5 September 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Councillor/Sir/Madam

 

You are invited to attend an ORDINARY MEETING of Ashfield Council, to be held in

the Council Chambers, Level 6, Civic Centre, 260 Liverpool Road, Ashfield on

TUESDAY 10 SEPTEMBER 2013 at 6:30 PM.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SEE ATTACHED AGENDA


 

Ordinary Meeting - 10 September 2013

 

AGENDA

 

1.               Opening

 

2.               Acknowledgement of Local Aboriginal Community

 

3.               Apologies/Request for Leave of Absence

                   

4.               Condolence and Sympathy Motions

 

5.               Moment of Private Contemplation

 

6.               Disclosures Of Interest

 

Disclosures to be made by any Councillors who have a pecuniary / non-pecuniary interest in respect of matters that are before Council at this meeting.

(10/09/2013)

 

7.               Confirmation of Minutes of Council/Committees

 

Ordinary Meeting - 27/08/2013

Planning & Environment Committee – 20/08/2013

Ashfield Youth Committee – 19/08/2013

 

8.               Mayoral Minutes

 

MM40/2013  CAROLYN WALKER - 45 NOT OUT

 

MM41/2013  CELEBRATING AUSTRALIAN CITIZENSHIP DAY

 

MM42/2013  $2 MILLION GRANT FOR COOKS RIVER ALLIANCE

 

9.               Notices of Motion

 

NR5/2013     96,98 & 100B RAMSAY STREET HABERFIELD

 

 

10.            Staff Reports

 

10.1     INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING

 

10.2     FOURTH QUARTER REVIEW AGAINST COUNCIL PLAN 2012 - 2016

 

10.3     DELEGATES AT LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFERENCE

 

10.4     PROCESSING OF GARDEN ORGANICS AND CLEAN UP MATERIAL

 

10.5     DRAFT FLOOD STUDY UPDATE

 

 

 

11.            Closed (Public Excluded) Committee

 

 

12.            General Business

 

 

13.            Close

 

 

 


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 MM40/2013

Public Relations- Congratulations

MAYORAL MINUTE

 

CAROLYN WALKER - 45 NOT OUT

       

 

Council recently hosted a very successful function to acknowledge the enormous contribution of Ms Carolyn Walker to Council and the community after 45 years of service as personal assistant to the Mayor, General Manager and Councillors.

 

Carolyn has worked with 10 Mayors: the late Richard Murden, Paul Whelan, the late Lewis Herman, Dr John Ward, Vincent Sicari, Mark Bonnano, Rae Jones, Edward Cassidy, Lyall Kennedy, and myself.  She has also worked with 6 Town Clerks and General Managers: Mr Kelly, Mr Spittle, Mr Tobin, Dr Niven, Mr Gainger and Ms Chan.

 

Carolyn began working for Council when the old Victorian-style Town Hall was being used; she has worked through the construction of the current Town Hall and also the completion of our brand new Civic Centre.

 

Carolyn’s record of service to Council and the community is unmatched and unlikely to be surpassed. She has a strong involvement in a number of community groups as well, including the Western Suburbs Lawn Tennis Association and the Ashfield Charitable Team (formerly known as the Ashfield Benevolent Society).

 

Carolyn has always been a warm, friendly and vivacious servant of the Ashfield Municipality. She is an institution in our local area.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

 

That Council send a letter of thanks to Ms Carolyn Walker expressing its

gratitude for her 45 years of service to Council and the community

 

 

 

 

    

Mansour

 

COUNCILLOR M MANSOUR

Mayor


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 MM41/2013

Public Relations - Citizenship Ceremonies

MAYORAL MINUTE

 

CELEBRATING AUSTRALIAN CITIZENSHIP DAY

       

 

Citizenship of our great country is something we should all be rightly proud of. It is more than a legal status – it carries with it important rights and responsibilities. It is our common bond that represents our shared democratic beliefs and gives us a sense of belonging and pride in our achievements as a nation.

 

In 2001, Australian Citizenship Day was launched to increase community awareness of Australian citizenship and provide a main point for citizenship-related activities and celebrations. It is celebrated annually on 17 September.

 

Australian Citizenship Day is an important opportunity for all Australians to take pride in their citizenship and to reflect on the meaning and importance of being Australian.

 

All Australians are encouraged to value their Australian citizenship and the contributions that citizens make in shaping the nation.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council host an annual community event celebrating Australian Citizenship Day.

 

 

 

 

    

Mansour

 

COUNCILLOR M MANSOUR

Mayor

 

 

 


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 MM42/2013

Financial - Donations

Planning >Cooks River Alliance

MAYORAL MINUTE

 

$2 MILLION GRANT FOR COOKS RIVER ALLIANCE

       

 

 

The Cooks River Alliance, of which Ashfield Council is a partner, has received almost $2 million as one of the Sustainable Environment Stream Target Area Grants for 2013/14 made as part of the Australian Government’s Caring for our Country initiative.

