NOTIICE OF MEE ETING hereby giv ven that an n Ordinary y Councill meeting of the Devvonport City Councill Notice is h will be held in the Council Cha ambers, on n Monday 21 March 2016, com mmencing at a 6:30pm.. he public a at 6:30pm. The meetiing will be open to th QUA ALIFIED PERS SONS dance with h Section 65 of the Local Go overnmentt Act 19933, I confirm m that the e In accord reports in this agen nda conta ain advice e, informattion and recommen ndations given by a person w who has the t qualifications o or experie ence nece essary to give such advice,, informatio on or recom mmendatio on.
Paul Westt GENERAL MANAGER R 16 March 2016
Counc cil and Secttion 23 Com mmittee Me eetings April 2016 M Meeting Infrastructure e Works & evelopmen nt De Community Services Council
Da ate M Monday 11 1 April 2016 6 M Monday 18 8 April 2016 6 Tu uesday 26 6 April 2016 6
Commence C ement Time e 6:00pm 6:00pm 6:30pm
AGENDA FOR AN ORDINARY MEETING OF DEVONPORT CITY COUNCIL HELD ON MONDAY 21 MARCH 2016 AT THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 6:30PM Item
Page No.
1.0
APOLOGIES ............................................................................................... 1
2.0
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST ........................................................................ 1
3.0 3.1
PROCEDURAL............................................................................................. 2 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES .................................................................................. 2
3.1.1
Council meeting - 22 February 2016 ............................................................................................ 2
3.1.2
special Council meeting - 15 March 2016 .................................................................................. 2
3.2
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ...................................................................................................................... 3
3.2.1
Responses to questions raised at prior meetings ....................................................................... 4
3.2.2
Questions on notice from the public ........................................................................................... 8
3.2.3
Question without notice from the public .................................................................................... 8
3.3
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM ALDERMEN .............................................................................................. 8
4.0
PLANNING AUTHORITY MATTERS .................................................................. 9
4.1
DISP2014.03 Rezone from General Residential Zone to Particular Purpose Zone - 13 & 14-15 Victoria Parade & 5 Lower Madden Street Devonport (Elimatta Hotel) (D410939) ........................................................................................................................................ 10
5.0
REPORTS ................................................................................................ 61
5.1
Request for funding contribution - ALGWA (D410929) ........................................................... 61
5.2
Relocation of the Devonport Regional Gallery to the Devonport Entertainment and Convention Centre (D411195) ............................................................................................ 64
5.3
Unconfirmed Minutes of Meeting - Audit Panel - 7 March 2016 (D409549) ...................... 113
5.4
Tiagarra - Lease to Six Rivers Aboriginal Corporation (D411035) ........................................ 119
5.5
Living City Quarterly Update - March 2016 (D411053).......................................................... 122
5.6
Unconfirmed Minutes - Cradle Coast Authority - Representatives Meeting - 25 February 2016 (D411371) ............................................................................................................ 127
5.7
Meercroft Carpark Upgrade (D411415) ................................................................................. 151
6.0
INFORMATION ....................................................................................... 156
6.1
General Manager's Report - March 2016 (D408086) ............................................................ 156
6.2
Mayor's Monthly Report (D410330)........................................................................................... 168
6.3
Workshops and Briefing Sessions held since the last Council meeting (D410848) ........... 170
7.0
SECTION 23 COMMITTEES ....................................................................... 171
7.1
Governance and Finance Committee Meeting - 15 March 2016 (D412131) .................. 171
8.0
CLOSED SESSION - CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS .............................................. 181 Out Of Closed Session ................................................................................ 182
9.0
CLOSURE .............................................................................................. 182
PAGE 1 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
Agenda of an ordinary meeting of the Devonport City Council to be held at the Council Chambers, Fenton Way, Devonport on Monday, 21 March 2016 commencing at 6:30pm. PRESENT Present Chair
Ald S L Martin (Mayor) Ald A L Rockliff (Deputy Mayor) Ald C D Emmerton Ald G F Goodwin Ald A J Jarman Ald J T Keay Ald L M Laycock Ald J F Matthews Ald L M Perry
Apology √
IN ATTENDANCE All persons in attendance are advised that it is Council policy to record Council Meetings, in accordance with Council’s Audio Recording Policy. The audio recording of this meeting will be made available to the public on Council’s website for a minimum period of six months. Members of the public in attendance at the meeting who do not wish for their words to be recorded and/or published on the website, should contact a relevant Council Officer and advise of their wishes prior to the start of the meeting.
1.0
APOLOGIES
The following apology was received for the meeting. Ald Rockliff
2.0
Leave of Absence
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
PAGE 2 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
3.0
PROCEDURAL
3.1
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
3.1.1 COUNCIL MEETING - 22 FEBRUARY 2016 RECOMMENDATION That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 22 February 2016 as circulated be confirmed.
3.1.2 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 15 MARCH 2016 RECOMMENDATION That the minutes of the special Council meeting held on 15 March 2016 as circulated be confirmed.
PAGE 3 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
3.2
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
Members of the public are invited to ask questions in accordance with the following resolution of Council (Min Ref 5824): 1.
Public participation shall take place at Council meetings in accordance with Regulation 31 of the Local Government (meeting Procedures) Regulations 2005.
2.
Public participation will be the first agenda item following the formal motions regarding Leave of Absence, Apologies, Minutes and Declarations of Interest.
3.
A maximum period of time of 30 minutes in total will be allowed for public participation.
4.
A maximum period of time of 3 minutes will be allowed for each individual.
5.
A member of the public may give written notice to the General Manager 7 days before an ordinary meeting of Council of a question to be asked at that meeting.
6.
A member of the public will be entitled to ask questions relating to the activities of Council, giving an explanation that is necessary to give background to the question and ask supplementary or follow up questions relating to that specific matter that may come to light as a result of the answer.
7.
Questions do not have to be lodged prior to the meeting, whether verbal or in writing. If a verbal response cannot be given or if specifically a written response is required, the question must be reduced to writing and be submitted to the Chairperson prior to the end of the public section of the meeting.
8.
A question by any member of the public and an answer to that question are not to be debated.
9.
The Chairperson may a.
Address questions on notice submitted by members of the public;
b.
Refuse to accept a question.
10.
If the Chairperson refuses to accept a question, the Chairperson is to give reason for doing so.
11.
Verbal questions and the fact that a verbal response was supplied will be recorded in the minutes and where a written question is submitted the written question will be included in the minutes as well as any written answer or summary of that answer to that question.
12.
Council will continue its current practice of receiving deputations from organisations and individuals who wish to make submissions to Council at informal workshop sessions held between Council meetings. The date and purpose of any workshop sessions will be listed in the next agenda. Where necessary, reports of those deputations will be included in future agendas for Council to make a decision.
PAGE 4 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
3.2.1
Responses to questions raised at prior meetings Meeting held 22 February 2016 Reproduced below is the response dated 24 February 2016 to Mr Bob Vellacott’s question: “I write in response to your questions raised at the Council Meeting on 22 February 2016. Question 1: What is the estimated/budgeted amount for the consultancy of the Masterplanning/Concept Design Hotel and Waterfront Precinct part of the Living City project? Answer: The total operational budget for consultants for LIVING CITY in 2015/2016 is $245,000 of which $19,000 had been spent by 31 January 2016. The actual amount for the consultancy related to the recent advertised masterplan/concept design for the hotel and waterfront precinct will be funded from this budget line item. Question 2: Did Council give consideration to “test the market” by calling for expressions of interest from developers to actually PURCHASE the site, design and construct, rather than pay for yet again another expensive consultancy for concepts only for a development that may or may not materialise? (Incidentally some super concepts and plans, paid for by ratepayers, were drawn up for the said site some years ago). Am I correct in saying that ratepayers will be, in reality, paying once again for a subsidised site/environment for developers of a hotel and other business that may be part of that development which will be in direct competition with existing long term rate paying owners of similar establishments? It is worth noting the existing long standing accommodation properties and other business of Devonport, have rights and expectations in the protection of their business from their local Council and Aldermen who it seems are charging head long into manufacturing the demand rather than let the market forces of supply and demand prevail as is normal business practices throughout the world. Answer: The Masterplan is the first step in establishing guidelines for a sale of a portion of the waterfront land to developers. It is important that Council, set tight guidelines for what the community expects on the site prior to offering the site for sale so to avoid potential conflicts between the public, Council and commercial interests in the future. Question 3: Were DCC planning staff provided an opportunity to have input into the LIVING CITY project? Answer: A large number of Council staff, including those from the planning department have contributed to the LIVING CITY Masterplan and its implementation over the past 5 years. One staff member of the planning team has transferred to the economic development team to work on the LIVING CITY project exclusively. Meeting held 22 February 2016 Reproduced below is the response dated 26 February 2016 to Mr Peter Schulze’s question: “I write in response to your questions raised at the Council Meeting on 22 February 2016.
PAGE 5 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
Question 1: Is it true that Council is looking to borrow another $40m? Devonport Council rates are substantially higher than any of its surrounding municipalities on either rate revenue per capita basis or on the average rate per property. On average they are 62% higher. Answer: The project funding model for Stage 1 of LIVING CITY was placed on public display on the 23 February 2016. This modelling shows that Stage 1 has a total cost of $70M. This will be funded by $10M from the Federal Government, $10M from the State Government and the remainder by Council through both cash ($11M) and loan borrowings ($39M). The funding model demonstrates that the project will be able to service this level of debt using income generated through the project. Council has no intention for LIVING CITY to adversely impact rates. During the past two years Council has been preparing for LIVING CITY including undertaking a close review of its expenditure practices. Significant improvements have been achieved during this time which has coincided with two years of the overall rate intake being maintained at 2013 levels. In reference to the comparison you have made regarding the average rate in Devonport I would like to point out that this is for all properties, not just residential. Taking into account the urban compact nature of Devonport compared to other councils there is no doubt that the average rate will be higher due to the level of services and regional responsibilities provided to the area. The average residential general rate in Devonport as identified in the Annual Report for the 2014/15 financial year was $1,106.08. Question 2: What is the forecast of Council Debt in say 5 years time or whatever timeframe you work your forecasts over? Answer: Council has adopted a Long Term Financial Plan which forecasts Council financial position over a 10 year period. Council has incorporated LIVING CITY into this plan. The model shows that when $39M of LIVING CITY debt is added to Council’s existing debt, actual borrowings will peak at $58.6M in 16/17 before reducing to $39.5M by year 2025. A comprehensive set of documents regarding the financial implications of LIVING CITY, including the “project model” and “worst case” scenarios were released to the public on Tuesday 23 February. Question 3: Has there been a cost benefit study for the planned Convention Centre? Answer: A Cost Benefit Analysis has been completed for the LIVING CITY project as a whole. A Regional Benefits Study has also been completed. This study demonstrated that the convention centre, together with the food pavilion and hotel developments were the major economic stimulants in the project and are likely to have the widest ranging impacts. Question 4: Will the Council be leasing its new premises or borrowing to pay for them. Whatever way that is decided how much rate increase will result? Answer: Council will be the owner of the new multi-purpose building to be constructed as part of Stage 1. As has previously been indicated there is no intention for LIVING CITY to adversely impact rates. Question 5: Council has claimed that 1000 new jobs will be generated by the project. With a given population and with more efficient new businesses
PAGE 6 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
won’t that mean there will be at least as many jobs lost in those whose less efficient businesses who close or are diminished?” Answer: LIVING CITY is principled on attracting new and additional business activity to the region, rather than replicating what already exists. An independent study by HillPDA estimated that LIVING CITY, once complete will generate an additional $112M per year to the regional economy, much of which will flow into existing businesses. The financial, social and tourism experiences created by LIVING CITY are expected to benefit existing business rather than hinder.” Meeting held 22 February 2016 Reproduced below is the response dated 26 February 2016 to Mr Peter Stegman’s question: “I write in response to your questions raised at the Council Meeting on 22 February 2016. Question 1: What is commercial rate of return of Councils investment on the Bluff Precinct? Has it been looked at for whether we get a commercial return or are we subsidising a particular business there? Answer: Much of the development that has occurred at the Bluff is public infrastructure including the surf club facilities. There are two commercial tenancies in the precinct, both of whom pay rent to Council that offsets the cost of their portions of the building. Council aims to realise market rental rates for any commercial related properties that it owns. Question 2: What is the expected return of the LIVING CITY food market complex? If not a commercial return, why is it not a commercial return? Otherwise Council is subsidising new business to the town at the detriment of existing businesses. Answer: The project funding model shows that the expected rental yield to Council on its funds employed in the food pavilion will be approximately 7 per cent. This return is based on the expected net cost to Council of $5.6 million for the construction of the food pavilion (noting that $3 million of the construction cost is to be met by external grant funding). Council has also been clear that it will not begin construction of the food pavilion until such time as the major anchor tenancies are secured ensuring the commercial viability of the facility. Question 3: Are there any public meetings planned for ratepayers to express concerns regarding LIVING CITY project? Answer: A public information session on Stage 1 LIVING CITY is being held on 29 February 2016 at 6pm at the Devonport Entertainment & Convention Centre. Feedback on the funding model for Stage 1 will be accepted until 8 March 2016.” Meeting held 22 February 2016 Reproduced below is the response dated 26 February 2016 to Mr Trevor Smith’s question: “I write in response to your questions raised at the Council Meeting on 22 February 2016.
PAGE 7 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
Question 1: Do the Devonport Council employee’s and contractors use Glyphosate to spray weeds around the Devonport Municipality? According to a release in the Media, Glyphosate has been found to be carcinogenic!! Do the Council Employee’s and contractors wear suitable protective clothing? Answer: Yes Glyphosate is used by Council employees and contractors. All spraying works are carried out in accordance with the relevant codes of practice and safe work practises including the protective clothing requirements detailed in the Material Safety Data Sheet for Glyphosate. As a result of the recent media coverage relating to Glyphosate I understand that the Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicine Authority (APVMA) and the Federal Department of Health are reviewing their assessment of guidelines associated with this particular widely used chemical. It is prudent that we await that advice as to whether any further precautionary measures other than those already in place are necessary. Question 2: It was stated in the Advocate on Monday February 1st 2016, that the Burnie Council was facing a loss of $1.6 Million Dollars. What is the anticipated loss for the Devonport City Council, for this financial year? Do you have a long term financial plan going forward, so as to not impact heavily on the Ratepayers of Devonport. If you do have a plan, what does it entail in regards to the enormous costs involved with the LIVING CITY? Answer: Council prepare regular financial reports which are included in the Governance & Finance Committee agendas and/or the Council meeting agendas. The most recent Finance Report was tabled at the 18 January 2016 Council meeting, covering the period from 1 July 2015 to 31 December 2015. The report showed that Council budgeted for an operating surplus of $340,528. The actual position at 31 December 2015 is ahead of budget by $1,361,274. Council is currently anticipating a positive net operating result for the financial year. Council has an adopted Long Term Financial Plan which forecasts Council’s financial position over a 10 year period. Council has incorporated LIVING CITY into this plan. A comprehensive set of documents regarding the financial implications of LIVING CITY, including the “likely” and “worst case” scenarios were released to the public on Tuesday 23 February. Question 3: With the supposedly relocation of the Court House to Wenvoe Street, where are the Ratepayers going to park their cars when this complex is built?? The car park is nearly full now, with low cost parking for office workers, and those attending the nearby Medical Centre. Where are the Ratepayers going to be shunted to, in regards to the 2016 Parking Strategy? Answer: Part 6.2 of the Devonport Parking Strategy adopted at the 22 February 2016 meeting commits Council to identify new sites suitable for offstreet car parking in the Southern CBD. Council is currently working through a number of possible options with an announcement likely in the near future.”
