Report - Coordination Committee Meeting - 14 July 2015 · REPORT Coordination Committee Meeting ... KINSELLAS SPORTS FIELD, NORTH LAKES – FIELD LIGHTING WORKS ... Cr Adrian Raedel

REPORT

Coordination Committee Meeting

Tuesday 14 July 2015 commencing at 10.40am

Caboolture Chambers 2 Hasking Street, Caboolture

CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT The recommendations contained within this report of the Coordination Committee meeting held 14 July 2015 are recommended to the Council for adoption. COUNCILLOR ALLAN SUTHERLAND (MAYOR) CHAIRPERSON COORDINATION COMMITTEE Membership = 13 Quorum = 7 Mayor and all Councillors

ENDORSED GM20150714

Adoption Extract from General Meeting – 14 July 2015 (Page 15/1215) 12.1 Coordination Committee Meeting – 14 July 2015

(Pages 15/1217 - 15/1272) RESOLUTION

Moved by Cr Mick Gillam Seconded by Cr Bob Millar CARRIED 11/0

That the report and recommendations of the Coordination Committee meeting held 14 July 2015 be adopted.

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE a 14 July 2015 Report

COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE a 14 July 2015 Report

LIST OF ITEMS

1 GOVERNANCE SESSION (Cr Allan Sutherland, Mayor)

2 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SESSION (Cr Mick Gillam)

ITEM 2.1 1219 DA/29584/2014/V23R - MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO AFFECT THE PLANNING SCHEME FOR DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL A ZONE AND RECONFIGURING A LOT - DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR SUBDIVISION (1 INTO 17 LOTS AND NEW ROAD) - 53 KINSELLAS ROAD WEST, MANGO HILL - DIVISION 4

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

REPORT DETAIL

3 CORPORATE SERVICES SESSION (Cr Bob Millar)

4 ASSET CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE SESSION (Cr Peter Flannery)

ITEM 4.1 1250 KINSELLAS SPORTS FIELD, NORTH LAKES – FIELD LIGHTING WORKS (VP28243/MBRC003272) - DIVISION 4


REPORT DETAIL

5 PARKS, RECREATION & SPORT SESSION (Cr Gary Parsons)

6 LIFESTYLE & AMENITY SESSION (Cr Julie Greer)

ITEM 6.1 1255 PROJECT SPONSOR ARRANGEMENTS - GREEN ARMY ROUND 2 – DIVISION 1


REPORT DETAIL

7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM SESSION (Cr Allan Sutherland, Mayor)

ITEM 7.1 1259 TENDER FOR SUPPLY AND SERVICE OF BULK INDUSTRIAL BINS (MBRC004425) - REGIONAL


REPORT DETAIL

ITEM 7.2 1265 2015/16 SCHEDULE OF FEES & CHARGES – ADDITIONAL FEES CABOOLTURE POOL AND GYM - DIVISION 3


REPORT DETAIL

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE b 14 July 2015 Report

COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE b 14 July 2015 Report

ITEM 7.3 1268 REPORT ON UNIVERSITY PROJECT MANAGER'S ATTENDANCE AT NABCA CONFERENCE - REGIONAL


REPORT DETAIL

8 GENERAL BUSINESS

ITEM 8.1 1271 RECENT EVENTS – DIVISION 1

ITEM 8.2 1271 SUZUKI CHALLENGE NETBALL CARNIVAL – DIVISION 3

ITEM 8.3 1272 LOCAL SHOWS – DAYBORO AND SAMFORD – DIVISION 11

ITEM 8.4 1272 2015 PLANNING SUMMIT - REGIONAL


CLOSURE

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1217 14 July 2015 Report

COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1217 14 July 2015 Report

ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES Attendance: Committee Members: Cr Allan Sutherland (Mayor) (Chairperson) Cr Gary Parsons Cr Peter Flannery Cr Greg Chippendale Cr Julie Greer Cr James Houghton Cr David Dwyer Cr Mick Gillam Cr Mike Charlton (Deputy Mayor) Cr Bob Millar Cr Adrian Raedel Officers: Deputy Chief Executive Officer / Director Engineering, Construction & Maintenance (Mr Tony Martini) Director Community & Environmental Services (Mr Bill Halpin) Director Economic Development & Commercial Services (Mr Alan Sheridan) Aquatic and Leisure Centres Coordinator (Mr Brad Page) University Project Manager (Mr Doug Fraser) Team Leader Meeting Support (Kathrine Crocker) Apologies: Cr Koliana Winchester Cr Brian Battersby OAM The Mayor is the Chairperson of the Coordination Committee. Coordination Committee meetings comprise of Sessions chaired by Council’s nominated Spokesperson for that portfolio, as follows: Session Session Chair / Portfolio Spokesperson 1 Governance Cr Allan Sutherland (Mayor) 2 Planning & Development Cr Mick Gillam 3 Corporate Services Cr Bob Millar 4 Asset Construction & Maintenance Cr Peter Flannery 5 Parks, Recreation & Sport Cr Gary Parsons 6 Lifestyle & Amenity Cr Julie Greer 7 Economic Development & Tourism Cr Brian Battersby



1 GOVERNANCE SESSION (Cr Allan Sutherland, Mayor) No items for consideration



2 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SESSION (Cr Mick Gillam) ITEM 2.1 DA/29584/2014/V23R - MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO AFFECT THE PLANNING SCHEME FOR DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL A ZONE AND RECONFIGURING A LOT - DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR SUBDIVISION (1 INTO 17 LOTS AND NEW ROAD) - 53 KINSELLAS ROAD WEST, MANGO HILL - DIVISION 4 APPLICANT: HARDEV OWNER: MRS MAREE L BELL AND MR JOHN L MORANDY Meeting / Session: 2 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Reference: A11986298 : 9 June 2015 – Refer Supporting Information A11986299 Responsible Officer: PM, Development Planner (SPD Development Services) Executive Summary

Applicable Planning Scheme PineRiversPlan Applicant Hardev c/- RPS Owner(s) Mrs Maree L Bell and Mr John L Morandy Site Address 53 Kinsellas Road West, Mango Hill Property Description Lot 37 RP103139 Area 1.012ha Proposal Material Change of Use - Preliminary Approval to Affect the

Planning Scheme for development in accordance with the Residential A Zone and Reconfiguring a Lot - Development Permit for Subdivision (1 into 17 lots and New Road)

Proposal Plans Refer to proposal plan in Appendices of this report. Assessment Level Impact Assessable Requested Approvals Material Change of Use – Preliminary Approval

