NOTICE OF MEETING Notice is hereby given that a meeting of an Infrastructure, Works & Development Committee of Devonport City Council will be held in the Council Chambers, 44-48 Best Street, Devonport, on Monday 8 December 2014, commencing at 6:00pm. The meeting will be open to the public at 6.00pm.
QUALIFIED PERSONS In accordance with Section 65 of the Local Government Act 1993, I confirm that the reports in this agenda contain advice, information and recommendations given by a person who has the qualifications or experience necessary to give such advice, information or recommendation.
Paul West GENERAL MANAGER 3 December 2014
AGENDA FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE, WORKS & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF DEVONPORT CITY COUNCIL HELD ON MONDAY 8 DECEMBER 2014 AT THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 6:00PM Item
Page No.
1.0
APOLOGIES
2.0
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
3.0
PROCEDURAL
3.1
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ...................................................................................................... 6
3.1.1
Responses to Questions raised at prior meetings ...................................................................... 7
3.1.2
Questions on notice from the public ........................................................................................... 7
3.1.3
Questions without notice from the public ................................................................................... 7
3.2
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM ALDERMEN .............................................................................. 7
3.3
NOTICE OF MOTIONS ......................................................................................................... 7
4.0
TENDERS
4.1
Tender Report - Contract 1278 Mersey Valey Burial System - Design & Construct (D347521) .......................................................................................................................................... 9
5.0
INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKS REPORTS ......................................................... 6
5.1
Spirit of the Sea Level of Service (D343904) .............................................................................. 15
5.2
Turton Street - Report on one-way conversion proposal (D346469)..................................... 21
5.3
Sorell Street Laneway Parking Restrictions - Summary of Resident Correspondence (D347203) ........................................................................................................................................ 30
5.4
Development and Health Services Report (D348778) ............................................................ 45
5.5
Infrastructure and Works Report (D344858) .............................................................................. 51
6.0
CLOSURE ....................................................................................................
PAGE 5 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Agenda of a meeting of the Devonport City Councilâ€&#x;s Infrastructure,Works & Development Committee to be held at the Council Chambers, Fenton Way, Devonport on Monday, 8 December 2014 commencing at 6:00pm. PRESENT Present Chairman
Ald Perry Ald Emmerton Ald Goodwin Ald Jarman Ald Matthews
IN ATTENDANCE
1.0 APOLOGIES 2.0 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Apology
PAGE 6 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
3.0
PROCEDURAL 3.1 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. ITEM 3.0
PAGE 7 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
3.1.1 Responses to Questions raised at prior meetings Nil 3.1.2 Questions on notice from the public At the time of compilation of the agenda no questions on notice from the public were received. 3.1.3 Questions without notice from the public
3.2 QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM ALDERMEN
At the time of compilation of the agenda no questions on notice from Aldermen were received.
3.3 NOTICE OF MOTIONS At the time of compilation of the agenda no notices of motion were received.
ITEM 3.0
PAGE 8 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
4.0
TENDERS
In accordance with Section 22(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 Council has delegated powers to the Infrastructure and Works Committee to accept tenders for activities related to the functions of the Committee to the extent of the estimates for the current financial year (Min 83/14 refers). The following item is to be dealt with by the Infrastructure and Works Committee in accordance with delegated authority. 4.1
Tender Report - Contract 1278 - Mersey Vale Burial System – Design and Construct (D347521)
The following table details all tenders and contracts which have been entered into by Council above $100,000 for the 2014/15 financial year. Contract Number & Contractor/ Supplier Contract 1264 - Classic Landscapes Contract 1274 - Roadways Pty Ltd Contract 1273 - Hardings Hotmix Pty Ltd
Description of Contract
Mersey Vale Memorial Garden construction Supply, Delivery and Placement of Hotmix Asphalt Supply Delivery and Placement of Sprayed Bituminous Surfacing Contract 1275 - TMA Tech PAYL Conversion - Best Street Pty Ltd Car Park Contract 1271 - Kentish Kelcey Tier Road Safety Construction & Engineering Improvements Stage 3 Co. Pty Ltd PO Box 21 Sheffield 7306 Contract 1276 - Veolia Waste Transport - Spreyton Environmental Services WTS to Dulverton
July 2014
$ Value (Excluding GST) $278,240
July 2014/June 2015 July 2014/June 2015
Schedule rates Schedule rates
Contract or Supply Period
of
22 September $111,750 2014 November $232,761 2014/March 2015
November Schedule 2014/Nov 2016 Rates with 1+1 option Contract 1277 - Kentish Stony Rise Road - Middle October $758,771 Construction & Engineering Road intersection new 2014/June Co. Pty Ltd PO Box 21 2015 Sheffield 7306 Contract 1279 - Hardings William Street Reconstruction November $338,959 Hotmix Pty Ltd PO Box 709 Tasman to Charles St 2014/February Ulverstone 7315 2015
ITEM 4.0
of
of
PAGE 9 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
4.1
TENDER REPORT - CONTRACT 1278 MERSEY VALEY BURIAL SYSTEM DESIGN & CONSTRUCT File: 29416 D347521
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council‟s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 2.3.3
Provide and maintain Council buildings, facilities and amenities to appropriate standards
SUMMARY
Award the design and construct contract 1278 to CBB Contracting for a new burial system at the Mersey Vale Memorial Park.
BACKGROUND In 1968 Devonport, Latrobe and Kentish Council entered into a three way agreement to jointly establish and operate a central lawn cemetery for the three municipalities. This was a forty year agreement which included the establishment of the cemetery on land in Quoiba which was purchased by the three Councils from the estate of William Henry Constable for the sum of twenty four thousand dollars. Devonport Council operated and administered the Lawn Cemetery located at 29-31 Stony Rise Road Devonport for the life of the agreement on behalf of the three Councils. At the end of the agreement in 2008, Devonport Council took over sole responsibility for the operation and administration of the cemetery. The site is formally known as the Mersey Vale Memorial Park (MVMP) and in 2012 Council adopted the Mersey Vale Memorial Park Master Plan 2011-2030 to guide future development (Min 24/12, 30 January 2012). There are approximately 9,000 occupied gravesites, increasing at a rate of approximately 80 new graves per year. The MVMP is running out of available land for future burials and based on the current burial method and rate of consumption, is estimated to have less than 10 years of life left. In July 2013 a detailed analysis was completed to determine the most cost effective manner to establish future graves and maintain the cemetery over the medium to long term. A number of items were considered as part of the investigation including:
Explore option of additional land purchase and development into a lawn cemetery. Examine maintaining the purchased land based on the current burial system. Explore an alternate burial system, known as the “Modern Burial System” (MBS) and the financial implications of that system. Compare the current system of burial with the proposed alternative system.
It was found that obtaining, clearing and developing a new site from the adjoining properties is not only more costly but involves further risk as to its suitability and final useful capacity due to unforseen rock and groundwater issues. It was concluded that if more land was purchased and developed in order to accommodate additional grave sites the whole of life cost over a 27 year period would be in excess of 50% more expensive than the MBS.
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 10 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
In August 2013 an information session was held with the local funeral directors to gain their feedback on the concept of the MBS. A report was considered by Council at its October 2013 meeting and it determined (Min Ref 285/13): That Council: 1.
Note the information provided in this report;
2.
Endorse the Memorial Garden concept allowing progression to community consultation stage and further development and refinement of the design; and
3.
Endorse the Modern Burial System concept allowing the community to be informed of Council‟s plans and further investigation and design development.
Council made a budget allocation of the 2014/15 Capital Works Budget to identify and commence construction the alternative burial system. Key components of the development are:
Increase the capacity of the cemetery;
Efficient and economical use of remaining burial space;
Improve site drainage;
Provide a cost effective modular type in ground system with a lawn surface;
Provide mechanical plant & equipment to suit daily operations of the new system;
A system that is capable of being used all year round in all weather conditions;
Plot identification and memorial plaque space including cast in flower vase.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Council is required to comply with Section 333 of the Local Government Act 1993 and its own adopted Code for Tenders and Contracts when considering awarding tenders over the prescribed amount of $100,000.
DISCUSSION Expressions of Interest were publicly advertised on 23 August 2014 seeking suitably qualified contractors to register and participate in a multi stage tender process for this project. Two submissions were received, accepted and advanced to the tender phase. The tender documents were made available to the tenderers on 1 October 2014, closing 23 October 2014. At the closing time two conforming tenders were received. The Tender Planning and Evaluation Committee assessed the tenders against the evaluation criteria and have concluded that CBB Contracting provided the best value for money for Council. CBB have also provided a superior solution which has been tried and tested at a number of mainland cemeteries. The Tender Planning and Evaluation Committee minutes are attached in the confidential section.
