ITEM NO: 1 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS SISTER CITIES … · 2018-02-19 · Sanda for an exhibition and...

MINUTE BY MAYOR Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 1 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS SISTER CITIES COMMITTEE FILE NOS: C00299. C00576 Recommendations: 1. That Council wish Johanna Parsons and Tony Gasparee every success in the

Sanda City International Masters Half Marathon. 2. That Council thank Marion Crossman, Chairperson of the Blue Mountains Sister

Cities Committee, for her report for 2004 and that it be received. Minute by Mayor: 1. Presentation to Participants in Sanda City International Masters Half

Marathon.

It is my great pleasure to advise the Council that we have present with us this evening, Johanna Parsons (Blaxland) and Tony Gasparee (Wentworth Falls) who have been chosen to represent the Blue Mountains as runners in the Sanda City International Masters Half Marathon which will be held in Sanda City, Japan on Sunday, 19th December, 2004. We extend a very warm welcome to them. On behalf of Council I would like to present Johanna and Tony with Blue Mountains tracksuits and to wish them every success in the forthcoming Marathon.

2. Chairperson’s Report 2004

Marion Crossman, Chairperson of the Blue Mountains Sister Cities Committee has kindly submitted a report on the various projects and activities of the Committee. This report is attached for your information.

MINUTE BY MAYOR Item 1 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

Attachment

BLUE MOUNTAINS SISTER CITIES COMMITTEE

ANNUAL REPORT BY MARION CROSSMAN – CHAIRPERSON (2004)

In December of 2003 two runners, Trevor Hamilton and Rebecca Schaber went to Sanda to compete in the Sanda Masters Half Marathon. They were hosted by people in Sanda City. In January a group of 22 students and adults from Winmalee High School went to Japan for a two week cultural exchange. The group travelled through the Alps and spent one week in homestay with families from Arima Senior High School. The students were able to practise and improve their language skills and learn more about Japanese culture. In February we held our inaugural celebration for Japan National Day. A large number of Japanese people living and working in the Blue Mountains Community joined with Committee members and the Japanese Consul-General, Mr. Yasuaki Nogawa for afternoon tea at the Council Chambers. Cheryl Irwin of Hazelbrook left for 12 months exchange at Arima Senior High School. Miss Konomi Saki from Arima Senior High School arrived in the Mountains for 12 months exchange at Winmalee High School. In April the Committee set up an information booth at the Springwood Foundation Day Celebrations. In June, two runners from Sanda came out to compete in the Woodford to Glenbrook Run, they were hosted by previous competitors in the Sanda Half Marathon and were entertained by members of the Committee. In July the Committee held the Annual 4th July Celebrations at Glenbrook and were joined by American personnel from the RAAF base and expatriates living in the local community. A surprise and welcome addition to the celebrations was a coach load of students from Pennsylvania who happened to be passing through. At the end of July, 22 students and 3 teachers from Arima Senior High School arrived for their bi-annual culture exchange visit to Winmalee High School. This exchange goes from strength to strength with many long term friendships formed during these visits. Also during August, 32 students from Hokusetsu Senior High School spent a day at their Sister School, St. Columba’s High School. We also hosted 2 students from Sanda, winners of the Annual English Speech Competition. In September and October artworks from various Mountains Primary Schools were sent to Sanda for an exhibition and a penfriend exchange was established. In November of 2004 the details of the Inaugural Garden Clubs visit to Japan were finalized. 22 people from the Blue Mountains will travel to Sanda in May 2005 to attend the Garden Festival and to spend some time visiting famous gardens in Kyoto and Kanazawa.


ITEM NO: 2 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS SISTER CITIES COMMITTEE -

ADDITIONAL MEMBER FILE NO: C00576 Recommendation: That Council approve the membership of Michael Tebbutt to the Blue Mountains Sister Cities Committee. Minute by Mayor: The Blue Mountains Sister Cities Committee would like to put forward the name of Michael Tebbutt of Springwood for official nomination to this Committee. Michael has had an interest in the Committee for the last few years as his son went to Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff for 5 years. His son was also coach of the University’s men’s and women’s tennis team in 2003 and has a plaque in their Hall of Fame for becoming the first University student to achieve “All-America” honours in tennis, (singles and doubles) reaching No. 2 in their NCAA National USA Championships. Michael visited Flagstaff in 2003 to see his son’s graduation and enjoyed seeing Flagstaff, its environs and friendly people and hopes to return in the near future. Michael has also been intermittently attending committee meetings for the last four years and would like to continue on a more regular basis. Michael Tebbutt has been a resident of the Blue Mountains for seven years and has been visiting friends (residents) here for approximately 25 years. Michael is a Contract Manager for Multiplex FM and currently manages all facilities at three retail sites (Queen Victoria Building, The Strand Arcade and The Galeries Victoria) in the City. The Committee is pleased to endorse Michael’s nomination.


ITEM NO: 3 SUBJECT: BILL SAWERS – RETIREMENT FILE NO: P0045 Recommendations: 1. That Council thank Bill Sawers for his 46 years of dedicated service to the Council

and the Blue Mountains Community. 2. That Council wish Bill Sawers good health and every happiness in his retirement. Minute by Mayor: Bill, at 20 years of age, commenced his service with Blue Mountains City Council on 21st July, 1958 as a Junior Clerk. During the period 1958-1969 Bill was employed in the Rates and Electricity Departments, as well as working as a Branch Office Cashier at Council’s Offices in Lawson and Blackheath. Bill was appointed as Officer-in-Charge, Outstanding Accounts Section, City Treasurer’s Department from 13th October, 1969. Between 1969 and 1995 Bill held the position of Senior Debt Recovery Officer. In 1997 Bill was promoted to the position of Administration Officer in the then Finance Division. Essentially this has remained Bill’s job, notwithstanding a few changes and the move to Council’s Executive Services Unit. During this time he has provided dedicated support services to Councillors. Bill’s love for the Local Government Elections has demonstrated his value to Council. Bill has had many years experience at Elections and was, at one stage, Council’s Returning Officer until appointments were transferred to the State Government. I would like to congratulate Bill, on behalf of Blue Mountains City Council, for his long-standing and valuable service to Council and the Blue Mountains Community over the last 46 years. We will miss Bill and all his experience but we wish him all the very best in his retirement and trust that the future will be a very happy one for him.


ITEM NO: 4

SUBJECT: PROPOSED COMMUNITY ART-ROOM & CRAFT WORKSHOP

AT THE KATOOMBA TROTTERS PAVILION FILE NO: Recommendations: 1. That Council support the Wentworth Area Health Service in establishing the

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

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

proposed use of the building as a community art-room and craft workshop. Minute by Mayor: The Wentworth Area Heath Service (WAHS) as part of its broader community program is seeking Council’s support in establishing a community art-room and craft workshop in Katoomba for use by the K@2mba Men’s Shed Project. This is a not for profit community development initiative that will bring together men and boys from the community to work on practical projects such as repairing various objects, building maintenance tasks, computer applications and training and other community activities. WAHS has been investigating the suitability and possibility of using the Trotters Pavilion at the Katoomba Show Ground for the project. The building is structurally sound, but generally in poor repair. It was used as a non-conforming buggy storage shed for the discontinued Trotters Association for many decades. The building is erected within Council’s Operational Land at 189-191 Great Western Highway, Katoomba. The land is currently zoned 5(A) Special Use Defence under LEP 4 and proposed to be zoned Village Housing and Accessible Housing Area under the Draft LEP 2002. WAHS offers to undertake preliminary repairs, as a K@2mba Men’s Shed project, at no cost to Council. WAHS further offers to submit a development application for change of use in order to legitimise the proposed new use in due course. Whether or not any development application finally submitted is approved will obviously be dependent on the type of use being sought by the applicant. As the project aims at working collaboratively with many agencies to build a stronger community in the mountains, I ask Council to provide its support to the project subject to WAHS:

MINUTE BY MAYOR Item 4 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

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

project; repairing and/or upgrading the building to meet the Building Code Australia

requirements and occupational health and safety standards. agreeing to meet all on-going maintenance and outgoings associated with the use of the

building; being responsible for the risks and insurance covers associated with public liabilities,

workers compensation and occupational health and safety issues; and acknowledging Council’s rights to serve a notice of termination within a reasonable

period of time and to terminate the agreement should Council decide to use or redevelop the site for other purposes.

PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 5 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS OUR FUTURE AWARD RECOGNITION AND

HOSTING OF 2005 KEEP AUSTRALIA BEAUTIFUL METRO PRIDE AWARDS IN THE BLUE MOUNTAINS

FILE NO: C06938 Recommendations: 1. That Council notes and receives the report. 2. That Council conveys the success of the Blue Mountains Our Future project to the

local community through appropriate media and communication avenues, reinforcing Council’s appreciation for the significant contribution of local residents and organisations in shaping the City Vision and Map for Action.

3. That Council hosts the 2005 Keep Australia Beautiful Metro Pride Awards in the

Blue Mountains in September 2005. 4. That a Councillor be nominated as a liaison contact for Council staff organising

this event and that the full Council be kept informed on progress. Report by Group Manager, City Sustainability: Introduction This report provides an overview of significant national and state recognition being given to Blue Mountains City Council for: its work in initiating and leading the Blue Mountains Our Future project; and for the way it has actively responded to the Community’s Vision for a more sustainable

City through its business and management planning. The report also outlines that as a result of being the winner of the Keep Australia Beautiful Overall Metro Pride Award in 2004, Council has been bestowed the honour of hosting the 2005 NSW Metro Pride Awards. Background The Blue Mountains Our Future project was initiated by Blue Mountains City Council in its 2000/2001 Management Plan. This plan identified the need to develop a long term strategy in consultation with the community and other levels of government that would set future directions for the City over the next 25 years. While Council provided the leadership for the project, the local community has actively shaped and endorsed it. Through an extensive and innovative engagement process, Blue Mountains residents have worked with Council and local organizations to develop a sustainability strategy for the City.

PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE Item 5 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

The project is significant: Locally, in presenting a framework for all stakeholders – residents, organisations,

other agencies and the Council - to take action for a more sustainable Blue Mountains

Regionally, nationally and globally - in setting in place a long term sustainability strategy and framework to foster action to achieve social and economic well-being while protecting a globally significant World Heritage Environmental Area

In July 2003, Council adopted the “community endorsed” City Strategy (City Vision and Map for Action) as the “external policy framework for the City of Blue Mountains to guide decisions and actions of the community, Council and external agencies”. Council also declared 2003-2004 a "transitional year" for “reviewing Council policy and decision making in line with the community endorsed Outcomes of the City Strategy to guide development of the 2004-2008 Management Plan, Capital Works Program and the targeting of resources.” A comprehensive process of engagement between Councillors, the Executive Management Team and staff across the Council, was implemented in 2003-2004. This process used numerous workshops and meetings to re-align thinking and decision-making. The result of this work was the development of a 2004-2008 Management Plan (adopted by Council in June 2004) that directly addresses the community’s vision for a more sustainable Blue Mountains (see www.bmcc.nsw.gov.au ). Principle Activities within the Management Plan were re-defined to directly align with Key Directions of the City Vision and Map for Action. These included: Looking After Environment, Looking After People, Using land for Living, Moving Around, Working and Learning. Resources were targeted to a range of sustainability initiatives including sustainable management of community resources, a review of Council’s long term financial strategy, improving management and maintenance of built assets and continued roll out of triple bottom line decision-making following its successful introduction into the Capital Works assessment process. Comprehensive State of City monitoring was initiated including development of five pilot Sustainability Indicators for the City and linked to them - five pilot Council Performance targets – all outcome (rather than input or output) based. These are aimed at driving the achievement of sustainability results on the ground that align with the City Vision and will be further developed in consultation with the community over the 2004-2008 period. Award Outcomes for Blue Mountains Our Future Project in 2004 Since August 2004, Council and the Blue Mountains community have been recognised for the following awards:


Award

Category

Keep Australia Beautiful (NSW) Metro Pride Awards 2004

Metro Pride Overall Award, Overall Winner Council Category, awarded to Blue Mountains City Council for Towards A More Sustainable Blue Mountains, Blue Mountains Our Future, The Next 25 Years The Metro Pride Award recognises outstanding environmental initiatives implemented by local government authorities, schools and community groups whilst raising public awareness of a range of environmental issues affecting metropolitan NSW.

Local Government Excellence in the Environment Awards Sponsored by Local Government Association of NSW, Shires Association of NSW and Australian Greenhouse Office

Local Sustainability Winner 2003/2004 Winner Division C and Overall Category Winner awarded to Blue Mountains City Council for “Towards a More Sustainable Blue Mountains – Blue Mountains Our Future” A special award covering Council initiatives to implement Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) and strive for a sustainable future for their local community. It includes a $10,000 grant for Council staff to undertake a study tour linked to the award.

Award for Excellence in Planning 2004 Planning Institute Australia New South Wales Division

Community Based Planning Category Winner awarded to Blue Mountains City Council for Blue Mountains Our Future This Award Category is for planning schemes, projects or reports which particularly arise out of a significant initiative or from a planned program of consultation, that demonstrates achievement of community goals.

National Awards for Local Government Sponsored by Australian Government Department of Transport and Regional Services

Category Award Winner for Social and Community Engagement awarded to Blue Mountains City Council for Blue Mountains Our Future…The Next 25 Years This Category Award, sponsored by the Australian Government Department of Family and Community Services, recognises and acknowledges Local Government initiatives that increase community capacity for self help and sustainability and that foster local action and innovative partnerships.

2004 Local Government Managers Australia Management Excellence Awards Sponsored by The Sydney Morning Herald

Excellence in Sustainability within Local Government Merit Award awarded to Blue Mountains City Council for Blue Mountains Our Future …The Next 25 Years

Significance of Awards Winning these peer recognised awards has resulted in significant attention and interest from around Australia and internationally (New Zealand). The interest is coming from leading communities who are seeing the long term benefits of creating a ‘community owned visions’ for residents, Local Government and other agencies that empower all stakeholders to take responsibility for working together and taking action in partnership to achieve more sustainable local communities. In addition Council has been asked to make a formal presentation to a number of Federal Government Departments and representatives from Local Government in Canberra on the Blue Mountains Our Future project and Council’s response to it.


Hosting 2005 Keep Australia Beautiful Metro Pride Awards Program As a result of winning the ‘Overall’ Keep Australia Beautiful Metro Pride Program award, Council has the role of hosting the next Metro Pride awards currently scheduled to take place in September 2005. The cost of hosting the awards night is essentially covered by the ticket price for the event. It is anticipated that there may be minor expenses for Council in the order of $3,000 to $5,000. Previous Councils who have won the ‘overall’ award and hosted the awards program include Manly, Newcastle, Sutherland and Holroyd Councils. It is estimated that the conference will bring around 200 delegates to the Mountains for an evening awards dinner presentation. It is likely that a number of delegates will stay overnight (if not for the weekend) and may also bring partners. The flow on effect of the conference will be an injection into local business and will highlight the Blue Mountains as a desired destination. Those organising the event will be liaising with Tourism staff as to how best to market the event so as to maximise attendance and promote extended visitation. A study by the New South Wales Convention Bureau shows that delegates spend on average $900 during their stay at conference locations. Based on daily expenditure, convention delegates spend nearly four times more than the average international tourist. Conclusion Blue Mountains City Council has shown considerable leadership in initiating and implementing the Blue Mountains Our Future project and more significantly in actively responding to it through business and management planning. The local community has played a major role in shaping the City Vision and Map for Action emerging from the project. In light of national and state recognition of the project through various awards it is recommended that the community be informed of the projects success and of Council’s appreciation for their contribution towards it. It is further recommended that Council accept the role of hosting the 2005 Keep Australia Beautiful Metro Pride Awards in the Blue Mountains in September 2005.


ITEM NO: 6 SUBJECT: NATURE BASED RECREATION STRATEGY FILE NO: C05880 Recommendations: 1. That Council note the response to the public exhibition of the Draft Nature Based

Recreation Strategy and proposed changes to the document as detailed in Enclosure 1.

2. That Council adopt the revised Nature Based Recreation Strategy (enclosed

separately for Councillors) that incorporates recommended changes detailed in Enclosure 1.

Report by Group Manager, City Sustainability: Introduction At its meeting of 2nd November 2004 Council considered a report on the Draft Nature Based Recreation Strategy for the City and resolved to place this strategy on public exhibition for a period of one month for public comment. The purpose of this report is to:

- present the results of the exhibition process; - outline proposed amendments as a result of issues raised in submissions received

(see Enclosure 1); and - seek Council adoption of the final proposed Nature Based Recreation Strategy

(enclosed separately for Councillors). Background The Nature Based Recreation Strategy has been prepared in response to increasing community concern over the impact of recreational activities in natural areas and a need to provide the commercial Nature Tourism industry with approval processes for use of public land. The strategy has explored issues and concerns surrounding recreation activities in natural areas and provides a program for improved management of nature based recreation in the Blue Mountains City. The Blue Mountains Map for Action 2000-2025 identifies the importance of the mountains in providing tourism and recreational opportunities for locals and visitors. The Nature Based Recreation Strategy will assist Council and other agencies in ensuring recreation in natural areas of the Blue Mountains supports the achievement of desired economic, social and environmental outcomes for the City.


The Strategy outlines directions and outcomes for the management of natural recreation assets and opportunities within the City. It identifies tools to manage a wide range of nature based recreation opportunities, attuned to community needs and linked with the requirements of Department of Environment and Conservation Parks & Wildlife Division (PWD-DEC) and private landholders. Public Exhibition Process and Response The Draft Nature Based Recreation Strategy was placed on public exhibition from 3rd November 2004 to 1st December 2004. It was exhibited at Councils Katoomba and Springwood Business Information Centres as well as public libraries and on Councils website. Notice of the exhibition and links to the Website were sent to the many people and organisations that have participated in the preparation of the draft strategy. A total of 9 submissions were received in response to the Public Exhibition as detailed in Table 1 below. Table 1: Overview of Submissions Received Submission

Number Type Details Response to Draft

Strategy 1 Resident Leura Do Not Support 2 Organisation Sydney Rockclimbing

Club Inc Not Specified

3 Business operator Winmalee ‘Generally Support’ 4 Organisation

member Carlingford Not Specified

5 Business operator Katoomba ‘Agree in principal’ 6 Organisation Blue Mountains

Conservation Society Inc ‘Broadly endorse’

7 Resident Mount Victoria Support in Part 8 Business operator Katoomba Not Specified 9 Resident Katoomba Support in Part 10 Organisation The National Trust of

Australia (NSW) Blue Mountains Branch

Not specified

11 Government Agency

Department of Environment and Conservation, Parks and Wildlife Division

Not specified

Submissions raised a number of issues that could be broadly categorised as follows:

- Management of public land (4 submissions) - Licensing of commercial and group use of public land (4 submissions) - Implementation time (2 submissions) - Signage of recreational sites (2 submissions) - Rubbish and litter control (3 submissions) - Cycling (1 submission) - Rock climbing (4 submissions) - Sustainable management (2 submissions)


- Impacts (4 submissions) - User conflict (2 submissions) - Cultural heritage (2 submissions) - Walking track guidelines (4 submissions) - Volunteers (2 submissions) - Environmental education (1 submission) - Consultation (1 submission) - Campsites (1 submission) - Planning (1 submission) - Overall Comments (3 submissions)

Enclosure 1 provides an analysis of each of these issues outlining comments made by the various submissions raising them. This analysis also details proposed amendments to the strategy as a result of issues raised in submissions. Generally the comments supported the Draft Nature Based Recreation Strategy with requests to strengthen the Strategy through elaboration of the existing recommendations. Proposed changes to the Strategy are outlined in Enclosure 1 and involve:

• More detail explaining environmental and heritage conservation measures to be taken in planning and management of nature based recreation sites

• More detail explaining the proposed integrated planning approach which seeks to ensure that complementary recreational opportunities are maintained across the mountains

• More detail explaining the role of Environmental Education in achieving sustainable recreation practises

• More detail on the role of licensing and accreditation for business operations and guides in the promotion of sustainable nature based recreation practises

• Clarification of lands affected by the Public Lands Rationalisation Project and of this Strategy

• Clarification of Council’s role in fostering partnerships to advocate and promote the importance of nature based recreation in the City.

A number of the submissions included detailed comments, which do not require addressing in the Strategy, and these are recommended for referral to the Manager of Environmental Management and other relevant sections of Council for consideration. Key Recommendations of the Nature Based Recreation Strategy: The purpose of the strategy is to guide Council in how it manages its natural recreation assets. The Nature Based Recreation Strategy seeks to achieve 5 major Outcomes for the City of Blue Mountains. These are:


1. An integrated framework for sustainable management of recreation in natural areas of

the City is in place by 2010 and ongoing management is based on sound planning, good data and effective consultation.

2. The Blue Mountains region is recognised as a premier nature based recreation

destination in Australia offering a range of dynamic and diverse world-class experiences accessible to visitors and local residents.

3. All natural area users share the resource appropriately, amicably and safely; and

important natural, social and cultural values of recreation sites are protected, with the impacts of nature-based recreation controlled and remediated to an acceptable and sustainable level. All natural area users are educated about the potential impacts of their nature based recreation activities and are able to use best practice to mitigate the potential impacts of those activities and protect the environment.

4. Management of natural recreation is implemented cooperatively and costs of

management are shared between Local Governments, land management agencies, the tourism industry, recreation providers and recreation participants.

5. State and Federal Governments recognise and provide support for appropriate

infrastructure to meet the management and promotional responsibilities for nature based recreation in a City within a World Heritage Area.

A Strategic Framework outlines strategies and actions to guide Council towards achievement of these outcomes over a 10-year period. In order to identify the capacity of Council to deliver these strategies and actions, necessary resources and a suggested timeframe have been identified. A series of performance measures and indicators are presented to measure success in achievement of these outcomes over the life of the Strategy. Broad recommendations of the Strategy are: 1. Development over the next 10 years of a sustainable management framework for

public land managed by Council composed of

• Plans of Management for Community and Crown Land • Asset Management Plans • Facility Management Guidelines • Information and Interpretation Guidelines • Research and monitoring of user demand, user satisfaction and impacts from

nature based recreation on natural, social and cultural environments.

2. That Council Environmental Planning Instruments and related codes and policies be reviewed in response to the Strategy and amendments pursued as necessary to permit appropriate nature based recreation activities and facilities in both public and privately owned natural areas.


3. That a review of existing recreation sites and facilities is undertaken, and a program

for maintenance and /or upgrading of facilities is developed. Provision of information to visitors and residents on alternate attractions is proposed to assist spreading recreation use over the range of suitable existing sites.

4. That unplanned recreation sites are surveyed and assessed for suitability for

continued use, or closure and remediation. Education and regulation are proposed to discourage unplanned development of further new recreation sites.

5. That Council develop partnerships to lobby the State and Federal Governments to

recognise the importance of sustainable nature based recreation to the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and the regional economy, and seek financial assistance to implement the Strategy.

Funding of the Strategy Implementation The Strategy identifies outcomes that are dependent upon the quality of nature based recreation experiences available in the Blue Mountains. Recreation experiences directly reflect the resources allocated for facility provision and maintenance. The processes recommended for implementation through the Nature Based Recreation Strategy will assist better direction of existing resources. There is however a need to increase resources available to Council and to the Blue Mountains National Park for management of nature based recreation. Funding opportunities are being explored for a number of items that support the strategy and that are currently unfunded or resourced. Those items currently unfunded are clearly identified in the Strategic Framework, Part 3.4 of the Strategy. They include preparation of Planning Area 1, 2, 4 and 5 Plans of Management, 0.5 staff for land management activities and Council’s contribution to the next stage of the Blue Mountains Region Walking Track Strategy. This involves preparation of Guidelines for Interpretation and Visitor Information, and a Visitor Survey. Other Products of the Strategy In preparation of the Nature Based Recreation Strategy a priority was placed upon developing sufficient supporting information for a review of existing environmental planning instruments to permit appropriate commercial recreation operations in natural areas. This has involved:

• Identifying the land affected by nature based recreation • Examination of the economic, social and environmental effects of nature based

recreation in the Blue Mountains local government area • Examination of the effect of existing planning laws, policies and strategies on

nature based recreation in the City of Blue Mountains.


A number of specialist studies were commissioned by Council to assist this work. These specialist studies included:

• Survey of Commercial Nature Tourism Industry Operations: ”Blue Mountains City Council Nature Based Recreation Study: An online survey of businesses conducting adventure tours to the Blue Mountains” was prepared for Council by IRIS Research Ltd (August 2003). The study demonstrates the significant contribution this activity makes to the economy of the City. The study has influenced policy development for Nature Tourism in the Blue Mountains, and has been useful in preparation of the licensing system for Council managed land.

• Cliff Recreation Site Assessment: To assist with examination of the environmental effects of nature based recreation a study, “Blue Mountains Cliff Recreation Site Assessment; Final Report”, was prepared for Council by Elanus Word and Image in association with EcoGIS (January 2004). This report provided a methodology for assessment of recreation sites in natural areas. Key rock climbing and abseiling sites managed by Council were assessed for their condition and their capacity to sustain continued use. The study generally supported continued access to existing sites. Management recommendations of this study include some improvements to access tracks to sites, provision of toilets in high use areas, use of protective landing platforms for high use abseiling sites, and introduction of interpretation and signage to promote minimum impact recreation behaviour. Mechanisms are suggested to reduce conflict between different users of natural areas.

• Regulation of Nature Based Recreation: An approval process suitable for licensing of commercial uses on community land has been developed, and reported to Council separately. Liaison with commercial operators and with other land management agencies has been undertaken to ensure a consistent and practical approach is taken between agencies.

• Blue Mountains Regional Walking Track Strategy: The existing 300 tracks were assessed for their recreational significance and classified using the Australian Standards for Walking Tracks. This work supplemented a Walking Track Heritage Study, Draft Heritage Assessment and Conservation Guidelines and a Conservation Management Plan for Walking Tracks of State Heritage Significance in the Blue Mountains previously prepared for the National Parks and Wildlife Service.


An asset management system for walking tracks is being developed as a joint agency project. Blue Mountains City Council, Department of Environment and Conservation Parks and Wildlife Division and the Department of Lands, in association with Blue Mountains Tourism Authority, are developing guidelines for the management of walking tracks in the greater Blue Mountains area. This project provides tools for the coordinated and comprehensive management of the network of heritage walking tracks of the Blue Mountains, across the different tenures and land management agencies. Stage 1 of this work has been undertaken, and provides:

• Walking Track Classification System; • Construction and Maintenance Guidelines; • Risk Management Guidelines; • Signage Guidelines.

Conclusion The draft strategy document as exhibited has been amended in accordance with the recommendations arising from the consideration of submissions received which provided valuable input. These are summarised in the body of the report and contained in the revised Nature Based Recreation Strategy (enclosed separately to this business paper for Councillors). As one submission stated “The Nature Based Recreation Strategy is breaking new ground and the final Strategy has the potential to set the benchmark for land managers around Australia. The Strategy promises to be significant not just for its content and method of implementation, but also for its demonstration of the value of cooperation between stakeholders and those charged with protecting the environment.” The Nature Based Recreation Strategy is recommended to Council for adoption.


ITEM NO: 7 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS CULTURAL CENTRE AND KATOOMBA

LIBRARY FILE NO: C03199 Recommendations: 1. That Council endorses the revised Cultural Centre Detailed Schematic Design

prepared by Hassell architects dated 15 November 2004 for inclusion in the Development Agreement.

2. That Council reconfirms its intention to include the Library as part of the Cultural

Centre project in the Development Deed subject to satisfactory legal advice. 3. That Council thanks the State Government and the local State Member for the Blue

Mountains Bob Debus for the additional funding to support the achievement of the Blue Mountains Cultural Centre and mixed use commercial development to support the Katoomba Town Centre Revitalisation Strategy 1999.

4. That Council thanks the Federal Member for Macquarie Kerry Bartlett for his

support to our current grant funding application to the Department of Transport and Regional Services that if approved will significantly contribute to deliver the current enhancements to the Cultural Centre.

Report by General Manager: Purpose of report The purpose of this report is to bring Council up to date with several issues that have been progressing since March this year, and to seek Council’s endorsement to include the revised Cultural Centre Detailed Schematic Design and the Library in the Development Deed negotiations. It is intended that the Development Deed would be structured in such a way so that Council has the option to proceed with the revised design, subject to funding. It is also intended for practical reasons to include the Library as part of the Cultural Centre construction project. Issues to be canvassed in this report The following issues will be considered in the report; 1. Revised Cultural Centre Detailed Schematic Design 2. Funding opportunities for the enhancements 3. Progress on the schematic design for the Library 4. Inclusion of the Library as part of the Cultural Centre development and the

development agreement


5. Additional State Government Funding 6. Rezoning and reclassification process 7. Further authorisations to the General Manager 8. Update on the current Development Deed negotiations 1. Revised Cultural Centre Detailed Schematic Design The design of the Cultural Centre has always been influenced by the site characteristics, the development uses to be incorporated and the available funding. The objectives during the design phases have always been to satisfy as many of the design brief objectives as possible within these parameters. These factors have been raised in the various reports to Council and have influenced Councils decisions in adopting the site Master Plan and the Detailed Schematic Design. Several issues were raised at the architect’s presentation sessions conducted by Council earlier this year for the cultural interest group and the Katoomba Echo Point Advisory Taskforce. Council’s architect was requested to consider some of the substantive issues within a budget frame. Many of these issues also related to Council’s technical brief. The significant issues addressed by Council’s architect include;

• Provision of a pedestrian link aligning with Froma Lane • Increasing the size of the Art Gallery by 150sqm to 600sqm. • Increasing the size of the Interpretive Centre by 50sqm to 250sqm • Increasing the size of the lecture theatre by 20sqm • Relocating the Interpretive Centre so that its entry is immediately off the entry

foyer. • Providing greater opportunity to take advantage of the views by creating a viewing

court in conjunction with the Interpretive Centre. • Increasing the size of the entry foyer by enlarging its depth adjoining the

interpretive centre and relocating the amenities. This will enable large groups to congregate in comfort and also allow opportunities for multi purpose functions.

• Provision made for a commercial style kitchen to enable external catering • Provide a more active frontage to College Lane on the eastern boundary and visual

connection with the commercial arcade level below • Improved opportunities for the public to access the viewing platform between the

Library and the interpretive centre • Relocated the fire stair adjoining Parke Street to open up the NW corner and

introduced some soft landscaping elements • Reconfigured the back of house layout for the Art Gallery • Reintroduced a tier of public square seating. • Introduced automatic sliding entry doors to the main entry • Relocated the Café further to the north • Made provision for a mini bus drop off on the splay corner in the NE corner of

College Lane


Council’s quantity surveyors Currie and Brown have estimated that the works can be carried out for around $500,000. Details of the Currie and Brown costing were provided to Councillors at the recent briefing session and detailed negotiations are currently taking place with the developer, Stevens Group, in order to arrive at an agreed cost for the enhancements. There is some flexibility to the extent of works that can be carried out to fit within the cost and funding parameters. The purpose of this exercise is to provide confidence that significant enhancements can take place for an injection of addition funds of around $500,000. The issue of funding opportunities will be dealt with separately in this report under item 2. It is considered that the enhancements identified in the latest Hassell plans dated 15 November 2004 (copy enclosed separately for Councillors), significantly address many of the issues that have been raised by some members of the community, and indeed Council’s own technical brief. For the purpose of distinguishing the latest enhancements prepared by Hassell Architects from the current Council approved Detailed Schematic Design (DSD) it is proposed to call the DSD Option 1 and the revised details Option 2. 2. Funding opportunities for the enhancements Council was informed in the report of the 20th July 2004 that an application had been made through the Federal Department of Transport and Regional Services for a grant of $550,000. That grant is currently being processed, but cannot be finalised until the Development Deed has been completed. The application has received strong support from the local Federal Member for Macquarie, Kerry Bartlett. Whilst there is good reason for confidence, the outcome cannot be taken for granted and any certainty will have to wait until after the signing of the Deed. Consideration should be given to negotiating with the developer to include in the Development Deed the right to proceed with Option 2 with a fall back to Option 1. The Deed will provide some flexibility for changes that will inevitably occur during the detailed design phase for both the cultural facility and the commercial component. Depending on the outcome of the federal grant application Council may wish to consider funding some or all of the revised enhancements if the funding application is unsuccessful, or falls short of final costings. This is a decision that can be considered once the outcome of the grant application is known. It is considered that the enhancements provide a significantly superior cultural facility more in keeping with Council’s design brief and community expectations and would contribute to the longer term viability and success of the project 3. Progress on the schematic design for the Library Council resolved to bring the Library concept design up to the same standard as the Cultural Centre Detailed Schematic Design. This work is currently being finalised by Hassell architects. Currie and Brown are preparing a detailed costing of the Library. This work is scheduled for completion by mid-December. Details will be reported to Council at the earliest opportunity in the New Year.