PAGE 8 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
RECOMMENDATION That Council note the responses provided to questions taken on notice at the February 2016 Council meeting. 3.2.2
Questions on notice from the public At the time of compilation of the agenda no questions on notice from the public were received.
3.2.3
Question without notice from the public
3.3
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM ALDERMEN At the time of compilation of the agenda no questions on notice from Aldermen were received.
PAGE 9 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
4.0
PLANNING AUTHORITY MATTERS
The Mayor will now announce that Council intends to act as a Planning Authority under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 for the consideration of Agenda Item 4.1. Council is required by Regulation 8(3) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2005 to deal with items as a Planning Authority under the LUPA 1993 in a sequential manner. The following item is to be dealt with at the meeting of Council in its capacity as a Planning Authority. 4.1
DISP2014.03 Rezone from General Residential Zone to Particular Purpose Zone - 13 & 14-15 Victoria Parade & 5 Lower Madden Street Devonport (Elimatta Hotel) (D410939)
ITEM 4.0
PAGE 10 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
4.1
DISP2014.03 REZONE FROM GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE TO PARTICULAR PURPOSE ZONE - 13 & 14-15 VICTORIA PARADE & 5 LOWER MADDEN STREET DEVONPORT (ELIMATTA HOTEL) File: 29976 D410939
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 2.1.1
Apply and review the Devonport Interim Planning Scheme as required to ensure it delivers local community character and appropriate land use
Strategy 2.1.2
Provide high quality, consistent and responsive development.
SUMMARY This report is to fulfil Council’s statutory responsibility to forward a report to the Tasmanian Planning Commission on the representations received from the public exhibition of draft amendment DISP2014.03 to the Devonport Interim Planning Scheme 2013.
BACKGROUND In November 2014 Council acting as a Planning Authority (refer resolution 274/14) initiated an amendment to set aside the provisions of the General Residential zone to allow the above sites to be zoned Urban Mixed Use on the condition that only the defined use of Hotel Industry, Food Services and Visitor Accommodation (if provided within a building) be permissible. The amendment was placed on public exhibition for a three week period that ended on 19 December 2014. Eight (8) representations were received from members of the public within this public exhibition period. The representations and the accompanying commentary were submitted to the 27 January 2015 Council meeting. The purpose of this meeting was to consider the merits of each representation and report to the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) with its views on any need for modification, the impact of the representation on the draft amendment and any necessary recommendations. During this process the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 was substantially amended and applications for ‘dispensation’ transitioned to ‘draft amendments’. The TPC conducted a Hearing on 22 April 2015 and handed down its decision on 5 June 2015. That decision was to instruct Council that the amendment required substantial alteration under Section 41(a) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act) and that the amendment should create a Particular Purpose zone over the site which achieves the following outcomes: (i)
A reasonable level of certainty for the owner that the existing Hotel Industry use can continue and be further developed in accordance with a planning permit with appropriate conditions granted by the Planning Authority;
(ii)
Acknowledgement of the quality of the locality in which the current Hotel industry use operates (which may include visitor accommodation and food services as integrated components) and the level of residential amenity already present in the neighbourhood; ITEM 4.1
PAGE 11 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
(iii)
Formulation of appropriate use standards and development standards directed towards establishing acceptable outcomes for residential amenity, traffic generation, operating hours, noise, heritage protection and streetscape appeal for the site and in adjacent General Residential zone.
The Planning Authority was given 28 days to alter the draft amendment to reflect these directions. On 14 July 2015 a proposal for a Particular Purpose zone was submitted to the TPC that provided a first draft of the required outcomes. On 22 January 2016 the amendment was certified by the TPC and Council was directed to exhibit it for a period of 28 days. A copy of the certified amendment is attached - Attachment 1. The application was advertised initially on 6 February 2016 and again as required by the Act on 17 February 2016. The required 28 day public scrutiny period expired on 4 March 2016.
DISCUSSION Twelve (12) representations were received during the 28 day exhibition period. The representations are all in opposition to the draft amendment. No representations of support were received. The representations were received from the following persons with an interest in the outcome. 1. Cheryl Evans – 11 Lower Madden Street, Devonport 2. Helen Cahalin – 9 Lower Madden Street, Devonport 3. Lester Franks – North Hobart 4. Scott Carse – Lower Madden Street, Devonport 5. David and Carol Watson – 11 Chalmers Lane, Devonport 6. Mac and Marje Russell – 16a Victoria Parade, Devonport 7. Ian Day – Devonport 8. Judy Richmond – 7 Lower Madden Street, Devonport 9. John Henry – 14 Lower Madden Street, Devonport 10. Brian Chandler – 25 Victoria Parade, Devonport 11. Brian Chandler – additional questions 12. **Cheryl Evans – additional questions ** received after the exhibition period closed The representations are attached – Attachment 2. Section 40K of the Act contains certain protocols for the Planning Authority to address within 35 days after the end of the exhibition period. These protocols require the Planning Authority to provide to the TPC a report in relation to the draft amendment which is to contain: (a)
A copy of each representation made in relation to the draft amendment before the end of the exhibition period; and
(b)
A copy of each representation made in relation to the draft amendment after the end of the exhibition period in relation to the draft amendment that the planning authority in its discretion includes in the report; and
(c)
A statement of the planning authority’s opinion as to the merit of each representation including in particular as to – (i)
whether the planning authority is of the opinion that the draft amendment ought to be modified to take into account the representation; and ITEM 4.1
PAGE 12 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
(ii)
the effect on the draft amendment and the Local Provisions Schedule to which it relates, as a whole, of implementing the recommendation;
(d)
A statement as to whether it is satisfied that the Local Provisions Schedule meets the Local Provisions Schedule criteria; and
(e)
Any recommendations in relation to the draft amendment that the planning authority thinks fit.
The representations have been analysed and a precis of each has been prepared. It should be noted that many of the issues and concerns are common between representors. A planning response has been included where applicable about each representation and a brief assessment of its merit in accordance with the requirements of the Act. Representation 1 Precis of issues Concerns with transparency of delivering details of the application to the public. Planning response: The application was advertised for 28 days. The Act requires the advertisement to be advertised once before and once within 14 days after the first day of exhibition in a newspaper that circulates generally in the area. The first advertisement appeared in the Advocate newspaper on Saturday 6 February 2016 and the second on Wednesday 17 February 2016. The calculated 28 days expired on 5 March 2016. The details of the application were also included on Council’s website. Assessment of Merit: Council fulfilled all obligations for exhibition as required by the Act. Representation 2 Precis of issues The issues currently being experienced will be exacerbated particularly if the rezoning enables the addition of a drive through bottle shop and nightclub. Extended opening hours will amplify the existing anti-social and behavioural issues. Planning response: The bottle shop, whether drive through or walk through, is often an activity integrated with a Hotel Industry use. The amenity standards of the proposed Particular Purpose zone (PPz) could be modified to include specific opening hours for a drive through bottle shop operation or the Hotel Industry use could be qualified by not allowing a drive through bottle shop in the permitted use classification and relying on discretion to judge the merits of any development proposal. Assessment of Merit: Council may choose to support the PPz but with conditions specific to the addition of a drive through bottle shop. Representation 3 (multiple issues) Precis of issues 1.
The proposal does not represent sound strategic planning – (a)
The proposed amendment undermines the LIVING CITY Master Plan by expanding and intensifying a use which should be consolidated in the CBD.
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 13 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
(b)
The proposed amendment is not consistent with the 2008 Devonport Retail Strategy which directs retail to be consolidated in centres and to recognise the primacy of the Devonport CBD. It allows an existing non-conforming use to be expanded which will draw people away from the investment area of the CBD.
(c)
Relevant sections of the Cradle Coast Regional Land Use Framework provides land use policies that promote integration of neighbourhood service provision in to a scale and location to suit to service local need. The proposal is not consistent with this as the proposed Particular Purpose zone is of a size far in excess of what would be required. The linear extension of commerce to Lower Madden Street extends the CBD. The subject site is not a preferred location for commercial or retail activities according to the LIVING CITY Master Plan or the Devonport Retail Strategy because it allows leakage of commercial or retail activities into other land use areas.
Planning response: LIVING CITY does ultimately include provision for a large scale accommodation facility. The development plans for the Elimatta site are not known and whether this would negatively impact the LIVING CITY precinct or supplement it is subjective in nature. There are other areas of the CBD that are zoned appropriately to allow for a large scale hotel/motel development. LIVING CITY cannot constrain other sites from developing in the CBD if the use fits the zone purpose. Assessment of Merit: The proposed PPz would allow for a large scale hotel development. Existing zoning elsewhere in the City would also allow such a development. Although LIVING CITY is a clear priority for Council it cannot be used to prevent other developments if they are located in a zone that permits the use. Precis of issues 2.
The proposed rezoning does not sufficiently protect residential amenity – (a)
A single access point to Lower Madden Street will result in high levels of traffic entering a residential street late at night. Traffic impacts need to be considered.
(b)
Social impacts and potential conflicts are recognised by my professional planning associations and ignoring social impacts is not sound planning.
Planning response: Previous comments were made on how the high levels and consequential effects of drive through bottle shops could be alleviated. Ultimately this is a design issue that is dependent on a favourable determination of the rezoning. The social impacts of developments as submitted in the representation are often deflected as not being a land use planning issue. The framework of the Cradle Coast Interim Planning Schemes does not include any reference to this matter. Assessment of Merit: This report deals with the proposed rezoning amendment only. Any development application that included a drive through bottle shop could be made subject to design standards relating to entry and exit points and if necessary a traffic impact study. Council is not in a position to determine what if any conditions about the nature and hours of operation within a Hotel Industry use might control or lessen anti-social behaviours. ITEM 4.1
PAGE 14 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
Precis of issues 3.
The proposed development standards are excessive. A 10m high permitted building height is inconsistent with the scale of buildings in the surrounding area and it is noted that a higher building is possible through assessment of the Performance Criteria. Also the building envelope permits buildings on more than 80 percent of the site which is not consistent with the surrounding lots.
Planning response: The Urban Mixed Use zone alternative first proposed has a permitted building height of 8.5m for all possible development within that zone. Anything higher requires the merits to be assessed through a discretionary permit application. It seems reasonable to limit the building height to a similar threshold that exists in the adjoining Residential zone. While the building envelope may be 80% of the site it is indicative only and allows a design to fit within those dimensions. Any development application would need to be considered against the overall development standards. It is highly unlikely that the built form will be 80% as this would compromise storage and the required car parking numbers. Assessment of Merit: As when this matter last came before Council there is no development application and therefore any consideration of building height and site coverage can only be theoretical. Council would rely on the application of development standards and other relevant conditioning in any assessment process. Precis of issues 4.
The proposed zone will fragment the General Residential areas to the south by causing pressure for conversion to commercial usage. This would conflict with existing strategies and policies adopted for the CBD.
Planning response: The revision and preparation of the planning zones as part of the Local Provisions Schedule of the State Planning Scheme will consider the appropriateness of how and where zones are applied. A previous draft planning scheme did include this linear strip as Urban Mixed Use but that was later discarded. A proposal by Council to introduce a heavily restricted Urban Mixed Use zone to accommodate this hotel industry was overturned by the TPC in favour of this PPz. Assessment of Merit: Council will consider the appropriate zoning of the particular area referred to in this representation when developing a Local Provisions Schedule which will form part of the State Planning Scheme. It must first deal with this matter as it was the subject of an application by the property owner and this report forms part of the statutory process now in train. Precis of issues 5.
The proposed rezoning prolongs the commercial viability of the Hotel industry and allows development that will be detrimental to existing strategic plans for Devonport while further fragmenting the CBD when the LIVING CITY is trying to invigorate it.
Planning response: The Central Business District of Devonport has often been reported as fragmented and the Central Business zone of the planning scheme merely reflects this. In effect this creates sites for many different business opportunities that could also be deemed to be
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 15 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
competing with the LIVING CITY project. A development opportunity cannot be denied if it accords with the zone purpose and can reasonably fit on a site. Assessment of Merit: Council cannot amend zones merely to protect the LIVING CITY project. There will be an opportunity to reconsider the overall zoning in the City when developing the Local Provisions Schedule for the State Planning Scheme. Representation 4 Precis of issues The public notification process and lack of information doesn’t permit sufficient consideration of the application. Any ingress and egress onto Lower Madden Street will affect the residential amenity especially at night. Planning response: This application did not need to provide details of how the site may develop if the rezoning was approved and the notification process has been duly followed. If and when a development application is made it would be subject to assessment against design standards, including any traffic impacts. Assessment of Merit: Council may choose to propose a further amendment as part of this process so that the PPz would prevent such matters as a drive through bottle shop, or it could rely on development standards and conditions to limit traffic impacts when a development application is received. Representation 5 Precis of issues The objective states that use and development is not to impact adversely on the residential amenity or heritage values of the locality and if there is any uncertainty the application should not be approved. Including 13 Victoria Parade and 5 Lower Madden Street will remove the buffer area between the hotel and surrounding residences in other ownership. Insufficient car parking exists now and any redevelopment will exacerbate the problem. Planning response: The impact on the residential amenity is a pivotal matter of the proposed amendment. The directions given to Council by the TPC in developing the PPz are intended to limit adverse impacts and this amendment was certified by the TPC as meeting its requirements prior to exhibition. Assessment of merit: Without seeing a development proposal Council is not able to make an objective assessment of what if any impacts the rezoning may have on the surrounding area. It may be for instance that a renovation would enhance the streetscape. As before there is an opportunity to apply development standards and conditions to assist in achieving that aim when a development application is received. Representation 6 Precis of issues The location is prime residential land and any rezoning would detrimentally erode the residential amenity of the area.
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 16 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
The development standard for building height is not acceptable and not consistent with the residential standard. A drive through bottle shop cannot be accommodated onto Lower Madden Street and was disallowed by the Planning Commission. The other properties that are seeking to be included (13 Victoria Parade & 3 Lower Madden Street) now form an appropriate buffer and allowing the application would remove that buffer. The current zone is in place for correct and sound reasons and there is no justification in changing it. Planning response: Previous commentary on the building height has been submitted. A lower alternative is reasonable and can be supported. Similarly an alternative exists for the drive through bottle shop. Whether a use standard or qualification provides the best means of control is a matter to be decided in the assessment of a development application. A previous representation also raised this concern. A Council decision to support the amendment as presented, modifying it to deal with height and drive through bottle shop concerns or rejecting it altogether is what this regulatory process is intended to determine. The retention of the General Residential zone is another pivotal matter. If Council acting as a Planning Authority determines that the future direction for this locality is General Residential then it must support the representations. The General Residential zone (GRz) is more ‘general’ in nature than the previous Closed Residential zone. The zone purpose statement for the GRz does allow compatible non-residential uses that primarily serve the local community to be developed, or adaptive re-use of existing buildings. It does not allow for any intensification of the existing hotel use hence the application for a planning scheme amendment. Assessment of Merit: To a certain extent Council in considering this proposed amendment must determine what it sees as the most suitable mix of uses for the area in future years. As already stated the GRz is not restricted to single residences and this particular area already contains a mix of allowable uses such as visitor accommodation. The GRz would also allow such things as cafes, consulting rooms and even schools. Even if the GRz is retained the hotel would remain as an existing use. Council is hindered in its determination by the lack of any development proposal but it may be that a renovated or reconstructed hotel might enhance rather than detract from the existing streetscape. Representation 7 Precis of issues The properties at 5 Lower Madden Street and 13 Victoria Parade currently provide a buffer between the non-conforming activities of the Elimatta and the properties immediately west of and south of those properties respectively. The proposed building envelope allows for a relatively large building which is contra to the zone purpose of ensuring that use and development is not to impact adversely on the residential amenity or heritage values of the locality.
