Ordinary
Meeting of Council
TO
BE HELD ON Tuesday, 16 November 2021 AT 7:00pm
Level
3, Council Chamber
Agenda
** ** ** ** ** **
NOTE:
For Full Details, See Council’s Website –
https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au
under the link to business papers
The Livestream can be viewed here:
https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-meetings/Council-meeting-live-stream
Disclaimer: All
Ku-ring-gai Council Ordinary Meetings of Council are livestreamed for on-demand
viewing on the KMC website. Although Council will do its best to ensure the
public is excluded from the livestream, Council cannot guarantee a
person’s image and/or voice won’t be broadcast. Accordingly,
attendance at Council meetings is considered consent by a person for their
image and/or voice to be webcast. Council accepts no liability for any damage
that may result from defamatory comments made by persons attending meetings. As
per clause 15.21 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, a person must not
live stream or use an audio recorder, video camera, mobile phone or any other
device to make a recording or photograph of the proceedings of a meeting of the
council or a committee of the council without the prior authorisation of the
council.
APOLOGIEs
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Documents Circulated to Councillors
Confirmation of Reports to be
Considered in Closed Meeting
NOTE:
That in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 of the Local
Government Act 1993, all officers’ reports be released to the press and
public, with the exception of confidential attachments to the following General
Business reports:
GB.6 St
Ives Indoor Sports Centre – Project Update
In accordance with 10A(2)(d)(i):
Attachment 1: Funding Deed with ME mark-ups
Attachment 2: Risk Table from ME
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs
Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council 9
File: S02131
There are no minutes to be confirmed at this meeting as yet.
minutes from the Mayor
Petitions
PT.1 Removal of 3 trees in
Darnley Street Gordon 12
File: RT1/13
We the undersigned hereby
petition Ku-ring-gai Council to remove three trees in Darnley Street Gordon
because of the potential danger they pose not only to nearby residents but to
many people who regularly walk along this street.
The trees in question are a
liquid amber tree near the junction between 15 Darnley Street Gordon and 17
Darnley Street, a very tall lemon-scented gum outside 17 Darnley Street and a
liquid amber tree outside 17 Darnley Street.
The two liquid amber trees have
previously caused damage to nearby properties and the lemon-scented gum poses a
dangerous threat to four properties. It also would seem that the liquid amber
tree at the junction of 17 Darnley Street is infested with termites.
Until now there has been no
personal injury caused by these trees even though, in the case of the liquid
amber trees, powerlines have been brought down. However, the potential for
human injury in the future remains. (32 signatures)
Recommendation:
That the petition be received and
referred to the appropriate Officer of Council for attention.
PT.2 New footpath - Buckra
St - Princes St to Charlton Ave 13
File: 88/05205/01
We, the undersigned residents of
Buckra Street, Turramurra are strongly opposed to the proposed new footpath in Buckra
Street – from Princes Street to Charlton Avenue. (14 signatures)
Recommendation:
That the petition be received and
referred to the appropriate Officer of Council for attention.
GENERAL BUSINESS
i.
The Mayor to invite Councillors to
nominate any item(s) on the Agenda that they wish to have a site inspection.
ii.
The Mayor to invite Councillors to
nominate any item(s) on the Agenda that they wish to adopt in accordance with
the officer’s recommendation allowing for minor changes without debate.
GB.1 Ku-ring-gai
Council End of Term Report 2017-2021 14
File: S13319/2
To present to Council the End of
Term Report for the period 2017-2021.
Recommendation:
That Council receive and note the
End of Term Report for the period 2017-2021.
GB.2 2021 - 2022
Budget Review - 1st Quarter ended September 2021 19
File: S09112/10
To inform Council of the results
of the first quarter budget review of 2021/22 and proposed adjustments to the
annual budget based on the actual financial performance and trend for the
period 1 July 2021 to 30 September 2021.
Recommendation:
That Council receive and note the
September 2021/22 Quarterly Budget Review and the recommended changes.
GB.3 Analysis of
Land and Environment Court Costs - 1st Quarter 2021 to 2022 64
File: FY00623/4
To report legal costs in relation
to development control matters in the Land and Environment Court for the
quarter ended 30 September 2021.
Recommendation:
That the analysis of Land and
Environment Court costs for the quarter ended 30 September 2021 be received and
noted.
GB.4 Investment
Report as at 31 October 2021 75
File: FY00623/4
To present Council’s
investment portfolio performance for October 2021.
Recommendation:
That the summary of investments
performance for October 2021 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of
the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.
GB.5 Response to
OLG Guidelines - Risk Management and Internal Audit 82
File:
CY00578/4-4
The Office of Local Government
(OLG) has updated the 2019 guidelines on the Internal Audit and Risk Management
Framework to support and inform the operations of Audit, Risk & improvement
Committees (ARIC).
This report outlines the key
changes that are proposed and how they will impact Ku-ring-gai Council and the
internal audit shared service. Further, it provides the basis for providing a
submission on behalf of Council.
The OLG is inviting submissions
on the proposed guidelines by 26 November 2021.
Recommendation:
That Council consider the
proposed Guideline and endorse the issues identified in this report for
Council’s submission to the OLG by 26 November 2021.
GB.6 St Ives
Indoor Sports Centre – Project Update 215
File: S12712-3
To update Council on the St Ives
Indoor Sports Centre project.
Recommendation:
That Council receive and note
updates contained within this report and that Council endorse a request for
variation to the Milestone payment dates for the grant from the NSW Office of
Sport.
GB.7 Planning
Proposal to rezone and heritage list Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club 224
File: S13316
To present the Planning Proposal
for the heritage listing and rezoning of Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club
for consideration.
Recommendation:
That the Planning Proposal to
rezone the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club and list the site as a local
heritage item be adopted and submitted for Gateway Determination under section
3.34 of the EPA Act 1979.
GB.8 St Ives
Showground & Precinct Lands Plan of Management 401
File: S13492
To have Council adopt the St Ives
Showground and Precinct Lands - Final Plan of Management, dated October 2021.
Recommendation:
That Council adopt the St Ives
Showground and Precinct Lands - Final Plan of Management, dated October 2021.
Extra Reports Circulated to Meeting
Motions of which due Notice has
been given
NM.1 Employee
Assistance Program 631
File: S11228
Notice
of Motion from Councillors Kay and Kelly dated 29 October 2021
EAP is an employee assistance
program that supports employees with work-related problems as well as personal
problems that may impact on their job performance, health and mental
well-being. EAP offers employer funded confidential counselling for employees and
their family members as well as consultative support for managers and
supervisors to address employee and organizational challenges and needs.
This has been available for more
than 15 years to Ku-ring-gai Council staff with a different provider prior to
2020. The average number of employees using the service was 6.5 per quarter in
2020 and this has increased to 7 per quarter to the end of September 2021.
Prior statistics were not readily available at the time of making enquiries of
staff.
Unfortunately, EAP has not
previously been available to councillors from Ku-ring-gai Council, but their
services are offered to councillors from other Councils in NSW.
This was brought to my attention
when a serious matter that related to my work as a Councillor occurred, and I
was offered no support or assistance to deal with the issue at the time.
There has been a dramatic
increase of EAP services over the years, with many more businesses coming on
board, and should continue to be offered to all staff including post lockdown
when mental health issues are predicted to be on the rise.
Recommendation:
We therefore move that:
A. The
provision of the employee assistance program (EAP) be included in the
Councillor Expenses and Facilities Policy, to ensure it is available to future
councillors.
B. The
services offered by EAP are available to councillors as well as staff, and that
this information is provided in the induction material that Councillors are
issued when elected with the list of these contacts readily available.
NM.2 Basketball
and Netball Facilities in Roseville, Lindfield and Killara 633
File: S07823
Notice
of Motion from Councillor Ngai dated 29 October 2021
It is
unfortunate that council was unable to achieve quorum on at least three
occasions in October, denying the opportunity for sporting facilities to be
considered in October.
I therefore propose that this
matter be considered by council in November. For more information about this
motion, please refer to NM2 of the October 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council.
Recommendation:
I therefore move that:
A. Netball:
Council proactively engages with Lindfield Netball Club and KNA to ensure that
the netball hoops at the flood-lit Tryon Road Tennis Courts will be available
for training whenever required in 2022. If there are already pre-existing
tennis bookings causing a clash in availability, council staff should exercise
discretion in offering an alternate location.
B.
Basketball: Council staff investigate suitable locations for increasing the
number of council-owned basketball hoops in Roseville / Lindfield / Killara
from the current five up to a target of at least twelve, and a report be
brought back to council for consideration by April 2022. Some of these
basketball hoops could potentially come from quick wins such as the conversion
of courts at Tryon Road (up to four basketball hoops to accompany the netball
hoops), Lindfield Library (up to four hoops), and other locations in the area.
Additional hoops can also come from the reconfiguration of public spaces in the
medium to long term. It is also understood that the conversion of popular
tennis courts to basketball may have a revenue impact if tennis hirers do not
choose to book the other available courts in the council network, and the
potential cost implications should be included for council’s
consideration.
NM.3 Lindfield
Pedestrian Bridge 634
File: S12268
Notice
of Motion from Councillor Ngai dated 29 October 2021
It is unfortunate that council
was unable to achieve quorum on at least three occasions for the October
Ordinary Meeting of Council, denying the opportunity for this matter to be
considered.
Recommendation:
I therefore move that:
A. As
part of the Lindfield Village Hub negotiations, each proponent must demonstrate
how its proposed design will reasonably interface with or incorporate a future
pedestrian bridge across the Pacific Highway.
B. Council
publishes a project timeline for the Lindfield Village Hub once negotiations
are complete.
NM.4 Saving Bates
Park 635
File: S09767
Notice of Motion from Councillors Ngai,
Spencer, Kay, Kelly and Pettett
It is unfortunate that council
was unable to achieve quorum on at least three occasions for the October
Ordinary Meeting of Council, denying the opportunity for the park to be
considered.
We therefore propose that this
matter be considered by Council in November. For more information about this
motion, please refer to NM3 of the October 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council.
Recommendation:
We therefore move that:
Council does not proceed to
divest 97 Babbage Road Roseville Chase (Lot 47, DP 13444), and the land be
reclassified from ‘operational land’ back to ‘community
land’ in accordance with section 33 of the Local Government Act 1993.
BUSINESS WITHOUT NOTICE – SUBJECT TO CLAUSE 9.3 OF code
of meeting practice
Questions With Notice
InspectionS– SETTING OF TIME, DATE AND RENDEZVOUS
** ** ** ** ** **
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
PT.1 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
PT.1
|
RT1/13
|
Removal
of 3 trees in Darnley Street Gordon
We the undersigned hereby petition
Ku-ring-gai Council to remove three trees in Darnley Street Gordon because of
the potential danger they pose not only to nearby residents but to many people
who regularly walk along this street.
The trees in question are a liquid amber tree near the
junction between 15 Darnley Street Gordon and 17 Darnley Street, a very tall
lemon-scented gum outside 17 Darnley Street and a liquid amber tree outside 17
Darnley Street.
The two liquid amber trees have previously caused damage to
nearby properties and the lemon-scented gum poses a dangerous threat to four
properties. It also would seem that the liquid amber tree at the junction of 17
Darnley Street is infested with termites.
Until now there has been no personal injury caused by these
trees even though, in the case of the liquid amber trees, powerlines have been
brought down. However, the potential for human injury in the future remains.
(32 signatures)
Recommendation:
That the petition be received and referred to the appropriate
Officer of Council for attention.
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.1 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.1
|
S13319/2
|
|
|
5 July 2021
|
Ku-ring-gai Council End of Term Report
2017-2021
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
|
purpose of report:
|
To present to Council the End
of Term Report for the period 2017-2021.
|
|
|
|
|
background:
|
The End of Term Report is one of the accountability
mechanisms between Council and the community and has been prepared in
accordance with Section 428(2) of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the
Office of Local Government’s Integrated Planning and Reporting
Guidelines.