4. Inclusion of the Library as part of the Cultural Centre development and the

development agreement It has become evident during the negotiations for the Development Deed that consideration needs to be given to the way that the Library is included in the Deed. There are significant practical implications that warrant this consideration. It would be more difficult to construct the Library after the Cultural Centre is completed with potential flow on cost implications. From the perspective of each of the Council and the community it would be a highly unsatisfactory outcome to have the cultural facility completed and the Library under construction or yet to be commenced. Legal advice on the probity issues and on the options on how this stage can be handled in the Development Deed to provide the best practical and cost effective outcome is currently being sought, and will be considered separately as a confidential report. In the interim the Stevens Group and the Department of State and Regional Development have indicated, in principle, that they have no objection to the Library being included as part of the Cultural Centre. 5. Additional State Government funding The NSW Government approved additional funding of $2.5 million for the Cultural Centre project. This brought the total State funding to $7.3 million. Approval for the additional State funding was based on the extra costs for relocating the RTA, the movement in construction costs since the project went out to tender in 2000 and a commitment by the Council that it was prepared to allocate $3 million to the Cultural Centre project to bring it up to a standard acceptable to the Blue Mountains community. The detailed breakdown of State Funds is as follows: Original Allocation $4.8 million

Made up of: Cultural Centre Construction $4.2 million Interpretative display $0.6 million

Additional Allocation $2.5 million Made up of: Additional cost RTA relocation $0.9 million Cultural Centre Construction $1.6 million

Total State Funds $7.3 million


6. Rezoning and reclassification process The draft environmental planning instrument is currently being finalised. The draft instrument has been the subject of consultations with the relevant public authorities in accordance with Section 62 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act. In response to these consultations, Council has received comments back from each of the authorities, and these comments are now being considered in relation to the finalisation of the draft plan. It is intended that the draft plan, which proposes to both zone and reclassify the relevant land parcels will be placed on public exhibition from mid January to mid February 2005. An exhibition strategy has been developed which proposes pre-notification of the exhibition from mid December 2004 in the local newspaper together with continual notices during the exhibition period. 7. Further authorisations to the General Manager If Council decides to pursue the issues raised in this report it will be necessary to extend the General Manager’s delegations in relation to the Cultural Centre project. In particular the General Manager will need to be authorised to negotiate and execute the Development Deed to include a) The Hassell Revised Cultural Centre proposal dated the 15th November 2004;

and b) Provision for the Library to be constructed at the same time as, and as part of, the

Cultural Centre development. Discussion including legal input on these issues will be considered in the confidential report and the recommendations will be included on the proposed delegations to support Council’s preferred way forward. 8. Update on the current Development Deed negotiations Detailed and intensive negotiations have been continuing with the Stevens Group, the preferred tenant and Department of State and Regional Development. Lawyers on all sides regard this as a very complex agreement. A way forward on the substantive issues affecting all parties would appear to have been achieved. It is anticipated that subject to Council’s concerns being met, that the agreement will be completed by mid-February 2005. Legal and commercial details informing Council of the current negotiations will be provided by way of the confidential report dealt with separately in the business paper.


Public Consultation As stated previously in this report Council will be pursuing as a priority the revised plan Option 2, with a fall back position to the Detailed Schematic Design approved by Council in March 2004 Option 1, depending on funding outcomes. There will be some room for minor design modifications at the detailed design stage provided they do not impact on the overall cost of the project. The overall design layout, floor areas and functionality will not significantly change from the detailed schematic designs considered and approved by Council. Further public consultation will occur during the rezoning and development application stages. It has been suggested that there be a public meeting on the project to more fully explain the agreed plans. It is suggested that this occur, once all parties have signed the Development Deed. Once the Deed is signed a Cultural Centre and Library Advisory Group will be formed consisting of a number of representatives from the Blue Mountains cultural and business community. In addition the Katoomba Echo Point Advisory Taskforce Group will be kept informed of progress. Conclusion This report brings Council up to date on the latest progress, and raises various aspects that have been pursued on the project since the March and July 2004 Council reports. The design has been revised; grant funding is being pursued to deliver the revisions; the Library design is being finalised and the developer has indicated a willingness to incorporate the Library in the Cultural Centre project; additional State government funding has been provided to support the achievement of the overall project; the rezoning and reclassification process is progressing as is the Development Deed negotiations. Council is being asked in this report to endorse the revised Hassell Detailed Schematic Design referred to as Option 2, to be pursued subject to funding, as the preferred option to be included in the Development Deed. Council is also being asked to support the Library being incorporated as part of the Cultural Centre project in the Development Deed so that it can be constructed at the same time. Several issues will be subject to legal advice and will be dealt with in more detail in the confidential report in the business paper.


ITEM NO: 8 SUBJECT: ITEM C1 IN CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PAPER – BLUE

MOUNTAINS CULTURAL CENTRE AND LIBRARY – STAKEHOLDER DEVELOPMENT DEED

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 9 SUBJECT: ANNUAL REPORTING OF CONTRACTS FOR SENIOR STAFF FILE NO: C06762 Recommendation: That the report be received and noted. Report by General Manager: Pursuant to Section 339 of the Local Government Act the general manager must, at least once annually, report to the council on the contractual conditions of senior staff. Under the current organisational structure (excluding the position of General Manager) Council has five designated senior staff positions under contractual arrangements. These include:

• Group Manager, City Sustainability; • Group Manager, Corporate Policy; • Group Manager, City Solutions; • Group Manager, BM City Services; • Group Manager, Environmental & Customer Services

The following contractual conditions apply to the above positions: Senior Staff Positions Term of Contract Expiry Date Group Manager, City Sustainability Robert Greenwood 4 year 23/10/2007 Group Manager, Corporate Policy Graham Collins 5 year 27/5/2005 Group Manager, City Solutions Tony Martini 4 year 21/10/2006 Group Manager, BM City Services Dave Allen 4 year 7/4/2007 Group Manager, Environmental & Customer Services (Michael Edgar acting – recruitment deferred until February 2005)

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT Item 9 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

A review of the contractual conditions of each senior staff member has been undertaken including a review of each of the following activities:- 1. Corporate Strategic and Management Plan Responsibilities; 2. Business Plans; 3. Routine Operational Responsibilities. As an adjunct to the review, annual performance management reviews have been completed for all designated positions for 2003/2004 in accordance with the contract of employment and the next review is due to be completed as at 30 June 2005. New performance targets for the next 12 months have been set, based on Council’s priorities in the Management Plan and Budget 2004/2005 as at 1 July 2004.


ITEM NO: 10 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY FILE NO: C02394 Recommendations: 1. That Council delegate to the person holding the position of General Manager,

including to any temporary appointee, the powers, authorities, duties and functions of Council as shown in the Schedule hereto, subject to the limitations and exceptions as shown:

SCHEDULE

(a) All powers, authorities, duties and functions of the Council conferred under

the Local Government Act, 1993 other than the functions listed in Section 377 of that Act as matters incapable of being delegated.

(b) All powers, authorities, duties and functions conferred or imposed on the

Council under any other Act.

(c) Specific authority to affix the Common Seal of Council to appropriate documents to acquire, extinguish, release, vary or modify easements and Restrictions as to User affecting private land in favour of Council, subject to compensation to be paid by Council for an acquisition not exceeding $10,000 plus reasonable legal and survey costs incurred in the acquisition.

LIMITATIONS

(a) A power, authority, duty or function the subject of this delegation shall not

be exercised in a particular case if the holder of the office of General Manager receives a direction from the Council withdrawing a power, authority, duty or function in relation to any matter for which the Council is enabled to withdraw that power, authority, duty or function.

(b) These delegations may be exercised only in accordance with legislation,

prescribed standards, codes, policies and decisions of Council.

EXCEPTIONS

(a) Determination of any land use applications of a value in excess of $1,000,000.

(b) Resolution of any matter requested by two or more Councillors to be

referred to the Council by notice in writing addressed to the General Manager.


(c) Resolution of any issue that, in the opinion of the Mayor and/or the General

Manager, is one of major public interest or controversy. (d) Determination of any land use application, which provides for:

* a reliance on a SEPP 1 application to vary development standards

in respect of floor space ratio and site cover by more than 20%; * building work in an Environmental Protection Zone; * the utilisation of the ‘Development in adjoining Zone’ provisions

and where the adjoining Zone is Environmental Protection; (e) Determination of any matter involving Council properties other than:

(i) operational matters including maintenance, repairs and improvement; (ii) leases or tenancies or (iii) land use application where the property is a community asset, there

has been no public objection, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works;

(iv) for minor types of development on operational land, where there are no community objections, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works.

(f) Any commercial activity involving Council assets other than specified in

EXCEPTION (e)(ii). (g) Land use applications submitted either as applicant or landowner by

Councillors, senior officers or staff with delegations in the E&CS Group other than minor land use applications. e.g. additions to existing dwellings less than 50m2, decks, carports, other additional works ancillary to a main dwelling;

(h) Those functions or matters which are required to be exercised ‘by

resolution’ of the Council.

2. That a report come back to Council within the next twelve months concerning the delegations relating to the planning delegations as specified in 1(d) above.

Report by General Manager: Introduction Council at its meeting of 21 September 2004 resolved:

“That this matter [Review of Delegations] be deferred pending a briefing and discussion at a relevant Working Party meeting.”

(Minute No. 394).


The matter is brought back to Council following further discussion at the Policy and Review Working Party. Background Under the provisions of Section 380 of the Local Government Act, 1993 Council must review all its delegations during the first 12 months of each term of office. Delegation is the process by which a person or body empowers another person or body to perform a function. A function includes a power, authority or duty. A person or body making a delegation retains the capacity to perform that function. Under Section 377 of the Local Government Act, Council may delegate to the General Manager or any other person or body, any of the functions of Council other than the matters set out in that section. However, Council cannot delegate to an employee other than the General Manager. Council has therefore in the past delegated functions only to the General Manager. The General Manager may delegate to other employees any of the statutory functions of a General Manager and sub-delegate a function delegated by Council to the General Manager. The power to delegate cannot be delegated. This regime enables the General Manager to establish a workable framework of delegations to those persons qualified to perform functions on Council’s behalf. Form of Existing and Proposed General Delegations - Local Government Act, 1993 The current form of Delegations to the General Manager as adopted on 26 September 2000 (see Annexure 1) is by exception. That is, the General Manager is empowered to carry out all functions of Council except those functions specified in Section 377 of the Act and other limitations and exceptions included in the instrument of delegations. Working Party Deliberations The previous report (see Annexure 2) recommended amongst other things certain changes to the delegations concerning the determination of land use applications. It is apparent from Working Party discussions that while there appears to be no issues with the non-planning type delegations proposed, Council may need more time to work through the issues concerning these planning delegations. Accordingly it is proposed to not change any planning delegations (other than minor DAs lodged by staff), allow the Working Party further time to review such delegations and a further report come back to Council within the next 12 months. Recommended changes As a result a review of the non-planning type delegations, some changes are recommended to take into account minor matters involving maintenance to Council property. The only changes to the planning type delegations relate to minor land use applications by staff.


For ease of reference, listed below are the current EXCEPTIONS outlined in the delegations of 26 September 2000, with the recommended changes highlighted in bold:

EXCEPTIONS (a) Determination of any land use applications of a value in excess of

$1,000,000 (b) Resolution of any matter requested by two or more Councillors to be

referred to the Council by notice in writing addressed to the General Manager.


Manager, is one of major public interest or controversy. (d) Determination of any land use application, which provides for:

(i) a reliance on a SEPP 1 application to vary development Standards in respect of floor space ratio and site cover by more than 20%;

(ii) building work in an Environmental Protection Zone; (iii) the utilisation of the ‘Development in adjoining Zone’ provisions


(i) operational matters including maintenance, repairs and improvements where budgeted; (added)

(ii) leases or tenancies; or (iii) land use application where the property is a community asset, there

has been no public objection, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works;

(iv) for minor types of development on operational land, where there are no community objections, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works (added).


EXCEPTION (e)( ii).

(g) Land use applications submitted either as applicant or landowner by Councillors, senior officers or staff with delegations in the Environment and Customer Service Group other than minor land use applications such as additions to existing dwellings less than 50m2, decks, carports, other additional works ancillary to a main dwelling (added).




Attachment 1

DELEGATIONS

(26 September 2000) 1. That Council delegate to the person holding the position of General Manager,

including to any temporary appointee, the powers, authorities, duties and functions of Council as shown in the Schedule hereto, subject to the limitations and exceptions as shown:

SCHEDULE

(a) All powers, authorities, duties and functions of the Council conferred under the Local Government Act, 1993 other than the functions listed in Section 377 of that Act as matters incapable of being delegated.

(b) All powers, authorities, duties and functions conferred or imposed on the

Council under any other Act.


LIMITATIONS

(a) A power, authority, duty or function the subject of this delegation shall not be exercised in a particular case if the holder of the office of General Manager receives a direction from the Council withdrawing a power, authority, duty or function in relation to any matter for which the Council is enabled to withdraw that power, authority, duty or function.

(b) These delegations may be exercised only in accordance with legislation,

prescribed standards, codes, policies and decisions of Council.

EXCEPTIONS (a) Determination of any land use applications of a value in excess of

$1,000,000.

(b) Resolution of any matter requested by two or more Councillors to be referred to the Council by notice in writing addressed to the General Manager.


Manager, is one of major public interest or controversy.


Attachment 1

(d) Determination of any land use application which provides for:

* a reliance on a SEPP 1 application to vary development standards in

respect of floor space ratio and site cover by more than 20%; * building work in an Environmental Protection Zone; * the utilisation of the ‘Development in adjoining Zone’ provisions


(i) leases or tenancies or (ii) land use application where the property is a community asset, there

has been no public objection, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works.


EXCEPTION (e) (i). (g) Land use applications submitted either as applicant or landowner by

Councillors, senior officers or staff with delegations in the Health and Development Group.




Attachment 2


ITEM NO: 6 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY FILE NO: C02394 Recommendations: 1. That Council delegate to the person holding the position of General Manager, including to any

temporary appointee, the powers, authorities, duties and functions of Council as shown in the Schedule hereto, subject to the limitations and exceptions as shown:

SCHEDULE

(a) All powers, authorities, duties and functions of the Council conferred under the Local

Government Act, 1993 other than the functions listed in Section 377 of that Act as matters incapable of being delegated.

(b) All powers, authorities, duties and functions conferred or imposed on the Council under

any other Act.


LIMITATIONS

(a) A power, authority, duty or function the subject of this delegation shall not be exercised in

a particular case if the holder of the office of General Manager receives a direction from the Council withdrawing a power, authority, duty or function in relation to any matter for which the Council is enabled to withdraw that power, authority, duty or function.

(b) These delegations may be exercised only in accordance with legislation, prescribed

standards, codes, policies and decisions of Council.

EXCEPTIONS

(a) Determination of any land use applications of a value in excess of $1,500,000. (b) Resolution of any matter requested by two or more Councillors to be referred to the

Council by notice in writing addressed to the General Manager.


Attachment 2

PROVIDE GOOD GOVERNMENT

Item 6 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/9/04

(c) Resolution of any issue that, in the opinion of the Mayor and/or the General Manager, is one of major public interest or controversy.

(d) Determination of any matter involving Council properties other than:

(i) operational matters including maintenance, repairs and improvement; (ii) leases or tenancies or (iii) land use application where the property is a community asset, there has been no

public objection, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works;

(iv) for minor types of development on operational land, where there are no community objections, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works.

(e) Any commercial activity involving Council assets other than specified in EXCEPTION

(d)(ii). (f) Land use applications submitted either as applicant or landowner by Councillors, senior

officers or staff with delegations in the E&CS Group other than minor land use applications. e.g. additions to existing dwellings less than 50m2, decks, carports, other additional works ancillary to a main dwelling;

(g) Those functions or matters which are required to be exercised ‘by resolution’ of the

Council; (h) Section 96 modifications for applications previously approved by Council where, in the

opinion of the General Manager, the proposed modification(s) is minor and keeping within the intent of the Council approved DA.

Report by General Manager: Background Under the provisions of Section 380 of the Local Government Act, 1993 Council must review all its delegations during the first 12 months of each term of office. Delegation is the process by which a person or body empowers another person or body to perform a function. A function includes a power, authority or duty. A person or body making a delegation retains the capacity to perform that function. Under Section 377 of the Local Government Act, Council may delegate to the General Manager or any other person or body, any of the functions of Council other than the matters set out in that section. However, Council cannot delegate to an employee other than the General Manager. Council has therefore in the past delegated functions only to the General Manager.


Attachment 2


Item 6 - Ordinary Meeting, 21/9/04 The General Manager may delegate to other employees any of the statutory functions of a General Manager and sub-delegate a function delegated by Council to the General Manager. The power to delegate cannot be delegated. This regime enables the General Manager to establish a workable framework of delegations to those persons qualified to perform functions on Council’s behalf. Form of Existing and Proposed General Delegations - Local Government Act, 1993 The current form of Delegations to the General Manager as adopted on 26 September 2000 (see Attachment 1) is by exception. That is, the General Manager is empowered to carry out all functions of Council except those functions specified in Section 377 of the Act and other limitations and exceptions included in the instrument of delegations. Recommended changes The current EXCEPTIONS outlined in the delegations of 26 September 2000 follow, with the recommended changes highlighted in bold:

EXCEPTIONS

(a) Determination of any land use applications of a value in excess of $1,000,000 (changed to $1,5000,000).

In making this recommendation a balance needs to be made between efficiencies in relation to the processing of land use applications and community interest. Reports to Council on land use applications contribute to a failure to meet statutory timeframes for processing Development Applications frequently adding four weeks to processing time. The $1 million threshold was set some time around 1994. Since that time, building costs have increased and if indexed, the threshold in today’s dollars would be $1.5 million dollars.

(b) Resolution of any matter requested by two or more Councillors to be referred to the

Council by notice in writing addressed to the General Manager. (c) Resolution of any issue that, in the opinion of the Mayor and/or the General Manager, is

one of major public interest or controversy.

(d) Determination of any land use application which provides for:

• a reliance on a SEPP 1 application to vary development standards in respect of floor space ratio and site cover by more than 20%;

• building work in an Environmental Protection Zone; • the utilisation of the ‘Development in adjoining Zone’ provisions and where the

adjoining Zone is Environmental Protection; This section (d) completely deleted


Attachment 2



This section (d) of the EXCEPTIONS was inserted by the last Council in response to concerns that Council officers were willing to vary standards that had been established by Council through policy. Varying of development standards is a technical issue and any such requests need to be carefully considered with robust planning assessment. Out of 37 land use reports in this calendar year, this section (d) has lead to one additional report to Council. In that case, officers did not support the proposal to vary the development standards however, Council voted against this recommendation. This exception therefore seems unnecessary.

(e) Determination of any matter involving Council properties other than: (i) operational matters including maintenance, repairs and improvements where

budgeted; (added) (ii) leases or tenancies; or (iii) land use application where the property is a community asset, there has been no

public objection, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works;

(iv) for minor types of development on operational land, where there are no community objections, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works (added).

(f) Any commercial activity involving Council assets other than specified in EXCEPTION (e)(

ii).

(g) Land use applications submitted either as applicant or landowner by Councillors, senior officers or staff with delegations in the Environment and Customer Service Group other than minor land use applications such as additions to existing dwellings less than 50m2 , decks, carports, other additional works ancillary to a main dwelling (added).

(h) Those functions or matters which are required to be exercised ‘by resolution’ of the

Council.

(i) Section 96 modifications for applications previously approved by Council where, in the opinion of the General Manager, the proposed modification(s) is minor and in keeping within the intent of the Council approved development application (added).

The added sections to (e), (g) and (i) have been recommended to ensure Council meeting time is not taken up with minor matters involving maintenance to Council property, and/or minor changes to development applications.


Attachment 2



Attachment 1

DELEGATIONS (26 September 2000)

1. That Council delegate to the person holding the position of General Manager, including to any

temporary appointee, the powers, authorities, duties and functions of Council as shown in the Schedule hereto, subject to the limitations and exceptions as shown:

SCHEDULE (a) All powers, authorities, duties and functions of the Council conferred under the Local Government

Act, 1993 other than the functions listed in Section 377 of that Act as matters incapable of being delegated.

(b) All powers, authorities, duties and functions conferred or imposed on the Council under any other

Act.


LIMITATIONS

(b) A power, authority, duty or function the subject of this delegation shall not be exercised in a particular case if the holder of the office of General Manager receives a direction from the Council withdrawing a power, authority, duty or function in relation to any matter for which the Council is enabled to withdraw that power, authority, duty or function.

(c) These delegations may be exercised only in accordance with legislation, prescribed standards,

codes, policies and decisions of Council. EXCEPTIONS

(j) Determination of any land use applications of a value in excess of $1,000,000. (k) Resolution of any matter requested by two or more Councillors to be referred to the Council by

notice in writing addressed to the General Manager. (l) Resolution of any issue that, in the opinion of the Mayor and/or the General Manager, is one of

major public interest or controversy. (m) Determination of any land use application which provides for:

• a reliance on a SEPP 1 application to vary development standards in respect of floor space ratio and site cover by more than 20%;

• building work in an Environmental Protection Zone; • the utilisation of the ‘Development in adjoining Zone’ provisions and where the adjoining

Zone is Environmental Protection;


Attachment 2



Attachment 1

(n) Determination of any matter involving Council properties other than: (i) leases or tenancies or (ii) land use application where the property is a community asset, there has been no

public objection, and there is no commercial advantage to the Council from any proposed works.

(o) Any commercial activity involving Council assets other than specified in EXCEPTION (e) (i). (p) Land use applications submitted either as applicant or landowner by Councillors, senior officers or

staff with delegations in the Health and Development Group. (q) Those functions or matters which are required to be exercised ‘by resolution’ of the Council.


ITEM NO: 11 SUBJECT: WARD BOUNDARIES FILE NO: C00143 Recommendations: 1. That Council determine the proposed changes to its Ward Boundaries 2. That the proposed Ward Boundaries be placed on public exhibition for a period

ending 11 February 2005. 3. That the General Manager advise all relevant authorities of the new boundaries. Report by General Manager: Introduction Changes to the Local Government Act now requires a Council to adjust its ward boundaries where the difference between electors in wards is greater than 10 per cent. This report outlines the review undertaken and some suggested options for Council’s consideration. Statutory Position Section 211 of the Local Government Act 1993 states, amongst other things: (2) If:

(a) during a council’s term of office, the council becomes aware that the number of electors in one ward in its area differs by more than 10 per cent from the number of electors in any other ward in its area, and

(b) that difference remains at the end of the first year of the following term of

office of the council, the council must, as soon as practicable, alter the ward boundaries in a

manner that will result in each ward containing a number of electors that does not differ by more than 10 per cent from the number of electors in each other ward in the area.

(3) Nothing in subsection (2) prevents a council that has become aware of the

discrepancy referred to in subsection (2) (a) from altering its ward boundaries before the end of the first year of the following term of office of the council.


The current Council structure is four wards, each electing three to a Council of twelve Councillors and with the Mayor elected from the Council for a period of one year. The latest population figures for each ward provided by the Electoral Commission indicates that there is a greater than 10 per cent variation between wards. This has been the case for some time. The enrolments in August 2004 for the wards in the Blue Mountains City Council area were: Ward 1 12333 Ward 2 14208 Ward 3 14101 Ward 4 11576 The difference between the highest (Ward 2 – 14208) and the lowest (Ward 4 – 11576) is 2632. Applying the formula used by the NSW Electoral Commissioner, the percentage difference is therefore 18.52%. This means that the Council has a statutory obligation to adjust its ward boundaries. Recent Ward Boundary Changes Council last varied ward boundaries for the 1995 local government elections. With these changes: Leura electors became wholly in Ward 1 (moving from Ward 2); and Many Faulconbridge electors moved into Ward 2 from Ward 3; and Warrimoo electors shifted from Ward 4 to Ward 3. Council decided not to make changes to boundaries for the 1999 and the 2004 elections even though there was a greater than 10% variation between some wards. At that stage it was not compulsory to adjust ward boundaries where a greater than 10% variation was evident. Reviewing Ward Boundaries – Principles and Issues The following principles have guided past decision making on ward boundaries:

• Avoiding splitting townships into different wards. • That the adjustments coincide with whole Census Collection Districts (CCD’s).

These are the building blocks of Wards. They are small areas declared by the Australian statistician for the purpose of collecting data. The Blue Mountains is divided into 145 CCD’s.


• Minimising the frequency of changes made to boundaries to reduce costs in

implementing changes. • Making use of the breaks in development between villages, reinforced through

implementation of the LEP, as natural boundaries. • Ward boundaries following prominent, preferably permanent, and distinguishable

landmarks such as roads, railway lines, and rivers, and avoiding property, Lot, DP, Portion or Parish boundary descriptions (as emphasised by the Electoral Commissioner).

Other relevant issues have included:

• The notion that wards should be geographically based and manageable for Councillors.

• The design of ward boundaries should maintain a community of interest/cohesion. Notwithstanding the relevance of these principles and issues in guiding past decisions, the changing population dynamics (eg the two middle wards are experiencing considerable growth in recent years) makes it more difficult to address in all cases in current decision making on ward boundary changes. Current Situation The Table below presents:

• The most recent population of the wards from the Australian Electoral Commission.

• The electoral population of the wards in 1995 and 1998. • The growth patterns over the periods.

Ward Eligible

Enrolment (1995 Electoral Roll)

Eligible Enrolment(1998 Electoral Roll)

Growth (%)

Eligible Enrolment (August 2004)

Growth (%)

Electors per Councillor (2002)

One 11,387 11,692 3% 12,333 5 4,111 Two 12,692 13,124 3% 14,208 8 4,736 Three 12,482 12,960 4% 14,101 8 4,700 Four 11,608 11,553 -(negative) 11,576 .20 3,859 Options Because of the geographical nature of the Blue Mountains it is considered that there are practically three viable options to adjust the Ward Boundaries. Option 1 - Warrimoo/Faulconbridge/Wentworth Falls

1. Residences in Census districts 1231108, 1231107, Pt. 1231109 and Pt. 1231105 in Warrimoo (1560) moving from Ward 3 to Ward 4.


2. Residences in the Census districts Pt. 1230912, Pt. 1230913 and Pt. 1230905 in

Faulconbridge (700) moving from Ward 2 to Ward 3. 3. Residences in the Census districts 1231702 and Pt. 1231706 in Wentworth Falls

(439) moving from Ward 2 to Ward 1. The distribution across the Wards would be as follows: Ward Eligible Enrolments Electors per

Councillor Status

One 12772 4257 Lowest Two 13069 4356 Three 13241 4414 Highest Four 13136 4379 The difference between the highest and the lowest wards would be 469. Applying the formula used by the NSW Electoral Commissioner, the percentage difference would be 3.54% Option 2 - Warrimoo/Faulconbridge/Wentworth Falls (2)

1. Same as Option 1. 2. Same as Option 1. 3. Residences in the census districts 1231709 and Pt. 1231706 in Wentworth Falls

(278) moving from Ward 2 to Ward 1. The distribution across the wards would be as follows: Ward Eligible Enrolments Electors per

Councillor Status

One 12611 4204 Lowest Two 13230 4410 Three 13241 4414 Highest Four 13136 4379 The difference between the highest and the lowest wards would be 630. Applying the formula used by the NSW Electoral Commissioner, the percentage difference would be 4.76% Option 3 - Warrimoo/Faulconbridge

1. Same as Option 1. 2. Same as Option 1. 3. Ward 1 remains unchanged.


The distribution across the Wards would be as follows: Ward Eligible Enrolments Electors per

Councillor Status

One 12333 4111 Lowest Two 13508 4502 Three 13241 4413 Highest Four 13136 4378 The difference between the highest and the lowest ward would be 1175. Applying the formula used by the NSW Electoral Commissioner, the percentage difference would be 8.70% Summary The proposed adjustments to Ward 4 as shown in all three options by moving Warrimoo from Ward 3 to Ward 4 appears to be the most practicable solution having regard to the guiding principles. The same criteria are applicable to the proposed adjustment to the boundaries of Ward 2 and 3. With regard to the boundaries of Ward 1 and 2 there are three possible options to adjust this Boundary. Option 1 Moving CCD’s 1231702 and Pt. 1231706 from Ward 2 to Ward 1. This option would have the greatest compliance with the principals of boundary adjustments, in that the area to be transferred is bounded by the Railway, Wentworth Falls lake and natural bushland along Bass Road. This option would result in a 3.54% difference. Option 2 Moving CCD’s 1231709 and Pt. 1231706 from Ward 2 to Ward 1. The land proposed to be transferred does not have any physical demarcations defining the boundaries; also the Golf Club would be split between the two Wards. Adoption of this Option would result in a percentage difference of 4.76%. Option 3 This option proposes no changes to the boundaries between Wards 1 and 2 but would result in a percentage difference of 8.7%. The current population fluctuations and growth trends would result in Council most likely needing to revisit the issue again after the next election. Process To Review And Change The Ward Boundaries In moving the process forward the following is proposed:

• Council reviews the options available and determines a position for public exhibition.

• Maps are commissioned to define the proposed new boundaries based on the option determined by Council.


• The proposal is advertised inviting public comment – these would need to be

advertised at least twice and the period for submissions would need to be 28 days. It is intended that the public exhibition period run until 11th February 2005 allowing sufficient time over the holiday period.

• Affected households would be targeted with direct communication explaining the proposed changes and inviting comment. This will be commence in December 2004/January 2005.

• Council will consider the community feedback and to make a final decision. It is proposed that this will occur in March 2005 depending on the number of submissions received.

• The Australian statistician and the Electoral Commissioner are advised of any changes following the final decision.

• A communication strategy is implemented informing the community of the final decision.

Suggested Approach In terms of administration efficiency the preferred option would be Option 1 transferring Warrimoo, Faulconbridge and part of Wentworth Falls as this meets cleanly the guiding principles and allows the greatest opportunity for future growth thereby maximising the period of future statutory ward boundary adjustments.


Attachment

QUALITY LOCAL GOVERNMENT Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 12 SUBJECT: SCHEDULE OF INVESTED MONIES FILE NO: C00694 Recommendation: That the Schedule of Invested Monies as at 31 October 2004 be received. Report by Group Manager, Corporate Policy: This report is submitted for the purposes of financial accountability and in satisfaction of the Financial Regulations under the Local Government Act, 1993. The Schedule of Council’s Invested Monies as at 30 September 2004 is attached for information. Interest returns on Council's investments are slightly above budget due to the better than anticipated cash position for this part of the financial year.

QUALITY LOCAL GOVERNMENT Item 12 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

Attachment

BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL

SCHEDULE OF INVESTED MONIES

Report prepared to 31 October 2004

Institution and Fund Return

for Month

Return Year to

Date

Current Fixed Rate

Investment Value

Commonwealth Bank of Australia * 5.50% 5.50% $2,678,061 National Australia Bank – Offset * 5.48% 5.48% $2,674,672 National Australia Bank – Call a/c N/a N/a Variable 0 Macquarie Bank – Diversified Treasury 5.92% 6.06% $170,463 Deutsche Bank – Cash Plus Fund 5.92% 6.35% $1,291,316 UBS Cash-Plus 5.92% 6.13% $1,926,711 CBA Series 12 ** 6.4783% $500,000 CBA Series 18** 6.44% $500,000 Grange Securities ** 5.585% $503,050 Grange Securities ** 6.74% Variable $500,750 Grange Securities ** 6.8933% Variable $1,000,000 Total $11,745,023 UBSWA Bank Bill Index 5.51% 5.56%

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

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

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

Financial Year to Date Budgeted Return $248,208 Council’s Actual Return $257,321

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

Wayne Rogers Responsible Accounting Officer


ITEM NO: 13 SUBJECT: UNDERGROUND FUEL TANKS AT KATOOMBA AND

SPRINGWOOD DEPOT FILE NO: Recommendations: 1. That Council notes the non-compliance issues relating to the underground fuel tanks

at Katoomba and Springwood depots and the options for the decommissioning of the fuel tanks as outlined in this report.

2. That option 2, foam filling of underground fuel tanks be adopted and implemented in

2005/2006 Capital Work Program. 3. That Council allocates $118,000 from the Capital Works Program 2005/2006 for the

implementation of this project to achieve compliance with all relevant legislative requirements.

4. That the EPA be advised of Council’s decision to address the non-compliance issues

relating to the underground fuel tanks at Katoomba and Springwood depots and to implement option 2 for the foam filling of underground tanks at Katoomba and Springwood depots in 2005/2006.

Report by Group Manager, BM City Services: Background The issue of the unleaded and diesel underground fuel tanks at Katoomba and Springwood depots has been raised several times by external authorities over the last 2 years, and represents a very high risk of fines and negative publicity to Council. Each depot has two diesel and one unleaded underground fuel tanks. Both sites have Dangerous Goods Licenses, which cover the volume of fuel storage. A Legislative Compliance Audit conducted by Avendra Singh Strati & Kam Lawyers in February 2003 highlighted that the fuel tanks will need to be removed if not being used regularly. The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) conducted an audit of Katoomba Depot in May 2003, and Springwood Depot in July 2003, and it was found the Council was not complying with Section 120 of the POEO Act in regards to potential for fuel entering the stormwater system. The decision was made and communicated to the EPA that Council will no longer use the refuelling areas at the depots, and that refuelling will be outsourced (fuel cards system).


The EPA were also concerned with possible undetected leakages from the underground fuel tanks, and recommended that the tanks be inspected for leaks and the soils/subsoils surrounding the tanks be tested for hydrocarbons. If the ground is contaminated, Council may be breaching the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997. Groundwater is protected by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Water Administration Act 1986, the Clean Waters Act 1970 and the Water Act 1912. A Dangerous Goods and Hazardous Substances Audit conducted in April 2004 identified that the last deliveries of fuel were 4 September 2002 (ULP) and 25 September 2002 (Diesel). The last issue of fuel was recorded on 4 September 2003. It is a requirement of the Regulation 143 of the Dangerous Goods Act (General Regulation) 1993, that any underground fuel tank for the storage of combustible or flammable goods, that has not had substance put into or taken out of for a continuous period of 6 months, must immediately abandon the tanks in accordance with the requirements of AS 1940 - The Storage of Flammable and Combustible Liquids. Council has not been using the tanks regularly for more than a year, and is therefore in breach of EPA and Workcover legislative requirements The EPA has requested a program and timeline for environmental improvement at both depots to ensure compliance with the relevant legislation. The EPA has indicated that Council is required to the de-commission of the fuel tanks by July 2005. Introduction The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s prior approval to allocate funds in 2005/2006 for addressing the non-compliance issues relating to the fuel tanks at Council’s depots. investigate the alternative proposals for the Decommissioning of the existing Fuel Tanks at the Katoomba and Springwood depots and replace or convert them to storm water storage tanks. This report will cover four options for the decommissioning of fuel tanks:

• Option1: Excavation and Removal; • Option2: Foam Filling; • Option 3: Re-lining of tanks; and • Option 4: Do nothing

Scope of Works Katoomba Depot: Three tanks identified north of refuelling awning area:

• 45,000L • 25,000L • 20,000L


Springwood Depot: Three tanks identified below refuelling awning area:

• 45,000L • 25,000L • 20,000L

Additional two tanks identified between the southern side of store and new wash bay, which have not been used in excess of 20 years,

• 2 x 5,000L

Summary of Proposals The following is a brief summary of the proposals submitted including cost estimate. These cost estimates are from a contractor’s submission and do not represent a procurement commitment or guarantee of price for the work. Option 1. Excavation and Removal – Estimated Value $153,000 This proposal involves the removal of tanks from site and the implementation of soil sampling to determine if any level of contamination exists. No allowance has been allowed for any treatment of contaminated material outside the tank excavation area, as this can only be determined once tanks have been removed. The advantage of this option is that the tanks are removed from site and thereby the land will be free from any encumbrances. The disadvantage of this option is unknown value of soil remediation once tanks have been removed, contamination could extend beneath structures and buildings in which must be removed and remediate as per EPA guidelines. The scope of remediation works and its associated cost are unknown. Costing (excluding remediation works for potential land contamination) include:

• Tank removal and disposal of site; • Remediate excavation area; • Removal of liquid and fuel from tanks; • Environmental and validation works; • EPA approved auditor; • Removal of two large trees at Katoomba; • Demolishing of awning at Springwood; and • Installation of 2 x 10,000L concrete storm water tanks.