Reconfiguring a Lot – Development Permit Consistent / Inconsistent proposal

Policy Neutral

Planning Scheme Details

PineRiversPlan Urban Locality (Precinct UL-6) Future Urban Zone Acid Sulphate Soils Overlay Bushfire Hazard Areas Overlay Operational Airspace and Facilities Overlay

Relevant Codes Urban Locality Code - Future Urban Zone / Residential A Zone provisions Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code Subdivision in All Other Zones Design Code Detached House Code Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code Setbacks Code Landscape Design Code Site Earthworks Code Infrastructure Works Code Acid Sulphate Soils Overlay Code Bushfire Hazard Areas Overlay Code Operational Airspace and Facilities Overlay Code

Application ‘properly made’ 27 November 2014

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1220 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 2.1 DA/29584/2014/V23R - MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE - PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO AFFECT THE PLANNING SCHEME FOR DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL A ZONE AND RECONFIGURING A LOT - DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR SUBDIVISION (1 INTO 17 LOTS AND NEW ROAD) - 53 KINSE - A11986298 (Cont.)


Information Request Issued 24 December 2014; Information Request Response received 2 February 2015, final response received 14 May 2015

Referral Agencies Nil Public Notification (Notice of Compliance received)

23 March 2015

Submissions Received Properly Made: 2 Not Properly Made: 1

Decision Stage ends 14 July 2015 Is a Notation to the Planning scheme required?

Yes: Refer to Recommendation

Number of Existing Lots 1 Further Development Permits that may be required

• Development Permit for Material Change of Use – Future uses in accordance with the Residential A Zone

• Development Permit for Operational Works – Civil

• Development Permit for Building Work (demolition of existing Detached House and outbuildings)

This application seeks a Material Change of Use - Preliminary Approval to Affect the Planning Scheme for development in accordance with the Residential A Zone and Reconfiguring a Lot - Development Permit for Subdivision (1 into 17 lots and New Road) situated at 53 Kinsellas Road West, Mango Hill, on land described as Lot 37 RP103139, Parish Redcliffe. The site is located within the Urban Locality and Future Urban Zone and has an area of 1.012ha. The Preliminary Approval proposes to apply the Residential A Zone provisions contained within the PineRiversPlan. Overlay codes are to be addressed as part of the Preliminary Approval application. Therefore, the applicant proposes that overlay codes do not apply to future development applications made pursuant to the Preliminary Approval. The application was publicly advertised with three (3) submissions received (two (2) properly made and one (1) not properly made). The proposed development is considered to generally accord with the intent of the Pine Rivers Planning Scheme for the Future Urban zone, and is recommended to be approved subject to conditions. The proposal was lodged with Council and deemed to be “Properly Made” on 27 November 2014 and accordingly, this application has been assessed in accordance with the Sustainable Planning Act 2009. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved by Cr Julie Greer Seconded by Cr Greg Chippendale CARRIED 11/0 That the Officer’s Recommendation be adopted as detailed in the report.



OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION A. That Council, in accordance with the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, approves a Material Change

of Use - Preliminary Approval to Affect the Planning Scheme for development in accordance with the Residential A Zone and Reconfiguring a Lot - Development Permit for Subdivision (1 into 17 lots and New Road) at 53 Kinsellas Road West, Mango Hill, on land described as Lot 37 RP103139, Parish Redcliffe, subject to the following conditions:

Approved Plans and Documents Plan / Document Name Reference Number Prepared By Dated Serviceability Report and Stormwater Management Plan

14280 Rev B Bornhorst & Ward Jan 2015

Addendum to Stormwater Management Plan (letter) 14280 Bornhorst & Ward 14 May 2015

Bio-retention basin layout & notes & details 14280 SK-C0004 Rev A Bornhorst & Ward 14 May 2015

Plans to be Amended Plan / Document Name Reference Number Prepared By Dated Plan of Development 124369-06C RPS 14 May 2015

MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

CONDITIONS TIMING

1. DPU Variation of the PineRiversPlan

(a) The PineRiversPlan has been varied by applying the

Residential A Zone provisions within the Urban Locality to the land; and

(b) Future development carried out under this Preliminary

Approval to have a level of assessment in accordance with the Zone Assessment Tables applicable to the zone (applying to the land as approved under this Preliminary Approval) in the PineRiversPlan in effect at the date that the development is carried out.

To be maintained at all times.

2. DPU Development in Accordance with Codes

The Overlay Codes of the PineRiversPlan are not applicable to future development of the land for development (other than Operational Works) carried out under this Preliminary Approval. In the case where a relevant code has not been specified for any aspect of the subsequent development as part of this Preliminary Approval, the relevant provisions of the PineRiversPlan will apply to the development.

To be maintained at all times.



MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE – PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

CONDITIONS TIMING

PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF APPROVAL

3. DPU Prescribed Period (S.343 SPA 2009)

The prescribed period for this approval is six (6) years, unless written approval has been obtained from Council for an extension of this period.

From the date the Preliminary Approval takes effect.

DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING CONDITIONS

4. DEP1 Preliminary Approval – Standard Engineering Conditions

(a) Council Roads

Provide all new Council roads in accordance with Council’s standards current at the time of development.

(b) Stormwater Management & Drainage Provide stormwater management and drainage works in accordance with Council’s standards current at the time of development.

(c) Service Connections

Connect each new lot and/or dwelling in the development to the following services: • Reticulated underground telecommunications; and • Reticulated underground electricity.

The works must be in accordance with the relevant standards current at the time of development.

Provide all necessary connection works, internal and external to the development.

(d) Alterations and relocation of existing services

Carry out, at no cost to Council, any alteration or relocation in connection with or arising from the development to any service, installation, plant, equipment or other item belonging to or under the control of the telecommunications authority, electricity authorities, the Council or other person engaged in the provision of public utility services.

At the time of development.



RECONFIGURING A LOT – DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

CONDITIONS TIMING

APPROVED PLAN

1. DP20 Approved Plans

Undertake development generally in accordance with the approved plans. These plans will form part of the approval, unless otherwise amended by notations or conditions of this approval.

Prior to lodging a request for compliance assessment of subdivision plans.

2. DP150 Certify Lots are in Accordance with Approved Plan

Provide certification from a Licensed Surveyor that the lots created accord with the approved plan.


AMENDED PLANS REQUIRED

3. DS30 Amended Plan Required

(a) Submit an amended Plan of Development incorporating the

following:

(i) Removes the area of ‘Open Space’ shaded in green at the north eastern corner, opposite Lot 1 (this area to remain shown as road reserve).