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 11 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
The key project outputs that this proposal will deliver are: The number of actual grave sites this project will provide The total amount of square meters of land each grave site will consume The total amount of square meters of land this project will consume Future MBS capacity within the allocated site area based on the proposed design
290 graves 2.88sqm 836sqm 2600 graves
Future Rollout CBB Contracting along with subcontractors Hudson Civil Products and Austeng have spent considerable time considering layouts for stage 1 and planning for future stages of the cemetery as per the proposed layout plan attached. Stage 1 includes the installation of 290 sites with the overall potential for approximately 2,600 sites based on preliminary designs. These future designs are concept only and will be finalised with Council after award of the contract. This will potentially increase the life of the cemetery in this area alone for a total of 30 years based on the current consumption rates. Future stages could be tendered in 300 grave lots (approximately 4 years of burials) or as required. For consistency Council is able to specify the MBS components and civil contractors will tender the site installation works. Proposed Design The preliminary design is to follow the existing contours of the land as much as possible to minimise structural changes to the landscape. The preliminary design allows for subsoil drainage upslope of the grave sites and free draining material under each chamber to ensure groundwater doesn't enter the graves. Utilising the overall chamber system will remove all ground water from the surface and enable all weather access on the lawn surface of the grave sites. The design adopted and provided by Austeng is patented and utilises the experience of a national company specialising in funerals and cemeteries. The MBS incorporates a precast chamber and separate lid that includes lifting points for specialised equipment to remove the lid in a single operation. The lid design and specialised lid lifting equipment is one of the significant benefits of the MBS as the machine cuts and holds the lid including soil and grass when removed from the grave. The machine including lid and grass is removed from the immediate area during a service. After lid removal the grave is neat, tidy, safe and respectful for the duration of the service. The entire lid removal process will take between 5 to 10 minutes for an operator that is familiar with the machine. After the service the lid is replaced including the soil and grass and to an untrained eye after reinstallation it looks like the grave was never disturbed. This process provides an overall saving in opening and closing the grave but even more important is the cost saving associated with rehabilitation of the site after burials. The tender submitted by CBB Contracting includes the supply of a trailer mounted lid removal system that works off the hydraulics of a minimum 40HP tractor. This is the most cost effective option of the lid lifters available and is easily moved around the site. In the rare event that either of the selected machines is broken down or requiring maintenance the soil can be removed from the surface of the chamber utilising a backhoe or excavator and then attach lifting chains to the lid to remove and reinstall the lid as required. ITEM 4.1
PAGE 12 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
The MBS is similar to traditional burial systems as it allows for each burial to be backfilled with soil and reopening the grave for a second burial is also similar to traditional burial methods. By utilising the MBS the site receives a major subsurface drainage system which will remove all moisture from the surface of the grave sites. By utilising the slope of the existing ground all drainage will leave the bottom end of the site. This will ensure the surface is going to be much improved compared to adjacent grave sites in the existing cemetery. The layout of the chambers allows for an as constructed GIS pick up and easy numbering system to be adopted by the Council prior to backfilling. As shown on the photos below the chamber lid has a space for a plaque to be installed similar to the adjacent existing cemetery. The CBB Contracting tender submission allows for the reinstatement of the lawn surface on top of the chambers utilising some of the removed topsoil plus imported topsoil if necessary. No additional footpaths, roads or retaining walls have been included in this tender and are not required in stage 1. This will need to be developed within the master plan of the cemetery for this particular area. Photos from similar construction sites.
Lids removed
Lids installed ready for soil and turf
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT In May 2014 community consultation was conducted on Councilâ€&#x;s web page, Facebook, via signage at MVMP, Speak up Devonport and a manual survey that was available through Customer Service and at the MVMP. Minimal responses were received.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS At the tender closing time two conforming tenders were received: Contractor CBB Contracting Hardings Hotmix Pty Ltd
Tender Price excluding GST $987,910.00 $998,300.00
Council has a budget of $997,780 included in the current financial year for Stage 1 of the MBS. It is anticipated that this project would commence prior to the end of this financial year 2014/15 and run into next financial year 2015/16. ITEM 4.1
PAGE 13 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
The mobile plant included in this tender (grave site lid lifting trailer) is worth approximately $148,000. This piece of plant won‟t be required until the site is well established and operational, estimated to be late 2015/16. The trailer will require a 40hp tractor to tow and operate hydraulics. The likely cost for a suitable tractor is around $35,000, however with changes in operational process it is likely some existing cemetery plant may become redundant. The tractor will be considered along with all other cemetery operational plant in the 2015/16 budget preparation.
The Council project management and administration cost associated with completing stage 1 of the modern burial system is estimated to be approximately $10,000. With the introduction of the MBS system it will require Council to allocate capital investment every 3 to 4 years of around $875k to keep up with the current burial rate. Utilising the land within MVMP, a total of $5.88m would need to be spent over 30 years to obtain approximately 2600 graves. Previous investigations concluded land purchase and traditional burial methods would cost approximately double this amount over the same 30 year period.
RISK IMPLICATIONS
Work Health and Safety Hazard identification, risk assessment and development of safe systems of work are required to be carried out on all projects and are provided to Council prior to commencing work.
Political/Governance The tender administration and reporting processes related to this contract comply with Council‟s Code for Tenders and Contracts which was developed in compliance with Section 333 the Local Government Act, 1993.
Contractual/Legal Contract management of consultants and contractors is carried out in accordance with developed policy, procedures and Council‟s Code for Tenders and Contracts.
Financial The tender amount is within the budgeted allowance and monthly monitoring of expenditure will assist in avoiding over expenditure. ITEM 4.1
PAGE 14 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Environmental/Public Health Consideration has been given to the protected species Central North Burrowing Crayfish located on the north eastern corner of this site. Stage 1 of this project is well outside of the exclusion zone.
Communication/Reputation The contractor is required to give consideration to any burials conducted on the site. The location of the burial will determine the type of work if any, allowed to continue throughout the ceremony.
Professional Indemnity/Public Liability Contracts for consulting and contracting and supply of services include clauses to mitigate risks.
CONCLUSION Taking into account the selection criteria, assessment and the tendered rates, the Tender Planning and Evaluation Committee has determined that CBB Contracting has satisfied the selection criteria and offer best value in relation to Contract 1278.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
CP0099 - MBS stage 1 - CBB Contracting Layout Plan
2.
CP0099 Tender Planning & Evaluation Committee Minutes SIGNED
Confidential
RECOMMENDATION That Council in relation to Contract 1278 – Mersey Vale Burial System, Design and Construct: a)
award the contract to CBB Contracting for the tendered sum of $987,910.00 (ex GST);
b)
note that the project management and administration cost associated with completing stage 1 of this project are estimated at $10,000; and
c)
note that based on current burial rates further capital expenditure will be required to continue the roll out of the modern burial system approximately every four years.
Author: Position:
Jamie Goodwin Technical Support Supervisor
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 4.1
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 15 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
ITEM 4.1
PAGE 16 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
5.0
INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKS REPORTS
5.1
SPIRIT OF THE SEA LEVEL OF SERVICE File: 23997 D343904
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council‟s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 2.3.3
Provide and maintain Council buildings, facilities and amenities to appropriate standards
SUMMARY
This report provides information to Council on the maintenance level currently provided to the Spirit of the Sea Statue (the Statue) and the supporting infrastructure. The report also details requests from Mr Leon Wootton on behalf of the Lions Club of City of Devonport Inc to reinstate the supporting infrastructure and increase the level of maintenance provided to the statue.
BACKGROUND The Statue was a project initiated by the Lions Club of City of Devonport Inc and managed by a combined service club committee (the committee) of representatives from the City of Devonport and Mersey Lions Clubs, Devonport and Devonport North Rotary Clubs and volunteers from the Devonport community. The committee was chaired by Mr Leon Wootton. The committee was successful in obtaining a State Government grant to help fund the purchasing and installation of the statue. The committee raised additional funds for the installation of the Statue. Council approved in principal support of the project to assist with the grant funding application and a planning application was approved in 2006, and then amended in 2007 after an appeals process. There was mixed views from the public on the project. In late 2008 Council received a petition containing 281 signatures requesting Council to reverse its decision to support the project. Council resolved to continue their support and to work with the committee to resolve any issues. The project was officially opened on 22 January 2010 and Council received a management plan from the committee for the Statue in September 2010. The management plan detailed the requirements for ongoing maintenance of the statue and supporting infrastructure. The supporting infrastructure includes the lighting around the base of the statue, the electrical control box, water pump and poly pipe ring main connected to a fountain. Since Council received a copy of the management plan for the Statue, the ongoing maintenance has generally been completed in accordance with the details in the plan. Maintaining the supporting infrastructure in working condition has been a challenge due to a number of factors:
Vandalism of Lights: The lights around the base of the concrete plinth that supports the Statue have been vandalised a number of times. When the light fittings are broken, rain and sea spray is able to get into the fittings and then travel down the conduit into the electrical control box causing the electrics to fail.
ITEM 5.1
PAGE 17 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Pump Burnout: The water pump draws water from the sump at the base of the Statue and pumps it through a basic poly pipe ring main. The poly pipe has holes in it which are designed to spray jets of water over the base of the statue. The statue is located on the breakwater at the mouth of the Mersey River. The breakwater is a popular fishing spot. Water spray from the base of the statue appears to make fishing difficult resulting in rocks being placed over the holes on the poly pipe to stop the jets of water; however the water pressure then builds up in the pipe and eventually causes the pump to burn out. To date 2 pumps have burnt out.
When the electrical supply fails due to water in the control box, the water pump also stops working.
Water entering the electrical control box: The control box is located within the rocks on the top of the breakwater. The box has been vandalised a number of times. When the lid is damaged rain and seawater is able to easily enter the box and cause the electrics to fail. This has been an on-going issue and for safety reasons the electrical supply was isolated back at the mains power supply on Victoria Parade approximately 2 years ago. This has meant that both the lights and the water pump have not been operational, since this was undertaken.