Option 2. Foam Filling of Tanks – Estimated Value $118,000 This proposal is an acceptable alternative to the removing of tanks is to fill them with Bacel Hardfoam. This is an approved system for abandoning the tanks and involves injecting the foam through the tank fill and dip points. Once the foam is in evidence at the vent pipe riser this signifies that the whole system is filled and no voids exist. The foam being light, allows for the tanks to be removed should BMCC decide to divest themselves of the site in years to come. The foam is environmentally friendly and once broken down can be used as landfill. The advantage of this option is the EPA compliance of abandonment without the expense of remediation. The disadvantage of this option is that the tanks and the contaminated material are still in the ground and would have to be removed if BMCC decide to divest them of the site. Costing include:

• Decommission tanks; • Foam filling all 8 tanks; • Removal of liquid and fuel from tanks; and • Installation of 2 x 10,000L concrete storm water tanks.

Option 3. Lining of Tanks - $296,000 This proposal involves basically cutting open the six current operating tanks and lining with a Fiber Reinforced Plastic so as to convert them into storm water tanks. The older two tanks at Springwood would be foam filled, as they are not considered suitable for this treatment. The advantage of this option is the EPA compliance of abandonment and new use of the tanks, without the expense of remediation ever being required. The disadvantage of this option is the upfront cost. Costs include:

• Decommission tanks; • Civil works; • Removal of liquid and fuel from tanks; • Lining of 6 tanks; and • Foam filling of the 2 older tanks at Springwood.


Option 4. Do Nothing This is not an option as Council will not be able to comply with EPA requirements and may be subject to a substantial fine. There is no advantage in this option. At present the Katoomba and Springwood Depot sites do not comply with current legislative requirements, and ultimately remedial action would be forced on the Council. If no action is taken the EPA may serve an Investigation Order on the Council, to report on the nature and extent of contamination. Such a declaration to investigate would be made public. The do nothing approach would not be consistent with Council’s stated environmental objectives. Conclusion The best value for money option to achieve compliance with the relevant legislation is the option 2, foam filling of fuel tanks. Discussions with the EPA have indicated the proposal to schedule the necessary works for completion in 2005/2006 is acceptable, subject to a letter of confirmation to this effect being sent to the EPA outlining the proposed plan and funding approval for 2005/2006.


ITEM NO: 14 SUBJECT: COMMUNITY CONSULTATION FILE NO: C03357 Recommendations: 1. That Council adopt the Community Consultation Policy and Matrix. 2. That Council receives a further report, following the deliberations by the Policy

Review Working Party, outlining the process to be followed to review the Policy’s effectiveness after twelve months of operation.

Report by General Manager: Background In November 2003, Council resolved to place a community consultation framework on public exhibition. The framework was placed on Public Exhibition from 14 January – 12 March 2004. Thirteen submissions were received on the framework and the issues raised are outlined in Attachment 1. During the past year, Council has trialled many of the methods to engage the community set out in the Consultation matrix, including

• Public tours of Blaxland Waste Facility in conjunction with information forums • Information days for Glenbrook Lagoon • Revised environment festival over 3 different locations • Photography competition to highlight water protection • Tumbling water program which included aerosol artwork at bus shelters • Public meetings at Lapstone about the Management Plan for Lapstone Oval • Information Days about the master plan held on site at Summerhayes Park

Council has recognised the importance of developing a Community Consultation Policy to increase community participation in Council’s decision-making. It is recognised that Council communicates with citizens in a variety of ways, and different issues require different levels of community involvement. The policy and matrix provides guidelines for understanding the level of community participation that is most appropriate for particular issues or projects, and for a consistent approach to consultation throughout Council. After consultation with staff, community and as a result of submissions the framework has been streamlined to make it easier for staff and the community to use.


Components of the Consultation Policy The Consultation Matrix The community consultation Matrix aims to guide staff on when and how they should consult with the community. The Matrix is relevant to all staff who have dealings with the community and a communications and consultation plan should be part of any project being undertaken by Council staff. The type and level of consultation may vary between activities and projects and the level consultation may be more intense and detailed depending on the needs of particular groups or a community within the Mountains. The matrix provides the minimum levels that should be considered when planing activities and projects. The matrix identifies different levels of impact that would require certain levels of consultation. When planning an activity or project staff need to assess the level of consultation according to the impact. Timeframes for consultation are important and each project should include adequate timelines for consultation with the community i.e. enough time to disseminate information to allow the community to make a considered response. The Consultation Toolkit The Consultation Toolkit has been designed to assist staff with practical suggestions and guidance for undertaking different types of community consultation. The Toolkit also reinforces some of the Council’s protocols that need to be taken into consideration when undertaking consultation. Training It is planned that staff will receive consultation training over the next 12 months, and as a regular component of staff training, to compliment the Community Consultation Policy . Review A component of the Consultation Policy is assessment. Staff will be required to provide information assessing the consultation they have undertaken, and its effectiveness. The results of these assessments will be reported back to Council in 12 months. A further report will be prepared for the Policy Review Working Party on how the review process will be undertaken.


Building an effective and positive relationship with the local Indigenous community On 24 June 2003, Council received and adopted a report relating to the continued development of an effective and positive relationship with the local Aboriginal community and on 23 November 2004, Council endorsed the position description, employment structure and selection process for an Aboriginal Community Development Officer. This position is due to be filled 1 July 2005. The Community Consultation Policy and tools may require some specific requirements and adjustments for specific consultation with the local Indigenous Community. This will be undertaken in conjunction with the Aboriginal Community Development Officer.


Attachment

Public Exhibition Feedback Submission Points Raised Comments 1 Timing of consultation – needs to be

adequate length so groups who only meet monthly can discuss

Addressed in the Policy and Guidelines – timeframes for feedback must be part of the consultation plan for each project.

2 Inclusive of all groups and individuals

See policy

3 Inform, consult and involve are “tokenism” and must lead into collaboration and empowerment Must include development applications and DCP’s Criteria for levels of participation Matters supported by sufficient numbers of public should be on Council’s meeting agenda Toolkit for staff will be a barrier to participation

DA’s and DCP’s have legislative requirements and these serve as a “base-line” for consultation. Councillors can get items on council agenda on behalf on residents. Toolkit is designed to help- not hinder - staff to undertake consultation

4 Links to 25 year strategy and councillor code of conduct Amendment to councillor code of conduct to include consultation Levels of consultation and criteria for participation Appropriate and widespread consultation – not limited to “neighbours” Timelines – longer leads to public meetings Changes to meeting practices including supply of information, skilled chairperson, recording of follow up action , group approval of agendas Accessible venues Feedback is essential Public exhibition should be 56 days Follow up meetings with those who make submission Timing and availability of business papers

Council’s planning and particularly the management plan are now formed directly from the 25 year strategy. In this way the community have set the agenda for Council. Other issues are covered in the policy and guidelines


Attachment

Submission Points Raised Comments 5 Transparent development application

procedure needed Closed council meeting should not be allowed – briefing session should be open to the public Dispute resolution process should be implements Co-ordinated communications system – different sections = differing interpretations Fail-safe mechanism Business papers should be available one week before council meetings

DA process set by legislation. Council meetings only closed for commercial in confidence issues – Council votes to decide whether to go into confidential session. Policy and guidelines designed to ensure consistency of consultation

6 Policy in context with code of conduct, access & equity and 25 year strategy Consultation should not be tokenistic and deals not made by councillors that dismiss consultation outcomes Specific protocol to be developed with local indigenous peoples Training for all council staff to understand an implement Chair Timeframes

See above Specific protocols are being developed for consultation with local indigenous peoples. Training will be undertaken with council staff – some access and equity training has taken place in the last 12 months – specific consultation training is planned

7 Public participation includes the promise that the public’s contribution will influence the decision

See policy and guidelines

8 Consultation on Strategy as it is developed


9 Wider notification to the community on DA’s Notification of bushcare groups for DA’s adjacent to their sites Facilitation of community meetings by independent and professional persons

See policy and guidelines. See previous comments on DA’s

10 Review the area manager structure Develop precinct committees Public at councillor briefing session Council meetings in other wards

Area Manager structure is under review. Councillor working parties have been established to deal with specific areas of Council work.

11 Annual community consultation - your town this year – what’s happening

Annual survey undertaken by Council


Attachment

Submission Points Raised Comments 12 Meeting procedures – decision making

processes need to be instituted before the meeting


13 DA’s for commercial use to involve neighbours

See previous comments on DA’s


Attachment

POLICY: COMMUNITY CONSULTATION STATUS: DRAFT ADOPTED: LAST REVISION: 9.11.04 ISSUED BY: EXECUTIVE SERVICES POLICY REF.: INQUIRIES: EXECUTIVE SERVICES OBJECTIVE To ensure that consultation with the community is carried out in a consistent and professional manner by the organisation at all times. POLICY

1. All community consultation is carried out according to the criteria set out in the consultation matrix.

2. Community consultation as designated by the Council is carried out according to the criteria and any other criteria set by Council.

PROCEDURES The matrix identifies different levels of impact that would require certain levels of consultation. When planning your activity or project you need to assess the level of consultation according to the impact. Assess the level of impact Determine the likely level of impact of the project, issue, service or action using the assessment criteria in the tables Determine Community Participation: Determine the desired level of community participation/ involvement: Do you need to inform of a decision or involve the community in the decision making process. This will be influenced by the degree of impact and the desired outcomes of consultation. Use the guidelines in the consultation matrix to help with this decision and also consider legislation and other Council Policy requirements or Council decisions. Determine the Type of Consultation Use the Matrix to determine the type of consultation that should occur Establish a consultation/communication strategy Using the matrix and the detailed chart, plan a communications strategy for your project or issue which incorporates a timetable for communications and consultation. Timeframes for consultation are important and each project should include adequate timelines for consultation with the community i.e. enough time to disseminate information to allow the community to make a considered response. Enter information into the Council Communications Calendar All consultation dates, including mail outs and advertisements for exhibitions, must be entered into the Communications Calendar. Information in the Communications Calendar will then be collated for the annual report. Complete assessment of consultation Complete the assessment form, which may include feedback from the community about the consultation process. These assessments will be used in reviews of Council’s consultation processes


Attachment

BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION MATRIX

2004 Table of contents page Introduction 2Criteria for impact 3Level of community participation 4The Matrix 5Types of Consultation: Descriptions, Strengths & challenges 6

Informing 6Consulting 6Involving 8Partnerships 9


Attachment

Introduction

The community consultation Matrix aims to guide staff on when and how they should consult with the community. The Matrix is relevant to all staff who have dealings with the community and a communications and consultation plan should be part of any project being undertaken by Council staff. The type and level of consultation may vary between activities and projects and the level consultation may be more intense and detailed depending on the needs of particular groups or a community within the Mountains. The matrix provides the minimum levels that should be considered when planning activities and projects. How to use the matrix: The matrix identifies different levels of impact that would require certain levels of consultation. When planning your activity or project you need to assess the level of consultation according to the impact. Step 1: Assess the level of impact Determine the likely level of impact of the project, issue, service or action using the assessment criteria in the tables Step 2: Determine Community Participation: Determine the desired level of community participation/ involvement: Do you need to inform of a decision or involve the community in the decision making process. This will be influenced by the degree of impact and the desired outcomes of consultation. Use the guidelines on Page 4 to help with this decision and also consider legislation and other Council Policy requirements or Council decisions. Step 3: Determine the Type of Consultation Use the Matrix to determine the type of consultation that should occur Step 4: Establish a consultation/communication strategy Using the matrix and the detailed chart, plan a communications strategy for your project or issue which incorporates a timetable for communications and consultation. Timeframes for consultation are important and each project should include adequate timelines for consultation with the community i.e. enough time to disseminate information to allow the community to make a considered response Step 5: Enter information into the Council Communications Calendar All consultation dates, including mail outs and advertisements for exhibitions, must be entered into the Communications Calendar. Information in the Communications Calendar will then be collated for the annual report.


Attachment

Step 6: Complete assessment of consultation Complete the assessment form, which may include feedback from the community about the consultation process. These assessments will be used in reviews of Council’s consultation processes.


Attachment

Matrix for consultation

Level of Impact

Descriptions

Level 1 High

High level of impact on the city or local

community Level 2 Low

Lower level of impact on the city or local community

Criteria for determining the level of impact High Level Impact

Low level impact

L E V E L 1

High level (real or perceived) on whole of city Significant impact on attributes of high value to community (environment/ heritage) Impact on health, safety or well being of community Potential of high degree of controversy or conflict High level of community interest Potential impact on state or regional strategies or directions Examples : City strategy , Management plan ,Cultural Strategy, DLEP, Disability action plan, Strategy Plan (youth culture aged), Removal of - or significant changes to- a whole of city service Provision of a regional facility (sport or cultural centre) Economic Development Policy Vegetation Management Plan

Recurrent large scale programs and activities which impact across the city but have a lower level controversy or potential for dispute Examples: Improvements to city wide services Upgrade of regional park/facility Changes to customer services e.g payment of rates, office hours Review of community needs, annual survey Weed & Bushcare programs Capital Works Program (overall) URCP works Tourism promotion Road sealing programs Fuel management plans Community events such as NAIDOC celebrations, Youth Week, Seniors Week

C I T Y

W I D E

L E V E L 2

High level (real or perceived) impact or risk on local area, community or group Loss or significant change to a local facility or service Potential for high degree of controversy or division in community Examples: Removal or relocation of local playground/park Changes to or loss of service eg local youth services Redevelopment of park or sportsground Masterplan process Local street works or closure Changes to local car parking Area planning, Plans of Management DCP’s , Town Centre studies & designs

Only a small change or improvement to a facility or service at a local level Low risk of conflict at the local level Examples : Upgrade of local playground local street or area upgrade changes to a local activity Local road changes/upgrades Park upgrades, changes Community building upgrades/introduction Local events – celebrations Specific groups events

L O C A L

A R E A


Attachment

Level of Community Participation

Level of participation

Definition

Inform

Advise the community of a situation or proposal Inform on a decision or direction Provide advice on an issue No response required - free to seek further levels of participation

Consult

Undertake research to help identity needs or issues Seek comment on proposal, action or issue Seek feedback on service or facility Require response, limited opportunity for dialogue Take account of consultation in decision making

Involve

Involve the community in discussion or debate Ensure informed input through briefing and information Adopt innovative and participatory approach -meetings forums Involve at different times of the planning process - advisory committees

Partner

Establish partnerships for involvement in decision making - task force Enable ongoing involvement and keep informed Allocate responsibility in achieving initiatives

Level of Impact Level of Participation

generally required Exceptions

Level 1 – High Impact Informing Consultation Involving Partnerships

In emergency situations it may not be possible to consult before taking action Partnerships may be appropriate – or a local advisory committee to provide input into plans or issues

Level 2 – Low Impact Informing Seeking Information Involving

May conduct a survey to assess needs rather than involve – especially if community has been previously involved in consultation May be partnerships for events


Attachment

The Matrix

Type of consultation

Level 1 High Impact City Wide

Level 1 High Impact Local Level

Level 2 Low Impact City Wide

Level 2 Low Impact Local Level

Informing Essential Essential Essential Essential Telephone contact May be appropriate May be

appropriate May be appropriate May be appropriate

In person meeting May be appropriate May be appropriate

May be appropriate May be appropriate

Written correspondence

Essential Essential May be appropriate May be appropriate

Pamphlet May be appropriate May be appropriate


Letter box drop May be appropriate May be appropriate


Notice in local paper Essential Essential Essential Essential Notice in newsletter May be appropriate May be


Media release Essential Essential Essential Essential Site display May be appropriate May be


Displays in other locations



Consulting Suggestion box May be appropriate May be appropriate Telephone survey May be appropriate May be


Written survey May be appropriate May be appropriate

May be appropriate

Hotline/phone in May be appropriate May be appropriate

May be appropriate

Letter inviting submissions

Essential May be appropriate

May be appropriate

Media release inviting submission

Essential Essential Essential May be appropriate

Public exhibition Essential May be appropriate

May be appropriate

Interview May be appropriate May be appropriate


Focus Group Session May be appropriate May be appropriate


Involving Meeting with user groups/stakeholders

Essential Essential May be appropriate May be appropriate

Meeting with existing groups



Workshop session May be appropriate May be appropriate


Meeting by invitation May be appropriate May be appropriate


Site tour/meeting May be appropriate May be appropriate


Public meeting May be appropriate May be appropriate

May be appropriate


Attachment

Type of consultation

Level 1 High Impact City Wide

Level 1 High Impact Local Level

Level 2 Low Impact City Wide

Level 2 Low Impact Local Level

Partnerships Committee of management


Taskforce or working party


May be appropriate

Joint venture May be appropriate May be appropriate


1 Essential 2 May Be appropriate


Attachment

Type of consultation Description Strengths Challenges Informing In person meeting Informal or semi

informal discussion either one-to-one or in a small group

Allows discussion of specific issues and points of view

Limit to number of people accessing information

Correspondence Personally addressed letter informing resident of a service, action or project

All residents receive the same information

Assumes literacy level of residents

Pamphlet Designed to provide information on particular project or issue

All residents receive the same information in the same format Allows more detailed information, diagrams etc

Assumes literacy level of residents More costly – distribution and dissemination needs to be addressed

Letterbox Drop Designed to provide information on particular project or issue

All residents receive the same information in the same format Allows more detailed information, diagrams etc Can be targeted to certain areas

Assumes literacy level of residents May be perceived as “Junk mail” and discarded

Notice in local paper Advertisement in Council page or other sections

Widespread notification

Assumes residents read local papers

Media release News story and/or photo in media

Creates interest by making issue “news”

Depends on media using release and time sensitivity

Site display On site information about proposed project/ activity

Information for those with access to the site – immediate information for passers by

Depends on location of the site and quality of information or display

Displays in other locations eg villages, shopping centres, community noticeboards

Information placed in areas of high public use,

Can inform a cross section of the community

Depends on quality of information or display Assess need to update information

Consulting Suggestion Box Place for residents

to provide ideas or feedback Physical –i.e. at council offices or on the website

Easy access to ideas and easy for community input

Feedback needs to be provided on suggestions


Attachment

Type of consultation Description Strengths Challenges Consulting Telephone survey Phone contact to

complete a structured interview

Provides data to assess needs Wide consultation Trends can be plotted

Costs Limit/target questions Expert analysis of results Excludes those without a phone Telemarketing fatigue


Attachment

Type of consultation Description Strengths Challenges Consulting Written survey Structured survey

to gather information

Provides data to assess needs Wide consultation Trends can be plotted

Costs Limit/target questions Expert analysis of results

Hotline/phone-in Time-limited opportunity for residents to make contact and provide feedback

Capacity to gather information from interested parties and clarify concerns

Relies on skilled interviewers Relies on publicity and public interest

Media promotion inviting submissions

Ask the community for written submissions on a proposal, concept or activity

Useful as part of wider consultation process Broadens potential information source Easy to implement Enables formal comments on an issue

Limited opportunity for dialogue or clarification Attracts literate, motivated and organised groups and individuals

Public exhibition The formal exhibition of a plan or document at key locations for a set period of time

Gives the community the opportunity to view and comment on a plan or strategy

Requires high level of promotion Requires motivated residents to respond

Interview Face to face structured interview

Forms the basis of assessing issue and trends Rich source of resident information Capacity to reflect, expand and clarify points

Time consuming and costly May not be representative of all groups

Focus Group Session Semi-structured interview in a small group (with invited participants)

Participants explore and build on issues Allows in-depth discussion

May not be representative of all groups

Meeting with user/stakeholder group

Face to face semi-structured meeting with a specific group

Capacity to draw out issues of concern to the group Opportunity to clarify issues of contention and uncertainty Opportunity to develop an action that responds to issues

Requires a competent and effective facilitator


Attachment

Type of consultation Description Strengths Challenges Involving Meeting with existing group e.g. parents, school children, youth aged etc

Link to an existing group to discuss broad issues

Involves people who would not normally come to other meetings

Requires a competent and effective facilitator

Workshop session Structured approach where participants work through and issue to develop solutions

Can produce a plan or recommendation All participants involved in discussion and outcomes

Requires a competent and effective facilitator Needs limited numbers to be effective

Community forum Panel of speakers provide information and facilitate discussion on a topic

Greater information on all aspects Good to generate general interest in a topic

Need to ensure a balance of speakers

Community Debate Organised speakers and debating panels used to discuss an issue

Promotes informed thinking Ensures managed debate and discussion and the recognition that there is more that one side to an argument

Needs to be clear sides to an issue Need to ensure balanced and articulate speakers

Public Art Session The integration of public art into the consultation process i.e. using public art as a tool to encourage people to express their views, ideas and values

A positive and creative way to involve people Contributes to community development Results in a Product that can be used to enhance the built environment

Resources required for materials Requires a skilled facilitator

Site tour/meeting Structured meeting on site

Opportunity to view or visualise issues or proposals

Good organisation and high quality display material

Public meeting Gathering of large numbers of residents to inform them and enable comment

Broadcast of information to a large group Open to all

Requires skilled facilitation and informed staff to answer questions Risk of disruption by interest groups

Community Advisory Committee

Community representatives who can help disseminate information to the community and comment on plans

Cross section of representatives can give input on plans Can help structure plans for release to the wider community

Need to ensure broad representationTerms of reference need to be clear – does the committee decide or advise?


Attachment

Type of consultation Description Strengths Challenges Partnerships Committee of Management

Committee that works with council under delegated power to manage a service or facility.

Shares responsibility for the management of a facility or the delivery of a service Involves community members in the care and control of local resources

Need to ensure broad involvement Risk of control be select few Methods of representation – appointment or election need to be clear

Taskforce or working party

Groups of people selected to work with Council to complete a task or develop a new service or facility

Opportunity to maximise skills and resources in the community

Requires a skilled chair to maximise contribution of all members

Joint venture A formal arrangement with stakeholders or organisations to plan and achieve a project or service (eg funding a joint venture)

Greater commitment and responsibility from the community to establish a facility or service Less reliance on council funding and resources

Ongoing costs – maintenance etc


ITEM NO: 15 SUBJECT: COUNCIL’S CARAVAN PARKS BUSINESS PLAN – TRIPLE

BOTTOM LINE REPORT FILE NO: H00065. H00513 Recommendations: That the information contained in this report be received and noted. Report by Group Manager, Corporate Policy: This report provides a Triple Bottom Line (TBL) assessment and examines ways and means to improve the environmental impact and triple bottom line within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan. Background Council at its meeting of 29 June 2004 adopted the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan and resolved inter alia (Minute No.276):

“That a report come back to Council examining ways and means to improve the environmental impact and triple bottom line within the Business Plan.”

The objectives of the Business Plan are to:

a) Implement a business improvement plan that assists in maintaining the parks’ long-term viability and functionality.

b) Provide customers with a range of quality accommodation at reasonable prices

together with a tranquil environment and opportunities for having enjoyable and rewarding recreational experience.

c) Reinvest an appropriate portion of the net income generated from the caravan

parks in undertaking self-funded projects for the overall improvement of the parks’ facilities and ensuring that the condition of the parks is safe and well maintained, satisfying the relevant statutory requirements and Council’s policies.

d) Promote the parks and further develop the partnership arrangements between

Council and its contract managers to ensure the efficient and effective operation of the parks.

The adopted Business Plan does not aim to expand the current business operation of Council’s Caravan Parks.


Sustainability Principles Sustainability refers to “the ability to meet the needs of the current generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It also refers to the ability to improve the quality of life while living with the capacity of the supporting environment.” Within this concept of being sustainable, there are three important elements that can be summarised as follows: Environment: control built environment and conserve natural environment Economics: providing employment opportunities and commercial viability Social: inclusive community & cultural values

The abovementioned elements also guided the approach to developing Council’s current organisational structure to achieve a sustainable organisation. A set of questions had also been developed to assist Council in assessing potential Capital Works Program projects on a TBL basis. Similar frameworks have been used by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, City of Melbourne in Victoria and City of Joondalup in Western Australia. The set of questions used to assess potential Capital Works Program project have been customised in relation to the works in the Caravan Parks Business Plan and employed to examine ways and means to improve the environmental impact and TBL contribution of the Business Plan. Triple Bottom Line Assessment Works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan include:

Construction of carwash bay areas to comply with Sydney Water’s and EPA’s

requirements. (It should be noted that this is a requirement of Sydney Water and the EPA and that while caravan parks, being commercial/business ventures, are entitled to have Sydney Water’s permit for use of water for this purpose during the current restrictions, such use will not be allowed under the park’s rules while the restrictions remain in force).

Refurbishment of existing toilet blocks to comply with OH&S requirements. Improvement of camp kitchen facilities to meet customers’ expectation. Extension of office/kiosk space, construction of disabled access and visitor parking

spaces at the Katoomba Falls Caravan Park. Replacement of existing vans with new cabins and construction of recreation shelter at

the Blackheath Caravan Park. The triple bottom line assessment for the abovementioned works can be summarised as follows: 1. Environmental Sustainability

a) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan protect the surrounding natural resources (for example: soil, vegetation, water, air quality)?


Yes. The proposed construction of carwash bay areas at the two caravan parks would comply with Sydney Water’s and the Environment Protection Authority’s (EPA’s) requirements and assist in protecting the surrounding drainage system and water quality.

b) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan affect any rare or threaten flora or fauna/biodiversity in the area?

No. The main focus of the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan is to improve existing facilities and replace existing old vans. No expansion or land clearing is proposed. Therefore the proposed works would not affect any rare or threaten flora or fauna/biodiversity in the area.

c) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan achieve efficient energy usage and/or efficient use of renewable resources?

Yes. The tender document for the supply of new cabins at Blackheath Caravan Park specifically requires that:

• Cabins must incorporate sustainable and environmental building

design features such as solar, wind or green energy. • Cabins must attain a thermal comfort and performance level • Cabins must employ energy saving and high star rating appliances • Cabins must be designed to have reduced or recycled water

consumption features or an ability to incorporate these features • Cabins must be designed in such a way that could sustain

volatile/cold weather climates.

d) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan enable effective ongoing waste management and minimisation?

Yes. The proposed refurbishment of the existing toilet blocks including an upgrade of existing pumping system would better meet current and future Sydney Water’s and EPA’s requirements. This would improve ability to determine discharge rate, ability to set discharge times, and an upgrade of discharge point at receiving sewer.

e) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan damage areas of the natural environment and/or the built environment?

No. The works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan would not damage areas of the surrounding natural environment and/or the built environment. However, it is proposed to work with the Blackheath Bushcare Group to develop an enhancement program for bushland around Popes Glen Creek.


This would include weed control, revegetation work and appropriate barriers along the section of the creek adjacent to the campsite. Accordingly, this would discourage camping activities near the creek and improve the long-term bushland value for the site. Council’s officers are working on a separate plan for improving Crown land and public land in the Katoomba Falls Reserve precinct. This will involve Friends of Katoomba Falls Creek Valley, Kedumba Friends Bushcare Group and local aboriginal community.

f) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan contribute to the reduction in greenhouse gases?

Yes. The reduction in greenhouse gases would be mainly achieved through the provision of energy saving and efficiency.

2. Economic Sustainability

a) Would the works proposed within the Business Plan assist Council’s Caravan Parks in operating in a profitable manner?

Yes. The works as proposed in the Business Plan would assist Council’s Caravan Parks in: meeting their market demand and customers’ expectation complying with occupational health and safety (OH&S)

requirements minimising OH&S risks improving accommodation standards and occupancy factors maintaining their financial performance and long-term asset values operating in a profitable manner.

b) Has accurate budget been prepared for the works proposed within the

Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan?

Yes. A budget for the proposed works has been prepared in accordance with available building cost indicators and market information.

c) How would the cost of the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan

Parks Business Plan be funded?

The cost of works associated with OH&S or EPA’s requirements would be mainly funded by the caravan park’ income. The replacement cost of old with new cabins at Blackheath Caravan Park would be funded by a special loan. The loan repayments would be funded by the park income.

d) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan expose to financial risk?


No. The works proposed within the Business Plan would assist the caravan parks in mitigating the long-term financial risk as shown below:

Expected Outcomes From Implementing

Business Plan From doing nothing or

carrying out minimal works Net Yearly Income at year 15 Net Present Value over 15

years Asset Value at year 15 Maintenance Cost

$205,000 $1,300,000 $1,100,000

Average

$22,000 $688,000 $719,000

High

e) How would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks

Business Plan assist in providing local employment opportunities and in supporting local economy?

The works proposed within the Business Plan would ensure that the caravan parks would continue to provide alternative budget accommodation at a cheaper end of the market for tourists and ratepayers overflow visitors. This would also maintain certain levels of disposable income that tourists and visitors could inject into the local economy. The multiplying effect of this would assist in providing local employment opportunities and in supporting local economy.

f) Have methods of life cycle costing been analysed and costed appropriately?

Yes. An asset life cycle over a period of 33 years has been employed throughout the financial analysis for the Caravan Parks Business Plan. Depreciation and maintenance costs have also been included in the analysis.

g) Does the timing of the project represent cost efficiencies?

Yes. It is best to implement the Business Plan during a period of time when interest rates (costs of finance) are still considerably low and building/construction activities slow down when tradespeople are more available.

3. Community and Social Sustainability

a) Would the goals of the works proposed within Council’s Caravan Parks Business align with City Strategy Objectives?

Yes. The goals of the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan align with the following City Strategy Objectives:

Looking after Environment: “…We conserve energy and the

natural resources and we use and reduce environmental impact…”

Looking after People: “… People have access to an appropriate range of services and facilities…”


Using Land for Living: “…We use our land to live in harmony

with the environment. We have created vibrant livable places and spaces for people of all ages and abilities to meet and play…”

Moving Around: “…We value safe and accessible pathways of travel that improve our connections with our destinations and each other…”

Working and Learning: “…Through responsible economic development we have strengthened our local economy…”

b) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan incorporate community consultation strategy to ensure minimal impact on community/other partnership in place?

No. The works proposed within the caravan parks are more relating to either complying with statutory requirements, improving existing facilities or meeting business operation needs. However, the community will be notified of the proposed works through the Land Use Application process. Council has lodged an application with Sydney Water for the proposed replacement of the existing vans with en-suite cabins. Upon receipt of Sydney Water’s approval, a Land Use Application will be lodged with Council’s Environmental and Customer Services Group for assessment.

c) Is there demonstrated community need for the works proposed within the

Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan?

Yes. Visitors have given feedback that the condition of the existing facilities is well below industry standards and travel community’s expectations and that they would repeat their visits should the facilities be improved.

d) Are there any works required by relevant laws, government and/or Council

policies, strategies and plans?

Yes. As mentioned above, various works are proposed for compliance with Sydney Water’s and EPA’s requirements as well as OH&S requirements.

e) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan encourage and support a healthy community lifestyle?

Yes. Being the only caravan parks in the Blue Mountains Local Government Area, Council’s caravan parks hold a very important position in and contribution to the tourism industry’s structures.


The works proposed within the Business Plan would ensure that the caravan parks would continue to provide alternative budget accommodation at a cheaper end of the market for tourists and ratepayers overflow visitors. This would encourage and support a healthy community lifestyle, within which people could:

Experience a more enjoyable and rewarding stay at the parks Enjoy the natural settings of the environment Relax during their leisure time Escape from the day-to-day busy city lives Explore new things and new places Experience changes and differences Learning and exchanging new cultures Understanding different social values

f) Would diverse cultural and heritage values of the area and/or surrounding

environment be protected?

Yes. The works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan would not affect the diverse cultural and heritage values of the area. However, the works proposed for bushland around Popes Glen Creek with the Blackheath Bushcare Group and the separate improvement plan for Katoomba Falls Reserve as mentioned earlier would protect and enhance the surrounding environment.

g) Would the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business

Plan accord access and equity and social justice principles?

Yes. Disabled access would be provided to the office/kiosk of the Katoomba Falls Caravan Park and to designated cabins at the Blackheath Caravan Park.

h) Would the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan support

community/other partnership for the benefits of the local business community and viability of all business partners?

Yes. The Business Plan identifies and supports packaging opportunities and special deals/arrangements that complement local business activities and assist visitors in having ‘value for money’ for the range of services obtained from Council’s caravan parks and from local business partners.

Conclusion The TBL assessment outlined above has clearly demonstrated that Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan works towards sustainability principles. In implementing the proposed works, Council’s Caravan Parks Business would not just comply with statutory and OH&S requirements, but also be environmentally, economically and socially sustainable.


Although the works proposed within the Council’s Caravan Parks Business Plan would not detrimentally affect the surrounding natural environment and/or the built environment, it is proposed to work with the Blackheath Bushcare Group to develop an enhancement program for bushland around Popes Glen Creek. This would discourage camping activities near the creek and improve the long-term bushland value for the site. It is recommended that Council receive and note the information contained in this report.