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 17 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
Planning response: Previous commentary on the scale of the building envelope has been provided. The opportunity to modify this amendment is one of the fundamental provisions of the Act that the Planning Authority can reasonably consider during this process. Assessment of Merit: It is for Council to determine whether it accepts this amendment in its current form, modifies it to reflect some or all of the concerns set out in the representations or reject the amendment in favour of retaining the GRz. If a PPz is established Council in its role as a Planning Authority retains the statutory right to apply development standards and appropriate conditions to any subsequent development application. Representation 8 Precis of issues An increase in the commercialism of the hotel will impact severely on the loss of the residential amenity due to anti-social behaviour. The character of the area will alter due to the planned increase in buildings and associated activity which is contra the zone purpose. The potential bulk of future development and the security lighting will overshadow and cause loss of privacy, all resulting in an impact on the residential amenity. The hours for commercial vehicle movement times from Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) are different to those proposed in the Use Standards of the PPz. Planning response: Previous commentary has been provided on these amenity issues. The commercial vehicle movement times cannot be verified at this stage. The proposed times set out in the amendment are similar to those applying to commercial equipment operating on residential premises. Assessment of Merit: If Council is concerned about the potential impacts of development allowable in the amendment it could resolve to make further amendments with respect to such matters as the bulk and scale of a development and the hours of operation. Alternately it could rely on the development standards and reasonable conditions that could be applied to a development application to control impacts. Representation 9 The rezoning will result in excessive traffic movements and congested car parking in Lower Madden Street. Planning response: The overall balance to be found between any proposed building development and the need to comply with the Traffic Generating Use and Parking Code is difficult to assess without the details of a proposed development. It is reasonable for Council to anticipate, however, that vehicle parking and deliveries of goods etc will be facilitated on site rather than in Lower Madden Street. Assessment of Merit: It would be a matter for Council, in its role as a Planning Authority to ensure that any future development includes satisfactory off street parking.
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 18 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
Representation 10 & 11 Precis of issues The various titles subject to this application have been purchased by the owners and now a ‘Spot zone’ is proposed. A Particular Purpose zone will create a major commercial hotel complex in the midst of a residential area and erode its amenity. The Use and Development Standards of the proposed zone seek to introduce artificial Performance Criteria to lessen the impact on residential amenity. If rezoned the developers will have carte blanche to undertake further development. Non-conforming use rights can continue in the zone and will ensure the amenity is not eroded. The application was not advertised for the required 28 days. Planning response: Commentary has already been provided in relation to matters raised in these representations. The assertion that Council has not complied with statutory exhibition requirements is incorrect. The amendment was advertised twice in The Advocate within the stipulated 28 days and was also readily available on Council’s website. Assessment of Merit: Council is unable to assess the size and scale of any development on this site in the absence of a development application. Representation 12 (received by email outside the exhibition period) Precis of issues Five dot points have been submitted as questions to the elected members. Planning comments: The questions do not specifically relate to the application but are focused more on process and politics. They can be responded to under separate cover if required or the representor can ask the questions at the Commission Hearing into the application. Assessment of Merit: The dot points in this representation do not relate specifically to a consideration of the proposed amendment.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There will be costs associated with the inevitable TPC Hearings that follow this decision. It is also possible that Council may incur legal costs associated with any appeal.
CONCLUSION The issues raised in the representations have a common theme but Council has room to retain the PPz and reach common ground with some of the representors if modifications are made to the use and development standards. There is of course no guarantee that the TPC would accept and certify any such modifications. In general terms such a compromise would ensure that any loss of existing residential amenity is minimised and that the owners of the site will have some development rights to allow expansion. The difficulty in this outcome is not having knowledge of any tangible development proposal and how it would demonstrate compliance with the Acceptable Solutions or achieve compliance by satisfying the Performance Criteria. ITEM 4.1
PAGE 19 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
The use and development standards of the PPz have to be considered in any subsequent permit application and if variations from any zone or code standards are identified the opportunity to examine the application with a view to applying appropriate conditions in mitigation of adverse impacts on the neighbouring residential zone would present itself. An objective look at the proposed use and development standards in the amendment suggests that it is highly unlikely that a development application for a hotel industry use on this site would not trigger a “discretionary� application process. Before any development application is even considered, however, Council must first assess the merits of representations made about the proposed amendment to create a Particular Purpose zone. In so doing Council as a Planning Authority can support the representations either totally or in part, or reject them. Partial acceptance of the representations would result in further modifications to this Particular Purpose zone while full acceptance would see Council reverting to the existing General Residential zone. Complete rejection of the representations would result in a report to the TPC supporting the modification as currently presented. Prior to considering any modifications the strategic matters raised in the representations need to be determined. These are: 1.
The effects this amendment may have on the LIVING CITY project. Clearly LIVING CITY is a development priority for Council. It cannot, however, be used as the basis for blocking complying development elsewhere in the City. This existing hotel is already part of the fabric of the Mersey waterfront and although no proposed development details are available there is a possibility suitably controlled development on the site may enhance the streetscape and in time complement LIVING CITY.
2.
Determine whether the proposal is consistent with the Devonport Retail Strategy. The Devonport Retail Strategy is implemented under the Objectives of the Devonport Interim Planning Scheme. It should be noted that this study was prepared by Access Economics in 2008. Since that time major development projects in the City, notably the Homemaker Centre and now LIVING CITY call into question its relevance to the assessment of this zoning amendment.
3.
Determine whether the proposal is consistent with the Cradle Coast Regional Land Use Framework. The Cradle Coast Regional Land Use Framework was a policy document that was intended to provide uniformity in planning across the seven municipal areas. It was initially a guiding tool in the development of the seven regional Interim Planning Schemes. As those schemes were developed, however, it was inevitable that there would be differences in zoning requirements. Certainly Particular Purpose zones have been developed in a number of Council areas and appear to be the mechanism favoured by the TPC to control particular forms of development. Council is also aware from consultation sessions about the new State Planning Scheme that Particular Purpose zones are seen as a tool to assist in preparing the Local Provisions that will complement the core of the new Scheme.
4.
Discuss options to include social impacts in planning outcomes. As mentioned earlier in this report land use planning is not intended to shape social impacts in our community. ITEM 4.1
PAGE 20 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
There is a mention in the Objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania that it should deliver “a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environment for all Tasmanians”. This is an extremely broad statement with no specific requirements that link directly to development standards in the Interim Planning Scheme. With no application details to give an indication of what might be developed on the site it is not possible to make any assessment of “social impacts”. Council may determine that the restrictions in the draft amendment deliver that outcome or it may choose to modify the amendment to strengthen that aim. If the Planning Authority is satisfied that these matters do not apply and generally supports the introduction of the Particular Purpose zone, but with modifications in response to the representations, then further discussion of the proposed zone and associated use and development standards that could be modified is set out below. A suitable compromise between development and the concerns expressed in the representations would involve the following modifications to the rezoning document in the attachments. 1.
Concerns about a drive through bottle shop At 32.2 of the Use Table qualify the “Hotel industry” use by inserting the words “not including a drive through bottle shop”. This would satisfy a major concern from the representations and put the onus on the applicant to provide details of the size and location of a proposed drive through bottle shop for the consideration of both Council and the public.
2.
Concerns about the potential bulk and scale of a development At 32.4.1 (i)
reduce building height to 8.5 m for consistency with surrounding neighbourhood and adjust diagram at 32.4.1 accordingly; and
(ii)
increase setbacks at southern boundary (adjoining 12 Victoria Parade) and western boundary (adjoining 7 Lower Madden Street) to 8m and modify the Table to Clause 32.4.2 A1 accordingly.
3.
Concerns about traffic impacts to Lower Madden Street Modify 32.4.1 to remove Lower Madden Street as the only ingress and egress point.
4.
Concerns about noise generation by commercial vehicles At 32.3.1 A2 amend the hours for commercial vehicle moments from those stated, which are 6.00am to 8.00pm Mondays to Saturdays and 7.00am to 6.00pm Sundays and Public Holidays to: (a)
8.00am to 6.00pm Mondays to Saturdays and
(b)
9.00am to 4.00pm Sundays and Public Holidays.
It is recommended that these amendments to the existing certified Particular Purpose Zone provide an objective response to the matters raised in the representations. Most of the other matters raised in the representations would be dealt with through the application of development standards and conditions when a development application is made. Hours of operation and dispensation for “special” days such as New Year’s Eve are a matter for the Liquor Licensing Authority rather than Council.
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 21 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
There will be an opportunity for the applicant and the representors to debate the proposed amendments at a hearing and at that time although under no obligation to do so the applicant may see fit to produce details of what is actually proposed for the site. It should be noted that the Act requires the Planning Authority to submit a report to the TPC about its assessment of the merit of the representations and this report including the resolution form part of that statutory report. It should be further noted that regardless of the Planning Authority’s determination following consideration of the matters set out in this report the Act stipulates that the final decision and certification of any amendment rests with the TPC.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Altered draft amendment - certified 22 January 2016
2.
All representations - DISP2014.03
RECOMMENDATION That Council acting in its role as a Planning Authority accept the report of the Planning Coordinator and Option 1 determine that it will not support an amendment to the Devonport Interim Planning Scheme to create a Particular Purpose zone for the properties at 13 and 14-15 Victoria Parade and 5 Lower Madden Street and instead maintain the existing General Residential zoning classification. OR Option 2 determine that having assessed the merits of the representations received during the exhibition period it will support the introduction of an amendment to the Devonport Interim Planning Scheme to create a Particular Purpose zone as set out in the document at attachment 1 to this report and certified by the Tasmanian Planning Commission on 22 January 2016. OR Option 3 determine that having assessed the merits of the representations received during the exhibition period it supports the introduction of a Particular Purpose zone for the properties at 13 and 14-15 Victoria Parade and 5 Lower Madden Street subject to the modifications set out in relation to “concerns” in points 1 to 4 above to: (1)
remove a drive through bottle shop from the Use Table; and
(2)
reduce the maximum building height and increase some boundary setbacks; and
(3)
allow ingress and egress from both Victoria Parade and Lower Madden Street; and
(4)
reduce the hours for commercial vehicle movements to the site,
AND
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 22 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
That a report containing the Planning Authority’s recommendation about the draft amendment to the Devonport Interim Planning Scheme be forwarded to the Tasmanian Planning Commission in satisfaction of the requirements of Section 40K of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.
Author: Position: Coordinator
Shane Warren Planning & Environmental
Health
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 4.1
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 23 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 24 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 25 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 26 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 27 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 28 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 29 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 30 Altered A draft amendmentt - certified 22 2 January 20 016
ITEM 4.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 31 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 32 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 33 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 34 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 35 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 36 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 37 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 38 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 39 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 40 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 41 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 42 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 43 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 44 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 45 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 46 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 47 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 48 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 49 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 50 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 51 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 52 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 53 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 54 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 55 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 56 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 57 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 58 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 59 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 60 All A representa ations - DISP2 2014.03
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 61 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
5.0
REPORTS
5.1
REQUEST FOR FUNDING CONTRIBUTION - ALGWA File: 32359 D410929
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.1.3
Represent and promote Council at Regional, State and National forums
SUMMARY To consider a request from the Tasmanian branch of the Australian Local Government Women’s Association (ALGWA) for funding towards their biennial National Conference.
BACKGROUND A letter was received from Ald Heather Chong (attached) seeking financial support of up to $1,000 to assist in the running of ALGWA’s biennial National Conference to be held in Launceston from 11-13 April, 2017.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS There are no legislative requirements that relate to this report.
DISCUSSION ALGWA’s Committee are currently working to book speakers and venues but are facing difficulty due to budgetary constraints. They have written to each Council seeking their support in making a contribution of up to $1,000 towards the running of the Conference. Each contribution will be recognised in ALGWA’s program and sponsor list. There will also be an opportunity for promotional material from the local government area to be provided to each delegate at the Conference.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT There has been no community engagement as a result of this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Council will need to make provision for the sum of $1,000 in their 2016/17 budget if the request from ALGWA (Tas) is approved.
RISK IMPLICATIONS It is believed there are no risks that relate to this report.
CONCLUSION Council may determine to support ALGWA’s National Conference with a contribution of up to $1,000. If so, the contribution will need to be budgeted for in Council’s 2016/17 operational budget.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Request For Contribution To Australian Local Government Women's Association Tasmanian Branch Inc. - National Conference 11-13 April 2017
ITEM 5.1
PAGE 62 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
RECOMMENDATION OPTION 1 That Council include a $1,000 contribution towards the Australian Local Government Women’s (Tasmanian Branch) biennial conference to be held 11-13 April 2017 in its 2016/2017 budget. OR OPTION 2 That Council advise the Australian Local Government Women’s (Tasmanian Branch) that it is unable to make a contribution to its biennial conference to be held 11-13 April 2017.
Author: Position:
Karen Hampton Governance Coordinator
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.1
Paul West General Manager
PAGE 63 Request R For C Contribution To T Australian Local Goverrnment Wom men's Association Tasmanian T Brranch Inc. - National N Con nference 11-1 13 April 2017
ITEM 5.1
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
PAGE 64 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
5.2
RELOCATION OF THE DEVONPORT REGIONAL GALLERY TO THE DEVONPORT ENTERTAINMENT AND CONVENTION CENTRE File: 32161 D411195
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 2.4.1
Develop and implement a CBD Master Plan aligned to the key LIVING CITY principles based on community engagement outcomes
SUMMARY This report presents the outcomes of community consultation on the Feasibility Study to relocate the Devonport Regional Gallery (DRG) from its current location at 45 Stewart Street to within the existing Devonport Entertainment and Convention Centre (DECC).