ITEM 5.1
PAGE 18 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Since Council was gifted the Statue, due to the issues outlined in this report, the supporting infrastructure has only been operational for short periods of time. The combined service club committee was dissolved in November 2011. When the committee was dissolved the surplus funds raised by the committee were directed to the City of Devonport Lions Club to hold in trust for future contingencies relating to the Statue. Since then some of those funds have been used to purchase a spare pump. Council have funded a number of items since the Statue was gifted:
A vehicle access way was constructed along the top of the breakwater to enable vehicle access to the Statue and supporting infrastructure;
In 2013, as part of the Capital Expenditure Budget, Council replaced the existing lighting on the walkway to the viewing platform for the Statue. That project included replacing 6 lighting fittings and installation of a new light pole. The primary motive of the project was public safety; and
In 2014, as part of the Capital Expenditure Budget, Council altered the pedestrian access and increased the car park capacity at the car park nearest the Statue. The primary motive of the project was to provide a safer passage for pedestrians to walk on that didn‟t require walking through the car park or across the access road into the car park.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS There are no statutory requirements that relate to this report
DISCUSSION Issues relating to the maintenance of the Statue have been discussed extensively between Council Officers and representatives of the committee on a number of occasions since 2011. Council received a further request from the City of Devonport Lions Club in October, requesting that the supporting infrastructure is reinstated to meet the expectations of the original committee. The original intent of the committee was that the Statue will be visually attractive and harmonious with a continual spray of water from the base of the Statue (daily – 6am to midnight) and illuminating the Statue during the evening (daily – dusk to midnight). There are two main items that would need to be fixed to provide the continuous water spray and evening lighting: 1.
Replace the existing control box with a secure stainless steel box mounted vertically on a sign pole near the front of the viewing platform: By mounting the box vertically the risk of water damage is lessened, even if the box is vandalised. By providing a reliable power supply the lights and water pump will be operational as intended.
ITEM 5.1
PAGE 19 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
2.
Replace the spot lights that are installed around the base of the Statue with vandal proof light fittings encased in concrete. This will make damaging the lights more difficult.
Alternatively, the maintenance can continue being delivered to the level that it currently is, without the fountain or lights being operational. The Statue would continue to be an attraction for the public; just not to the level it was originally intended. Since the power supply was isolated 2 years ago Council has received very little comment from the general public.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
There was no community engagement as a result of this report. Council Officers have had several discussions with representatives from the committee regarding the level of service for the Statue since it was gifted to the Council.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Council‟s operational budget is based on the maintenance currently provided to the Statue which is based on the details in the management plan provided by the committee. If the infrastructure was reinstated to meet the original intent of the project, the Lions Club have agreed in principle to fund some of these changes if Council agree to maintain the infrastructure to the ensure the fountain and lighting are in continual working order. Increasing the level of maintenance would also increase ongoing costs to Council. The costs associated with increasing the maintenance for the Statue have been summarised below: Item:
Estimate:
Funding Source:
Replace the existing electrical control box to the outside of the existing viewing platform and replace the box with a stainless steel, vandal proof box
$8,000 (inc GST)
The committee‟s trust fund
Replace the lights around the base of the statue with vandal proof light fittings encased in concrete
$12,000 (inc GST)
The committee‟s trust fund
Increased cost of electricity to run the lights and pump – although this cost had previously been included in the operational budget it has not been an actual cost as a result of the infrastructure being operational for only small periods of time
Approx. $1,000 annually
Council‟s future operational budgets
Increased maintenance costs – due to responding to vandalism immediately to ensure the agreed level of service is maintained. This would also involve at least weekly inspections and increased depreciation costs.
$1,500 annually for inspections,
Council‟s future operational budgets
ITEM 5.1
$2,000 annually for depreciation, $1,000 annually for vandalism repairs
PAGE 20 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Item:
Estimate:
Decreased Costs – ie less pump maintenance
Funding Source:
Nil – since the power was isolated there has been little reactive costs apart from vandalism
RISK IMPLICATIONS
Political/Governance There is mixed support from within the community for Council to spend any money on the Statue. If the level of service is increased it will need to be clearly communicated to the public that the infrastructure upgrade was funded by the Lions Club of City of Devonport Inc.
Communication/Reputation The level of service that is resolved by Council will need to be clearly communicated to the Lions Club of City of Devonport Inc.
CONCLUSION Spirit of the Sea Statue was gifted to Council in 2010. There was mixed views from the public on the project at the time. Since the Statue was gifted to Council there has been a number of challenges in maintaining the supporting infrastructure to the level that was originally intended. This resulted in the power being isolated 2 years ago and since then the fountain and lighting has not been operating. The Lions Club of City of Devonport Inc on behalf of the original committee that managed the project have agreed to fund the infrastructure changes, however agreeing to increase the level of service, Council will incur increased ongoing operational costs.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
RECOMMENDATION That it be recommended to Council that the report from the Infrastructure & Works Manager regarding the level of service to the „Spirit of the Sea‟ statue be received and noted and Council: Option 1 continue to maintain the „Spirit of the Sea‟ Statue as it currently has been; and decline the offer from the City of Devonport Lions Club to upgrade the infrastructure associated with the statue; OR Option 2 accept the offer from the Lions Club of City of Devonport Inc to reinstate the infrastructure associated with the Statue. Noting the requirement to allocate additional funds in future budgets for operating and maintenance costs. Author: Position:
Kylie Lunson Infrastructure & Works Manager
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.1
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 21 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
5.2
TURTON STREET - REPORT ON ONE-WAY CONVERSION PROPOSAL File: 14238 D346469
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
To report on the findings of an investigation into the conversion of Turton Street between Forbes Street and Wenvoe Street to one-way travel.
BACKGROUND A petition was presented at Council‟s July 2014 meeting regarding traffic issues in Turton Street. The petition outlined a number of resident concerns, including:
Cars parked on both sides of the street and drivers are required to pull in behind stationary vehicles and wait for oncoming traffic to pass
Cars queuing over driveways during peak times
Road safety concerns related to the above, including damage to vehicles parked on-street
At the meeting it was determined (Min 184/14 refers): “That Council be provided with a report on the merits of converting Turton Street between Wenvoe Street intersection and Forbes Street, to one way or other measures that may satisfactorily address the concerns of the local residents.” An investigation has been undertaken, which included consultation with affected residents and other stakeholders. The findings are presented in this report.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with Sections 49 and 59 of the Traffic Act 1925, the Transport Commission has authority for traffic signs and line marking on public streets. This authority is delegated to officers of the Department of State Growth. In accordance with Section 10 of the Transport Act 1981 Council has delegated authority to regulate parking restrictions.
DISCUSSION Road Geometry and Hierarchy Turton Street extends from Formby Road in the east to Forbes Street in the west. The section between Wenvoe Street and Forbes Street has a road reservation around 10m wide with road widths around 6m. These are narrow by modern standards but were established in an era when roads in residential areas were generally narrower. Turton Street has good horizontal alignment (i.e. is straight), but the vertical alignment is variable with grades up to 13 % between Macfie Street and Wenvoe Street, and a short section of 8% just east of Forbes Street. The intersections on Turton Street are give-way controlled, except at the western approach to Hiller Street which is stop controlled. Traveling on Turton Street, vehicles must give way at Wenvoe Street and Hiller Street, but have priority over Macfie Street. ITEM 5.2
PAGE 22 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Turton Street is classified as a Minor Collector in Devonportâ€&#x;s Urban Road Hierarchy. The function of a minor collector is for residential access but carrying a higher volume of traffic than local streets. A minor collector is nominally intended to carry 750-3000 vehicles per day (vpd) while maintaining a reasonable level of amenity and safety. It is classified as such because it is one of only three roads linking Formby Road and Forbes Street south of the CBD, along with Elizabeth and Ashburner Streets. Turton Street is the collector for the residential area south of the CBD and provides an alternative link to the southern part of the CBD (in combination with Wenvoe Street). Turton Street and the surrounding area are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Turton Street and surrounds with Urban Road Hierarchy Traffic Volume and Speeds Traffic data was collected in September 2014 in three sections of Turton Street. Average daily traffic (two way) is 788 vpd, which is at the lower end of the minor collector range. 60% of vehicles travelled westbound and 40% eastbound. This is probably due to the prohibition of right turns on Formby Road. Turton Street is subject to the urban default limit of 50km/h. From the same traffic counts in September 2014, the average 85% speed was 43km/h. This is the speed at or below which 85% of vehicles are observed to travel and is considered by traffic engineers to be the speed that reasonable people adopt according to the road environment. The 85% speed was higher between Forbes Street and Hiller Street at 47km/h. On average 2.8% of ITEM 5.2
PAGE 23 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
vehicles were measured above the speed limit, with the highest level of 7% recorded between Forbes Street and Hiller Street. The marginally higher speeds and higher percentage of vehicles travelling above the speed limit between Forbes Street and Hiller Street is likely due to the more favourable (i.e. flatter) alignment of this section of Turton Street. A summary of traffic and speed data is shown in Table 1. Section
Eastbound Traffic (vpd)
Westbound Traffic (vpd)
Forbes to Hiller 241 422 Hiller to Macfie 416 491 Macfie to Wenvoe 289 507 Average 315 473 Table 1 – Traffic data, September 2014
Total traffic (vpd)
85% speed (km/h)
663 907 796 788
47 40 42 43
% of vehicles exceeding 50km/h 7.0 0.6 1.7 2.8
Crash History A total of seven vehicle crashes have been recorded in the past five years with all of these crashes occurring at intersections. Three of the crashes occurred at the Hiller Street and Turton Street intersection. The most common cause of crashes is failure to give way. The supporting petition also identified three instances of parked cars being damaged in Turton Street, although it appears none of these were reported to Police. Parking On-street parking in the area is time limited to 2 hours from 8:30am to 5:30pm weekdays. However, residents are able to apply to obtain exemption from this limit for up to two vehicles per property and most have taken up this option. There are No Parking restrictions on the north side of Turton Street between Wenvoe Street and Hiller Street (2 blocks) where sight distance is limited. Adequate off-street parking appears to be available for residents as aerial images indicate that virtually all properties fronting Turton Street have sufficient space to accommodate a minimum of 2 vehicles off the street. Current parking restrictions are shown in Figure 2
Figure 2 – Current parking restrictions in Turton Street
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 24 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Options investigated Three options were investigated and compared for their effectiveness in addressing the resident concerns and the potential positive and negative impacts on the Turton Street residents, the surrounding residents and the wider community. It is important to ensure that any changes are an improvement compared to existing conditions.