LAND USE MANAGEMENT Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 16 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REFERRAL FROM LITHGOW

CITY COUNCIL – CHURCH AND CORPORATE RETREAT, PEACH TREE ROAD, MEGALONG

FILE NO: C00308 Recommendation: That Council endorse the attached submission for forwarding to Lithgow City Council to inform its consideration in the assessment of the Development Application for a Church and Corporate Retreat in Peach Tree Road, Megalong. Report by Group Manager, City Sustainability in association with Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Background Council has been advised by Lithgow City Council of a Development Application on Peach Tree Road, Megalong. Whilst the proposed development is located within Lithgow Council Area it is accessed via the Blue Mountains City Council area through Megalong and it is therefore a relevance to our residents and will impact on the Valley. The application is for a church and corporate retreat incorporating: • 77 seat chapel; • Meeting rooms and dining room; • 38 double rooms contained within three accommodation blocks; • Associated conference management facilities (management offices, reception area,

staff accommodation). The facility is designed to accommodate up to 76 guests and 4 staff for overnight accommodation. The application also stated that up to 200 people may be visiting the site on limited occasions during the year. Consideration The submission, Attachment 1, raises the following issues to be considered by Lithgow Council when determining the application. They relate to: • Limited road access to the site, and concerns in relation to a substantial increase in

vehicle traffic on an unsealed road; • Potential impacts on the Cox’s River, particularly with regard to on-site effluent

disposal and the site being located within a drinking water catchment under SEPP 58 (Protecting Sydney’s Drinking Water);

LAND USE MANAGEMENT Item 16 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

• Potential impacts on wildlife habitats in conjunction with increased volumes of

traffic passing through stands of remnant vegetation; and • Potential cumulative impacts on local amenity arising from a development of this

scale in an area dominated by low-intensity rural or tourist activities. Conclusion The impacts of a development of this scale concern Council, particularly with regard to the current issues facing residents in the Megalong Valley, and the need to appropriately manage development in an otherwise isolated area. It is our view that this development is inconsistent with the existing planning framework currently applied in the Megalong Valley under Blue Mountains LEP 1991. It is also inconsistent with ongoing efforts by Council to maintain and enhance the natural and physical environment by restricting land use to a scale that is appropriate, taking into account the inherent physical limitations in that area – such as remote access, unserviced properties, significant vegetation and habitats, and a history of low-intensity rural or tourist uses. Therefore, Council has raised a number of issues in its submission, which will be forwarded to Lithgow Council requesting that they be considered when determining the development application.


Attachment 1

General Manager’s Office Reference File: C00308

15 December 2004 General Manager Lithgow City Council P O Box 19 LITHGOW NSW 2790 Dear Mr Stewart SUBJECT Development Application DA504/04 – Church and Corporate Retreat,

Peach Tree Road, Megalong Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Development Application for the abovementioned proposal. This advice reflects Blue Mountains City Council’s consideration of this matter at its meeting of 14 December 2004. To date, residents in the Megalong Valley have contacted Council and Ward 1 Councillors on a number of occasions raising concerns about the proposed development. These concerns would have been detailed in submissions to Lithgow Council lodged separately by individual residents. Consequently, this proposal raises concerns by Council about the potential impacts of this development on the amenity of the Megalong Valley and its residents. Council staff have reviewed this proposal and the issue was reported to Council on 14 December 2004. At this meeting Council resolved “resolution to be inserted” and requests Lithgow Council to consider the issues outlined below in their assessment of this application. Road Access to the site Primary access to the subject site will be along Megalong Road and Peach Tree Road, the majority of which is located within Blue Mountains City Council’s jurisdiction. It is to be noted that most of Peach Tree Road is unsealed (gravel surface). The additional vehicle movements along this road likely to be generated by the proposed development will have significant implications for on-going maintenance and upgrading of the road surface. In the event that sealing is required, the cost of this work will most likely be borne by the broader resident base in the Blue Mountains who will not derive substantial benefit from the improvements. The applicant proposes that the majority of trips may involve a shuttle-bus service from Blackheath Station as a mitigating measure. Council, however, considers this notion is overly optimistic, particularly bearing in mind the likely use of the site for corporate retreats where, more often than not, the corporate organisation involved may prefer to transport their own staff to the site. This, in turn, may present further issues for ongoing road safety where a driver is unfamiliar with the territory (e.g. day trippers to the property).


Attachment 1

It should also be noted that inherent issues with public transport, often beyond the developers’ control, might also have implications for the viability of a shuttle-bus service. In short, if public transport cannot be reasonably relied upon to convey passengers to Blackheath (e.g. weekend track-work, incidents on the network, necessity of changing trains, etc.) then users of the facility will consequently rely on their own means of transport – i.e. private car use. Therefore, Council considers that the proposed development will have unacceptable impacts on the safe and efficient operation of the road network for the following reasons: • Road access via a gravel road is unsuitable for large volumes of traffic. • Reliance on shuttle-bus services and public transport are, in Council’s opinion,

unlikely to mitigate or significantly reduce demand for additional private motor vehicle use arising from the proposed development.

• It is unlikely that the road may be further sealed in the foreseeable future due to the limited number of residents located along this stretch of road and the substantial costs that would be incurred from sealing the full length of the road. Additionally, that part of the road within Lithgow Council’s jurisdiction would also need to be sealed to maintain a consistent level of service to the subject site.

• Wet weather, combined with heavy use by the proposed development, will exacerbate any damage to the current road surface, resulting in higher costs of maintenance imposed on Council as the road controlling authority.

• Silt runoff from additional use of the road is likely to have adverse impacts on creek morphology and water quality and in turn the Cox’s River. Measures such as sediment control basins may be able to mitigate impacts on water quality, but sealing the road may have to be the final solution.

• Unless arrangements are made to charge the development a proportion of the ongoing maintenance costs of that part of Peach Tree Road within Blue Mountains City, the proposed development will derive substantial benefit at a large cost to Blue Mountains ratepayers. This is considered an inequitable outcome.

Potential Impacts from on-site effluent disposal The proposed development area is located approximately 250 metres from the Cox’s River, and is within one of the Blue Mountains drinking water catchments identified by the Sydney Catchment Authority. SEPP 58 (Protecting Sydney’s Water Supply) addresses matters relating to development within these catchments and their potential impacts on drinking water quality. Council is concerned that a substantial development such as this, located close to a major waterway, is proposing on-site effluent disposal using an Ecomax effluent disposal system. Such a large scale proposal involving high numbers of visitors in this location would pose significant challenges in sustainably managing the safe disposal of effluent. Apart from on site disposal, any use of pump out would also have commercial limitations in addition to the road impacts previously discussed. Presumably the Sydney Catchment Authority has also been consulted and may have more specific comments on the proposal and its impact on the area with regard to SEPP 58.


Attachment 1

Council requests that in assessing the proposal, rigorous attention should be given to assessing the amount of effluent disposal and the ability of the site to sustain the loading generated over the long term without posing threats to water quality and the environment. Blue Mountains City Council DCP 13 could be used as a guide to the level of detail and assessment that should be applied. (Copy enclosed). Potential Impacts on wildlife Access to the site along Peach Tree Road goes through a number of stands of remnant vegetation. This vegetation forms habitat for a number of species, including vulnerable or endangered species, such as the Barking or Powerful Owls. Council’s Environmental Scientist – Terrestrial advised that wildlife in a particular location can become accustomed to “typical” traffic conditions. Due to the substantial variability of traffic volumes associated with this proposed activity, there is a concern that wildlife areas could be adversely affected as a result of collisions with “abnormal” volumes of motor vehicles travelling through the area. This would be especially the case on days where the facility may have large numbers of day-trippers visiting for a meeting or event. When considering the development application, Council requests that Lithgow Council take into account the potential adverse impacts on local wildlife populations and habitats along the route to the property subject to the proposed development, in addition to any localised impacts on wildlife likely to be associated with the development. Cumulative impacts on local amenity The limited access to the property, combined with an unsealed road for a significant portion of the route will have impacts on local residential amenity, particularly with regard to dust and noise generated by a substantial increase in road users. This is an issue that has already been conveyed to Council in discussions with a number of residents. The Megalong Valley is one of the few areas in the Blue Mountains that has relatively unconstrained land that can be used for a variety of low-intensity rural activities, low-intensity and limited tourist activities (holiday cabins or bed and breakfast establishments). Council is concerned that a substantial development of this nature could provide a catalyst for other comparable developments. When considering the difficulties in getting access to the Megalong generally, along with issues of on-site effluent disposal, intensified development of the nature proposed is considered inappropriate and is likely to have substantial adverse impacts on the rural amenity of the area with regard to demands for road improvements, effluent management, and impacts on wildlife and habitats, which have been discussed above. Conclusion On the basis of advice provided by relevant staff from Blue Mountains City Council, I am of the view that this development is likely to generate substantial adverse impacts on the amenity and intrinsic characteristics of the Megalong Valley as a low-intensity rural area. Therefore, I strongly request that when considering the application as submitted to Lithgow Council, the impacts on the Blue Mountains City Council area be taken into account.


Attachment 1

If you have further questions in respect of this matter, please contact Bill Langevad, Acting Manager – Strategic Planning, on (02) 4780 5759; or David Hewetson, Senior Strategic Planner, on (02) 4780 5512 during business hours. Yours faithfully MICHAEL WILLIS General Manager


ITEM NO: 17 SUBJECT: FOOTPATH USAGE FEES FILE NO: C01343 Recommendation: That Council reaffirm the footpath usage fee as adopted in the 2004/05 Management Plan of $150.00 per lineal metre of frontage per annum subject to the following variations: 1. Business operators with a frontage of greater than 5 metres be given the

opportunity to indicate whether they wish to use all or part of the frontage. 2. Only that part of the frontage that is useable within terms of the footpath usage

policy be included. 3. A promotional stand, or the like, of less than 1 m2 shall incur a flat fee of $150.00

per annum on the basis of one stand per business and no other part of the frontage being used.

Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental & Customer Services: Introduction The Management Plan and Revenue Policy were exhibited during April and May 2004. A component of the Revenue Policy was the Schedule of Fees and Charges for Council’s services in 2004, which contained an increased fee for the use of the footpath by participating businesses for dining or the storage of goods. A letter dated 18 August 2004, was subsequently forwarded to the operators of approximately 90 businesses throughout the Mountains, indicating that the fee for the use of the footpath for dining or storage of goods had increased. The letter requested an expression of interest from business operators in continuing with their current arrangements. The change in fee structure has generated considerable community debate and Council, through a Mayoral Minute at the Ordinary Meeting of the 21st September 2004 adopted the following:

“1. That staff provide a report to Council providing mechanisms to assess the fee structure for the use of footpath space for dining and promotional purposes, which takes into account those businesses which are using substantially less space than their shop frontage.

2. That Council suspend the issue of further invoices until that report has

come to Council.”


Background A policy to permit the use of Council’s footpath was introduced in 1998 and since that time business operators have paid a flat annual fee of $210 (originally $200) for the footpath space, irrespective of the length of the footpath frontage. Approval to use the footpath is ongoing, subject to payment of the annual fee, and submission to Council of the relevant public liability insurance information. The increase in the lease/rental fee from $210 per premises to $150 per lineal metre of frontage was included in the Fees and Charges to provide a fair return to Council for the use of the asset and to offset the cost of monitoring and administering the scheme. By far the most time consuming aspect of this activity is the follow up of insurance annually and the inspections of the premises participating. Costs incurred by Council in administrating the program include:

• Annual notification of the need to renew the approval to all operators. • Inspection of premises and assessment of insurance coverage. • Database management of the approval given. • Provide a response to complaints received about footpath dining and storage. • Issuing the Certificate of Continuing Approval. • Commencing in 2003/04, a quarterly monitoring program had been planned to

respond to complaints received about the activity. While the administrative and inspection programs are a relative constant, the return on the use of asset is variable according to the amount of frontage used. Up until the fee proposed in the Management Plan, the annual flat rate gave no consideration of the variation between users. Some applicants have made observations to Council staff that the flat fee was unfair as people with larger frontages were gaining more from the activity. Apart from the regulatory costs, there is an argument that there should be some consideration for the lease of the public asset that is being used for private gain, particularly as participation is discretionary. In this regard, Council’s Manager of Corporate Property Management and Governance has advised that the $100.00 m2 rate per annum would be considered to reflect a fair market value for rental of the footpath. Report The use of Council’s footpath for dining and display of goods for sale has both public and private benefits. It is also acknowledged that Council does receive complaints about the policy particularly concerning untidiness and obstruction to other users. On the positive side, it does add atmosphere to the streetscape and if managed well, makes a positive contribution to the City. What has also become apparent, particularly in some townships, is the belief that the invitation to participate in footpath dining or the storage of goods on the footpath creates the visual impression that the shop is ‘open for business’ particularly during colder periods when the front door may be closed for weather reasons.


Following Council’s letter to existing operators in August 2004, Council received complaints and representations in response to the fee increase. In response to the concerns raised, Council staff met with a delegation of shopkeepers on 27 August 2004, whereby the reasons put forward by petitioners for the displeasure with the new fee structure vary from world terrorism events, the SARS crisis, the lack of forewarning of the increase, the downturn in tourism, the bushfires, seasonal usage, the plight of small businesses, the perceived unfairness in that the bigger the business frontage, the bigger the rental fee irrespective of whether the whole area is used and additionally, smaller businesses indicated that the fee was unfair relative to the quantity or articles stored on the footpath. At the same time however, 45 businesses operators after receiving Council’s letter, indicated a willingness to continue to use the footpath under the new fee structure. The corresponding fees charged for footpath usage by other Councils vary substantially in monetary terms, depending on the location and market demand. The methods used by other Councils for determining fees for footpath dining/storage vary from charging a fee:

Per table, or Per chair, or Per square metre, or Per lineal metre, or A flat rental fee.

There are practical considerations in the variety of methods listed above for calculating fees. The difficulty of charging on the basis of the number of tables and chairs is that the type and standard of furniture varies from business to business. To calculate it on this basis would incur greater costs to Council in physically measuring the street furniture of each operator. A lineal metre rate is much easier to nominate and check during routine compliance inspections. Council officers have conducted a survey of other Council areas that permit the use of footpaths for dining and storage activity, gathering a variety of information. This research has indicated that in Sydney City and Inner City Local Government Areas, the fee for street dining ranged from around $110 per m2 to $730 per m2. For Councils in the Western Sydney Local Government Areas, the range was from $30 per m2 to $350 per m2.. The higher fees usually apply to areas where there is high demand for outdoors dining. The $150 per lineal metre adopted in the 2004/05 Management Plan equates to $100m2 for footpath dining and $214.29 for footpath storage. The difference is attributable to the variation of allowable width of footpath used for the different uses. For footpath dining, the maximum allowable width that can be utilised is 1.5m out from the shop front. For storage and display purposes, it is a maximum of 700mm. The difference in allowable width between the uses reflects the different intensity between the two uses. While the fee structure may seem to favour dining usage, the use of the shop frontage for storage and display of goods for sale is usually somewhat higher than dining tables and utilises the entire space along the frontage used provided there is no safety hazard posed. Further, a person stopping to view stored items encroaches into the available footpath width. The decrease in allowable width for storage is aimed at ensuring sufficient space is left for customers to look at stored items without overly hindering pedestrian movement.


From the information received about the charges levied by other Councils, the fee in Council’s 2004/05 Management Plan is consistent with a middle range charge relative to other Councils in the Western Sydney Local Government Area. The City of Blue Mountains attracts a higher tourist population than other Western Sydney areas which would add to the demand for footpath usage. Furthermore it is considered that the proposed fee is consistent with retail rental charges throughout the Mountains. At the present time, invoices have not been forwarded to any business involved in the scheme. The intended $150 per lineal metre was seen as correcting an unfair ‘one size fits all’ approach while at the same time, providing a fair financial return to Council. From the perspective of a business operator, the fee increase will mean for example, an average premises with a 5 metre wide frontage will be charged 4 x $150 = $600, on the basis that the doorway width of most premises is approximately 1 metre wide and cannot be practically used for either dining or storage. It is recognised that in some cases, there will need to be some flexibility in regard to the width of the doorway and the frontage that can be used will be required. There will be circumstances where the entire frontage cannot be used, as there are other obstructions such as electricity poles, garbage bins and other street furniture items that would prevent the operator from utilising that part of the footpath. In these circumstances, it would be fair to allow the operator to nominate these areas to be excluded. Similarly, for businesses with greater than 5m of useable frontage or happen to have two frontages with only one being used, the operator should be given the opportunity to nominate the actual frontage used and be charged accordingly. Another type of usage that has come to light are those operators who choose to only place a small stand, a rack or table on the footpath for the purpose of creating awareness that the business is open. These types of businesses will generally be smaller in number however it is acknowledged that the fee applied to the entire frontage is unreasonable in this instance. In this case, a flat fee would seem to be a fair fee for this use. The limitation of use for seasonal reasons has also been put forward as a reason why the charges should be reviewed. It is acknowledged there are times when weather conditions would prevent footpath usage, however this would apply to all Local Government areas. In the Blue Mountains, the weather impact is usually the greatest when wet or cold. In other areas, it would be when wet or too hot. On balance, the fee adopted is in the mid range and is considered to reflect a reasonable fee for the usage. The recommended fee structure was outlined to the shopkeepers’ representative with the offer of a further meeting with Council staff. This offer was unable to be taken up due to difficulties in arranging a time convenient to the group members. Further, advice was provided as to when the full Council Report would be publicly available and that there is an opportunity for representatives to address the Council Meeting. Recommendations Having regard to the review of the application of the new fee structure, the following is recommended:


1. That the rental fee of $150 per lineal metre, as previously determined by Council,

be adhered to. 2. That business operators with a business frontage of more than 5 metres be given the

opportunity to indicate whether they wish to use all or part of the frontage. 3. A promotional stand, or the like, of less than 1 square metre in size shall incur a flat

fee of $150 per annum and shall be permitted on the basis of one stand per premises.

4. The fee structure be reviewed prior to the 2005/06 budget and be prominently

advertised. Conclusion It is concluded that the fee as adopted in the 2004/05 Management Plan is a reasonable reflection of the costs and benefits associated with the use. The new fee structure with the amendments contained in the recommendation is equitable and represents a fair return to Council for the regulatory and administrative aspects of the policy and for the private use of the community asset.


ITEM NO: 18 SUBJECT: APPLICATION NO. O/1445/2004 FOR THE REZONING OF LOTS 1

AND 2 DP 1009510, NO. 36 MOUNT STREET AND NO. 63 KINGS ROAD, LEURA

FILE NO: Z11/021 Recommendations: 1. That pursuant to Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act,

1979, Council prepare Local Environmental Plan No. 154 amending Local Environmental Plan No. 4 and Local Environmental Plan No. 1 amending Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 as detailed in Attachment 1 and providing for the following:

• Rezone Lot 1 and Lot 2 of DP 1009510; 36 Mount Street and 63 Kings Road

Leura to allow for an additional land use by:

amending Schedule 7 of Local Environmental Plan No 4 by inserting the following wording “36 Mount Street and 63 Kings Road, Leura (Lots 1 and 2 of DP 1009510) as shown edged heavy in black on the map marked “Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan No. 154” – development for the purposes of tourist accommodation”; and

amending Clause 6 of Local Environmental Plan No. 4 by inserting within

the definition of “the map” after Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan No. 148 – Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan No. 154; and

amending Clause 6 of Local Environmental Plan No. 4 by inserting the

following definition:

“tourist accommodation” means a building or buildings providing for short term visitor accommodation and recreation which use, adapt or complement the existing building or buildings and which may include a refreshment room and space capable of being used for functions such as receptions, conventions or the like.

• Rezone Lot 1 and Lot 2 in DP 1009510; 36 Mount Street and 63 Kings Road

Leura to allow for an additional land use by amending Schedule 8 of Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 (as adopted by Council on 9 October 2003) by inserting the following wording:

ALU04 - 36 Mount Street and 63 Kings Road, Leura

Land at 36 Mount Street and 63 Kings Road, Leura zoned as Living Bushland Conservation for the purposes of tourist accommodation.


2. That the Director of Planning be advised that in Council’s opinion a Local

Environmental Study is not required to be carried out in accordance with Section 57 of the Act.

3. That Council exercise its delegations to exhibit the draft amendments. Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Reason for report Council has received an application to amend the land use

zoning of the subject site to allow for the use of the site as tourist accommodation. In order to facilitate this Council is required to decide whether to prepare a Local Environmental Plan in accordance with Clause 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (E P and A Act). This report and its recommendations if adopted by Council, will enable the proposed LEP amendment to progress to the consultation stage of the process. At the conclusion of the consultation phase, a further report to Council will be required in order to make the amendment.

Applicant/Owner

Mr M F Hennessy

Application lodged

11 June 2004

Site Description The site consists of two separate adjoining parcels of land

located at the southwestern junction of Mount Street and Kings Road, Leura. The site has frontages to Mount Street and Kings Road. The site has an approximate total area of 2500m2. The site drains to the northwest and northeast. The highest point of the subject site is 958 metres above sea level at the southwestern corner of the site and the lowest point is 951 metres along the Kings Road frontage. A mix of native and exotic species exists on site. The site has been revegetated with native species in recent years as part of site improvements. Four main buildings (two on each allotment) exist on the site. These are referred to in the following manner:


Lot 1:

• The “Straw Bale House” comprising a two storey residence

with two living areas, three bathrooms and five bedrooms. The gross floor area of the building is approximately 297.6m2. Council approval was granted 4 February 2000 as a dwelling house (reference no. X/1958/1999).

• The “Studio” comprising a bedroom, a bathroom and

kitchenette. The gross floor area is approximately 23.8 square metres. Council approval was granted on the 4 February 2000 for the structure as a studio (reference no. X/1958/1999).

Lot 2: • The “Worker’s Cottage”: as the original residence on the

property this building contains three bedrooms, two bathrooms and a kitchen and faces east to Mount Street. The gross floor area is approximately 90 square metres. This building is likely to have been constructed in the inter war period of the early twentieth century with more recent additions and renovations.

• The “Milking Shed”: this building according to rates notices

was originally an outbuilding or garage. A heritage assessment of the site disqualifies the previous use of this building as a milking shed. Improvements to the building were approved by Council in April 2002 (X02/0401). The building now comprises a living area, meal preparation areas, bathroom and a bedroom on the mezzanine level. The gross floor area is approximately 80.4m2.

The buildings on the subject site are currently used for the purposes of tourist accommodation, providing short term self contained accommodation within four buildings on two allotments. Breakfast provisions are available and the proprietors organise catering where required. No commercial kitchens operate from the subject site. The site has the capacity to accommodate up to twenty-three (23) persons. Small conferences or workshops can be held by corporate or community groups within the milking shed or studio. It is contended that the site presents the appearance of a single dwelling on each allotment with ancillary buildings.


The surrounding locality is characterised by detached single

dwelling houses on relatively large allotments. The locality has a bushland character with outlooks to the National Park to the north. Streets within the vicinity run along the northern ridges convergent to the Great Western Highway. The original subdivision of the locality was undertaken in 1907 and was known as the Marmion Estate subdivision. Many of the original dwellings erected on surrounding allotments were burnt in the 1947 bushfires. As a consequence there are a variety of housing styles and forms reflecting different periods as dwellings were rebuilt and built over a long period of time.

Background

Several applications have been received by Council over the past 5 years in relation to the subject site. These are outlined below: • Subdivision approval was granted on 24 May 1999 for a 3

into 2 lot subdivision. The subdivision sought to alleviate boundary encroachments created by the existing dwelling and shed structure and to create a new parcel of land unencumbered by structures and available for development; (S99/0019).

• Approval was granted for a two storey rendered dwelling and studio on 4 February 2000 at 36 Mount Street, (X99/1958).

• Council approved additions to a workshop building on 63 Kings Road on 23 April 2003 (X02/0401). This was in addition to the existing dwelling on the site.

As a consequence of the above approvals the subject site now has four (4) structures. Each lot contains one (1) approved dwelling and an ancillary structure (studio/ workshop). The applicant sought verbal advice regarding the use of the premises for holiday lets. It was the applicant’s understanding that the premises could be utilised for holiday lets. However the subsequent use of the premises did not accord with Council’s definition of “Holiday Let.” This matter is discussed further in the Report. Council has not granted approval for the use of the subject site for tourist accommodation. The technical assessment of the two approvals issued in 2000 and 2002 provided for a dwelling on each allotment and ‘studios’ as ancillary buildings to the two dwellings. A studio does not constitute a separate dwelling and does not have all the facilities of a separate domicile. Most commonly a studio may contain a shower/ bathroom but does not provide for food preparation areas.


Studios must be used in conjunction with the primary dwelling

on a site. In this instance the buildings are able to be inhabited separately. Council became aware of the use of the site for tourist accommodation in late 2003. Following consultation with the proprietors, Council requested the removal of the kitchenettes from the studio and workshop and to restrict the use of the site to the definition of Holiday Let which permits the renting out of a single dwelling on an allotment. The proprietors of the subject premises have given notice that they would comply with Council’s requirements and began investigating avenues to legitimise the tourist accommodation on the subject site. One of the options canvassed was a rezoning application which was seen as an appropriate way of dealing with the matter.

Proposal

It is proposed to amend Council’s planning instruments to permit the ongoing use of the subject site for tourist accommodation. Whilst the buildings (excepting the internal kitchens in the Studio and Milking Shed) have approval; the current use of the premises for tourist accommodation is not approved and is not permitted on the subject site due to the residential zoning of the site. The LEP amendment process will not change the overall zoning of the site. It will allow through amending the Schedules of the LEP, this one additional land use for this particular site. As the property operates as one land use it is envisaged that a condition of development consent would be imposed to consolidate the two allotments into one parcel of land. A copy of the plans showing the site area and extent of the buildings including the present use of the buildings are provided in Attachment 2 to this Report.

Alternatives to the proposal

Other avenues to legitimize the present use of the subject site have been investigated. These are outlined below: Holiday let – is defined within Draft LEP 2002 as meaning: “…the use of a dwelling house for short term paid accommodation where visitors or tourists stay for a period of less than 3 months and have a principal place of residence elsewhere but does not include a use elsewhere defined in this Dictionary”


This definition cannot be utilised in this instance as more than

one separate domicile is provided on each allotment. In addition the arrangements include catering and the provision of conference/workshop facilities, thus going beyond the definition of holiday let. Bed and Breakfast – is defined within Draft LEP 2002 as being: “(a) a dwelling house that has been constructed, adapted or altered to provide short term accommodation for no more than 6 visitors at any one time, and (b) provides that accommodation within non more than 3 bedrooms, and (c) is designed to enable the use of other rooms within the dwelling-house for activities associated with the accommodation, and (d) is connected to a reticulated sewerage system, and (e) is operated solely by the permanent residents (who may include the owner) of the dwelling house, and (f) is so operated as to provide for the consumption of food on the premises only by permanent residents and guests of the bed and breakfast establishment, but does not include a refreshment room”: The proprietors do not live on the subject site and more than six (6) people can be accommodated on each allotment, thereby excluding consideration of the land use under this definition. Heritage provisions within Draft LEP 2002 allow for the use of land, not otherwise permissible within the zone, if the subject site is a heritage item and if the use of the site as proposed is in accordance with a Conservation Management Plan or if the proposed use of the site would retain the heritage significance of the site. The heritage significance of the premises has been investigated and found to be insubstantial in relation to the potential for listing the property as a heritage item. Having regard to the option considered, the proposal is considered to be defined as tourist accommodation under the provisions of Draft LEP 2002. The definition reads as follows: “Means a building or buildings providing for short term visitor accommodation and recreation which use, adapt or complement the existing building or buildings and which may include a refreshment room and space capable of being used for functions such as receptions, conventions or the like.”


This is considered the most appropriate definition, particularly

given the number of buildings within the property and the use of the buildings for small conventions. If the site was rezoned, it would allow for the applicant to lodge a development application to legitimise its use.

Development controls

Zoning: Residential 2 (a1) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4, and ‘Living Bushland Conservation’ under Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002: Development Control Plan No. 29—Car Parking Sydney Regional Environmental Plan – Hawkesbury Nepean (SREP20)

Public and Statutory Authority Notification

The application has not been publicly exhibited or notified to relevant Statutory Authorities at this stage, however this would be formally carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, should Council resolve to support the rezoning proposal and proceed to exhibition of the draft Plan.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is presently zoned Residential 2(a1) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4 and is proposed to be zoned Living Bushland Conservation under the provisions of Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002. Both the current and the proposed zones do not permit the use of land for tourist accommodation. In order for Council to permit the subject site to be used for the purposes of tourist accommodation, it is necessary to amend the provisions of Local Environmental Plan No. 4. Because of the imminence of Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002, it is recommended that the processes to amend this plan be also undertaken at this stage.

Assessment of Proposal The application before Council seeks to amend Local Environmental Plan No. 4 and to commence proceedings to amend Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 once gazetted, so that the current use of the site for tourist accommodation may be permissible with consent allowing for future consideration of a development application for tourist accommodation.


Tourist accommodation is not permissible within low density residential zones due to the generally higher impact and higher intensity use associated with tourist accommodation, thereby making it a potentially conflicting use with residential development. The applicant contends that the present use of the site does not impart a higher intensity use of the site. The present configuration of the development has the appearance of two detached dwellings on two parcels of land and it is argued that the use is only marginally more intense than a bed and breakfast establishment. The existing Residential 2(a1) and the proposed Living Bushland Conservation objectives and standards will remain applicable to the site which will limit potential future development of the site. Relevant issues and aspects in support of the proposal include: • The current use has been established for two years and has not generated any

complaints. The applicant has provided a petition from adjoining residents in support of the proposal with 8 signatories.

• The development provides medium sized accommodation and supplements the tourist industry.

• Existing development does not impart strains on the local road network. Car parking facilities are provided on site.

• Existing development has incorporated ‘best practice principles’ in terms of eco-design; utilising recycled materials and low water use garden and stormwater design.

In consideration of the proposed amendment the following issues have been given preliminary assessment: Bushfire Risk The subject site is designated as being bushfire prone. A rezoning application is not integrated development under the provisions of the E P & A Act, however the use of the site would require a development application subsequent to the gazettal of the rezoning process. This development application would be integrated and would be forwarded to the Rural Fire Service for assessment. The proposed rezoning would be subject to Section 62 consultation and initial comments from the Rural Fire Service will be solicited at that stage. The applicant has lodged a bushfire hazard assessment to accompany the rezoning proposal. This assessment recommends that additional bushfire protection measures be implemented including: • the provision of a 10,000 litre water tank with a petrol or diesel pump • occupant evacuation plan • retrofitting of the Workers Cottage • sprinkler system around the perimeter

It would appear that the development may be retrofitted in order to comply with the relevant requirements.


Car Parking and Access The existing site provides seven (7) car parking spaces on site. Under Council’s Development Control Plan No. 29—Car Parking (DCP 29) tourist accommodation generates parking at the rate of one (1) space per unit and two (2) spaces per three (3) employees. In this instance, a unit is determined by the number of bathrooms contained within each of the structures. There are seven (7) bathrooms throughout the subject site. Staff are not employed on site but are contracted to clean the units after each occupancy. This allows for dual use of the car parking spaces on site, however the provision of one (1) additional car parking space is considered reasonable to ensure that overflow car parking does not encroach on the surrounding streets. It should be noted that there have been no complaints received by Council in relation to the operation of the site, indicating that issues such as noise and overflow parking are not interfering with the amenity of the locality. Council's requirements for any subsequent development consent would include: • 8 car parking space and the access driveway to be sealed and designed in accordance

with Australian Standards for off street car parking AS 2890.1/2004 ensuring forward entry and exit movements;

• Apron crossings across the footway area to be reconstructed in heavy duty reinforced concrete crossings designed in accordance with Council’s “specifications for dwelling driveways”;

• All stormwater runoff generated from the impervious areas of the site to be collected and piped to the public road via an underground stormwater system.

These conditions may be imposed, as part of any development consent should Council support the proposed rezoning. Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 The site is located within a sub-catchment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River and is therefore affected by the provisions of SREP 20. The proposal is considered to be consistent with the aims and strategies of the SREP in the following manner: • Stormwater is managed on site with on site detention systems. • The site is serviced by reticulated sewerage. • The use of the premises does not involve any additional buildings on site; any future

works required as a result of a future development consent (such as driveway construction) will require the retention of stormwater on site or connection to Council’s drainage easements.


Accessibility The buildings would not meet the requirements for accessibility as described in Clause 100 of the Draft LEP 2002 which requires that: “(2) in the case of development that comprises 5 dwellings or accommodation suites, at

least 20 per cent of all dwellings or accommodation suites (to the nearest whole number) shall be accessible to people with a disability….

(3) Tourist accommodation, bed and breakfast establishments and boarding houses shall be designed so that all common amenities (toilet laundry facilities, games room etc) shall be accessible to people with a disability”

The structures have been approved without the need to comply with these clauses. Consent for tourist accommodation would result in adjustments to the building at the development application stage to achieve compliance with this clause. The works required to bring the buildings into compliance should be possible. Utilities The subject site is serviced by reticulated water and sewerage. Should Council support the proposed rezoning process Sydney Water will be notified at Section 62 stage of the process. All other utilities are available on site. Stormwater retention pits were installed in conjunction with the alterations and additions approved by Council in conjunction with development consents X02/0401 and X99/1958. Amenity The use of the premises for tourist accommodation at the subject site has not had an impact on the residential amenity of the surrounding locality. This is largely a result of the building capacity on site. The style of the buildings are consistent with the single detached dwellings within the locality and the number of visitors to the site is controlled by the number of bedrooms. Car parking is contained within the site. Should Council rezone the site to allow for an Additional Land Use it is unlikely that there will be future adverse impacts on the residential amenity of the locality due to the limited number of buildings and rooms on site. There is no proposal to expand the number of rooms and any proposal to do so would be subject to future development applications which would assess the impact of such proposal. As the use is considered to be of low impact, it does not require a Local Environmental Study in accordance with Section 57 of the Act.


Statutory Processes Should Council endorse the proposed rezoning, the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources will be advised of the resolution. Subsequent to this, relevant statutory authorities and adjoining local Councils will be notified of the proposal. The relevant authorities are considered to be: the Rural Fire Service, the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (Natural Resources), Sydney Water, the Heritage Office, Environment Protection Authority (now Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW)), Integral Energy and Telstra. Furthermore, based on the limited potential for impact on the surrounding locality and the assessment of the major issues as outlined previously in this report and in supporting documentation, it is considered that an environmental study (as defined by Section 57 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979) will not be required should Council resolve to support the proposal and prepare a Draft Local Environmental Plan. Should Council decide not to endorse the proposed rezoning, the site will need to revert to only those uses approved by Council. Conclusion The rezoning proposal seeks to provide for the ongoing use of the subject premises for a medium sized tourist accommodation business. Other land use categories currently permissible within the subject zone do not provide for the extent of the use proposed. The proposal whilst not permissible with consent within the zone complies with the principle objectives of the Draft LEP in that the development those being; • Clause 12(b)“….provides an appropriate balance of land uses and built forms that

respond to the principles of ecologically sustainable development.” and • Clause 12(h) “…identifies and retains the diverse built and landscape elements that

contribute to the character and image of the Blue Mountains.” and • Clause 12(k) “…promotes and strengthening the local economic base by providing

a range of sustainable employment opportunities that respond to lifestyle choices, emerging markets and changes in technology while protecting local amenity, character and environmental values.