BACKGROUND Council in adopting the LIVING CITY Master Plan in September 2014 determined to undertake further investigation into relocating the Devonport Regional Gallery to a suitable location within the Cultural/Waterfront Precinct of the Master Plan. Initial discussions with the Art Gallery Special Interest Group highlighted the advantages of relocating Council’s Art Gallery close to the major tourist attractions including the food pavilion, conference centre and proposed hotel. The new multi-purpose building included as part of LIVING CITY Stage 1 includes several high quality community meeting spaces, that are likely to transfer demand from the existing Devonport Entertainment and Convention Centre (DECC) to the new facility. Consequently, the future of the existing meeting spaces within the DECC will need to be considered. Council was also approached by representatives from the performing arts fraternity and has formally resolved to consider the needs of the Devonport Repertory Society Inc in any future planning of cultural/performing arts infrastructure. In light of these resolutions, the future opportunities with the DECC and the willingness within the arts community to consider options, Council at its June 2015 meeting, determined (Min. Ref.120/15): “That the report on the progress of LIVING CITY be received and noted and that Council engage the Stage 1 design team to undertake a high level feasibility review of incorporating the Devonport Regional Gallery and an intimate performing arts space into the Devonport Entertainment and Convention Centre.” The review was led by Jack Birrell of Birrelli Architects and included initial consultation sessions with a number of stakeholder groups from the various fascist of the art’s community. Council considered the resultant documentation entitled “Feasibility Study to incorporate the Regional Art Gallery and Intimate Performing Arts Centre into the Devonport Entertainment and Convention Centre” at its November 2015 meeting. At this November 2015 meeting, Council determined (Min. Ref. 244/15): “That Council note the report from the Deputy General Manager regarding the relocation of the Devonport Regional Gallery and new performing arts theatre and: a)
accept the Feasibility Study by Birrelli Architects dated October 2015; ITEM 5.2
PAGE 65 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
b)
endorse consultation on the Study with relevant stakeholder groups;
c)
endorse the public release of the Study following stakeholder consultation; and
d)
consider funding for the project as part of Council’s 2016/17 budget deliberations.”
This report summarises the outcomes from the consultation and public release of the project plans.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS There are no relevant statutory requirements.
DISCUSSION In accordance with Council’s November resolution, on 16 December, representatives of key stakeholders groups attended a series of briefing sessions on the Feasibility Study to incorporate the Regional Art Gallery and Intimate Performing Arts Centre into the Devonport Entertainment and Convention Centre. Representatives from the Devonport Eisteddfod Society, Devonport Choral Society, the Devonport Reparatory Society, the Devonport Regional Gallery Special Interest Group and staff from the DECC and Art Gallery attended these briefings. Jack Birrell presented the feasibility study at these meetings. The attendees at these briefings were unanimously supportive of the concepts presented and openly congratulated Mr Birrell on his work. The concept was also presented to the Arts, Culture and Tourism Strategic Special Committee at its January meeting. A three week public consultation period was undertaken early in the year, closing on 21 February 2016. During this time the following public engagement tools were utilised: ·
A copy of the feasibility study, FAQ’s and background documents were available to download through Speak Up Devonport;
·
Information on Council’s website and social media platforms;
·
Advertisements in the print media of the consultation opportunities; and
·
two drop in Q & A sessions at the DECC.
Media coverage was provided by The Advocate and a number of radio stations. The Speak Up Devonport website attracted the following level of interest: 99 documents viewed or downloaded (including the Council report, frequently asked questions); 84 unique visitors looking at the LIVING CITY Stage 1 Plans consultation page; and 25 contributions to the on-line community forum. In addition to the 25 contributions to Speak up Devonport, Council has received four letters/feedback forms. The majority of verbal and written comments received were favourable. submissions received, 27 supported the concept and two opposed.
Of the 29
Submissions have been received supporting both the art gallery relocation and the creation of a new black box theatre facility. Most of the supporting submissions speak about the cohesion between the various arts communities and advantages of colocation. ITEM 5.2
PAGE 66 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
In relation to the Art Gallery relocation, supporting submissions are pleased with the additional display space enabling different exhibitions to run concurrently. Several submissions also support the creation of an educational programs space. Many submissions recognise the Art Gallery as a tourist attraction and support the proposed location near other tourist attractions proposed as part of LIVING CITY. Supporters of the concept did raise issues with respect to the future of the existing Art Gallery building at 45 Stewart Street and the loading and unloading of sets to the existing DECC stage. Of the two submissions that oppose the concept, one suggested that the existing Visitor Information Centre on Formby Road would be preferable and the other suggested Council concentrate on traditional local government responsibilities such as roads and garbage. Should Council decide to proceed with relocating the Art Gallery to the DECC, the next step is to progress detailed design to enable a construction tender to be selected. It is estimated that construction of stage 1a would take approximately nine months. The DECC will be able to operate its main auditorium during the construction period, however the meeting rooms would be impacted.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT A three week consultation period on the proposal concluded on 21 February 2016. This report outlines the results of this consultation.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The total cost of all stages is estimated to be in the order of $6 million. Stage 1 involving the relocation of the DRG is estimated in the order of $1.5 - $1.8 million. Council does not currently have an allocation within its forward works program for this project. Relocating the DRG would allow Council to dispose of its property at 45 Stewart Street to assist with funding the new facility. The current Government valuation for the existing property is $680,000. It should be noted this includes the adjacent public toilet block. From an operational perspective a saving in the order of $30-$40,000 per annum could potentially be achieved as a result of the relocation, based on retaining the existing staff structure, but reducing a number of building related budget expenses.
RISK IMPLICATIONS There are not considered any direct risk implications as a result of this report.
CONCLUSION Council commissioned a Feasibility Study into the potential relocation of the Devonport Art Gallery into the DECC along with the development of an intimate performing arts venue. Key stakeholder consultation and public exhibition of the study resulted in a high level of support. The next step is for Council to consider the proposal as part of its budget deliberations.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Consultation Feedback DECC Feasibility
2.
Feasibility Study Relocation of Art Gallery and Intimate Performing Arts Facility
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 67 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
RECOMMENDATION That Council note the report regarding the relocation of the Devonport Regional Gallery and provision of a new performing arts theatre and: 1.
note the feedback provided as part of the public consultation period; and
2.
consider funding Stage 1 of the project as part of Council’s budget deliberations.
Author: Position:
Rebecca McKenna Project Officer Development
Economic
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.2
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 68 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 69 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 70 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 71 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 72 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 73 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 74 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 75 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 76 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 77 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 78 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 79 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 80 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 81 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 82 Consultation C Feedback DECC Feasibility
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 83 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 84 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 85 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 86 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 87 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 88 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 89 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 90 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 91 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 92 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 93 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 94 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 95 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 96 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 97 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 98 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 99 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 100 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 101 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 102 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 103 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 104 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 105 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 106 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 107 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 108 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 109 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 110 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 111 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 112 Feasibility F Stu udy Relocatio on of Art Gallery and Intim mate Performing Arts Facillity
ITEM 5.2
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 113 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
5.3
UNCONFIRMED MINUTES OF MEETING - AUDIT PANEL - 7 MARCH 2016 File: 30196 D409549
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.6.4
Provide internal and external audit functions to review Council's performance, risk management, financial governance and reporting
SUMMARY To report the unconfirmed minutes of the Audit Panel meeting held on 7 March 2016.
BACKGROUND The Audit Panel is in place to assist Council in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities by providing independent advice and assurance in regard to the Council’s financial management, risk management, internal control and compliance framework. In late 2014, Council determined to establish a shared Audit Panel arrangement with Central Coast Council. The Audit Panel of each Council comprises two elected members and two independent members. The independent members are appointed jointly by both Councils to be shared between each Council’s Audit Panel. As part of the transition to a joint Audit Panel, current member Ken Clarke’s existing three year term on the Devonport City Council Audit Panel will be honoured until its expiry scheduled for July 2016.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS All Councils must have Audit Panels that operate in accordance with Part 8 of Division 4 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) and the Local Government (Audit Panels) Order 2014.
DISCUSSION The unconfirmed minutes of the Audit Panel meeting held on 7 March 2016 are attached for Aldermen’s information. These minutes are for the joint meeting of the two Audit Panels and for the Devonport City Council specific section. Items of note from the combined meeting include:
Credit Card Policies and procedures were presented by both Councils;
Each Council provided an overview of the Budget process; and
The Chairperson presented the results of the recent Audit Panel self-assessment process.
The Devonport City Council Audit Panel discussed the following:
Representatives from the Tasmanian Audit Office attended and presented the Audit Strategy document for the 2015/16 financial year;
The Financial performance report for the period ending 31 January was noted by the Panel;
The Panel discussed the highest ranking strategic risks in the Risk Register; and ITEM 5.3
PAGE 114 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
A presentation on the LIVING CITY funding model was provided.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT There was no community engagement undertaken as a result of this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications as a result of this report.
RISK IMPLICATIONS
Risk Management Practices The Audit Panel plays a key oversight role in Council’s Risk Management activities providing elected members with an extra level of comfort that the systems in place are adequate. Within its charter, the primary objectives of the Audit Panel are to consider whether:
the annual financial statements of the Council accurately represent the state of affairs of the Council; the Strategic Plan, Annual Plan, long-term financial management plan and long-term strategic asset management plans of the Council are integrated and the processes by which, and assumptions under which, those plans were prepared are sound and justified; the accounting, internal control, anti-fraud, anti-corruption and risk management policies, systems and controls that the Council has in relation to safeguarding its long-term financial position are appropriate; the Council is complying with the provisions of the Act and any other relevant legislation; all strategic and business risks affecting the Council are identified and assessed, and the effectiveness of mitigation controls evaluated; and the Council has taken any action in relation to previous recommendations provided by the Audit Panel to the Council.
CONCLUSION The information contained in the report and the minutes of the Audit Panel meeting held on 7 March 2016 are presented to the Aldermen as per the recommendation below.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Devonport City Council Audit Panel Minutes
2.
Shared Audit Panel Minutes
RECOMMENDATION That the unconfirmed minutes of the Audit Panel meeting held on 7 March 2016 be received and noted.
Author: Position:
Kym Peebles Executive Manager Performance
Organisational
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.3
Paul West General Manager
PAGE 115 Devonport City Council Audit Panel Minutes
ATTACHMENT [1]
DEVONPORT CITY COUNCIL AUDIT PANEL Minutes of meeting held Monday7 March 2016 at Central Coast Council commencing at 2.10pm Attendance Members – Sue Smith (Chair), John Howard, Ken Clarke, Ald Charlie Emmerton, Ald Grant Goodwin Officers - Paul West (General Manager), Kym Peebles (Executive Manager Organisational Performance) Apologies Nil 1.
Tasmanian Audit Office (TAO) The Deputy Auditor General Ric De Santi and Engagement Leader Simone Lee attended the meeting and presented the draft Devonport Audit Strategy for 2015/16. Matters discussed included: DCC have been selected to trial the Long Form Audit Report in 2015/16. The TAO will continue to issue an Audit Report in the existing format for use in the Annual Report, however they will also issue a report in the new format. While the adoption of the new Report is not mandatory for Councils, TAO believe the adoption of the proposed format is good practice;
Two pending Accounting Standards will become applicable in the 2016/17 year and Council will need to consider the impact of the Standards; and
Timing of the asset revaluation process given the target to have the audit complete by 2 September.
2.
Confirmation of the minutes It was moved by Ald Grant Goodwin, seconded John Howard, and resolved unanimously that the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 November 2015 be confirmed as true and correct.
3.
Declarations of Interest Nil
4.
Matters arising from previous meeting Action 16/2015: John Howard requested that the Risk Management Plan for LIVING CITY be included on the Agenda for the next Audit Panel meeting. Action 20/2013: The Panel discussed the options for implementing an internal audit function, with the preference being Council staff undertake the function rather than engaging an external provider.
5.
Risk Management The Panel were provided with an update on current insurance claims, current workers compensation claims, and an overview of the highest ranking risks in the risk ITEM 5.3
PAGE 116 Devonport City Council Audit Panel Minutes
ATTACHMENT [1]
register. John Howard requested that Council officers provide the Panel with a report after each review of the risk register, highlighting any changes. 6.
Financial Report The Panel were provided with an overview of the January 2016 Financial Report. Ken Clarke queried the status of two capital projects listed on the Work In Progress Report. EM Organisational Performance will provide response. EM Organisational Performance presented the LIVING CITY funding model. The Panel discussed a number of assumptions in the model in relation to both the stand alone project model and the integration into the Long Term Financial Plan.
7.
Major Projects Nil
8.
General Business The Chairperson presented a confidential report summarising the performance of Panel members for discussion.
Meeting closed at 3.35pm
ITEM 5.3
PAGE 117 Shared Audit Panel Minutes
ATTACHMENT [2]
DEVONPORT CITY COUNCIL AND CENTRAL COAST COUNCIL SHARED AUDIT PANEL Minutes of meeting held Monday7 March 2016 at Central Coast Council commencing at 3.40pm Attendance Members – Sue Smith (Chair), Councillor Ken Clarke, Alderman Charlie Emmerton, Alderman Grant Goodwin, John Howard, Councillor Phillip Viney Officers - Sandra Ayton (General Manager), Vernon Lawrence (Director Organisational Services), Kym Peebles (Executive Manager Organisational Performance), Paul West (General Manager), Apologies Councillor Gary Carpenter 1.
Confirmation of the minutes It was moved by Councillor Phillip Viney, seconded John Howard, and resolved unanimously that the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 November 2015 be confirmed as true and correct.
2.
Declarations of Interest Nil
3.
Matters arising from previous meeting Nil
4.
Policies & Procedures Credit Card Policies - both General Managers provided an overview of the Credit Card Policy presented. Sandra Ayton advised that Central Coast will review the associated procedure. Paul West advised that Devonport City Council will amend the current authorisation procedure to ensure the Mayor scrutinises the General Managers credit card as well as the Deputy General Manager approving the transactions/payment. The Panel noted the policies and procedures and endorsed the current practices. The Panel determined that they did not believe it necessary for the General Manager’s credit card transactions to be provided to it for scrutiny as the internal processes at both Councils were sufficient. Annual Budget Program/Strategy – both General Managers provided an overview of the proposed budget process. Sandra Ayton agreed to circulate the Central Coast budget timetable to Panel members. Paul West provided an outline of the budget consultation process being undertaken by Devonport City Council.
5.
Governance The Panel noted and endorsed the annual work plan presented. The Chairperson reminded Panel members that they are entitled to add agenda items to any of the scheduled meetings if they deem it necessary. ITEM 5.3
PAGE 118 Shared Audit Panel Minutes
ATTACHMENT [2]
Ken Clarke queried the need to reschedule the June meeting to ensure the Panel could discuss any issues identified in the TAO Management Letter drafted following the interim audit. The General Managers agreed to circulate the respective Management Letters to Panel members and to consider an additional meeting once the Letters have been issued. 6.
Legislative Paul West provided brief update on the status of the proposed review of the Local Government Act 1993.
7.
General Business The Chairperson provided an overview of the feedback received through the Panel self-assessment process. The Panel and Council Officers noted the comments and will implement the necessary changes to the meeting process. The Chairperson noted it is a requirement that the Audit Panel report to each Council on an annual basis and will draft a report accordingly. Shared Services Project Update – Paul West provided an update on the project. All Cradle Coast Councils have signed up to the project and the project brief has been drafted. The State Government have agreed to provide 50% of the consultants cost, with the member Councils meeting the remaining 50% based on population.
Meeting closed at 4.40pm
ITEM 5.3
PAGE 119 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
5.4
TIAGARRA - LEASE TO SIX RIVERS ABORIGINAL CORPORATION File: 26729 D411035
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 4.2.1
Acknowledge, preserve and celebrate local art, culture and heritage
SUMMARY To consider a submission received regarding the proposed lease of land to Six Rivers Aboriginal Corporation (SRAC) for the property known as Tiagarra.
BACKGROUND At its meeting held 23 November 2015, Council resolved as follows (Min. ref. 231/15 refers): That the report of the General Manager relating to the future of Tiagarra be received and noted and that Council in line with the request from the Tasmanian Regional Aboriginal Communities Alliance: 1.
conditionally agree to transfer the ownership of Tiagarra to the local Aboriginal community, represented by Six Rivers Aboriginal Corporation providing a lease agreement for the land can be agreed between the parties and in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.