(ii) Label the external road (Macadamia Street) and adjoining property descriptions to the east.

(iii) Amend Small Lot Plan Note 2 to remove ‘(allotments less than 20m wide)’ under the heading ‘Notes Applicable to Small Lot Housing Only’.

(iv) Amend Small Lot Plan Note 2 to include the following ‘(except Lots 14 and 15)’ after the statement ‘have optional built to boundary walls’.

(v) Include a new Small Lot Plan Note ‘Where two storey buildings are proposed, the Detached House does not have to be built to the mandatory zero lot line boundary as indicated on the Small Lot Plan.’ under the heading Built to Boundary Walls.

(vi) Amend Small Lot Plan Note 7 to remove ‘and/ or 8.5 metres’.

(vii) Amend Small Lot Plan Note 9 to remove ‘Setbacks are subject to engineering requirements’.

(viii) Include a new Small Lot Plan Note ‘Minimum Side boundary setbacks (other than mandatory Built to the

Prior to lodging a request for Compliance Assessment of subdivision plans.




CONDITIONS TIMING

Boundary walls) shall be as per the Queensland Development Code, unless otherwise dimensioned.’ under the heading Setbacks.

(ix) Remove Small Lot Plan Note 14. (x) Remove the ‘Side Boundary’ and ‘Garage Location’

tables from the Small Allotments Setbacks table. (xi) Remove the optional built to boundary wall reference

on the Small Lot Plan for Lots 14 and 15. (xii) Relocate the indicative driveway for Lot 12 to the

western site boundary for shared driveway access with Lot 13.

(xiii) Relocate the optional built to boundary wall on Lot 12 to the western site boundary.

(xiv) Show the meandering 2.0 metre wide footpath through the pedestrian pathway (road reserve) in accordance with DE701 Pedestrian Pathways.

(b) Obtain approval from Council for the amended Plan of

Development in accordance with (a) above. (c) Implement the requirements and recommendations of the

approved Plan of Development. The approved amended plan(s) will form part of the approval.

RECONFIGURING A LOT – GENERAL

4. DPU Retaining Structures adjoining Southern Boundary

(a) No retaining structures are to adjoin or be located along the

southern property boundary of the site; or (b) Retaining structures adjoining the southern property

boundary of the site do not visually dominate and the location, design, height, extent and materials of retaining walls minimises visual impact as approved by the Director Strategic Planning and Development.


5. DP7 Dedicated Road Access

Provide dedicated constructed road access to the development.

Prior to lodging a request for Compliance Assessment of subdivision plans and to be maintained at all times.




CONDITIONS TIMING

6. DP109 Payment of Rates

Pay all outstanding rates and charges applicable to the subject land.


7. DP110 Permanent Survey Marks

Provide Certification from a licensed surveyor that permanent marks are in the correct position in accordance with applicable legislation and the plan of survey.


8. DP170 Water and/or Sewerage

Submit to Council a Certificate of Completion or Provisional Certificate of Completion for the development from the Northern SEQ Distributor–Retailer Authority (Unitywater) confirming; (a) a reticulated water supply network connection is available to

the land; and (b) a sewerage network connection is available to the land; and (c) all the requirements of Unity Water have been satisfied.


SETBACKS/ BUILDING ENVELOPES/SMALL LOT PLAN

9. DP52 Advice to Purchasers Regarding Building Envelopes Lots 1 – 12 & 14 - 17 (inclusive)

Acknowledge in writing that potential purchasers will be advised of the approved building envelope and the requirement to comply with the building envelopes as nominated on the approved plans.


10. DP54 Compliance with Small Lot Plan and Detached Houses on Small Lots Code

(a) The Detached House on the proposed small lot must comply

with the approved Small Lot Plan unless otherwise approved by the Council’s Delegate.

(b) The Detached House on the proposed small lot must comply

with the requirements of Council’s Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code.

(c) Where there is a conflict between the approved Small Lot

Plan and the Council's Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code the approved Small Lot Plan prevails.

(a – c) To be maintained at all times.




CONDITIONS TIMING

11. DP139 Provision of Electricity

(a) Provide underground electricity to each lot (b) Provide evidence (e.g. Certificate for Electricity Supply to

Subdividers with Agreement Number or Certificate of Supply) demonstrating that a Below Ground electricity supply network has or will be constructed within all new roads and along the frontage of each proposed lot.


FENCING

12. DP33 Fencing – Pedestrian Pathway

Provide semitransparent fencing to the northern boundary of proposed Lots 14 and 15 to enable passive surveillance of public areas. Fencing is to have a minimum height of 1.5 metres and a maximum height of 1.8 metres and a minimum 50% transparency. The details of proposed fencing must be included within landscape plans.


TELECOMMUNICATIONS

13. DP167 New Telecommunications Infrastructure – Reconfiguring a Lot

(a) Provide Fibre-Ready telecommunications infrastructure (pit

and pipe) throughout the development in accordance with the Communication Alliance specifications contained within Industry Guideline G645:2011 Fibre Ready Pit and Pipe Specifications for Real Estate Development Projects or in accordance with the NBN Co. specifications contained within New Developments: Deployment of the NBN Co Conduit and Pit Network – Guidelines for Developers NBN-TE-CTO-194 and Creating Pit and Pipe Designs for New Developments (Job Aid for Developers) NBN-TE-CTO-586 as amended and current at the date of installation.

(b) Provide certification from a RPEQ electrical engineer that

the works specified in (a) above have been installed and evidence that a telecommunications carrier licensed under the Telecommunications Act 1997 has agreed to take ownership of the infrastructure.

Note: council policies are available on council’s website.





CONDITIONS TIMING

LANDSCAPING

14. DP156 Landscaping – Reconfiguring a Lot

(a) Carry out landscaping and associated earthworks, site

preparation and other necessary works in accordance with approved plans, details and technical specifications of any proposed planting or landscape work (both soft and hard works) where such works will be on land under the control of Council, whether as a park, reserve or road reserve. Landscaping is to accord with the PineRiversPlan. Landscaping of the 5m wide pedestrian pathway (road reserve) is to achieve a high standard pedestrian environment combining ground covers, shrubs and shade trees at appropriate intervals.

(b) Before commencing the works obtain approval for the plans,

details and technical specifications of any planting or landscape work from Council.

(a) Prior to lodging a

request for compliance assessment of subdivision plans.

(b) Prior to work

commencing on site.