The End of Term Report is presented at the final Ordinary
Meeting of Council for the outgoing Councillors prior to the December
elections. It is also required to be submitted to the Minister for Local
Government as part of Council’s 2020/21 Annual Report.
|
|
|
|
|
comments:
|
The report provides an overview of Council’s
challenges and achievements in implementing the Community Strategic Plan over
the previous 4 years from 2017 to 2021. This includes a review of both
the implementation and effectiveness of the Community Strategic Plan in
progressing Ku-ring-gai’s long-term social, environmental, economic and
civic leadership objectives.
|
|
|
|
|
recommendation:
|
That Council receive and note the End of Term
Report for the period 2017-2021.
|
Purpose of Report
To present to Council the End of Term Report for the period
2017-2021.
Background
This is
Ku-ring-gai Council’s report to the community on the implementation of
Ku-ring-gai’s Community Strategic Plan over the term of this
Council.
The End
of Term Report is one of the accountability mechanisms between Council and the
community and has been prepared in accordance with Section 428(2) of the Local
Government Act, 1993 and the Office of Local Government’s Integrated
Planning and Reporting Guidelines.
The report provides an overview of Council’s challenges
and achievements in implementing the Community Strategic Plan over the previous
4 years from 2017 to 2021. This includes a review of both the
implementation and effectiveness of the Community Strategic Plan in progressing
Ku-ring-gai’s long-term social, environmental, economic and civic
leadership objectives.
The End
of Term Report is required to be presented at the final Ordinary Meeting of
Council for the outgoing Councillors prior to the December elections. It is
also required to be submitted to the Minister for Local Government as part of
Council’s 2020/21 Annual Report.
To meet
statutory reporting requirements the time period for the End of Term Report is
taken from September 2017 to the end of June 2021. This includes the nine month
period between the September 2017 local government election, under the previous
Community Strategic Plan, and prior to the adoption of the current
Community Strategic Plan in June 2018.
Reporting
for the current Community Strategic Plan, is taken up to 30 June 2021 (for long
term objectives, contributing term achievements and performance indicators and
financial results.)
The report will also be used to inform and assist the newly
elected Council to develop strategies and objectives for the next four year
Delivery Program to ensure that Council continues to progress the
community’s long term objectives.
Comments
Ku-ring-gai Council adopted its current Community Strategic
Plan – Our Ku-ring-gai 2038 in June 2018. This Plan was prepared in
accordance with the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Integrated
Planning & Reporting framework, which was introduced in 2009.
Each elected Council is also required to adopt a Delivery
Program for its term of office. This ensures each elected Council identifies
strategies and key deliverables which will contribute to the successful
implementation of the community’s long term objectives contained in the
Community Strategic Plan.
The
effectiveness of the Community Strategic Plan, in progressing the vision and
long term objectives, is measured by:
· The progress of each long term objective contained in the
Plan
· Monitoring progress for performance indicators set for each
long term objective
· Completion or substantial completion of Council’s
term achievements in the Delivery Program.
The report provides an overview of Council’s key
successes and challenges during the period September 2017 to June 2021 within
the six themes of the Community Strategic Plan:
· Community, People
& Culture
· Natural
Environment
· Places, Spaces and
Infrastructure
· Access, Traffic
& Transport
· Local Economy
& Employment
· Leadership &
Governance
integrated planning and reporting
Leadership & Governance
|
Community Strategic
Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
L1.1 - A shared long term vision for Ku-ring-gai underpins
strategic collaboration, policy development and community engagement.
|
L1.1.1 – The priorities of our community are
reflected in the Ku-ring-gai Community Strategic Plan and inform
Council’s policy development, decision-making and program delivery.
|
L1.1.1.1 – Complete an End of Term Report on
Council’s progress implementing the Community Strategic Plan 2038.
|
Governance Matters
In accordance with the Local Government Act, 1993 and
the Integrated Planning & Reporting framework, Councils are required to
prepare an End of Term Report detailing the progress of implementing the
adopted Community Strategic Plan. The Report must be presented at the final
Ordinary Meeting of Council for the outgoing Councillors.
As required under the Local Government Act, in the year of
an ordinary election, the End of Term Report will be included in the 2020/21
Annual Report.
Risk Management
There are no direct risk impacts in relation to this report.
The Leadership and Governance theme in the Community Strategic Plan addresses a
range of risk management objectives and requirements. Information on risk
management considerations are included in the End of Term Report.
Financial Considerations
There are no direct financial considerations in relation to
this report. The Leadership and Governance theme in the Community Strategic
Plan addresses a range of financial requirements. Financial results as
well as key achievements and challenges are included in the End of Term Report.
Social Considerations
There are no direct social considerations in relation to
this report however, a number of themes contained in the Community Strategic
Plan address social considerations. Key achievements and challenges Council
experienced in delivering social outcomes to the community are included in the
End of Term Report.
Environmental Considerations
There are no direct environmental considerations in relation
to this report however, a number of themes contained in the Community Strategic
Plan address environmental considerations. Key achievements and challenges
Council experienced in delivering environmental outcomes to the community are
included in the End of Term Report.
Community Consultation
Community consultation is not required for the preparation
of this report. However, the extent of community consultation and
engagement undertaken by Council staff during the reporting period on a diverse
range of issues is detailed in the report, as well as the results of community
satisfaction and feedback on Council’s delivery of services and
facilities.
Internal Consultation
Staff across all departments within Council have provided
progress reporting which has contributed to the preparation of the End of Term
Report.
Summary
Under the Local Government Act, 1993 Council is
required to prepare an End of Term Report which documents the progress made
implementing the adopted Community Strategic Plan. This End of Term Report (Attachment
A1) outlines Council’s key achievements and challenges experienced
throughout the term of Councillors.
The report outlines how Council has progressed the
objectives and goals of the community identified in the Community Strategic
Plan and fulfils requirements under the Local Government Act, 1993, for
the Integrated Planning & Reporting framework.
|
Recommendation:
That Council receive and note the End of Term Report for
the period 2017-2021.
|
|
Helen Lowndes
Integrated Planning Coordinator
|
Michael Wearne
Manager Governance and Corporate Strategy
|
|
David Marshall
Director Corporate
|
|
|
Attachments:
|
A1
|
Ku-ring-gai
Council End of Term Report 2017-2021
|
Excluded
|
2021/333850
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.2 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.2
|
S09112/10
|
|
|
19 October 2021
|
2021 - 2022 Budget Review - 1st Quarter
ended September 2021
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
To inform Council of the results of the first quarter budget
review of 2021/22 and proposed adjustments to the annual budget based on the
actual financial performance and trend for the period 1 July 2021 to 30
September 2021.
Background
In accordance with Part 9,
Division 3, Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005
(“The Regulation”):
(1) Not later than 2 months after
the end of each quarter (except the June quarter), the responsible accounting
officer of a council must prepare and submit to the council a budget review
statement that shows, by reference to the estimate of income and expenditure
set out in the statement of the council’s revenue policy included in the
operational plan for the relevant year, a revised estimate of the income and
expenditure for that year.
(2) A budget review statement must
include or be accompanied by:
a) a report as to whether or
not the responsible accounting officer believes that the statement indicates
that the financial position of the council is satisfactory, having regard to
the original estimate of income and expenditure, and
b) ifa that position is
unsatisfactory, recommendations for remedial action.
(3) A budget review statement must
also include any information required by the Code to be included in such a
statement.
The Office of Local Government has developed a set of
minimum requirements that assists councils in meeting their obligations as set
out in legislation.
At the Council meeting held on 15
June 2021, Council adopted the Revised Delivery Program 2018-2022 &
Operational Plan 2021-2022, which incorporated the Annual Budget for 2021-2022.
Comments
This review analyses Council’s financial performance
for the first quarter of 2021/22 and forecasts an end of financial year
position by recommending budget adjustments to operating and capital budget.
Budget adjustments proposed in this review will decrease the
forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) by $999k compared to
revised budget. This is primarily due to the financial impact of COVID-19
pandemic and other adjustments in income and expense as detailed in the report.
Financial impact of COVID-19 Pandemic
The net financial impact (loss of revenue less reduced cost
associated with the pandemic) for the current financial year has been estimated
at $1.2m. This has been funded from various sources as outlined in the table
below.
For estimating the financial impacts, it has been assumed
that the COVID-19 Pandemic will continue to affect Council and the community
for a period of at least 6 months therefore this report reflects the impact and
proposed funding for the current financial year and projects a forecast result
to June 2022.
Staff will continue to monitor closely the financial
performance of affected business units and report on the results and further
impacts as part of the December review. Details of income and
expenditure categories impacted are discussed further in this report.
Proposed
adjustments to forecast budget
The forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) to
June 2022 will decrease by $999k compared to revised budget; after adjusting
for COVID-19 net unfavourable impact and other adjustments. All proposed budget
adjustments have been fully funded from various sources as detailed in this
report.
Operating Income
The proposed increase to the operating income of $337k
is mainly from additional operating grants and contributions received
($1.595m), offset by decreased income of $1.258m as a result of COVID-19
restrictions, as detailed below:
· Net
decrease in “user fees” due to COVID-19 related business
interruption such as:
o Ku-ring-gai
fitness and aquatic centre ($817k) partly offset by reduced expenditure,
o Reduced
sports field income ($155k),
o Reduced
art centre income ($187k), permits ($60k) and a range of other community
facilities ($130k) offset by
o Increased
tennis fees ($300k) and golf course fees ($200k).
· Net
decrease in “user fees” ($303k) due to other proposed
adjustments, mainly in:
o Compliance
levy – decrease as a result of legislation change ($200k),
o Bus
shelter fees and State Rail income –contract expiry ($167k) offset by
increased building unit fees ($64k).
· Net
decrease in “other revenue” ($281k) due to :
o COVID-19
related business restrictions ($410k) such as:
§ Decreased
parking fines ($350k), rental income ($64k) and building fines and permits
($64k) offset by increased area rangers other fines ($54k).
o Offset
by a favourable increase in this category due to other adjustments ($128k):
§ Increased
income for carbon credits ($80k),
§ Fuel
tax credit ($48k.
· Net
increase in operating grants and contributions mainly from:
o Transport
NSW contribution to Lindfield Village Green ($1m),
o Grosvenor-Gwydir
fire trail complex upgrade contribution from RFS ($495k),
o Catchment
Flood studies grant from Department of Planning Industry and Environment
($158k),
o Grants
received for environmental education ($145k),
Operating expenditure
The change (net increase) to the operating expenditure
($1.3m) is mainly due to allocation of expenditure for operational projects
funded from contributions/grants received, additional employee costs and other
expenses partly offset by decreased materials and contracts as detailed below:
· Net
increase in employee costs ($134k): a one-off expenditure associated
with the change of library operating model fully funded from savings within the
Community department ($96k) and other minor one-off adjustments ($38k).
· Decrease
in materials and contracts due to:
o COVID-19
related business restrictions ($571k) from: Ku-ring-gai fitness and aquatic
centre expenses ($467k) offset by reduced income, art centre contractors ($84k)
and community halls cleaning ($20k).
o Offset
by additional materials and contracts ($91k) due to other adjustments
from change of library operating model fully funded from savings within the
Community department and other minor adjustments.
· Decrease
in statutory levies ($497k) – due to emergency services levy being
less than budget,
· Decrease
in other expenses due to:
o COVID-19
related business restrictions ($50k) – commission paid on
infringements,
o Offset
by additional other expenses ($232k) due to other adjustments such as
Information Management SaaS implementation (licence) ($205k) and insurance
premiums($27k).
· Increased
operational projects expenditure mainly due to:
o PPE
and other COVID-related costs $15k,
o Projects
funded from grants mentioned under the income category ($798k),
o Budget
transfers from capital to operational projects ($1.27m) funded from
environmental levy ($460k), unexpended grants ($548k) and general fund (261k);
offset by
o Operational
projects deferred to 2022/23 ($85k) funded from general fund.
Capital Budget
Major adjustments to the capital budget are due to:
· Capital grants and contributions received
($3.8m), mainly Road Safety Program ($1.66m), Turramurra Memorial Park Pavilion
Upgrade ($868k) and Lindfield Village Green ($1m),
· Recognition of unexpended grants tied to
liability reserve ($2m), mainly Lindfield Village Green ($1.02m) and Norman
Griffith Oval Upgrade ($763k),
· Projects deferred to future financial years
($10.4m),
· Project brought forward from future financial
years ($4.2m),
· Other transfers to/from operating projects,
mainly projects funded from environmental levy ($460k), reinvestment of savings
from energy projects funded from general fund ($231k) and Local roads and
Infrastructure Grant ($275k).
