore other options for the future of the café.

Council has received funding from Department of Premier and Cabinet through the Stronger Country Communities Funding program to upgrade the Hall kitchen.  Since the current occupier has closed the café doors, the Candelo Town Hall Committee has contacted Council to suggest instead of upgrading the kitchen within the Hall they make use of the commercial kitchen within the café.  Council could seek approval from the Department of Premier and Cabinet to use the grant funding to construct an access from the Hall to the café and convert the existing Hall kitchen into storage/meeting room space.  Given the small population in Candelo, the new thriving retail café business in the main street of Candelo and previous failed tenures of the café site, this option is considered favourable.

Below is a diagram of the building for the information of Councillors:

Council approval is being sought to terminate the current Lease as well as make an application to Crown Lands and Department of Premier and Cabinet for approval to modify the Town Hall/Café building for use by the community.

Options

The options available to Council are:

1.    Approve the termination of the current Lease and make an application to Crown Lands and Department of Premier and Cabinet for approval to modify the Town Hall/Café building for future use by the community.  This option will mean permanent closure of the Candelo Town Hall Café however will create a more effective community space within the Hall facility.

2.    Approve the termination of the current Lease, with Council officers conducting a further public EOI process to locate a new tenant for the site.  This option would require the existing tenant to vacate the site and remove all personal belongings (ovens, stove top, fridges, dishwasher, and microwave).  Until such time as a new tenancy was established, the café would remain closed and unusable to the community.

3.    Continue with the current tenancy and approve an assignment of the current Lease to a proposed new business operator, if the lessee is able to find a buyer for her business.  This option will allow the current lessee to try find a new operator without the need to remove all stock, fittings and equipment from the café.  Given the café has already closed its doors and rent is no longer being paid, this option is not recommended as rental arrears will continue to accumulate.

Community Engagement

Consultation undertaken

Council officers have been in ongoing contact with the current lessee regarding this matter.  Due to personal reasons beyond her control, the current lessee can no longer operate the café but has indicated her preference would be to find a buyer to take over the business and remaining Lease tenure.

Since the café has closed its doors, the Candelo Town Hall Committee has made contact with Council to express their interest in constructing an access from the Hall to the café and converting the existing Hall kitchen into storage/meeting room space.

Consultation Planned

Council has arranged to meet with Crown Lands to discuss the proposal in late May and will continue to liaise with all effected parties as the matter progresses.

Council consideration of input

To ensure the continued use and occupation of the Reserve is appropriate, Council officers will consider:

·        Compliance with the legislation, related policies and guidelines;

·        Compatibility with the Reserve purpose;

·        Native Title rights;

·        Aboriginal land claims.

Financial and resource considerations

The current monthly rental achieved for the café is $448 per month.  All rental lease fees collected assist with ongoing operational and maintenance costs for the Candelo Town Hall complex.  The existing Lease has the provision for an annual increase by CPI, with a current market rent review due to be conducted on expiry of the current Lease term on 27 November 2019.  Although the proposal to incorporate the café into the Hall will see a loss in rental income to the complex, it is considered a better result for the community of Candelo as it will create an exciting hireable space for community users.  The Candelo Town Hall is already a highly used facility and therefore generates significant income, providing a current healthy reserve balance of $39,185.  This financial year the Candelo Town Hall Committee have taken approximately $8,000 in Hall hire bookings and it is anticipated that if they also had the café area to hire out the hiring opportunities would be increased as would their income.

As mentioned above the grant funding from Department of Premier and Cabinet could be used to make the proposed alterations to the building.

If Council were to progress an EOI process for the future use of the café, Council officers would be required to obtain an updated market rental valuation to determine the annual rental for any new tenancy. 

Should Council approve the termination of the current Lease, there will be Council officer resources and legal costs associated with the termination.  Council would need to commence debt recovery action to recover all arrears.

Legal /Policy

The Candelo Town Hall Café Lease falls under the provisions of the Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) (RL Act).  Pursuant to section 39(c) of the RL Act, Council as lessor is entitled to withhold consent to an assignment of a retail shop lease if the lessee has not complied with section 41 of the RL Act (Procedure for obtaining consent to assignment).