 

The four year project will deliver on ground works across the Cooks River catchment area to filter stormwater and remediate wetlands. The Alliance will work very closely with local communities, including many community organisations and local indigenous groups, to engage and educate on how everyone can help the health of the Cooks River and tributaries.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council welcomes the Australian Government’s $2 million grant to the Cooks River Alliance as part of its Caring for our Country initiative.

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

Mansour

 

COUNCILLOR M MANSOUR

Mayor

 

 

  


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 NR5/2013

10.2013.086.1

NOTICE OF RESCISSION BY

 

COUNCILLORS Julie Passas, Adriano Raiola and Max Raiola

 

 

96,98 & 100B RAMSAY STREET HABERFIELD

     

 

That Council rescind the previous resolution in relation to Minute No. 313, Item 10- 1 passed at the Ordinary meeting of Council held on 27 August 2013 namely:

 

That Council as the consent authority pursuant to Clause 80(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) refuse Development Application No. 10.2013.86.1 for customer seating on the footpath to be used for outdoor dining associated with cafe and restaurant premises at the corner of Dalhousie Street and Ramsay Street Haberfield NSW 2045 being 96, 98, and 100B Ramsay Street, Haberfield NSW 2045 (Lot 1 DP 560077 (No.96), Lot: 5 DP: 8246 (No.98), Lot 1 DP 950665 (No.100B)), for the following reasons:

 

1.   The proposed development does not comply with the requirements of Council’s Outdoor Dining and Footpath Trading Policy with respect to positioning the proposed outdoor dining furniture on the kerbside of the footpath and therefore does not provide a safe guidance line along this section of footpath for visually or mobility impaired pedestrians.

 

2.   The proposed development does not comply with the requirements of Council’s Outdoor Dining and Footpath Trading Policy with respect to providing a minimum clearance of 3.0m away from the intersection along both Dalhousie and Ramsay Street thereby restricting sight lines and providing inadequate clearance at and around the signalised pedestrian crossing.

 

3.   Having regard to the requirements Council’s Outdoor Dining and Footpath Trading Policy and the requirements of the NSW Roads and Maritime Services the proposed development fails to resolve significant safety issues for all pedestrians on the Dalhousie and Ramsay Street footpath in respect to being able to provide a minimum 1.8m wide clear path of travel for pedestrians.

 

4.   The proposed development fails to provide a continuous path of travel as defined and required by the Ashfield Development Control Plan 2007 Part C 1 – “Access and Mobility”.

 

5.   The proposed development fails to comply with the requirements of the Ashfield Development Control Plan 2007 Part C 11 – “Parking” by not providing for 1 car space and 1 cycle parking space generated by the additional customer seating.

 

6.   The proposed development fails to provide a safe and secure environment for all persons and therefore does not achieve the objectives of the Ashfield Development Control Plan 2007 and is not in the public interest.


 

 

7.   The proposed development fails to promote the orderly and economic development of land and therefore does not achieve the objectives of the Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 1985 or of the Draft Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013 and is not in the public interest.

 

 

If successful, we intend to move:

 

That the application be approved, and the General Manager be given delegated authority to impose standard conditions of consent.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 

 

That Minute No. 313/13 be rescinded.

 

 

 

 

 

Julie Passas

Councillor

 

 

Adriano Raiola

Councillor

 

 

Max Raiola

Councillor

 

  


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 CM10.1

Subject                            INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING

 

File Ref                            SAMP Funding

 

Prepared by                   Nellette Kettle - Director Corporate & Community Services       

 

 

Reasons                          To respond to a Council resolution

 

Objective                         To seek further direction from the Council as required.

 

 

 


Overview of Report
This report responds to a resolution of Council seeking a report on a possible new infrastructure levy to commence from 1 July 2014.  The report also canvasses additional funding options for the renewal and maintenance of Council’s infrastructure such as the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme and the use of s94 and s94A funds.

 

 

Background

At the Council meeting on 25 June 2013, in relation to a report considering the updated Long Term Financial Plan, Council resolved the following:

 

1/3    That Council adopt the updated Long Term Financial Plan.

 

2/3    That the General Manager report to Council regarding a new infrastructure levy to commence from 1 July 2014 to address the long term decline in Council’s financial position.

 

3/3    The report should at minimum outline the process for seeking a new levy, the pros and cons of the levy, advice as to whether the levy could be for the long term and if it should cover the funds needed for the refurbishment of the Ashfield Aquatic Centre.