Other budget adjustments
to capital projects are detailed further in the report and listed in Attachment
A2.
The forecast working capital balance at 30 June 2022 is
projected to achieve $4.7m, moderately lower than the Long Term Financial Plan
target of $5.3m.
Quarterly
Budget Review Statements (QBRS)
The Quarterly Budget Review
Statements (QBRS) as prescribed by the OLG guidelines are composed of the following budget review reports:
· Income and Expenses Budget Review Statement (Table 1)
· Capital Budget (Expenditure and Funding) Budget Review
Statement (Table 2)
· Proposed Operating Budget Adjustments by Resource Group
(Table 3)
· Proposed Capital Budget Adjustments by Resource Group
(Table 4)
· Income and Expenses Statement by Theme (Table 5)
· Cash and Investments position (Table 6)
· Contracts and Consultancy Expenses (Table 7)
· Capital and Operational Projects Summary (Table 8)
· Statement by the Responsible Accounting Officer
These statements are shown below.
Proposed Budget
Adjustments
The table below lists
the proposed budget adjustments, including comments for the March Quarterly
Budget Review.
Attachment A2 summarises all
proposed budget adjustments for Projects.
The table below splits the current
budget by six themes identified within Council’s Revised Delivery Program
2018 – 2022. These themes are used as a platform for planning our
activities to address the community’s stated needs and aspirations.
Cash and Investments
position
Restricted funds are invested in
accordance with Council’s Investment Policy. Total investments portfolio
as per the September Investment Report is $203.6m.
A detailed Restricted Assets Report as at September
2021 (Actual) is shown in Attachment A1.
Contracts and Consultancy
Expenses
Capital & Operational
Projects Summary
Actual expenditure for
capital and operational projects for the period ending 30 September 2021 is
($13.2m) against the full year revised budget of ($130m). The September review
increases the forecast project budget by ($689k), mainly from new grants received
($4.5m), unexpended grants tied to liability ($2.2m) partly off-set by net
adjustment to S7.11 funded projects ($3.3m) and internally restricted reserves
($2.9m) deferred or brought forward.
The table and chart
below show the YTD actual project expenditure against 2021/22 full year revised
budget and projected forecast.
The proposed budget
changes to operational and capital projects represent an increase of $689k. The
most significant variations and projects proposed for adjustment are listed below:
· Allocation of expenditure budget due to capital grants
and contributions received from the Federal and State government, mainly
for:
o Road Safety Program ($1.66m),
o Turramurra Memorial Park Pavilion Upgrade
($868k),
o Norman Griffith Oval (Including contributions
from local sporting clubs) ($763k)
o HPAA – Gordon ($382k)
o Grosvenor – Gwydir Fire Trail Upgrade
– Capital Works ($295k),
o Other projects included in Traffic Facility
Program ($336k) partly offset by
o Re-classification of contribution for Norman
Griffith Oval (Including contributions from local sporting clubs) to unexpended
grants ($763k).
· S7.11 funded projects brought forward ($3.1m):
o St Ives Village Green New Recreation Precinct
($1m) and
o St Johns Avenue Construction ($2.1m).
· Project funded from unallocated S7.11
funds:
o Land acquisitions ($534k) from 2000/03 and SEPP5
funds.
· S7.11 funded projects deferred to future years (6.9m):
o Robert Pymble Park Precinct ($3m),
o Ibbotson Park Upgrade ($787k),
o East Turramurra Neighbourhood Centre Upgrade
($606k),
o Turramurra Village Park Refurbishment ($505k),
o Gordon Recreation Ground Masterplan ($500k),
o Lindfield Avenue Streetscape Improvement ($250k),
o Turramurra Streetscape Improvements –
Design ($229k)
o St Ives Streetscape Improvements ($194k),
o Pymble Streetscape Improvements ($202k),
o Roseville Streetscape Improvements ($200k),
o Redleaf Lane Rd Modification/Footpath Widening
($133k),
o Bedes Forest upgrade ($100k),
o Other minor budgets deferred ($198k).
· Infrastructure and facilities funded projects brought forward:
o Lindfield Soldiers Memorial Park Oval No 2
($357k),
o Wellington Road Sportsground upgrade ($200k).
· Infrastructure and facilities funded projects deferred to future years
($2.7m):
o Council Chambers upgrade ($2m),
o Bannockburn Oval – Masterplan and Sports
field upgrade ($721k) and
o Queen Elizabeth Reserve upgrade ($43k).
· Other transfers to/from operating projects,
mainly projects funded from environmental levy ($460k), reinvestment of savings
from energy projects funded from general fund ($231k).
All Proposed Budget adjustments
for each Project and explanation for the changes are detailed in
Attachment A2 –
Summary of Capital and Operational Project Budget Adjustments
Statement
by Responsible Accounting Officer
It is my opinion that the Quarterly Budget Review Statement
for Ku-ring-gai Council for the quarter ended 30 September 2021 indicates that
Council’s projected financial position at 30 June 2022 will be
satisfactory, having regard to the projected estimates of income and
expenditure and the original budgeted income and expenditure.
Due to the changing environment related to COVID-19
Pandemic, financial impacts are uncertain and are likely to vary from the
estimates provided and further impacts will be assessed and reported to Council
as part of the end of financial year reporting.
One of Council’s key
performance indicators in the Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) is to provide for
a minimum available working capital balance of $5.3m. The forecast working
capital balance at 30 June 2022 projected to achieve $4.7m, moderately lower
than the Long Term Financial Plan target.
integrated
planning and reporting
Theme 6: Leadership and Governance
|
Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial resources
and assets to maximise delivery of services.
|
L2.1.2 Council’s financial services provide
accurate, timely, open and honest advice to the community.
|
Manages financial performance to achieve targets as
defined in the Long Term Financial Plan.
|
Governance Matters
Section 203(1) of the Local Government Regulation 2005
requires that at the end of each quarter, a Budget Review Statement be prepared
and submitted to Council that provides the latest estimate of Income and
Expenditure for the current financial year.
Risk Management
Income and expenditure is managed through the quarterly
budget review process. Although some income and expenditure cannot be directly
controlled, it can be monitored and action taken to mitigate potential
financial or budgetary risk. Further, Council staff utilise monthly management
reporting for managing operational and project income and expenditure, and any
budget variations are reported to the Director. The executive team are also
provided with monthly financial reports that allow Directors to make informed
decisions and plan ahead to ensure budget targets are met.
Financial Considerations
The forecast working capital
balance at 30 June 2022 is projected to achieve $4.7m, moderately lower than
the Long Term Financial Plan target of $5.3m.
Social
Considerations
Not applicable.
Environmental
Considerations
Not applicable.
Community
Consultation
Not applicable.
Internal
Consultation
Finance met with directors and managers as part of the
Quarterly Budget Review process to ensure departmental budget targets reflect
current forecasts.
Summary
Budget adjustments proposed in this review will decrease the
forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) by $999k compared to
revised budget. This is primarily due to the financial impact of the
COVID-19 Pandemic, decrease in compliance levy and bus shelter fees.
The forecast working capital balance at 30 June 2021 is
projected to achieve $4.7m, moderately lower than the Long Term Financial Plan
target of $5.3m.
Staff will continue to monitor closely the financial
performance of impacted units and report on the results as part of the December
quarterly budget review.
|
Recommendation:
That Council receive and note the September 2021/22
Quarterly Budget Review and the recommended changes.
|
|
Mette Kofoed
Strategic Management Accounant
|
Angela Apostol
Manager Finance
|
|
David Marshall
Director Corporate
|
|
|
Attachments:
|
A1 ⇩
|
Attachment
A1 - Restricted Assets Report - September 2021
|
|
2021/330404
|
|
|
A2⇩
|
Attachment
A2 - Summary of Capital and Operational Projects Budget Adjustments -
September 2021
|
|
2021/330438
|
|
APPENDIX No: 1 - Attachment
A1 - Restricted Assets Report - September 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.2
|
|
APPENDIX No: 2 - Attachment
A2 - Summary of Capital and Operational Projects Budget Adjustments -
September 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.2
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.3 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.3
|
FY00623/4
|
|
|
21 October 2021
|
Analysis of Land and Environment Court
Costs - 1st Quarter 2021 to 2022
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
To report legal costs in relation to development control
matters in the Land and Environment Court for the quarter ended 30 September
2021.
Background
A
person may commence proceedings in the Land and Environment Court in relation
to a development application which has either been refused by Council or is
deemed to have been refused (a development application is deemed to have been
refused if it has not been determined within a period of 40 days or such longer
period that may be calculated in accordance with the Act). An appeal may also
be commenced in relation to conditions of development consent and the issue of
building certificates and orders. Council is a respondent to such
proceedings.
Comments
Appeals
Lodged
In quarter ended 30 September 2021 there were 4 new appeals
lodged with the Land and Environment Court. The number of appeals
received in prior years is as follows:
|
Financial year
|
Number of appeals
received (whole year)
|
|
2017/2018
|
45
|
|
2018/2019
|
44
|
|
2019/2020
|
25
|
|
2020/2021
|
13
|
|
2021/2022 (as at 30
September 2021)
|
4
|
The appeals commenced during the quarter to 30 September
2021 concerned the following subject matters:
· Shop-top housing
· Seniors living
· Additions and
alterations to an existing dwelling
· Modification of
existing development consent for dwelling
costs
For the quarter ended 30
September 2021, Council made payments of $402,328 on appeals and associated
expenses in relation to Land & Environment Court matters. This compares
with the annual budget of $1,315,300.
In addition to expenditure on appeals, a further amount of $
24,471 was spent in obtaining expert advice regarding development assessment
matters.
|
Land & Environment
Court Costs
2017/2018
- 2021/2022
|
|
Financial Year
|
Total Costs
|
1st quarter September
|
2nd quarter December
|
3rd quarter March
|
4th quarter June
|
|
2017/2018*
(45
appeals lodged)
|
$1,267,706
|
$221,520
|
$461,976
|
$201,332
|
$382,878
|
|
2018/2019*
(41 appeals lodged)
|
$1,648,229
|
$372,972
|
$491,788
|
$336,336
|
$447,133
|
|
2019/2020*
(25 appeals lodged)
|
$1,892,040
|
$417,046
|
$446,071
|
$543,218
|
$485,705
|
|
2020/2021*
( 13 appeals lodged)
|
$1,512,459
|
$356,735
|
$501,925
|
$278,510
|
$375,289
|
|
2021/2022
(4 appeals lodged)
|
$402,328
|
$402,328
|
|
|
|
* Costs reported to Council in previous reports
The costs
incurred in the period to 30 September 2021 represent 30% of the annual budget
of $1,315,300.
As noted
above, the number of appeals lodged up until current calendar year has been
high. The commencement of appeals does not lie within the control of
Council, however there a number of factors that appear to have influenced the
volume of appeals:
· Amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment
Act made in 2013 reduced the timeframe for lodgement of an appeal from
twelve months to six months. This had the effect of applicants for more
substantial and complex development proposals lodging appeals for no other
reason than as a mechanism to preserve early appeal rights. The number of
development applications received by Council in recent periods has itself been
high. The recent amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment
Act which took effect in August 2020, reinstated the appeal timeframe
to 12 months.
· In addition, the prospect of changing economic market
conditions in recent periods appears to have led to urgency on the part of
developers, with a particularly high number and proportion of appeals commenced
at an early stage on the basis of deemed refusal. As a result, Court
listings are currently heavily booked and long delays for several months for
the holding of both mediation conferences and hearings are occurring. Most recently,
this situation has been exacerbated as a result of disruption caused by
measures associated with COVID-19.
· Due to the abovementioned delays in the listing of
Court-convened mediation conferences, the Court has required parties to
participate in without-prejudice meetings in the meantime. These meetings
have tended to result in additional iterations of amended plans being provided
by applicants during the appeal process and therefore, additional costs.
Current
delays in the Court have resulted in limited progress of many of the current
appeals. Notwithstanding these factors, Council’s overall success
rate in appeals has been high.
In
relation to costs recovered, the amount of $49,763 had been recovered as at the
end of the quarter to 30 September 2021 compared to an annual budget for costs
recovered of $105,100.