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Strategic Alignment

In 2014 Council agreed to fund renewal of the commercial kitchen fit-out in the Café, including new stainless-steel benches, splashbacks, shelves, sink and mechanical exhaust system.  The existing kitchen was ageing and no longer complied with current health and Workplace Health and Safety standards.  Various items of kitchen equipment (including an old stove, microwave and dishwasher) were also no longer operational and were removed at that time.  The lessee was required to provide all equipment necessary for the operation of a café.  These items (ovens, stove top, fridges, dishwasher, and microwave) are the property of Ms Elliott and will remain her property at the end of the Lease.  Any incoming occupant will be required to supply their own equipment in this regard.

Risk

If Council continue with the existing Lease there is a risk that no further rental payments will be made and the café will remain closed to the community.

If a further public EOI process to locate a new tenant for the café site is conducted any new tenancy will need to consider Native Title legislation.  Council officers will be required to undertake a Native Title assessment and send notification to NTS Corp regarding a proposed new Lease as it may affect Native Title interests in the reserve.  When exercising powers provided by the transitional arrangements under the Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW), Council Crown Land Managers must obtain written advice from a qualified Native Title Manager that the proposed Lease complies with the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). 

 

Attachments

Nil

   

 


Council

29 May 2019

 

Staff Reports –  Finance

 

29 May 2019

 

14.1            Certificate of Investment.................................................................................. 124


Council 29 May 2019

Item 14.1

 

14.1. Certificate of Investment     

 

This report details Council’s Investments at the end of April 2019.

 

Director Business and Governance  

 

 

Officer’s Recommendation

1.    That Council receive and note the attached reports indicating Council’s investment position as at 30 April 2019.

2.    That Council note the certification of the Responsible Accounting Officer.

 

Executive Summary

I, Graham Stubbs, as the Responsible Accounting Officer of Bega Valley Shire Council (BVSC), hereby certify the investments listed in the attached reports have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act), clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

Also, all investments have been appropriately recorded in Council’s financial records and reconciled on a monthly basis.

Background

Under the legislation and Regulations mentioned below, the Responsible Accounting Officer must present to Council on a monthly basis, the status of the investments held by Council. The Responsible Accounting Officer must detail the investments held, and their compliance with both internal Policy and external regulation under the Ministerial Order of Investments.

In accordance with the recommendations made by the Office of Local Government (OLG) Investment Policy Guidelines published in May 2010, the monthly Investments Reports are attached to the Business Paper. This allows a stand-alone report to be published on Council’s website for the public to view without having to peruse the Council’s Agenda for the relevant meeting.

Financial and resource considerations

The attached report indicates a current investment portfolio of $83,159,918 at 30 April 2019. These funds can be broken into the following Funds:

Table 1: Investments by Fund $’000

Fund

February 2019

March 2019

April 2019

General Fund

$17,982

$32,755

$29,967

Water Fund

$19,394

$18,634

$18,462

Sewer Fund

$36,048

$35,570

$34,731

TOTAL

$73,424

$86,959

$83,160

·     Each Fund’s allocation can only be utilised on its specific operations. For example, Water Fund cannot use its financial resources on General Fund projects, etc.

As at 30 April 2019, BVSC’s available cash balance was $2,172,048 and the investment balance was $83,159,918. The investments are broken up as follows:

·     TCorpIM Cash Fund - $35,672,274

·     TCorpIM Strategic Cash Fund - $47,487,644

With respect to the Fund’s monthly distributions, the custodian calculates the Fund’s earnings at month end and then pays a distribution based on these earnings. Distributions are paid to investors by way of the issue of additional units.

Legal /Policy

Section 625 of the Act determines money may only be invested in a type of investment authorised by Order of the Minister for Local Government and published in the Local Government Gazette. The most recent Ministerial Order of Investment was published 17 February 2011.

Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 determines the Responsible Accounting Officer must provide Council with a written report setting out details of all money Council has invested under Section 625 of the Act.

The report must also include a Certificate as to whether or not the investments have been made in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and the Council’s Investment Policy.

