Agenda of Council Meeting - Tuesday, 2 November 2021

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

MINUTES OF THE

Ordinary Council Meeting

HELD IN Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Byng Street, Orange

ON 19 October 2021

COMMENCING AT 7.00pm

Attendance

Cr R Kidd (Mayor), Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Munro, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Romano, Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Chief Executive Officer, Director Corporate and Commercial Services, Director Development Services, Director Community, Recreation and Cultural Services, Director Technical Services, Chief Financial Officer, Works Manager, A/Manager Corporate Governance, A/Executive Support Manager, Executive Support Administration Officer

1.1 APOLOGIES

RESOLVED - 21/376 Cr J Hamling/Cr J Whitton

That the apologies be accepted from Cr G Taylor for the Council Meeting of Orange City Council on 19 October 2021.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

1.2 LIVESTREAMING AND RECORDING

The Mayor advised that the meeting was being livestreamed and recorded.

1.3 OPENING PRAYER

John Baker of the Orange Church of Christ led the Council in prayer.

1.4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

The Mayor conducted an Acknowledgement of Country.

1.5 Declaration of pecuniary interests, significant non-pecuniary interests and less than significant non-pecuniary interests

Cr S Munro declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary interest in Item 5.6 - Local Housing Strategy and will leave the Chamber for voting as he has association with people that may have a pecuniary interest in the future.

THE MAYOR DECLARED THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ADJOURNED FOR THE CONDUCT OF THE OPEN FORUM AT 7.PM.

Kayla Clanchy – Agenda Items 4.2 – Social and Affordable Housing and Item 5.6 – Local Housing Strategy

THE MAYOR DECLARED THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL RESUMED AT 7.10PM.

2 Mayoral Minutes

2.1 Orange City Council New Years Eve Laser Event

TRIM Reference: 2021/2428

RESOLVED - 21/377 Cr R Kidd/Cr K Duffy

That the information contained in this Mayoral Minute be acknowledged.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

2.2 Sculpture Park

TRIM Reference: 2021/2429

RESOLVED - 21/378 Cr R Kidd/Cr S Nugent

That the information contained in this Mayoral Minute be acknowledged.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

3 Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

RESOLVED - 21/379 Cr J Whitton/Cr S Nugent

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Orange City Council held on 5 October 2021 (copies of which were circulated to all members) be and are hereby confirmed as a true and accurate record of the proceedings of the Council meeting held on 5 October 2021.

MATTER ARISING Cr S Nugent

Cr Nugent made the meeting aware that the minutes of 5 October 2021 had in error in the resolution of Item 4.1 where the Amendment became the Motion and the Motion was carried. The resolution was recorded incorrectly and needs to be corrected to indicate the amended motion.

4 Notices of Motion/Notices of Rescission

4.1 Notice of Motion - Solar my School

TRIM Reference: 2021/2298

MOTION Cr S Nugent/Cr S Munro

That Council:

1 Liaises with schools in the Orange LGA to determine interest in being involved in the Solar my School program

2 Determines the appropriate model for local implementation of the Solar my School (SmS) program based on the SmS Proposal Document and liaison with the SmS Manager

3 Agrees to join the Solar my School program subject to outcome of these investigations.

THE MOTION ON BEING PUT TO THE MEETING WAS LOST.

For: Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro

Against: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano, Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Absent: Cr G Taylor

4.2 Notice of Motion - Social and Affordable Housing

TRIM Reference: 2021/2299

Motion Cr S Nugent/Cr S Munro

That Council opts into the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 70 – Affordable Housing (Revised Schemes) (SEPP 70) and develops an Affordable Housing Contribution Scheme to help address the critical shortage of social and affordable housing in the city.

THE MOTION ON BEING PUT TO THE MEETING WAS LOST.

For: Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro

Against: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano, Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Absent: Cr G Taylor

MATTER ARISING Cr K Duffy

That a report be brought to Council detailing the legislation that has been recently taken to Parliament regarding Developer contributions.

4.3 Notice of Motion - Investigation into Stocking Stormwater Harvesting Wetlands with Fish Species

TRIM Reference: 2021/2342

RESOLVED - 21/380 Cr S Romano/Cr K Duffy

That staff investigate the stocking of stormwater harvesting wetlands with appropriate fish species including trout, silver perch and golden perch in line with NSW regulations.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

5 General Reports

5.1 Recommendations and Resolutions from Policy Committees

TRIM Reference: 2020/2579

RESOLVED - 21/381 Cr K Duffy/Cr J Whitton

1 That the resolutions made by the Planning and Development Committee at its meeting held on 5 October 2021 be noted.

2 That the resolutions made by the Employment and Economic Development Policy Committee at its meeting held on 5 October 2021 be noted.

3 That the resolutions made by the Infrastructure Policy Committee at its meeting held on 5 October 2021 be noted.

2 That the resolutions made by the Sport and Recreation Policy Committee at its meeting held on 5 October 2021 be noted.

4 That the resolutions made by the Environmental Sustainability Policy Committee at its meeting held on 5 October 2021 be noted.

5 That the resolutions made by the Finance Policy Committee at its meeting held on 5 October 2021 be noted.

6 That the resolutions made by the Services Policy Committee at its meeting held on 5 October 2021 be noted.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

5.2 Register of Disclosures - Interests of Councillors and Designated Persons

TRIM Reference: 2021/1812

RESOLVED - 21/382 Cr K Duffy/Cr J Whitton

That the Register of Returns for the period 1 July 2020 – 30 June 2021 disclosing interests of Councillors and Designated Persons, which will be made available on Council’s website with appropriate redaction, be acknowledged.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

5.3 Update on Outstanding Resolutions of Council including Questions Taken on Notice and Notices of Motions.

TRIM Reference: 2021/249

RESOLVED - 21/383 Cr J Hamling/Cr S Munro

That the information provided in the report by the Director Corporate and Commercial Services on Outstanding and Completed Notices of Motion, Questions of Notice and Matters arising be acknowledged.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

Cr Duffy asked when would a report on the state of our rural roads (level of grading) which he had previously raised be coming to Council.

Director Technical Services said that there is a report in tonight’s Council meeting papers that discusses the work Council has done on rural roads and an update in the current works report to be brought to the Council Meeting of 2 November 2021.

Cr Nugent asked about where staff were up to in regard to investigating options for achieving greater use of recycling materials in roads and pavements.

Director Technical Services said that there was an information-only report going to a November 2021 Council meeting and that the information was also provided to Councillors via email.

