MINUTES OF Ordinary Meeting
Held at Council Chambers, HORNSBY
on Wednesday, 15 June, 2011
at 6.36pm
Councillors Berman (Chairman), Browne, Chopra, Evans, Hutchence, Martin, McMurdo, Mills, Russell and Smart.
NATIONAL ANTHEM
OPENING PRAYER
The Mayor opened the meeting in prayer.
Acknowledgement of RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY
Statement by the Chairman:
"We recognise our Shire's rich cultural and religious diversity and we acknowledge and pay respect to the beliefs of all members of our community, regardless of creed or faith."
ABORIGINAL RECOGNITION
Statement by the Chairman:
"We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the Darug and Guringai Peoples. We pay our respects to elders past and present."
AUDIO RECORDING OF COUNCIL MEETING
Statement by the Chairman:
"I advise all present that tonight's meeting is being audio recorded for the purposes of providing a record of public comment at the meeting, supporting the democratic process, broadening knowledge and participation in community affairs, and demonstrating Council’s commitment to openness and accountability. The recordings will be made available on Council’s website once the Minutes have been finalised. All speakers are requested to ensure their comments are relevant to the issue at hand and to refrain from making personal comments or criticisms."
APOLOGIES / leave of absence
Nil
presentations
The Mayor advised that Council had been successful in achieving the National Bronze Award – 50:50 Vision – Councils for Gender Equity from the Australian Local Government Women’s Association, and presented the General Manager with the Award.
The Mayor advised that Council had been awarded a Certificate of Merit in the Australian Crime and Violence Prevention Awards, and presented the Certificate to the Manager, Community Development.
declarations of interest
Nil
confirmation of minutes
petitionS
THE MAYOR tabled a petition containing 167 signatures from residents of Pennant Hills objecting to the construction of an Electrical ‘Kiosk’ next to the gate of Pennant Hills Public School.
COUNCILLOR MILLS tabled a petition containing 24 signatures from residents of Oliver Way, Cherrybrook regarding parking and safety concerns at the entrance to Oliver Way.
Mayoral Minutes
NOTE: Mayoral Minute No. MM6/11 and Mayoral Minute No. MM7/11 are shown as Items 24 and 25 respectively in the ‘Supplementary Reports’ section of these Minutes.
Notices of Motion
Nil
Rescission Motions
Nil
MATTERS OF URGENCY
MOVED ON THE MOTION OF COUNCILLOR MILLS, seconded pro forma by COUNCILLOR RUSSELL,
THAT Councillor Mills be permitted to raise a Matter of Urgency regarding construction of the Fagan Park Maze.
FOR: Councillors Browne, Hutchence and Mills
AGAINST: Councillors Berman, Chopra, Evans, Martin, McMurdo, Russell and Smart
_________________________________________________________
RESOLVED ON THE MOTION OF COUNCILLOR SMART, seconded by COUNCILLOR BROWNE,
THAT Councillor Smart be permitted to raise a Matter of Urgency regarding the Berowra Tennis Court lease.
FOR: Councillors Berman, Browne, Chopra, Evans, Hutchence, Martin, McMurdo, Mills, Russell and Smart
AGAINST: Nil
ITEMS PASSED BY EXCEPTION / CALL FOR SPEAKERS ON AGENDA ITEMS
Items 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 24 and 25 were withdrawn for discussion.
RESOLVED ON THE MOTION OF COUNCILLOR Evans, seconded by COUNCILLOR Smart,
THAT the recommendations in respect of items 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 22 be adopted.
FOR: Councillors Berman, Browne, Chopra, Evans, Hutchence, Martin, McMurdo, Mills, Russell and Smart
AGAINST: Nil
NOTE: Items 21 and 23 were called over and noted.
For the sake of clarity, the above items are recorded in Agenda sequence.
NOTE: Persons wishing to address Council on matters which were on the Agenda were permitted to speak, prior to the item being discussed, and their names are recorded in the Minutes in respect of that particular item.
General Manager's Division
Corporate and Community Division
Environment Division
Planning Division
Nil
Works Division
Supplementary Reports
CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS
Nil
PUBLIC FORUM – NON AGENDA ITEMS
Nil
Mayor's Notes
Questions of Which Notice Has Been Given
|
21 QWNHBG3/11 Rural Sports Facility, Galston (F2004/09972-02) |
|
ASKED BY COUNCILLOR Mills TO THE EXECUTIVE MANAGER, ENVIRONMENT DIVISION:
1. Per EN09/05 the cost estimate for acquisition of the two properties in Bayfield Road was $3.34 million and the construction work $2.37 million. What were the actual costs for purchasing and constructing this facility?