One way proposal (option 1)involves the conversion of Turton Street to one-way between Wenvoe Street and Forbes Street
„No parking‟ proposal (option 2) involves banning parking on the north side of Turton Street between Wenvoe Street and Forbes Street (an extension of the existing ban)
Retain the existing conditions (option 3).
One way proposal (option 1) When considering the one-way proposal, it was determined that one way travel in a westerly direction would be most appropriate. This is in line with traffic data, but also allows Tasmania Police to continue to utilise Turton Street as an outward route from the station in Wenvoe Street. The one-way proposal is show in figure 3.
Figure 3 - One-way proposal (option 1) Converting Turton Street to one way would be a reasonably simple process. Approval from the Traffic Engineering Section of the Department of State Growth is required. Following that, there would need to be a process to make the public aware of the changed traffic conditions, followed by the provision of signage at all junctions advising motorists of the no entry or one way requirements. This may need to be supplemented by kerb outstands that would narrow the road to alert motorists not to enter against the flow. Converting Turton Street to one-way traffic would have various effects on the traffic in Turton Street and the surrounding road network. As desired by the petitioners, traffic would not have to weave or be restricted by parked or oncoming vehicles. This means there is no extra caution required for meeting oncoming traffic and as a consequence the speed of through vehicles may increase which actually reduces the safety and amenity of the area. It also has time implications for residents of Turton Street as they will no longer have access to their properties from Forbes Street and will have to take an indirect route to „go around the block‟ when arriving or departing. Conversion of Turton Street to one way will lead to an increase in traffic in parallel streets including Harold Street, Smith Street, Henry Street and Hilltop Avenue. These streets are lower in the road hierarchy (refer to figure 1) so moving traffic to these streets is contrary to the Devonport Road Network Strategy (RNS). ITEM 5.2
PAGE 25 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
There is also a potential safety issue for the one-way proposal. Given the relatively low traffic volumes, there will be times when vehicles mistakenly or deliberately travel the wrong way on Turton Street, resulting in the potential for a serious crash. Non-compliance is frequently observed on Devonport‟s only other one-way street – Fenton Way. ‘No parking’ proposal (option 2) A proposal that would address resident concerns would be to retain two way traffic but to ban parking to one side of Turton Street between Hiller Street and Forbes Street which matches the „No Parking‟ in the adjoining sections. This would provide a straight alignment of parked cars reducing the „wait and weave‟ that is of concern. The „no parking‟ proposal is shown in figure 4
Figure 4 – „No Parking‟ proposal Implementing the „no parking‟ would also be a simple process. Council has delegated authority to regulate parking restrictions. Proceeding with this proposal would require further public consultation with affected residents, then provision of signage in Turton Street between Hiller Street and Forbes Street This option would also have the desired effect of eliminating weaving and waiting for oncoming traffic. However, similarly to the one-way proposal, this may result in increased vehicle speeds in Turton Street as the street will be more open once parked cars are only present on one side. This option is a reduction in amenity for Turton Street residents, particularly those on the Northern side. It is not the proposal on the original petition and is unlikely to be supported by residents of Turton Street. Retain existing conditions (option 3) This option retains all existing traffic control and parking control devices that are currently in place. This option does not address the resident concerns raised in the petition. It does however address the issues raised in this report that both option 1 and option 2 would create if they were to be implemented, vehicle speeds in Turton Street will not increase and there will be no impacts on resident in the surrounding area or in the wider community.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Council Resolution 184/14 was supported by a petition with 30 signatories, with 28 of those residing in Turton Street. These 28 signatories came from 25 properties, as there were cases where multiple residents from the same property signed the petition. However conversion of Turton Street to one-way affects nearby residents and other stakeholders. Over 200 residents and 62 non-resident property owners were contacted by ITEM 5.2
PAGE 26 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
mail as part of this investigation and asked to provide their opinion on the one-way proposal. The area consulted is shown in figure 5.
Figure 5 –Public consultation area A total of 27 responses were received. Ten (10) responses were in favour of the proposal, although 4 of these respondents had already signed the petition. Sixteen (16) responses were opposed to the change. One (1) response was neutral. With the responses in favour of the proposal, there was a mixture of other comments including two that preferred the one-way to be the other way, and one that wanted the proposal extended to surrounding streets. Three of the respondents reported witnessing crashes in Turton Street. The respondents who did not support the proposal cited concerns over increased traffic in adjoining streets, increased vehicle speeds in Turton St and extra travel to negotiate around the one-way system. Tasmania Police also made a representation on the issue (refer attachment 1). Tasmania Police does not support the one-way proposal, predicting an increase in vehicle speeds and an increase in crashes if the one-way proposal is adopted. The Devonport City Traffic Committee was also consulted as the group representing key stakeholders in Traffic, Road Safety, Policing, Town Planning and Parking. The Committee considered the concept at its October meeting and did not support the one way proposal, recommending that the local and overall network function of Turton Street remain. The Committee considered the „no parking‟ proposal but did adopt a position on this proposal. ITEM 5.2
PAGE 27 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Either the one-way proposal (option 1) or the „no parking‟ proposal (option 2) could be implemented within available operational and capital budgets. Retaining the existing conditions (option 3) has no cost. If the one-way proposal (option 1) is implemented additional funds may need to be allocated in next year‟s Capital Works Budget to construct kerb outstands that would narrow the road to alert motorists not to enter against the flow if it is determined they are required after the one-way proposal is implemented.
RISK IMPLICATIONS
Assets, Property and Infrastructure By implementing the one-way proposal, the road network would be less efficient.
Communication/Reputation By choosing to implement any of the options, a group of residents will be unhappy with the decision. Council must consider that the decision made may set a precedent for other similar locations in Devonport.
CONCLUSION The one-way proposal (option 1) has support from the majority of residents of Turton Street, but is generally not supported by residents in the surrounding area. This option does address the resident concerns in the petition but creates other problems within Turton Street and in the surrounding area. There is unlikely to be a net improvement in safety and amenity that the residents are hoping for as the road network will be less user friendly and vehicles speeds in Turton Street are likely to increase. It is possible those who signed the petition were not fully aware of some of the negative consequences of the proposal. From a strategic point of view, the one way proposal does not align with the Devonport Road Network Strategy and is not supported by the Devonport City Traffic Committee. The „no parking‟ proposal (option 2) would achieve the same flow improvements as the one-way proposal but would not have the same negative impacts in surrounding streets. It would however, significantly reduce amenity for Turton Street residents and would be likely to increase vehicle speeds in Turton Street. There has been no public consultation on the „no parking‟ proposal, but it is unlikely to be supported by the Turton Street residents. Whilst both proposals address the traffic flow concerns in Turton Street, both have negative impacts that are likely to outweigh the benefits. The proposal to retain the existing conditions (option 3) provides the best available balance of parking availability, traffic flow, and road safety considering the overall road network requirements and current traffic volume and vehicle speeds on Turton Street.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Tasmania Police Devonport Division - Turton Street Proposal for One-Way Street
ITEM 5.2
PAGE 28 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
RECOMMENDATION That it be recommended to Council that the report of the City Engineer regarding the conversion of Turton Street to one-way be received and noted and that: 1.
no changes be undertaken to the existing traffic and parking conditions in Turton Street; and
2.
a response be provided to the convenor of the petition advising of Councilâ€&#x;s decision.
Author: Position:
Michael Williams City Engineer
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.2
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 29 Tasmania Police Devonport Division - Turton Street Proposal for One-Way Street
ITEM 5.2
ATTACHMENT [1]
PAGE 30 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
5.3
SORELL STREET LANEWAY PARKING RESTRICTIONS - SUMMARY OF RESIDENT CORRESPONDENCE File: 12780 D347203
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 provides details of correspondence received from residents of the Sorell Street Laneway since the Council decision to implement overnight parking restrictions in the laneway.
BACKGROUND
A report was provided to Council at its 20 October 2014 meeting regarding the installation of parking restrictions in the Sorell Street laneway. A copy of the October report is attached. Council considered the matter and determined (Min. 269/14 refers): “That appropriate seal be provided and drainage on the southern side of the laneway and this to be included in the forward program and that no parking on the laneway verge from 5:00pm to 9:00am daily.” The resealing and drainage improvements in the laneway will be considered as part of future budget deliberations. Since Council‟s decision was communicated to the residents, complaints have been received from three of the five properties affected by the parking restrictions. Details of the complaints are presented in this report for Council‟s consideration prior to proceeding with the installation of new signage.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS In accordance with Section 10 of the Transport Act 1981 Council has delegated authority to regulate parking restrictions.
DISCUSSION
The following three complaints have been received from residents adjoining the Sorell Street laneway since Council‟s decision in October. 1.
A letter was received from the residents of 185A Steele Street. They were disappointed with the decision to install parking restrictions and pointed out that the decision is not supported by the majority of residents affected by the decision. They also noted that the parking arrangements in the laneway have operated satisfactorily prior to Council‟s decision. A copy of the letter is attached.
2.
An email was received from the resident of 1/185 Steele Street. They were disappointed with the decision to install parking restrictions and pointed out that the decision is not supported by the majority of residents affected by the decision. They requested that street lighting be provided to the laneway on the basis that some residents will be required to park elsewhere and access their home by foot. A copy of the email is attached. ITEM 5.3
PAGE 31 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
3.