15. DE701 Pedestrian Pathways

Construct a 2.0 metre wide reinforced concrete pathway in accordance with Council’s standards at the following locations: • On the approved alignment for the full frontage of Kinsellas

Road West; and • Within the pedestrian pathway (road reserve) connecting

Kinsellas Road West and the new road. The alignment of the footpath should meander through the pedestrian pathway and be located no closer than 2.0 metres to the boundary of proposed Lots 14 and 15.

This condition has been imposed under section 665 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.


16. DP165 Street Trees

Provide street trees within the development in accordance with the Landscape Design Code and Planning Scheme Policy 30 of the PineRiversPlan.


EXISTING BUILDINGS

17. DP63 Removal / Demolition of Buildings




CONDITIONS TIMING

(a) Remove / demolish the existing dwelling and associated structures located over the site.

(b) Maintain the site in a clean and manageable state.

(a) Prior to lodging a request for Compliance Assessment of subdivision plans.

(b) Prior to works

commencing on site.

RECONFIGURING A LOT – GENERAL

18. DP108 Street Name

(a) Submit requests for the names of new street/s in

accordance with Council’s Policy 11-2150-038 Allocation of Road Names and Street Address Numbers or as amended;

(b) Obtain approval from Council for the names of new streets

in accordance with (a) above; (c) Erect approved street name boards on all new roads in

accordance (a) and (b); and (d) Mark all street names on the survey plans.

(a) & (b) & (c) & (d) Prior to lodging a request for Compliance Assessment of subdivision plans.

19. DP150 Certify Lots are in Accordance with Approved Plan

Provide certification from a Licensed Surveyor that the lots created accord with the approved plan.


20. DP140 Provision of Electricity – All Lots

Provide a reticulated underground electricity supply connection to each proposed lot. Any existing electrical supply traversing the site that is being made redundant by the development is to be removed.


DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING

21. DE302 Replace Existing Council Infrastructure




CONDITIONS TIMING

Replace existing Council infrastructure (including but not limited to street trees and footpaths) that is damaged as part of construction works, to a standard which is consistent with Council’s standards.


22. DE303 Alterations and Relocation of Existing Services

Any alteration or relocation in connection with or arising from the development to any service, installation, plant, equipment or other item belonging to or under the control of the telecommunications authority, electricity authorities, the Council or other person engaged in the provision of public utility services is to be carried with the development and at no cost to Council.


23. DE305 Earth Retaining Structures

(a) Design and construct all earth retaining structures in

accordance with: • Council’s planning scheme and relevant planning

scheme policies PSP28 – Civil Infrastructure Design; • Relevant Australian Standards; and • Relevant Building code requirements.

The minimum Design Life (the period assumed in design for which a structure or structural element is required to perform its intended purpose without replacement or major structural repairs) for the earth retaining structure is that specified in Table 3.1 of Australian Standard AS4678-2002. Timber retaining structures and boulder retaining walls are generally not acceptable unless specifically approved in writing by Council’s Development Engineering Manager.

(b) Earth retaining structures within the land and around areas of

cut on or near the boundaries of the site must be designed to allow for live and dead loads associated with the land/premise’s current occupancy and use.

(c) Provide design drawings that clearly show the location and

overall configuration (fully dimensioned), design parameters and loads, materials and finishes of all earth retaining structures for the development. The retaining wall configuration must not compromise the area of private open space as identified on the approved small lot plan.

(d) Provide temporary safety fencing to all earth retaining

structures over 1.0 metre in height. (e) Provide written certification from a suitably qualified and



(b) Prior to lodging a


(c) Prior to

commencement of construction of the wall/s.

(d) Prior to acceptance

of the development works “on maintenance”.

(e) Prior to lodging a


(f) Prior to lodging a

request for compliance assessment of




CONDITIONS TIMING

experienced RPEQ that the works comply with this permit condition.

(f) Configure the retaining walls as follows:

• For residential development the maximum cumulative height of retaining walls structures (side and rear boundaries) is 3.0m with the maximum height of any wall limited to 1.5m.

• For rear boundaries retaining walls must be provided where the difference in allotment levels exceeds 1.5m (i.e. the maximum height of batter within the rear of an allotment is 1.5m).

subdivision plans.

24. DE400 New Council Roads – Design & Construction

(a) Design and fully construct at no cost to Council, all new

roads (and associated works) in accordance with Council’s design standards and relevant planning scheme code Probable Solutions current at the time of development.

(b) Design and construct new roads in accordance with the

following classification as identified in the relevant planning scheme codes:

Road Name Classification 13m Wide New Road Access Place

Note: The current design standards and relevant Planning Scheme Codes are: 1. Planning Scheme Policy 28; and 2. Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code. This condition has been imposed under section 665 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.



(b) Prior to lodging a request for compliance assessment of subdivision plans.

25. DE402 Council Frontage Roads – Design & Construction

(a) Design and construct at no cost to Council, all frontage roads

(and associated works) in accordance with Council’s design standards and relevant planning scheme code Probable Solutions current at the time of development.

(b) Design and construct the following frontage roads in

accordance with the following classification as identified in the relevant planning scheme codes:

Road Name Classification



(b) Prior to lodging a

request for compliance assessment of




CONDITIONS TIMING

Kinsellas Road West Trunk Collector (c) The extent of frontage road construction shall be as follows:

Road Name Construction Kinsellas Road West

In accordance with Probable Solution PS 71 of the Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code.

Note: The current design standards and relevant Planning Scheme codes are: 1. Planning Scheme Policy 28; 2. Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code; and 3. Infrastructure Works Code. This condition has been imposed under section 665 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

subdivision plans.

26. DEU Driveway Crossover to Lots 10 and 11

Construct the driveway crossovers from the constructed road to Lots 10 and 11 must be designed and built as a Residential Crossing in accordance with Council Standard Driveway Crossover Drawing 8-10043. The driveway crossovers are to be located clear of the bio-retention basin within the road reserve. Provide certification from an RPEQ that all works have been designed and constructed in accordance with this permit condition. Notes: (a) The internal access works must be designed to ensure the

correct line, level and layout is achieved for the driveway crossover.

(b) Where the works are designed by an RPEQ and subsequently certified as built to the design, Council does not require the submission of an operational works development application for the driveway crossover.

(c) Council will not accept driveway crossovers that do not conform to the above requirements.


27. DEU Shared Driveway Crossover to Lots 12 and 13

Construct the shared driveway crossover from the constructed road to Lots 12 and 13 must be designed and built as a Residential Crossing in accordance with Council Standard Driveway Crossover Drawing 8-10043.