2.
following finalisation of a lease agreement the ownership of the built assets and all fixtures and fittings (including the exhibition material); will be transferred for the sum of one dollar.
3.
all costs associated with the transfer, including the writing off of the buildings and other asset are to be recognised in the Council 2015/16 financial reporting period.
4.
prior to finalising the formalities related to the land lease and subsequent transfer of the built assets, Council agrees to enter into an ‘exchange of letters’ with Six Rivers Aboriginal Corporation allowing that organisation to resume its occupation of Tiagarra immediately. SRAC’s responsibilities relating to this short term arrangement will be on the basis that they will be assuming ownership.
5.
advise the Office of Aboriginal Affairs of its decision and withdraw its request for funding to be provided to Council, requesting instead that this money be allocated to Six Rivers Aboriginal Corporation to assist it in reopening Tiagarra to the public.
6.
formally wind up the Tiagarra Special Interest Group and thank the members for their support.
In accordance with Section 178 of the Local Government Act, 1993, the intention to lease the land for a period of 20 years was advertised in The Advocate on 10 February and again on 20 February 2016. A notice was also displayed on the boundary of the property for a 21 day period.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS A long term lease over the land on which Tiagarra is situated need to be dealt with in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993:
ITEM 5.4
PAGE 120 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
178. Sale, exchange and disposal of public land (1)
A council may sell, lease, donate, exchange or otherwise dispose of public land owned by it in accordance with this section.
(2)
Public land that is leased for any period by a council remains public land during that period.
(3)
A resolution of the council to sell, lease, donate, exchange or otherwise dispose of public land is to be passed by an absolute majority.
(4)
If a council intends to sell, lease, donate, exchange or otherwise dispose of public land, the general manager is to– (a)
publish that intention on at least 2 separate occasions in a daily newspaper circulating in the municipal area; and (ab) display a copy of the notice on any boundary of the public land that abuts a highway; and
(b)
notify the public that objection to the proposed sale, lease, donation, exchange or disposal may be made to the general manager within 21 days of the date of the first publication.
(5)
If the general manager does not receive any objection under subsection (4) and an appeal is not made under section 178A, the council may sell, lease, donate, exchange or otherwise dispose of public land in accordance with its intention as published under subsection (4).
(6)
The council must –
(7)
(a)
consider any objection lodged; and
(b)
by notice in writing within 7 days after making a decision to take or not to take any action under this section, advise any person who lodged an objection of – (i)
that decision; and
(ii)
the right to appeal against that decision under section 178A.
The council must not decide to take any action under this section if – (a)
any objection lodged under this section is being considered; or
(b)
an appeal made under section 178A has not yet been determined; or
(c)
the Appeal Tribunal has made a determination under section 178B(b) or (c).
DISCUSSION Following the 21 day period, one submission was received relating to the long term lease to SRAC. Due to a request by the author of the submission, this is being provided to Aldermen confidentially. Council’s solicitor has received instructions to prepare a lease and sub-lease for the land as well as legal documentation required for the transfer of the built assets to SRAC.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Community engagement has been undertaken in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications as a result of this report.
ITEM 5.4
PAGE 121 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
RISK IMPLICATIONS It is believed there are no risk implications as a result of this report.
CONCLUSION Council has followed the processes as outlined in the Local Government Act 1993 regarding the long term lease of land containing the building known as Tiagarra with one submission being received relating to this. Council needs to now consider the submission in light of its previous decision to lease the land to SRAC.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Tiagarra Lease Of Premises And Land Mersey Bluff To Six Rivers Confidential Aboriginal Corporation
RECOMMENDATION That Council in relation to the Tiagarra lease to Six Rivers Aboriginal Corporation: (a)
receive and note the submission provided during the 21 day consultation period;
(b)
authorise the finalisation of a 20 year lease (including sub-lease) to SRAC general in line with normal lease terms and conditions;
(c)
authorise the General Manager to finalise the transfer of the built assets to SRAC once the lease agreement is finalised.
Author: Position:
Paul West General Manager
ITEM 5.4
PAGE 122 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
5.5
LIVING CITY QUARTERLY UPDATE - MARCH 2016 File: 32161 D411053
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 2.4.1
Develop and implement a CBD Master Plan aligned to the key LIVING CITY principles based on community engagement outcomes
SUMMARY This quarterly report provides an update to Aldermen and the community on the current status of LIVING CITY.
BACKGROUND LIVING CITY is an urban renewal project that will transform Devonport and revitalise Tasmania’s North West Region. Council adopted the LIVING CITY Master Plan in September 2014. The Plan is underpinned by key principles which involve creating the following distinct precincts within the CBD: 1.
Retail Precinct linking the existing shopping centres and preventing further fragmentation;
2.
Business and Professional Services Precinct giving purpose to the Southern CBD; and
3.
Cultural Waterfront Precinct opening the City up to the river and creating a new City heart.
An independent regional benefits study undertaken on the LIVING CITY Master Plan concluded that the strategy will result in:
2,943 direct and indirect construction job years;
830 direct full time jobs once operational and significantly more indirect jobs;
$650M in construction phase economic multiplier effects;
$112M annually in additional output to the North West region.
With the planning phases complete, the focus has now moved to implementation of the plan. Implementation will be multi-faceted, with sub-projects progressively rolling out over the next decade and beyond. Council has entered into a four year agreement with Projects and Infrastructure (P+i) to act as Development Managers and assist with the implementation. Quarterly reports are provided to Council to keep Aldermen and the community updated on progress.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS The predominant legislation to which Council must comply in undertaking LIVING CITY is the Local Government Act 1993.
DISCUSSION Key activities in recent months have concentrated on ensuring the progression of Stage 1, including the adoption of the funding model and appointment of a preferred building contractor. ITEM 5.5
PAGE 123 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
FUNDING MODEL – Stage 1 - At a Special Meeting on the 15 March 2016, Council adopted a Stage 1 Funding Model which will see Stage 1 funded by a mix of equity and loan borrowings. Stage 1 has an estimated development cost of $70M. The Australian Government have agreed to contribute $10M towards the project. The State Government will commit $10M towards the base building, plus $2M in fitout costs for the LINC and Service Tasmania and transfer ownership of the existing library site(to be utilised in Stage 2). Council will commit $11M in equity with the remaining amount, up to $39M to be borrowed. The borrowed amount is primarily serviced from revenue generated from the development. Section 78 (2) of Local Government Act 1993 states that “A council may not raise a loan in any financial year exceeding any amount the Treasurer determines for that financial year.” The Department of Treasury and Finance provided its formal advice to Council on 24 December 2015 that the Treasurer had approved for Council to borrow up to an additional $40 million for the purposes of funding Stage 1 of LIVING CITY. Contractor – Stage 1 - At the Special Council Meeting on the 15 March 2016, Council appointed Fairbrother as the preferred contractor for Stage 1 of LIVING CITY. The appointment of a preferred contractor is a significant step in the implementation of the Master Plan. The selection of a Preferred Contractor for Stage 1 was undertaken in a two-step process with phase one involving an open market expression of interest process to identify potential building contractors. Council then nominated three firms to proceed to the second phase of the selection process. Phase two involved the short listed contractors preparing a guaranteed maximum price, design and construct tender submission. Request for tender documentation was issued to the three tenderers on 4 November 2015 and tenders closed on 14 January 2016. A thorough analysis of the submissions received was then undertaken by P & I and Council approved the recommended builder as preferred contractor. The contractor is now working through a value management process with Council with the intention of signing a Guaranteed Maximum Price contract in the next quarter. Tank Removal and Site Contamination Testing - Council has had four disused underground tanks removed from within the boundary of Stage 1. Three of the tanks were part of an abandoned service station fronting Rooke Street under the existing Rooke Street carpark and one tank was located out the front of 13 Oldaker Street (formally Repco). All these tanks have been successfully removed and the site and subsequent ground water tests are clear of significant levels of contamination. One small tank remains under the footings of the former Repco building, and will need to be removed during the building demolition process. Food Pavilion – Meetings have been held with a variety of potential tenants and stakeholders in the food pavilion and associated food education facility. Agreements with the key permanent tenants are continuing to be negotiated. Expressions of Interest – Waterfront Precinct – Expressions of Interest have been sought from design teams interested in preparing a masterplan for the Waterfront Precinct. The Waterfront Precinct is to primarily include a hotel development and public open space. The selection will involve a two-step process, with the first phase closing on 18 March. A short list of the most suitable firms will then be selected to prepare a final submission. Future Direction - The next three months will see the continued focus on Stage 1 of LIVING CITY. During the next three months, the following major milestones are expected to be completed: ITEM 5.5
PAGE 124 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
Borrowings negotiated and agreed for Stage 1;
Details of the State Government funding commitment finalised in a grant deed;
Guaranteed Maximum Price contract finalised with contractor;
Agreements signed with permanent tenants on the food pavilion; and
Commencement of construction of Stage 1.
In addition to preparations for Stage 1, Council will continue to negotiate with potential tenants for Stages 2 and 3 and the Southern CBD.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Public consultation has been a significant and important part of LIVING CITY since its inception. A two week consultation period on the financial implications of Stage 1 was undertaken in March 2016. A public forum was held at the Devonport Entertainment and Convention Centre at 6:00pm on 29 February and was well attended by approximately 120 people. 57 written responses were received. Council considered these responses at the March Special Council Meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Council’s 2015/16 Operational Budget has an allowance for income and expenditure associated with LIVING CITY. This includes the rent, and outgoings of commercial properties purchased by Council to facilitate the implementation of LIVING CITY. It also includes staff resources, consultants, advertising and general materials along with finance related items such as depreciation, interest charges, internal charges and land tax. Below is the operational budget detail at cost centre level along with graphs that indicate current year to date actual income and expenditure in comparison to the budget allocation.
Devonport City Council - Living City Financial Report YTD
YTD to January 2016
Budget
Actual
YTD Variance $ %
Full Budget 2016
INCOME Rates & Service Charges Fees & Charges Grants Contributions Investment Revenue Other Income
TOTAL INCOME
454,933
467,588
12,654
2.8%
682,400
454,933
467,588
12,654
2.8%
682,400
121,038 235,651 68,400 348,124 205,880 21,381
133,620 74,182 56,394 348,124 198,313 33,218
(12,582) 161,469 12,006 0 7,567 (11,837)
-10.4% 68.5% 17.6% 0.0% 3.7% -55.4%
184,729 387,076 102,600 498,974 205,880 32,072
1,000,475
843,851
156,624
15.7%
1,411,331
(545,541)
(376,263)
169,278
-31.0%
(728,931)
EXPENSES Employee Benefits Materials & Services Depreciation Finance Costs Levies & Taxes Internal Charges
TOTAL EXPENSES NET OPERATING SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)
The following graphs indicate current year to date actual income and expenditure in comparison to the budget allocation. ITEM 5.5
PAGE 125 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
Dollars $
Devonport City Council ‐ Living City Cumulative Income 2015/16 500,000 450,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 July Aug Sep Actual ‐ Cumulative
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Dollars $
Budget ‐ Cumulative
1,100,000 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000
Devonport City Council ‐ Living City Cumulative Expenditure 2015/16
July Aug Sep Actual ‐ Cumulative Budget ‐ Cumulative
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
As of 29 February 2016, income is tracking in line with budget. The demonstrated variance in expenditure is primarily a timing issue, and is expected to closer align with budget by the next update. Some funds allocated under materials and services for consultants are unlikely to be spent. Capital Expenditure So far in the 2015/2016 year, $3,246,542 of a total capital budget of $5,496,000 (inc’s carried forward amount) has been spent. More than half of the capital money has been spent progressing the design for the new multi-purpose building, food pavilion and car ITEM 5.5
PAGE 126 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
park. The remainder was used to purchase 74 Rooke Street, the last major property to be secured within the LIVING CITY footprint. Actual capital expenditure (primarily for the acquisition of strategic properties) on LIVING CITY related items over the last four financial years is summarised below: Year
Actual Expenditure $7,683,282 $4,614,323 $770,268 $3,246,542 $16,314,415
2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 (YTD) Total
RISK IMPLICATIONS Council has prepared a risk register specifically for LIVING CITY. The register is monitored and updated regularly.
CONCLUSION LIVING CITY will create a transformed city that will revive the region. With the Master Plan now formally adopted by Council, the focus has moved from planning to implementation. Progress on Stage 1 has been significant over the past three months, with Council adopting the financial model and appointing a preferred construction contractor. The highest priorities in coming months are finalising tenancies and grant agreements for Stage 1and securing the best possible terms and conditions for project debt.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
RECOMMENDATION That the report on the progress of LIVING CITY be received and noted.
Author: Position:
Rebecca McKenna Project Officer Development
Economic
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.5
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 127 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
5.6
UNCONFIRMED MINUTES - CRADLE COAST REPRESENTATIVES MEETING - 25 FEBRUARY 2016
AUTHORITY
-
File: 31710 D411371
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.1.4
Develop and maintain partnerships and advocate for improved service provision, funding and infrastructure
SUMMARY To provide Council with the unconfirmed minutes of the Cradle Coast Authority Representative’s meeting which was held on 25 February 2016.
BACKGROUND As a member of the Cradle Coast Authority, Council is provided with a copy of the minutes.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS There are no statutory requirements which relate to this report. Under the Authority’s Rules, minutes of representatives meetings and the Annual General meeting can be considered by Council in open session.
DISCUSSION The unconfirmed minutes of the Cradle Coast Authority Representatives meeting which was held on 25 February are attached for consideration. The PowerPoint presentation is also attached for your information. Items of interest from the Representatives meeting which relate to Devonport Council:
Item 2.4 Regional Governance – following a Mayors Workshop with Adjunct Professor Graham Sansom a proposal has been provided to restructure the governance arrangement of the Cradle Coast Authority. A briefing paper is to be provided to Council to allow consideration of the proposal and feedback to be provided. It is likely that a report will be provided to the April Council Meeting in relation to this issue.
Item 3.1 Chairman’s Report – comment provided that Chairman Fuller advised that her first item of business as the new Chair is to consider the financial impact of a member withdrawal, something CCA has never faced before. If Devonport Council withdraws it will affect 22% of CCA core funding.
Item 7 General Business – Clay Brick Manufacturing – Representative Ald Goodwin requested that the CCA CEO follow up on the viability and any issues associated with the recommencement of clay brick manufacturing at the disused site in Devonport.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT There was no community engagement as a result of this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There a no financial implications as a result of this report. ITEM 5.6
PAGE 128 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
RISK IMPLICATIONS There are no risk implications as a result of this report.
CONCLUSION The unconfirmed minutes of the Cradle Coast Authority Representatives meeting which was held on 25 February 2016 are presented.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Minutes - Cradle Coast Authority - Representative Meeting - 25 February 2016
2.
Powerpoint Presentation - Cradle Coast Authority - Representatives Meeting 25 February 2016
RECOMMENDATION That the unconfirmed minutes of the Cradle Coast Authority Representatives meeting which was held on 25 February 2016 be received and noted.