A phone call was received from the resident of 181 Steele Street. The caller was disappointed with the decision to install parking restrictions and felt that there wasn‟t an opportunity to make his point of view known at the Council meeting. For this caller, parking restriction in the laneway will result in at least half an hour a day of loading and unloading tools from a Ute and trailer before parking on Steele Street overnight where previously the Ute could be parked safely in the laneway without unloading. A file note regarding the phone call is attached.
The decision to ban parking from 5:00pm to 9:00am daily is generally inconsistent with other parking controls around Devonport. In a residential area, Council officers generally try to minimise parking controls to provide amenity for residents and maintain simplicity. If a specific issue existed, controls would be considered. However, it is not clear in this instance what the issue is and how the 5:00pm to 9:00am restriction addresses that issue.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Affected property owners and residents were consulted during the preparation of the report for the October 2014 Council meeting. The three complaints were provided by property owners after they were notified of Council‟s decision.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications as a result of this report.
RISK IMPLICATIONS
Communication/Reputation Council must also consider that the decision made regarding this laneway may set a precedent for other locations in Devonport.
CONCLUSION
The correspondence received since the Council decision is consistent with that received during consultation for the previous report and highlights that the majority of the residents do not support the proposed parking restrictions. As outlined in the October report, there is no technical requirement to restrict parking. Given the obvious concern of residents following the Council decision this report is provided to allow further consideration prior to proceeding with the installation of parking restrictions.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Sorell Street Service Laneway - Parking Review
2.
Letter addressed to Mayor - From Linda & Steve Ellis of 185A Steele Street - RE: Sorell Street Laneway
3.
Parking in Sorell St laneway - complaint about Council decision to ban parking (word version of email)
4.
Sorell St laneway - complaint regarding parking (word version of file note)
ITEM 5.3
PAGE 32 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
RECOMMENDATION That it be recommended to Council that the report of the City Engineer regarding the Sorell Street laneway be noted and that Council: Option 1 due to residentsâ€&#x; concerns determine not proceed with the installation of parking restrictions in the Sorell Street laneway. OR Option 2 despite the residentsâ€&#x; concerns proceed with the installation of signage to restrict parking from 5:00pm to 9:00am daily in the Steele Street laneway.
Author: Position:
Michael Williams City Engineer
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.3
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 33 Sorell Street Service Laneway - Parking Review
12.1
ATTACHMENT [1]
SORELL STREET SERVICE LANEWAY - PARKING REVIEW File: 12780 D343104
RELEVANT PORTFOLIO Technical and Finance RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council‟s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 3.3.1
Improve the City's physical access and connectivity
SUMMARY An investigation has been undertaken into parking issues in the Sorell Street service laneway. Reasons both for and against the installation of parking restrictions are outlined in the report to allow Council to determine its position on the matter.
BACKGROUND Council at its meeting in September 2014 determined (Min. 230/14 refers): “That an investigation be undertaken, and if so decided by Aldermen at the October Council meeting, Council condition the Council owned laneway servicing 181, 183, 185 and 187 Steele Street (Title Reference 243287/1) as a „no parking‟ laneway and subsequently install appropriate signage at the entrance to the laneway to advise motorists of such.” As a result of this resolution an investigation has been undertaken, which included consultation with the affected residents and the findings are presented in this report.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS In accordance with Section 10 of the Transport Act 1981 and Sections 49 and 59 of the Traffic Act 1925, Council has delegated authority to regulate parking restrictions.
DISCUSSION The unnamed laneway off Sorell Street is a single lane, 90m long. The width of the sealed laneway varies from 3.5m to 3.9m. The nature strip on the northern side varies from 1.3m to 1.6m. The unsealed shoulder on the southern side is 0.6m wide. The minimum total width is 5.7m. There is no opportunity for vehicles to pass if cars are parked all the way along the northern side of the laneway. Ten properties adjoin the lane but only five have vehicle access to the laneway. These five properties are highlighted in figure 1. Of these five properties, the laneway is the sole access point for two properties and the main access point for two more. Owners and tenants use the laneway for parking. At times, much of the northern side of the laneway is taken up by parked cars, as shown in figure 2. Generally there are more cars parked in the laneway after hours and on weekends and fewer during normal business hours.
ITEM 5.3
PAGE 34 Sorell Street Service Laneway - Parking Review
ATTACHMENT [1]
Figure 1: Properties that have access to the laneway outlined in red.
Figure 2: Parked vehicles on Northern side of Sorell Street laneway There have been reports of poor, and allegedly illegal parking practices in the laneway, most notably being parked cars blocking access to properties at the end of the lane. ITEM 5.3
PAGE 35 Sorell Street Service Laneway - Parking Review
ATTACHMENT [1]
There have also been reports of minor accidents in the laneway, including a collision with a parked car whilst reversing from the laneway. Tasmanian Road Rules require “at least 3 metres of the road next to your car clear so traffic can pass when there‟s a broken dividing line or no dividing line or strip”. This rule is applicable in many streets in Devonport where there is insufficient width for parked cars and through traffic. Street parking in the section of Sorell Street that the service laneway joins (between Steele Street and Don Road) is very limited due to this requirement. There has recently been new residential construction occurring at 187 Steele Street. Previously this site only contained one dwelling which was accessed from Steele Street. However, the dwelling currently being constructed at the southern end of the site only has access from the Sorell Street laneway. It is understood that the parking practices in the laneway have at times hampered the residential construction activities and equally added to the congestion in the laneway impacting on residents of other properties adjoining the laneway. Near the end of the laneway there is a stormwater manhole lid that if lowered would improve the available width for traffic in the laneway. Work to lower this manhole has been programmed by Council officers and will be undertaken soon. There are a number of reasons both for and against applying parking restrictions to the laneway which are outlined below: Reasons supporting a ban on parking in the laneway
Improved access to properties at the end of the lane: If parking was banned, access to the properties at the end of the laneway would be improved and there would be less chance of the access being blocked by illegal parking. It would also be possible for two vehicles to pass in the laneway, although given the low traffic volume, it is unlikely this is a frequent occurrence.
Road Safety: It has been observed that it is common for vehicles that are parked in the laneway to reverse out of the laneway onto Sorell Street. Although not illegal, it is less safe than leaving the laneway in a forward direction. If parking was to be banned, reversing from the laneway would be less frequent.
Emergency Access: If parking was banned, access for emergency vehicles would be enhanced. However it should be noted, that if vehicles are parked legally in the laneway (i.e. leaving 3m to pass), then there are no access issues for emergency vehicles.
Reasons to not ban parking and retain the status quo
Laneway Width: The laneway is of sufficient width to allow cars to park legally on one side and retain a minimum 3m clearance.
Strategic Road Use: In the Devonport Road Network Strategy, the laneway is classified as a local access, the lowest level in the road hierarchy and likely to have less than 50 vehicle movements per day. Generally, there would not be parking restrictions in a local access leaving users flexible to accommodate the needs of each other.
Loss of Amenity: Although, all the affected properties have room for multiple vehicles to park off street, a loss of parking in the laneway would negatively affect most residents. For ITEM 5.3
PAGE 36 Sorell Street Service Laneway - Parking Review
ATTACHMENT [1]
example 183 Steele Street has two separate tenants who share the access and the tenants of 1/185 Steele Street include 4 vehicle owners. Beyond the laneway, there is very limited on-street parking for these properties in Sorell Street. The nearest available parking is in Steele Street or Don Road. This means a resident would have to park up to 140m from their house if internal parking was not available.
Alienation of residents: The majority of affected owners and tenants have indicated that they oppose the ban on parking in the laneway. Many stated that parking in the laneway was occasionally an issue but could be managed by cooperation between the residents.
Lack of enforcement: The occasions when the laneway is blocked generally occurs outside of normal work hours, so Council parking attendants are unlikely to play a part in enforcing the parking ban. Enforcement would be unlikely to be a priority for Tasmania Police officers.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT As part of the preparation of this report, letters were sent to all affected owners and tenants asking for feedback on the proposed parking ban. Of the responses received, only two respondents supported the proposed ban on parking, with the majority wishing to retain the current arrangements. Although not contacted by Council, three property owners in Don Road who abut the laneway but do not have vehicle access have written to Council supporting the ban.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Implementing a ban on parking in the laneway would involve the installation of two signs and could be undertaken from within the existing operational budget.
RISK IMPLICATIONS
Communication/Reputation In choosing to either ban or not ban parking in the laneway, Council will upset some of the residents of the laneway. Council must also consider that the decision made regarding this laneway may set a precedent for other similar locations in Devonport.
CONCLUSION Due to the residential construction at 187 Steele Street, traffic in the laneway has increased, however once works are complete and traffic returns to a more normal level it is likely some of the existing issues will be resolved. Current conditions in the laneway do not appear to be different from prior to the commencement of construction activities at 187 Steele Street. It would be reasonable to assume that the owner of 187 Steele Street considered the layout of the laneway when electing to construct a dwelling whose sole access is through the laneway. Banning parking in the laneway would negatively affect more residents than it benefits and provided vehicles are parked legally in the laneway (i.e. leaving 3m to pass), the benefits to the property owners at the end of the laneway are desirable rather than necessary. It is recommended that no further action be taken on the matter, however if Council were of a view to proceed with the introduction of parking controls in the laneway a possible alternative motion would be: ITEM 5.3
PAGE 37 Sorell Street Service Laneway - Parking Review
ATTACHMENT [1]
“That the report of the City Engineer regarding the Sorell Street service laneway parking be received and that Council install signage to ban parking for the full length of the laneway off Sorell Street.�
ATTACHMENTS Nil
RECOMMENDATION That the report of the City Engineer regarding the Sorell Street service laneway parking be received and noted and that no further action be taken.