 

In response to community feedback seeking better maintained roads, footpaths and streetscapes, Council introduced a 5 year, 4% special rate variation in 2009/10.  This special rate variation has contributed an additional $651,000 each year to fund infrastructure renewal and maintenance.  This current financial year (2013/14) is the last year of these additional funds.

 

The following table shows the infrastructure projects that have been undertaken with these funds over the 5 year period.

 

Infrastructure Levy                                                                                               Allocation of funds

4% Special Rate Variation                                                           

                                                                                                                                  2009 - 2014

Roads and Streetscape

Paving and parking Croydon Park, Georges River Road & Forbes Street

$

75,000

Relay paving in Ashfield CBD Liverpool Road, extend kerb ramps

$

200,000

Aerial bundling overhead power

$

175,000

Integrated footpath & bike works – from bike plan

$

280,000

Extra 20% road resurfacing (30yr cycle)

$

221,000

Reconstruct roundabout Queen St & Norton Street

$

100,000

Reconstruct Holden Street, Norton to Liverpool Road

$

160,000

Croydon CBD – Streetscape enhancements

$

379,000

Condition 4 road major patches

$

305,000

Street furniture

$

45,000

Condition 4 footpath replacement (2007 audit)

$

451,000

Traffic and Parking

Local Area Traffic Management Scheme – Northcote St & Wolseley St

$

170,000

Traffic Facilities & parking measures

$

185,000

Parks

Cecile Herman Stage 4

$

30,000

Building and Amenities

Yeo Park Toilet Block

$

150,000

Pratten Park change rooms

$

125,000

Repairs and replacements

$

204,000

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

3,255,000

 

With the cessation of this funding it is timely for Council to make some important choices and decisions about the future.  Most importantly, Council should consider:

 

·    a fresh appraisal of short, medium and long term infrastructure renewal and maintenance needs, including an assessment of the immediate impact of a reduction in asset renewal and maintenance of $651,000 each year from 2014/15;

·    the scope and available funding options for any redevelopment of the Ashfield Aquatic Centre;

·    the impact these infrastructure needs will have on Council’s financial sustainability over the medium to long term; and

·    other opportunities for funding infrastructure renewal and maintenance that are available to Council.


 

 

Council Infrastructure Programs

 

The infrastructure levy funding has allowed Council to bring forward infrastructure renewal programs which would otherwise have been deferred pending special funding.

 

This funding has provided a higher level of service than previously available.  Therefore if the funding is not replaced or maintained some of the tabulated programs would cease unless alternative sources of revenue were made available.

 

Projects funded under the SRV include the Condition 4 Footpath Replacement Program,  Extra Road Resurfacing Program, Condition 4 Road Patching Program and Building & Amenities Renewals and Streetscape projects.


In conjunction with this there is also the Aquatic Centre infrastructure options which have been identified separately.

 

Potential Options for Infrastructure Funding

 

To put it in the simplest terms, like every Council, in order to satisfactorily fund the renewal and maintenance of its infrastructure assets into the future, Ashfield Council needs more money.  If additional funds are not sourced, Council will not be able to maintain and renew assets at a level that is acceptable to the community into the long term.  Council will simply be managing the rate of decline.  This is the situation for most councils.

 

The most sustainable source of funding for infrastructure into the long term would be to seek a new special rate variation.  The appropriateness of an SRV to fund the Aquatic Centre Redevelopment are addressed specifically in the July Report to the Works and Infrastructure Committee, which has indicated that an SRV is one of a range of potential funding options.

 

Less sustainable and more short term funding sources include the application of existing s94 and s94A funds to infrastructure projects and the NSW State Government’s Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme.

 

1.   Special rate variations

 

A special variation under the Local Government Act 1993 allows a council to increase its general income by more than the rate peg. 

 

Special variations may be either ‘permanent’ or ‘temporary’. A permanent increase is retained in the rates base, while a temporary increase is removed from the rates base in a future year.


 

 

Special rate variation applications are assessed and determined by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) under powers delegated by the Minister for Local Government.  The Division of Local Government (DLG) establishes guidelines for applying for special variations and sets the criteria against which applications will be assessed by IPART.   All special variation applications must comply with the requirements set out in the DLG guidelines.

 

Special variations do not have to be tied to a particular project or series of projects, however the need for additional funding through a special variation has to be demonstrated through Council’s integrated planning documents and the community engagement that underpins the preparation of those documents.

 

Types of special variations

 

There are 2 types of special rate variations:

 

·    a variation in a single year under section 508(2) of the Act

·    a variation in 2 or more consecutive years (up to 7 years) under section 508A of the Act.