Author: Position:
Robyn Woolsey Administration Officer
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.6
Paul West General Manager
P PAGE 129 Minutes M - Cra adle Coast Au uthority - Rep presentative M Meeting - 25 5 February 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
P PAGE 130 Minutes M - Cra adle Coast Au uthority - Rep presentative M Meeting - 25 5 February 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
P PAGE 131 Minutes M - Cra adle Coast Au uthority - Rep presentative M Meeting - 25 5 February 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
P PAGE 132 Minutes M - Cra adle Coast Au uthority - Rep presentative M Meeting - 25 5 February 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
P PAGE 133 Minutes M - Cra adle Coast Au uthority - Rep presentative M Meeting - 25 5 February 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
P PAGE 134 Minutes M - Cra adle Coast Au uthority - Rep presentative M Meeting - 25 5 February 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [1 1]
P PAGE 135 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 136 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 137 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 138 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 139 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 140 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 141 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 142 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 143 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 144 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 145 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 146 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 147 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 148 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 149 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
P PAGE 150 Powerpoint P P Presentation - Cradle Coa ast Authority - Representa atives Meetin ng 25 2 February 2 2016
ITEM 5.6
ATTTACHMENT [2 2]
PAGE 151 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
5.7
MEERCROFT CARPARK UPGRADE File: 29415 D411415
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 2.3.1
Provide and maintain roads, bridges, footpaths, bike paths and car parks to appropriate standards
SUMMARY This report seeks approval to accept the quotation for “Meercroft Park Reserve - Car Park” from Kentish Construction and Engineering Company Pty Ltd, based on an increased scope of works to maximise parking spaces.
BACKGROUND This report considers quotations received for “Meercroft Park Reserve - Car Park” listed within the 2015/16 capital expenditure budget. The project objective was to maximise the number of additional parking spaces within the project budget. The work involves constructing additional parking spaces at the car park on the south side of Bluff Road adjacent to the hockey field. This position was determined as the prefered location considering the current and future demand for parking, the location of facilities within the Bluff precinct and planning constraints with other alternatives. The location is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Car park location
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS The purchase of goods and services are a function of Council. The Local Government Act 1993 outlines specific requirements in relation to contracts and services above a prescribed limit. The project this report refers to does not exceed the prescribed amount.
ITEM 5.7
PAGE 152 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
DISCUSSION Quotations were requested based on a design that included 44 additional spaces, as shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2: Original scope of works Quotations were received from four companies. All quotations received were conforming and are summarised in Table 1. No. 1 2 3 4
Tender
Conforming Conforming
Tender Price Carpark Works (ex GST) $ 87,175 $ 92,696
Conforming Conforming
$ 99,568 $100,704
Status
Civilscape Kentish Construction and Engineering Company Pty Ltd (trading as Treloar Transport) Hardings Hotmix Pty Ltd CBB Contracting
Table 1: Quotations received for the original scope of works Prices received were over budget so the original scope of works was reviewed to determine an option closer to the budget allocation. Given the demand for additional parking another option was also considered which maximises spaces, whilst recognising some additional funding will be required. The design was reviewed and the scope of works altered to create the following two options. ď€
Option 1: reduced the scope of works to suit the available budget. This option creates 36 additional spaces (8 less than the original scope). This option is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Option 1 - Reduced scope Quotations on this option were requested from the two lowest priced contractors from the original quotation and are shown in Table 2:
ITEM 5.7
PAGE 153 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
No. 1 2
Tender
Status
Kentish Construction and Engineering Company Conforming Pty Ltd (trading as Treloar Transport) Civilscape Conforming
Tender Price (ex GST) $75,086 $78,246
Table 2: Quotations received for option 1
Option 2: increased the scope of work to maximise the number of cars spaces in the available area, creating 52 additional spaces (8 more than the original scope), but recognising that this option will be above the allocated budget. This option is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Option 2 - Increased scope Quotations on this option were requested from the two lowest priced contractors from the original quotation and are shown in Table 3: No.
Tender
Status
1
Kentish Construction and Engineering Company Pty Ltd (trading as Treloar Transport) Civilscape
Conforming
Tender Price (ex GST) $97,161
Conforming
$99,924
2
Table 3: Quotations received for option 2 Kentish Construction and Engineering Company Pty Ltd represent the best value for money for Council, so their quotations have been used to compare the two options. Both option 1 and option 2 are viable options. Option 1 restricts the scope of work to suit the project budget. However, option 2 provides 16 more spaces, which are definitely in demand during peak periods and events throughout all seasons. If option 1 was selected, it is likely a future project would be required to extend the car park to option 2. Option 2 is a more optimum outcome in terms of the overall layout given it is a neat rectangle. If additional funds can be allocated to the project, option 2 is the preferred option.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT User groups from Meercroft Park have been informed of the project and are accepting of the proposal. There were concerns that a junior soccer ground may be lost as a result of the additional car parking space, but this will not be the case and the ground in question is to be “moved” further east.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The 2015/16 capital expenditure budget includes an allocation for the “Meercroft Park – Reserve Car Park” project of $82,000. ITEM 5.7
PAGE 154 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
A comparison of the financial implications of the two options is summarised below in table 4. No.
Option1 (ex GST)
Component
Option2 (ex GST)
1
Contract works
$75,086
$97,161
2
Project management/administration
$ 9,000
$ 9,000
3
10% Construction contingency
$ 7,500
$ 9,700
$91,586
$115,861
TOTAL Table 4: Comparison of total cost of options 1 and 2
The contingency allowance for this project is 10% of the construction cost. The potential for unforeseen construction issues at this site is low. The estimated over expenditure from option 2 is $33,861. Based on savings already achieved and predicted on projects underway, the 2015-16 capital program (excluding LIVING CITY) is forecast to be delivered $230,000 under budget. This saving does not consider those jobs that have been cancelled or had budget adjustment, such as the Devonport Oval Facilities project. Based on this forecast the over expenditure from option 2 can be accommodated within the existing budget for the overall capital program.
RISK IMPLICATIONS To minimise risk the tender administration processes related to this contract comply with Council’s Code for Tenders and Contracts which was developed in compliance with Section 333 of the Local Government Act 1993.
CONCLUSION The current and future demand for parking in the Bluff Precinct and the superior layout of option 2 means that option 2 is the preferred layout for the car park. This option, whilst over the allocated project budget can be delivered through savings achieved and forecast on other capital works projects. Should Council not wish to allocate further funding to the project option 1 could be undertaken, noting a budget overrun of approximately $10,000 would be likely. Kentish Construction and Engineering Company Pty Ltd meet Council’s requirements and are therefore most likely to offer “best value” in relation to Quotation Meercroft Carpark Upgrade for option 2.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
RECOMMENDATION That Council in relation to the Meercroft Carpark Upgrade: a)
accept the quotation of $97,161 from Kentish Construction and Engineering Company Pty Ltd for Option 2, outlined in this report;
ITEM 5.7
PAGE 155 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
b)
note that design, project management and administration for the project are estimated to cost $9,000 (ex GST); and
c)
note that a construction contingency of $9,700 (ex GST) is included in the budget.
Author: Position:
Shannon Eade Project Management Officer
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.7
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 156 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
6.0
INFORMATION
6.1
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT - MARCH 2016 File: 29092 D408086
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.8.2
Ensure access to Council information that meets user demands, is easy to understand, whilst complying with legislative requirements
SUMMARY This report provides a summary of the activities undertaken by the General Manager, 17 February to 15 March 2016. It also provides information on matters that may be of interest to Aldermen and the community.
BACKGROUND The report is provided on a regular monthly basis and addresses a number of management and strategic issues currently being undertaken by Council. The report also provides regular updates in relation to National, Regional and State based local government matters as well as State and Federal Government programs.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Council is required to comply with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 and other legislation. The General Manager is appointed by the Council in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
DISCUSSION 1.
2.
COUNCIL MANAGEMENT 1.1.
Attended and participated in a number of internal staff and management meetings.
1.2.
Attended Workshops, Section 23 Committee and Council Meetings as required.
1.3.
Met with a consulting firm to be provided with an outline of services they provide and where there might be opportunities for them in the future to gain some work with Council.
1.4.
Attended the Council’s Audit Panel meeting at Ulverstone. The Audit Panel is a shared arrangement between Central Coast and Devonport Councils. Meetings alternate between the two councils four times a year. Copies of the minutes of both the Devonport and Shared Audit Panel meetings have been provided under a separate report on this agenda.
LIVING CITY 2.1.
Participated in working group meetings with the P+i Group.
2.2.
A number of staff briefings were provided on the progress of LIVING CITY following on from the acceptance by Council of the proposed funding model. With the funding model released for public comment it was important for staff to gain an appreciation of the information available in the public arena.
ITEM 6.1
PAGE 157 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
3.
2.3.
With the Mayor provided a briefing to the Advocate Newspaper on the LIVING CITY funding arrangements and Council’s proposal to seek community comments prior to the formal adoption of the funding plan. A briefing was also provided to the local 7AD and SeaFM Radio Station.
2.4.
Participated as a panel member at the LIVING CITY Public Information Session held at the Devonport Entertainment & Convention Centre on Monday 29 February. Approximately 120 people attended this meeting. The meeting was independently chaired by former President of the Legislative Council, Sue Smith. Introductory remarks were provided by the Mayor followed by a presentation by Council’s Deputy General Manager. A question and answer session followed where those in attendance were given an opportunity to ask panel members about the project. The Panel included the Mayor, General Manager, Deputy General Manager and Grant Hirst (P+i Group).
2.5.
A meeting was held at the request of a group of local residents to further respond to a number of queries they had in relation to LIVING CITY. The Mayor, Ald Perry and Ald Emmerton attended this meeting.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT (RESIDENTS & COMMUNITY GROUPS) 3.1.
Attended a Devonport Chamber of Commerce & Industry (DCCI) event. The speaker at the event was Nicole Maslin, Executive Officer, Mainstreet Australia. The focus of the presentation was on the benefits to be gained by businesses working together to promote specific attractions and/or events in the local area. In most cases a mainstreet program is funded through a levy on business collected by the local government. Following a presentation to Council by the President of DCCI, Stacey Sheehan the DCCI are currently seeking views on whether there is support or otherwise to pursue a mainstreet program for Devonport.
3.2.
Attended the launch of the 2016 Devonport Food & Wine Festival at Drift Café. This year’s Festival is showcasing in excess of 30 events over the City during the month of March. A Devonport Food & Wine Festival Booklet is also available.
3.3.
Met with a resident to discuss the involvement that Council has with the local Men’s Shed. It was explained that the Men’s Shed operates separately from Council and is part of the Devonport Community House program.
3.4.
Met with a local resident to discuss a number of matters including the future development of the Victoria Parade/Bluff Precinct. In particular concern was expressed regarding the large tree stumps which remain in situ many years after the trees were felled.
3.5.
Attended the launch of the 2016 Help Film Festival at the Youth Family & Community Connections (YFCC). The theme for the 2016 HELP Film Festival is: RESPECTFUL REAL-ationships. This year, young people aged between 12-24 will be asked to explore the complex relationships which exist within our community, between individuals, relatives/families, friends, neighbours and groups. Young film makers will produce a short film (no more than 4 minutes duration) on “Respectful REAL-ationships” which will be screened at CMAX Cinemas in August.
3.6.
At the invitation of Chris Palmer visited Palmer’s Plumbing in East Devonport.
ITEM 6.1
PAGE 158 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
4.
NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND STATE BASED LOCAL GOVERNMENT 4.1.
Met with the General Manager, Waratah-Wynyard Council to discuss the collation of information for the Cradle Coast Shared Services study. A standard questionnaire is being developed to source background information to be made available to consultants appointed to undertake the project.
4.2.
With the Deputy Mayor attended as a Council Representative the Dulverton Waste Management Joint Authority meeting. The Dulverton Waste Management Joint Authority is an initiative of the Central Coast, Devonport, Kentish and Latrobe Councils and is tasked with managing the sub-regional landfill site.
4.3.
Attended a Cradle Coast Regional Governance Workshop with Council’s Representatives to the Authority, the Mayor and Ald Goodwin. The purpose of the meeting was to explore further opportunities for improving the governance structure which operates at the CCA.
4.4.
Attended a LGAT organised General Managers’ Meeting at George Town. Items discussed included:
4.5.
Policy matters (Copyright, Code of Conduct, Street Lighting, Heavy Vehicle Regulations, LGAT budget submission to Government);
Director of Local Government – review of the Local Government Act 1993;
SAI Global – compliance with Australian Standards;
Surveyor General – discussion around digital mapping and GIS systems and future enhancements;
TasNetworks – discussion around the conversion of mercury vapour street lighting to LED technology and the current State energy crisis;
Department of Justice – planning reforms and the progress with developing the Statewide Planning Scheme provisions;
TasPlan Super – following its merger with Quadrant Superannuation a presentation on the current status of the new organisation which provides superannuation services to the majority of local government employees. Work is now progressing on the merger with the State Government Retirement Benefits Fund;
Tasmanian Audit Office – impending changes to accounting standards that will impact on local government.
Met with Cradle Coast General Managers to discuss further the Shared Services proposal for the region. In particular the background data gathering was discussed to ensure that all councils will provide consistent information that will assist the consultant eventually appointed to undertake the study.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT The information included above details any issues relating to community engagement.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Any financial or budgetary implications related to matters discussed in this report will be separately reported to Council. There is not expected to be any impact on the Council’s operating budget as a result of this recommendation. ITEM 6.1
PAGE 159 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
RISK IMPLICATIONS Any specific risk implications will be outlined in the commentary above. Any specific issue that may result is any form of risk to Council is likely to be subject of a separate report to Council.
CONCLUSION This report is provided for information purposes only and to allow Council to be updated on matters of interest.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
RECOMMENDATION That the report of the General Manager be received and noted.
Author: Position:
Paul West General Manager
ITEM 6.1
PAGE 160 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
ATTACHMENT [1]
DEVONPORT CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT ON COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS - MARCH 2016 OPEN SESSION MEETING DATE
RESOLUTION NO
February 2016
RESOLUTION/ITEM
STATUS
COMMENTS
22/16
East Devonport Corridor - NOM Ald J F Matthews
Raise possibility of main Passenger and Tourist route (namely Tarleton Street) leading to and from Spirit of Tasmania Terminal and Bass Highway being transferred to State responsibility.
Completed
23/16
AM2016.03 and PA2016.0013 - 2026 Valley Road Devonport
Completed
24/16
2016 Parking Strategy Community Feedback Cat Management at the Mersey Bluff
Agreed to certify AM2016.03 to rezone land from Community purpose to General residential and conditionally approve PA2016.0013 for a 24 lot subdivision. Both AM2016.03 and PA2016.0013 be placed on public exhibition for a 4 week period. Adopted Parking Strategy with immediate effect.
A letter has been forwarded to Infrastructure Tasmania identifying that Council would be interested in discussing this issue with the State Government as part of their proposed road audit. Development Permit issued.
Completed
Parking Strategy adopted placed on Council’s website
Determined to extend funding for a TranNeuter-Return cat management program at the Mersey Bluff by capped payments of $8,000 per annum to Mr & Mrs Burtt on the production of purchase records. Mr & Mrs Burtt to provide a brief annual report with the program funding reviewed every two years. IWC 02/16 Tender Report - Contract 1307 Devonport Road Reconstruction McLeod Avenue to Horsehead Creek Award tender to Kentish Construction
Completed
Correspondence outlining the financial support arrangements forwarded to Mr and Mrs Burtt.