5.4 Councillor Attendance, Training and Compliance

TRIM Reference: 2021/2196

RESOLVED - 21/384 Cr S Nugent/Cr J Whitton

That Council note the report on Councillor Attendance, Training and Compliance.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

5.5 Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee (ARIC) - Independent Members - Extension of Current Tenure, Remuneration and Expressions of Interest for Next Tenure

TRIM Reference: 2021/2192

RESOLVED - 21/385 Cr K Duffy/Cr J Whitton

1 That Council extends the appointment of Mr Phillip Burgett and Mr Bill Gillooly AM as the two independent members of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee until December 2021.

2 That the remuneration for the independent members of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee be set at:

Independent Chairperson - per meeting	$1,098.00 (ex GST)
Independent Member - per meeting	$888.00 (ex GST)
All travel costs for independent members and chairperson to attend Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee meetings are to be at the km rate in the Local Government State Award for use of own vehicles.

3 That Expressions of Interest be called for next tenure of independent members (including chairperson) of Council’s Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

5.6 Local Housing Strategy

TRIM Reference: 2021/1196

Cr Munro declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary interest in this Item and left the Chamber for voting as he has association with people that may have a pecuniary interest in the future.

RESOLVED - 21/386 Cr S Nugent/Cr J Whitton

That Council note the contents of this report and resolve to place the draft Orange Local Housing Strategy on public exhibition closing at 5.00pm on Monday 21 February 2022.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano, Cr R Turner,

Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor, Cr S Munro

Cr Nugent asked if the new Council was to develop an Affordable Housing Contributions Scheme what would be the process the new Council would follow after the exhibition period.

Director Development Services said that one of the actions in the draft housing strategy is the development of a policy that would consider Affordable Housing Contributions Schemes, the procedure behind that would be once the new Council adopts the Housing Strategy (identified as a short term timing schedule), it would progress into a policy to bring back to the new Council. It would be a contribution plan that would be extra to the $20,000 per block developer contribution cap that was discussed in the Public Forum. The Policy would be brought back to Council for consideration and exhibition at the time. So it is an additional policy that would fall out of this Strategy. The recommendation for this item is supposed to read Monday 21 February 2022.

Cr Nugent asked referencing on page 214 item 4 Support for the Supply of affordable housing prepare and endorse affordable housing policy for development contributions via voluntary planning agreements (VPA’s) and reference to “short term”.

Director Development Services responded by saying that it is definitely in the implementation and delivery section of the Strategy. Matter that we would progress fairly quickly and the first stage would be analysis of data to determine or ensure we are putting the resources in the right area, don’t want to bring in a strategy/policy that isnt going to deliver on the items including affordable housing.

Cr Mileto acknowledged that we are relying on Census information from 2016, but asked when does the Census information for 2021 become available (12 months?); why don’t we wait until more relevant information is available

Director Development Services responded by saying that this definately highlights a tricky part of the development of this Strategy. Council prepared the Strategy document based on the requirements of a policy written by the Government, which requires use of the last ABS census data. Would we wait the 12 to 18 months? No, we need to set direction now, so we have allowed for this data gap by carrying out a 5 year review of the Strategy. We keep moving, as we like to keep a minimum of 15-20 years of housing stock availablilty in the City.

Cr Mileto when was the last review?

Director Development Services responded saying 2011. This draft Strategy was written to be reviewed more frequently and to line up with the review of other key documents like the Water Cylce Management Plan, that are a key part of Orange’s growth.

CEO stated that the last big strategy was written in 2004, 2011 was a basic update (review).

Cr Nugent asked when the new Census data is out would Council review the need for any changes, Council wouldn’t wait 5 years would it to update the document.

Director Development Services replied by saying that it is a higher level strategic document, that focus is on how many blocks are needed per year, However the policies and actions that arise from the Strategy would consider the most available Census data at the time of their drafting.

5.7 Projects Activities October 2021

TRIM Reference: 2021/1907

RESOLVED - 21/387 Cr K Duffy/Cr J Hamling

That the information in the report on Projects be acknowledged.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

MATTER ARISING Cr J Whitton/Cr R Kidd

That the Summary on Projects Activities be altered accordingly and circulated to media outlets for publication to the community.

Cr Mileto asked why do some footpaths appear to be 1-2 metres wide and others not as wide.

Manager Works responded by saying that the 1.2 m wide footpaths follow the appropriate Austroad standards and this is what gets Council “the most bang for our buck”. 2.5m paths are constructed to promote shared cycling and walking on the same path.

5.8 Transport Road Network - Term in Review

TRIM Reference: 2021/2193

RESOLVED - 21/388 Cr J Hamling/Cr K Duffy

That the report on Transport Road Network – Term in Review be acknowledged.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

MATTER ARISING Cr J Whitton

That the Transport Road Network – Term in Review be altered accordingly and circulated to media outlets for publication to the community.

5.9 Lease Hangar Site Lot 5 DP 805597 Orange Airport

TRIM Reference: 2021/2251

RESOLVED - 21/389 Cr S Munro/Cr R Turner

That Council resolves:

1 To enter into a lease of Hangar Site Lot 5 DP 805597 for a term of 5 years plus 2, 5 year options.

2 That approval be granted for the use of the Council Seal on all relevant documents.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

5.10 Statement of Investments - September 2021

TRIM Reference: 2021/2273

RESOLVED - 21/390 Cr K Duffy/Cr S Munro

That Council resolves:

1 To note the Statement of Investments as at 30 September 2021.

2 To adopt the certification of the Responsible Accounting Officer.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

Cr Kidd asked if there were many unpaid rates

Chief Financial Officer responded by saying that Council had not seen any great drop off in rate payments. The next Quarterly Review will have details but certainly no cashflow issues.

5.11 Fees for use of the retail pods under Future Cities

TRIM Reference: 2021/2275

RESOLVED - 21/391 Cr S Nugent/Cr J Whitton

That Council:

1. Adopt the fees as recommended.

2. Place the fees on public exhibition for 28 days.

3. Endorse the fee for service payment to Biz HQ for providing the start-up business placement service for the use of the pods.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

Cr Duffy asked where were the pods going to be located

Director Technical Services responded by saying that they were being located in the McNamara St carpark, so both facilities will sit over that setback from the footpath where the carparks start, they will not take up a car space only one motorbike space.

Cr Kidd asked if the figures were a rate per day

Director Corporate and Commercial Services said that yes they are a rate per day.

Cr Mileto asked what is the proposal in terms of type of businesses allowed to hire these pods

Director Technical Services said that while they are not intended to be set up as professional offices, if Council was of the opinion there was a demand for that type of facility this could be explored. They are all air conditioned and they have water supply and sewage connected as well. There is currently an existing business that provides office space in McNamara Lane and we wouldn’t want to compete directly with such a business.