 

The type of special variation that is appropriate will be determined by the revenue requirements of Council, and will depend on a number of factors including:

         

·    the size of the variation required

·    the reason for the variation

·    the need for the increase to be ongoing or for a fixed term

·    the ‘lumpiness’ of expenditure over time

·    the financial objectives of the Council

 

The current DLG guidelines, which explain the differences in the types of applications and their impact are provided at Attachment 1.

 

Criteria for the assessment of applications

 

Whilst subject to change, the current criteria (as applied for 2013/14 financial year) for the assessment of applications, as outlined in an IPART fact sheet for councils, is as follows:

 

The assessment of applications for a special variation will examine the extent to which councils have fulfilled their obligations under Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R), in accordance with the criteria.  In summary, the criteria require the council to:

 

1.   Demonstrate the need for the revenue requested in the special variation. This need is to be clearly articulated and identified through the council’s Integrated Planning and Reporting documents, including its Delivery Program and Long Term Financial Plan.

 

2.   Provide evidence that the community is aware of the need for, and the extent of, the rate rise and that the council has engaged with its community.


 

 

3.   Show that the impact on affected ratepayers is reasonable, having regard to current rate levels, the existing ratepayer base and the proposed purpose of the variation. The proposed rise must also be affordable, having regard to ratepayers’ capacity to pay.

 

4.   Base its proposed Delivery Program and Long Term Financial Plan on realistic assumptions.

 

5.   Explain the productivity improvements and cost containment strategies it has realised in past years, and plans to realise over the proposed special variation period.

 

Further, IPART will assess each application based on its merits against criteria 1 to 5 above, and in doing so, will also consider:

·    the size of the council

·    its resources

·    the size (both actual $ and %) of increase requested

·    current rate levels and previous rate rises

·    the purpose of the special variation, and

·    any other matters it considers to be relevant.

 

 

Evidence of awareness and engagement should be proportionate to the size and impact of the proposed rate rise.  Councils are also required to show the impact of not applying for, or not having the special variation approved (e.g. resultant service reductions or projects that will not go ahead).

 

Timeframes for applications

 

Dates for lodgement of special rate variation applications for the 2014/15 financial year have not yet been released.  However the key dates are not expected to vary significantly from last year.  Following are the indicative timeframes:

 

Mid December 2013            Special variation notifications due to IPART

Early-mid March 2014        Special variation applications due to IPART

Mid June 2014                     Decisions announced by IPART

 

Benefits and risks of a special rate variation for 2014/15


 

 

Benefits

Risks

·    Guaranteed source of funds

·    Appropriate source of funds for infrastructure

·    Is not required to be repaid (unlike a loan)

·    Would be supported by the majority of residents (in order to proceed)

·    Would enable Council to plan projects for a sustainable future

·    Would enable infrastructure projects that can’t be funded within existing revenue to proceed

·    Timing of the application - if approved, would replace the funds that will be lost from 2014/15 with the expiry of the existing infrastructure levy

·    Requires substantial additional work on our current suite of asset plans

·    The Aquatic Centre redevelopment proposal requires substantial additional work as indicated in the report to July Works and Infrastructure Committee.

·    That this work cannot be sufficiently progressed to meet the required timeframes this year

·    Timing of the application - whether Council is in a sufficient state of preparedness to put together an application of adequate quality (including the community engagement) between now and March 2015.

·    Risks and implications of either, submitting two applications in separate years, and/or one in a future year.

·    Impact on the delivery of existing projects (in some areas) over the next 6 months while the application is formulated and community engagement is undertaken.

·    Special rate variation is not supported by the community

 

 

2.   NSW State Government Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme

 

The NSW Government is providing a total of $100 million over six years for the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS).

 

The LIRS aims to provide up to a 4% interest subsidy to assist those councils with legitimate infrastructure backlogs to cover the cost of borrowing. The subsidy aims to provide an incentive to councils to make greater use of debt funding to accelerate investment in infrastructure backlogs and augment funding options already available to councils.  The LIRS is being administered by the DLG.

 

All loans subsidised by the LIRS must have a loan term not exceeding ten years (irrespective of the starting date of the loan agreement), and will be subject to specific conditions of LIRS support.


 

 

It is anticipated that there will be three rounds of applications for LIRS assistance.  Two of these rounds have already been completed and determined.  Details of the third (and likely final) round are expected to be provided shortly (as advised by the DLG LIRS website) and will commence no later than 2013/14, to enable loan drawdown by 30 June 2015. The Guidelines for the LIRS issued by DLG are provided at Attachment 3.