DGM
Completed
Contract awarded.
DGM
25/16
29/16
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER
TOPIC
Infrastructure Works and Development Committee Meeting - 8 February 2016
ITEM 6.1
and
GM
DGM
EM (CC&B)
PAGE 161 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
MEETING DATE February 2016
RESOLUTION NO 29/16 (cont.)
30/16
ATTACHMENT [1]
TOPIC
RESOLUTION/ITEM
STATUS
COMMENTS
Infrastructure Works and Development Committee Meeting - 8 February 2016
IWC 03/16
Completed
Council decision confirmed to CCA.
Community Services Committee Meeting - 15 February 2016
CSC 18/16
Completed
Letter sent to Club 24 February 2016 - Lease Agreement drafted.
CSC 19/16
North West Coastal Pathway - Don to Leith Receive and note report and adopt the North West Coastal Pathway Plan until underpass near Waverley Road option and then follow Waverley Road and Don Heads Road and cross the Don River on a new bridge as preferred route. Devonport Gymnastics Club - Conditionally agree to lease area of land in Bay Drive for purpose of building new regional gymnastics centre. Minutes of the Sport and Recreation Strategic Special Committee Meeting Consider including provision in the 2016-2017 Capital Budget for Byard Park Shade Structures Devonport Recreation Centre Paving and Landscaping in front of Youth Centre Devonport Recreation Centre upgrade facilities
ITEM 6.1
Completed
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER DGM
EM (CC&B)
PAGE 162 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
MEETING DATE
RESOLUTION NO
February 2016
30/16 (cont.)
ATTACHMENT [1]
TOPIC
RESOLUTION/ITEM
STATUS
COMMENTS
Community Services Committee Meeting - 15 February 2016
CSC 20/16
In progress
In discussions with EDBSPC and EDCFC regarding external funding.
CSC 22/16
CSC 23/16
CSC 24/16
CSC 25/16
Minutes of the Community Development Strategic Special Committee Meeting Overturn previous decision and provide capital funding for East Devonport Bike Safety Park - transferring previous 2015/16 capital works allocation of $80,000 for the Mall Playground Equipment to this project. Proposed Lease of Council Land to Optus Pty Ltd for Telecommunications Tower at Devonport Oval General Manager be authorised to finalise a lease agreement to Optus Pty Ltd subject to planning approval. Acknowledge changes to operational delivery model of both Christmas Events and New Year’s Eve to potentially further reduce financial impact on Council and improve consumer experience. Sponsorship Policy Amend Sponsorship Policy by changing wording at Section 5. Mersey Community Care Matter deferred pending future Workshop session.
Email sent to Optus re agreement, Completed
Options will be considered during year. Completed
Completed To be scheduled for discussion at a future Workshop. In progress
ITEM 6.1
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER EM (CC&B)
PAGE 163 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
ATTACHMENT [1]
Previous Council Resolutions - still being actioned MEETING DATE January 2016
RESOLUTION NO 06/16
07/16
December 2015
RESOLUTION/ITEM
STATUS
COMMENTS
Dog Management Policy
1. endorse the draft Dog Management Policy 2016; 2. release draft for public consultation purposes for a period of 21 days; 3. providing no major issues are identified as part of the consultation authorise General Manager to finalise and publish Dog Management Policy 2015 by 1 March 2016. Determined to amend its Parking By-Law 1 of 2013 enabling parking infringement charges to be rounded down to the nearest dollar. Authorise General Manager to finalise negotiations with the State Government generally in accordance with its offer received on 7 December 2015 and sign the grant deed and lease agreement once negotiations are complete. General Manager authorised to continue discussions with Department of Education regarding their request to lease part of land known as 260 Steele Street, Devonport for the purpose of their SPACE Learning Program.
Completed
Report detailing details of consultation prepared for Governance and Finance Meeting to be held 15 March
In Progress
Draft amendment prepared.
In progress
Discussions underway.
Completed
Department of Education has moved in to the premises
Proposed Amendment to Parking By-Law No 1 of 2013 State Government Contribution LIVING CITY Stage 1
255/15
256/15
TOPIC
Land at 260 Steele Street, Devonport Application from SPACE Learning Program Department of Education
ITEM 6.1
to
by-law
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER DGM
GM
DGM
GM
PAGE 164 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
MEETING DATE December 2015
November 2015
RESOLUTION NO 260/15
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER DGM
TOPIC
RESOLUTION/ITEM
STATUS
COMMENTS
Infrastructure Works and Development Committee Meeting - 14 December 2015
IWC 44/15 Local Government Road Hierarchy adopted. Updating of Council documents and systems that reference road hierarchy to occur. IWC 45/15 Reduced scope of works for Devonport Oval Facilities remove further upgrade projects currently identified in 5 year capital program - amend capital works estimates by reducing the upgrade project from $700,000 to $32,500. In relation to the motion passed at the AGM that Council advertise to seek expressions of interest from those ratepayers who have paid rates for 50 years plus to ascertain whether there is sufficient interest in such an event being organised. Agreed to conditionally transfer the ownership of Tiagarra to the local Aboriginal community, represented by Six Rivers Aboriginal Corporation providing a lease agreement for the land can be agreed between the parties and in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.
Completed
Documents and systems progressively being updated to incorporate the changes.
Completed
Capital Budget amended.
In Progress
Invitation extended to the community to register their expression of interest via social media, Council’s website and newsletters, as well as the Mayor’s message, Coast to Coast in the Advocate.
EM (CC&B)
In Progress
Lawyer instructed to prepare necessary agreement.
GM
Authorise a twelve month licence agreement for the extended operation of the Harbourmaster’s Café in the area directly north of the Café.
In progress
227/15
Minutes - AGM 28 October 2015
231/15
Tiagarra
233/15
ATTACHMENT [1]
Harbourmaster’s Cafe
ITEM 6.1
Temporary arrangements entered into with SRAC to regain access to Tiagarra. Keys were handed over to SRAC on 26 November 2015. 12 month licence to use land with appropriate conditions prepared and provided to applicant to consider. Awaiting finalisation of Lease from Crown.
DGM
PAGE 165 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
ATTACHMENT [1]
MEETING DATE
RESOLUTION NO
RESOLUTION/ITEM
STATUS
COMMENTS
Delegate the Mayor and Ald Goodwin as its nominated Representatives to Cradle Coast Authority, the final decision as to whether Devonport is a participant in the Cradle Coast Region Shared Services Project. IWC 38/15 Offer Mr & Mrs Wyllie to fund construction of a subsoil drain and swale drain along northern boundary of 160B Sheffield Road as recom-mended by consultants SEMF Pty Ltd. CSC 30/15 Consideration in 2016-2017 budget of installation of: ablution and BBQ facilities at Horse Head Creek Reserve; and signs to deter unauthorized driving in Pioneer Park and consider implementing infringement process. Seek expressions of interest for the project in line with project brief - further report to be provided to Council once expressions of interest have been received and evaluated. CSC 13/15 b) seek Department of State Growth advice re potential installation of signage outlining Devonport attractions on Tarleton Street/Bridge Road. Conditionally engage Ben Milbourne as LIVING CITY Food Ambassador until October 2017.
Completed
Council agreed to participate in the Cradle Coast Region Shared Services Project.
GM
In progress
Report being prepared for March Council meeting.
DGM
In progress
To be considered as part of the 16/17 budget deliberations.
EM (CS)
In progress
No EOI received reopened and closes 26 February 2016
EM (C&B)
In progress
Existing directional signage being reviewed by Infrastructure & Works Department.
EM (CS)
Completed
Agreement has been modified with Council’s changes and signed by Ben.
DGM
November 2015
238/15
General Manager’s Report - November 2015
October 2015
219/15
Infrastructure Works & Development Committee Meeting - 12 October 2015 Community Services Committee Meeting - 19 October 2015
220/15
July 2015
145/15
East Devonport Public Art Project Proposal
June 2015
130/15
February 2016
34/16
Community Services Committee Meeting - 15 June 2015 Food Ambassador
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER
TOPIC
ITEM 6.1
PAGE 166 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
ATTACHMENT [1]
CLOSED SESSION MEETING DATE February 2016
RESOLUTION NO 35/16
TOPIC Closed Session Community Services Committee Meeting - 15 February 2016
36/16
Stage 1 LIVING CITY Funding Implications Proposed Public Release
RESOLUTION/ITEM
2. 3. 4.
COMMENTS
Completed
Letter sent to Devonfield Enterprises advising them of the Lease extension. Public exhibition period held between 23 February and 9 March 2016.
CSC 18/16
1.
Bass Strait Maritime Centre Café Lease 1. Proceed with review of Visitor information Services to determine whether they should be relocated to BSMC 2. Extend lease term of Devonfield Enterprises until 31 August 2016. Endorse funding model for public exhibition Note model includes new Council borrowings of up to $39 million Undertake 14 day period of community consultation Consider feedback prior to finalising LIVING CITY Stage 1 funding model at Special Meeting on Tuesday 15 March 2016.
STATUS
ITEM 6.1
Completed
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER EM (CC&B)
PAGE 167 Action Report on Council Resolutions - March 2016
ATTACHMENT [1]
Previous Council Resolutions - still being actioned MEETING DATE January 2016
RESOLUTION NO 18/16
November 2015
244/15
TOPIC Steele Street Car Park
Feasibility Review of incorporating Devonport Regional Gallery and Intimate Performing Arts Space into DECC
RESOLUTION/ITEM
STATUS
COMMENTS
1. authorise General Manager to negotiate purchase of required Steele Street properties (allowing for development of option 1 as detailed in report) at a value of up to $1,000,000 (ex GST); 2. approve development of a 98 space at grade car park generally in accordance with option 1 outlined in this report; and 3. note a construction budget of $650,000 is required to complete works with funding to be provided from allocation in 2015/16 capital expenditure budget for Southern CBD car park as part of LIVING CITY. a) accept the Feasibility Study by Birrelli Architects dated October 2015; b) endorse consultation on the Study with relevant stakeholder groups; c) endorse public release of the Study following stakeholder consultation; and d) consider funding for the project as part of Council’s 2016/17 budget deliberations.
In progress
Negotiations continuing finalise a sale contract.
Completed
Consultation undertaken and report prepared on feedback received from March Council meeting.
ITEM 6.1
to
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER DGM
DGM
PAGE 168 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
6.2
MAYOR'S MONTHLY REPORT File: 22947 D410330
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.3.2
Provide appropriate support to elected members to enable them to discharge their functions
SUMMARY This report details meetings and functions attended by the Mayor.
BACKGROUND This report is provided by the Mayor to provide a list of meetings and functions attended by him for the month of January 2016.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS There are no statutory requirements which relate to this report.
DISCUSSION In his capacity as Mayor, Alderman Steve Martin attended the following meetings and functions during the month of February 2016:
PCYC Tasmania Local Government Association of Tasmania Breakfast – Burnie Cradle Coast Authority – Burnie Rotary Club of Devonport – Teddy Bear Fly in & Kite Festival Community Development Committee Don River Railway – Nils Brun & Phil Murray Ray Chaplin Budget Consultation – www.speakupdevonport.tas.gov.au Devonport Regional Gallery Special Interest Group Learning Communities Special Interest Group Meetings ABC Radio Northern Tasmania interview Evening of Excellence, Don College HMAS Stuart – Hobart LIVING CITY Workshop - Council Country Women’s Association – guest speaker Infrastructure Works & Development Committee Sister City Committee Trades Challenge meeting 7AD Radio interviews Infrastructure Tasmania introduction - Minister for Infrastructure Rene Hidding & CEO Alan Garcia Spreyton Primary School Grades 5/6 – guest speaker Stacey Sheehan, President DCCI Volunteering Tasmania LGAT General Meeting Devonport Warrior’s Launch & Home Game Resident meetings Healthier Communities forum – Launceston (smoking age, obesity) Community Services Committee ITEM 6.2
PAGE 169 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
ABC Radio – Devonport Food & Wine Festival LIVING CITY Reference Group Devonport Food & Wine Festival media briefing Peter Goodin, Portside Apartments & Ald Goodwin – Melbourne AFL House – Melbourne Adult Learning Australia – Melbourne Malcom Hales – Launceston Rural Alive & Well Inc – launch Health & Resilient Communities Initiative – Launceston Break o Day Council official opening Recreation Centre – St. Helens Second Bite official opening warehouse Formby Road Council Ordinary meeting ABC Radio – Belinda King LIVING CITY - Libby Bingham briefing Rotary Club of Devonport South East – guest speaker LIVING CITY - Radio 7AD & Sea FM briefing MY State Branch Manager Romy Lucas Jim Hosie – “The Jesus Tent” Tasmanian Broadcasters – Brian Carlton North Melbourne Football Club breakfast Cradle Coast Authority Representatives meeting Launched Devonport Food & Wine Festival, Drift City of Devonport Lions Club – guest speaker Summer in the City – “Pan” movie Devonport Oval Melanoma March Kite Festival & Teddy Bear Drop LIVING CITY public information session – Devonport Entertainment Centre
ATTACHMENTS Nil
RECOMMENDATION That the Mayor’s monthly report be received and noted.
Author: Position:
Karen Hampton Governance Coordinator
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 6.2
Paul West General Manager
PAGE 170 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
6.3
WORKSHOPS AND BRIEFING SESSIONS HELD SINCE THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING
Council is required by Regulation 8(2)(c) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 to include in the Agenda the date and purpose of any Council Workshop held since the last meeting. Date
Description
7/3/2016
Cradle Coast Authority Update on Cradle Coast Authority and Update and Regional an outline relating to the Regional Economic Development Economic Development Strategy. Strategy TasWater Briefing
Purpose
General update on TasWater matters.
LGAT and Local Government Both events scheduled for mid-year. Association’s 2016 National General Assembly of Local Government Call for Submissions
8/3/2016
Budget Timetable
2016/17 budget development process.
LIVING CITY Update
Update of LIVING CITY.
LIVING CITY
Meeting with a group of ratepayers regarding Council’s LIVING CITY project.
RECOMMENDATION
That the report advising of Workshop/Briefing Sessions held since the last Council meeting be received and the information noted.