Cr Mileto asked if there was any interest expressed to date

Director Corporate and Commercial Services said that Council is in talks with BizHQ and half a dozen prospecitive busnesses that could move into these facilities had expressed an interest.

5.12 Development Application DA 362/2021(1) - 10 Fahy Crescent

TRIM Reference: 2021/2282

RESOLVED - 21/392 Cr K Duffy/Cr S Nugent

That Council consents to development application DA 362/2021(1) for Dwelling (two storey), Retaining Walls and Swim Spa at Lot 302 DP 1273534 - 10 Fahy Crescent, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

Cr Duffy asked within the 60 days 14 days are advertising which leaves a 40 day space, is that taken into account with these approval figures

Director Development Services said that the statistics that are reported annually include all DA’s across the board, it’s a total figure, the straightforward ones we try to turn around as quickly as we can. This week we are at 123 DA’s outstanding with a total value of around $72M of works still to be assessed.

CEO - During the 60 days we could have gone back to the applicant to confirm or to provide additional information relating to the DA and that information may take 20 days to come back.

6 Closed Meeting

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in Section 10A(2) of the Act, and should be dealt with in a Confidential Session of the Council meeting closed to the press and public.

In response to a question from the Mayor, the Chief Executive Officer advised that no written submissions had been received relating to any item listed for consideration by the Closed Meeting of Council.

The Mayor extended an invitation to any member of the public present at the meeting to make a presentation to the Council as to whether the meeting should be closed for a particular item.

Recommendation

That Council adjourn into a Closed Meeting and members of the press and public be excluded from the Closed Meeting, and access to the correspondence and reports relating to the items considered during the course of the Closed Meeting be withheld unless declassified by separate resolution. This action is taken in accordance with Section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act, 1993 as the items listed come within the following provisions:

6.1 Acquisition of Easement - Lot 22 DP756899 - Lake Canobolas to Orange Water and Sewer Pipeline

This item is classified CONFIDENTIAL under the provisions of Section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act 1993, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to (c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

6.2 Tender for the Construction of the Sieben Drive Sewer Pump Station

The Mayor declared the Ordinary Meeting of Council adjourned for the conduct of the Closed Meeting at 8.50pm.

The Mayor declared the Ordinary Meeting of Council resumed at 8.57pm.

The Mayor read out to the meeting a letter he had received from the Premier of NSW, Gladys Berejiklian in response to his correspondence to her regarding holding a covid safe local government election.

7 Resolutions from Closed Meeting

The Chief Executive Officer read out the following resolutions made in the Closed Meeting of Council.

6.1 Acquisition of Easement - Lot 22 DP756899 - Lake Canobolas to Orange Water and Sewer Pipeline

TRIM Reference: 2021/2211

RESOLVED - 21/393 Cr S Munro/Cr R Turner

That Council resolves:

1 To acquire an easement for water and sewer over Lot 22 DP756899 for construction of the Lake Canobolas to Orange Water and Sewer Pipeline in accordance with the details and recommendation outlined in this report.

2 To delegate to the Chief Executive Office such authority as may be necessary or convenient to give effect to this resolution, including without limitation, the affixing of the seal of the Council on any document if required.

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

6.2 Tender for the Construction of the Sieben Drive Sewer Pump Station

TRIM Reference: 2021/2313

RESOLVED - 21/394 Cr S Munro/Cr S Nugent

That the Chief Executive Officer enter into a standard contract with Qmax Pumping Systems Pty Ltd for the Construction of the Sieben Drive Sewer Pump Station for the amount of $561,160.00 (excl. GST).

For: Cr R Kidd, Cr K Duffy, Cr J Hamling, Cr S Nugent, Cr S Munro, Cr T Mileto, Cr S Romano,

Cr R Turner, Cr J Whitton

Against: Nil

Absent: Cr G Taylor

Cr Nugent asked if the members of community committees would be thanked for their contribution over this term

The Chief Executive Officer responded saying that yes a letter of thanks would be sent to all Community Committee members

The Meeting Closed at 9.00pm.

This is Page Number 14 and the Final Page of the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Orange City Council held on 19 October 2021.

Council Meeting 2 November 2021

5 General Reports

5.1 Bulky Waste Services-2021 Comparison

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/1794

AUTHOR: Wayne Davis, Manager Waste Services and Technical Support

EXECUTIVE Summary

In 2021, the Orange community was provided with two alternative options to dispose of household bulky wastes. Resulting from a Councillor Notice of Motion in 2020, Council resolved at its meeting of 15 December 2020:

RESOLVED - 20/001 Cr G Taylor/Cr S Romano

That Council resolves:

1 To allow residents and ratepayers to deliver bulk household waste/goods to the Ophir Road Resource Recovery Centre free of charge over weekends to be determined.

2 That this service be limited to a Ute Load/Table Top or 6 x 4 Trailer load.

Council will recall that in 2016, Orange residents were given a free waste disposal day at the Ophir Road Resource Recovery Centre. This resulted in significant traffic congestion, increased servicing of the receival bins and general patron dissatisfaction due to the extended delays at the weighbridge. In order to mitigate these previous issues of the free waste day and to satisfy the resolution of Council, a voucher system to allow residents one free trip to the waste facility to dispose of their eligible load of waste was provided and available from 18 January until 30 June 2021. Residents were able to collect their voucher from the Council Customer Service desk whilst providing proof of residency and deliver their waste over this extended period and thereby negate the problems previously experienced by concentrating the free disposal to one day of the year.

The second option provided to Orange residents during 2021 was the scheduled Kerbside Bulky Waste Service supplied by J R Richards & Sons under the Domestic Waste & Recycling Contract. This service was provided at the request of the Council after a five year absence of the service as it was replaced with a “user-pay” option that allowed residents to call on the service at their convenience under the current contract. The scheduled Kerbside Bulky Waste Service was held over the month of February 2021 and this report provides a comparison of the two Bulky Waste Services for the information of the Council.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “8.3 Preserve - Promote the range of recycling services”.

Financial Implications

The voucher system of allowing free waste disposal to Orange residents cost the Waste Services program $25,662.55 in lost income over the period of January to June 2021. The cost of the scheduled kerbside Bulky Waste Service is met via the rates charges applied to the Orange residential rate base at a cost of $11.35/service and thereby does not impact the Waste Services program. The scheduled Kerbside Bulky Waste Service also results in greater waste diversion from landfill and resource recovery whilst the voucher system of delivering mixed household wastes results in little to no resource recovery and significant landfill of all delivered materials thereby consuming valuable landfill capacity.