Outcomes
At an early stage of each appeal, Council as respondent, is
required to file with the Court a Statement of Facts and Contentions outlining
the grounds which Council asserts as warranting refusal of a development, or
alternatively, that may be addressed by way of conditions of consent.
In cases
where issues raised by Council are capable of resolution by the provision by
the applicant of additional information or amendment of the proposal, it is the
Court’s expectation that this should occur. The Court’s
current practice of listing appeals for a preliminary mediation conference
before a Commissioner of the Court pursuant to section 34 of the Land &
Environment Court Act, strongly encourages this.
In this
context, any of three outcomes can be regarded as favourable, namely:
1. If the appeal is in
relation to a deemed refusal of an application which, upon assessment, is
appropriate for approval: that the development is determined by Council,
allowing the appeal to be discontinued by the applicant and avoiding as much as
is practicable the incurring of unnecessary legal costs;
2. If the issues raised
by Council are capable of resolution by the applicant providing further
information, or amending the proposal: that this occurs, so that
development consent should be granted, either by Council or the Court;
3. If the issues raised
by Council are either not capable of resolution or the applicant declines to
take the steps that are necessary to resolve them: that the appeal is
either discontinued by the applicant, or dismissed (refused) by the Court.
Seven matters were concluded during the quarter.
A wholly or partly favourable outcome was achieved in all matters:
· Two matters were
dismissed by the Court;
· One matter was
resolved by agreement in accordance with an amended proposal;
· Four matters were
upheld in accordance with an amended proposal.
integrated
planning and reporting
Leadership & Governance
|
Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial
resources and assets to maximise delivery of
services.
|
Achieve financial sustainability targets
identified in the Long Term Financial
Plan.
|
Undertake quarterly reporting to Council on the financial
performance of the
organisation.
|
Governance Matters
Under
Section 428 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council is required to report
legal costs, and the outcome of each case in its Annual Report.
Risk Management
Quarterly reporting of legal
costs to Council together with information about the number, character and
outcomes of proceedings enable ongoing oversight of this area of
Council’s activity.
Financial Considerations
Land
& Environment Court legal costs form part of Council’s recurrent
operating budget.
Social Considerations
None undertaken or required.
Environmental Considerations
None undertaken or required.
Community Consultation
None undertaken or required.
Internal Consultation
This
report has been developed with input from Council’s Corporate Lawyer,
Director Corporate and Director Development & Regulation.
Summary
For the
quarter ended 30 September 2021, Council made payments of $402,328 on Land
& Environment Court appeals. This compares with the annual budget of
$1,315,300.
|
Recommendation:
That the
analysis of Land and Environment Court costs for the year ended 30 September
2021 be received and noted.
|
|
Tony Ly
Financial Accounting Officer
|
Jamie Taylor
Corporate Lawyer
|
|
Michael Miocic
Director Development & Regulation
|
David Marshall
Director Corporate
|
|
Attachments:
|
A1 ⇩
|
Individual
Case Summary September 2021 - Land and Environment Court Costs
|
|
2021/333670
|
|
APPENDIX No: 1 - Individual
Case Summary September 2021 - Land and Environment Court Costs
|
|
Item No: GB.3
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.4 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.4
|
FY00623/4
|
|
|
28 October 2021
|
Investment Report as at 31 October 2021
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
To present Council’s investment portfolio performance
for October 2021.
Background
Council’s investments are reported monthly to Council
in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government
(General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.
Comments
Investment Portfolio Performance Snapshot
The table below provides the investments portfolio
performance against targets identified in Council’s Investment Policy as
well as other key performance indicators based on industry benchmarks.
Cumulative
Investment Returns against Budget
The net return on investments for the financial year to the
end of October 2021 was $961,000 against an annual budget of $764,000 giving a
year-to-date favourable variance of $197,000 as shown in the table below.
A comparison of the
cumulative investment returns against year to date budget is shown in the Chart
below.
Cash
Flow and Investment Movements
Council’s total cash and
investment portfolio at the end of October 2021 was $198,975,000 compared to
$203,568,000 at the end of October2021, a net cash outflow of $4,593,000 mainly
due to creditor payments.
Two investments matured during
the month of October 2021. One new investment was made.
Investment
Performance against Industry Benchmark
Overall during the month of
September the investment performance was above the industry benchmark. The
benchmark is specific to the type of investment and the details are provided
below. AusBond Bank Bill Index is used for all Council’s investments.
Table 1 -
Investments Performance against Industry Benchmarks
Table 2
below provides a summary of all investments by type and performance during the
month.
Table
2 - Investments Portfolio Summary during October 2021
*
Weighted average returns
**
Funds in at-call/short term accounts are working funds kept for the purpose of
meeting short term cash outflows. At the time of investing interest
rates were comparable or more competitive to other equivalent investments. At-call
investments portfolio is being monitored on a regular basis to ensure funds are
reinvested at higher rates when opportunities arise, whilst also keeping and
adequate balance for short-term cash outflows.
***
Market Values as at 31 October 2021 were not
available at the time of writing the report
Investment
by Credit rating and Maturity Profile
The allocation of
Council’s investments by credit rating and the maturity profile are shown
below:
integrated
planning and reporting
Leadership & Governance
|
Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial resources
and assets to maximise delivery of services
|
Council maintains and improves its long term financial
position and performance
|
Continue to analyse opportunities to expand the revenue
base of Council
|
Governance
Matters
Council’s investments are made in accordance with the
Local Government Act (1993), the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and
Council’s Investment Policy.
Section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation
2005 states:
(1) The
responsible accounting officer of a council:
(a) must
provide the council with a written report (setting out details of all money
that the council has invested under section 625 of the Act) to be presented:
(i) if
only one ordinary meeting of the council is held in a month, at that meeting,
or
(ii) if
more than one such meeting is held in a month, at whichever of those meetings
the council by resolution determines, and
(b) must
include in the report a certificate as to whether or not the investment has
been made in accordance with the Act, the regulations and the council’s
investment policies.
(2) The report must be made up to
the last day of the month immediately preceding the meeting.
Risk
Management
Council manages the risk associated with investments by
diversifying the types of investment, credit quality, counterparty exposure and
term to maturity profile.
Council invests its funds in accordance with The Ministerial
Investment Order.
All investments are made with consideration of advice from
Council’s appointed investment advisor, CPG Research & Advisory.
Financial
Considerations
The budget for interest on investments for the financial
year 2021/2022 is $2,292,000. Of this amount approximately $1,539,300 is
restricted for the benefit of future expenditure relating to development
contributions, $273,900 transferred to the internally restricted Infrastructure
& Facility Reserve, and the remainder of $478,800 is available for
operations.
Social Considerations
Not applicable.
Environmental Considerations
Not applicable.
Community
Consultation
None undertaken or required.
Internal
Consultation
None undertaken or required.
Certification -
Responsible Accounting Officer
I hereby certify that the investments listed in the attached
report have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government
Act 1993, clause 212 of the Local Government General Regulation 2005 and
Council’s Investment Policy.
Summary
As at 31
October 2021:
· Council’s
total cash and investment portfolio is $198,975,000.
· The
net return on investments for the financial year to October 2021 was $961,000
against an annual budget of $764,000, giving a YTD favourable variance of
$197,000.
|
Recommendation:
That the:
A. Summary of investments and performance for October 2021 be
received and noted.
B. Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted
and the report adopted.
|
|
Tony Ly
Financial Accounting Officer
|
Angela Apostol
Manager Finance
|
|
David Marshall
Director Corporate
|
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.5 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.5
|
CY00578/4-4
|
Response to OLG Guidelines - Risk
Management and Internal Audit
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
The Office of Local Government (OLG) has updated the 2019
guidelines on the Internal Audit and Risk Management Framework to support and
inform the operations of Audit, Risk & improvement Committees (ARIC).
This report outlines the key changes that are proposed and how
they will impact Ku-ring-gai Council and the internal audit shared service.
Further, it provides the basis for providing a submission on behalf of Council.
The OLG is inviting submissions on the proposed guidelines
by 26 November 2021.
Background
Sections 428A and 428B of the
Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) have commenced. Under section 428A, all
councils (including county councils) and joint organisations are required to
have an audit risk and improvement committee (ARIC).
In August 2021, the OLG released
a ‘Summary of changes to the proposed new risk management and
internal audit framework in response to submissions’, from the
new Risk Management and Internal Audit Framework for Local Councils discussion
paper issued in September 2019. The full guidelines (A1) and summary of
changes (A2) are attached.
The new framework proposes the
following timelines:
· All
councils must appoint an ARIC from 4 June 2022.
· All
councils have until 2024 to establish their risk management framework and
internal audit function – attestation commences 2024.
· Councils
have until 2027 to ensure ARIC membership complies with the Guidelines,
allowing councils to transition into the new membership requirements as and
when membership of existing ARICs expires – attestation commences 2027.
Under the transitional
provisions of the Act, all councils (including county councils) and joint
organisations must have either appointed an ARIC or entered into an arrangement
with another council or joint organisation to share an ARIC before 4 June 2022
to independently review and advise on the following aspects of the council’s
operations:
(a) Compliance
(b) Risk management
(c) Fraud control
(d) Financial management
(e) Governance
(f) Implementation of the
strategic plan, delivery program and strategies
(g) Service reviews
(h) Collection of performance
measurement data by the council, and
(i) Any other matters prescribed
by the regulation.
Comments
At present, Council’s internal audit and risk
framework is generally operating within the intent of the nine (9) aspects of council’s
operation as per Section 428A and 428B of the Act requirements.
Council currently operates
within the intent of this framework and has identified the actions required to
achieve compliance with the proposed guidelines within the timeline.
Statutory Framework
Requirements
The analysis identified seven
(7) statutory framework requirements. The attached gap analysis (A3)
undertaken by Council’s Internal Auditor provides a summary of the
current position and proposed actions required to comply against the three core
requirements:
· Core
Requirement 1 to establish an ARIC consistent with the guidelines. Of
the forty-one (41) requirements the current Committee:
o Complies with
twenty (20)
o Partially complies
with seven (7)
o Fourteen (14) new
requirements will need to be addressed
· Core
requirement 2 requires the implementation of a risk management
framework. Of the eight (8) requirements:
o The current
draft risk management framework will comply with six (6)
o Partially complies
with one (1)
o One (1) new
requirement with respect to attestation will need to be addressed
· Core
requirement 3 requires the implementation of an internal audit function
consistent with the guidelines. These core requirements have been
assessed inclusive of the shared service arrangements. Of the twenty (20)
requirements:
o Eleven (11) are
currently complied with
o Seven (7) are
partially complied with
o Two (2)
requirements are new
The remaining four requirements
are new and include:
1. Annual Attestation from the General Manager (or Council)
that the guidelines have been implemented in the preceding financial year.
2. Exemption from compliance with guidelines. The Secretary
of DPIE may grant an exemption where there are extenuating circumstances, or
where proposed alternatives achieve the same outcome.
3. Councils that are non-compliant with statutory
requirements, without an exemption, may face enforcement action under the Act.
4. The NSW Auditor General may audit Council compliance with
the core requirements in the Act, Regulations and Guidelines.
Summary of changes and impact
on Ku-ring-gai Council
Ku-ring-gai has already implemented many of the reforms
sought by the Guideline and has a high quality ARIC, Internal Audit function
and a developing risk management framework. Nevertheless, the Guidelines will
increase the compliance burden on Council and local government as a
whole.
• The
NSW Auditor General may audit Council compliance with the core requirements in
the Act, Regulations and Guidelines, increasing costs and adding another level
of compliance.
• Attestation
and oversight by the ARIC Chair and GM will increase workloads.
• Responsibilities
of the Chair in developing plans etc. can be potentially onerous.
Compounded with the requirement for Independent Members to be ‘pre-qualified’
this could potentially limit the availability of candidates and potentially
increase remuneration costs.
· Having only one
councillor on the ARIC, and in a non-voting capacity is considered insufficient
in order to be inclusive and allow engagement with councillors. There
should be up to two voting councillors on the ARIC, while maintaining a
majority of three independents.