Council has an Investment Policy published under Policy number 6.07. This Policy is reviewed every 4 years by Council and annually by Council officers.

Impacts on Strategic/Operational/Asset Management Plan/Risk

Environmental / Sustainability

TCorp has provided BVSC with their Investment Stewardship Policy (attached to the Business Paper to Council on 31 January 2018).

In order to deliver the best long-term risk adjusted returns for clients, TCorp integrates Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) factors into the investment processes of the appointed investment managers. TCorp will evaluate the ESG policies and practices of its investment managers as part of the manager selection process, as well as during periodic manager reviews.

 

Attachments

1.          2019.05.29 Investment Report TCorp Strategic Fund April 2019

2.          2019.05.29 Investment Report TCorp Cash Fund April 2019

 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 14.1 - Attachment 1

2019.05.29 Investment Report TCorp Strategic Fund April 2019

 


Council

29 May 2019

Item 14.1 - Attachment 2

2019.05.29 Investment Report TCorp Cash Fund April 2019

 

     


Council

29 May 2019

 

 

Questions On Notice

 

29 May 2019

 

19.1            Cr Nadin Question on Notice - Native Title....................................................... 129

19.2            Cr Nadin Question on Notice - Sediment breach at Back Lake, Merimbula.... 132


Council 29 May 2019

Item 19.1

 

19.1. Cr Nadin Question on Notice - Native Title     

 

Response to Cr Nadin’s Question on Notice at the Council meeting of 10 April 2019.

 

Director Assets and Operations  

 

Native Title

Cr Nadin asked a Question on Notice regarding Aboriginal Land Claims under the Native Title Claim and the potential exposure and effect of the Northern Territory landmark Native Title Decision on NSW Crown Lands and what the legal and statutory obligations are of owners/managers of potentially affected land.

The question was taken on notice by the Director Assets and Operations, who has provided the following answer:

Commonwealth Native Title and NSW Aboriginal Land Rights

There are fundamental differences between Aboriginal land rights and Native Title in NSW. 

Land rights are usually granted as freehold or perpetual lease title to the NSW Aboriginal Land Council or Local Aboriginal Land Councils and are established under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW).  Where land rights are granted, the Aboriginal Land Council is exempt from rates and charges under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW)The responsibility for determining Aboriginal land claims lies with the Minister administering the Crown Lands Management Act 2016 (NSW). The current position of the NSW Aboriginal Land Council is that it prefers that land claims are finally determined prior to any change of use on the land. 

Native Title recognises, under Australian common law, the rights of first Australians to access land to continue traditional laws and customs.  This right was established by the landmark 1992 Mabo judgement in the High Court, and subsequent Native Title Act 1993 (Clth).  Native Title determinations are made by the Federal Court.

Both Native Title and land rights only apply to Crown Land (including Crown Land in council management).  Where a valid grant of a freehold estate was made on or before 23 December 1996, Native Title is extinguished.

Although the relationship between land rights and Native Title is legally complex, the following principles generally apply:

·    Land rights and Native Title may co-exist.

·    The granting of an Aboriginal land claim lodged after 1994 will not affect any Native Title rights.

·    Where Native Title has been extinguished on land owned by an Aboriginal Land Council it may be ‘revived’ but will not restrict an Aboriginal Land Council’s ability to deal with the land.

·    Land claims made over land that is the subject of a registered Native Title claim or a positive determination of Native Title must be refused.

·    Aboriginal Land Councils cannot deal in land that has been granted subject to Native Title unless there is a determination of Native Title over that land.

·    Native Title claimants may be members of Aboriginal Land Councils and vice-versa.

·    Aboriginal Land Councils and Native Title holders may develop agreements about land subject to both Native Title and land rights.

Overview of Timber Creek High Court Judgement

As far as local councils in NSW are concerned, Part 8 of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 imposes obligations on Council Crown Land Managers to protect Native Title rights and interests and this obligation is accompanied by compensation responsibilities that are imposed on councils for failure to do so.

On 13 March 2019, the High Court handed down the Timber Creek judgement, which awarded $2.5m in compensation (for both economic and cultural loss) to the Native Title holders for activity undertaken by the Northern Territory Government on the subject land.  