The proposal therefore has merit and it is recommended that Council commence proceedings towards the rezoning of the subject site to allow for the additional land use permitting tourist accommodation.


ITEM NO: 19 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. X04/0383 FOR THE

PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF AND ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING MEDICAL CENTRE AND PHARMACY AT LOT 18 DP 239909, NO. 143 KATOOMBA STREET, KATOOMBA

FILE NO: X04/0383 Recommendation: That the Development Application No. X04/0383 for the partial demolition of and additions to the existing medical centre and pharmacy at Lot 18 DP 239909, No. 143 Katoomba Street, Katoomba be determined pursuant to Section 80 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 by refusing consent to the application for the following reasons: a) The proposed development does not comply with the relevant provisions of Local

Environmental Plan No. 4 in terms of floor space ratio and heights. b) The proposed development does not comply with the relevant provisions of draft

Local Environmental Plan 2002 in terms of floor space ratio and heights. c) The proposed development does not comply with the relevant provisions of

Development Control Plan 29 in terms of car parking. d) The proposed development is contrary to Section 79C (1)(b) in terms of

inappropriate scale that is antipathetic to the character of the surrounding area and being visually dominant.

e) The proposed development is contrary to Section 79C (1)(c) in terms of stormwater

management. The application has not demonstrated adequate management of stormwater flows.

Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Reason for report The application is referred to Council for determination as its

estimated work value is in excess of $1,000,000. Applicant

Rappoport Pty Ltd

Owner

Mr K Rizkalla

Application lodged

19 March 2004


Property address 143 Katoomba Street, Katoomba

T

JEWEL LN

PARKE ST

KATOOMBA ST

LURLINE STKATOOMBA ST

CHURCH LN

LURLINE ST

COLLEGE LN

COLLEGE LN

PARKE ST

777

71A71A71A71A71A71A71A71A71A

000000000

616161616161616161

595959595959595959444444444444444444 575757575757575757

424242424242424242

404040404040404040

757575757575757575

38A38A38A38A38A38A38A38A38A

737373737373737373

383838383838383838

717171717171717171

656565656565656565

63A63A63A63A63A63A63A63A63A

555555555555555555

515151515151515151

494949494949494949

30-3430-3430-3430-3430-3430-3430-3430-3430-34

42-5042-5042-5042-5042-5042-5042-5042-5042-50

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

363636363636363636

343434343434343434

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

181-185181-185181-185181-185181-185181-185181-185181-185181-185

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

171-175171-175171-175171-175171-175171-175171-175171-175171-175169169169169169169169169169

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

157157157157157157157157157

153153153153153153153153153

143143143143143143143143143135-137135-137135-137135-137135-137135-137135-137135-137135-137

193193193193193193193193193

131131131131131131131131131

119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129

189189189189189189189189189

81-8381-8381-8381-8381-8381-8381-8381-8381-83

119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129119-129115115115115115115115115115

103103103103103103103103103999999999999999999939393939393939393

898989898989898989

188188188188188188188188188

182182182182182182182182182

172172172172172172172172172166-170166-170166-170166-170166-170166-170166-170166-170166-170

160160160160160160160160160

152-154152-154152-154152-154152-154152-154152-154152-154152-154144144144144144144144144144

142142142142142142142142142

140140140140140140140140140

160160160160160160160160160

136-138136-138136-138136-138136-138136-138136-138136-138136-138130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134130-134

118118118118118118118118118

11211211211211211211211211223-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-27

100100100100100100100100100

434343434343434343

511515111

494949494949494949474747474747474747

313131313131313131

292929292929292929

23-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-2723-27

646464646464646464

606060606060606060

525252525252525252

505050505050505050484848484848484848

404040404040404040

404040404040404040

404040404040404040

363636363636363636

222222222

222

676767676767676767

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

545454545454545454

122-126122-126122-126122-126122-126122-126122-126122-126122-126

156-158156-158156-158156-158156-158156-158156-158156-158156-158

38-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-4038-40

484848484848484848

696969696969696969

Site description The subject land is situated on the western side of Katoomba

Street, centrally located within the Katoomba Town Centre. The site is rectangular in shape and is approximately 491m2 in area. It has 9 metre wide frontages to both Katoomba Street and Pioneer Place. A walk way (Penny Lane) is located to the north of the site and provides a pedestrian link between Katoomba Street and Pioneer Place. The site is developed with an existing 2 storey structure covering most of the site. The front building facing Katoomba Street is identified as a local heritage item. A range of retail and commercial uses, in single and 2 storey structures, adjoin the site to the north and south. The St Canice’s primary school is located directly to the east, with a public car park and other retail businesses located directly to the west.

Subject site


Proposal It is proposed to demolish the rear section of the existing

structure and to develop a 5 level commercial and residential development as follows: Basement – storage area, located beneath ground level; Ground floor- pharmacy, and entrance to medical centre; First floor - medical suites; Second floor - medical suites and training area; Third floor – 2 residential apartments for medical

practitioners.

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

Development controls

Zoning Business General 3(a) under Local Environmental Plan 4 Proposed Zoning Village Town Centre under Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002. Precinct—Katoomba Village (VTC KA01) Development Control Plan DCP 29 – Car Parking Section 94 Development Contribution Plan

Notification

The application was notified to eleven (11) adjoining and nearby properties as well as being advertised in the Blue Mountains Gazette. Notification was for a 14-day period between 7 April 2004 and 21 April 2004. No submissions were received as a result of this notification process.

Issues

Assessment issues: 1. Statutory Considerations. 2. Likely Impact. 3. Suitability of Site. Variation to Policy: 1. Clause 38, LEP 4 (Floor Space Ratio). 2. Clause 39, LEP 4 (Height)


Discussion of Issues 1. Statutory Considerations Local Environmental Plan No 4 The proposed development is assessed against the relevant provisions of LEP 4 in accordance with the requirements of Section 79C (1)(a)(i) of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. A comparison of the proposal against the relevant provisions of LEP 4 is summarised as follows:

Clause Standard Proposed Complies 9 Permissible land uses Retail, residential and medical

centre. Yes

38 Maximum FSR – 2:1 FSR – 2.85:1 (excluding basement area)

No

39 Maximum height – 2 Storeys Height – 4 storeys No

The applicant has requested a variation of Clauses 38 and 39 under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 (SEPP 1). A SEPP 1 objection allows flexibility when applying development standards to proposals where it can be shown that compliance with the standards would, in the particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary, or hinder the objectives in Section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the Act. The objectives of Section 5 broadly relate to the proper management of development and the promotion of orderly development of land. The basis of the submitted SEPP 1 objection is summarised as follows: a. Development is constrained within 25 metres of the Katoomba Street (front) façade

in order to facilitate preservation of the heritage item. b. The proposed FSR is in accordance with DLEP 2002. c. Basement storage is below ground and does not contribute to bulk or scale. d. The building bulk and scale does not produce overdevelopment or overshadowing

of the surrounding public domain. e. Building bulk has primarily been located to the Pioneer Place (rear) façade where it

does not appear out of character with its surroundings. It is accepted that the development is somewhat constrained within 25 metres of the Katoomba Street frontage, due mainly to the heritage item, however it is noted that the existing roof of the item has a high point of 9.1 metres and supports an existing 2 storey building. This constraint could lend some weight to a variation in height to the rear of the site, although not to the extent requested.


The constraint is not considered to lend weight to the significant variation of FSR requested. Contrary to points b. and c. above, the calculated FSR used in this assessment already excludes the basement area. The prescribed FSR, combined with the prescribed height requirement, guides development in terms of setting an appropriate scale that is sustainable in terms of the character and economic development of the town centre. Council’s Environmental Management Plan, which outlines the planning considerations that guided the provisions and objectives of DLEP2002, identifies the Katoomba Town Centre as having a built environment that is derived from a traditional shopping strip streetscape and a diverse mix of building forms and styles. The scale of development set by the FSR is important in terms of allowing suitable development whilst preserving the historical scale of the town centre. It is considered that the proposed bulk and scale of the building to the Pioneer Place elevation is out of character with the existing buildings in the locality. The side elevations are inappropriately visible and result in a development contrary to the desired character of the surrounding area. Whilst, the submitted SEPP1 objection shows that strict compliance with Clause 39 (Height) can be considered unnecessary due to the imminence of DLEP 2002 it has not shown the same in terms of Clause 38 (FSR). It is considered that the proposed variation does not result in a development that encourages proper management of resources or the promotion of orderly development of land. Therefore the SEPP 1 objection is not supported. The submission does not show that compliance with Clause 38 is unnecessary and the resultant development generally hinders the objectives of Section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Draft Local Environmental Plan 2002 The proposed development is assessed against the relevant provisions of DLEP 2002 in accordance with the requirements of Section 79C (1)(a)(ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. A comparison of the proposal against the relevant provisions is summarised as follows:

Clause Standard Proposed Complies 32 Permissible land uses. Retail, residential and medical

centre Yes

75 Development in the curtilage of a heritage item shall not: • Obscure views or overshadow • Physically damage the item • Have an adverse impact

• Heritage Impact Statement provided.

• Development setback from main frontage and separate from heritage elements

A heritage assessment of the proposal is outlined in the Likely Impact section of this report.

Yes


Katoomba Village Town Centre - Precinct KA01

Clause Standard Proposed Complies 3 • Maximum height 11m

• Primary setback 0m • Side setback 0m • Maximum FSR 1.5:1

• Proposed height 14.3m • Primary setback 0m • Side setback 0m • Proposed FSR 2.85:1

• No • Yes • Yes • No

The DLEP allows an increase in the defined maximum height to 13 metres in situations where adjacent buildings have a maximum height greater than 11 metres. The existing building to the north of the development, fronting Pioneer Place, has a maximum height of approximately 7.1 metres whilst the building to the south is 4.8 metres. These heights are typical of the remainder of frontages along Pioneer Place. It is clear that the 13 metre provision would not be appropriate if applied to the subject site and, if it were approved, would establish a height regime that could change the surrounding area beyond that envisaged by the DLEP 2002. The submitted material suggests that a three storey presentation is retained to Pioneer Place, which is achieved by the fourth level being stepped back 3 metres from the boundary. It is noted that the main façade of the proposed building itself is setback 1 metre from the rear boundary. The further 2 metres setback of the fourth level does not visually screen it from public view due to the multi level nature of the surrounding retail, pedestrian and car parking areas. Clause 3 of the KA01 precinct allows an increase in the FSR from 1.5:1 to 2:1 only if the proposal can demonstrate that it: Significantly enhances the public domain. Significantly enhances pedestrian amenity. Provides public places and plazas Provides residential uses where a minimum of 65% residential use is provided in the

additional floor space. It is noted that the proposed FSR at 2.85:1 already exceeds the allowable increase of 2:1, and represents an area of approximately 405m2. Additionally, the residential component of the development is approximately 210.4m2 in area, or 32% of the additional floor area. The proposed development does not alter the existing retail activity along its Katoomba Street frontage although it does improve its appearance. The development also provides some retail activity along its secondary frontage to Pioneer Place, which is currently faced with a brick wall. The proposed northern (side) elevation is considered to overcrowd Penny Lane due to its proposed height and presentation. The development is inappropriate when assessed against the principles of Safer by Design (CPTED), as it does not afford adequate surveillance opportunities or provide open pedestrian traffic routes. This situation results in an area that would be uninviting and that does not encourage pedestrian activity.


It is considered that the excess in FSR contributes to a scale of development that is out of character with the surrounding area and exceeds that allowed under DLEP 2002 for nearby sites in this precinct. Whilst, the proposed development improves the existing presentation to Katoomba Street and provides some public activity to Pioneer Place, overall the development does not meet the requirements outlined above and therefore the allowable increase in FSR from 1.5:1 to 2:1 is not supported.

Development Control Plan No 29 The proposed development is assessed against the relevant provisions of DCP 29 – Car Parking in accordance with the requirements of Section 79C (1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. A comparison of the existing and proposed use against the relevant provisions of DCP 29 is summarised as follows:

Existing Development Parking Requirements Total

Retail (Pharmacy) 1 space per 25m2 of gross floor area 5 Medical Centre (12 rooms) 3 spaces per consulting room 36 TOTAL 41

Proposed Development Parking Requirements Total

Retail (Pharmacy) 1 space per 25m2 of gross floor area 18 Medical Centre (20 rooms) 3 spaces per consulting room 60 Residential apartments 1 space per dwelling (< 125m2)

1 space visitor parking 2 1

TOTAL 81 On-site parking was not provided for the existing use of the site and the proposed development does not include additional on-site parking. As indicated above, the existing use of the site has a parking requirement of 41 cars with the proposed development having a parking requirement of 81 cars, a resultant increase of 40 cars. A traffic assessment report was submitted with the application in support of the proposed development, however this report concluded that the proposed development has a parking requirement of 64 cars. This divergence from the above table results from the traffic assessment report calculating a number of the proposed suites on the first floor and all the proposed suites on the second floor as professional suites, which potentially has a lower traffic generation rate to that of a medical centre. However, these suites are identified as being used by range of medical practitioners, including dentist, chiropractor, physiotherapist and gynaecologist. It is considered on the basis of intended use that the proposed suites are appropriately assessed as a medical centre. Therefore, the appropriate parking requirement associated with this proposed development is 81 cars.


The traffic assessment report undertook a count of available parking in the surrounding area, including on-street parking and parking to adjoining public and commercial car parking areas. The counts were undertaken over a 3 day period in October 2003 being Thursday and Friday between 9:00am and 8:00pm, and Saturday between 9:00am and 2:00pm. The traffic assessment report reached the following conclusions: a. On-street demand was variable but with a peak between 11:00am and 3:00pm

Friday with 17 spaces available. b. Public car park areas had a peak demand at 12:00 midday on Thursday and Friday

with 24 spaces available. c. Commercial car park areas had a peak demand at 12:00 midday on Thursday and

Friday with 20 spaces available. d. That a decrease in demand should be considered due to a complementary use that

exists between the medical centre and the pharmacy. e. That a further decrease in demand should be considered due to the 2 residential

apartments for medical practitioners being located in the same building and for medical practitioners only.

f. That many people will attend the pharmacy/medical centre whilst in the town centre

on other business. Points d) to f) above are accepted, but are considered to have a marginal impact on the identified traffic generation rate. The submitted traffic assessment report has not calculated the potential impact of these elements. It is noted that all the periods identified above have reasonably high traffic counts for both on-street and identified car parking areas. Traffic counts leading up to the cut off time on Saturday are also identified a being reasonably strong. A Katoomba Town Centre study was undertaken for Council in September 1998. The study includes the conclusion that existing car parking in the town centre should increase by 38% to cater for the existing traffic generation rate. The traffic assessment report is considered inadequate with the periods being counted considered small, and no justification provided of the times used. The assessment report should include a repetition of periods to allow for the identification of anomalies, including a calculation of potential seasonal and tourist variations. Section 94 Contributions The proposed development would be subject to the provisions of Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, which enables Council to levy contributions from developers for the provision of amenities and services required as a consequence of development. In November 2003, Council adopted a Contribution Plan with a rate of $15,000 per car space in the Katoomba Town Centre. This rate would result in a required total contribution of $600,000, if the application was approved.


2. Likely Impact Visibility The proposed development is primarily visible from Pioneer Place, which provides access to the main public car park and surrounding retail area. It has a resultant high rate of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The rear and side elevations are not considered to be of an appropriate built scale or be consistent with the existing or potential future development in the vicinity. The applicant submits that the potential social benefit of the proposed development is paramount with an increased number of medical services provided in greatly improved facilities. It is acknowledged that the proposed development provides a social benefit, however, it has not been shown why other proposals, with a reduced adverse visual impact are not as viable. The proposed development is considered to result in a proposal that is highly visible and out of character with the surrounding area. The increased visibility of this development is not in keeping with the low rise commercial premises and scale of the surrounding area. Heritage The subject site is identified as a proposed local heritage item under the draft Blue Mountains Heritage Inventory (Item K097). The section facing Katoomba Street is identified as being built in 1916 and is considered a reasonably intact example of a Federation period commercial building. Previous modifications to the item include alteration of the northern and central shopfronts, the central awning and the arcade. The structure to the rear of the heritage item, facing Pioneer Place, was constructed in approximately the 1960’s but is not identified as having significant aesthetic or heritage value. The proposed development includes the remodelling of the shop façade to Katoomba Street and restoration of finished material. Some concern is raised in relation to the proposed opening of the heritage item’s northern (Penny Lane) elevation, as this area is visible from Katoomba Street. The proposed openings were intended to provide public access to the new medical centre. However, the concern could be reduced by alteration of the proposed layout. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to alter the layout, which could be incorporated into any conditions of consent. All other modifications are considered to be well separated from the original heritage item and not to change the existing significant fabric of the building. Connection between the item and the proposed new building shall be located to the rear of the item, be of light weight construction and be reversible.


3. Suitability of Site A number of issues have arisen in relation to the overland stormwater to the site in relation to a low point that exists within Penny Lane. The collected stormwater is unable to be effectively drained due to the location of the proposed building as well as by other adjoining buildings. This will result in the pooling of water during storm events until it can flow out of Penny Lane into Katoomba Street. This scenario effectively makes Penny Lane inaccessible during heavy storm events. The application does not adequately address the issue of the stormwater and drainage and creates a potential access and pedestrian issue. Conclusion The proposed development is considered to be inappropriate in terms of resulting scale and character and does not result in a development that is consistent with the potential future development in the area. The applicant has advised that “With respect to the other issues that you have raised in your letters dated 3 and 27 March, we would like you to assess the DA on the basis of the information you already have and confirm that we will not be providing any further details in relation to those questions.” The issues referred to above include non-compliance with LEP 4 and DLEP 2002, inadequate car parking, presentation and pedestrian amenity, finished material, energy efficiency, inadequate stormwater management. Given the issues raised above, it is recommended that the application be refused for the reasons stated in the recommendation to this Report.


Attachment 1 - Elevations


ITEM NO: 20 SUBJECT: DRAFT BLUE MOUNTAINS LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN

1991 (AMENDMENT NO. 33) TO REZONE LOT 2 DP 749100 AND LOT 126 DP 751644, NO. 222-286 DARLING CAUSEWAY, BELL TO PART BUSHLAND CONSERVATION (NO SUBDIVISION) AND PART ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

FILE NO: Z01/003 Recommendation: That Draft Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Amendment No. 33) included as Attachment 1 to this Report, together with all accompanying documentation required pursuant to Section 69 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, be submitted to the Minister for Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources requesting that the Plan be made. Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Reason for Report Council at its meeting on 9 July 2002 resolved to prepare and

exhibit draft Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Amendment No. 33) in accordance with Section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The period of public exhibition has now been completed and resolution as to whether or not to refer the draft Plan to the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning must also be the decision of the Council. The full Report that led to this resolution is provided as Attachment 2 to this Report.

Applicant

Craven Elliston & Hayes Pty Ltd

Owner

Coalpac Pty Ltd

Application lodged

21 February 2002

Zoning

• Lot 2, DP 749100

− Part Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) under Local Environmental Plan 1991; and

− Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4.


• Lot 126, DP 751644

− Part Environment Protection (EP) under Local Environmental Plan 1991; and


The significant proportion of both lots are designated as Protected Area - Land Between Towns and Protected Area - Escarpment Area, while Part of Lot 2 DP 749100 is also designated as a Protected Area – Environmental Constraint Area.

Site description The site consists of two (2) separate parcels of land located on

the western side of the Darling Causeway, 1.5 km south of the intersection of the Darling Causeway and Bells Line of Road, approximately opposite the entrance to the now abandoned Coalpac Colliery. An appraisal of each site is as follows: • Lot 2, DP 749100, has an area of 14.1 hectares and a

frontage to the Darling Causeway of 316 metres. The majority (95%) of the lot is presently zoned Bushland Conservation (NS) under LEP 1991 with a small portion (5%) on the eastern side of the Darling Causeway zoned Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4.

Subject Site

N

Darling Causeway


The lot adjoins Lot 126, DP 571644 to its north, east and

west. The lot has a frontage to the Darling Causeway along the majority of its southern boundary with the exception of a small section that effectively encapsulates three sides of a smaller adjoining allotment also fronting the Darling Causeway. This adjoining allotment contains an electrical substation and originally formed part of the same parcel of land. The subject lot contains a number of easements for electrical transmission lines over the eastern half of the site as well two (2) intermittent watercourses. The land contains large areas of native vegetation, particularly in the western portion of the site. Hanging swamp and heath vegetation communities are located toward the north east and north west corners of the site respectively. However, large areas of the site have been extensively modified and poorly managed in the past with denuded areas and evidence of illegal dumping of refuse and excavated/demolished material within and adjacent to the easements and service roadways.

• Lot 126, DP 751644 occupies an area of 130 hectares and is presently zoned Part Environmental Protection (98%) under Local Environmental Plan No. 1991 and Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4 (ie. those small portions of the lot on the eastern side of the Darling Causeway). It is almost entirely covered in indigenous vegetation other than for a cleared area of approximately 9,600m2 located approximately 150 metres from the Darling Causeway. This area is accessed by an existing vehicular track off the Darling Causeway and generally comprises level land having gradients not exceeding 10% (1 in 10).

Both lots have access to power however town water and sewer are not available.

Proposal/Background The owners of the land, Coalpac Pty Ltd, seek to amend Local Environmental Plan 1991 by rezoning the subject allotments to provide a more suitable Bushland Conservation zone to establish an appropriate building area for a dwelling house than is currently available under the existing planning scheme. (Note: The proposal does not involve any part of either site presently zoned Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4.)


To achieve this, it is proposed to rezone a 4.4 hectare

(approximate) portion of Lot 126 DP 571644 from its present Environmental Protection designation to Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision). At the same time it is proposed to rezone all of Lot 2 DP 749100 (with the exception of that portion of land zoned Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways)) and a small strip of land, 40 metres wide by approximately 150 metres long, from Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) to Environmental Protection. This strip of land is proposed to retain its Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) zoning and form a battle-axe access handle for the portion of Lot 126 rezoned Bushland Conservation (NS). Attachment 2 to this Report includes diagrams of the current Local Environmental Plan configuration and the draft amendment configuration.

At its meeting held 9 July 2002, Council considered a Report by the Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services concerning the proposal and resolved as follows:

“1. That pursuant to Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Council prepare and exhibit Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Amendment No. 33), as detailed in Attachment 1, to amend Local Environmental Plan 1991 as follows:

• Rezone Lot 2, DP 749100, No. 222–286 Darling Causeway, Bell from

Part Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) and Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railway) to Part Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision), Part Special Uses ‘B” (Railway) and Part Environmental Protection.

• Rezone Lot 126, DP 751644, No. 222–286 Darling Causeway, Bell from Part Environment Protection and Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railway) to Part Environment Protection, Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railway) and Part Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision).

2. That the Director of Planning be advised that in Council’s opinion a Local

Environmental Study is not required to be carried out in accordance with Section 57 of the Act.”

Following the resolution of 9 July 2002, the then Planning NSW (now Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources) were advised of Council's decision and provided with the required information in accordance with the provisions of Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Clause 9 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.


In accordance with Section 62 of the Act, the following public authorities were consulted during preparation of the draft Plan: The National Parks and Wildlife Service; Department of Mineral Resources; Mine Subsidence Board; Department of Land and Water Conservation; Sydney Water Corporation; Integral Energy; Energy Australia; Environmental Protection Authority; Roads and Traffic Authority; Telstra; NSW Rural Fire Service; Sydney Catchment Authority; State Rail Authority; and Lithgow City Council.

Council subsequently received the following comments for consideration in preparing the draft Plan. Mine Subsidence Board

This property is not within a proclaimed Mine Subsidence District and is not subject to any building restrictions imposed by the Mine Subsidence Board.

Roads and Traffic Authority

The RTA raises no object to the draft LEP subject to the following:

‘Retention of the existing vehicular track opening to Darling Causeway and retention of existing vehicular access track to service the vehicular needs of the proposed dwelling house development.’

Sydney Catchment Authority

The Authority has reviewed the Report to Council's meeting of 9 July 2002 and has no objection to the draft LEP as proposed.

Department of Mineral Resources

The land proposed for rezoning overlies coal bearing strata but no economically recoverable coal resources. No other mineral resource is affected, therefore the Department does not object to the rezoning nor does it have any further comment on the proposal.


NSW Rural Fire Service

Having reviewed the document, there are no objections against the spot rezoning as indicated for Lot 2 and Lot 126 Darling Causeway, Bell providing that all relevant bush fire planning provisions relating to these sites are employed to any future residential development (not including subdivisions).

The Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources (which now

includes the Department of Land and Water Conservation)

The DLWC does not object to the proposed amendment since it will allow designation of a preferable development site which can provide

Department of Environmental and Conservation (which now includes the National

Parks and Wildlife Service)

The NPWS requests the following additional information to assist in commenting under Section 62 and Section 34A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act with regard to the potential impacts of the proposed rezoning on threatened species, populations, ecological communities and their habitats: 1. Flora and fauna assessment of the subject lands (Lots 2 and 126) including

identification and mapping of listed species, ecological communities and their habitats (for example, Blue Mountains Water Skink, this will include mapping hanging swamp areas) listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and an assessment of condition.

2. An analysis of the positive and negative impacts of the proposed rezoning based on

sensitivity of flora and fauna and their habitats to proposed future development. This should include information on:

o What additional vegetation will need to be cleared; o Topographical and hydrological features of the site; o The potential impacts of associated development including effluent disposal

and bush fire hazard reduction measures on flora and fauna.

3. An assessment by Council technical officers on the proposed amendment in relation to flora and fauna.

With the exception of the Department of Environment and Conservation, the remaining comments received raised no objections to the making of the Plan with issues raised generally forming matters that would be taken into consideration in the assessment of any future development application for the site. In respect to the requirements of the Department of Environment and Conservation, the applicant was duly informed (16 October 2002), however the required Flora and Fauna Assessment Report did take a considerable period of time to complete. When Council received the documentation (3 May 2004), it was forwarded to the Department of Environment and Conservation who were satisfied with the documentation stating:


‘The flora and fauna assessment assesses whether the proposed rezoning will have a ‘significant effect’ on threatened species etc. pursuant to Section 5A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. While this assists Council in its determination at the time a development application is lodged, the purpose of Section 34A consultation is for Council to consider whether a draft plan ‘will or may affect’ threatened species etc. thereby providing Council and the DEC an opportunity to address conservation of threatened species etc. at the LEP stage.

The assessment finds that;

o No endangered ecological communities or populations occur on the site; o No threatened flora and fauna species were recorded; o Potential threatened flora and fauna species habitat occurs (Persoonia

acerosa, Red-crowned toadlet, Powerful Owl, Spotted-tailed Quoll) but is well represented in the surrounding area.

On this basis, the DEC has no objection to the Draft Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 1991 Amendment No. 33. The DEC reinforces the recommendations of the flora and fauna assessment that development on the site be restricted as far as possible to previously cleared areas. This will enable retention of potential threatened flora and fauna habitats where possible.’

Notification The Section 65 Certificate authorising the exhibition of the draft Local Environmental Plan was issued by Council’s General Manager on 23 July 2004. The draft Plan was placed on public exhibition in accordance with Section 66 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 for a period of thirty (30) days from 15 September 2004. The exhibition process included an advertisement being placed in the Blue Mountains Gazette as well as written notification to adjoining and nearby property owners. No community submissions were received. Notification was also forwarded to the public authorities previously consulted. At the conclusion of the public exhibition process, Council had received one (1) written submission from the NSW Rural Fire Service again indicating no concerns with the rezoning proposal. In this regard, it should be noted that adequate area exists within the existing cleared area of the proposed Bushland Conservation zone in which to satisfy requirements of the ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2001’ legislation.


Conclusion The draft Local Environmental Plan (Attachment 1) proposes to provide for a more suitable location in which future consideration could be given to a Development Application for a dwelling house on Lot 126 DP 751644 while actively restoring Lot 2, DP 749100, the latter site being in poor condition through previous site disturbance associated with the provision of various easements over the land. Although a range of other activities are possible with Council consent on the level area proposed to become a Bushland Conservation zone, it is likely most would be unsuitable and not possible due to the absence of town water and reticulated sewer. Adoption of the draft Plan is therefore supported and it is recommended that it be submitted to the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning pursuant to Section 69 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, requesting that the Plan be made.


Attachment 1 – Draft Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 1991

(Amendment No. 33)


Attachment 2 – Report to Council Meeting of 9 July 2002



LAND USE MANAGEMENT

Ordinary Meeting, 9/7/02 ITEM NO: 11 SUBJECT: PROPOSED REZONING OF LAND BEING LOT 2 DP 749100 AND LOT 126 DP

751644, 222–286 DARLING CAUSEWAY, BELL FILE NO: Z01/003 Recommendations: 1. That pursuant to Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Council

prepare and exhibit Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Amendment No. 33), as detailed in Attachment 1, to amend Local Environmental Plan 1991 as follows:

• Rezone Lot 2, DP 749100, No. 222–286 Darling Causeway, Bell from Part Bushland

Conservation (No Subdivision) and Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railway) to Part Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision), Part Special Uses ‘B” (Railway) and Part Environmental Protection.

• Rezone Lot 126, DP 751644, No. 222–286 Darling Causeway, Bell from Part Environment Protection and Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railway) to Part Environment Protection, Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railway) and Part Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision).

2. That the Director of Planning be advised that in Council’s opinion a Local Environmental Study is

not required to be carried out in accordance with Section 57 of the Act. Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Applicant

Craven Elliston & Hayes Pty Ltd.

Owner

Coalpac Pty Ltd.

Application lodged

21 February 2002.

Zoning

• Lot 2, DP 749100

− Part Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) under Local Environmental Plan 1991; and


• Lot 126, DP 751644

− Part Environment Protection (EP) under Local Environmental Plan 1991.




LAND USE MANAGEMENT

Item 11 - Ordinary Meeting, 9/7/02 The significant proportion of both lots are designated as Protected Area - Land

Between Towns and Protected Area - Escarpment Area, while Part of Lot 2 DP 749100 is also designated as a Protected Area – Environmental Constraint Area.

Site description The site consists of two (2) separate parcels of land located on the western side

of the Darling Causeway, 1.5 km south of the intersection of the Darling Causeway and Bells Line of Road approximately opposite the entrance to the now abandoned Coalpac Colliery. An appraisal of each site is as follows: • Lot 2, DP 749100, has an area of 14.1 hectares and a frontage to the

Darling Causeway of 316 metres. The majority (95%) of the lot is presently zoned Bushland Conservation (NS) under LEP 1991 with a small portion (5%) on the eastern side of the Darling Causeway zoned Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4.

The lot adjoins Lot 126, DP 571644 to its north, east and west. The lot has a frontage to the Darling Causeway along the majority of its southern boundary with the exception of a small section that effectively encapsulates three sides of a smaller adjoining allotment also fronting the Darling Causeway. This adjoining allotment contains an electrical substation and originally formed part of the same parcel of land.

Subject Site



LAND USE MANAGEMENT

Item 11 - Ordinary Meeting, 9/7/02 The subject lot contains a number of easements for electrical

transmission lines over the eastern half of the site as well two (2) intermittent watercourses The land contains large areas of native vegetation, particularly in the western portion of the site. Hanging swamp and heath vegetation communities are located toward the north east and north west corners of the site respectively. However, large areas of the site have been extensively modified and poorly managed in the past with denuded areas and evidence of illegal dumping of refuse and excavated /demolished material within and adjacent to the easements and service roadways.

• Lot 126, DP 751644 occupies an area of 130 hectares and is presently zoned Part Environmental Protection (98%) under Local Environmental Plan No. 1991 and Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4 (ie. those small portions of the lot on the eastern side of the Darling Causeway). It is almost entirely covered in indigenous vegetation other than for a cleared area of approximately 9,600m2 located approximately 150 metres from the Darling Causeway. This area is accessed by an existing vehicular track off the Darling Causeway and generally comprises level land having gradients not exceeding 10% (1 in 10).

Both sites have access to power however town water and sewer are not available. A plan showing the location of the lots and the existing zone boundaries forms Attachment 2 to this Report while a site plan showing the relevant portions of the lots proposed to be rezoned is included at Attachment 3.

Proposal The owners of the land, Coalpac Pty Ltd, seek to amend Local Environmental Plan 1991 by rezoning the subject allotments to provide for a more suitable building area than is currently available under the existing planning scheme, on which to enable a dwelling to be constructed. The proposal does not involve any part of either site presently zoned Part Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) under Local Environmental Plan No. 4. In this regard, it is proposed to rezone a 4.4 hectare (approximate) portion of Lot 126 DP 571644 from its present Environmental Protection designation to Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision).



LAND USE MANAGEMENT

Item 11 - Ordinary Meeting, 9/7/02 At the same time it is proposed to rezone all of Lot 2 DP 749100, with the

exception of that portion of land zoned Special Uses ‘B’ (Railways) and a small strip of land, 40 metres wide by approximately 150 metres long, from Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) to Environmental Protection. This strip of land is proposed to retain its Bushland Conservation (No Subdivision) zoning and form a battle-axe access handle for the portion of Lot 126 rezoned Bushland Conservation (NS).

Public and Statutory Authority Notification

The application has not been publicly exhibited or notified to relevant Statutory Authorities at this stage, however this would be formally carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, should Council resolve to support the proposal in principal and proceed to exhibition of the draft Plan.

Statutory Requirements

The land proposed to be rezoned Bushland Conservation (other than a portion of the access handle) is presently zoned Environment Protection (EP) under Local Environmental Plan 1991. LEP 1991 does not permit development or activities on land zoned EP other than for the purpose of bushfire hazard reduction, drainage works, recreation areas, roads, subdivision, utility installations and walking tracks. For Council to permit this area of Lot 126, DP 751544 to be used and development for other purposes, such as a dwelling house, it is necessary to amend the provisions of Local Environmental Plan No. 1991.