Policy and Governance Implications

Council should consider the costs of these additional service options and waste diversion outcomes in deliberating on whether to continue with any form of Bulky Waste Service in the future beyond 2022. For the information of Council, allowance has been made for another scheduled Bulky Waste Collection Service via the rates system for March 2022 at a cost of $11.60 per residential Assessment.

Recommendation

1 That Council maintain the contract provision of “User-Pay” Bulky Waste Disposal whereby residents may choose to purchase a ticket for the collection and disposal of Bulky Waste from the footpath at any agreed time between the resident and the waste contractor in accordance with the parameters of the service.

2 That the future of Kerbside Bulky Waste Service and/or a voucher system that allows residents to deliver their waste (up to 2 cubic metres in volume and within acceptance parameters) to the Ophir Road Resource Recovery Centre be considered by the incoming Council in their 2022/23 budget considerations.

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The following data compilation is provided to Council as a summary of waste volumes and community uptake of the two variants of Bulky Waste disposal service options provided in 2021 to assist with determination of the future provision of any such service beyond 2022.

The table below provides a breakdown of the number of waste, scrap steel and whitegoods collected from the scheduled kerbside Bulky Waste Service held over February whereby each of the ten (10) collection zones within the City were provided with a three pass collection regime to collect the three acceptable segregated waste streams. The attached maps indicate the ten collection zones which provides a good complimentary overview of community uptake of the service throughout the City.

	Waste		Steel			Whitegoods
Day	Number of Pickups	Tonnes	Number of Pickups	Tonnes	Number of Items		Tonnes
Monday A	352	7.85	267	4.86	9		0.89
Tuesday A	95	1.89	35	1.1	6		0.47
Wednesday A	930	42.85	784	30.25	45		3.98
Thursday A	360	12.47	414	12.1	20		1.14
Friday A	582	18.8	671	21.91	13		0.94
Monday B	1,368	55.91	1,015	40.8	45		3.47
Tuesday B	375	6.8	210	3.1	13		0.97
Wednesday B	270	5.25	135	4.98	10		0.99
Thursday B	1,266	48.89	797	13.68	21		1.17
Friday B	736	35.14	694	13.08	30		2.89
Total	6,334	235.85	5,022	145.86	212		16.91

There were potentially 16,682 services that could have been rendered to the Orange residential rate base (all of which paid $11.3505 for the service) however, the actual number of services rendered for each collection area fell well short of a maximum uptake. For example, there was 6,334 collections of general waste which equates to a 37.97% uptake. Similarly, there were 5,022 collections of scrap steel which equates to a 30.10% uptake. Whitegoods only represent 1.27% of the collected materials.

At best, with less than 38% of the Orange residential rate base utilising the service (with 100% of the rate base having paid for the service) one would best describe the service as being utilised at a “moderate” uptake.

In relation to the voucher system utilised between 18 January to 30 June 2021, there were 674 vouchers presented to the Ophir Road Resource Recovery Centre weighbridge from the 1,194 collected from Council (56.4% presentation rate). Advice from weighbridge staff indicates that the split of waste volumes was approximately 50/50 in relation to full utes/trailers versus partially full utes/trailers.

As Council is aware, any waste delivered to the Ophir Road facility that is destined for landfill results in a fee being applied which covers the cost of landfill and associated pre-processing. More than 95% of the material delivered by the resident was landfillable waste and not recoverable. This equated to an equivalent cost of $25,662.55 which was absorbed by the Waste Services Program area. Aside from this negative outcome from providing the “free waste disposal” service under the voucher Bulky Waste disposal offering, the relatively poor uptake of the service and associated resource recovery does not compare as favourably as the scheduled service which has a higher uptake, no cost impact on the Waste Services Program area and affords better resource recovery all rendered over a shorter window period of one (1) month. The following table provides Council with an overview of where initial interest in utilising the voucher system was taken from residents across the ten (10) collection zones of the City.

Areas	Vouchers Collected
A Monday	136
B Monday	112
A Tuesday	79
B Tuesday	75
A Wednesday	147
B Wednesday	113
A Thursday	110
B Thursday	116
A Friday	167
B Friday	139
Total	1194 674 presented = 56.4% uptake

Whilst the voucher system prevents waste from being presented on the footpath which has potential impacts from a social, amenity, pollution and insurance perspective, its utilisation is very limited, resource recovery is minimal and the administration of voucher production, issue and reconciliation is resource intensive.

Major stakeholders within the waste industry such as service providers and regulatory authorities (Environment Protection Authority) prefer to recommend alternative collection and resource recovery systems that result in targeted, cost effective and higher resource recovery options that maintain greater control over environmental factors such as pollution and amenity impact. Council provides these services through the three bin kerbside collection system, recovery shop operations, community recycling centre, household hazardous waste facility, green waste, scrap steel and construction and demolition waste drop off points at the Ophir Road Resource Recovery Centre.

For all of the aforementioned reasons, this is why Council adopted in the current domestic waste and recycling contract in 2015 to make provision for those residents who don’t have a means of delivering bulky waste to the Ophir Road facility a “user-pay” ticket system that allows removal of up to two (2) cubic metres of waste from the kerbside at a mutually convenient time with the contactor. The current ‘user-pay” ticket service cost is $220.25 which reflects the actual cost for the Service Contractor to collect and dispose of two (2) cubic metres of waste. This results in a more equitable utilisation of the service which by all accounts is only warranted by a moderate percentage of the residential rate base on rare occasions.

Attachments

1 Waste Services Program - Collection Zones, D21/65295 ⇩

Council Meeting 2 November 2021

5.4 Request for Financial Assistance - Event Sponsorship Funding Round 2 - Events 1 October to 31 December 2021

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/2308

AUTHOR: Sharon D'Elboux, Manager Business Development

EXECUTIVE Summary

Council has received an additional application for Event Sponsorship for the second-round of 2021/2022 events to be held in Orange between October and December 2021. The report is coming before Council for determination.

This report summaries these applications for Council’s consideration.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “11.2 Prosper - Develop and attract a variety of events, festivals, venues and activities for locals and visitors, ensuring accessibility for all”.

Financial Implications

The Event Sponsorship Program budget for the 2021/22 financial year is $100,000, from which $58,526 has been allocated to date.

Policy and Governance Implications

Council can assist other organisations financially (in cash or in kind) in accordance with section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Council's Strategic Policy - ST144 - Event Sponsorship Program and its related Event Sponsorship Program Guidelines are used to assess applications for Event Sponsorship.