Update on South Coast People Native Title Claim

A Native Title application was made for the South Coast region by Yuin traditional owners in July 2017. The first respondent is the NSW Government. 

Bega Valley Shire, Shoalhaven and Eurobodalla councils are parties to the South Coast People Native Title application and are represented by Marsden’s Law Group.  Hearing dates in the Federal Court have not yet been set, but the matter is listed for case management on 20 June 2019. There are numerous other parties to the claim.

Update on Aboriginal Land Rights Claim

An Aboriginal Land Claim was lodged by Local Aboriginal Land Councils over all Crown Land in the Bega Valley Shire in December 2016.  Consequently, there are additional processes for Council to undertake with the Department of Industry – Lands and Water in relation to any change of use of Crown Land in Council’s management.  There is currently no timeframe for determination of this claim. 

Amendments to the Crown Land Management Act 2016

The Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW) recognises and facilitates Aboriginal involvement in the management of Crown Land, including recognition of Aboriginal lands rights, Native Title rights and interests, and the spiritual, social, cultural and economic importance of Crown Land to Aboriginal people. 

On 1 July 2018 a revised management structure for the management of Crown Reserves was established. All Reserve Trust Managers appointed under the Crown Lands Act 1989 (NSW) were automatically transitioned as Crown Land Managers. Council is appointed Crown Land Manager of 95 Crown Reserves and a further 48 Reserves have devolved to our care and control. Crown Reserves are generally considered as ‘Community Land’ under the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW). Management as ‘Community Land’ requires Council to:

·    Assign a Community Land ‘category’ to the Reserve that aligns with the Reserve purpose; and

·    Prepare and adopt a compliant plan of management for the Land by 30 June 2021.

In certain circumstances, the Minister may consent to Council management of a Crown Reserve as ‘Operational Land’.

Council is required to employ or engage an accredited Native Title Manager to ensure compliance with Native Title obligations when managing Crown Reserves.

Council will generally not be required to seek the Minister’s approval for dealings on Crown Reserves and will not have to lodge annual reports to the Department of Industry—Lands and Water.

The Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW) also includes provision for the transfer of specified Crown Land to councils under the Land Negotiation Program.  All transfers of Land to councils will be voluntary. Crown Land that is identified as State Land, being Land that is of significance to all the peoples of NSW, will not be available for transfer under this program.  The negotiation process will be run in partnership with local councils and Aboriginal Land Councils.  Council and the Bega Local Aboriginal Land Council will be participating in a pilot of the Land Negotiation Program, which was due to commence on 1 July 2018.  A revised commencement date has not yet been determined.

 

Attachments

Nil

 


Council 29 May 2019

Item 19.2

 

19.2. Cr Nadin Question on Notice - Sediment breach at Back Lake, Merimbula     

 

Response to Cr Nadin’s Question on Notice at the Council meeting of 10 April 2019.

 

Director Community Environment and Planning  

 

Sediment breach at Back Lake, Merimbula

Cr Nadin asked a Question on Notice regarding a sediment breach at Mirador, particularly what actions were taken by Council and the contractor to resolve the issue, were fines issued and was there any permanent damage to the environment?

Dr Howe indicated that several site inspections have been undertaken and a notice has been issued to the developer to reinstate the erosion and sediment controls. The developer has been complying with Council’s direction.

The question regarding whether there was any permanent damage to the environment was taken on notice by Dr Howe and the following response is provided:

Response

Following the initial pollution incident and subsequent rainfall events, Council officers inspected the northern foreshore of Back Lake and the Pages Creek delta on several occasions.

There has been some limited deposition of sediment at the mouth of Pages Creek. The suspended fine particle plume that was visible along the northern side of the Lake following the rain event appears to have either settled across the Lake bed in a very fine layer or been swept out to sea following the opening of the estuary that occurred shortly after.

The impact of this sediment deposition on the benthic (bottom) ecosystem of Back Lake is expected to be minor and less than that generated by runoff from a moderate catchment flood event, in the absence of the Mirador development impact.

 

Attachments

Nil