Assessment of Proposal The application before Council essentially seeks to amend Local Environmental Plan 1991 to provide for a more suitable location in which future consideration could to be given to a Development Application for a dwelling house on the land. Apart from a dwelling house, a range of other activities are possible with Council consent in a Bushland Conservation Zone, however it is likely most would be unsuitable due to the absence of town water and sewer. The applicant indicates that Lot 2, which is predominantly, zoned Bushland Conservation (NS), is generally unsuitable and represents a poor option for future development due to the physical constraints and associated aesthetic impacts that exist. Appropriate areas for development are a considerable distance (250–300 metres) from the Darling Causeway and would require removal of extensive areas of indigenous vegetation for a development and its associated fire protection zones.



LAND USE MANAGEMENT

Item 11 - Ordinary Meeting, 9/7/02 Relevant issues and aspects in support of the proposal include: • A reduction in the amount of land zoned Bushland Conservation (NS) from 14.1 hectares to

approximately 4.4 hectares. • A reduction in frontage to Darling Causeway of land zoned Bushland Conservation (NS) from 316

metres to approximately 40 metres. • Development on the land would not require the removal of any significant vegetation as it would

essentially be confined to an existing cleared area having dimensions of approximately 80 metres by 120 metres (9600m2), and in which the required Principal Development Area would be located. This area would also be capable of accommodating a fuel free inner zone and fuel reduced outer zone.

• An existing vehicular access track presently services the area. • A detailed water balance and geotechnical report confirms that there would be no significant adverse

environmental impacts on the surrounding area. • The presence of a dwelling would reduce and be a deterrent to the indiscriminate dumping of rubbish

presently occurring in the area. In considering the proposed amendment to the LEP, consultation was undertaken with the relevant technical experts within Council with positive written comment being received. In this regard the following comments were made:

Bushfire

The local RFS Deputy Fire Control Officer has assessed the proposed rezoning. The area’s potential rating under Development Control Plan No. 26 is calculated as being in the ‘high’ to ‘extreme’ category with an extreme rating applying under the recently released guidelines ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection. The proposed rezoning will potentially result in any future dwelling being located further away from the Darling Causeway than may otherwise be the case under the existing zoning configuration. Notwithstanding, no objections were raised to the proposed rezoning given the size and gradient of the existing cleared development area, and the ability to provide adequate fuel protection zones.

Appropriate conditions would however need to be imposed in any future Development Consent concerning construction standards, maintenance and appropriate vegetation within the fuel free and fuel reduced area surrounding the development together with fire protection measures applying to the vehicular access track.

Effluent Disposal

The site’s suitability to accept and dispose of effluent by septic tank and absorption trench has been addressed in a Geotechnical and Water Balance Report accompanying the rezoning application.



LAND USE MANAGEMENT


Upon review of this documentation and inspection of the site, no major concerns have been raised given the size and attributes of the site, and the low density of on site effluent disposal systems in the area.

Strategic Planning

No objections have been raised to the proposed rezoning from a strategic planning perspective subject to certain matters being addressed. These matters essentially relate to issues such as site rehabilitation, bushfire protection and consolidation of lots. With the exception of the consolidation of lots, the remaining matters are considered to be more appropriately addressed or considered as part of the assessment of any future development application for the site.

Consolidation of the lots can be addressed through the provisions of Clause 29.2 of LEP 1991 by including a Consolidation Requirement on the Map accompanying the draft Instrument.

Statutory Processes Having regard to the location of the subject site, adjoining land within the Lithgow City Council Local Government Area, having a frontage to a Classified Road, being the Darling Causeway, and opposite the main western rail line, it is considered appropriate that, in preparing the draft LEP, Section 62 Consultation occur with Lithgow Council, the Roads and Traffic Authority and the Office of the Co-ordinator General Rail. Furthermore, as the site is within the outer Warragamba Catchment, contains electrical transmission line easements and is part of a former coal mine, it is also considered appropriate that the Sydney Catchment Authority, Integral Energy, Energy Australia, the Department of Mineral Resources and the Mine Subsidence Board be consulted as part of this process. Furthermore, based on the studies and assessment undertaken to date, as outlined in a preceding section of the Report, it is not considered that an environmental study, (as defined by Section 57 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979), is required should Council resolve to support the proposal and prepare a Draft Local Environmental Plan. Conclusion The proposal as indicated in the Report above offers a number of advantages over the current land use zoning arrangements under Local Environmental Plan 1991 and is worthy of support. Furthermore, given that there are no environmental or strategic impediments to progressing the rezoning, providing there are no fundamental concerns arising from the Section 62 consultation process, it is recommended that the draft Plan, as detailed in Attachment 1 to this Report, be adopted for exhibition.



LAND USE MANAGEMENT


Attachment 1

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979

DRAFT BLUE MOUNTAINS LOCAL ENVIRONMENT PLAN 1991 (Amendment No. 33)

I, the Minister for Planning, make the following Local Environmental Plan under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Minister for Planning Sydney, 2002 1. Name of plan

This plan is Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Amendment No. 33). 2. The aims of this plan are to:

a. Reduce the extent of and relocate the area of Bushland Conservation Zoning currently applying to the land to which this Plan applies.

b. Reduce the extent of land available for development fronting the Darling Causeway.

c. Encourage development in a more appropriate location whilst achieving restoration of site

disturbance located on land to which this Plan applies. 3. Land to which plan applies

This plan applies to Lot 2, DP 749100 and Lot 126, DP 751644 having frontage to Darling Causeway, Bell, as shown edged heavy black on the map marked ‘Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan No 33’ deposited in the office of the Council of the City of Blue Mountains.

4. Relationship to other environmental planning instruments.

This plan amends Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 1991 as set out in Clause 5.

5. Amendment of City of Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 1991

Blue mountains Local Environmental Plan No. 1991 is amended by inserting in appropriate order in the definition of Map in Schedule 4 the following words:

Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan No. 1991 (Amendment No. 33).



LAND USE MANAGEMENT


Attachment 1



LAND USE MANAGEMENT


Attachment 2 – Current Local Environmental Plan



LAND USE MANAGEMENT


Attachment 3 – Site Plan


ITEM NO: 21 SUBJECT: DRAFT LOCAL APPROVALS POLICY AND DRAFT LOCAL

ORDERS POLICY FILE NO: C02121. C07426 Recommendations: 1. That in accordance with Section 160 of the Local Government Act, Council

advertise the Draft Local Approvals Policy and the Draft Local Orders Policy for a period of twenty-eight (28) days and that Council receive comments on the draft policies for a further period of forty-two (42) days after the expiration of the advertising period.

2. That in accordance with Section 162 of the Local Government Act, the Local

Approvals Policy be referred to the Director General for concurrence. 3. That a further report be prepared for Council following any submissions made. Report by Acting Group Manager, Environmental and Customer Services: Introduction In accordance with Section 165 of the Local Government Act, a local policy is automatically revoked at the expiration of 12 months after the declaration of the poll for that election. Council therefore need to consider the adoption of a new Local Approvals Policy and a new Local Orders Policy. The consequence of a delayed adoption of the new Local Approvals Policy and the Local Orders Policy is simply that the exemptions permitted will cease to apply for the interim period. Key Issues Staff have reviewed the policies and suggested improvements and changes. The following is a summary of the reviewed documents: Local Approvals Policy The purpose of a Local Approvals Policy (Attachment 1 to this Report) is to highlight certain areas where Council does not require a separate approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act. In many respects, it operates in a similar way as Council’s “DCP33 – Exempt and Complying Development”.


The Draft Local Approvals Policy has “deleted” those activities that relate to DCP33. Other changes include the following: a) The links to other policies of Council have been improved. b) The requirements for most approvals have been refined. Some have been reduced and

others have been expanded for clarity and to ensure consistency with other policies. c) Busking has been moved from its location at F7 to D4 within the policy. It has also

been modified. d) A new section dealing with small amusement devices has been added. Local Orders Policy The purpose of a Local Orders Policy (Attachment 2 to this Report) is to highlight additional matters to those listed in Section 124 of the Local Government Act that Council considers important when addressing unsatisfactory situations. Additionally, it sets out what Council intends to do to remedy these situations including the time period for compliance. Council currently does not have a similar DCP to deal with orders under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. Council’s current Local Orders Policy only deals with failure of on-site sewage management systems and the connection of premises to the sewer. Whilst these have been retained in the draft policy, a number of other orders have been added including the following: a) The fencing of land to protect the public from potentially dangerous properties and to

secure livestock (Order 7). b) The clean up of untidy premises (Order 10). c) Failing stormwater systems such as guttering, downpiping and drainage lines (Order

12). d) Unhealthy conditions resulting from the keeping of animals (Order 18). e) Unsanitary food premises, food vehicles or utensils (Order 20). f) Overgrown vegetation, unsafe and unhealthy swimming pools, sewer chokes,

inappropriate storage or handling of hazardous materials and failure of on-site sewage management system (Order 21).

g) Connection of premises to the sewer (Order 24). h) The removal of items stored in a public place (Item 27). Public exhibition Section 160 of the Local Government Act stipulates the draft local policies must be publicly exhibited for a period not less than 28 days. The public notice must also specify a period of not less than 42 days after the date on which the draft policies are placed on public exhibition during which submissions may be made to Council. This is a mandatory minimum requirement. Council can extend these time periods but this is not recommended due to the time constraints. To overcome the holiday period, notification in the Gazette will extend into the 42 day period for submissions to alert interested parties to their rights to provide comment.


Concurrence of the Director General for Local Approvals Policy Section 162 of the Local Government Act requires the Director General’s consent for the Local Approvals Policy. It is recommended this approval be sought immediately so as not to hold up the adoption of the policy. Conclusion This report has highlighted the review of Council’s Draft Local Approvals Policy and Draft Local Orders Policy. These policies need to be exhibited to the public for a period of twenty-eight (28) days and submissions are to be received for a further forty-two (42) days. The Local Approvals Policy will also require concurrence from the Director General and this referral should occur immediately. A further report will be prepared for Council for consideration of any submissions made.


Attachment 1

LOCAL APPROVALS POLICY (2005)

FOR STRUCTURES AND ACTIVITIES UNDER LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT, 1993

Adopted:


Attachment 1

Table of Contents

PRELIMINARY.............................................................................................152

1. TITLE......................................................................................................................................... 152

2. STATUS AND PURPOSE OF THE POLICY........................................................................ 152

3. GENERAL AIMS OF THE POLICY...................................................................................... 152

4. COMMENCEMENT OF THE POLICY ............................................................................. 152

5. AMENDMENT OF THE POLICY....................................................................................... 153

6. REVOCATION OF THE POLICY ...................................................................................... 153

7. LAND TO WHICH THE POLICY APPLIES..................................................................... 153

8. APPROVALS TO WHICH THE POLICY APPLIES........................................................ 153 Part A: Buildings, temporary structures or moveable dwellings ................................................. 154

9. DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................ 155

10. NOTES IN THE TEXT...................................................................................................... 155

11. RELATED DOCUMENTS................................................................................................ 156

PART 1 - EXEMPTIONS FROM THE NECESSITY TO OBTAIN APPROVAL TO INSTALL CERTAIN STRUCTURES OR CARRY OUT CERTAIN ACTIVITIES157

12. EXEMPTIONS UNDER THIS LOCAL APPROVALS POLICY................................. 157

13. EXEMPTED ACTIVITIES............................................................................................... 157

14. LIMIT OF ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY EXEMPTION...................................... 158

15. AREAS IN WHICH EXEMPTIONS APPLY.................................................................. 158

PART 2 - CRITERIA COUNCIL MUST CONSIDER WHEN DETERMINING APPLICATIONS...........................................................................................177

16. GENERAL MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION ......................................................... 177

17. COUNCIL’S DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICIES....................... 177

PART 3 - OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO APPROVALS ......................178

18. APPLICATION OF THE POLICY.................................................................................. 178


Attachment 1

PRELIMINARY 1. TITLE This Policy (“The Policy”) is called the “Blue Mountains City Council Local Approvals Policy”. 2. STATUS AND PURPOSE OF THE POLICY The Policy is a local approvals policy prepared and adopted under Chapter 7, Part 3 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (“the Act”). The purpose of the Policy is to supplement provisions of the Act and the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation by: • Part 1: Specifying the circumstances in which a person is not required to obtain a

particular approval from the Council; • Part 2: Specifying the criteria which the Council must consider when determining

whether or not to grant approval to a particular activity; • Part 3: Specifying other matters relating to approvals not dealt with by the Act or

Regulations. 3. GENERAL AIMS OF THE POLICY • To provide an integrated framework for dealing with applications for approval with

clear guidelines. • To apply common and consistent requirements and procedures for the relevant

types of approvals. • To ensure consistency and fairness in the manner in which the Council deals with

applications for approval. • To make the Council’s policies and requirements for approvals readily accessible

and understandable to the community. • To assist the Council in the carrying out of its responsibilities under Chapter 8 of

the Act. 4. COMMENCEMENT OF THE POLICY The Policy was adopted by the Council on (????) 2005 and commences on (????) 2005.


Attachment 1

5. AMENDMENT OF THE POLICY The Policy incorporates the amendments listed in the Note to this Clause. Amendment Date Nature of Amendment Date Notified in No. Commenced Local Paper 6. REVOCATION OF THE POLICY The Policy will be automatically revoked at the expiration of 12 months after the declaration of the poll for the next general election, unless the Council revokes it sooner. Note: Automatic revocation of the Policy is provided for by Section 165(4) of the Act. The next general election is expected to be held in September 2008. 7. LAND TO WHICH THE POLICY APPLIES The Policy applies to all land within The Blue Mountains City Council area. 8. APPROVALS TO WHICH THE POLICY APPLIES The Policy applies to the regulatory function of the Council to grant approvals under Section 68 of the Local Government Act, as reproduced in the table that follows.


Attachment 1

Note: Under Section 68, approval by Council is required for the following activities: Part A: Buildings, temporary structures or moveable dwellings 1 Install a manufactured home, moveable dwelling or associated structure on land 2. Install a temporary structure on land 3. Use a building or temporary structure as a place of public entertainment or permit its use as a place of public

entertainment Part B: Water Supply, sewerage and stormwater drainage work 1. Carry out water supply work 2. Draw water from a Council water supply or a standpipe or sell water so drawn 3. Install, alter, disconnect or remove a meter connected to a service pipe 4. Carry out sewerage work 5. Carry out stormwater drainage work 6. Connect a private drain or sewer with a public drain or sewer under the control of a Council or with a drain or

sewer, which connects which such a public drain, or sewer Part C: Management of waste 1. For fee or reward, transport waste over or under a public place 2. Place waste in a public place 3. Place a waste storage container in a public place 4. Dispose of waste into a sewer of the Council 5. Install, construct or alter a waste treatment device or a human waste storage facility or a drain connected to any

such device or facility 6. Operate a system of sewage management (within the meaning of section 68A) Part D: Community Land 1. Engage in a trade or business 2. Direct or procure a theatrical, musical or other entertainment for the public 3. Construct a temporary enclosure for the purpose of entertainment 4. For fee or reward, play a musical instrument or sing 5. Set up, operate or use a loudspeaker or sound amplifying device 6. Deliver a public address or hold a religious service or public meeting Part E: Public roads 1. Swing or hoist goods across or over any part of a public road by means of a lift, hoist or tackle projecting over

the footway 2. Expose or allow to be exposed (whether for sale or otherwise) any article in or on or so as to overhang any part

of the road or outside a shop window or doorway abutting the road, or hang an article beneath an awning over the road

Part F: Other Activities 1. Operate a public car park 2. Operate a caravan park or camping ground 3. Operate a manufactured home estate 4. Install a domestic oil or solid fuel heating appliance, other than a portable appliance 5. Install or operate amusement devices (within the meaning of the Construction Safety Act 1912) 6. (Repealed) 7. Use a standing vehicle or any article for the purpose of selling any article in a public place 8. (Repealed) 9. (Repealed) 10. Carry out an activity prescribed by the regulations or an activity of a class or description prescribed by the

regulations


Attachment 1

9. DEFINITIONS (1) Words or expressions used in the policy have the following meaning:

Acceptable public liability insurance means a current policy acceptable to Council and having the minimum cover as set by Council and varied from time to time. Commercial premises means a building or place used as an office or for other business or commercial purposes, but does not include a building or place elsewhere specifically defined in Council’s planning Instruments. Install means to place in position for service or use. Refreshment room means a building or place, such as, a restaurant, café, tea room, eating house or the like, the purpose of which is to provide food for consumption on the premises. Shop means a building or place used for the purpose of selling, exposing or offering for sale by retail or hire, goods, merchandise or material, but does not include a building or place elsewhere specifically defined in Council’s Planning Instruments or a building or place used for a purpose elsewhere specifically defined. Take-away food outlet means a shop for the sale of prepared food to the public. Temporary structure includes a tent, marquee, stage and street stall. Waste storage container in this policy relates to mini-skips and the like up to 2 m3 in size.

(2) Expressions used in the Policy not specifically defined above and which are defined in the dictionary at the end of the Act (the “Act Dictionary”) have the meaning set out in the Act Dictionary.

10. NOTES IN THE TEXT Notes in the text are explanatory notes, and do not form part of the Policy. They are provided to assist understanding.


Attachment 1

11. RELATED DOCUMENTS The following documents are related, either directly or indirectly, to the Policy: • Local Government Act, 1993 - particularly Chapter 7 • Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1999 • Local Government (Water Services) Regulations 1999 • The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 • The Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 • Planning for Bushfire Protection 2001 • The Building Code of Australia • Blue Mountains City Council Local Environmental Plan 1991 • Draft Blue Mountains City Council Local Environmental Plan 2002 • Local Environmental Plan No.4 • Blue Mountains City Council Development Control Plan No.13 – Effluent

management for unsewered development • Blue Mountains City Council Draft Development Control Plan No 21 – Outdoor

advertising • Blue Mountains City Council Development Control Plan No 26 – Building in

bushfire prone areas • Blue Mountains City Council Development Control Plan No 29 - Carparking • Blue Mountains City Council Development Control Plan No.31 – Public

Infrastructures works & Subdivision and developments. • Blue Mountains City Council Development Control Plan No. 33 – Exempt and

complying development • Blue Mountains City Council Better Living DCP • Blue Mountains City Council Events Policy • Blue Mountains City Council Policy on A-Frame/Sandwich Board Signs • Blue Mountains City Council Policy on Activities in Public Places • Blue Mountains City Council Guidelines for Booking Street Stalls • Blue Mountains City Council Footpath Dining Note: Section 163 of the Act requires that the Policy is void to the extent that it is inconsistent with the Act or the regulations. Section 164 of the Act requires that the policy cannot impose a more onerous criterion than does the Act or regulations in relation to a specified aspect of an activity.


Attachment 1

PART 1 - EXEMPTIONS FROM THE NECESSITY TO OBTAIN APPROVAL TO INSTALL CERTAIN STRUCTURES OR CARRY OUT CERTAIN ACTIVITIES 12. EXEMPTIONS UNDER THIS LOCAL APPROVALS POLICY A person is exempt from the necessity to obtain a particular approval of the Council under the Local Government Act in the circumstances specified in this Part and set out in Table 1. It is a condition of any exemption provided in Column 1 of the Exemptions Table that the carrying out of an activity for which an exemption is provided must observe and comply with: (i) the relevant exemption circumstances or requirements listed in the Exemptions

Table; and (ii) the relevant performance standards prescribed in the Local Government Act, the

Regulations and the Building Code of Australia (“BCA.”). This Part does not exempt a person from the need to obtain approval to carry out an activity as described in Section 68 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (as reproduced on page 3) unless that activity is listed in Table 1 or the activity is one that the Council is taken to have granted by virtue of the issue of Development Consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. 13. EXEMPTED ACTIVITIES Even though an activity may be exempted by this policy from the need to obtain approval under the Local Government Act, it may still require development consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. Some activities under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act are also exempt and these are detailed in “DCP33 – Exempt and Complying Development”. Exempted activities must comply with the Local Government Act and Regulations, the Building Code of Australia (where relevant), and any Council Plans and Policies. In relation to exempted activities a person must give due consideration to the following: The amenity of adjoining or neighbouring property The provision of adequate drainage Any potential fire risk Structural stability External finishes Avoid creating a harbourage for vermin Avoid creating an obstruction or risk to public safety Not create a nuisance Public health


Attachment 1

14. LIMIT OF ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY EXEMPTION If subsequent activities involve an increase over and above the stated exemption conditions then approval will be required for the further activity. 15. AREAS IN WHICH EXEMPTIONS APPLY Options listed in the following Table under Part 1 apply to all land within the jurisdiction of the Blue Mountains Local Government area.


Attachment 1

TABLE 1

SCHEDULE OF EXEMPTIONS TO APPROVAL (Note: To be read in conjunction with the preceding Clauses 12 to 15 of Part 1)

SECTION 158(3) - Local Government Act, 1993

SECTION 68 PART A2 INSTALL A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE ON LAND

Type of Activity Exemption Circumstances / Requirements

Advisory Note

Install a Temporary Structure on land (eg a tent, marquee, stage, street stall etc) (Item A2 of Table to Section 68)

The use shall be only in conjunction with or ancillary to a development that is subject to a valid Development Consent (Note:- Marquees and tents for private home functions such as a party or wedding do not require separate development consent). Acceptable public liability insurance in accordance with Council’s current policy must be obtained; The structure shall have a maximum size of 50 m2 ; The structure shall be installed on the land for a maximum period of 72 hours; The use shall not occur more than 4 times per calendar year; The siting does not affect approved landscape, car parking or loading areas;

Council acknowledges that separate development consent is not required for one off home functions. All other uses will need to ensure the erection and use of the temporary structure is within their consent approval. Council has an events policy for festivals and fairs and guidelines for booking street stalls.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART A2

INSTALL A TEMPORARY STRUCTURE ON LAND Type of Activity Exemption

Circumstances / Requirements

Advisory Note

The structure must be structurally sound and placed on ground sufficiently firm to sustain its placement; In the case of stages, a maximum height of 1.0 metre above surrounding ground level; Marquees and tents must have at least 2 exits, each having a minimum unobstructed width of 750mm, being provided and uniformly distributed around the structure. Stages shall have a suitable load notice fixed to alert people to the maximum permissible point loads and uniformly distributed loads. These loads are to be given in kilograms; The structure must not involve the removal of trees or disturbance of the ground other than by fixing stakes; The structure may only be located in existing cleared areas.

Stages greater than 1.0 metre in height require balustrades to stairs and the edge of the stage.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART A3

USE OF BUILDING OR TEMPORARY STRUCTURE AS A PLACE OF PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT OR PERMIT ITS USE AS A PLACE OF PUBLIC

ENTERTAINMENT Type of Activity Exemption


Advisory Note

Use of a building as a Place of Public Entertainment (Item A3 of Table to Section 68)

The use shall be only in conjunction with or ancillary to a development that is subject to a valid Development Consent. Premises where the primary use is a restaurant and it provides entertainment and the patron area is less than 200 m2 (Note:- this does not include cabaret or theatre restaurants); Premises that are used as a pin-ball parlour or snooker room; Premises that are used only for public meetings; Premises that are primarily used for religious functions but are rented to dance groups for practice purposes, public meetings, art and craft exhibitions or similar functions (Note:- performances will require approval);

The provisions of the Policy acknowledge that certain low-occupancy premises can provide public entertainment (involving the imposition of a direct or indirect fee upon patrons for entry to an exhibition or performance), without being subject to any provisions applicable to a Class 9b building used for such purpose. These buildings will require specific development consent for some uses. For example, the playing of amplified music. The buildings will need to comply with the requirements of the BCA and the Regulations and this relates to access to exits, the provision of services and equipment and the maintenance of essential fire safety measures.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART A3




Advisory Note

Halls in educational establishments used only for school assemblies, award presentations or art and craft exhibitions (Note:- halls used for school discos, theatre productions and the like will require approval). Stages shall have a suitable load notice fixed to alert people to the maximum permissible point loads and uniformly distributed loads. These loads are to be given in kilograms


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART A3




Advisory Note

Use of a Temporary Structure as a Place of Public Entertainment (Item A3 of Table to Section 68)

The use shall be only in conjunction with or ancillary to a development that is subject to a valid Development Consent. Acceptable public liability insurance in accordance with Council’s current policy must be obtained; The maximum number of people to be accommodated shall not exceed 50 persons. At least 2 exits, each having a minimum unobstructed width of 750mm, being provided and uniformly distributed around the structure.

The requirements for the installation of the temporary structure also apply (refer Item A2 of the Table).


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART B1

CARRY OUT WATER SUPPLY WORK Type of Activity Exemption


Advisory Note

Carry out water supply work. (Item B1 of Table to Section 68)

Property located outside Sydney Water Corporation supply district. Minor extension of existing residential or rural water supply service comprising such works as relocation of taps, installation of water storage tanks not requiring the consent of Council (see DCP No. 33 – Exempt and Complying Development), residential garden irrigation works and rural irrigation works utilising a private water supply. Does not relate to the re-cycling of grey water. All work carried out by a licensed Plumber. Water supply work is to comply with the Plumbing and Drainage Code of Practice. Any drinking water supply is to meet Australian National Health and Medical Research Council’s Guidelines for Drinking Water.

Any water supply drawn from a river, creek, bore or the like may require separate approval from the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources prior to the carrying out of water supply works.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART B5

CARRY OUT STORMWATER DRAINAGE WORK Type of Activity Exemption


Advisory Note

Carry out stormwater drainage work. (Item B5 of Table to Section 68)

Relates to a single dwelling on a single allotment of land. Relates to the repair or replacement of existing stormwater drainage lines including guttering and downpipes. New stormwater drainage works servicing a maximum roof area of 100 square metres. Drainage lines are to be connected to the street drainage system where the fall permits. Absorption trenches shall be a minimum 600 mm wide x 600 mm deep x 3000 mm in length for every downpipe discharging thereto (Note:- Downpipes are to be spaced at 12 metre maximum centres). Absorption trenches shall be located parallel to the ground contours at least 3 metres from any building or property boundary. Drainage work to comply with AS/NZS 3500.3.2-Stormwater Drainage.

Separate approval will be required under Council’s Tree Preservation Order prior to the removal of any trees required as a result of drainage works. Council’s Better Living DCP deals with appropriate stormwater disposal methods.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART C3

PLACE A WATSE STORAGE CONTAINER IN A PUBLIC PLACE Type of Activity Exemption


Advisory Note

Place a waste storage container in a public place (eg road reserve) (Item C3 of Table to Section 68)

The waste storage container is associated with a single dwelling on a single residential premises; Only 1 container per property; The container is to have a maximum capacity of 2m3; Maximum period of 72 hours; Located so as to not interfere with vehicular or pedestrian traffic; Appropriate barricades, guards, lighting and reflectors shall be provided where necessary to prevent the container being a traffic hazard; Waste shall be secured to prevent being dislodged by wind and other forces including animals; Not to be used for the disposal of hazardous or noxious material.

This relates to the use of mini skips and not the normal weekly collection service. Commercial premises require a separate approval from Council. Council may require the relocation of a container where it is or is likely to pose a hazard. Many chemicals and materials such as asbestos cement sheeting pose a threat to public health and safety and separate arrangements are to be made for their disposal.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART D4

FOR FEE OR REWARD, PLAY A MUSICAL INSTUMENT OR SING. Type of Activity Exemption


Advisory Note

Busking or street theatre. (Item D4 of Table to Section 68)

Not to occur: • In tourist areas such as

Echo Point or lookouts.• Within 5 metres of a

bus stop, pedestrian crossings, taxi stand or intersections.

• Any area adjacent to a residential premise, educational establishments or place of public worship.

• Any park or reserve. Where props are used, acceptable public liability insurance in accordance with Council’s policy must be obtained; Minimum 2.5 metres of footpath shall be available for public movement. The activity shall not be offensive or cause offensive noise. The activity shall incorporate appropriate risk management practices so as to avoid injury or loss. Not to include a public address system or amplified music.

Council does not want its most prominent areas used for busking or street theatre. It is also important that performances not be placed in areas where it is likely to create traffic problems and possible injury to the public. Some props in street theatre may carry some risks to the public. These include flame, knives, juggling articles and the like. Appropriate insurances must be obtained. Council and the Police have the right to remove people if they are causing a nuisance to the public (including shop owners). This includes repetitive performances.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART E2

EXPOSE OR ALLOW TO BE EXPOSED (WHETHER FOR SALE OR OTHERWISE) ANY ARTICLE IN OR ON OR SO AS TO OVERHANG ANY

PART OF THE ROAD OR OUTSIDE A SHOP WINDOW OR DOORWAY ABUTTING THE ROAD, OR HANG AN ARTICLE BENEATH AN AWNING

OVER THE ROAD. Type of Activity Exemption


Advisory Note

Display an A-Frame or sandwich board signs on footpaths. (Item E2 of Table to Section 68)

Not permitted outside premises where the footpath or arcade has been approved for dining; Acceptable public liability insurance in accordance with Council’s policy must be obtained; Located outside commercial premises, refreshment rooms, shops or take-away outlet within a defined village centre; Not more than one (1) sign per shop or business; The sign shall not exceed 1 metre in height with the advertising panel not exceeding 900 mm high by 600 mm wide; Located immediately adjacent to and extending no further than 700mm from the front of the shop or business; A minimum of 2.5 metres of unobstructed footpath to be maintained between the sign and the kerb;

An A-frame/sandwich board sign will not be permitted for premises with an approval for the use of the footpath for restaurant seating or the display of goods. The area will become too cluttered and dangerous for the public. Further information relating to criteria/guidelines for A-Frame/sandwich board signs is contained within Council’s Policy on A-Frame/sandwich Board signs. Council may impound signs under the Impounding Act 1993 where they do not meet the exemption criteria or have not received separate approval from Council.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART E2





Advisory Note

Where installed in an arcade, an unobstructed distance of 2 metres is to be provided in the arcade; No lewd or provocative advertisements; The sign must not present an obstruction or risk to public safety. Signs shall be removed during inclement or windy weather or when the business is not trading; All signs shall be prepared in a professional manner and maintained in good repair. Text of the sign shall relate only to the business conducted at the premises and shall be removed outside approved trading hours.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART E2





Advisory Note

Placement of Pay-Phones on footpaths. (Item E2 of Table to Section 68)

Acceptable public liability insurance in accordance with Council’s policy must be obtained; Not more than one phone per premises. Located outside commercial premises, refreshment rooms, shop or take-away outlet within a defined village centre.

Phones shall not be located where security or safety of persons may be at risk.

Display of potted plants (Item E2 of Table to Section 68)

Acceptable public liability insurance in accordance with Council’s policy must be obtained; Plants are to be displayed for decorative purposes and not for sale; A maximum of two (2) plants per premises; Plants are not be dangerous to the public; Pots must be at least 450 mm x 450 mm and securely fixed to prevent vandalism and expected wind forces;

Some plants present a problem for the public. These include thorny plants such as roses and some citrus species.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART E2





Advisory Note

Located immediately adjacent to and extending no further than 700mm from the front of the shop or business; A minimum of 2.5 metres of unobstructed footpath to be maintained between the pots and the kerb; A minimum of 2 metres of unobstructed width to be maintained in arcades. Located outside commercial premises, refreshment rooms, shop or take-away outlet within a defined village centre.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART E2





Advisory Note

Installation of roll-up under awning blinds (Item E2 of Table to Section 68)

Not attached to premises listed as a Heritage Item or located within a Heritage Conservation Area without Development Consent. The material of the blinds shall comply with the provisions of the BCA with respect to combustibility and smoke hazard indices. Awnings shall be structurally adequate to support loads. Blinds shall be parallel to the kerb. Outside edge of the blind is to be minimum 600 mm clear of the kerb line and minimum 2400 mm clear of the footpath. No advertising shall be displayed on the blind. The colour of the blind shall complement the colour scheme of the building.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART E2





Advisory Note

Small amusement devices (Item E2 of Table to Section 68)

The amusement device is to have appropriate WorkCover registration; There are to be no trip hazards to the public including cords; Located immediately adjacent to and extending no further than 700mm from the front of the shop or business; A minimum of 2.5 metres of unobstructed footpath to be maintained between the device and the kerb; A minimum of 2 metres of unobstructed width to be maintained in arcades.

These amusement devices are commonly found outside shops.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART F4.

INSTALL A DOMESTIC OIL OR SOLID FUEL HEATING APPLIANCE


Advisory Note

Installation of solid fuel or oil heaters by qualified Contractors only. (Item F4 of Table to Section 68)

Installation by a contractor accredited by Council. Council is notified in writing of the installation along with the accredited contractor’s details, after the installation. Installation to be in accordance with the Building Code of Australia, AS 2918 – Domestic solid fuel burning appliances and the Department of Environment and Conservation.

Existing legislation enables Council to take appropriate action to overcome any nuisance, which may arise from the installation of solid fuel heating appliances.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART F7

USE A STANDING VEHICLE OR ANY ARTICLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SELLING ANY ARTICLE IN A PUBLIC PLACE.


Advisory Note

Street Collections (including Badge/Pin days), information and promotional displays. (Item F7 of Table to Section 68)

Not to occur: • In tourist areas such as

Echo Point or lookouts.• Within 5 metres of a

bus stop, pedestrian crossings, taxi stand or intersections.

• Any area adjacent to a residential premise, educational establishments or place of public worship.

• Any park or reserve. Minimum 2.5 metres of footpath shall be available for public movement. The activity shall not cause offence or obstruction. Not to include a public address system or the like. Surrounding area is to be maintained in a clean and tidy condition and free of hazard and rubbish.

Further detail in relation to other activities, including street stalls, etc can be obtained from Council’s Policy on Activities in Public Places. Approvals are not required for Local, State or Federal Elections.


Attachment 1

SECTION 68 PART F10

CARRY OUT AN ACTIVITY PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS OR AN ACTIVITY OF A CLASS OR DESCRIPTION PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS.

Type of Activity Exemption


Advisory Note

Approval to operate a System of Sewage Management

Systems serving a single dwelling on a single allotment of land involving pumping directly into a Sydney Water reticulated sewerage system. Approval obtained from the Sydney Water Corporation for the disposal of effluent.