Recommendation

That Council resolves:

1 That funding of $5,000 be made from the Event Sponsorship Program to Book Orange for the Pre Loved Market Day event.

2 That Council's intention to donate $5,000 to Book Orange be placed on public exhibition for 28 days.

3 That Council's Chief Executive Officer be given delegation to finalise determination for the Event Sponsorship to Book Orange post exhibition.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

In the Events Sponsorship Program Strategic Policy and guidelines, the following categories exist to support assessment of applications received:

Category	Description
Incubator Event Fund	Provides seed funding to events in their first or second year of activity. Funding range is $1,000 to $5,000.
Flagship Event Fund	Identifies and assists the development of events that contribute to the unique character and culture of the Orange360 tourism region and can demonstrate that they attract overnight visitation. Funding range is $1,000 to $10,000.
Event Development Fund	Supports events that have already received funding from Council in previous years and can present a comprehensive strategy for future growth that includes the continued development of its tourism potential to drive overnight visitation to the event. Funding range is $1,000 to $10,000.
Quick Response Event Fund	Provides seed funding and/or support to events that occur as new and unplanned opportunity for Orange and have not met the funding rounds as outlined below. Funding range is $1,000 to $20,000.

Application Number ESP21/10	Book Orange
Not for profit (yes/no)	No
Event name	Book Orange’s Pre Loved Market Day
Event date/s	21 November 2021
Level of participation	300 attendees
Ticketed event	Yes
Amount requested	$5,000
Category and Category range	Incubator Event Fund - $1,000 to $5,000
Aligned with Community Strategic Plan	Yes
Comment and recommendation Book Orange’s Pre Loved Market Day, a community event connecting women and sustainable fashion alternatives. Held at Councils South court precinct, local businesses will hold stores and local musicians will be performing. Funds raised at the event will be donated to The Orchard managed by Housing Plus. This event will comply with NSW Health Orders in place at the time of the event and be managed under a Covid-19 safe plan. This is a new application to Council and in line with policy, $5,000 is recommended. No request to cover the hire fees has been made. These are payable to Orange City Council. As the organiser of this event is not recognised as not-for-profit, exhibition of the proposed funding is required.

Attachments

1 CCL 2 November 2021 - infocouncil attachment - Incubator Event Application - Book Orange, D21/65922 ⇩

Council Meeting 2 November 2021

5.5 Delegations to the CEO 04 December 2021 - 01 February 2022

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/2277

AUTHOR: Catherine Davis, Acting Manager Corporate Governance

EXECUTIVE Summary

Under the Local Government Act 1993, all current Councillors (except the Mayor) cease to hold their civic office on election day 4 December 2021. This means that Council will be without a governing body from 4 December 2021 until the anticipated 22 December 2021 declaration of the election. This report seeks Council’s delegation to the Chief Executive Officer to exercise the functions of Council as required in the period between election day and the first meeting of Council which currently will be 01 February 2022.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “17.1 Collaborate - Provide representative, responsible and accountable community governance”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Under Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 Council may, by resolution, delegate to the CEO any delegable function under this Act.

Recommendation

That Council resolves to delegate any permissible delegable function under the Local Government Act 1993 to the Chief Executive Officer (those delegations currently in place) for the period 05 December 2021 through to the first meeting of the new Council which is currently scheduled for 01 February 2021.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Given the timing of the Local Government Elections this year, the declaration of Council elections will coincide with the Christmas/New Year period and the first meeting of Council is currently not scheduled until 01 February 2022. It has been recommended by the Office of Local Government that Councils ensure appropriate delegations are in place for Chief Executive Officers/General Managers to be able to exercise the functions of the Council as required in this hiatus period between election day and the first meeting of the Council following the election.

For the information of Councillors, Section 377 (1) of the Local Government Act states that the following functions are NOT able to be delegated to the Chief Executive Officer:

377 General power of the council to delegate

(1) A council may, by resolution, delegate to the general manager or any other person or body (not including another employee of the council) any of the functions of the council under this or any other Act, other than the following—

(a) the appointment of a general manager,

(b) the making of a rate,

(d) the making of a charge,

(e) the fixing of a fee,

(f) the borrowing of money,

(g) the voting of money for expenditure on its works, services or operations,

(h) the compulsory acquisition, purchase, sale, exchange or surrender of any land or other property (but not including the sale of items of plant or equipment),

(i) the acceptance of tenders to provide services currently provided by members of staff of the council,

(j) the adoption of an operational plan under section 405,

(k) the adoption of a financial statement included in an annual financial report,

(l) a decision to classify or reclassify public land under Division 1 of Part 2 of Chapter 6,

(m) the fixing of an amount or rate for the carrying out by the council of work on private land,

(n) the decision to carry out work on private land for an amount that is less than the amount or rate fixed by the council for the carrying out of any such work,

(o) the review of a determination made by the council, and not by a delegate of the council, of an application for approval or an application that may be reviewed under section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,

(p) the power of the council to authorise the use of reasonable force for the purpose of gaining entry to premises under section 194,

(q) a decision under section 356 to contribute money or otherwise grant financial assistance to persons,

(r) a decision under section 234 to grant leave of absence to the holder of a civic office,

(s) the making of an application, or the giving of a notice, to the Governor or Minister,

(t) this power of delegation,

(u) any function under this or any other Act that is expressly required to be exercised by resolution of the council.

(1A) Despite subsection (1), a council may delegate its functions relating to the granting of financial assistance if—

(a) the financial assistance is part of a specified program, and

(b) the program is included in the council’s draft operational plan for the year in which the financial assistance is proposed to be given, and

(c) the program’s proposed budget for that year does not exceed 5 per cent of the council’s proposed income from the ordinary rates levied for that year, and

(d) the program applies uniformly to all persons within the council’s area or to a significant proportion of all the persons within the council’s area.

(2) A council may, by resolution, sub-delegate to the general manager or any other person or body (not including another employee of the council) any function delegated to the council by the Departmental Chief Executive except as provided by the instrument of delegation to the council.

(3) A council may delegate functions to a joint organisation only with the approval, by resolution, of the board of the joint organisation.

Council Meeting 2 November 2021

5.6 Development of the Safe and Secure Water Program - Cabonne, Orange and Central Tablelands Water - Regional Town Water Strategy

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/2314

AUTHOR: Wayne Beatty, Water and Sewerage Strategic Manager

EXECUTIVE Summary

This report seeks Council approval to proceed with the development of a Regional Town Water Strategy (RTWS) in partnership with Orange City Council, Cabonne Council (Cabonne) and Central Tablelands Water (CTW). The RTWS, which is part of DPIE Water’s Safe and Secure Water Program version 2, Stream 2 funding, provides the opportunity for Local Water Utilities (LWU’s) to develop a regional approach to long-term water security, which extends beyond the boundaries of individual LWU’s.