Author: Position:
Robyn Woolsey Administration Officer
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 6.3
Paul West General Manager
PAGE 171 Report to Council meeting on 21 March 2016
7.0
SECTION 23 COMMITTEES
7.1
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING - 15 MARCH 2016 File: 29468 D412131
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council’s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.3.2
Provide appropriate support to elected members to enable them to discharge their functions
SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to receive the minutes and endorse the recommendations provided to Council by the Governance and Finance Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 15 March 2016.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
RECOMMENDATION That the minutes of the Governance and Finance Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 15 March 2016 be received and the recommendations contained therein be adopted. GFC 01/16
Public Wi-Fi Expansion
GFC 02/16
Dog Management Policy - Community Feedback
GFC 03/16
Renew Devonport
GFC 04/16
Dulverton Regional Waste Management Authority - Amendments to Rules
GFC 05/16
Council Meeting Dates - Notifications
GFC 06/16
Local Government Association of Tasmania Government Association - Call for Motions
GFC 07/16
Review of Public Question Time guidelines
GFC 08/16
Independent Living Units - Rating Arrangements
GFC 09/16
Finance Report for February 2016
GFC 10/16
Annual Plan Progress Report - November 2015-February 2016
GFC 11/16
Elected Members' Expenditure Report - November 2015 to February 2016
GFC 12/16
Governance & Finance Report
Author: Position:
Robyn Woolsey Administration Officer
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 7.1
and
Australian
Paul West General Manager
Local
PAGE 172 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
ATTACHMENT [1]
MINUTES OF A GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE DEVONPORT CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON TUESDAY, 15 MARCH 2016 COMMENCING AT 6:30PM PRESENT:
Ald J T Keay (Chairman) Ald C D Emmerton Ald S L Martin Ald L M Perry
Aldermen in Attendance: Ald L M Laycock Ald J F Matthews Council Officers: General Manager, P West Deputy General Manager, M Atkins Executive Manager Corporate & Business, S Crawford Executive Manager Organisational Performance, K Peebles Governance Coordinator, K Hampton Audio Recording: All persons in attendance were advised that it is Council policy to record Council meetings, in accordance with Council’s Audio Recording Policy. The audio recording of this meeting will be made available to the public on Council’s website for a minimum period of six months. 1.0
APOLOGIES The following apologies were received for the meeting. Name Ald Goodwin Ald Rockliff
2.0
Reason Apology Leave of Absence
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no Declarations of Interest.
3.0
PROCEDURAL 3.1 3.1.1
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM THE PUBLIC
Nil 3.1.2
QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE FROM THE PUBLIC
MR TREVOR SMITH - 7 GLEN COURT, DEVONPORT Q1. I noticed in your Finance Report for February 2016, that you have omitted to include the amount of interest paid on your loan of $15 million dollars, to purchase buildings in and around the Devonport CBD. This should be a
ITEM 7.1
PAGE 173 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
ATTACHMENT [1]
separate item included in your report and not fudged with other figures!!! After all, the Ratepayers of this LIVING CITY have a right to be informed. Q2. You state in your Strategic Plan Progress Report, ‘That Devonport is the Retail and Service Centre for the North West Tasmania’. Do you judge this outcome on the population of Devonport or the number of shops open for business?? Does this also include the growing number of empty shops around this LIVING CITY as well? Response The questions were taken on notice and a response will be provided in writing. MR PETER SCHULZE - 6 ENDERLY COURT, AMBLESIDE The Devonport Council held a public meeting on Monday 29th Feb 2016, this meeting was only about one week after Council had disclosed (Advocate 24th Feb) that they were putting $50 million into stage one, apparently because private developers saw the project as unviable. At the meeting a Slide Show displayed the following cost inputs for Stage 1:$ 578,000 $ 987,000 $1,000,000
Rentals Parking Fees Council Rental
The Council Rental Figure was qualified in that it was notional. Most who viewed the slide regarded those figures as income that justified the project. However when clarification was sought at a meeting with Council by a ratepayer group on Tuesday 8th of March 2016 the Parking fee figure did not seem credible as it indicated a 40% increase from current receipts and the Council Rental was being paid by Council to itself from a property they would own, that also seemed peculiar. At the meeting with Council we were told that these figures had been ‘qualified’ and were not the figures used in the Long Term Financial Plan and that in the case of the Parking fees the figure displayed was just from the new multi-story car park and there had been no deduction from the loss from other meters that would not be used. At the public meeting I had been misled by what I later saw as dodgy accounting or even fudged figures? The figures displayed to ratepayers at the public meeting had little relevance to the economic viability of the project or to how the loan repayments could be met, so in that sense they were misleading, and may justify a complaint to the Director under Section 339E of the Local Government Act. My question relates to the LIVING CITY Project and the cost inputs as displayed at the Public meeting on the 29th Feb. being: $578,000 Rentals
$987,000 Parking Fees
and $1,000,000 Council Rental
Because the Parking fees do not have a reduction because of the lower use of existing meters, and because the Council rental is being paid by council for a building, they will own: does the Council therefore accept that these figures have little relevance to the economic viability of the project, nor do they give any real indication on how the loan can be serviced, so in this sense they were misleading?
ITEM 7.1
PAGE 174 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
ATTACHMENT [1]
Response The question was taken on notice and a response will be provided in writing. TONY BUTLER - 2 DREW STREET, EAST DEVONPORT Q1
On many occasions I have asked Council about 26 Pardoe Street in East Devonport. Reading through all the information I have got the building and the activities in there should have been closed down two years ago. This has been going on for five years it must be asking a lot to find out what has been going on there. How come we can’t get an answer?
Q2
Why can’t something be done with the old cars in Bass Street, East Devonport?
Response The questions were taken on notice and a response will be provided in writing. BOB VELLACOTT - 11 COCKER PLACE, DEVONPORT The following are the views of an Accountant (From someone who knows how to add up one and one and gets TWO). It seems to me that most of the income generated from the LIVING CITY project is questionable: 1.
Car parking $1.70 per hour x 3 hours per day x 365 days) = $996,450 cf $987,000 per dashboard. What about the existing revenue and fines which will be forgone. This is not all NEW income, so what replaces this revenue to fund existing programmes etc?
2.
Multipurpose building has income of $1,176,000. But, $1,000,000 of this is notional rent from the council. They are not paying this amount now, so this will need to be found from within existing revenues?
3.
Take these amounts out and there is very little left to fund the loan P+i.
Each “new” retail area has an effect on the existing spaces. The mere construction of a retail space does not increase the retail spend. There may be marginal increase if new retail offerings can effect a change in behaviour. ie move and online purchase to in store. What is the effect on business confidence in Devonport, when the council is proposing to “shift” the focus of the town? Rooke Street traders and property owners are facing substantial sovereign risk to their investments. This plan does nothing to consolidate retail areas, it stretches an underperforming, patchy, vacancy ridden area even thinner. Apart from some uninformed ideas of creating a food pavilion which showcases local produce, there is nothing in the plan which would add to a tourist experience in Devonport. Even this idea does not seem tourist friendly. There is a lack of experience in this sort of sanitised offering. In my opinion the experience is in visiting the place that the produce is grown or produced. This cannot compete with farm/factory tours, for starters there is not likely to be the connection with the passionate producer. I do not believe that our population is large enough to sustain specialist food outlets ( which will necessarily be seasonal in many instances) without a substantial change in consumer mindset. While local produce is preferred in principal, for the vast majority of people, cost is pre-eminent. This is especially true in a society which has a lower socioeconomic profile. Tourists are attracted to experiences: MONA, mountain bike trails, bush walks, cellar door wine tasting. Devonport will never have the population base to become a shopping Mecca. There is a reason people flock to Sydney and Melbourne for ITEM 7.1
PAGE 175 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
ATTACHMENT [1]
shopping experiences. It is possible to have a wider range not only of goods but also outlets, where the base population is large enough to sustain variety. We need only look south to Sheffield to see how a simple idea done well can attract visitors. The mural trail not only attracts tourists, it encourages them to explore the region, by taking them on a journey. The Mersey River is beautiful, and should be the focal point of our City, but to attract visitors there needs to be a reason to stay and to explore. There is an existing bike/walking track, why not use the parklands to showcase sculpture and tie this into other cultural activities which exist in the City? Q1
Do you Mayor and Aldermen agree with the assessment/conclusion for points 1 & 2 in regard to the car parking and Council paying itself rental of $1 Million per year in rent?
Q2
Would you also agree with all the other comments?
Response The questions were taken on notice and a response will be provided in writing. PETER STEGMAN - 118 RIVER ROAD, EAST DEVONPORT Q1
What makes the Council believe that they have the support of the ratepayers for this amended plan, because my research indicates that nearly the whole of the City itself is totally opposed to it and I am talking particularly about the CBD because this new plan intends to create a new CBD totally separate which is going to downgrade the valuation of those properties in this area.
Q2
The other question I have is with the contract that you are about to let I believe it is a guaranteed maximum price contract for the design to construct tender submission which the Council has accepted. I really struggle to believe that you can agree and commence work on a project of this magnitude that you have sold to us with a guaranteed maximum price and yet you are going to continue over the next two months to negotiate with the builder. That is just an appalling management tool, I can’t imagine how anyone would go into a contract like this, start work then start to negotiate and if you can’t agree on the negotiations, you stop work and maybe even sack the builder you have employed. My question is why is it necessary to commence work on this LIVING CITY project prior to finalising the construction contract?
Response The questions were taken on notice and a response will be provided in writing. 3.2
QUESTIONS FROM ALDERMEN
Nil
3.3 NOTICES OF MOTION Nil
ITEM 7.1
PAGE 176 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
4.0
ATTACHMENT [1]
GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE REPORTS 4.1
PUBLIC WI-FI EXPANSION (D404599) GFC 01/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Martin Ald Perry
That it be recommended to Council that the report of the Executive Manager Corporate and Business Services be received and Council: 1.
note the information relating to the public Wi-Fi utilisation;
2.
agree to proceed with the provision of free Wi-Fi services to include the Fourways, East Devonport Shopping Precinct, expanded CBD area and the Mersey Bluff, within the existing budget allocation. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against
For
Ald Martin Ald Perry
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.2
DOG MANAGEMENT POLICY - COMMUNITY FEEDBACK (D409542) GFC 02/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Perry Ald Martin
That it be recommended to Council that in relation to the Dog Management Policy 2016, Council: (a)
note the feedback received;
(b)
amend the draft as outlined in this report; and
(c)
adopt the attached Policy with immediate effect. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.3
RENEW DEVONPORT (D409553) GFC 03/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Emmerton Ald Martin
That it be recommended to Council that the report of the Executive Manager Corporate, Community and Business Services regarding Renew Devonport be received and noted and that Council: 1.
wind up the program due to a lack of support from landlords; and
ITEM 7.1
PAGE 177 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
2.
ATTACHMENT [1]
agree the residual money from the State Government of $2,980.74 be returned to the Department of State Growth from the Devonport Chamber of Commerce where it is currently held in trust. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.4
DULVERTON REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY - AMENDMENTS TO RULES (D409587) GFC 04/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Martin Ald Perry
That it be recommended to Council that it approves the amendments to the Dulverton Regional Waste Management Authority Rules in accordance with the “1 September 2016 Rules Draft” attached to this report. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.5
COUNCIL MEETING DATES - NOTIFICATIONS (D409775) GFC 05/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Perry Ald Martin
That it be recommended to Council that it note that advertising of Council meetings has been undertaken in accordance with the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 and that a comment outlining the ordinary meeting schedule will be included in the rates brochure to be distributed with the annual rate notices. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.6
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION OF TASMANIA AND AUSTRALIAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION - CALL FOR MOTIONS (D409785) GFC 06/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Perry Ald Emmerton
That it be recommended to Council that it note the details in relation to the 2016 Local Government Association of Tasmania Annual General Meeting and General Meeting and the 2016 Australian Local Government Association’s 2016 National General Assembly. ITEM 7.1
PAGE 178 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
ATTACHMENT [1]
Against
For
Ald Martin Ald Perry
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.7
REVIEW OF PUBLIC QUESTION TIME GUIDELINES (D409822) GFC 07/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Martin Ald Perry
That it be recommended to Council that Council’s updated Public Question Time guidelines be endorsed as follows: 1.
Public participation shall take place at Council meetings in accordance with Regulation 31 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.
2.
Public participation will be the first agenda item following the formal motions; Apologies, Minutes and Declarations of Interest.
3.
A maximum period of time of 30 minutes in total will be allowed for public participation.
4.
A maximum period of time of 3 minutes will be allowed for each individual.
5.
A member of the public may give written notice to the General Manager 7 days before an ordinary meeting of Council of a question to be asked at that meeting.
6.
A member of the public will be entitled to ask questions relating to the activities of Council, giving an explanation that is necessary to give background to the question and ask supplementary or follow up questions relating to that specific matter that may come to light as a result of the answer.
7.
Questions do not have to be lodged prior to the meeting, however they would be preferably provided in writing.
8.
A question by any member of the public and an answer to that question are not to be debated.
9.
The Chairperson may refuse to accept a question. If the Chairperson refuses to accept a question, the Chairperson is to give reason for doing so.
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
For
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
ITEM 7.1
PAGE 179 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
4.8
ATTACHMENT [1]
INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS - RATING ARRANGEMENTS (D409964) GFC 08/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Martin Ald Perry
That it be recommended to Council that the report of the General Manager relating to the rating arrangements for independent living units be received and noted and that: 1.
2.
Council consult with the aged care providers regarding its intention to: (a)
withdraw the 100 per cent remission/exemption from the General Rate for independent living units managed by a not-forprofit/charitable institution with effect from the 2016/17 financial year.
(b)
phase in at 20 per centre per year the levying of the general rate on aged care providers over the next five financial years for all existing independent living units;
(c)
require any units under construction or proposed in the future to be charged the full General Rate from time of valuation.
following feedback from the aged care sector a further report be provided to Council for consideration prior to the finalisation of the 2016/17 budget. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.9
FINANCE REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 2016 (D410190) GFC 09/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Perry Ald Emmerton
That it be recommended to Council that the Finance Report for February 2016 be received and noted. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.10
ANNUAL PLAN PROGRESS REPORT - NOVEMBER 2015-FEBRUARY 2016 (D402585) GFC 10/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Perry Ald Martin
That it be recommended to Council that the 2015/16 Annual Plan Progress Report for the period 1 November 2015 to 29 February 2016 be received and noted. ITEM 7.1
PAGE 180 Minutes - Governance and Finance Committee - 2016/03/15
For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
ATTACHMENT [1]
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.11
ELECTED MEMBERS' EXPENDITURE REPORT - NOVEMBER 2015 TO FEBRUARY 2016 (D409461) GFC 11/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Emmerton Ald Perry
That it be recommended to Council that the report advising of Aldermen expenses be received and noted. For
Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.12
GOVERNANCE & FINANCE REPORT (D408937) GFC 12/16 RESOLUTION MOVED: SECONDED:
Ald Martin Ald Perry
That it be recommended to Council that the Governance and Finance report be received and noted. Ald Keay Ald Emmerton
For
Against Ald Martin Ald Perry
For
Against
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
5.0
CLOSURE
There being no further business on the agenda the Chairman declared the meeting closed at 7:30pm. Confirmed
Chairman
ITEM 7.1
PAGE 181 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
8.0
CLOSED SESSION
RECOMMENDATION That in accordance with Regulation 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the following be dealt with in Closed Session.
Item No
Matter
Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 Reference
8.1
Application for Leave of Absence
15(2)(i)
8.2
Unconfirmed Minutes - Cradle Coast 15(2)(g) Authority Board Meeting held 9 February 2016 and Dulverton Regional Waste Management Authority Board Meeting held 18 February 2016
8.3
160B Sheffield Road stormwater - progress 15(2)(b) following independent report
PAGE 182 Council meeting Agenda 21 March 2016
OUT OF CLOSED SESSION RECOMMENDATION That Council: (a)
having met and dealt with its business formally move out of Closed Session; and
(b)
resolves to report that it has determined the following:
Item No
Matter
8.1
Application for Leave of Absence
8.2
Unconfirmed Minutes - Cradle Coast Noted Authority Board Meeting held 9 February 2016 and Dulverton Regional Waste Management Authority Board Meeting held 18 February 2016
8.3
160B Sheffield Road stormwater - progress following independent report
9.0
Outcome
CLOSURE
There being no further business the Mayor declared the meeting closed at <insert time> pm.