· From an internal
audit perspective having a fixed four year plan has the potential to lack
relevance and agility in line with Council’s risk appetite. Such an approach is not in line with better practices
prescribed in the internal audit standards. It must be revised at least
annually in line with a formal re-assessment of Council risks.
integrated planning and reporting
Good Governance and Management
|
Community Strategic
Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
L3.1: The organisation is recognised and distinguished by
its ethical decision-making, efficient management, innovation and quality
customer service.
|
L3.1.1: Integrated risk management, compliance and
internal control systems are in place to identify, assess, monitor and manage
risks throughout the organisation.
|
L3.1.1.1. Manage and Coordinate a compliant and effective
Enterprise Risk management System.
L3.1.1.2: Manage, coordinate, support and facilitate the
effective operation of Council’s Internal Audit function.
L3.1.1.5: Coordinate the efficient and effective delivery
of the North Shore Council’s Internal Audit Service.
|
|
L3.1 The organisation is recognised and distinguished by
its ethical decision-making, efficient management, innovation and quality
customer service
|
L3.1.2 Council’s Governance Framework is developed
to ensure probity and frequency
|
L3.1.2.4: Ensure Council fulfils its obligations under the
Local Government Act and Regulations, including compliance with legislative
changes and relevant guidelines and circulars.
|
Governance Matters
· The
requirements under core requirement 1 will require greater oversight aby the
ARIC.
· ARIC
and internal audit charters will require review to ensure they comply with the
model charters prescribed in the guidelines.
Risk Management
The draft enterprise risk
framework largely complies with the guidelines and follows risk management
standard ISO31000-2018.
Financial Considerations
The following costs require
consideration in the 2022/23 budget:
· There
will be increased costs to resource an additional independent member. The
Committee currently has one Chair and one independent member. Being a
Tier 3 council, at least one additional independent member will be required so
that there are at a minimum, three or more members.
· Increased
staff costs to adequately resource the internal audit and risk management
function may be required.
· External
assessment costs for both the ARIC and the internal audit function.
Social Considerations
Nil
Environmental Considerations
Nil
Community Consultation
Nil
Internal Consultation
There has been consultation
with the ARIC and relevant areas of Council’s Corporate Department.
In addition, there has been
consultation with the ARICs and senior management from the five member councils
of the shared service. Each Council will be deciding whether to make
their own submission. There will be no submission provided by the shared
service.
Summary
At present, the internal audit
and risk framework is generally operating within the intent of council’s operation
as per Section 428A and the shares service arrangement as per section 428B of
the Act requirements.
Based on a gap analysis
undertaken, Council can achieve the operation of the ARIC, risk management and internal
audit framework guidelines within the proposed timeframe.
Recommendation:
That Council consider the proposed Guideline and endorse the
issues identified in this report for Council’s submission to the OLG by
26 November 2021.
|
Susan Leahy
Head of Internal Audit
|
|
|
Attachments:
|
A1 ⇩
|
Summary
Guide – changes made to the proposed new framework in response to
submissions
|
|
2021/283699
|
|
|
A2⇩
|
Risk
Management and Internal Audit for local councils in NSW- Full Guidelines
|
|
2021/283697
|
|
|
A3⇩
|
OLG
Guidelines Gap Analysis
|
|
2021/334090
|
|
APPENDIX No: 1 - Summary
Guide – changes made to the proposed new framework in response to
submissions
|
|
Item No: GB.5
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 2 - Risk
Management and Internal Audit for local councils in NSW- Full Guidelines
|
|
Item No: GB.5
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 3 - OLG
Guidelines Gap Analysis
|
|
Item No: GB.5
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.6 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.6
|
S12712-3
|
St Ives Indoor Sports Centre – Project
Update
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
To update Council on the St Ives Indoor Sports Centre
project.
Background
At the OMC 15 June 2021 Council resolved:
A. Council receive and note updates contained within this
report.
B. Council notes its decision of 26 February 2019, viz.:
“That
Council, in accordance with 55(3)(i) of the
Local Government Act 1993 determines that the use of consultants who have
documented two courts for the Department of Education constitutes extenuating
circumstances that should result in cost benefits for Council in designing and
documenting a further two court at the same site and to the same design
standards and specifications”,
continues to be relied upon in
the documentation of this project for construction.
The Heads of Agreement was executed by both parties in March
2021.
The DA was lodged at the end of June 2021 and remains under
assessment at the time of this report.
Negotiations on the terms of the Funding Deed and Licence
are on-going.
Comments
The Project has entered Gateway 4 (Development Application
– Consideration & Approval) of the Major Projects Gateway governance
process. The DA was lodged 29 June (lodgement fees paid early July). The
Department of Education (DoE) lodged the DA and by doing so it became a
Crown DA. Requests for more information from Council’s DA assessment team
have been received and are currently been worked on/answered by the consultant
design team.
The draft Deed & Licence were received from DoE on 2
September 2021. At the Major Project Steering Committee (MPSC) of 29
September 2021, the committee noted that there are significant outstanding
issues with the Deed and Licence, including not insignificant departures from
the Heads of Agreement (HOA). A review of the Deed & Licence by
Minter Ellison (ME) is included as Confidential Attachment A1
to this report as well as a “risk assessment’ by ME Confidential
Attachment A2.
Some points of note in the risk table include:
· The HOA provides
that the Department will obtain the prior approval of Council (acting reasonably)
to the terms (including the price) of the design and construction contract with
the contractor and all contracts with other contractors and consultants. At
this time, the Project Deed does not provide that the Department will obtain
the prior approval of Council to the terms of the consultancy contracts.
· The HOA provides
that the Council may withdraw from the Project if the tender results in a total
cost for the delivery of the Council Facilities (excluding external project
management fees) that are not within the Council's project budget including
contingency. The right to withdraw is not currently included within the Project
Deed.
· The Licence
defines the Operational Expenses to be the demonstrated costs incurred by
Council in operating the booking system. This is not consistent with the HOA
which defines Operational Expenses more broadly to include Council's
contributions to the Facility Costs and the internal management costs, costs of
finance and depreciation/amortisations costs. It should be noted that Council
shares half of the Revenue to the extent that Revenue exceeds the Operational
Expenses, so factoring in internal management costs and so on may be important.
Negotiations between Council and DoE on the Terms of the
Deed & Licence are on-going at this time. At the time of writing this
report the matter sits with the DoE.
With negotiations being slow, the programme is now under
pressure as DoE are not able to progress with tendering the project until the
Deed is executed. Additionally, external PM services cannot be procured by
SINSW until the Deed is agreed. This is because DoE does not have funds for
implementing and shared use agreements without other parties funding DoE
internal costs for shared use arrangements. Therefore, the MPSC proposed that
Council procure external PM services to facilitate approval of Detailed Design
and Tender Documents by DoE only i.e., not including construction phase
services.
The project is currently behind schedule according to the
sports grant milestones agreed in 25 February 2019. An email was received
14 October from the Office of Sport prompting Council to submit amended
milestone dates for consideration and approval for payment of the $3.5m grant
offered for this project. A request for variation to adjust the Milestone
dates is attached to this report for Council endorsement (see Attachment A3).
integrated planning and reporting
Theme
1 Community, People and Culture
|
Community Strategic
Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
C4.1: A community that embraces healthier lifestyle
choices and practices.
|
A range of cultural, recreational and leisure facilities
and activities are available to encourage social interaction and stimulate everyday
wellbeing.
|
Healthy and active lifestyle programs and activities are
delivered in collaboration with agencies and partners.
|
Theme
3 Places, Spaces and Infrastructure
|
Community Strategic
Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
P6.1: Recreation, sporting and
leisure facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and
changing needs.
|
A program is being implemented
to improve existing recreation, sporting and leisure facilities and
facilitate the establishment of new facilities.
|
Negotiate a Heads of Agreement
with the Department of Education for the construction and joint usage of an
indoor sports facility at St Ives High School.
|
|
P6.1: Recreation, sporting and
leisure facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and
changing needs.
|
Partnerships are established
with community groups and organisations to optimise the availability and use
of sporting, recreation and leisure facilities.
|
Engage with community partners
to improve sporting, leisure and recreational facilities through
partnerships, grant funding and other external funding opportunities.
|
Governance Matters
On 4 March 2020 Council received
a letter of support from the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) following the
Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) assurance process. The letter of
support included a program of work as advisory notes, being key considerations
to implement the LSPS. Item 2 in the advisory notes provides:
|
Shared use agreements
|
|
|
Planning Priority N3,
Action 10 seeks to optimise the use of available public land for social
infrastructure.
|
Work with Department of
Education on the potential delivery of a new indoor sports facility for St
Ives High School.
|
Continuing to work with DoE
on this project is consistent with Council’s obligations to implement its
LSPS.
Monthly project reports to MPSC are prepared in line with
the approved Major Projects Governance Structure.
Risk Management
The
following risks have been identified for the project:
· if tender costs for construction come in higher than
expected and/or sufficient budget is not allocated for the project, Council may
not be able to deliver the project;
· the DoE will be managing the project and hence
Council’s ability to control costs will be limited;
· once the project proceeds further and more costs are sunk,
it may be difficult to withdraw from the project no matter how much costs
increase;
· the HoA is not binding, there is a risk the terms may
change again through commercial negotiations i.e. if Council and DoE cannot
agree to terms and conditions of a Funding Deed & Licence the project is
unviable for Council;
· risk to Council’s broader financial position if asset
sales are not achieved to fund the project as currently reflected in
Council’s Long Term Financial Plan and Operational Program and Delivery
Plan;
· with Council’s application for the Greater Sydney
Sports Facility Fund being successful for $3.5 million towards the
project, there is reputational risk if Council do not proceed with the project;
and
· Office
of Sport may reject the request for variation to Milestone dates and withdraw
the $3.5m funding grant.
Financial Considerations
On 28 April 2020 Council
resolved to part fund the project through a short-term bank loan due to delays
in asset sales. A TCorp loan application was approved 1 December 2020 and a
LCLI (Low cost loans initiative) was approved March 2021.
Due to Council bearing all project costs including risk of
cost overruns (which it cannot necessarily control) up to the project budget,
it was recommended to Council that an additional 5% contingency on top of the
estimated budget be added now so that a larger amount is applied for in a loan.
This now makes the total estimated project budget to be $19.6m.
Social Considerations
A long term objective of
Council’s Community Strategic Plan is to ensure that recreation,
sporting, and leisure facilities are available to meet the community’s
diverse and changing needs.
As the age profile of the
community changes, different preferences for recreation and leisure are
emerging. Through its own programs Council will maintain its emphasis on access
to a range of fulfilling recreation and leisure opportunities including multi-use
spaces, facilities and infrastructure. This will include the acquisition of
land for new parks under the Ku-ring-gai Open Space Acquisition Strategy.
Council will continue to work closely with sporting organisations and clubs,
user groups and residents to upgrade and build sustainable sports grounds,
netball, tennis and multi-sport courts, clubhouse facilities and other
recreational facilities and amenities to provide for the needs of the
population into the future. Many of these works require extended planning and
are subject to available funding. Council will also continue to identify
opportunities for multi-use recreational facilities, including optimising the
community’s use of Council’s existing facilities.
The inclusion of community
use of the facilities at St Ives High School will provide increased social and
cultural venues for the community and enable better utilisation of facilities.
Environmental Considerations
Environmental considerations
have been taken into account in project design and documentation of the DA.
Community Consultation
DoE have undertaken some preliminary consultation with the
broader community as is part of their due process with any DA.
Statutory notification has also been carried out as part of
the DA process.
Further consultation with sporting bodies and the intended
future users will be done while the DA is under assessment.
Internal Consultation
This project has been
reported through Council’s Major Projects Steering Committee and the
Major Projects Advisory Committee on a number of occasions.
Summary
The draft Deed & Licence were received from DoE on 2
September 2021. At the Major Project Steering Committee (MPSC) of 29
September 2021, the committee noted that there are significant outstanding
issues with the Deed and Licence, including not insignificant departures from
the Heads of Agreement (HOA). A review of the Deed & Licence by
Minter Ellison (ME) is included as Confidential Attachment A1
to this report as well as a “risk assessment” by ME Confidential
Attachment A2.
Negotiations between Council and DoE on the Terms of the
Deed & Licence are on-going at this time. At the time of writing this
report, the matter sits with the DoE.