CONDITIONS TIMING

Provide certification from an RPEQ that all works have been designed and constructed in accordance with this permit condition. Notes: (a) The internal access works must be designed to ensure the

correct line, level and layout is achieved for the driveway crossover.

(b) Where the works are designed by an RPEQ and subsequently certified as built to the design, Council does not require the submission of an operational works development application for the driveway crossover.

(c) Council will not accept driveway crossovers that do not conform to the above requirements.

28. DEU Overland Flow Management

(a) Provide measures to properly manage overland flows

draining to and through the land to ensure no nuisance or annoyance is created to any person or premises as a result of the development. The development must not result in ponding of adjacent land, redirection of overland flows to other premises and blockage of an overland flow relief path for flows exceeding the design flows for any underground system within the development.

(b) Provide drainage easements, free of cost and compensation in Council's favour, over any drainage paths and drainage infrastructure within all new lots including all inter-allotment drainage works.

(c) Design the major and minor drainage systems through the subject land to cater for a fully developed upstream catchment (in accordance with the planning scheme.

(d) Ensure that the roads, drainage pathways, drainage features and waterways safely convey the stormwater flows for the major storm event without allowing flows to encroach upon lots.

(e) Ensure that the overland flow paths and pipe drainage (for any storm event) from roads and public open space do not pass through lots. Drainage pathways or drainage reserves are provided to accommodate overland flows from roads and public open space areas.

(f) Ensure that the stormwater drainage infrastructure through or within private land is protected by easements in favour of Council (at no cost to Council) with easement areas and dimensions conforming to Council’s standards.

Note: The current design standards and relevant planning scheme codes are:

1. Planning Scheme Policy 28; and

All prior to lodging a request for compliance assessment of subdivision plans.




CONDITIONS TIMING

2. Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code. This condition has been imposed under section 665 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

29. DE605 Stormwater Drainage - Lawful Discharge

Ensure that stormwater from the proposed development is lawfully discharged from the subject land without causing nuisance and annoyance to any person.

At all times.

30. DE613 Stormwater Management Plan (Quantity & Quality) – Plan Approved

(a) The approved Stormwater Management Plan is accepted as

demonstrating that stormwater from the proposed development can be managed in accordance with the Single State Planning Policy – Water Quality, Council’s planning scheme requirements and Council’s design standards (see note below), the “Healthy Waterways Water Sensitive Urban Design Technical Guidelines for South East Queensland” and other relevant legislative requirements.

The detailed design must consider “Water Sensitive Urban Design” principles, integrating the stormwater infrastructure into the urban design wherever possible.

Notes:

1. The approved report demonstrates satisfactory stormwater management at the time of its approval. At the time of the development works legislative/planning scheme requirements may have changed and a further amended or more detailed report may be required.

2. Internal works and/or detailed design of the development works may also result in necessary amendments to the approved proposal plan.

(b) Provide Operational Works drawings to Council which address

the following aspects in relation to the stormwater proposal: • Provide detailed cross sections of the proposed bio-

retention basin, identify how the bio-retention basin avoids conflicts with the public utility corridors; and

• Stormwater treatment devices must be designed and constructed such that an aesthetic landscape feature is created. Council will accept an appropriate street tree species to be planted within the bio-retention basin.

(c) Implement the works identified in the approved Stormwater

Management Plan and provide certification from an RPEQ that

(a) Note. (b) Prior to lodging a





CONDITIONS TIMING

all works have been designed and constructed in accordance with this permit condition.

This condition has been imposed under section 665 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

ADVICE

1. DPA1 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003

The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 commenced in Queensland on April 16, 2004. Under the Act, indigenous parties are key in assessing cultural heritage significance. The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 establishes a Duty of Care for indigenous cultural heritage. This applies on all land and water, including freehold land. The Cultural Heritage Duty of Care lies with the person or entity conducting the activity. Penalty provisions apply for failing to fulfil the Cultural Heritage Duty of Care. Those proposing an activity that involves additional surface disturbance beyond that which has already occurred on the proposed site need to be mindful of the Duty of Care requirement. Details of how to fulfil the Duty of Care are outlined in the Duty of Care Guidelines gazetted with the Act. Council strongly advises that you contact the relevant state agency to obtain a copy of the Duty of Care Guidelines and further information on the responsibilities of developer under the terms of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003.

2. DPA30 Adopted Infrastructure Charges

Payment of Infrastructure Charges in accordance with Council’s Adopted Infrastructure Charges Resolution (minute page 11/1229 of 28 June 2011) or as amended apply to this development approval. From 1 July 2014, Moreton Bay Regional Council no longer issues an Infrastructure Charges Notice on behalf of Unitywater for water supply and sewerage networks and therefore a separate Infrastructure Charges Notice may be issued directly to the applicant by Unitywater in respect to this development approval. Payment of Infrastructure Charges is to be in accordance with the Infrastructure Charges Notice issued with this development approval and any Infrastructure Charges Notice issued by Unitywater. From 1 July 2014, all Infrastructure Charges for infrastructure networks controlled by Unitywater (eg. water and/or sewerage) regardless of when the Infrastructure Charges Notice was issued are to be paid directly to Unitywater while Infrastructure Charges for



ADVICE

networks controlled by Moreton Bay Regional Council will continue to be paid directly to Moreton Bay Regional Council.

3. DPA36 Telecommunications Infrastructure

Telecommunications Infrastructure to and within the development is to be in accordance with the Telecommunications Act 1997 and any other relevant legislation.

PROPERTY NOTES

4. PN3 Property Note – Small Lots - Lots 1 – 12 & 14 – 17

At the time the plans of subdivision are endorsed by Council, the following property note will be attached to each small lot within the development: This lot is included in a residential precinct that contains small lots (less than 500m2).The development of this lot will be in accordance with the approved Small Lot Plan and requirements of Council’s Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code and Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code, unless otherwise approved by Council’s Delegate.

5. PNU Property Note – Vehicular Access Advice – Lots 10 - 13

A property note will be placed on Council’s database for proposed Lots 10 – 13 notifying that direct vehicular access onto the road is not permitted outside of the constructed driveway areas.

6. PNU Property Note – Structures on Boundaries Adjoining Public Land

The following property note will be attached to Council’s database for Lots 14 and 15: “The maintenance of any structure, including fences, retaining walls, and revetment walls located on a lot adjacent to the common property boundary with public land, including roads and parks is the responsibility of the lot owner.”