The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment – Water (DPIE Water) will be funding 75% of the cost of developing the strategy, with the remaining 25% proposed to be shared equally between the three participating LWU’s (DPIE Water funding eligibility letter attached). The estimated order of cost of developing the strategy is between $400,000 and $600,000, which would require a funding commitment from each LWU of between $33,000 and $50,000.

In order to progress development of the strategy, DPIE Water requires an In-Principle Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to be prepared which details the commitment to the project by all three Councils.

A draft MOU has been circulated to each of the three participating Councils, with the aim of discussing any proposed changes and gaining In-Principle Agreement. The draft MOU, for endorsement by Council, is included as an attachment to this report.

This will then enable tenders to be called for the development of the strategy, which is expected to take at least 12 months to complete.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “8.1 Preserve - Identify and deliver essential water, waste and sewer infrastructure to service the community into the future”.

Financial Implications

An estimated commitment of $33,000 to $50,000 from Orange City Council Water Fund which is likely to be recouped through savings of at least this magnitude in the preparation of the updated Integrated Water Cycle Management Plan (IWCM Plan).

Policy and Governance Implications

Expands on the existing Cabonne, Blayney Orange alliance with CTW representing Blayney as their local water utility. The project also has support from the Central JO and DPIE Water.

Recommendation

That Council:

1 Note the report on the project “Development of the Safe and Secure Water Program – Orange City Council, Cabonne Council and Central Tablelands Water Regional Town Water Strategy (SSWP270)”.

2 Agree to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (draft included in this report D21/65347) for the project “Development of the Safe and Secure Water Program – Orange City Council, Cabonne Council and Central Tablelands Water Regional Town Water Strategy (SSWP270)”.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Background

Introduction

Cabonne Council (Cabonne) and Central Tablelands Water (CTW) commissioned an assessment into potential opportunities to develop a more integrated approach to water supply across the footprint of the two organisations. This assessment also recognised that Orange City Council (OCC) has water supply connections in place to both the Cabonne and CTW networks, and so was included in considerations relating to a future regional water supply network.

Key Issues

Cabonne are looking at future options for the management and operation of the Molong/Cumnock/Yeoval potable water supply system. This is a small-scale system with relatively large-scale infrastructure, resulting in high ongoing operational and ownership costs. Options for potentially linking this supply into either the CTW water supply system or the OCC water supply system need to be explored.

Central Tablelands Water is focussed on augmenting Lake Rowlands to increase its long-term supply and drought resilience capacity. Lake Rowlands is the key water supply source for the whole CTW network, with water treated at the nearby Blayney and Carcoar Water Treatment Plants (WTP’s).

The augmentation of Lake Rowlands offers a potentially significant additional regional water supply source option which needs to be further explored, not just to supply the CTW network, but also share with existing and potential interlinking pipeline connections with other neighbouring Local Water Utilities (LWU’s).

The CTW network covers a large area, with many towns connected by a single supply pipeline. This presents a risk to towns at the extremities of this network should supply be interrupted and its backup bore system fail. Options for improving security and resilience of supply to these towns, specifically Cudal and Manildra, should be explored through the development a strategic two-way interconnection with the Molong Water Supply network, similar to the Parkes-Forbes-CTW pipeline project currently being developed.

Orange City Council already has potable water supply connections to both CTW and the Molong Water Supply system, with the latter ensuring Molong’s water supply was maintained during the recent drought. Therefore, any long-term investigation into an integrated regional water supply system should also include OCC. Connection to a regional water supply network, with numerous potential additional water sources, will provide options for OCC to consider in order to improve its overall future water supply security.

Strategic Water Review Stage 1 Report

A high-level Strategic Water Review across the operational areas of the Cabonne, CTW and OCC water utilities was completed in January 2021. This report identifies potential opportunities for better integration of the three water supply networks.

A copy of the Strategic Water Review Stage 1 Report (including appendices) is attached.

The report identified that the study area lends itself to analysis as three discrete water supply zones, based on existing water supply infrastructure and topography.

The three water supply zones have been identified as:

· North Zone – centred on the Molong water supply system;

· West Zone – the lower end of the CTW water supply network; and

· East Zone – the upper section of the CTW and OCC water supply networks.

These zones, as well as an emergency supply connection to Cowra and the OCC zone are illustrated on the next page. The approach taken was to examine the capacity of each zone to operate in isolation as well as part of an inter-connected regional network, with any potential water supply excess within one zone capable of being transferred to an adjacent zone which requires additional water.

Each zone has identified capacity for supply to be diversified and/or augmented by:

· maximising the use of existing water supplies and associated infrastructure;

· assessing the potential to re-instate existing supplies which are currently not operational; and/or

· exploring options for development of new localised solutions.

Map

Description automatically generated

Options and Scenario Development

A range of water supply options were identified within each of the three zones, with the options then bundled into a number of scenarios, with a preferred scenario, Scenario A, being identified.

This scenario:

· maximises the use of existing infrastructure across the region;

· decentralises water supply capacity across the network;

· maximises and diversifies water treatment capacity;

· results in the Molong WTP becoming the key potable supply point for the West and North Zones;

· provides for smaller scale water supply options to be progressively developed within the West and North Zones, which are appropriate for the smaller demands and dispersed nature of the demand centres in these zones;

· provides for the development of longer-term, larger scale projects in the East Zone (such as the upgrade to Lake Rowlands) to meet the increased demands within this zone, especially in Orange, and also provide benefits across the entire network; and

· reduces demand on supplies in the East Zone from the North and West Zones to ensure the East Zone can adequately meet future demands.

Scenario A is illustrated below in Fig 2

Map

Description automatically generated

Figure 2 Scenario A

This scenario provides decentralised water treatment capacity across the region, ensuring the Molong WTP continues to play a key local role in supplying water to the North Zone, as well as having additional capacity to also supply potable water to the West Zone, especially Manildra, Cudal and possibly Cargo. This will also improve the water security of towns in the West Zone and improve supply reliability due to the relatively short distance between the Molong WTP and these towns. This would justify the cost of upgrading and potentially expanding its treatment capacity.

Raw water supplies in the North Zone will need to be enhanced by the development of additional water sources as well as undertaking necessary dam safety/upgrade works at Molong Creek Dam to ensure it can continue to play a key role as the main water supply for the North and West Zones. Upgrading the raw water pipeline from Molong Creek Dam to Molong would also be required.

The upgrading of Lake Rowlands can focus on the benefits this project brings to the major population areas in the East Zone, especially Orange. In addition, it also has the capacity to enhance the reliability of supply to the West Zone and act as a region-wide back-up to the entire network through the interconnection between the existing CTW and Molong/Cumnock/Yeoval water supply networks.