 

Eligibility requirements:

 

·    A maximum of two separate projects/programs can be submitted in each round

·    The projects/programs to be subsidised under the scheme must be identified as part of the council’s infrastructure backlog

·    Preference will be given to projects/programs listed in asset management plans but it will not be an essential criterion

·    The borrowing to be subsidised under the LIRS should be incurred for the purpose  of funding specific new works, upgrades or renewal of infrastructure that meets a core purpose of local government and is intended for community use (e.g. roads, community halls, libraries, parks, sports grounds)

·    Preference is given to projects/programs or groups of projects/programs with a total cost of at least $1 million.  For small councils, projects/programs with a total cost of less than $1 million may still be considered on a case by case basis

·    Acceptance of the scheme’s conditions (listed in section 6 of the Guidelines)

 

Essential criteria

 

·    Project/program must be for legitimate infrastructure backlog works

·    Council must demonstrate how the LIRS subsidy will accelerate the provision of infrastructure in the LGA

·    Adequate demonstration at the submission of applications of a realistic project/program delivery timetable; evidence of the indicative terms of the loan to be subsidised; evidence of the necessary resources, project management expertise and administrative capacity to deliver the program/project and maintain the asset once it is complete

·    Evidence that the program/project construction will commence within 12 months after the date of signing of the LIRS agreement

·    Evidence that construction is expected to be completed in accordance with the construction timetable submitted

·    Information on project/program financing including cost estimates, council resolutions to fund the project/program with borrowings, and results of financial appraisal work undertaken

·    Commitment to delivering affordable and sustainable infrastructure projects/programs

 

Desirable criteria

 

·    Project/program is consistent with State and Regional planning

·    Higher priority may be given to projects/programs with shorter term loans (generally, greater financial risks tend to be associated with longer term loans)


 

 

It is anticipated that applications for the third and final round will close by the end of this year.  The key question for Council is not whether suitable projects can be identified but whether it is prudent for Council to take on additional loan borrowings.

 

There is potential for linking a LIRS application to an SRV application. In this instance  Council would seek an SRV to fund loan redemption payments, in this case a LIRS assisted loan.

 

It is suggested that an analysis of suitable projects as well as the financing implications be undertaken in order for further consideration to be given to Council’s potential participation in the 3rd round of the LIRS.

 

3.   Section 94 and 94A funds

 

Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 enables councils to levy contributions for public amenities and services as a consequence of development.  The Act and Regulations require a council to prepare a Contributions Plan, if Council intends to levy any contributions under the terms of the Act, and make Council publicly accountable for the use and administration of contributions it receives.  

 

Council’s existing s94 and s94A Contributions Plans were last reviewed in 2009 and contain prioritised and costed works schedules.  However, greater attention needs to be paid to the schedules as Council had not been in the receipt of section 94 and s94A funds until more recently. 

 

As at 13 August 2013, Council has the following funds available in the s94 and s94A restrictions:

 

S94 - $2,847,306

S94A - $1,041,419

 

These funds are currently available to be spent on suitable infrastructure projects but only as detailed in the Contributions Plans. The limitations of the S94 Plans are that the scope of projects permitted for inclusion are restricted by the EP&A Act. The S94 Plan must demonstrate a nexus between the capital projects and development, and includes some projects that also contain a Council attributable portion (i.e. not fully funded by development contributions). Council’s S94 Plan collects developer contributions under the following categories – open space, community facilities, local roads, car parking and public transport infrastructure.  S94A has greater flexibility as no nexus is applicable.

 

Of relevance, Council resolved on 13 August 2013 to conduct a review of the s94/s94A works schedules as follows and work in progress.

 

 

Financial Implications

n/a


 

 

Other Staff Comments

The Executive Management Team have contributed to the development of this report.

 

Public Consultation

n/a

 

Conclusion

A special rate variation application is a suitable longer term option for funding Council’s infrastructure needs.  If Council wishes to pursue an application to commence from 1 July 2014 a direction in that respect is needed now in order for officers to prepare and consult on the application in time to meet IPART lodgement deadlines.  There are some risks associated with an application this year, and these are identified in the report.  If required, a further report would need to be brought back to Council as soon as possible on options for the scale and scope of the application and community engagement strategy.