Author: Position:
Michael Williams City Engineer
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.3
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 38 Letter addressed to Mayor - From Linda & Steve Ellis of 185A Steele Street - RE: Sorell Street Laneway
ITEM 5.3
ATTACHMENT [2]
PAGE 39 Letter addressed to Mayor - From Linda & Steve Ellis of 185A Steele Street - RE: Sorell Street Laneway
ITEM 5.3
ATTACHMENT [2]
PAGE 40 Letter addressed to Mayor - From Linda & Steve Ellis of 185A Steele Street - RE: Sorell Street Laneway
ITEM 5.3
ATTACHMENT [2]
PAGE 41 Letter addressed to Mayor - From Linda & Steve Ellis of 185A Steele Street - RE: Sorell Street Laneway
ITEM 5.3
ATTACHMENT [2]
PAGE 42 Parking in Sorell St laneway - complaint about Council decision to ban parking (word version of email)
ATTACHMENT [3]
Morning Michael I have received my letter from the council and I am quite bewildered as to how at the meeting they came to that decision. It seems very unfair and seems to me they have come to their decision to please only ONE resident, maybe it's a case of who you know? I'm not sure if you are the right person to express my concerns to and if not could you please put me in contact with the appropriate person or department? I am sure the council has no issue with placing street lighting in the laneway as at present there is no lighting and I think it is a necessity if all concerned have to park out on the main road and walk into the laneway to access houses? I expect this to be done at the same time the no parking signs are erected. Look forward to your response, Cheers Kellie
Sent from my iPhone On 20 Oct 2014, at 3:46 pm, "Michael Williams" <MichaelWilliams@devonport.tas.gov.au> wrote: Hi Kellie, The report that was written for the alderman was factual and included arguments both for and against the proposal, but concluded that from a technical perspective the best course of action was to continue to allow parking in the laneway. However, the Aldermen still have both options available to them. It should not be a disadvantage to you if you not attend although those wishing to ban parking will likely be there. Regards,
Michael Williams City Engineer | Devonport City Council 44-48 Best Street (PO Box 604) Devonport TAS 7310 P: (03) 6424 0578| M: 0429 939 755 | F: (03) 6424 9649 | www.devonport.tas.gov.au
From: kel cox [mailto:kelchat@hotmail.com.au] Sent: Saturday, 18 October 2014 4:41 PM To: Michael Williams Subject: Re: confirmation of receipt of email - Sorell St laneway
Hi Michael Unfortunately I cannot attend the meeting on Monday night due to work commitments. I am hoping that the residents opposing this will still get a fair unbiased representation? And it does not disadvantage us in anyway by not attending?
ITEM 5.3
PAGE 43 Parking in Sorell St laneway - complaint about Council decision to ban parking (word version of email)
ATTACHMENT [3]
Kellie Sent from my iPhone On 9 Oct 2014, at 8:51 am, "Michael Williams" <MichaelWilliams@devonport.tas.gov.au> wrote: Hi Kellie, Thank you for your email. The feedback we received from you and other residents was greatly appreciated. The matter is being discussed at the Council meeting on October 20th. Regards, Michael Williams City Engineer | Devonport City Council 44-48 Best Street (PO Box 604) Devonport TAS 7310 P: (03) 6424 0578| M: 0429 939 755 | F: (03) 6424 9649 | www.devonport.tas.gov.au
ITEM 5.3
PAGE 44 Sorell St laneway - complaint regarding parking (word version of file note)
ATTACHMENT [4]
''Monday, 10 November 2014 at 4:15:44 PM (GMT+11:00) Williams, Michael:'' Received a phone call from Rod Guthrie on 5/11/14. Rod is tenant of 181 Steele Street with his access onto the Sorell St laneway. Rod was disappointed at the decision to restrict parking in the laneway and also the process of the Council meeting where he felt that he didn't have an opportunity to make his point of view known. One of Rod's issue is that his son is a tradesman who currently parks a ute and trailer in the laneway overnight, loaded with scaffolding and tools. If parking is banned as resolved by Council, his son will have to come home and unload all the trailer and ute, before parking on Steele Street overnight, then loading up again prior to going to work.
ITEM 5.3
PAGE 45 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
5.4
DEVELOPMENT AND HEALTH SERVICES REPORT File: 29543 D348778
RELEVANT PORTFOLIO
Technical and Finance RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council‟s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.4.1
Provide timely, efficient, consistent and quality services which are aligned with and meet our customers needs
SUMMARY
This report provides a summary of the activities undertaken by the Development and Health Services Department for the months of October and November 2014.
BACKGROUND This report is provided to the bi-monthly Infrastructure, Works and Development Committee meeting to summarise the activities of the Development and Health Services Department in the preceding two months. The Council functions undertaken by the Department are:
Planning; Building and Plumbing Services; Environmental Health; Animal Control; and Regulatory Services.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS In carrying out its activities the Development and Health Services Department is required to ensure compliance with a substantial amount of legislation and regulation. The principal legislation administered by the Department includes the:
Local Government Act 1993 Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Building Act 2000 Public Health Act 1997 Food Act 2003 Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 Dog Control Act 2000
DISCUSSION 1.
Planning Reform Update The State Government is continuing its reform of the Tasmanian Planning System with a package of reforms to both the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 and the Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1993 currently before the Parliament. As part of those reforms the Tasmanian Planning Commission has advised that where hearings had been intended for every representation made about the Devonport Interim Planning Scheme 2013 those matters will now be dealt with by invitations for further written submissions in support of the original representations. ITEM 5.4
PAGE 46 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
2.
Application for dispensation and planning permit at 23-61 Tarleton Street, East Devonport The hearing into this matter was convened by Commissioners from the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) on 11 November 2014. At the conclusion of the hearing and after taking submissions from Council, the applicant and various representors the TPC reserved its decision. The TPC had some concerns over a number of conditions and directed the applicant and Council to consult further on the draft planning permit conditions and to circulate the revised conditions to the representors for comment. This has now been done. The TPC did not indicate when it might hand down its determination, but under the existing legislation it has three months in which to do so.
3.
Application for Dispensation 13 &14-15 Victoria Parade and 5 Lower Madden Streets Council at its meeting on 24 November 2014 determined to exhibit all documents associated with this application for 3 weeks to allow for public comment. The documents were made available at Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x;s offices from Thursday 26 November and the application was notified in The Advocate on Saturday 29 November. A report about the merit of any representations will be provided to the January 2015 meeting of Council.
4.
Statistical Report for October and November 2014 Please note that due to meeting agenda closing dates the November statistics are to COB 24 November only.
FOOD Inspections
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June
13/14 24 29 21 24 25 20 24 15 21 19 14 1
14/15 3 23 7 15 31
Improvement Notices 13/14 14/15 1 1 0 0 3 0 4 0 1 1 3 0 3 3 0 2 1
New Premises Permit 13/14 14/15 0 2 2 5 3 4 3 3 2 4 1 5 1 0 1 3 3
ITEM 5.4
Temporary Premises Permit 13/14 14/15 5 6 8 4 8 6 13 9 12 17 20 14 11 21 9 9 6
Complaints Received 13/14 14/15 5 11 2 3 0 5 3 6 0 10 0 0 3 1 1 0 3
Infringements Issued 13/14 14/15 0 0 21 0 1 11 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PAGE 47 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014 MISC
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June
Public Health Risk Ass/Insp 13/14 14/15 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Immunisations Given 13/14 14/15 12 34 762 5 549 17 37 23 27 340 17 22 7 659 82 26 977
Special Plumbing Permits 13/14 14/15 0 4 1 0 1 4 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 2
Fire Hazard Notices 13/14 14/15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 31 12 0 0 0 0
Street Trading Inspections 13/14 14/15 49 0 33 0 52 50 27 120 43 100 19 24 8 31 11
Litter 13/14 14/15 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 1 2 2 1
Environmental 13/14 14/15 3 8 7 1 4 11 0 6 4 4 7 5 1 2 2 5 5
Water 13/14 14/15 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 0
Fire Hazard 13/14 14/15 0 0 0 0 10 0 67 3 82 9 143 72 2 1 0 0 0
Street Trading Permits 13/14 14/15 44 0 47 80 28 20 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
COMPLAINTS
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June
Noise 13/14 14/15 0 5 2 4 1 4 2 5 0 3 3 1 5 3 3 6 2
ANIMAL CONTROL: Current Dog Registrations
13/14 July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June
14/15 3168 3591 3676 3794 3833
Animal Complaints
13/14
14/15 71 86 6 53 36
Complaints Closed
13/14
3776
4321
22 25 23 26
20 23 22 26
Complaints Outstanding
14/15 71 76 N/A 51 36
13/14
1 1 2 1 0
14/15 0 10 N/A 2 0
Complaint Response (Days) 13/14
1 1 1 1
14/15 1 0 N/A 1 1
Other 13/14 14/15 4 6 1 6 4 9 1 14 2 6 0 0 5 1 10 4 9
Infringement Notices Issued
Prosecutions Commenced / referred to MPES
13/14
13/14 14/15 0 0 0 1 0
6 7 4 6 2
14/15 0 2 1 2 4
1 0 0 0
There has been a significant increase in animal complaints as compared to this time last financial year. There have been a worrying number of dog attacks due to owners not adequately restraining their animals. As a result numerous dogs have been impounded, a number have been euthanized and in some instances action has been taken to have the dogs involved declared as â&#x20AC;&#x17E;dangerousâ&#x20AC;&#x;.