Response:
Actual acquisition cost was $3.3 million (excludes conveyance and legal costs). Actual capital construction costs were $3,091,652 for expenditure between 2005 and 2010.
2. Did the $2.37 million estimate for construction work apply to the construction scope as outlined in EN09/05? If not, what scope of works did the $2.37 million estimate apply to?
Response:
The $2.37 million estimate applied to the construction scope that was outlined in Report EN09/05.
3. In arriving at the actual figures for construction, what aspects of the construction scope outlined in EN09/05 were deleted from the final as delivered construction scope? Were there any construction works incurred that were not included in the original scope? What were the costs of these additional works? How were these additional costs absorbed? Were works deleted from the construction scope used to fund other necessary construction works?
Response:
The scope of work changed significantly after the EN09/05 March 2005 Ordinary Meeting report due to subsequent amendments to the Development Application.
Works that were deleted from the final delivered construction include:
Construction works that were not included in the original scope but required by development consent conditions:
These additional works were absorbed into the overall costs of the project. Additional funding was also sought through the usual quarterly budget review process. Works that were deleted from the construction scope were used to fund other necessary construction works.
The overall cost of the project increased above the 2005 estimate due to requirements of the development consent that were not allowed for in earlier estimates, key elements of the construction works that were not adequately estimated in 2005 and tender prices for the civil and building works coming in well above estimate.
In developing the design following development consent, it was found that the 2005 estimate did not allow adequate costs for servicing or civil works (including demolition, site services, earthworks, road and car park construction works). This led to the provision of additional funds in Council’s Management Plan in June 2007 and May 2008 (WK35/07 and EN18/08 accounting for an additional $650,000) when Council accepted and considered tenders for the civil and building works packages.
In 2009 the Arcadia Pony Club (APC) constructed a large storage shed adjacent to Arena 1 and additional fencing works to create a day stall area for horses adjacent to Arena 2. This was undertaken with limited funding assistance from Council.
4. Per EN09/05 the principal source of funding was development contributions levied under section 94. Should 75% or less of forecast s94 receipts be received, the financial position would then be recovered through an extension of the current s94 plan, sale of assets such as the Arcadia Pony Club site in Johnson Road, Galston. Was an internal loan raised against forecast s94 funds? If yes, has the internal loan from section 94 funds been paid in full? If not, what amount is still outstanding? At what date did s94 funds cease being directed to this facility?
Response:
Council records indicate that a total of approximately $6.4m of s94 funds were spent on this project. It appears that up to approximately $1m may have been borrowed to cover a temporary shortfall in available s94 funds in the 2005-06 financial year, however records are no longer available. Any such internal debt has since been repaid. Funds in later years were sufficient to cover the actual construction costs. S94 funds stopped being spent on this facility in 2009/10.
5. Per EN09/05 this was to be a 'Shire wide' facility. What data does Council have available to demonstrate that the facility, since opening, is used by a 'Shire wide' representation of the community? More specifically, what data does Council have to demonstrate that there is an equitable representation of usage by residents from planning districts 1-9?
Response:
The Rural Sports Facility (RSF) is identified as a Shire wide sports facility due to it having the potential to attract sports users from across the Shire just like all the sportsgrounds that are provided by Council and used by soccer, football, cricket, baseball, AFL and other sports clubs. All of these clubs either attract users from a wider area or use sports facilities outside of their immediate local area. As with all sports clubs, Council does not collect data on membership of the clubs who hire Council facilities.
6. What data does Council have to demonstrate that the facility, since opening, is used by residents on a 'regular' basis (i.e. more than 20 times a year per the May 2000 Hornsby Leisure Strategic Plan)? More specifically, what are the actual figures for usage by residents on a 'regular' basis and how do these compare to the projections the May 2000 Hornsby Leisure Strategic Plan (adjusted for population increase). Further, what data does Council have to demonstrate that there is an equitable representation of usage by residents on a 'regular' from planning districts 1-9.
Response:
The APC uses the facility on a fortnightly basis with 27 annual events. The Galston Equestrian Club (GEC) uses the facility on a fortnightly basis, with 24 annual events held in the last year.
There are no actual figures available for use of the RSF although an estimate is put forward below in response to question 11 indicating a conservative monthly usage of 300 horses/riders per month.
Council’s Leisure Strategic Plan (LSP) identified an unmet demand for horse riding of 1.6% of respondents to surveys, which equates to up to 3000 persons in the Hornsby population of 150,000 people.