B. That Council undertakes a notation to the PineRiversPlan that reflects this Preliminary Approval

varying the effect of the Planning Scheme to enable development in accordance with the Residential A Zone provisions of the PineRiversPlan at 53 Kinsellas Road West, Mango Hill, on land described as Lot 37 RP103139, Parish Redcliffe.



REPORT DETAIL 1. Background There is no relevant town planning history to the site. 2. Explanation of Item 2.1 Proposal Details This application seeks a Material Change of Use - Preliminary Approval to Affect the Planning Scheme for development in accordance with the Residential A Zone and Reconfiguring a Lot - Development Permit for Subdivision (1 into 17 lots and New Road) situated at 53 Kinsellas Road West, Mango Hill, on land described as Lot 37 RP103139, Parish Redcliffe. The subject site is located within the Urban Locality and Future Urban Zone and has an area of 1.012ha. The Preliminary Approval proposes to apply the Residential A Zone provisions contained within the PineRiversPlan to the future development of the site for residential purposes. Overlay codes are to be addressed as part of the Preliminary Approval application. Therefore, the applicant proposes that overlay codes do not apply to future development applications made pursuant to the Preliminary Approval. The proposed development seeks to create 17 lots for urban residential purposes pursuant to the outcomes sought under the Mango Hill Local Area Plan. The following lot types are proposed:

• One (1) Standard Residential Lots/Detached House Lots; and • Sixteen (16) Small Residential Lots

Lot sizes vary across the development and are proposed as follows:

• 325m2 to 399m2 – 6 Lots • 400m2 to 499m2 – 10 Lots • Greater than 500m2 – 1 Lot

Proposed Lots 1 – 14 are accessed via a new local street connecting eastward to Macadamia Street, part of the adjoining Park Vista estate. Proposed Lots 15 – 17 front onto and have direct access to Kinsellas Road West. A pedestrian pathway is proposed along part of the northern boundary to link the proposed new internal road back to Kinsellas Road West. The applicant has submitted a Structure Plan for the area demonstrating how the development does not prejudice the development potential of land to the north through future connections to the approved road layout on Lot 802 and 803 SP234781 as part of DA/27222/2012/V23R. A Small Lot Plan has been prepared to establish alternative building setbacks and site coverage provisions for all proposed small lots. The Small Lot Plan has been created to reflect Council’s Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code and includes all notes Council typically applies to small residential lots. A condition of approval is recommended to amend the small lot plan to improve streetscape appearance and access at the cul-de-sac head through a shared driveway access to Lots 12 and 13. 2.2 Site and Locality

2.2.1 Site Characteristics The site contains a single Detached House and associated structures. Scattered mature native and exotic vegetation occurs onsite. The majority of the site is open grassland. All existing structures and vegetation will be removed from the site prior to development.



2.2.2 Topography The site falls from the high point of approximately 15.5 metres AHD at Kinsellas Road West (at the south western corner) eastward towards the low point of approximately 10.25 metres AHD adjacent to Lot 238 SP264593 (27 Macadamia Street) at the south eastern corner at a gradient of approximately 2%. 2.2.3 Surrounding Land Use Direction Planning Scheme

Zone Current Land Use

North Detached House Future Urban Zone South Detached House Future Urban Zone (Park Vista estate) East Detached House Future Urban Zone (Park Vista estate) West Detached House Residential A Zone

2.3 State Planning Instrument Assessment

2.3.1 State Planning Regulatory Provisions (SPRPs)

An assessment against each of the State Planning Regulatory Provisions is set out as follows:

Name Designation Applicable Requirements Coastal Protection State Planning Regulatory Provision

Coastal Zone

The site is located in the Coastal zone, however the State Planning Regulatory Provisions do not apply to the development based on the nature of the development proposal.

State Planning Regulatory Provision (Adopted Charges)

None Not Applicable to Development Assessment however the SPRP has informed the Council’s Adopted Infrastructure Charges Resolution that is discussed in section 2.5.1 of this report.

State Planning Regulatory Provisions (Adult Stores)

None The development proposal is not for an Adult Store and therefore the State Planning Regulatory Provisions do not apply.

South East Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulatory Provisions

Priority Koala Assessable Development Area

The site is located in a Priority Koala Assessable Development Area Low Value Rehabilitation area. The development satisfies the provisions in the State Planning Regulatory Provision.

Southeast Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031 (SEQRP) State Planning Regulatory Provisions

Urban Footprint

The development proposal is for an urban activity in the urban footprint and there are no requirements in the State Planning Regulatory Provisions applicable to the development proposal.

2.3.2 State Planning Policy

On 2 December 2013, the single State Planning Policy (SPP) came into effect and includes interim development assessment requirements to be applied by Council until the SPP has been



appropriately integrated into Council’s planning scheme applying to the subject land. For some state interests, the SPP includes a statutory code the development is required to be assessed against. Assessment against the SPP is set out as follows:

Applicable to the Development SPP Requirement Comment

State interest - Mining and Extractive Resources

☐ No

None

State interest - Biodiversity

☐ No

None

State interest – Coastal Environment

☐ No

None

State interest – Water Quality

☐ Yes Receiving Waters trigger Development: (1) avoids or otherwise minimises adverse

impacts on the environmental values of receiving waters, arising from: (a) altered stormwater quality or flow,

and (b) wastewater (other than contaminated

stormwater and sewage), and (c) the creation or expansion of non-tidal

artificial waterways, and (2) complies with the SPP code: Water

quality (Appendix 2). SEQ Water Supply Catchment Trigger Development: (1) complies with the specific outcomes and

measures contained in the Seqwater Development Guidelines: Development Guidelines for Water Quality Management in Drinking Water Catchments 2012, as if: (a) the specific outcomes are the

performance outcomes, and (b) the measures are the acceptable

outcomes.

The development will alter stormwater quality and flow. An assessment of any impacts under this element of the SPP has been undertaken, as outlined in section 2.6.4.1 of this report

State interest – Emissions and Hazardous Activities

☐ No

None



Applicable to the Development SPP Requirement Comment

State interest – Natural Hazards

☐ Yes All Natural Hazards Trigger (1) avoids natural hazard areas or mitigates

the risks of the natural hazard, and (2) supports, and does not unduly burden,

disaster management response or recovery capacity and capabilities, and

(3) directly, indirectly and cumulatively avoids an increase in the severity of the natural hazard and the potential for damage on the site or to other properties, and

(4) avoids risks to public safety and the environment from the location of hazardous materials and the release of these materials as a result of a natural hazard, and

(5) maintains or enhances natural processes and the protective function of landforms and vegetation that can mitigate risks associated with the natural hazard.