Development of a Regional Town Water Strategy (RTWS)

A detailed evaluation of the options outlined in Scenario A is now required to fully understand the key issues associated with each option, with the aim of developing an overall action plan for delivery of each viable option within Scenario A within the DPIE Water Regional Town Water Strategy (RTWS) framework.

The outcomes of this strategy will provide guidance for each individual local water utility’s strategic and long-term planning for water infrastructure, aligning with sub-regional objectives.

The key outcomes of an RTWS, as outlined in the DPIE Water document, Comparison of Regional Water Strategies, Joint Organisation Regional Town Water Strategies and Local Water Utility IWCM Strategies (nsw.gov.au), are to:

Ensure urban communities that would benefit from across LWU boundaries interconnected town water supply systems have been identified, assessed and the benefits to each LWU and community are quantified.

The RTWS is a key strategic document which

Needs to take account of, and be consistent with any applicable Regional Water Strategy, water sharing plans and water resource plans. The Regional Town Water Strategy should align with other joint initiatives developed by the relevant Joint Organisation (JO), and with regional plans developed by the department’s Planning & Assessment Group.

Recent Developments

Orange City Council, Cabonne and CTW have agreed to investigate development of a RTWS based on the outcomes of the Stage 1 investigations.

A RTWS is normally undertaken by a Joint Organisation (JO) rather than a group of Councils, due to the regional focus of the JO’s. However, in this instance, due to the very localised nature of these three Councils, their existing water supply inter-connections and the need for them to all explore potential regional water supply solutions as a matter of some urgency, the Board of the Central NSW JO has agreed to support the development of a RTWS covering the footprint of the three Councils. As part of the development of the RTWS consideration needs to be given to potential strategic water supply interconnections during emergency periods with a number of adjacent Councils who are also part of the Central NSW JO, in particular Cowra Council who already have an existing water supply agreement with CTW.

A Proposal to Proceed with the development of the RTWS was submitted by the three Councils to DPIE Water in July 2021. Formal approval was received from DPIE Water on 10 August 2021, with the project being identified as “Safe and Secure Water Program – Cabonne, Orange and Central Tablelands Water Regional Town Water Strategy (SSWP270)” (DPIE funding eligibility letter attached)

Next steps

In order to progress with the RTWS a detailed Scope of Works, which will be used to engage a suitably qualified and experienced consultant to undertake this project, has been developed and is awaiting concurrence from DPIE Water. Once this is received tenders will be called and the project can commence.

The three Councils also need to develop and sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which details their commitment to the project. A draft MOU has been developed for each Council to consider and, if needed, make changes to arrive at a single document that all three Council’s agree to sign.

In addition, governance arrangements will be required to be developed for the project delivery. It is proposed to establish a Steering Committee and Working Party in order to guide the RTWS project. Preliminary drafts of the Terms of Reference for these two committees area attached for information.

Financial Considerations

The development of an RTWS is part of DPIE Water’s Safe and Secure Water Program version 2, Stream 2 funding, which includes funding for LWU’s to develop Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) Strategy as well as Regional Town Water Strategies.

DPIE Water will fund 75% of the cost of developing the strategy, with the remaining 25% to be funded by the three participating LWU’s on an equal share basis.

The order of cost of developing the strategy has been estimated to be within the range of $400,000 and $600,000. As this is a unique piece of collaborative work between three Councils, there is no recent examples of similar works upon which to base a more accurate estimate of cost. The 2009 CENTROC Water Security Study was completed at a cost of around $500,000 and is the only other similar type of strategy which provides some reference point in terms of cost and time to complete. The estimate of $400,000 and $600,000 was developed based on a first-principles cost estimation of the various sections of the RTWS which are outlined in a DPIE Water guidance document.

Based on the estimated cost range above and assuming the three participating Council’s agree to share the 25% contribution equally, this would require a funding commitment from OCC of between $33,000 and $50,000. By way of comparison, the development of an IWCM for an individual LWU costs in the order of $300,000 and $400,000. Much of the work contained in the proposed RTWS would also be required as an input into a LWU’s individual IWCM and therefore the development of the RTWS should result in cost savings associated with the review of OCC’s IWCM.

Attachments

1 Regional Town Water Supply Funding Eligibility Letter, D21/67440 ⇩

2 Memorandum of Understanding, D21/68037 ⇩

3 Regional Water Strategy - January 2021 - Final Document and Appendix A - Devitt Consulting Pty Ltd in consultation with Premise, D21/67436 ⇩

4 Terms of Reference - Steering Committee, D21/68036 ⇩

5 Terms of Reference - Working Party, D21/68035 ⇩

Council Meeting 2 November 2021

5.7 Northern Distributor Road/Telopea Way Roundabout concept

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/2452

AUTHOR: Jason Theakstone, Manager Engineering Services

EXECUTIVE Summary

Council, at its 16 February 2021 meeting, resolved the following:

RESOLVED - 21/001 Cr G Taylor/Cr J Whitton

1 That Council investigate the feasibility, viability, costs and funding options for the construction of a roundabout to replace the current traffic lights on the corner of the Northern Distributor Road and Telopea Way.

2 That a report be provided to Council, inclusive of a pedestrian access option.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “9.1 Preserve - Construct and maintain a road network meets the community’s transport and infrastructure needs”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council note the concept designs and the body of the report.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The existing intersections of NDR/Telopea and Telopea/Farrell is often a source of contention with the public due to its geometry, location and the commercial businesses it serves.

Existing Traffic Performance at the Intersection

Road authorities typically use SIDRA software to evaluate traffic performance at intersections. A lot of information goes into a SIDRA analysis of an intersection including,

· Geometry;

· Lane movements;

· Pedestrians;

· Volumes;

· Priorities;

· Gap acceptance;

· Movement data;

· Phasing and

· Timing.

The outputs of a SIDRA analysis are queue lengths, delays, degree of saturation and most importantly, level of service (LOS). LOS is typically rated from A being “Excellent” to F being “Failed”.

Council has recently undertaken SIDRA intersection traffic modelling and found that the LOS at the existing intersections as a C being “Satisfactory, with spare capacity”.

Council has drafted 4 roundabout options for the NDR/Telopea/Farrell intersections,

Option 1 is a single lane roundabout that has 4 arms being, NDR (east), NDR (west), Farrell and Telopea. Additionally is a westbound slip lane that bypasses the proposed roundabout.

Option 2 is the same as Option 1 but with the addition of a slip lane from NDR (eastbound) to Telopea and Telopea (southbound) to Farrell.