 

Council officers continue to investigate the LIRS scheme and work towards the review of S94 and S94A Plans in preparation for a special Councillors workshop.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1View

Guidelines for preparation of an application for a special variation to general income

21 Pages

 

Attachment 2View

IPART - Fact sheet_Community awareness and engagement for special variation applications

6 Pages

 

Attachment 3View

NSW Local Infrastructure renewal scheme

23 Pages

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council indicate whether or not it wishes Officers to progress work towards a potential SRV application 2013/14, noting that a further report on the specifics of an application and community engagement strategy would be needed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nellette Kettle

Director Corporate & Community Services

 

 

 

 


Attachment 1

 

Guidelines for preparation of an application for a special variation to general income

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Attachment 2

 

IPART - Fact sheet_Community awareness and engagement for special variation applications

 


 


 


 


 


 


Attachment 3

 

NSW Local Infrastructure renewal scheme

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 CM10.2

Subject                            FOURTH QUARTER REVIEW AGAINST COUNCIL PLAN 2012 - 2016

 

File Ref                            Governance>Council Plan

 

Prepared by                   Gabrielle Rennard - Manager Corporate Services       

 

 

Reasons                          To fulfil statutory reporting requirements according to the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government Amendment (Planning and Reporting) Act 2009

 

Objective                         To update Council on the delivery of the 2012/2016 Council Plan

 

 


Overview of Report


The report (attachment 1) reflects actions and achievements undertaken during the fourth quarter (April – June 2013) in relation to performance targets as determined in the Council Plan 2012/2016.

 

 

Background

This is the fourth and final quarterly review presented against the Council Plan 2012/2016.

 

Detailed information on performance against each initiative listed in the council plan is provided for this quarter in the attachment to this report. The report indicates that, overall, good progress was made towards finalising the delivery of programs/initiatives that Council committed to for the 2012/2016 year.

 

 

Financial Implications

These have been outlined in the fourth quarter Budget review report that was presented to Council in a separate report.

 

 

Other Staff Comments

All Program Managers and Directors have contributed to the review through the delivery of their operational plans.

 

 

Public Consultation

Not specifically required for this report, however on-going community consultation is undertaken in order to meet the aims and objectives of the various individual actions as noted. The quarterly review is also made available for viewing and downloading by the community on Council’s website.

 

 

Conclusion

This fourth quarter review provides detail regarding each of the actions in the council plan and reflects the performance against each initiative listed as undertaken over this period.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1View

4th quarter review

36 Pages

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council's performance over the Fourth Quarter 2012/13 be noted and the report be published on Council’s website.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nellette Kettle

Director Corporate & Community Services

 

 

 

 


Attachment 1

 

4th quarter review

 





































Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 CM10.3

Subject                            DELEGATES AT LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFERENCE

 

File Ref                            Governance-Conferences

 

Prepared by                   Carolyn Walker - Executive Assistant       

 

 

Reasons                          New advice from the Local Government NSW

 

Objective                         To seek an additional delegate to attend the Local Government NSW Conference

 

 

 


Overview of Report

Local Government NSW have advised Council it has four delegates. This advice was obtained from the LGNSW through a request from the Deputy Mayor, on the number of voting delegates for Ashfield Council. This information can only be obtained by ringing the LGNSW as it is not available on the LGNSW website.

 

 

Background

 

The 2013 Local Government Conference will be held at the Sydney Town Hall from 1-3 October 2013.

 

At Council Meeting on 11 June 2013 it was resolved:

 

“That Councillors Mansour, Wangmann, Drury be appointed as voting  delegates to the Local Government Conference.

 

That any other Councillors who wishes to attend as an observer be permitted to do so.”

 

We have since learned that Ashfield’s voting numbers have changed and we now have four voting delegates

 

LGNSW advised that no details of voting delegates are available on their website nor have Councils been directly advised of  changed numbers of delegates.

 

 

Financial Implications

 

The cost of Councillors attendance at the Annual Local Government Conference is already provided for in the 2013/14 budget.

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council determine an additional voting delegate to the Local Government Conference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vanessa Chan

General Manager

 

 

 

 


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 CM10.4

Subject                            PROCESSING OF GARDEN ORGANICS AND CLEAN UP MATERIAL

 

File Ref                            Resource Recovery

 

Prepared by                   Hazel Storey - Team Leader Sustainability       

 

 

Reasons                          To inform Council of the outcome of the tender process for processing garden organics and clean up materials and to request Council to approve the recommendations.

 

Objective                         To secure a contract that represents value for money for the processing of garden organic material and general household clean up materials from Council’s kerbside collection service.

 

 

 

 


Overview of Report
This report provides a summary of the outcomes of the tender process for the receiving, sorting and processing of garden organic material and general household clean up material from Council’s kerbside collection service. The Confidential Attachment details the tender process and the resulting recommendations to Council.

 

 

Background

 

Ashfield Council provides a kerbside collection service for garden organics material and a clean-up collections service for general household items for all residential properties and some commercial properties. This collection service is provided by Council’s kerbside collection contractor, Transpacific Cleanaway. Ashfield Council collects approximately 1,700 tonnes of garden organic material [on an opt-in basis] and approximately 850 tonnes of Clean-Up material per annum (based on the tonnage average from 2006-10).