The project is currently behind schedule according to the
sports grant milestones agreed in February 2019. An email was received 14
October from the Office of Sport prompting Council to submit amended milestone
dates for consideration and approval for payment of the $3.5m grant offered for
this project. A request for variation to adjust the Milestone dates is
attached to this report for Council endorsement.
Recommendation:
That Council:
A. Receive
and note project updates contained within this report.
B. Endorse
the request for variation to adjust the Sports Grant milestone dates as
attached to this report.
|
Dean Payne
Project Leader – Strategy & Environment
|
Andrew Watson
Director Strategy & Environment
|
|
Attachments:
|
A1
|
Funding
Deed with ME mark-ups
|
|
Confidential
|
|
|
A2
|
Risk
Table from ME
|
|
Confidential
|
|
|
A3 ⇩
|
Variation
Request form for Office of Sport
|
|
2021/327769
|
|
APPENDIX No: 3 - Variation
Request form for Office of Sport
|
|
Item No: GB.6
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.7 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.7
|
S13316
|
Planning Proposal to rezone and heritage
list Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
To present the Planning Proposal for the heritage listing
and rezoning of Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club for consideration.
Background
The Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Clubs are associated
with a number of parcels of land (Lot 3 DP 817195 and Lot 2 DP 817195 and Lot
11 DP 1083606 and Lot B DP 380305 and Lot 11 DP 1083606), which are located
adjacent to each other within the Springdale Heritage Conservation Area
(‘HCA’). The site is currently zoned R2 Low Density Residential. A
heritage assessment has concluded that the site reaches the threshold for a
local heritage listing against the New South Wales (‘NSW’) Heritage
criteria. The assessment is included as Attachment A2.
On 28 February 2021, Council received correspondence from a
local community member, requesting that an ‘…Urgent
Interim Heritage Order to apply to both the Killara Bowling Club Limited and
Killara Lawn Tennis Club Limited properties - with frontages to Arnold Street,
Locksley Street and Werona Avenue, Killara.’
Council officers advised the community member that Council
does not have the delegation to make an Interim Heritage Order
(‘IHO’) as the site is located within the Springdale HCA. It was
suggested that he approach NSW Heritage with the IHO request and seek their
feedback and action on the matter.
On 2 March 2021, NSW Heritage (OEH) requested information
from Council in relation to the heritage significance of the Killara Bowling
and Killara Tennis Clubs in response to the community member’s request.
Following a telephone conversation with NSW Heritage, Council provided general
information about the planning and heritage affectations relating to the site
to NSW Heritage, including the current zoning, permissible uses and heritage
inventory information for a number of items within the vicinity.
On 15 March 2021, Council received correspondence from NSW
Heritage to the community member which outlined that they were not proceeding
with making an IHO in this instance, as they did not deem the site to reach the
threshold for state significance nor did they consider it to be under any
imminent threat (Attachment A3). NSW Heritage further
noted that they would ‘encourage Council to consider reviewing Killara
Bowling Club and Killara Lawn Tennis Club as part of its review of items within
the Springdale Road Heritage Conservation Area and engage with [the community
member] and the community in assessing the sites local heritage.’
Following the feedback from NSW Heritage, Council officers
began preliminary investigations into the heritage significance of the site.
Despite their location within the Springdale HCA, the significance of this HCA
has been previously associated with significant architectural styles and
residential allotments. Therefore, the Springdale HCA could not necessarily
offer any protection of the Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club that may be required
from a heritage perspective.
At the 20 April 2021 Ku-ring-gai Council Public Forum, Mr
E.C Miller addressed Council regarding the potential listing of the Killara
Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club. Former president of the Killara Lawn Tennis Club,
Mr. R Heinrich, spoke on behalf of Mr. T Veale the current president, in
support of the listing of the Club.
At the 11 May 2021 Public Forum, community member Mr. E.C
Miller and the former President of Killara Lawn Tennis Club, Mr. R Heinrich,
addressed the Council again in support of the heritage listing of the Killara
Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club. Mr. R Heinrich indicated that there was support
from the Killara Lawn Tennis Club board members as well as a petition signed by
over 180 people in support of the heritage listing.
At the 18 May 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council resolved:
‘That:
A. That as a matter of urgency staff
carry out a preliminary review of the heritage significance of the Killara
Bowling Club and Killara Lawn Tennis Club.
B. That
a report be brought back to Council’s June meeting outlining the results
of the preliminary review of heritage significance with a view to initiating a
Planning Proposal to list the properties as heritage items in Council’s
Local Environmental Plan if appropriate.’
Council officers prepared a preliminary heritage assessment
of the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Clubs and discussed this with the
Ku-ring-gai Heritage Reference Committee (‘HRC’) on Thursday, 19
May 2021. The HRC agreed with the findings of the heritage assessment and
suggested that, with minor refinement, this would be sufficient to support the
Planning Proposal to Gateway Determination for the heritage listing of the
site. HRC outlined that this would expedite the process and save resources that
would otherwise be expended on an external heritage consultant. The HRC minutes
from the May meeting are included as Attachment A4.
At the 15 June 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council it was
resolved that:
A. Council prepares a planning proposal to amend KLEP
2015 to include the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club sites (Lot 3 DP 817195
and Lot 2 DP 817195 and Lot 11 DP 1083606 and Lot B DP 380305 and Lot 11 DP
1083606) as a proposed heritage item in Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map.
B. If in the meantime there is any threat of imminent
harm to either of the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club sites (Lot 3 DP
817195 and Lot 2 DP 817195 and Lot 11 DP 1083606 and Lot B DP 380305 and Lot 11
DP 1083606), Council request that NSW Heritage make an IHO on both properties
to enable the sites to have protection from that harm until a Planning Proposal
can be progressed to Gateway Determination.’
The Planning Proposal to heritage list the site as a local
heritage item on Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map of the KLEP 2015 is
included as Attachment A1.
The Council Report and Resolution
from the 15 June 2021 OMC is included as Attachment A5.
At the June Public Forum, Mr E.C. Miller addressed the
Council for the third time in support of the heritage assessment and the
heritage listing of the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club. Mr E.C. Miller
referred to a letter of heritage advice prepared by GML Heritage Pty Ltd at his
request. The advice states that ‘appropriate recognition and
protection of the heritage values of the Killara Lawn Tennis Club and Killara
Bowling Club site, are of vital important in maintaining the valued community
and heritage character of the suburb, and the HCA in particular. In this
context, the proposed heritage listing of the site as an individual heritage
item in KLEP 2015 is strongly supported’. The heritage advice
prepared by GML Heritage Pty Ltd is included as Attachment A6.
Former President of the Killara Lawn Tennis Club, Mr R.
Heinrich addressed Council for the third time in support of the heritage
listing. Mr R. Heinrich referred to letters of support received from the
Honourable Jonathan O’Dea MP and the Honourable Paul Fletcher MP. The
letters of support are included as Attachment A7.
Mr B. Shirvington, Chairman of the Board of Directors of
Killara Bowling Club and Ms M. Middleton also addressed the Council in support
of the heritage listing of the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club.
The Planning Proposal was presented to the KLPP on 16 August
2021 and the matter was deferred.
The Panel advised:
A. The matter be deferred to enable Council to provide a
clearer statement of the objectives of the Planning Proposal with more specific
detail of the heritage significance of the site. That further information be
provided on whether the Planning Proposal is the best means of achieving these
objectives.
The KLPP Advice is included
as Attachment A8.
The Panel deferred the matter to enable Council to provide
further information on whether heritage listing the site was the best means to
meet the objectives of the Planning Proposal. Alternatives discussed in the
meeting included rezoning the site to RE2 Private Recreation or preparing a
site specific DCP for the site. The Panel raised concerns regarding the future
development of the site.
The Planning Proposal was reconsidered by the KLPP on 18
October 2021. Further information was provided regarding whether the heritage
listing of the site was the best means to meet the objectives of the Planning
Proposal and the Panel was asked to provide advice to Council as to whether the
Planning Proposal should be amended to pursue rezoning the site to RE2 Private
Recreation in tandem with the heritage listing.
Several alternative options were assessed as part of the
report, including rezoning the site from R2 Low Density Residential to RE2
Private Recreation. Rezoning the site to RE2 Private Recreation would not
protect the heritage values of the site in isolation. However, rezoning the
site in tandem with the proposed heritage listing would both provide
recognition of the specific heritage values of the site as well as protect the
recreational values of the Clubs.
Another option assessed as part of the report was to
consider adjusting the statement of significance for the Springdale
Conservation Area to better embrace the significance of the Killara Bowling and
Lawn Tennis Clubs. The Springdale Conservation Area has been previously
associated with significant architectural styles and residential allotments. It
is intended that the statement of significance for the Springdale conservation
area will be adjusted, however, adjusting the statement of significance alone
would not recognise the full heritage significance of the site and it is
important to consider the significance of the Clubs within their own right.
Furthermore, the significance of the site goes beyond that of the conservation
area and the protection granted by the conservation area would not necessarily
celebrate and protect the specific heritage values of the site.
At the October 2021 KLPP meeting, the Panel advised:
A. The Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel is of the opinion
that the proposal has sufficient strategic and site specific merit and
therefore advises Council that the Planning Proposal to amend Schedule 5 of the
KLEP 2015 to include as a local heritage item Killara Bowling Club and Killara
Lawn Tennis Club (Lot 3 DP 817195 and Lot 2 DP 817195 and Lot 11 DP 1083606 and
Lot B DP 380305 and Lot 11 DP 1083606) be submitted to the Department of
Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination.
B. The Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel does not have
sufficient information to provide advice in regard to any prospective re-zoning
of the site.
The KLPP Report and Advice is
included as Attachment A9.
The revised Springdale Conservation Area Statement is
included at Attachment A10.
Comments
Assessment against the NSW Heritage Criteria
The significance of the Killara Bowling and Tennis Clubs has
been considered against the NSW Heritage criteria as outlined below.
a) an item
is important in the course, or pattern, of NSW’s cultural or natural
history:
The Killara Bowling and Tennis Clubs have continued to
demonstrate strong links to the Australian sporting culture for over a century,
since the declaration of JG Edwards in the late nineteenth century of the
sites’ suitability for the purpose of park and/or recreation. Both established
by JG Edwards, the site has continued to function for the purposes of a
Tennis Club since 1910 and Bowling Club since 1916 and have had an ongoing
affiliation with each other, which formally ended in 1919, but has informally
continued as a product of their proximity to one another and symbiotic uses.
b) an item
has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group
of persons, of importance in NSW’s cultural or natural history:
The site has a strong historical links to their founder, JG
Edwards, who resided in the area since the 1850s. Edwards demonstrated the
qualities of an early Australian entrepreneur, having acquired, established and
subdivided 160 acres known as the Springdale Estate in the late nineteenth
century. Often referred to as the ‘King of Killara’, Edwards was
known as an instigator in the establishment of the North Shore railway line,
including the construction of a station at Killara. The clubs have
provided recreational facilities for the immediate Killara and wider North
Shore community for over a century.
The Tennis Club has been associated with notable
Australians, including International Tennis players Neale Fraser, Lew Hoad,
Fred Stolle and Ken Rosewell.
The Bowling Club has historic links to notable local people
such as former President George Gissing who maintained a membership of the club
for over 30 years until his death in 1955. The Arnold Street brick fence was
later donated in memory of Gissing, by his family.
c) an item
is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of
creative or technical achievement in NSW:
The site is visually prominent within the Springdale
Conservation Area, maintaining landmark qualities through their recreational
and open space characteristics, which provide visual distinction within the
highly historic and suburban precinct. The regularity and rectilinear nature of
the tennis courts and bowling greens, centrally flanked by the clubhouses,
which continue to face their respective sporting precincts, conveys an
aesthetically pleasing sense of order to the site.
The existing tennis clubhouse has the potential to display
an aesthetically pleasing and distinctive use of brickwork through its apparent
high-quality construction and finer detailing.
The garden elements, fencing and historic stone walls are
notable.
d) an item
has strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group
in NSW for social, cultural or spiritual reasons:
The clubs have provided recreational facilities for the
North Shore community for over a century and have been associated with
prominent Australian Tennis players such Neale Fraser, Lew Hoad, Fred Stolle
and Ken Rosewell. The location of the clubs, side-by-side, within the suburban
precinct has ensured that strong links with the surrounding community have been
maintained since their establishment and the residential subdivision in the
early twentieth century.
e) an item
has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of
NSW’s cultural or natural history:
Without further research, it is not known whether the site
would meet the threshold for this criterion.
f) an item
possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of NSW’s cultural or
natural history:
Whilst part of the site is associated with lawn bowls, which
has continued to lose popularity as a sport within Australian society, without
further research or extensive comparative analysis, it is not known whether the
site would meet the threshold for this criterion.