The site is subject to the State Interest – Natural Hazards. An assessment of any impacts under this element of the SPP has been undertaken, as outlined in section 2.6.4.3 of this report.

State interest – State Transport Infrastructure

☐ No

None

State interest – Strategic Airports and Aviation Facilities

☐ Yes Development: (1) complies with the SPP code: Strategic

airports and aviation facilities (Appendix 4).

Development complies with the State interest – Strategic Airports and Aviation Facilities and the Operational Airspace and Facilities Overlay Code of the PineRiversPlan.

2.4 Local Planning Instrument Assessment – Pine Rivers Planning Scheme

The Future Urban Zone of the PineRiversPlan envisages that upon provision and availability of infrastructure required to service urban development, the predominant form of development is to consist of low density residential uses. A range of residential, commercial, retail, service industry, recreation and community uses of an appropriate scale and intensity are also anticipated in suitable locations. The proposed development will be fully serviced by all urban infrastructure. The proposed development of the site is consistent with the future intent for the area under the Mango Hill Local Area Plan (MHLAP). The MHLAP establishes a broad structure, layout, appropriate land uses, densities and infrastructure corridors required for the future development and community needs within the Mango Hill Locality. The development achieves a residential density of



16.8 dwellings per hectare which is consistent with the densities identified in the MHLAP for this location (12-25 dwellings per hectare). The material change of use seeks to apply the Residential A Zone provisions of the PineRiversPlan for all future residential development over the site. The proposed development provides for residential development and future housing choices that match the housing needs of the community. The development will be undertaken in a manner that provides for the continuation of existing urban residential development in the Mango Hill area, connected via the adjoining development to the east (the Park Vista estate). The proposed development meets the outcomes sought for an urban residential subdivision. 2.4.1 Desired Environmental Outcomes As the proposed development achieves, or can be conditioned to achieve the specific outcomes sought by the relevant codes of the PineRiversPlan, the Desired Environmental Outcomes are not compromised by the development.

2.4.2 Overall Outcomes As the proposed development achieves, or can be conditioned to achieve the outcomes sought by the relevant specific outcomes of the PineRiversPlan, the Overall Outcomes are taken to be satisfied. 2.4.3 Assessment of Applicable Codes The current zoning of the site is Future Urban reflecting the established lawful uses of the land for the Urban Locality – Future Urban planning provisions of the PineRiversPlan. The strategic intent for the Future Urban zone is to maintain the land in its existing form until such time as the necessary trunk infrastructure can be provided to support development.

Applicable Codes Code Compliance Alternative Solutions Proposed

Zone/ Locality Code Urban Locality Code Yes Future Urban Zone Yes

Development Codes Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code Yes PS 3

Detached House Code Yes Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code Yes PS 1.2, PS 2.1 and PS 2.2

Overlay Codes Bushfire Hazard Overlay Code Yes Acid Sulphate Soils Overlay Code Yes

Operational Airspace and Aviation Facilities Overlay Code

Yes

Miscellaneous Codes



Setbacks Code Yes Landscape Design Code Yes Site Earthworks Code Yes Infrastructure Works Code Yes

The proposed design incorporates alternative solutions that demonstrate that the development is able to achieve the intent of the relevant specific outcomes. The alternative solutions are discussed below:

Specific Outcome Probable solution

Urban Residential Subdivision Design Code 2.3.1 Lot Layout – Single Detached Housing SO 3 All lots have road frontage. PS 3 All lots have road frontages

conforming to the following:

Location Minimum Frontage (m)

Residential lots - all locations except the head of a cul-de-sac and the outside of a bend in the road with a deflection angle exceeding 60o

17

Residential lots - head of a cul-de-sac

10

Residential lots - rear lots

5(1) for a single rear lot 4(1) for more than one rear lot served by a shared driveway

Alternative Solution/s Assessment The applicant seeks to create a single lot (Lot 13 – a Standard Residential Lot/Detached House Lot) with a frontage less than 10m in length at the head of a cul-de-sac. In this instance, the applicant has demonstrated through an alternative solution that the proposed 5m frontage will allow for construction of a Detached House with appropriate setbacks and areas of private open space. Detached House construction will be subject to compliance with the Detached House Code. The 5m frontage is a sufficient width for a driveway to be constructed between the detached house and the road, and is consistent with rear access lots that are also required to provide a road frontage of 5m. All lots have front frontage. In this instance, Specific Outcome SO 3 is satisfied.

Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code SO 1 - Building size is consistent with that prevailing in the locality and buildings are of a domestic scale in their footprint and height.

PS 1.2 - The building footprint does not exceed 50% of the site area. For a rear access allotment, the building footprint does not exceed 50% of the site area excluding the access way.



Specific Outcome Probable solution

In calculating the building footprint, measurements must be taken from the outermost projections of all covered structures, including covered or uncovered pergolas, but excluding eaves or other sun shading devices projecting out from the walls

Alternative Solution Assessment The applicant has proposed maximum site coverage for all Small Lots to be 50% for the Detached House plus an additional 10% for open framed elements such as patios and alfresco areas. The proposal meets the specific outcome as the size and scale of the buildings will be domestic in nature satisfying the Specific Outcome SO 1 in this instance.

Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code SO 2 Uniform and repetitive housing set backs are avoided.

PS 2.1 - At the time of the creation of the small lot plan by the developer, which indicates minimum set-backs, building envelope areas, private open space areas, built to boundaries walls, no more than three (3) houses in sequence, may be positioned on the same building set-back. Where building set back variation is required, the set-back difference between any two (2) adjoining houses shall be a minimum of 1m. AND PS 2.2 - The small lot plan shall ensure, through a combination of street frontage indentations within individual building envelope areas, and the location of car accommodation within allotments, that no more than 30% of all houses within a street, have the car accommodation located forward of the living areas of the house.

Alternative Solution Assessment The applicant has submitted a Small Lot Plan that demonstrates a diversity of housing will occur on the site that avoids repetitive housing setbacks. The new road has a varied road alignment which alters the layout of the building alignments. This horizontal curve leading to the cul-de-sac head breaks up the streetscape leading to the appearance of Lots 4 – 9 on potentially the same building setback integrating within the development. Further, the establishment of the development will be undertaken in a manner that provides for the logical expansion of urban development of the Mango Hill area, connecting to the established residential development Park Vista estate. In this instance, Specific Outcome SO 2 is satisfied.