ITEM 5.4
PAGE 48 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014 PLACE OF ASSEMBLY Inspections July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June
PLANNING APPLICATIONS Single Dwelling Oct 14 Nov 14 YTD 2013/14
11 2 45 80
13/14 0 0 0 29 22 14 2 3 0 1 0 0
Temporary Permits 13/14 14/15 1 2 0 2 1 5 3 3 3 2 8 2 8 4 2 0 0
14/15 0 0 0 0 0
Units
Commercial
Industrial
Rural
Subdivision
Other
0 1 4 11
3 3 14 25
4 0 6 8
0 0 0 3
4 2 11 20
1 0 3 13
80 70
Single Dwelling
60
Units
50
Commercial
40
Industrial
30
Rural
20
Subdivision
10
Other
0 Oct-14
Nov-14
YTD
2013/14
PLANNING APPLICATIONS 13/14
13/14
14/15
14/15
Disc
Permitted
12 12 13 15 6
6 4 5 8 2
Disc
Permitted
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
16 10 8 11 6 5 6 6
5 4 2 3 4 3 2 1
Mar April May June
12 12 11 13
6 6 4 4
YTD
YTD Permitted
Disc
12 24 37 52 58
6 10 15 23 25
Planning applications have increased by 20% compared to this period last financial year. ITEM 5.4
PAGE 49 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014 BUILDING APPLICATIONS/PERMITS 2013/14 July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June
28 17 22 20 15 16 14 26 15 25 22 23
2014/15
YTD
20 20 35 24 19
20 40 75 99 118
VALUE OF BUILDING WORK (ESTIMATED COST) 2013/14 2014/15 July 5136659 3763900 Aug 1913605 1159559 Sept 2607300 4447500 Oct 2176489 2593500 Nov 1860500 1645000 Dec 4158925 Jan 2297235 Feb 1536300 Mar 4887300 April 4960900 May 3448600 June 5425200
PLUMBING APPLICATIONS/PERMITS 2013/14 2014/15 July 24 21 Aug 17 23 Sept 20 26 Oct 20 20 Nov 13 18 Dec 15 Jan 13 Feb 17 Mar 9 April 13 May 22 June 25
PLUMBING INSPECTIONS - DEVONPORT 2013/14 2014/15 July 86 72 Aug 91 62 Sept 69 85 Oct 108 82 Nov 69 57 Dec 88 Jan 58 Feb 74 Mar 65 April 40 May 73 June 74
YTD 3763900 4923459 9370959 11964459 13609459
YTD 21 44 70 90 108
YTD 72 134 219 301 358
PLUMBING INSPECTIONS â&#x20AC;&#x201C; LATROBE/KENTISH 2013/14 2014/15 YTD Latrobe Kentish Latrobe Kentish Latrobe Kentish July 15 0 15 0 Aug 14 1 29 1 Sept 21 3 50 4 Oct 17 1 21 4 71 8 Nov 8 13 1 84 9 Dec 14 6 Jan 11 4 Feb 19 5 Mar 16 4 April 15 3 May 13 1 June 14 1
There has been an increase of just over 14% in both building and plumbing applications compared to the same period last year. ITEM 5.4
PAGE 50 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
This report does not require community consultation or engagement.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications as a result of this report.
RISK IMPLICATIONS There are no risk implications attached to this report.
CONCLUSION
This report is provided for information purposes only about the activities of the Development and Health Services department in October and November 2014.
ATTACHMENTS Nil
RECOMMENDATION That it be recommended to Council that the Development and Health Services report be received and noted.
Author: Position:
Brian May Development Manager
&Health
Services
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.4
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 51 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
5.5
INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKS REPORT File: 23997 D344858
RELEVANCE TO COUNCIL’S PLANS & POLICIES Council‟s Strategic Plan 2009-2030: Strategy 5.4.1
Provide timely, efficient, consistent and quality services which are aligned with and meet our customers needs
SUMMARY
This report provides a summary of the activities undertaken by the Infrastructure and Works Department during the months of October and November, 2014.
BACKGROUND This report is provided to the Infrastructure and Works Committee every month and aims to update Aldermen and the community on matters of interest. The function areas of Council covered by this report are: Asset Management Program (forward planning and maintenance)
Recreation Reserves (incl. playgrounds, parks and gardens)
Capital Works
Sporting Grounds and Facilities
Roads, Footpaths and Cycle ways
Tracks and trails
Streetscape Design (incl. lighting, signs, furniture, vegetation)
Public Buildings (incl. public halls, toilets)
Storm water Management
Marine Structures (incl. jetties, boat ramps)
Traffic Management
Recreation and open space planning
Waste Management
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Council is required to comply with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 and other relevant legislation.
DISCUSSION 1.
2014/2015 Capital Works Program 1.1. Work is progressing well on the 2014/2015 Capital Works Program. The Capital Works Income & Expenditure Report combining both the physical progress and the financial status has been attached to this report. During the months of October and November a number of designs have been completed and tenders awarded for the construction of the works. Other items of note are listed below. 1.2. Reseal Programme – the preparation works for this year‟s road reseal programme have been completed and the approved contractor has confirmed that they will be carrying out the resealing works in January and February 2015. 1.3. Reg Hope Park Mowing Strip – a concrete strip was constructed along the foreshore at Reg Hope Park to make maintaining the area easier and safer ITEM 5.5
PAGE 52 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
1.4. James Street Footpath â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the footpath adjacent the Devonport Oval was replaced east of the main gates. The upgrade west of the main gates is proposed to be included in the 2015/16 Capital Works Budget.
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 53 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
1.5. Aquatic Centre Overflow Car Park – an overflow car park has been constructed on the eastern side of the main car park to cater for the high demand periods.
1.6. Torquay Road Reconstruction and Widening Stage 1 (east of Canning Drive) – the design has progressed sufficiently to allow consultation with the local residents. Officers are currently working through some minor issues raised by the residents. Tender drawings have been finalised and are currently out for tendering by contractors. Generally the scope of work involves:
reconstruction of 500m section of Torquay Road to current standards for rural roads, including gravel shoulders and slight changes to alignment to improve sightlines
improved drainage including construction of table drains and kerb and channel where the road reserve is too narrow for an open drain
improved delineation at night with line marking, reflective pavement markers and guideposts
reconstruction of access to private properties to suit new road levels
Copies of the relevant drawings will be displayed at the meeting for information. 1.7. Kelcey Tier Road Safety Improvement Stage 3 – the contract for the construction works has been awarded and the contractor will commence on site early December.
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 54 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
1.8. Devonport Road Reconstruction â&#x20AC;&#x201C; works have commenced for the reconstruction works. Due to limited availability of sealing contractors prior to Christmas the remainder of the works will be completed after Christmas so that the road isnâ&#x20AC;&#x;t left unsealed for long periods creating dust issues for the local residents.
2.
Management 2.1. The bi-monthly meeting of the Resource Recovery Facility Management Group was held at the Spreyton Waste Transfer Station (SWTS). The group are responsible to oversee the MOU between Council and Lifeline Tasmania for the management of the Tip Shop at the SWTS. The operation of the Tip Shop is progressing well. The operator is now including breakdown of mattresses on a regular basis. This is avoiding the mattresses going to landfill, and the individual components are recycled where possible (ie steel and wood). 2.2. At the October Council meeting it was resolved that the Victoria Parade Toilets be closed and demolished as soon as funds are available. Letters were sent to both the RSL Club and the Apex Regatta Association advising them that the toilets would be closed after Remembrance Day. The toilets were closed on 18 November, 2015. Requests for quotations have been sent out to gain pricing to demolish the toilet block and reinstate the area to park land.
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 55 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
2.3. The following table is a summary of the Action Requests for the Infrastructure and Works Department.
3.
Balance of Actions Requests – 25/9/2014
180
Action Requests created in Oct & Nov
393
Action Requests completed in Oct & Nov
353
Balance of Action Requests – 26/11/2014
220
Technical and Engineering 3.1. The draft revised Road Network Strategy was been released for a 6 week public consultation period. Feedback from the public is currently being collated by officers and a report will be provided to Council. 3.2. Parking controls have been altered at the northern end of Hiller Street to prevent vehicles from parking close to the intersection and causing safety issues The changes involved extending the centreline a further 5m back from the Steele Street intersection and moving the 2P signs to suit. Council‟s Parking Officers are monitoring compliance with the new signage. 3.3. The five year forward works program is currently being updated and a copy will be presented to Council early in the new year. 3.4. A list of preapproved roads and maps for various heavy vehicle types was provided to State Growth and the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator to reduce the number of permit requests to be processed and assessed. 3.5. 11 National Heavy Vehicle Regulator Assessments were completed in October and 8 were assessed in November. The following graph details the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator Assessments that have been issued so far this calendar year:
National Heavy Vehicle Regulator Assessments 2014 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 NHVR Assessments
Jan-14
Feb-14
Mar-14
Apr-14
May-14
Jun-14
Jul-14
Aug-14
Sep-14
Oct-14
Nov-14
3
3
4
9
11
10
11
48
11
8
ITEM 5.5
Dec-14
PAGE 56 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
3.6. The following table is a summary of the asset capitalisations that were processed during November. Number of Projects Capitalised in November
6
Total Value of Capitalisations in November
$266,453
Total Value of Works in Progress (WIP) at 25/11/2014
$3,219,578
Projects ready to be Capitalised next month
6 projects $778,525
3.7. The following graph details the engineering development assessments that have been completed to date this calendar year:
Development Application Engineering Assessments 2014 30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Jan-14
Feb-14
Mar-14
Apr-14
May-14
Jun-14
Jul-14
Aug-14
Sep-14
Oct-14
Nov-14
Building Assessments
18
20
15
26
15
24
20
21
26
26
15
Subdivision Assessments
3
1
0
1
2
2
0
1
1
4
1
Planning Assessments
6
5
8
17
11
10
14
14
8
15
8
Pre Assessments
1
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
1
2
0
ITEM 5.5
Dec-14
PAGE 57 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
3.8. The following graph details the Road Occupation Permits that have been issued so far this calendar year:
Road Occupation Permits 2014 25
20
15
10
5
0
Jan-14
Feb-14
Mar-14
Apr-14
May-14
Jun-14
Jul-14
Aug-14
Sep-14
Oct-14
Nov-14
Public
2
5
1
5
5
4
8
4
3
4
1
Tas Gas
6
9
18
12
10
9
10
21
5
7
3
Aurora/Telstra
4
1
3
2
1
0
2
1
1
3
0
Taswater
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
3
0
4
4
Dec-14
3.9. The following graph details the Dial-before-you-dig requests that have been processed this calendar year (as at 26/11/2014):
DBYD - Dial Before You Dig Requests 140 120 100 80
2014
60
2013
40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 58 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
3.10. The following graph details the 337 Certificates that have been assessed by the Infrastructure and Works Department this calendar year:
337 Certificate Requests 70 60 50 40
2014
30
2013
20 10
0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 4.