 

Transpacific Cleanaway then transports this material to facilities for processing. Currently the garden organics are taken to SITA’s resource recovery facility at Chullora and the clean-up materials are taken to Veolia’s processing facility at Greenacre.

 

The garden organics are then transported off-site to be processed into compost that is then distributed to a range of markets. The clean-up materials are sorted and recyclable materials (metals, cardboard, timber, mattresses and plastic) are recovered. The residual waste is disposed in landfill.

 

Ashfield does not currently operate under a contract with these processing facilities for this service.  There are potential significant cost savings to be realised for Council if these processing services were operated under a contract, similar to the existing processing contracts Council has for the processing of recyclables and general solid waste from Council’s kerbside collection service.

 

As a result, the Sustainability Team, in partnership with Works and Infrastructure, tendered for these two services as a combined tender (as the delivery of both services would be undertaken by the same players in the market) on 22nd January 2013 by publicly advertising the tender in the Sydney Morning Herald (and again in the Inner West Courier on 24th January 2013). Tenders closed at 2pm on 12 February 2013.

 

The tender objectives were to:

 

1.   Secure a more competitive pricing structure to deliver better value for money compared to the current non-contracted arrangements.

2.   Secure a service provider that is able to service Council’s needs and deliver a diversion from landfill.

3.   Ensure a high level of consistent technical and operational capability from the Service Provider.

4.   Ensure an ability to deliver sustainable services that benefit the environment.

 

The tender is for a three year contract with options to extend for a further two years (one plus one years).

 

Tender Evaluation

 

The purpose of the evaluation process was to select a tender that; offered the best value for money, met the evaluation selection criteria (outlined below) and assessed the tenders conformance to the contract conditions outlined in the Request for Tender.

 

The selection criteria and associated weighting used in the tender evaluation were:

 

Mandatory Criteria:

·    Conformity and compliance with tender submission requirements and demonstrated ability to meet the requirements specified

·    Financial capacity and insurances

·    Work Health and Safety Requirements

·    Quality Management System

·    Environmental Management System

 

Quality Criteria

·    Overall Technical Experience (15%) 

·    Past experience and performance (10%)

·    Proven Capacity to meet current service commitments (10%)

·    Proposed Methodology (30%)

·    Response Times (25%)

·    Appropriate integration of sustainability issues (10%)

·    Value for money, schedule of rates (assessed using ‘value for money’ methodology explained in the CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT).

 

The evaluation was undertaken in a process that was transparent, accountable and fair. Each Council staff member on the tender panel signed and submitted probity forms covering Confidentiality, Conflict of Interest and Pecuniary Interests. No conflicts of interest were noted.

 

Council engaged the services of Local Government Procurement (LGP) to provide legal guidance, in consultation with Council staff, during the evaluation stage of the tender process. LGP assisted with assessing tender conformance, the subsequent clarification process and reviewed contract amendments that were proposed by both tenderers.

 

Tenders were received from the following two companies:

·    Veolia Environmental Services (VES)

·    SITA Australia

 

The Tender Evaluation Panel was unanimous in its decision and the details of the tender submissions are outlined in the CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT.

Financial Implications

 

This tender is for services that are currently (and will continue to be) paid for from the Works and Infrastructure budget. The processing costs are currently paid for on a monthly basis and charged at standard rates as prescribed by the service providers because Council has no existing contract for these services.

 

Due to the fact there is a significant spend to the Council for this service and based on the tender submissions, Council will benefit from costs savings by contracting these services.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

See the CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT for details on the tender pricing and the potential cost savings for Council.

 

Other Staff Comments

The process has been run through Sustainability with close and consistent liaison with Director Works and Infrastructure & members of the Operational Team.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Final Confidential Attachment Tender Garden Organics and Household Clean Up -  - CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT - Confidential - It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (c) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; AND commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:
(i)   prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it, or
(ii)  confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council, or
(iii) reveal a trade secret.

5 Pages

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the report;

 

That Council adopt the recommendations contained in the CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phil Sarin

Director Planning and Environment

 

 


Ashfield Council – Report to Ordinary Meeting held on Tuesday 10 September 2013 CM10.5

Subject                            DRAFT FLOOD STUDY UPDATE

 

File Ref                            Flood Study

 

Prepared by                   Peter Cormican - Director Works & Infrastructure, Phil Sarin - Director Planning and Environment       

 

 

Reasons                          Advise Council on the progress of the flood study for the LGA

 

Objective                         Council to adopt an interim procedure on the use of information from the Draft Flood Study in the assessment of applications

 

 


Overview of Report
This report outlines progress on the flood study for the Ashfield LGA to date, the recent receipt of a Draft Flood Study report and a process by which the information that has been received to date is to be used in the assessment of applications.