Attachment 1

PART 2 - CRITERIA COUNCIL MUST CONSIDER WHEN DETERMINING APPLICATIONS 16. GENERAL MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION The matters that Council must consider in determining whether to approve an application are: • The matters prescribed in Section 89 of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the

regulations to the Local Government Act. • Any relevant adopted Council Policy or performance standard, including those listed in

Clause 17 hereunder. • The principles of ecologically sustainable development. 17. COUNCIL’S DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICIES Council’s Development Control Plans and Policies listed hereunder are included as criteria for the assessment of applications where relevant, unless the activity is exempted under Part 1 of this Policy. Development Control Plans • Development Control Plan No 13 – Effluent Management for Unsewered

Development. • Draft Development Control Plan No 21 – Outdoor Advertising. • Development Control Plan No 26 – Building in Bushfire Prone Areas. • Development Control Plan No 29 – Car Parking. • Development Control Plan No 31 – Public Infrastructure Works in Subdivisions and

Developments • Development Control Plan No 33 – Exempt and Complying Development. Council Policies • Access Policy • Policy on A-Frame/Sandwich Board Signs • Policy on Activities in Public Places. • Events Policy • Tree Preservation Order Note: Any policy, which is not consistent with or is more onerous than the Act or Regulations is void in respect of that inconsistency or more onerous provision (LGA S.163 and S.164).


Attachment 1

PART 3 - OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO APPROVALS 18. APPLICATION OF THE POLICY This local approvals policy applies to those activities requiring approval under the provisions of Chapter 7 Part 3 of the Local Government Act, 1993. Approvals/consents may be required for certain other activities under the provision of separate legislation, particularly in regard to the erection of other buildings which is controlled by the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.


Attachment 2

LOCAL ORDERS POLICY (2005)

FOR ORDERS ISSUED UNDER LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT, 1993

Adopted:


Attachment 2

Table of Contents

1. TITLE......................................................................................................................................... 181

2. STATUS AND PURPOSE OF THE POLICY........................................................................ 181

3. GENERAL AIMS OF THE POLICY...................................................................................... 181

4. COMMENCEMENT OF THE POLICY ............................................................................. 181

5. AMENDMENT OF THE POLICY....................................................................................... 181

6. REVOCATION OF THE POLICY ...................................................................................... 181

7. LAND TO WHICH THE POLICY APPLIES..................................................................... 182

8. DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................ 182

9. RELATED DOCUMENTS.................................................................................................... 182

10. GENERAL MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION ......................................................... 182

11. SPECIFIC MATTERS....................................................................................................... 183

12. CRITERIA COUNCIL MUST CONSIDER BEFORE THE SERVICE OF ORDERS194

13. REPRESENTATIONS AND NATURAL JUSTICE....................................................... 194

14. PROSECUTION AND THE RECOVERY OF COSTS.................................................. 194


Attachment 2

1. TITLE This Policy (“The Policy”) is called the “Blue Mountains City Council Local Orders Policy”. 2. STATUS AND PURPOSE OF THE POLICY The Policy is a local orders policy prepared and adopted under Chapter 7, Part 3 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (“the Act”). The purpose of the Policy is to supplement provisions of the Act and the Local Government (Orders) Regulation by specifying Council’s policy in regards to certain Orders under Section 124 of the Act. 3. GENERAL AIMS OF THE POLICY • To provide an integrated framework for dealing with proposed orders. • To apply common and consistent requirements and procedures for the relevant

types of orders. • To ensure consistency and fairness in the manner in which the Council deals with

orders. • To assist the Council in the carrying out of its responsibilities under Chapter 8 of

the Act. 4. COMMENCEMENT OF THE POLICY The Policy was adopted by the Council on (????) 2005 and commences on (????) 2005. 5. AMENDMENT OF THE POLICY The Policy incorporates the amendments listed in the Note to this Clause. Note:- The following amendments have been adopted: Amendment Date Nature of Amendment Date Notified in No. Commenced Local Paper 6. REVOCATION OF THE POLICY The Policy will be automatically revoked at the expiration of 12 months after the declaration of the poll for the next general election, unless the Council revokes it sooner. Note: Section 165(4) of the Act provides for automatic revocation of the Policy. The next general election is expected to be held in September 2008.


Attachment 2

7. LAND TO WHICH THE POLICY APPLIES The Policy applies to all land within the Blue Mountains Local Government area. 8. DEFINITIONS Expressions used in the policy not specifically defined and which are defined in the dictionary at the end of the Act (the “Act Dictionary”) have the meaning set out in the Act Dictionary. 9. RELATED DOCUMENTS The following documents are related, either directly or indirectly, to the Policy: • Local Government Act, 1993 - particularly Chapter 7 • Local Government (Orders) Regulation 1999 • The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 • The Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 • Food Act 2003 • Blue Mountains City Council Local Environmental Plan 1991 • Draft Blue Mountains City Council Local Environmental Plan 2002 • Local Environmental Plan No.4 • Blue Mountains City Council Development Control Plan No.13 – Effluent

Management for Unsewered Development. • Blue Mountains City Council Development Control Plan No. 33 – Exempt and

Complying Development. • Blue Mountains City Council Environmental and Health Protection Guidelines:

On-site Sewage Management for Single Households • Blue Mountains City Council Better Living DCP • Blue Mountains City Council Local Approvals Policy 10. GENERAL MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION The matters that Council must consider in determining whether to issue an Order are: • The matters prescribed in Section 124 of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the

Local Government (Orders) Regulation, 1999. • Procedures to be observed before giving orders as detailed in Chapter 7, Part 2,

Division 2 of the Local Government Act • Any relevant adopted Council Policy or performance standard, including those

listed in Clause 9 of this policy. • The principles of ecologically sustainable development. • Health and safety issues • Environmental issues


Attachment 2

11. SPECIFIC MATTERS The following specific matters are to be considered in determining whether to issue an Order:

TABLE 1 SPECIFIC MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

SECTION 124

Type of Order Matters in addition to those listed in the Table to Section 124 of the Act

Advisory Note

Order 7 To fence land.

Building issues When premises present a significant public health or safety risk, they will need to be fenced to protect people from entering the property. Council may require an emergency order in these situations. Works will need to be completed within 1 to 7 days depending upon the severity of the situation.

If the works are not completed, Council may need to effect the order to protect public health and safety. Council has an administration charge for this work and this is indicated in the order. Contractor’s fees for the carrying out of the works will be recovered. Examples include:

• Burnt out premises • Dangerous

circumstances such as broken glass, broken asbestos, excavations, contaminated sites.

• Unoccupied and derelict premises

• Construction sites


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

Order 7 To fence land.

To secure livestock Where livestock have escaped from premises, Council may require that the land be fenced. Council may require an emergency order in situations where the livestock cannot otherwise be contained on the premises. Works will need to be completed within 1 to 7 days depending upon the severity of the situation. Where there are alternatives for the securing of livestock, Council will require the works to be completed within a period of one to three months.

If the works are not completed, Council may need to effect the order to protect public health and safety. Council has an administration charge for this work and this is indicated in the order. Contractor’s fees for the carrying out of the works will be recovered.


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

Order 10 To remove or stack articles or matter, to cover articles or matter, to erect fences or screens or to plant trees

Where premises have become untidy due to the storage of articles and these articles are visible from the street, Council will require that they be removed or suitable screens or fences be erected within a period of one to three months.

These articles can include any of the following (Note:- the list is not exhaustive):

• Materials stored in boxes, drums and crates

• Building materials • Furniture • Machinery • Motor vehicle parts

and motor vehicle bodies

• Unregistered and derelict caravans, boats, box trailers, trucks or buses.

• Clothing • Rubbish and/or

recyclable materials

Order 12 To do such things as are necessary to control the flow of surface water across land

Where guttering and downpiping on a building are failing or not adequately connected to a stormwater system and the discharge is increasing the flow of surface waters over the land, Council will require works to be completed within one to three months.

Failure of the system includes:

• rusting of gutters or downpipes

• the removal of gutters or downpipes,

• the discharge of downpipes at the ground surface

• the discharge of drainage lines onto adjoining properties

• the blockage of gutters, downpipes or drainage lines


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

Order 18 Not to keep birds or animals on premises, other than of such kinds, in such numbers or in such manner as specified in the order

Where unhealthy conditions have arisen due to the keeping of animals creates a nuisance, Council will issue an order to have the situation improved. Due to the public health nature of the situation, the order may be issued in an emergency whereby the works need to be completed within a period of 1 to 7 days. In the case of rebuilding appropriate accommodation, Council will require works to be completed within a period of one to three months.

Examples where Council would serve an order include the following:

• where located too close to habitable buildings

• stagnant waters • improper

management and removal of excrement and/or food scraps

• foul odours • animal noise is

inappropriate in the locality.

• poor or inappropriate accommodation for the animals


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

Order 20 To do such things as are specified in the order to put premises, vehicles or articles used for the manufacture, preparation, storage, sale, transportation or other handling or use of or in relation to food into a clean or sanitary condition

Where premises, vehicles or articles are unclean or unsanitary including the presence of dusts, dirt and grease, Council will issue an emergency order directing that the works be completed with 1 to 7 days depending upon the severity of the situation.

Council may also issue orders under the Food Act 2003.

Order 21 To do or refrain from doing such things as are specified in the Order to ensure that land is, or premises are, placed or kept in a safe or healthy condition.

Overgrown vegetation Where premises have become overgrown with vegetation and the land is:

• located in close proximity to a dwelling,

• deemed to be unsafe or unhealthy and could harbour vermin or other animals,

Council will require that works be completed within a period of one to three months.

Overgrown vegetation can become a place where vermin and snakes can harbour and this is not considered safe or healthy in residential areas. This is particularly a problem with vacant land although it can equally apply to developed sites that have not been properly maintained. Council will require that the grass and/or shrub layer be modified. This will include dead and dry materials.


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note


Unsafe or unhealthy swimming pool Where premises have a swimming pool that is:

• not fenced and there is the possibility of direct access for children; and/or

• The pool water is not maintained in a sanitary condition

Council may issue an emergency order directing that works be completed within 1 to 7 days depending upon the severity of the situation. If the premises are otherwise secured from the street, Council will require that the fencing works be completed within a period of one to three months.

Council can also issue an order under the Swimming Pools Act where it is in a residential area and there is an existing dwelling on the allotment. Where there is no existing dwelling, it is not possible for Council to issue an order under the Swimming Pools Act.


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note


Sewer choke Where a premises has a sewer choke, Council may issue an emergency order directing that works be completed within 1 to 7 days depending upon the severity of the situation.

Sewer chokes create a public health risk and need urgent attention as serious illness can result.


Inappropriate storage or handling of hazardous materials Where premises present conditions that are unhealthy or unsafe due to inappropriate storage or handling of hazardous materials, Council may issue an emergency order directing that works be completed within 1 to 7 days depending upon the severity of the situation.

This may include the inappropriate storage of hazardous materials such as oils or contaminated wastes from industrial processes or asbestos.


Decking and balustrades Where decking and/or balustrades have deteriorated or no longer meet acceptable standards for safety, Council may issue an emergency order directing that works be completed within 1 to 7 days depending upon the severity of the situation. If it is not considered an emergency situation, Council may order that the works be completed within a period of one to three months.

Some decking and balustrades present a major safety risk to the community. In extreme cases, Council may also order that public access to these areas be prohibited until the works have been satisfactorily completed.


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note


Failure of sewage management system Where the premises are currently serviced by an on-site sewage management system (other than pump-out) and that system, in the opinion of Council, is failing to meet the requirements of:-

• Council’s Development Control Plan No.13 – Effluent Management for Unsewered Development and Council’s Better Living DCP;

• The conditions of

consent or approval to operate the on-site system;

• The requirements

of the Environmental and Health Protection Guidelines: on-site Sewage Management for Single Households.

The reason for this order is that the system is not operating satisfactorily and is or is likely to be causing an environmental and public health risk. Specific upgrading requirements may include, but are not limited to:

• De-sludging of existing septic tanks.

• Servicing of the Aerated Wastewater Treatment System.

• Replacement or supplementation of the current septic tank and disposal trenches (tank and trenches) with a pump-out system.

• Replacement of the current disposal system with another (specified) type of system.

• Installation of new trenches

• Installation of sub-surface irrigation pipe system

• Installation of surface water diversion drain or barrier


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

Council will require that the system be upgraded to comply with the provisions of the Environmental and Health Protection Guidelines: on-Site Sewage Management for Single Households.

• Installation of low water use devices within the premises.

• Or a combination of any of the above

Any proposal involving installation of a pump-out system will require approval from Sydney Water. Council will require completion of the works within a period ranging from 1 to 3 months depending on the scope of works to be undertaken.


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

Order 24 To connect premises with a sewage system by a specified date.

Pump-out system Where the premises are currently serviced by a pump-out system and the pump-out system is operating satisfactorily, Council will require that the premises be connected to the sewer within a period of 6 months. Where the premises are currently serviced by a pump-out system, and the pump-out system is not operating satisfactorily, Council will require that the premises be connected to the sewer within a period of three (3) months. On-site sewage management system Where the premises are currently serviced by an on-site sewage management system (other than pump-out) and that system, in the opinion of Council, is failing to meet the requirements of:

The continued operation of a pump-out system which is subsidised by the State Government is a duplication of expenses incurred in installing the sewer system in the area, it is not economically sustainable and the pump-out system has higher associated environmental risks The system is not operating satisfactorily and is or is likely to be causing an environmental and public health risk. Where it can be demonstrated that wastewater is being treated and used sustainably, Council will not require sewer connection


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

• Council’s Development Control Plan No.13 – Effluent Management for Unsewered Development and Council’s Better Living DCP;

• The conditions of

consent or approval to operate the on-site system;

• The requirements

of the Environmental and Health Protection Guidelines: on-site Sewage Management for Single Households.

Council will require that the premises be connected to the sewer within a period of 3 months.


Attachment 2

SECTION 124


Advisory Note

Order 27 To remove an object or matter from a public place or prevent any object or matter being deposited there

Where building materials, vehicles or other matter including rubbish are stored on Council’s footpath, road reserve or road, Council will issue an emergency order to have them removed within a period of 1 to 7 days.

The materials can cause an obstruction to the public or create unsightly conditions.

12. CRITERIA COUNCIL MUST CONSIDER BEFORE THE SERVICE OF

ORDERS Generally Council must consider the requirements of Chapter 7, Part 2, Division 2 of the Local Government Act before it serves the orders. Orders served in an emergency situation need not be preceded with a notice of intention. 13. REPRESENTATIONS AND NATURAL JUSTICE The person who signs the order will not be the person who receives representation. Council will ensure natural justice is observed in the assessment of any representations. 14. PROSECUTION AND THE RECOVERY OF COSTS Where works have not been completed within the allotted time period, Council may decide to prosecute for the offence. Council may also decide to enter upon the premises and complete the works. There is an administrative charge for this process together with the charges to complete the works. Council will recover all costs.

FACILITATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 22 SUBJECT: THE BIG ISSUE MAGAZINE FILE NO: C07413 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That Council approve the sale of the “Big Issue” in Blackheath at the designated

sites listed within the report. Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Introduction Council resolved at it’s October 12, 2004 meeting: “That Council endorses the continuation of the sale of the “Big Issue” in Katoomba at the designated sites listed within the report.” As outlined in the October 12 report an extension of the sale of the “Big Issue” into Blackheath was requested by Blackheath Area Neighbourhood Centre (BANC). The report required that Council officers consult local businesses and the Blackheath Chamber of Commerce, and that the outcome be reported back to Council. This report outlines the results of these consultations. The Blackheath Area Neighbourhood Centre provides services to clients with a psychiatric disability residing in boarding houses. The service links clients in with activities, services and projects that assist the individual and involve them with the local community. What is the “Big Issue” The “Big Issue” is an independent current affairs magazine that was set up to assist the homeless and long-term unemployed people. The “Big Issue” is set up as a charity and is authorised to fundraise for charitable purposes under the Charitable Fundraising Act, 1991. The “Big Issue” is provided at a low cost to then be re-sold to the public, providing the vendor with an income. The “Big Issue” ensures that all vendors of the magazine are fully trained and supported. In addition, the Disability Support Program will provide support to those wishing to participate. The “Big Issue” was established in the City of Sydney six years ago and has the endorsement of the Lord Mayor of the City of Sydney. Its sale has been approved by a number of councils. Penrith City Council approved the magazine’s sale in 1998.

FACILITATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Item 22 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

Background The sale of the “Big Issue” in Katoomba is currently managed by the Active Linking Initiative Katoomba office as part of the Blackheath Area Neighbourhood Centre’s Disability Projects. Due to limited resources to administer this program they are currently in the process of transferring the management of the “Big Issue” project directly to BANC. It is recognised that the Neighbourhood Centre is well placed to support current and future vendors of the magazine. This will mean vendors will need to travel to Blackheath to purchase the magazine. Due to vendors having very few / extremely limited resources, BANC are seeking Council approval for the sales within the Blackheath CBD in addition to Katoomba. This will enable vendors with the means to purchase only one or two magazines to sell on, and then walk back to the Neighbourhood Centre to purchase further magazines. The proposed Blackheath “Big Issues” sale sites are all on Govetts Leap Road and the Great Western Hwy in front of the following business:

• Kristies Video; • New Ivanhoe Hotel; and • The Old Blackheath Post Office.

The Old Blackheath Post Office building consists of The Memento Café, Ravir and Lotus shops. Council adopted a “Policy on Activities in Public Places” on 9/12/97 which covers activities of this nature, as part of being the relevant authority under the Roads Act 1993. The policy states “The spirit of the policy is to ensure that activities … carried out by non profit organizations will not incur a fee”, and Council approval under this policy is the mechanism to ensure equitable use of public land. Local business consultations Council officers consulted all businesses on the designated sites and also neighbouring businesses. Consultation was by letter outlining the proposal and by contact either by visiting or by telephone . Council also consulted with Blackheath District Chamber of Commerce by letter and telephone. All businesses and the Chamber of Commerce gave verbal agreement to the project with some offering full support and encouragement. The businesses that were consulted are listed below. Memento Café Cnr Govetts Leap Rd & Wentworth St Lotus Cnr Govetts Leap Rd & Wentworth St Ravir Cnr Govetts Leap Rd & Wentworth St New Ivanhoe Hotel Great Western Hwy Kristies Video Great Western Hwy Victory Theatre Café 15 Govetts Leap Rd Village Supermarket 14 Govetts Leap Rd Blackheath Shoe Shop Govetts Leap Rd The Vege Patch* Govetts Leap Rd


Raine & Horne Real Estate Agency Govetts Leap Rd Warigal Galleries Govetts Leap Rd Blackheath Butchery Govetts Leap Rd Blackheath Bakery Govetts Leap Rd Margaritas Great Western Hwy Dash’s Pharmacy Great Western Hwy * The Vege Patch requested that the magazine not be sold directly outside their shop, but raised no objection to its sale outside other venues. Should Council approve the sale of the “Big Issue” in Blackheath it is recommended that the conditions of sale are in line with those in place for the sale of the magazine in Katoomba. Conditions of Sale

1. Sellers must adhere to the “Big Issue’s” Code of Practice. 2. Sellers must not obstruct or cause obstruction to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. 3. Sellers must not set up a stand or sell from a vehicle unless prior written

approval from Council is obtained. 4. Sellers shall take direction given by an authorised officer of Council where

public safety or convenience is affected. 5. A minimum of $10 million public liability insurance policy shall be undertaken

on all sellers and to Blue Mountains City Council’s benefit. A copy of the policy shall be forwarded for Council’s approval prior to the selling of the magazines.

In regard to point 5, insurances are taken out by the Big Issue Australia charitable organisation. These insurances cover all registered vendors in all locations. Conclusion Due to the success of the sales of the “Big Issue” in Katoomba and the need for the project to be managed directly from Blackheath Area Neighbourhood Centre it is recommended that approval be given to Blackheath Area Neighbourhood Centre for the sale of the “Big Issue” magazine at the locations in Blackheath designated in this report.

FACILITATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 23 SUBJECT: COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE / DONATIONS -

RECOMMENDATIONS BY COUNCILLORS FILE NO: C00944 Recommendations: 1. That Council approve the following donations from the Councillors’ Minor Local

Projects Vote:

Organisation Amount Ecumenical Australia Day Committee $300 Kinship at Christmas Foundation $200 National Servicemen’s Association of Australia – Blue Mountains and Districts Sub Branch $400 NSW Police Service – Blue Mountains Local Area Command $100 Rotary Club of Lower Blue Mountains $450 Glenbrook District Guides $200 St Finbar’s School $150 Katoomba High School $100

2. That Council approve the following donation from the Mayoral Contingency Fund:

Organisation Amount Kinship at Christmas Foundation $250

Report by General Manager: On 11 July 2000 Council adopted a revised Policy for Councillors’ Minor Local Projects allocations for the provision of community assistance/donations. The following recommendations for donation, which appear to fall within the ambit of the Policy, have been received and are submitted for approval.


Minor Local Projects

Recommending Councillor

Organisation Purpose Amount

Cr J Angel Ecumenical Australia Day Committee

To assist with costs for Australia Day celebration $300

Cr P McInnes Kinship at Christmas Foundation Community lunch $50

Cr A Henson Kinship at Christmas Foundation Community lunch $50

Cr C Van der Kley Kinship at Christmas Foundation

To assist with cost of Christmas dinner $100

Cr C Van der Kley

National Servicemen’s Association of Australia – Blue Mountains and Districts Sub Branch

To assist with cost of memorial at Wentworth Falls

$200

Cr A Searle

National Servicemen’s Association of Australia – Blue Mountains and Districts Sub Branch

To assist with cost of memorial at Wentworth Falls

$200

Cr J Angel NSW Police Service – Blue Mountains Local Area Command

Crime Prevention Workshop $100

Cr K Frappell Rotary Club of Lower Blue Mountains

To assist in hosting Australia Day celebrations at Glenbrook

$250

Cr F Creed Glenbrook District Guides To assist with painting Guide Hall $200

Cr F Creed St Finbar’s School Administration costs $150

Cr F Creed Rotary Club of Lower Blue Mountains Australia Day celebrations $200

Cr T Hamilton Katoomba High School Crime Prevention Workshop $100

Mayoral Contingency Fund

Recommending Councillor

Organisation Purpose Amount

Cr J Angel Kinship at Christmas Foundation Community lunch $250

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 24 SUBJECT: LAWSON COMMUNITY HALL AND RFS SITE FILE NO: H01351 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That Council extends the period for submissions for the draft Plan of Management

(PoM) for the site until the close of business Friday 29 January 2004. 3. That Council formally advises the community of this date by:

(a) Writing to persons who attended the two (2) public meetings, or the public hearing meeting, or have lodged a submission to the PoM process to date advising them of the closing date for submissions to the draft PoM;

(b) Placing a suitable and appropriate advertisement in both the local paper

(Blue Mountains Gazette) and a Sydney metropolitan paper advising of the closing date for submissions to the draft PoM; and

(c) Placing advice of the closing date on the Council’s web page. and Council

offices in Katoomba and Springwood, as well as the Council libraries and the Mid Mountains Community Centre.

Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Background At its meeting of 12 October 2004, Council considered a report on the Lawson Community Hall and RFS site and resolved:

“1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That this report and the information contained within be used to inform the

current Plan of Management (PoM) process associated with this site, even though Council is not bound to undertake a PoM for the site.

3. That Council seek further legal advice on the status of the land and attempts

to locate the missing 1957 report. 4. That Council extend the period of time for submissions to PoM until such

further advice is available and reported back to Council.”

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Item 24 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

At its meeting of 2 November 2004, Council considered a report on Legal advice on the Lawson Community Hall and RFS site and resolved:

“1. That Council receives and notes this report and the appended legal advice. 2. That Council commence negotiations with the Department of Lands to

remove any ambiguity in Council’s legal status in relation to the land and arrange for council to have title to the land in fee simple, free from any equities or interests that may otherwise be asserted by the Crown.

3. That the Common Seal of Council be affixed to any necessary documents. 4. That Council continues to extend the period for submissions to be received

for the draft Plan of Management until there is both clarity of outcome and timing associated with item 2 above, and that this is reported back to Council at which time a date of cessation of the submission period will be adopted.

5. That Council publicly advertise this extension and notify those who have

attended community consultations or have made submissions to date.” Site Matters - Progress Council via its legal advisor, Mr. Trevor Cork of McPhee Kelshaw, received a letter from Ms. Bronwyn Everett of the Department of Lands, (attached) dated 11 November 2004, which advised:

“The title has been subsequently amended at Land and Property Information to show the proprietorship of the land by the Council of the City of the Blue Mountains The Department of Lands has therefore no further interest in the land.”

The folio identifier search shows on that as of the 11 November 2004, the dedication of the property as a mechanics institute has been deleted. Plan of Management - submissions period & process Now that the matters of ownership affecting the site have been resolved, Council can set a closing date for submission to the draft Plan of Management (PoM). It is suggested, given the time of the year that the submission period is extended to 29 January 2005. It is further suggested that Council advise the community of the revised closing date for submissions by formally writing to those persons who either attended a/the public meetings, including public hearing meeting and those people who have already made a submission to the draft PoM. In addition, suitable and appropriate advertisements be placed in the Blue Mountains Gazette and a Sydney metropolitan paper advising of the closing date.


Conclusion Now that the ownership of the land affected by the draft (PoM) has been resolved, Council can now set a revised closing date for submissions and advise the community of such amended date and allow the draft PoM process to continue.


Attachment

PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES/FACILITIES Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 25 SUBJECT: TENDER FOR DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION / REFURBISHMENT

OF THE BLACKHEATH SWIMMING POOLS, BLACKHEATH FILE NO: H00342 Recommendations: 1. That the Council receives and notes this report. 2. That the Council notes that the view of the Blackheath Pool Advisory Group

(BPAG), is that the revised option known as Option 2 represents the best overall value offer for Council and the Blackheath community.

3. That Council continues to negotiate with Crystal Pools and Kinsley & Associates,

representing the two (2) best overall revised offer option’s received over the course of December 2004 / January 2005 for the purposes of reducing the quantum of the revised offer to a maximum value of $2.05M (excluding GST).

4. That in the circumstance that the further negotiations do not achieve the Council’s

financial objective: a. That formal negotiations cease; and b. That this be reported back to Council.

5. That in the event negotiations are successful in achieving the Council’s financial project objective, being the stated maximum value, that the offer representing the best overall value, the General Manager: a. Be authorised to engage the tender representing the best value to commence

design work under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU); b. Report back to the Council meeting on 25 January 2005 on the formal

acceptance of the negotiated tender with the tenderer representing the best value.

6. That the General Manager or the Public Officer be authorised to sign the MoU on

behalf of Council. 7. That Council be kept informed of the progress of the further negotiations, similarly

does the Blackheath Pool Advisory Group (BPAG). 8. That Council makes application for a Development Application (DA) for the

project.


Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Introduction This report provides Council with the outcome of the negotiations with the three (3) tenderers following the resolution at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 31 August 2004, not to accept any tender. The report should be considered in two (2) parts. The first part of the report deals with the revised offers received for the two (2) options put to the three original tenderers. The second part provides background into matters called ‘Project Considerations’. Part A – Revised offers / tenders 1. Background Council has received earlier reports on this project at its 27 January 2004 meeting (Minute No. 22), and 31 August 2004 meeting (Minute No. 377). Council at its 31 August 2004 meeting (Minute No. 377) resolved:

“1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That Council resolves to decline to accept any of the tenders received in

accordance with the Local Government Tendering Regulations. 3. That Council through the Blackheath Pool Advisory Group (BPAG)

Technical Working Party commences negotiations with any or all of the tenderers or any external party on the tendered documentation and associated specifications.

4. That the outcome of the negotiations be reported back to Council. 5. That Items 3 and 4 proceed with the utmost urgency. 6. That Council appoints Anne Crowther, 96 Station Street, Blackheath, to be

a member of the Blackheath Pool Advisory Committee.” 2. The Tender Negotiations Following Council’s decision of 31 August 2004, a panel comprising Council staff and the late Mr. Ray Frost held discussion sessions with the three tenderers from which, two (2) revised options were developed.


Each tenderer was requested to price the two (2) revised options. The revised options were: • Option 1 – Cost saving opportunities based upon the original conforming tender, and • Option 2 – Cost saving opportunities based upon option 1 above, however, in this

option the requirement was for fully/partial demolition of the ‘Olympic’ pool and constructing a 25 metre x 20 metre ‘Lap’ pool in lieu of fully demolishing and reconstructing a 50 metre x 15 metre pool.

The following prices were received for the revised offers, being Options 1 and 2, and are shown, listed in apparent order of price, with the highest cost submission listed first and the lowest cost submission listed last, (GST excluded) in Tables 1 and 2 respectively. The revised offers were scrutinised for errors and or discrepancies, with the Crystal Pools values adjusted to include $325,000 the tender specification required to be allowed for specified items to be purchased /provided by others (commonly called PC items). Tenderer Option 1

(Excl. GST) Kinsley & Assoc. P/L $3,300,333.00*

$3,001,667.00# Crystal Pools P/L $2,926,594.00 Haslin Constructions P/L $2,688,360.00 Table 1 – Revised Offer – Option 1 * - Offer based upon Sand & DE Filters and no UV # - Offer based upon Sand only Filters and no UV Tenderer Option 2

(excl. GST) Haslin Constructions P/L $2,644,380.00 Kinsley & Assoc. P/L $2,529,089.00# Crystal Pools P/L $2,342,137.00 Table 2 – Revised Offer – Option 2 # - Offer based upon Sand only Filters and no UV Kinsley & Associates provided three (3) further options, in addition to the required option 1 and option 2. Two of the three additional options from Kinsley & Associates were based upon the premise to demolish the existing ‘Toddler’s’ pool and construct a new Toddlers area within the southern / shallow end of the existing ‘Free Form’ pool. Tenderer Option 1A

(excl. GST) Option 2A (excl. GST)

Kinsley & Assoc. P/L $ 2,166,393.00 $ 2,186,362.00 Table 3 – Additional Options – Kinsley & Associates


Option 1A is based upon: Sand filters only and no UV Re-use of existing equipment VM3 vinyl in lieu of tiles to reconstructed ‘Olympic’ pool

Option 2A is based upon: Sand filters only and no UV Re-use of existing equipment VM3 vinyl in lieu of tiles to new 25 m x 20 m ‘Lap’ pool

Option 1A, whilst of some merit, has a number of items of concern. Firstly reuse of the existing plant and equipment, which will mean that there is no guarantee / warranty associated with this option. The savings for re-use are not inconsequential, however, the relative risk is considered too high. The use of a liner in lieu of tiles is also seen to be of a short-to-medium term solution. The manufacturer’s life of the liner is estimated at ten (10) years. There are some concerns that the liner may be subject to damage and / or vandalism easier than that of tiles or a painted system. BPAG have been consistent in their commitment and views to retain the existing ‘Free Form’ and ‘Toddler’s’ pools in their entirety, unless there are no other appropriate options to achieve Council’s project cost target. BPAG has also expressed that the project choice incorporate maximising the full life of the pool, including providing for associated on going operations and maintenance budgets. These options were not, at this time, viewed as favourable or ones, which BPAG would support without all other options being exhausted. The third additional offer from Kinsley & Associates was the premise of a guaranteed maximum price, which in effect is what Council is pursuing. 3. Tender Evaluation All tenders were assessed using a weighted attribute evaluation method relating to selection criteria specified in the brief and in accordance with Local Government Tendering Regulation 1999.

ITEM ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTING 1 Relevant experience with similar projects 15%

2 Performance on previous projects 15%

3 Environmental Management Plan 10%

4 Site Safety Management Plan 10%

5 Risk management Plan 10%

6 Financial Capability 10%

7 Price 30%

TOTAL 100%


The Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP) evaluated the submissions received in accordance with the selection criteria specified in the revised tender / offer and finally made recommendations as to the most appropriate tenderer on the basis of the scores against the tender’s selection criteria / weighting attributes. Enclosed separately for the information of Councillors is “Commercial-in-Confidence” which records results of the summary of the findings of the TEP in order of ranking based on the selection criteria in respect to the average and average weighted score against the criteria. The full tender evaluation report is available on file for further reference. The average weighted scores shown are out of a total possible score of 4. Part B - Project Considerations 1. Political Council’s position regarding this project has been unchanged since 3 December 2002, where it adopted:

‘That Council is strongly committed to ensuring that Blackheath continues to have a swimming pool complex and the Blackheath community be kept fully involved at all times of this process’.

2. Community & Social The Blackheath swimming complex, which is located within the Blackheath Memorial Gardens has long played a significant role in the local community. This has been well demonstrated over the past two (2) years through community attendance at public meetings; the local community’s organisation of the 2004 Australia Day ‘celebration’ on the pool site; more recently by the work undertaken by Mr. Doug Spiller (BPAG) about the community’s attraction and feelings about the pool complex; and by the BPAG members, who represent the local community. 3. Environmental It is important that the leakage of chlorinated water from the pool complex is addressed satisfactorily to prevent any further leakage of water to the duck pond below the earthen embankment and into the local eco system. There are only two real ways that this situation can be addressed. The first option would be to permanently and decommission the pool complex; the second option, which Council is pursuing, is the remediation of the swimming pool complex through a mixture of refurbishment and new construction. John Wilson and Partners (JWP) in their report of September 2003 reported concentrations of chlorine in the duck pond body of water equating to 4mg/l. Care will need to be taken during the works under the contract are undertaken in a manner, which ensures that the pools and new treatment / circulation systems are watertight and leak free.