The site represents an early and possibly rare example of a
sporting precinct within an affluent residential setting, whose curtilages have
not been affected by the pressure of development.
g) an item is
important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of
NSW’s
- cultural or natural
places; or
- cultural or natural
environments.
Together, the clubs have the ability to represent the early
entrepreneurialism of JG Edwards, who had the ability to envisage and manifest
the ongoing use of the site for recreational purposes within a wider
residential precinct.
The history of the site and built fabric that has evolved is
somewhat representative of economic fluctuations, changing popularities of
sports as well as changes in social values, such as the shifting opinions in
relation to women.
Statement of Significance
Individually and combined,
the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Clubs demonstrate significance at a local
level through their ongoing association with the activities of lawn bowls and
tennis within the local area and wider North Shore for over a century.
The site has strong historical links to their founder, JG
Edwards, who resided in the area since the 1850s. Referred to as the
‘King of Killara’, Edwards demonstrated the qualities of an early
Australian entrepreneur, having acquired, established and subdivided 160 acres
known as the Springdale Estate in the late nineteenth century.
The site has continued to function for the purposes of a
Tennis Club since 1910 and Bowling Club since 1916 and have had an ongoing
affiliation with each other, which formally ended in 1919, but has informally
continued as a product of their proximity to one another and symbiotic
uses.
The Tennis Club has been associated with notable
Australians, including International Tennis players Neale Fraser, Lew Hoad,
Fred Stolle and Ken Rosewell whilst the Bowling Club has strong links to
prominent local community members such as former President George Gissing.
The Clubs are visually prominent within the Springdale
Conservation Area, maintaining landmark qualities through their recreational
and open space characteristics, which provide visual distinction within the
highly historic and suburban precinct. The regularity and rectilinear nature of
the tennis courts and bowling greens, centrally flanked by the clubhouses,
which continue to face their respective sporting precincts, conveys an
aesthetically pleasing sense of order to the site. The garden elements, fencing
and historic stone walls are notable.
Upon brief inspection, the existing tennis Clubhouse has the
potential to display an aesthetically distinctive use of brickwork with finer
detailing that is of interest.
The historical evolution of the Clubs, including the built
fabric that physically represents this, has continued to evolve because of
economic fluctuations and changes in social values, such as the shifting
opinions in relation to women. Together, the clubs have the ability to
represent early the entrepreneurialism of JG Edwards, who had the ability to
envisage and manifest the ongoing use of the site for recreational purposes
within a wider residential precinct.
The configuration of the courts and greens remains intact as
well as their relationship to the central clubhouse buildings, which have
undergone changes over time. Neither of the original clubhouses remains despite
possible evidence of the earlier Bowling Clubhouse within the extant fabric.
A draft Heritage Inventory (‘SHI’) form for the
Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club has been prepared to support the Planning
Proposal and is included as Attachment A11.
Rezoning of the site to RE2 Private Recreation
While the KLPP formed the view that it did not have
sufficient information to provide advice on any prospective re-zoning of the
site, the rezoning of the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Clubs sites to RE2
Private Recreation is considered to have merit. The rezoning, undertaken in
tandem with the heritage listing, is considered to be the best means to meet
the objectives to recognise the heritage and recreational value of the site,
and to ensure that the zoning objectives accurately reflect the past and
present recreational use of the site.
The objectives of the RE2 Private Recreation zone more
accurately reflect the past and present use of the site than the objectives of
the current zoning of R2 Low Density Residential. The RE2 Private Recreation
zone objectives in the KLEP 2015 are as follows:
· To
enable land to be used for private open space or recreational purposes.
· To
provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land
uses.
· To
protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.
The Killara Bowling and Tennis Clubs have provided
recreational facilities for the immediate Killara and wider North Shore
community and continued to demonstrate strong links to the Australian sporting
culture for over a century, since the declaration of JG Edwards in the late
nineteenth century of the sites’ suitability for the purpose of park
and/or recreation. The clubs represent the early entrepreneurialism of JG
Edwards, who had the ability to envisage and manifest the ongoing use of the
site for recreational purposes within a wider residential precinct.
In addition, the land uses permissible under the RE2 Private
Recreation reflect the current use of the site while providing flexibility for
a range of potential future uses that could be compatible with the existing
context of the site. These uses include, but are not limited to: Community
facilities; Environmental facilities; Environmental protection works; Flood
mitigation works; Information and education facilities; Kiosks; Markets;
Recreation areas; Recreation facilities (indoor); Recreation facilities
(outdoor); Registered clubs.
Rezoning the site to RE2 Private Recreation will ensure the
preservation of the recreational and open space characteristics of the site.
integrated planning and reporting
Theme 3: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure
|
Community Strategic
Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
Ku-ring-gai’s
heritage is protected, promoted and responsibly managed.
|
Strategies, plans and processes are in place to
effectively protect and preserve Ku-ring-gai’s heritage assets.
|
Implement, monitor and review Ku-ring-gai’s heritage
planning controls including the development of a heritage strategy.
|
Governance Matters
This report addresses the first stage in obtaining a Gateway
Determination for a Planning Proposal which seeks to list an item of local
heritage significance under an amendment to Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015. If the
Planning Proposal is supported by the Department of Planning, Industry and
Environment (‘DPIE’), the Planning Proposal will be placed on
exhibition seeking further State agency and stakeholder feedback prior to being
reported back to Council to consider if the property should be formally listed.
The process for the preparation and implementation of
planning proposals is governed by the provisions of the Environmental
Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (‘EP&A Act’). Council
will seek the plan-making delegation under Section 3.36(2) of the EP&A Act
to finalise the Planning Proposal.
Local Planning Panels
Direction – Planning Proposals issued by the Minister for Planning
under section 9.1 of the EP&A Act requires Council to refer all planning
proposals prepared after 1 June 2018 to the Local Planning Panel for advice,
before it is forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
for a Gateway Determination. The KLPP has reviewed the Planning Proposal and
provided advice that they support the Planning Proposal to heritage list the
site to be submitted to the DPIE for a Gateway Determination. The panel
advised that they did not have sufficient information to provide advice in
regard rezoning the site.
Risk Management
There is a community expectation that places of heritage
significance within the Ku-ring-gai Council LGA will be identified and
protected. There is a strategic risk of damaging the reputation of Council if
these culturally significant places are not identified and considered for
protection.
Financial Considerations
There is a community expectation that places of heritage
significance within the Ku-ring-gai Council LGA will be identified and
protected. There is a strategic risk of damaging the reputation of Council if
these culturally significant places are not identified and considered for
protection. The cost of preparing this report is covered by the Urban Planning
& Heritage Budget – Strategy and Environment Department.
Social Considerations
The identification and protection of Ku-ring-gai’s
heritage places contributes to the ongoing conservation of Ku-ring-gai’s
community-valued historic landscape and garden suburbs. The Planning Proposal
will result in positive social effects by facilitating the conservation of an
item of cultural heritage and maintaining a recreational facility that has
significance to the local community.
Environmental Considerations
The retention and conservation of heritage places has an
important role in protecting the environment. The environmental sustainability
benefits afforded by the retention of heritage places includes the substantial
reduction in building demolition and new construction waste, and the
conservation of embodied energy in the existing buildings. There is no
adverse environmental impacts envisaged as a result of the current and intended
future use of the site for recreational purposes.
Community Consultation
The Killara Lawn Tennis Club and the Killara Bowling Club
have been notified on multiple occasions, both when the matter was to be
considered by Council and of the Council resolution. Members of the community
as well as representatives of the clubs have addressed the Council in support
of the heritage listing of the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club.
Should the Planning Proposal receive a favourable Gateway
Determination, it will be exhibited in accordance with the DPIE’s Gateway
Determination requirements and with explanatory heritage information. This will
involve appropriate notification and receipt of submissions on the draft
Planning Proposal from the relevant State agencies and the general community,
and a further report back to Council regarding this matter. Neighbouring
properties and both Clubs will be individually notified of the public exhibition
and have the opportunity to provide feedback.
Internal Consultation
Consultation with relevant Departments of Council has taken
place in preparing this report.
Council’s Heritage Reference Committee in May 2021
reviewed the proposed heritage item and moved a unanimous decision to support
the listing based on the findings of the preliminary heritage assessment.
Summary
A heritage assessment has
concluded that the site meets the threshold for listing as a local heritage
item on Schedule 5 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015. A revised
statement for the Springdale Conservation Area has been presented, which
references the site as a significant landmark within the HCA. The Planning
Proposal to heritage list the Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club has been
supported by the Heritage Reference Committee and the Ku-ring-gai Local
Planning Panel.
Pursuing the rezoning of the
Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club to RE2 Private Recreation in tandem with
the heritage listing is considered to be the best means to meet the objectives
to recognise the heritage and recreational value of the site, and to ensure
that the zoning objectives accurately reflect the past and present use of the
site. A Planning Proposal to rezone Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club and
the associated allotments from R2 Low Density Residential to RE2 Private
Recreation and to list the site as a heritage item and should be progressed to
Gateway Determination.
Recommendation:
That:
A. Council
adopt the planning proposal included as Attachment A1 to list Killara Bowling
and Lawn Tennis Clubs and the associated allotments (Lot 3 DP 817195 and Lot 2
DP 817195 and Lot 11 DP 1083606 and Lot B DP 380305 and Lot 11 DP 1083606) as a
local heritage item on Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map of the KLEP 2015.
B. The
planning proposal be amended to include the rezoning of the Killara Bowling and
Lawn Tennis Clubs (‘the Site’) from R2 Low Density Residential to
RE2 Private Recreation.
C. The
amended Planning Proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning and
Environment for a Gateway Determination in accordance with the provisions of
the EP&A Act and Regulations.
D. Council
request the plan making delegation under Section 3.36(2) of the EP&A Act
for this Planning Proposal.
E. Upon
receipt of a favourable Gateway Determination, the exhibition and consultation
process is to be carried out in accordance with the Gateway Determination and
requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.
|
Angela Smidmore
Urban Planner
|
Vanessa Holtham
Heritage Planner Specialist
|
|
Craige Wyse
Team Leader Urban Planning
|
Antony Fabbro
Manager Urban & Heritage Planning
|
|
Andrew Watson
Director Strategy & Environment
|
|
|
Attachments:
|
A1⇩
|
Planning
Proposal to heritage list Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club
|
|
2021/324008
|
|
|
A2 ⇩
|
Appendix
A - Heritage Assessment of Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club - September
2021
|
|
2021/271781
|
|
|
A3⇩
|
Appendix
B - Letter - Response to request for an Interim Heritage Order - NSW Heritage
- March 2021
|
|
2021/075266
|
|
|
A4⇩
|
Appendix
C - Heritage Reference Committee Minutes - 20 May 2021
|
|
2021/153612
|
|
|
A5⇩
|
Appendix
D - Council report and resolution - OMC 15 June 2021
|
|
2021/221186
|
|
|
A6⇩
|
Heritage
Advice from GML Heritage Pty Ltd sought by E.C. Miller - June 2021
|
|
2021/268997
|
|
|
A7⇩
|
Letters
of support received from Jonathan O'Dea MP and Paul Fletcher MP to Killara
Bowling Club
|
|
2021/261813
|
|
|
A8⇩
|
Ku-ring-gai
Local Planning Panel Meeting - KLPP Advice - August 2021
|
|
2021/323692
|
|
|
A9⇩
|
Ku-ring-gai
Local Planning Panel Meeting - KLPP report and advice - 18 October 2021
|
|
2021/323627
|
|
|
A10⇩
|
Revised
Springdale Conservation Area Statement
|
|
2021/271782
|
|
|
A11⇩
|
SHI
Form - Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club
|
|
2021/271778
|
|
APPENDIX No: 1 - Planning
Proposal to heritage list Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 2 - Appendix
A - Heritage Assessment of Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club - September
2021
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 3 - Appendix
B - Letter - Response to request for an Interim Heritage Order - NSW Heritage
- March 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 4 - Appendix
C - Heritage Reference Committee Minutes - 20 May 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 5 - Appendix
D - Council report and resolution - OMC 15 June 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 6 - Heritage
Advice from GML Heritage Pty Ltd sought by E.C. Miller - June 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 7 - Letters
of support received from Jonathan O'Dea MP and Paul Fletcher MP to Killara
Bowling Club
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 8 - Ku-ring-gai
Local Planning Panel Meeting - KLPP Advice - August 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 9 - Ku-ring-gai
Local Planning Panel Meeting - KLPP report and advice - 18 October 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX
No: 10 - Revised
Springdale Conservation Area Statement
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
APPENDIX No: 11 - SHI
Form - Killara Bowling and Lawn Tennis Club
|
|
Item No: GB.7
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
GB.8 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
GB.8
|
S13492
|
St Ives Showground & Precinct Lands
Plan of Management
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
|
purpose of report:
|
To have Council adopt the St
Ives Showground and Precinct Lands - Final Plan of Management, dated October
2021.
|
|
|
|
|
background:
|
Section
3.23(6) & (7) of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 requires all
NSW councils to adopt plans of management for all reserves for which they are
the appointed Crown Land Manager. The new plans of management must meet both
the requirements of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 and the Local
Government Act 1993.