7. What has been the annual revenue raised through charges and fees per annum since opening?
Response:
Council financial records indicate the following income received:
2008/09 $3,284.00 (½ yearly fees) 2009/10 $6,568.00 2010/11 $6,761.00
The figures do not include rental income from the residence at 18 Bayfield Road, which accrues in the same budget area as the other income and maintenance expenditure. Although there is also some maintenance cost involved with the residence, the rental income is $22,412 per annum.
8. What have been the total expenses (direct and indirect) per annum incurred by Council in maintaining this facility since opening?
Response:
The cost of maintaining the RSF has largely been absorbed into the cost of maintenance of adjoining Fagan Park. There has been no increase in staff or contractors used for maintenance of Fagan Park since the RSF was added to the maintenance responsibility of the staff based there.
In late 2010 Council undertook some additional maintenance works at Arena 3 involving de-compaction, topsoiling and resurfacing with new turf at a cost of approximately $8,000.
Total expenses over the three years were not available prior to finalising this report. In the last year sewer pump out costs were approximately $7050, electricity costs were $904 and we have not been able to identify town water costs, although these are not expected to be significant due to the site not being irrigated.
A roof was recently installed on the horse wash bay by GEC which should greatly reduce the sewer costs as previously the wash bay was collecting rainwater as well as waste water from horse washing.
9. Are there any other Council expenses (like insurance costs) involving this facility?
Response:
Additional cost for insurance is approximately $684 per year.
110. The fee for annual use by an equestrian club is $3,850. Per EN48/08 in December 2008, these fees were reduced to $2,718 for the Arcadia Pony Club "to help to stimulate demand and provide a community benefit by allowing the APC (Arcadia Pony Club) to transfer operations to the Rural Sports Facility (RFS) and the Galston Equestrian Club (GEC) to become established in sounder fashion than would otherwise be the case". Is it correct that per EN09/05 a rationale for the facility was to meet high levels of pre-existing unmet demand? How has the transfer of operations progressed since 2008? What are the fees for these clubs now? Is the strategic rationale per EN48/08 for maintaining lower fees still valid?
Response:
The annual fee for APC was set at $2,718 in accordance with the resolution of Council, to apply to the years, 2009, 2010 and 2011.
GEC has paid the full annual hire cost, which in 2010/11 was $4,043.
In the year commencing 1 July 2011 the fee will increase to $4,500 for each equestrian club hiring the facility.
11. How many riders in total have used the facility on a monthly basis since opening? What is the proportion of fee-paying riders (i.e. clubs, etc.) to 'free' users (school carnivals, etc.). What proportion of total riders is from outside of the Hornsby Local Government Area?
Response:
No data is available that indicates the actual usage levels of the facility by casual users or club users.
The GEC has 106 registered members and has indicated that an average of 40 horses/riders attend per meeting. APC has 95 registered members and has not advised of its attendance numbers, although in the past these have been observed to be in the order of 40-60 horses/riders per meeting. Council’s ranger has observed occasional meetings with up to 120 horses.
Casual use of the RSF has been observed by Council staff as consistently being at least 2-4 riders every week day, and more on weekends when the facility is not booked by one of the clubs.
The following is a conservative estimate of average monthly usage, based on the above figures:
Club use - approximately 5 meetings per month x 40 = 200 horses/riders per month - larger events of up to 120 horses / 2 times per year = 20 horses per month
Casual use – approximately 2 riders/weekday = 40 riders per month - approximately 10 riders /weekend x 4 weekends = 40 riders per month
Total: 300 riders per month or 3,500 riders per year.
Note that these figures do not include club officials, family members or other non riders who attend events.
Based on the above estimate it would appear that approximately one third of users are non-fee paying users, although it should be noted that members of the public do not pay for casual use of other sportsgrounds within the Shire either.
Council officers have sought to move the Hornsby Dog Training Club’s annual event to the RSF; however the absence of lights at the RSF has prevented this.
112. Which schools have used the facility since opening (please identify which schools paid fees to use the facility and which did not)? What has been the total number of uses by these schools on a monthly basis since opening (please identify which schools paid fees to use the facility and which did not)?
Response:
Council is not aware of any schools using the facility to date. No fees have been received from any schools since the facility opened in 2009. The statements that were made in the Development Application about projected school use were on the basis of interest in using the facility expressed by schools at that time.
As per Council’s fees and charges, in most cases schools are not required to pay for use of the RSF or other sportsgrounds. called over and noted |
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Nil
THE MEETING terminated at 8.29pm.
These Minutes were confirmed at the meeting held on Wednesday, 20 July 2011, at which meeting the signature hereunder was subscribed.
CONFIRMED CHAIRMAN
___________________________________________________________________________