The duck pond and local eco system will be monitored on an ongoing basis, particularly during the initial year after, or defects liability period of the contract, to verify if any chlorinated water is leaking from the pool complex and associated systems. 4. Risk Site Conditions The project is not without its associated risk, the major one being the groundwater conditions associated with the site. These have been the subject of much discussion and information over the past two (2) years, and have had an adverse affect on the pool shells and associated pipe work systems. Mr. Ian Poppitt, a local engineering geologist, John Wilson & Partners, Douglas & Partners (geotechnical engineers) and the late Mr. Ray Frost provided advice regarding the site conditions. As a result, the new ‘Lap’ pool will be founded on a system of reinforced concrete bored piles founded in rock. The shell of the pool will be supported by a series of reinforced concrete beams, which will span over the top of the piles. The perimeter of the pool site, will be serviced by sub soil drains and pits designed to stabilise / control the ground water conditions and hence minimise any changes in groundwater conditions, which may give rise to cracking and movement of the pool shells and associated pipe work systems. The ‘Free Form’ pool, the ‘Toddler’s’ pool and the pool’s balance tank will all be refurbished and new pipe work systems (water treatment / circulation) will be constructed. Water Quality Other risks, which will be addressed in the project, will be the upgrading of the water treatment plant and equipment to ensure compliance with current pool water quality standards set down by the Department of Health. Maintenance Practice The past practice of draining the pools during the winter will cease. Whilst this will assist minimising ground / pore pressure fluctuations on the underside of the pool floor shells with the loading and unloading of the pool shells, this practice will be somewhat offset by the public liability risk of keeping water in the pools throughout the year. Further Negotiations Should the recommended further negotiations with Crystal Pools on Council’s targeted project cost, (which will more than likely affect the project scope), not be successful, the risk is that either the tender / negotiation process will have to commence anew, which, given past experience, will more than likely result in the pool project not being operational for the 2005/06 season. To minimise this risk Council could enter into discussions and negotiations with both Crystal Pools and the next highest ranked tender submission, being from Kinsley & Associates, both under a MoU during the course of December 2004.


Should the negotiations with one of the tenders prove successful, it is recommended that the General Manager be provided with delegated authority to engage the most appropriate tenderer for the design phase of the project, with a full report accepting the most appropriate tenderer as the project contactor at Council’s 25 January 2005 meeting. Funding As will be mentioned further below, another project risk is the securing of total project funds through the sale of Council assets, predominantly land sales. Should there be any problem with selling the land earmarked and/or finding further land to sell to fund the project, alternative sources of funds will need to be found, most likely through either rate revenue or loan funds. These latter two (2) sources of funds, as Council would be aware are under enormous pressure already. Council could determine to allocate further monies to the project, in addition to the existing budget of $2.5M, however, the source of such additional funds as outlined above would more than likely come from rate and / or loan revenue and if such a decision is made would require the postponement or deletion of projects from the Capital Works Program (CWP) to allow additional funds to be found for the Blackheath pool project. Project contingencies for the project have been set as 10% of the total project cost. In normal practice, project contingency allocation is usually between 15% to 20% of the project cost. 5. Legal Council is currently researching the 1930’s deed/trust associated with the building of the three (3) pavilions to the pool complex. Once the research has been completed this matter will be further reported to Council. A memorandum of understanding (MoU) will be drafted by Council’s legal representative, which will set out the terms and associated conditions for negotiations, with Crystal Pools, to achieve the Council’s financial project cost target of $2.05M. 6. Financial Funding Source Council, through its amendments to the Business Paper report of 27 January 2004, (Minute No. 22) ‘unofficially’ adopted a project budget of $2.5M, which involved selling Council owned land / assets.

“Further, that in adopting recommendation 2 above, Council: Agrees to the sale of land parcels as identified in attachment no. 1 to fund the

project as defined by Option B, Agrees for Council officers to further investigate and report back on any

additional assets sales to fully fund the project should there be a shortfall between the realised land sales and the (total) project cost”


The identified-for-sale parcels of land are : 108 Wentworth Street Blackheath 115 Wentworth Street Blackheath (old depot site) 107-111 Great Western Highway Blackheath Two (2) of the three (3) parcels cannot be sold until the DLEP2004 is gazetted. The third parcel of land requires reclassification and rezoning. As the total estimated return from these identified parcels of land is not be sufficient for funding the total cost of the pool, it would be prudent to identify more unusable land or land not required for public purposes in the area to fund the short fall should the realised sale prices not reach the required budget funding. Project Cost Breakdown Given that the total project cost being targeted is $2.5M, which is made up of the following: Targeted tender / contract amount $ 2.05M Estimated Council ‘project costs’, including $ 0.20M

o Project costs incurred to date o Project management o Project specialist costs

Heritage consultant Pool designer

Allowance for project contingencies $ 0.25M o This represents only 10%, normally 15-20% of project

Project Deletions – Not Budgeted During the negotiations with the three (3) tenderers some work was deleted from the scope of work in an attempt to constrain the revised offers to within Council’s project allocation. These works were: Entry road, and Perimeter fence (2.1m high)

At this time both these items are outside all of the revised offer prices. These two items are estimated to be worth some $120,000.00. The road component, being approximately $110,000 would / could be funded from the roads program of the CWP in 2005/06. The fence would have to come from contingencies. Estimated O&M Costs Whilst no exact figures can be put to any likely costs for operation and maintenance (O&M) of the pool complex until final designs have been completed. What is known, is that the electricity load to power the upgraded plant and equipment will increase from that previously, similarly there will be an increase in the use of chemicals associated with upgraded plant to ensure water quality compliance. Both of these elements together have the potential to increase previous O&M costs by more than $50,000 per season. The O&M costs for the 2001/02 season were in excess of $120,000.


Intergenerational equity This simply means that present and future users of the facility who gain enjoyment / benefit from using the facility need to ensure that the facility is available for future generations to enjoy through providing funding through a user pays fee and / or depreciation fee to fund any future upgrades / improvements / reconstructions of the facility for future use by future generations. Council will recall that the recently opened Springwood Fitness and Aquatic Centre (SF&AC) incorporated a depreciation component in the fees and charges schedule of the SF&AC. This is to ensure that there are sufficient funds available to upgrade / replace the pools in 25 years time and the building component in 40 years time. A report will be coming to Council for its 25 January 2005 meeting regarding aquatic centres fees and charges generally, which will also provide advice regarding funding depreciation of the other four (4) facilities, which will include Blackheath. Fees and charges Blackheath pool does not have user pays fee applied for the use and enjoyment of the facility. This means that there are no additional funds available to partially cover any outgoings associated with the operation and maintenance of the facility. As mentioned above, the O&M costs for the last season when all of the pools were in operation was in excess of $120,000. It is now estimated with the increased costs associated with greater electrical load and chemicals for the upgraded facility that the new O&M budget/costs will be of the order of $170,000. As mentioned previously, the reasons / basis behind the non-application of a user charge being applied to the Blackheath pool is being considered. A report will come to Council once the legal research regarding the matter has been completed. In all reality, this current situation of nil income generation and nil funding for depreciation of the facility is financially unsustainable. 7. Process / Timing Negotiations It is anticipated that the negotiations to achieve Council’s project price target will be achieved during December 2004. Design Phase Assuming successful negotiations can occur by 31 December 2004, it is anticipated that the design phase of the project will be completed by mid March 2005. Substantial design work will be progressively provided to inform and allow consideration of the DA process. Development Application (DA) The project’s Development Application (DA) will be exhibited in mid December 2004 and determined by mid February 2005. The relative merits of a staged DA would allow some works to occur, prior to the receipt of the project’s construction certificate, such as the demolition of the ‘Olympic’ pool and the construction of the perimeter drains.


Construction Certificate (CC) The CC will take two (2) weeks to issue once the full DA has been determined, assuming that the DA is determined favourably. It is anticipated that the CC will be issued by the end of February 2005 / early March 2005. Project Construction Phase Once the CC has been issued the construction period can commence. From discussions with all of the tenderers, this phase will take six (6) months to complete to practical completion stage. Allowing from wet / inclement weather, it is anticipated that the project will be completed by mid to late October 2005. Comment from the Tender Review Committee (TRC) The Tender Review Committee has reviewed the tender procedures and is satisfied as to the fairness of the process. Conclusion Council needs (through further negotiation) to reduce the quantum of the revised offers from either Crystal Pools and/or Kinsley & Associates to be within Council’s allocated project sum of $2.05M. for the project to proceed within the Council’s current financial allocation. If agreed to by the Council, officers will negotiate with these contractors during the course of December 2004, and if need be, January 2005 to achieve this objective. It is more than likely that the ‘current’ scope of works associated with Option 2 will be changed to accommodate such negotiations. Council and BPAG will be kept informed of any such changes and on the success of otherwise of the negotiations. Should neither tenderer be able to meet Council’s financial objective through negotiation Council and BPAG will be formally advised of this situation at the 25 January 2004 Council meeting. It is recommended that should Council be successful in achieving its financial objective with its negotiations with one of the two tenderers, that the General Manager be granted delegated authority to engage the successful tenderer on the design only phase of the project on the formalisation of the re negotiated offer, with a full engagement for the whole project, pending Council’s adoption of such at the Council meeting of 25 January 2005.

TRANSPORTATION & ROADS Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 26 SUBJECT: LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE FILE NO: C00534 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That the items 2004.41 to 2004.47 contained in the report of the Local Traffic

Committee meetings held on 26 October 2004 be approved by Council. 3. That the Director Client Services - Roads and Traffic Authority Blacktown, the

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

4. That the items 2004.48 to 2004.54 are noted. Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Attached to this Report are the Minutes of the meeting of the Local Traffic Committee held on 26 October 2004. The recommendations of the Committee are now submitted to Council for approval.

TRANSPORTATION & ROADS Item 26 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

Attachment

LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MEETING 26 October 2004 Previous Items adopted by Council

2004.53 Items 2004-29 to 2004-36 were adopted by Council on 21 September 2004.

Attendance:

Mr. John Derum Representative for Bob Debus MP Constable Mick Adams Police Mr Glenn Sherlock BMCC Chair Ms Lyn Van Putten RTA Ms Terri Hamilton BMCC Councillor Ms Janina Olmos-New BMCC Minutes Mr Peter Adams Program Leader – Sustainable Infrastructure and Access Mr Josh French Transport Corridor Project Officer

Ward 1 Mt Tomah to Leura

2004.41 Sutton Lane, Blackheath. Conversion to one-way traffic westbound between Wentworth Street and Great Western Highway and left-out only at GWH.

Numerous requests have been received regarding the unsafe right turn from the GWH into Sutton Lane. A draft report on Town Precincts, Traffic and Pedestrians has recommended that Sutton Lane is made one-way. Access is available via the controlled intersection at Govetts Leap Road.

Recommendation:

That subject to RTA approval, Council approves the conversion of Sutton Lane to one-way westbound between the carpark and Great Western Highway and right-turn manoeuvres out of Sutton Lane onto the Great Western Highway are restricted as shown on attachment 1.


Attachment

2004.42 Mt Blackheath Rd and Kanimbla Drive, Blackheath. Traffic priority.

Council has received a request from a resident to formalise the traffic priority at this intersection due to near misses. A give-way priority should be located as shown on attachment 2.

Recommendation:

That Council approves the traffic give-way priority as shown on attachment 2.

2004.43 Shipley Road and Mt Blackheath Road, Blackheath. Traffic priority.

Council has received a request from a resident to formalise the traffic priority at this intersection due to near misses. A give-way priority should be located as shown on attachment 3. Recommendation: That Council approves the traffic give-way priority as shown on attachment 3.

2004.44 Peckmans Road, Neale Street and Stuarts Road, Katoomba. Provision of

linemarking to improve delineation of road.

Council has received a request from a resident to improve the delineation of these narrow, and undulating streets by provision of linemarking including double barrier and hold lines as shown on attachment 4.

Recommendation:

That Council approves the linemarking as shown on attachment 4.

Ward 2 Wentworth Falls to Faulconbridge Nil Ward 3 Springwood to Warrimoo 2004.45 Endeavour Drive, Winmalee. Traffic Calming outside Highschool.

Council has received representations through Councillor McLaren from a resident requesting speed humps to be installed on Endeavour Drive outside Winmalee Highschool due to speeding vehicles and drag racing on weekends. Endeavour Drive is a cul-de-sac narrow road.


Attachment

Traffic calming such as speed humps or other treatments are not considered necessary on this already narrow and short section of road. The police advised that they have not received reports of speeding in this vicinity. It was regarded as inappropriate to consider traffic calming along Endeavour Drive.

Recommendation:

That Council notes this advice.

Ward 4 Blaxland to Lapstone

2004.46 St Johns Road, Blaxland. Extension of linemarking from new work to Great Western Highway.

New road sealing has been carried out along a stretch of St Johns Road, Blaxland. Double barrier lines have been provided for the extent of the new work but stop short 50 m from the intersection with the Great Western Highway. The linemarking should continue to the intersection as shown on attachment 5.

Recommendation:

That Council approves the linemarking the additional 50m from the new work to the intersection with the GWH as shown in attachment 5.

Late Items 2004.47 Railway Bridge, Blackheath. Proposed load limit restriction.

Council has received written advice from Rail Infrastructure Corporation on a survey of the condition of existing railway bridges in the Blue Mountains. They have determined that the bridge west of the Blackheath railway station can only safely carry a limit of 19 Tonnes. Railcorp has requested load limit signs be placed on the approaches to the bridge to prevent heavy vehicles over the load limit using the bridge in future.

Recommendation:

That Council notes this advice and the signs are installed as soon as possible.


Attachment

General Discussion Items

2004.48 Proposed changes by RTA to pedestrian crossing on Great Western

Highway outside Blackheath Station.

Council has received information from RTA on proposed changes to the western pedestrian crossing outside the Blackheath railway station. The proposal is to relocate the existing crossing approximately 10 m south. This is to improve the existing conflicts with the service station on the corner of Gardiner Crescent as shown on attachment 6. Discussion on the proposal identified some issues that should be raised with the RTA. The relocation of the pedestrian crossing would require associated fencing to be provided to direct the pedestrians to use the new location. The existing taxi rank would need to be relocated. An additional kerb blister should be considered at the intersection of the Great Western Highway with Gardiner Crescent to further reinforce the town centre environment by narrowing the expanse of road pavement. While the existing pedestrian refuge is to be removed, the additional blisters proposed would reduce the overall length of pavement to be crossed. It was considered that this would benefit pedestrians. Recommendation: That Council notes this advice and writes to the RTA requesting consideration to be given to the provision of a fence to reinforce the pedestrian route and an additional kerb blister at the intersection of the Great Western Highway and Gardiner Crescent to be funded by the RTA.

2004.49 Proposed changes to level railway crossing facilities at Blackheath and

Faulconbridge as identified by RTA and Rail Infrastructure Corporation (RIC).

A meeting was held at Council offices on 19 July 2004 between the RTA, RIC and Council representatives to discuss possible safety improvements to level crossings at Faulconbridge and Blackheath. These locations have been identified by the NSW Level Crossing Strategy Council (LCSC) as high risk and some safety improvements have been proposed for the 2004/2005 improvement program.


Attachment

It should be noted that the treatments have been investigated and proposed by the RTA on behalf of the LCSC. Council is a stakeholder in these works as both locations are on local roads and some contribution to the works would be expected. At this stage Council has been asked to comment on the proposals for both locations. Based on the comments received from Council further investigation and community consultation would follow. Faulconbridge To reduce the risk of collision at the crossing a presence detector for traffic is proposed between the GWH and the level crossing. The device will detect a vehicle, 3 car lengths back from the traffic signals. When activated, flashing yellow warning lights installed on the approach to the level crossing will warn drivers not to proceed across the railway lines. In addition, adjustments are proposed to the pedestrian facilities and crossing locations. Pedestrian level crossing gates are proposed with connecting footpaths to Sir Henry’s Parade and on the GWH as shown on attachment 7. Comments:

• The vehicle detector was considered beneficial addition to improve safety.

• The benefit of the new pedestrian arrangement was questioned as there is no existing footpath along Sir Henry’s Parade to connect the proposed pedestrian crossing. However it was acknowledged that some pedestrians do use the road and they do not currently have a safer option.

• Faulconbridge residents association should be consulted on the issue of connectivity of footpaths.

Blackheath Three alternatives have been proposed at Blackheath. These proposals primarily deal with the issue of long vehicles queuing on the existing hatched area across the railway line while waiting for the change in traffic signals at the intersection of GWH and Bundarra Street. This issue has been considered a high risk due to the uniqueness of the intersection where long vehicles do not have the ability to move forward until the traffic signals have changed.


Attachment

Option 1: Proposes the restriction of vehicles over 9 m in length using the level crossing at the traffic signals to access the GWH. In other words, long vehicles would be able to turn from the GWH into the level crossing but would be redirected north along Station Street to the railway bridge to access the highway. This option has the least impact as only long vehicles leaving the area would require redirection. Community consultation is proposed as part of the decision process. Refer to attachment 8. It is important to note that the information from RIC regarding the placement of load limits on the railway bridge (item 2004.47) significantly affect all the proposals.

Comments:

• The narrowness and horizontal alignment of Station Street is an important issue.

• The proposal resolves the heavy vehicle issue across the railway track but transfers the problem of safe vehicular access (for heavy vehicles) onto the highway to the unsignalised railway bridge further north.

• Investigation into the co-ordination of railway and GWH traffic signals has been considered and will be further investigated.

• The impact on the residents of Station Street. Option 2: Change Bundarra Street (at the traffic signals) between Station Street and the Highway to oneway westbound (traffic can turn into Bundarra Street only). This means that all vehicles from the western side of the rail line would be redirected along Station Street to the railway bridge to access the Great Western Highway. This proposal would again be subject to community consultation. Refer to attachment 9. Comments:

• The narrowness and horizontal alignment of Station Street is an important issue.

• The effect on the residents of Station Street with the increase in traffic.

• The proposal resolves the heavy vehicle issue across the railway track but transfers the problem of safe vehicular access (for all vehicles) onto the highway, to the unsignalised railway bridge further north.

• Investigation into the co-ordination of railway and GWH traffic signal has been considered and will be further investigated.


Attachment

Option 3: The same as option 2 and the conversion of Station Street to one way between Murri Street and Wombat Street due to the narrowness of the road pavement. Again this would be subject to community consultation. Refer to attachment 10. Comments:

• The narrowness and horizontal alignment of Station Street is an important issue. Making Station Street oneway to avoid upgrading the existing alignment is not acceptable.

• The effect on the residents of Station Street with the increase in traffic and the effect of the oneway on additional local roads.

• The proposal resolves the heavy vehicle issue across the railway track but transfers the problem of safe vehicular access (for all vehicles) onto the highway, to the unsignalised railway bridge further north.

• Investigation into the co-ordination of railway and GWH traffic signals will be considered and further investigated.

• Recommendation: That Council notes this advice.

2004.50 Truck parking issues outside Caltex Service Station Mt Victoria.

Council has received numerous letters, representations and a petition regarding the noise generated by trucks parked along the highway at Mt Victoria at the Caltex service station. The noise issue is particularly offending during the night when residents are trying to sleep. Complaints include the starting of stationery vehicles, running of refrigeration units, the leaving on of radios or stereos in vehicles and the vehicles being left idling while drivers use the services of the Caltex station. This issue has been passed on to the LTC to consider, however it is really an issue that should have been resolved during the DA process. The service station has a 24 hour operating license and the trucks use this facility because there is no other available between Lithgow and Penrith. Discussion took place with the owner of the complex on the issue of noise. Council officers were satisfied that the owner of the service station was being considerate of the surrounding residents. He has discussed issues with the clients and suggested the possible erection of some restricted parking signage. He has also advised that he has the rubbish picked up from across the road two times per week and is considering the installation of some bins in the nature strip that would be emptied by his staff.


Attachment

Consideration was given to restricting the parking of heavy vehicles along the highway between the hours of 10pm and 6am to reduce the noise impact on the residents. This suggestion was rejected by the LTC due to: • the satisfactory enforcement of the signage • illegal parking that may result due to the displacement of vehicles,

transferring problems further along the highway and thus resulting in other residents being affected

Recommendation: Council officers are to work with the Caltex management to develop a Code of Conduct for users of the facility. The code will be trialed for a period of three months.

2004.51 Informal rest area on Great Western Highway opposite nursery, Mt Boyce.

The former area manager for the upper mountains has expressed the desire to improve the informal parking that exists on the western side of the highway adjacent to the Mt Boyce nursery. Comments were sought from the LTC on the impact of any changes to this informal stop. Recommendation: That the existing stop should not be formalized to encourage stopping as this would require considerable works to be provided in accordance with the current standards.

2004.52 Proposed increase of speed limit from 60km to 70km on Megalong Valley Road, Megalong Valley.

In response to correspondence regarding the speed limit on Megalong Valley Road, an officer from the RTA Blacktown office has advised that consideration had been given to the matter. He advised that the RTA considered that the speed limit could be increased to 70 km/hr, 100 metres south of Blackheath Glen reserve except for the school zone that will remain at 40 km/hr. Recommendation: That Council notes this advice.


Attachment

2004.53 Requirements for local road closures for special events.

Changes have been made by the RTA to the requirements necessary for the approval of temporary closure of local roads for the hosting of special events. The new requirements are contained in the RTA document “Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events”. Local road closures for Class 1 and 2 events require formal endorsement from the RTA Blacktown Office. The proposed traffic control plan for the event is required to go to the Local Traffic Committee prior to the RTA. This process is used to allow the LTC to review the plan and recommend any changes to the traffic control plan prior to submission to the RTA. The RTA has the authority to decline approval for traffic control plans that are not considered adequate. For this reason the RTA recommends that traffic control plans are prepared by qualified professionals. In the event that organisers do not have the resources for professional assistance then consideration should be given to holding the event in other locations such as parks or schools. Council in conjunction with the RTA and Police are planning to hold a workshop in early 2005 for all the major event holders to explain the changes and new requirements. Recommendation That Council notes this advice.

2004.54 Lack of footpath along Great Western Highway between Moorecourt

Avenue and Boland Avenue, Springwood.

The RTA has received and passed on representations made via the Office of Bob Debus MP from the office of Ms Jackie Kelley regarding pedestrians crossing the GWH at Boland Avenue. Springwood. It has been observed that there is a grass verge with no formal footpath between Boland Avenue and Ferguson Road to encourage pedestrians to walk to and cross at the traffic signals. It is unlikely that BMCC will provide a concrete footpath along the GWH at this time. The section of verge between Moorecourt Avenue and George Street has been identified on a priority list and will be considered along with other locations subject to funding and priority. Recommendation That Council notes this advice and the Office of Hon. Bob Debus and Ms Kelly are advised accordingly.


Attachment


ITEM NO: 27 SUBJECT: LAWSON VILLAGE CENTRE – TENDER FOR THE

PREPARATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN AND DOCUMENTATION

FILE NO: C07409 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That Council accepts the tender from Complete Urban Solutions Pty. Ltd., for the

sum of $162,250.00, ($147,500.00 + $14,750.00 GST). 3. That the General Manager or the Public Officer be authorised to sign the Contract

on behalf of Council. Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Introduction This report recommends the acceptance of the tender submitted by Complete Urban Solutions Pty. Ltd. for the sum of $162,250.00 ($147,500.00 + $14,750.00 GST), for the preparation of infrastructure design and documentation at Lawson Village Centre. Background The tender package works comprises the preparation of infrastructure plans and documents to enable the calling of tenders for roads, carparking, stormwater drainage, sewer and water reticulation, electrical, street lighting, gas and telecommunications reticulation and associated works. The Tender Open Tenders were called in accordance with Council’s Tendering Guidelines. The Tender was advertised in the Sydney Morning Herald on 19th, 20th, 23rd, 26th and 27th October 2004 and in the Blue Mountains Gazette on 20th October 2004. Tenders closed at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday 16th November 2004. During the tendering period, one (1) Addendum was issued as a result of enquiries from prospective Tenderers:- • Addendum 1, 29 October 2004 – clarifying interface matters between the adopted

Master Plan and that of the RTA’s plans.


Twenty-two (22) copies of the tender documents were issued to prospective tenderers. Council received a letter from one (1) prospective tenderer declining to tender due to the “qualification required”. Two (2) tenders received by facsimile after the closing time were deemed to be invalid under Council’s Tendering Guidelines. The following Tenders were received and are listed in apparent order of price, with the highest cost submission listed first and the lowest cost submission listed last, (GST excluded). The tenders were scrutinised for errors and or discrepancies.

Tenderer Price (excl. GST) Kellogg Brown & Root Pty. Ltd $194,000.00 Complete Urban Solutions Pty. Ltd $165,500.00 BM City Services $152,827.27 Worley Pty. Ltd $119,970.00 Woolacott Hale Corlett & Jumikis $108,260.00 Northrop Engineers $89,950.00 Brown Consulting Pty. Ltd $39,280.00

Table 1: Tender Summary The tender from Brown Consulting was non conforming as they did not submit prices for several of the work components. This tender was not evaluated. The tenders from Worley Pty. Ltd. and Complete Urban Solutions Pty. Ltd. were amended to deduct additional works included within their tenders but not required at this stage of the works, accordingly the apparent order of price, with the highest cost submission listed first and the lowest cost submission listed last, (GST excluded).

Tenderer Price (excl. GST) KELLOGG BROWN & ROOT PTY. LTD $194,000.00 BM CITY SERVICES $152,827.27 COMPLETE URBAN SOLUTIONS PTY. LTD

$147,500.00

WOOLACOTT HALE CORLETT & JUMIKIS

$108,260.00

WORLEY PTY. LTD $90,720.00 NORTHROP ENGINEERS $89,950.00

Table 2: Amended Tender Summary Tender Evaluation All tenders were assessed using a weighted attribute evaluation method relating to selection criteria specified in the brief and in accordance with Local Government Tendering Regulation 1999.


ITEM ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTING 1 Relevant experience with similar projects 15%

2 Skills and Qualifications 10%

3 Technical Competence, Methodology and Environmental Management

15%

4 Capacity to Undertake the Project and Timeframe 10%

5 Understanding of Project Requirements 15%

6 Financial Capability 5%

7 Price 30%

TOTAL 100%

Discussion The Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP) evaluated the submissions received in accordance with the selection criteria specified in the revised tender / offer and finally made recommendations as to the most appropriate tenderer on the basis of the scores against the tender’s selection criteria / weighting attributes. Enclosed separately for the information of Councillors is the “Commercial-in-Confidence” assessment matrix, which records results of the summary of the findings of the TEP in order of ranking based on the selection criteria in respect to the average and average weighted score against the criteria. The full tender evaluation report is available on file for further reference. The average weighted scores shown are out of a total possible score of 4. The references for the recommended Contractor were checked by the selection panel and were found to be satisfactory. These are available on file. Conclusion It is recommended that the tender from Complete Urban Solutions Pty. Ltd. for the sum of $162,250.00 ($147,500.00 + $14,750.00 GST) be accepted. The overall budget allowance for the project was originally $3M. It was reported to Council 6th November 2001 of the offer from the RTA of $2M, which was subsequently negotiated to $3M, and this amount has since been adopted as the project budget. It was based on the best understanding of the associated local roads works at that time, and was prior to the Masterplan for Lawson. A breakup of estimates to the detailed level of design fees has not been done. Cost incurred to date leave the balance of the budget at $2.5M, and the value of the design component is within the budget allowance for the project. It is noted that the detailed estimate / budget for the remaining components of the work can only be finalised by proceeding with the design work.


Comment by Tender Review Committee The Tender Review Committee has reviewed the tender procedure and is satisfied as to the fairness of the process. Funding for this proposed contract is available in the 2004/05 Capital Works Program.


ITEM NO: 28 SUBJECT: TENDER FOR DESIGN AND RECONSTRUCTION AND/OR

RENOVATION OF DRAINAGE SYSTEM UNDER KATOOMBA & WARIALDA STREETS, KATOOMBA USING TRENCHLESS TECHNOLOGY

FILE NO: C07407 Recommendations: 1. That Council receives and notes this report. 2. That Council resolves to accept the tender submitted by Robsent Pty Ltd for the

design and reconstruction / renovation of the drainage system under Katoomba & Warialda Streets, Katoomba using trenchless technology for the lump sum price of $ 175,511.98 ($159,556.35 + $15,955.63 GST).

Report by Group Manager, City Solutions: Introduction: This report provides Council with information regarding the tender for the design and reconstruction / renovation of the drainage system under Katoomba and Warialda Streets, Katoomba, using trench less technology and the recommendations arising from the tenders received and the evaluation of same. The Tender: Open tenders were called in accordance with Council’s Tendering Guidelines. The tender was advertised in the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) on the 23 October 2004, 26 October 2004, 30 October 2004 and 2 November 2004 and the Blue Mountains Gazette (BMG) on the 27 October 2004 and 31 October 2004. Tenders closed at 2.00pm, Tuesday 16 November 2004.

The following tenders were received and are listed in order of price tendered, from lowest to the highest price. The tenders received are available on file for Councillor reference.


Table 1: Tender

Summary

Tender Evaluation

The Tender

Evaluation Panel (TEP)

evaluated the submissions received in accordance with the selection criteria and relative weightings as per table 2 below, and made recommendations as to the most appropriate tenderer on the basis of the scores against the selection criteria. The TEP through this process ranked the submissions based on the selection criteria and weighting as follows: ITEM ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTING

1 Relevant experience with similar projects 10%

2 Approach and methodology 30%

3 Availability of qualified and experienced personnel

10%

4 Availability of suitable plant and equipment 10%

5 Risk management system 10%

6 Price 30%

TOTAL 100% Table 2 – Tender Weighting Criteria Discussion Enclosed separately for the information of Councillors is a copy of the “Commercial-in-Confidence” assessment matrix, which records results of the summary of the findings of the TEP. The full tender evaluation report is available on file for further reference. The average weighted scores shown are out of a total possible score of 4. It is noted that the tenders with the two lowest prices were not recommended. The assessment matrix deals with factoring the non-price issues, and of particular note is that the lowest offer did not offer a technical solution complying with the specification, and the second lowest price was considered not viable because of the tenderers inability to deliver to the timeframe specified due to lack of available resources.

Tenderer Price (ex. GST) Blue Mountains City Services Option 3 $ 140,118.00 Bentham Investments Pty Ltd $ 145,000.00 Robsent Pty Ltd $ 159556.35 Interflow $ 189,072.99

Blue Mountains City Services Option 1 $ 189,218.00

Blue Mountains City Services Option 2 $ 196,508.00


Funding An amount of $250,000 has been allocated in the Council’s 2004/05 Capital Works Program (CWP) budget for this project. Comment from the Tender Review Committee The Tender Review Committee has reviewed the tender procedures and is satisfied as to the fairness of the process. Conclusion It is recommended that Council accept the tender submitted by Robsent Pty Ltd as providing the best value tender for the design and reconstruction renovation of the drainage system under Katoomba & Warialda Streets, Katoomba using trench less technology for the lump sum price of $ 175,511.98 ($159,556.35 + $15,955.63 GST).

NOTICE OF MOTION Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 29 SUBJECT: RADIATA PLATEAU, KATOOMBA FILE NO: A75920 By Councillor T Hamilton:

“That, as a matter of urgency, Council writes to the Member for the Blue Mountains, the Hon Bob Debus, with a copy to the Premier, the Hon Bob Carr, strongly supporting the request of the Nature Conservation Council of NSW Inc, dated 1 December 2004, that:

1. an Interim Protection Order be placed on the Radiata Plateau, Katoomba; and

2. the subject sites are acquired in public ownership for incorporation

within the National Parks system.”

Comments by Councillor Hamilton: The NCC is the peak environmental organisation in NSW and represents over 130 member groups. It is concerned that the pending sale of three parcels of land in this area would set a precedent for further degradation of the Radiata Plateau’s unique environment. The Plateau and adjacent area contain high numbers of rare and endangered plants and specialised habitats. It is felt that these endangered communities will be threatened by any development of the Radiata Plateau and it is essential that the State Government acquires the land for incorporation into the National Park.

NOTICE OF MOTION Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 30 SUBJECT: INSTALLATION OF SPEED CAMERAS - GREAT WESTERN

HIGH, WEST OF KATOOMBA FILE NO: C00212 Pt 11 By Councillor T Hamilton:

“1. That Council again writes to the RTA strongly requesting the installation of speed cameras in the area west of Explorers Road, Katoomba, on the Great Western Highway, due to cars and trucks greatly exceeding 70 kph on the overtaking lane going west.

2. That a copy of this letter be forwarded to the Minister for Roads, the Hon

Carl Scully, and the Member for Blue Mountains, the Hon Bob Debus, seeking their support in this matter.”

Comments by Councillor Hamilton: This area has been the scene of many accidents, some of them fatal. Following the death of a young boy there, the RTA carried out some roadworks and changed the speed limit from 80 to 70 kph. I am receiving complaints, and also constantly see it myself, that vehicles using the overtaking lane are grossly exceeding the speed limit. Residents are fearful that this could lead to more accidents on this notorious stretch of road and feel that speed cameras could be the only deterrent.

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

ITEM NO: 31 SUBJECT: PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE, 14/12/2004 FILE NO: C00680 Recommendation: That the Precis of Selected Correspondence be received and appropriate letters forwarded where necessary. 1. 18/11/2004 – The Secretary, Glenbrook Village Chamber of Commerce Inc Thanking Council staff responsible for the prompt replacement of the Garlick

Parade sign in Glenbrook. 2. 19/11/2004 – Resident of Blaxland Thanking Council staff for their assistance with various matters in the Blaxland

area, including addressing a matter concerning aggressive dogs. 3. 22/11/2004 – The Chief Inspector, RSPCA (NSW) Thanking a Council staff member for their support as a witness in a recent

prosecution run by the RSPCA. 4. 24/11/2004 – 196 Petitioners from Linden Requesting the repair and resealing of Glossop Road, Linden to an acceptable

standard for vehicular and pedestrian safety. 5. 24/11/2004 – Resident Congratulating Council and a staff member on the setting up of a recycling shed at

the Katoomba Tip, and noting the large number of useful items on offer that have been retrieved from the Tip.

6. 25/11/2004 – 146 Petitioners In support of the skate park being included in the Summerhayes Park Plan of

Management.

7. 25/11/2004 – Resident of Blaxland Expressing their appreciation for the assistance given by a staff member concerning

their recent request for maintenance to be carried out to a Council car park at Blaxland.

PRECIS OF SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE Item 31 - Ordinary Meeting, 14/12/04

8. 30/11/2004 – The Hon Kerry Bartlett MP, Member for Macquarie Regarding funding to upgrade the driveway to the Springwood & District Citizens

Boys & Girls Club and the Valley Heights Locomotive Heritage Museum, and providing a response from the Hon Jim Lloyd, Minister for Local Government, Territories and Roads. Advising that this project may meet the criteria for funding under the Regional Partnerships Program, which is a program that delivers on the Australian Government’s approach to regional development and focuses on fostering the development of self-reliant communities and regions.

ITEM NO: 1 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS SISTER CITIES … · 2018-02-19 · Sanda for an exhibition and...

Documents

Transcript of ITEM NO: 1 SUBJECT: BLUE MOUNTAINS SISTER CITIES … · 2018-02-19 · Sanda for an exhibition and...