Jul
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Operational Contracts 4.1. The roadside mowing contractor has commenced the bi-annual road side slashing program. Due to seasonal weather this work is being carried out about a month earlier than previous years. A second cut will be completed in March/April, 2015. 4.2. The following table details the contracts for Council managed within the Infrastructure and Works Department under $100,000 that have been awarded this financial year: Contract No. & Description of Contract: $ Value: Contractor/Supplier: (exc. GST) Contract 1272 River Road Widening – Treloar Transport $82,802 (trading as Kentish Construction & Engineering Co. Pty. Ltd.) Agreement Money Collection – JRB Protection P/L $92,248 over 2 years 4.3. The following table details the contracts for Council managed within the Infrastructure and Works Department under $100,000 that have been extended this financial year: Contract No. & Description of Contract: Contractor/Supplier: Contract 1246 Scrap Metal Recycling Contract – Sims Metals – The original contract was adopted by Council in July, 2013. The contract had an option for an additional 12 months. Further to a review in June the option for the additional 12 months was accepted. ITEM 5.5
$ Value: (exc. GST) $139.30 per tonne
PAGE 59 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
Contract No. & Description of Contract: Contractor/Supplier: Contract 1217 Roadside Mowing Contract – Cutting Edge – The original contract signed in August, 2012 had an option for a 12 month extension. Further to a review in June the option for the additional 12 months was accepted. Contract 1218 Weed Spraying Contract – Steeds Weeds & Seeds – The original contract signed in August, 2012 had an option for a 12 month extension. Further to a review in June the option for the additional 12 months was accepted. Contract 1253 Maintenance of Essential Safety & Health Features and Measures Fire Inspections, Electrical Inspections & Testing and Tagging – The original contract signed in Nov 2013 had an option for a 12 month extension. Further to a review in October the option for the additional 12 months was accepted 5.
$ Value: (exc. GST) $42,400 per annum
$36,428 annum
per
$26,862 per annum
Civil Work and Storm Water Maintenance 5.1. Maintenance in accordance with the Service Level Document, undertaken during October and November included:
Asphalt patching works were completed in the CBD area in preparation for the reseal program;
Replacement of footpath bays in Victor Court
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 60 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
5.2. Next month it is anticipated that civil and storm water maintenance works will include:
6.
Footpath repairs in various locations
Signage maintenance
Inspections of stormwater assets
Parks and Reserves Maintenance 6.1. Maintenance in accordance with the Service Level Document, undertaken in October and November included:
Verti draining and fertilising all sports grounds
Renovation of the main playing pitch at the Valley Road Soccer Complex is progressing. The results of the renovation will be known early in the new year.
Removal of topsoil from the practise grounds at the Valley Road Soccer Complex. This soil has been stockpiled and will be used for future works.
Annual maintenance of sports ground irrigation systems ready for summer season
Clearing fire trails prior to the upcoming fire season
6.2. Next month it is anticipated that Parks and Reserves maintenance works will include:
Preparation for the Athletics Carnival at the Devonport Oval
Preparation at Roundhouse Park for Christmas and New Year‟s Eve Events
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 61 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
6.3. Mersey Vale Memorial Cemetery Interment figures to date this year are as follows:
Mersey Vale Cemetery Interment Figures 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
Jul-14 10
Burial
7.
Aug-14 12
Sep-14 9
Oct-14 4
Nov-14 5 1
Ash Interment
1
1
1
1
Monthly Total
11
13
10
5
6
13/14 Monthly Total
15
16
12
14
11
Dec-14
Jan-15
Feb-15
Mar-15
Apr-15
May-15
Jun-15
17
11
10
12
13
19
10
Building and Facilities Maintenance 7.1. Maintenance in accordance with Service Level Document undertaken in October and November included: ď&#x201A;ˇď&#x20AC;
The external boards on the Surf Club Building were stained
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 62 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
A new rubbish bin and surround was installed near the BBQ shelter at Pioneer Park in East Devonport
The trusses on the Meercroft Park building were sandblasted and painted
A new PA system was installed at Girdlestone Park which will be used primarily by Little Athletics
Upgraded the electrical switchboard for the squash courts at the Devonport Recreation Centre
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 63 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
The seats at the Mersey Bluff Precinct were re-stained
A damp course was installed and an external wall sealed at the Courthouse Café to fix rising damp issues
Christmas Decorations have been installed in various locations and the Christmas Tree was erected in the mall
The glass balustrading at the Surf Club was repaired
7.2. Next month it is anticipated that building maintenance works will include:
8.
Sand and seal the stadium floor at the Devonport Recreation Centre
Sand and seal the stadium floor at the East Devonport Recreation Centre
Annual pest control in Council‟s operational buildings
Waste Management Operations 8.1. Waste Management Services were conducted in accordance with the Service Level Document during October and November. Items of note included:
Crushing of the stockpile of concrete waste at the Spreyton Waste Transfer Station. The crush product is the consistency of gravel. It is sold to the public and is also used by Council on construction projects.
Mulching the stockpile of green waste at the Spreyton Waste Transfer Station. The mulched product is transported to Dulverton Waste Management Authority‟s composting facility at Dulverton.
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 64 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
8.2. The following graph details the volumes of waste and recycling from the domestic collection services and the total volume of waste to landfill from the Spreyton Waste Transfer Station:
Waste & Recycling Monthly Figures 1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 Domestic Waste (tonnes)
Jun-14 595
Jul-14 486
Aug-14 484
Sep-14 475
Oct-14 715
Nov-14 506
Domestic Recycling (tonnes)
131
118
122
124
132
140
Total Waste to Landfill (tonnes)
1086
1111
1114
1193
1388
1052
Dec-14
Jan-15
Feb-15
Mar-15
Apr-15
May-15
8.3. The following table details the monthly figures for the Spreyton Waste Transfer Station: Landfill Figures: Asbestos – large loads Asbestos – small loads Mattresses Vehicle Loads – up to 0.5m3 Vehicle Loads – 0.5m3 to 1.5m3 Vehicle Loads – 1.5m3 to 2m3 Truck Loads – landfill waste
June 2014 0 tonnes
July 2014 0 tonnes
August 2014 0 tonnes
Sept 2014
Oct 2014 0 tonnes
Nov 2014 0 tonnes
6m³ 87 355
13m³ 22 401
12m3 17 345
1.2 tonnes 11m3 11 417
16m3 42 649
16m3 42 533
861
745
825
879
956
811
376
299
403
408
536
503
98 tonnes
96 tonnes
82 tonnes 56 tonnes
134 tonnes 95 tonnes 868 tonnes
87 tonnes 78 tonnes 602 tonnes
76 tonnes 7 tonnes 22
32 tonnes 6 tonnes 29
Truck Loads – non-landfill waste DCC Garbage Trucks (Domestic & Commercial Collection Services) Steel Recycling
79 tonnes
103 tonnes 91 tonnes
762 tonnes
629 tonnes
110 tonnes 703 tonnes
52 tonnes
68 tonnes
48 tonnes
22 tonnes
e-Waste Tyres
10 tonnes 46
7 tonnes 26
7 tonnes 15
3 tonnes 14
586 tonnes
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT The information provided above details any issues relating to community engagement. ITEM 5.5
PAGE 65 Report to Infrastructure and Works Committee meeting on 8 December 2014
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Any financial or budgetary implications related to matters discussed in this report will be separately reported to Council.
RISK IMPLICATIONS Any specific risk implications will be outlined in the discussion above. Any specific issue that may result in 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 activities undertaken by the Infrastructure and Works Department.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
Capital Works Summary - November 2014
RECOMMENDATION That it be recommended to Council that the Infrastructure and Works report be received and noted.
Author: Position:
Kylie Lunson Infrastructure & Works Manager
Endorsed By: Position:
ITEM 5.5
Matthew Atkins Deputy General Manager
PAGE 66 Capital Works Summary - November 2014
ATTACHMENT [1]
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 67 Capital Works Summary - November 2014
ATTACHMENT [1]
ITEM 5.5
PAGE 68
6.0 CLOSURE There being no further business the Chairman declared the meeting closed at
ITEM 6.0
pm.