 

Background

 

At the Council meeting of 14 February 2012 a report was prepared for Council to obtain Council approval to undertake a flood study for the Ashfield LGA. A copy of this report is attached which gives background information relating to the purpose of the study. As a result of this report Council resolved the following:

 

1/6       That Council note the content of this report.

 

2/6       That Council approve to proceed and undertake a flood study for the                                Ashfield LGA as per Sydney Water’s proposal.

 

3/6       That Council submit an application for grant funding under Floodplain                      Management Program for 2012/13.

 

4/6       That Council still proceed with both Sydney Water’s flood studies even if                         the grant application is unsuccessful.

 

5/6       That when the flood studies are complete they will be placed on public                     exhibition.

 

6/6       That once the flood studies are complete, Council proceeds to document                        149 certificates accordingly.

 

The process of the flood study commenced with an extensive mail out to all residents within the LGA, in which an Ashfield Flood Study Information Booklet was distributed in order to inform the community of the flood study being undertaken by Council. In addition to the Information booklet a questionnaire was also distributed with the aim of collecting historical flood data, and residents local knowledge of the catchment and personal experiences of flooding.


 

 

Also, as part of the flood study process it was necessary to establish a Floodplain Management Advisory Committee. This Committee has been established and the first meeting was held on 20 August 2013.

 

In progressing the matter, our consultants, WMA Water, have prepared a draft report which predominately contains a series of flood maps, with additional information still to be included in order to finalise the draft flood study report.

 

The next steps that are required to be undertaken are as follows:

-     Convene a technical meeting with the officers of the three councils involved in the flood study to establish consistent flood mapping criteria

-     Ground truthing to refine and verify the modelling

-     Final Draft Flood Study Report from WMA Water

-     Final Draft Flood Study Report to be tabled at the next Floodplain Management Advisory Committee meeting

-     Report to Council on the Flood Study

-     Providing flooding information for 149 certificates

-     Public exhibition

-     Further report to Council

-     Preparation of future DCP outlining planning controls

 

Considering that the catchments overlap the adjoining councils, it has been agreed by the officers of the three councils, that the report to Council and the public exhibition be actioned at the same time for consistency. Therefore, due to the work still required to be completed, and for consistency with the other councils, it is anticipated that a report will be presented to Council in December.

 

Interim Procedure for Application Assessment

 

Given that Council is now in receipt of information, in draft form, which identifies properties within the Ashfield LGA at flood risk, it has a duty of care to ensure that this information is a consideration in the assessment of any relevant application. Legal advice has been obtained on this issue which confirms that this is an appropriate response in relation to development applications (refer to attached advice provided under separate cover – confidential attachment).

 

It is therefore recommended that the following procedure be endorsed when applications are formally lodged or, in the case of DAs, are also being checked through the provisional development application process.

 

APPLICATIONS WITH POTENTIAL FLOOD AFFECTATION (Development Applications, Complying Development Certificates, Construction Certificates)

 

1    Upon the receipt of an application for Council determination through formal lodgement or the provisional development application process the application will be referred to Council Engineers to determine if the proposed development site has a potential flood affectation.


 

 

2    If the site is identified as potentially flood affected, Council will inform the applicant.

3    The applicant will be invited to view the draft flood study report and will be required to provide its own flood risk assessment. (Prior to Council having this flood information, the applicant was required to provide a flood risk assessment if the property was in close proximity to a canal.)

4    Should the applicant choose to undertake its own flood risk assessment then this information may be referred to Council’s Hydraulic Consultant for comment and review, if deemed necessary.

5    Information received from the applicant through its consultant and Council’s Hydraulic Consultant, where applicable, will be a relevant matter for consideration in the assessment of the application.

 

Financial Implications

 

Whilst there will be some anticipated cost to review the applicant’s flood risk assessment, it is expected that this will be no different to what has historically taken place with applications.

 

Other Staff Comments

 

Comments from other staff have been incorporated into the report.

 

Public Consultation

 

Not applicable at this time.

 

Conclusion

 

It is important for Council to have a consistent approach in how it applies the information now it its possession in the Draft Flood Study. By endorsing the above procedure applicants will be provided with relevant information and advice and have the ability to provide additional supporting information for Council’s consideration.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1View

Council Report 14 February 2012 - Flood Study

4 Pages

 

Attachment 2

Legal Advice (provided under separate cover) -  - CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT - Confidential - It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (g) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

4 Pages

 

 


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1/2    That the report be received and noted.

 

2/2    That the procedure outlined in the report be endorsed and followed in the           assessment of applications.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Cormican

Director Works & Infrastructure

 

 

 

Phil Sarin

Director Planning and Environment

 

 

 

 


Attachment 1

 

Council Report 14 February 2012 - Flood Study