Option 3 is 2 single lane roundabouts both being 3 armed roundabout but one with a slip lane from Farrell to NDR (eastbound).

Option 4 is a dual lane the same as Option 1.

It is feasible to construct any of these options. Council should note all options enjoy a LOS “A” at a 2028 horizon. The table below outlines the viability, feasibility, cost, constraints, opportunities and estimated cost.

OPTION	VIABILITY	FEASIBILITY	CONSTRAINTS	OPPORTUNITIES	ESTIMATED COST
1	LOS A (NB: The second most efficient movement of traffic)	Can be constructed	· Requires land significant acquisitions · Removed Woolworths and McDonalds parking spaces · Removes all trees · Services		$7M - $10M
2	LOS A (NB: The most efficient movement of traffic)	Can be constructed	· Requires land significant acquisitions · Removed Woolworths and McDonalds parking spaces · Removes all trees · Services	· Already own slip lane land	$7M - $10M
3	LOS A (NB: Will reach saturation first)	Can be constructed	· Services	· Small land acquisitions · May save a few trees	$5M - $8M
4	LOS A	Can be constructed	· Requires land significant acquisitions · Removed Woolworths and McDonalds parking spaces · Removes all trees · Services		$5M - $8M

Funding options

There are a number of funding options available to construct any of these roundabout options:

· General Ledger;

· Voluntary Planning Agreements;

· A new Section 7:11 plan; and

· Grants.

Pedestrian access

The existing intersection has better pedestrian access than any of the roundabout options but a number of pedestrian access treatments are available:

· Have pedestrian refuges and pram ramps like the newly constructed WMD/NDR/Hill roundabout;

· Install signalised crossings at strategic points – not included in the costs above;

· Underpass (pedestrian tunnel) – not included in the costs above; and

· Overpass (bridge) – not included in the costs above.

Attachments

1 Northern Distributor Road/Telopea Way/Farrell Road - Proposed Intersection Designs, D21/62794 ⇩

Council Meeting 2 November 2021

5.10 Fees and Charges - Carl Sharpe Cricket Centre and Anson Street OSHC

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/2511

AUTHOR: Catherine Davis, Acting Manager Corporate Governance

EXECUTIVE Summary

At its meeting of 07 September 2021, by Resolution 21/308, Council resolved to exhibit a daily hire rate for the use of the Carl Sharpe Cricket Centre, and proposed additional fees for Anson Street Out of School Hours Care (OSHC) to cover salary costs of rostered staff that are required to stay back after rostered hours. Due to an administrative error, these fees will not come off exhibition until 15 November 2021 and this is during caretaker period. This report is requesting that if no submissions are received during the exhibition period, Council is prepared to resolve these changes.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “17.1 Collaborate - Provide representative, responsible and accountable community governance”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council resolves to approve the amended fees and charges for the following:

1 Carle Sharpe Cricket Centre

2 Anson Street Out of School Hours Care (OSHC)

if no submissions against these applications are received from the exhibition of them ending on 15 November 2021.

If any submissions are received for either 1 or 2 above then the fees and charges for that venue will be brought back to the new Council in February/March 2022.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The background to the setting of the fees for use of the Carl Sharpe Cricket Centre follows:

· Cricket Centre levy was set at $20/player which provides unlimited access to any registered player for a 12 months period – this fee was agreed to by ODCA and ODJCA.

· Council’s only other charge for cricket is the seasonal registration fee that covers access to all Council cricket grounds and outdoor training facilities. Over the last 20 years, this fee has only ever increased by CPI and is currently at:

- $6.90/junior player

- $23/senior player

· Compared to other Council’s across NSW our per player registration fee offers exceptional value. ODCA and ODJCA paid Council a combined total of $8,043 for the use of our grounds. Compare this to fees charged by a few neighbouring Councils:

- Dubbo Senior Cricket $48,800

- Dubbo Junior Cricket $6,636

- Bathurst Cricket $19,600

- Cowra Cricket $8,400

- Orange City Council $8,043

- Wellington Cricket $7,909

· For a normal 24-week season, it costs over $160K in wages alone to prepare and maintain our turf and synthetic cricket grounds. This is based on wicket preparation and mowing time only. This cost doesn’t include other significant expenses such as machinery, pesticides, fertiliser, water, line marking, etc.

· A concern has been received from Centrals Cricket Club who have requested a reduction to $10 per player. It should be noted that they have accessed the Cricket Centre over the past season under the $20/ player levy with bookings as follows:

- Weekly – Fridays - 2 lanes from 5.00pm to 6.30pm

- Fortnightly – Tuesdays – 4 lanes from 4.00pm to 5.30pm & 2 lanes from 5.30pm to 6.30pm

- Individual Club members also regularly utilised the Centre outside these hours

· A concern has been received from ODJCA who have requested a reduction to $10 per player. The use of the centre by Junior crickets under the $20/ player levy has been significant

· ODCA have supported the $20 / player levy

· The levy of $20 per player per annum was calculated to cover the cleaning costs of the centre. All other expenses are met by Council.

UPDATING FEES AND CHARGES

Under Resolution 21/308, Council resolved:

2.2 Fees and Charges

TRIM Reference: 2021/1796

RESOLVED - 21/001 Cr S Nugent/Cr J Whitton

Council resolves to place the following fees on exhibition for the information of the community for a period of 28 days.

As per the report put to Council on 7 September 2021, the proposed additional Carl Sharpe Cricket Centre fees and charges are:

For Non-Commercial Operators visiting for approved events, a maximum of $250 Gst Incl. per day is proposed to be charged, regardless of the number of lanes hired, number of attendees, or day of the week.

Carl Sharpe Cricket Centre	GST Ex	GST	Total
Non-Commercial Operator (approved events only). Hourly rate charged per above to a maximum of $250 per day, regardless of lane hire. Any day of week.	$227.27	22.73	$250.00
Orange District Cricket Association & Orange Junior Cricket Association, Annual Cricket Centre Levy	$18.18	$1.82	$20.00

The proposed additional Anson Street OSHC fees and charges are:

Anson Street OSHC	GST Ex	GST	Total
Late fee – after 15 minutes of service closure, hourly ratio rate applies	To be determined by the NDIS agency
Short Notice Cancellations	To be determined by the NDIS agency

Water	$8,423.15	1.50	$ 12,634.73
Sewer	$5,173.00	1.50	$ 7,759.50
*Total s64*			*$ 20,394.23*


Political	Council is provided an opportunity to raise matters of importance at the annual conference through this process. Motions must be relevant to Local Government and fall within the categories identified in this report.