The 2021 St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands –
Plan of Management has undergone extensive external and internal consultation
including public exhibition and submission to the NSW Minister for Planning
and Public Spaces for landowner’s approval.
|
|
|
|
|
comments:
|
The St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands - Plan of
Management has been prepared and exhibited in accordance with the Crown
Land Management Act 2016 and the Local Government Act 1993.
As landowner, the NSW Department of Planning, Industry
and Environment - Crown Lands has requested a minor amendment for their
consent to Council under clause 70B of the Crown Land Management Regulation
2018 (CLM Reg).
|
|
|
|
|
recommendation:
|
That Council adopt the St Ives
Showground and Precinct Lands - Final Plan of Management, dated October 2021.
|
Purpose of Report
To have Council adopt the St Ives Showground and Precinct
Lands - Final Plan of Management, dated October 2021.
Background
Section 3.23(6) & (7) of the
Crown Land Management Act 2016 requires all NSW councils to adopt plans
of management for all reserves for which they are the appointed Crown Land
Manager. The new plans of management must meet both the requirements of the Crown
Land Management Act 2016 and the Local Government Act 1993.
Plans of management are an
essential tool to assist in the strategic and day-to-day management of
community land. They:
· are
written by Council in consultation with the community;
· identify
the important features of the land;
· clarify
how Council will manage the land; and
· indicate
how the land may be used or developed, such as leasing or other commercial
arrangements.
Until a Plan of Management for an area of community land is
adopted by a Council, the nature and use of the land must not be changed.
Council cannot approve a new development on the land nor grant a lease, licence
or other estate over the land, until a plan of management is in place.
The 2021 St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands – Plan
of Management has undergone extensive external and internal consultation
including public exhibition and submission to the NSW Minister for Planning and
Public Spaces for landowner’s approval.
Comments
The St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands - Plan of
Management has been developed following extensive community consultation and
considers the changes to the environment, legislation, and stakeholder
consultation.
In August 2021, Council resolved to adopt the draft St Ives
Showground and Precinct Lands - Plan of Management and submit the Plan of
Management to Crown Lands for consent. It was also resolved that delegation be
given to the Director Strategy and Environment to correct any minor amendments,
errors and inconsistencies to the St Ives Showground & Precinct Lands Plan
of Management prior to finalisation.
On 6 October 2021, the NSW Department of Planning, Industry
and Environment - Crown Lands provided consent to Council provided an amendment
was made:
“I have reviewed the amended draft PoM and as a
delegate for the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, I consent to council
adopting the PoM under clause 70B of the Crown Land Management Regulation 2018
(CLM Reg), provided the following amendment is made:
· removal of
reference to section 2.20 of the CLM Act on page 39. This was provided for use
to Council Crown land managers during the transition period (pre-PoM) and
cannot be used for granting short-term licences in the PoM (see clause 70(1) of
the CLM Reg).”
The overall effect of this amendment is minimal as it only
relates to the interim transitional period where the proposed plan of
management to be adopted is not in place.
The required Crown Land amendments along with corrected
minor errors and inconsistencies in the St Ives Showground & Precinct Lands
- Plan of Management, which is now ready for finalisation (see Attachment A1).
integrated planning and reporting
Places, Spaces & Infrastructure
|
Community Strategic
Plan Long Term Objective
|
Delivery Program
Term Achievement
|
Operational Plan
Task
|
|
Recreation, sporting and leisure facilities are available
to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs
|
A program is being
implemented to improve existing recreation, sporting and
leisure facilities and facilitate the establishment of new facilities
|
Progressively
review and update Community Plans of Management
|
Governance Matters
Ku-ring-gai Council amended and completed the draft St Ives
Showground and Precinct Lands - Plan of Management under section 3.23(6) of the
Crown Land Management Act 2016 (CLM Act) and section 39 of the Local
Government Act 1993 (LG Act). On 23 September 2021, following public
exhibition, the Plan of Management (PoM) was sent back to NSW Department of
Planning, Industry and Environment - Crown Lands for final review and consent.
Crown Lands advised on 6 October 2021 that they consent to
Council adopting the PoM under clause 70B of the Crown Land Management
Regulation 2018 (CLM Reg), providing Council removed reference to section 2.20
of the CLM Act on page 39.
This amendment has been made to the St Ives Showground and
Precinct Lands - Plan of Management, which is now ready for final adoption by
Council.
Risk Management
Council needs to have a final
Crown endorsed Plan of Management in place to ensure the lawful use and
occupation of Crown land. Any activities to be undertaken on the Reserve must
be expressly authorised in the PoM prior to implementation this includes
Council’s Cultural Environmental Education Centre.
Financial Considerations
No additional financial
considerations arising from this report.
Social Considerations
No social considerations
arising from this report.
Environmental Considerations
No environmental
considerations arising from this report.
Community ConsultatioN
Not required for this report.
Internal Consultation
Consultation between Council
teams (Property, Urban Planning & Heritage, and Environment &
Sustainability) has taken place in preparation of this report.
Summary
The St Ives Showground and
Precinct Lands - Plan of Management has been prepared and exhibited in
accordance with the Crown Land Management Act 2016 and the Local
Government Act 1993. As landowner, the NSW Department of Planning,
Industry and Environment - Crown Lands has provided consent to Council to adopt
the PoM under clause 70B of the Crown Land Management Regulation 2018 (CLM
Reg).
Recommendation:
That Council adopt the St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands
- Final Plan of Management, dated October 2021 in accordance with clause 70B of
the Crown Land Management Regulation 2018.
|
James Brisebois
Natural Areas Program Leader
|
Antony Fabbro
Manager Urban & Heritage Planning
|
|
Andrew Watson
Director Strategy & Environment
|
|
|
Attachments:
|
A1 ⇩
|
St
Ives Showground and Precinct Lands - Final Plan of Management October 2021
|
|
2021/319196
|
|
APPENDIX No: 1 - St
Ives Showground and Precinct Lands - Final Plan of Management October 2021
|
|
Item No: GB.8
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
NM.1 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
NM.1
|
S11228
|
Employee
Assistance Program
Notice of Motion from Councillors Kay
and Kelly dated 29 October 2021
EAP is an employee assistance program that supports
employees with work-related problems as well as personal problems that may
impact on their job performance, health and mental well-being. EAP offers
employer funded confidential counselling for employees and their family members
as well as consultative support for managers and supervisors to address
employee and organizational challenges and needs.
This has been available for more than 15 years to
Ku-ring-gai Council staff with a different provider prior to 2020. The average
number of employees using the service was 6.5 per quarter in 2020 and this has
increased to 7 per quarter to the end of September 2021. Prior statistics were
not readily available at the time of making enquiries of staff.
Unfortunately, EAP has not previously been available to
councillors from Ku-ring-gai Council, but their services are offered to
councillors from other Councils in NSW.
This was brought to my attention when a serious matter that
related to my work as a Councillor occurred, and I was offered no support or
assistance to deal with the issue at the time.
There has been a dramatic increase of EAP services over the
years, with many more businesses coming on board, and should continue to be
offered to all staff including post lockdown when mental health issues are
predicted to be on the rise.
We therefore move that:
A. The
provision of the employee assistance program (EAP) be included in the
Councillor Expenses and Facilities Policy, to ensure it is available to future
councillors.
B. The
services offered by EAP are available to councillors as well as staff, and that
this information is provided in the induction material that Councillors are
issued when elected with the list of these contacts readily available.
Recommendation:
That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.
|
Councillor Christine Kay
Councillor for St Ives Ward
|
Councillor Peter Kelly
Councillor for Gordon Ward
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
NM.2 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
NM.2
|
S07823
|
Basketball
and Netball Facilities in Roseville, Lindfield and Killara
Notice of Motion from Councillor Ngai
dated 29 October 2021
It is unfortunate that council was unable to achieve quorum
on at least three occasions in October, denying the opportunity for sporting
facilities to be considered in October.
I therefore propose that this matter be considered by
council in November. For more information about this motion, please refer to
NM2 of the October 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council.
I therefore move that:
A. Netball:
Council proactively engages with Lindfield Netball Club and KNA to ensure that
the netball hoops at the flood-lit Tryon Road Tennis Courts will be available
for training whenever required in 2022. If there are already pre-existing
tennis bookings causing a clash in availability, council staff should exercise
discretion in offering an alternate location.
B.
Basketball: Council staff investigate suitable locations for increasing the
number of council-owned basketball hoops in Roseville / Lindfield / Killara
from the current five up to a target of at least twelve, and a report be brought
back to council for consideration by April 2022. Some of these basketball hoops
could potentially come from quick wins such as the conversion of courts at
Tryon Road (up to four basketball hoops to accompany the netball hoops),
Lindfield Library (up to four hoops), and other locations in the area.
Additional hoops can also come from the reconfiguration of public spaces in the
medium to long term. It is also understood that the conversion of popular
tennis courts to basketball may have a revenue impact if tennis hirers do not
choose to book the other available courts in the council network, and the
potential cost implications should be included for council’s
consideration.
Recommendation:
That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.
|
Councillor Sam Ngai
Councillor for Roseville Ward
|
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
NM.3 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
NM.3
|
S12268
|
Lindfield
Pedestrian Bridge
Notice of Motion from Councillor Ngai
dated 29 October 2021
It is unfortunate that council was unable to achieve quorum
on at least three occasions for the October Ordinary Meeting of Council,
denying the opportunity for this matter to be considered.
I therefore move that:
A. As
part of the Lindfield Village Hub negotiations, each proponent must demonstrate
how its proposed design will reasonably interface with or incorporate a future
pedestrian bridge across the Pacific Highway.
B. Council
publishes a project timeline for the Lindfield Village Hub once negotiations
are complete.
Recommendation:
That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.
|
Councillor Sam Ngai
Councillor for Roseville Ward
|
|
|
Ordinary
Meeting of Council - 16 November 2021
|
NM.4 / 1
|
|
|
|
|
Item
NM.4
|
S09767
|
Saving
Bates Park
Notice of Motion from Councillors Ngai,
Spencer, Kay, Kelly and Pettett
dated 29 October 2021
It is unfortunate that council was unable to achieve quorum
on at least three occasions for the October Ordinary Meeting of Council,
denying the opportunity for the park to be considered.
We therefore propose that this matter be considered by
Council in November. For more information about this motion, please refer to
NM3 of the October 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council.
We therefore move that:
Council does not proceed to divest 97 Babbage Road Roseville
Chase (Lot 47, DP 13444), and the land be reclassified from ‘operational
land’ back to ‘community land’ in accordance with section 33
of the Local Government Act 1993.
Recommendation:
That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.
|
Councillor Sam Ngai
Councillor for Roseville Ward
|
Councillor Cedric Spencer
Councillor for Wahroonga Ward
|
|
Councillor Christine Kay
Councillor for St Ives Ward
|
Councillor Peter Kelly
Councillor for Gordon Ward
|
|
Councillor Jeff Pettett
Councillor for Comenarra Ward
|
|