2.4.4 Mango Hill Local Area Plan

The Mango Hill Local Area Plan (MHLAP) is not included as part of the PineRiversPlan. However it is a policy document adopted by Council to provide detailed planning policy for the future development of land within the future urban areas of the Northern growth Corridor (including Mango Hill) and identifies possible land uses and infrastructure required to create a functional urban



community in this locality. The site is located within the MHLAP, and is identified for residential development.

Residential Density

The average minimum residential density intended for the site is a minimum of 12-25 dwellings per hectare as net residential density, including the land utilised for roads and local parks (refer Figure 2 – Land Use Plan in MHLAP and the development model for Mango Hill). In accordance with the Mango Hill Development Model, the residential density is to be a minimum of 12 dwellings per hectare where is greater than 5% and a minimum of 25 dwellings per hectare where slope is 5% or lower. The site falls 4m over a length of 200m (slope of 2%). The development is therefore required to achieve a minimum of thirteen (13) dwellings in accordance with the Mango Hill Development Model. The proposed development provides an additional four (4) residential lots at a density of 16.8 dwellings per hectare. The applicant proposes allotments with a minimum 15m frontage adjoining Kinsellas Road West to reflect the prevailing street form of the Mango Hill Village on the western side of Kinsellas Road West. The proposal is consistent with residential allotment frontages adjoining Kinsellas Road West provided for as part of the Park Vista estate. The proposed development achieves the minimum density requirements set out in the MHLAP. 2.4.5 Non Standard Conditions Nil

2.5 Other Relevant Assessment

2.5.1 Infrastructure Charges In accordance with Council’s Adopted Charges Resolution (minute page 11/1229) on 28 June 2011, taking effect 1 July 2011, Adopted Charges are applicable to this development application. The site is located within the Priority Infrastructure Area as per the State Regulatory Planning Provisions (Adopted Charges). The future development of the site is commensurate with the planned densities of the MHLAP and demand assumptions. An infrastructure agreement is not required. Infrastructure Charges to be levied across the site are as follows: - Credit = Detached House at $28,000.00 - Charge = 17 Residential Lots at $28,000.00 = Levied Charge (17 lots x $28,000.00) – Existing Credit ($28,000.00) = $448,000.00 Adopted Infrastructure Charge (for all networks, inclusive of Unitywater)

2.6 Referrals

2.6.1 Concurrence Agencies There were no Concurrence Agencies involved in assessing this application.



2.6.2 Advice Agencies There were no Advice Agencies involved in assessing this application. 2.6.3 Third Party Agencies There were no Third Party Agencies involved in assessing this application. 2.6.4 Internal Referral

2.6.4.1 Development Engineering Earthworks The applicant has provided a preliminary bulk earthworks plan. This plan demonstrates the proposed lots will grade to the proposed new road with the fall across the land proposed at 2%. Proposed Lots 15-17 will be graded to the rear of the lots, where the overland flow will be collected and discharged via an inter allotment drainage system. Traffic and Transport Proposed Lots 1-14 will obtain access from the proposed road extension to Macadamia Street. The proposed road is classified as a local access place, which will need to be constructed with a 6m wide carriageway within a 13m wide reserve along the site boundary. The additional 2m reserve required to complete the typical verge profile for the local access place is to be dedicated by the adjoining development to the north upon future development of that site. Kinsellas Road West is classified as a trunk collector road. The recommendations of this report include conditions for Kinsellas Road West to be constructed to the ultimate, which includes reconstruction of the verge, kerb and channel and road pavement widening. The 2m wide pathway (constructed as part of the Park Vista and which currently ends at the site’s southern boundary) is to be extended for the full site frontage. It is proposed that within the 5m wide pedestrian pathway (road reserve) adjacent to Lots 14 and 15 a 2m wide pedestrian pathway be constructed to enable pedestrian movements from the development to Kinsellas Road West. The pathway is recommended to be constructed towards the northern boundary (that is, not centred within the current 5m dedication) to provide opportunities for landscaping and enhancements along the southern edge of the pedestrian pathway. Stormwater Management and Drainage Discharge The applicant has prepared a concept stormwater management plan for the subdivision. The lawful point of discharge has been identified via the stormwater connection provided at the eastern boundary of the site connecting into the Park Vista estate. It has been demonstrated the downstream system caters for the increase in stormwater quantity from the proposed development. It has been proposed that a bio-retention basin will be utilised to ensure the subdivision meets the water quality objectives of the Single State Planning Policy and Council’s standards. The MUSIC model provided by the engineer has demonstrated this bio-retention basin in combination with the existing basins within the Park Vista estate will achieve the relevant water quality objectives.



The location of the bio-retention basin is within the road reserve in front of Lots 10 and 11. The bio-retention has been conditioned to be located clear of proposed driveways for each of the lots. The concept provided is suitable for approval and a review of the detailed design will be undertaken during the operational works application.

2.6.4.2 Environmental Health Waste Management Each dwelling will use individual wheelie bins that will be serviced on the kerbside by a side loading HRV. 2.6.4.3 Environmental Planning The site is partially covered by the medium Bushfire Hazard Area Overlay. The Bushfire Hazard Area Overlay Code applies to development in the medium and high hazard areas. The development site is located in an urbanised area surrounded by similar residential development. The site has an easterly aspect and is not located within 100 metres of potentially hazardous vegetation. Connection to reticulated water is available. Overall the site is considered to have a low bushfire hazard risk given the surrounding urban environment and ongoing development in the area. No further assessment against the Bushfire Hazard Area Overlay Code is necessary in this instance.

2.7 Public Consultation 2.7.1 Public Notification Requirements under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 Three (3) submissions were received (two (2) properly made and one (1) not properly made) in respect to this application. The matters raised within these submissions are outlined below: Assessment of Submissions Issue Discussion Environment The site is not identified under the environmental overlays as

having environmental values under the PineRiversPlan. Further the site is not identified as comprising bushland koala habitat under the South East Queensland Koala SPRP. The development of the site for residential purposes is consistent with the planning intent for the site. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Density and number of new lots

The proposed site density of 16.8 dwellings per hectare is consistent with the Mango Hill Local Area Plan as discussed in section 2.4.4 of this report. Development for Reconfiguring a Lot to create Standard Residential Lots/Detached House Lots and Small Residential Lots is appropriate for the site and consistent with the pattern of development in the surrounding residential area. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Congestion Access to the development is via Kinsellas Road West and the proposed new road connecting to Macadamia Street.



Development Engineering have determined that the access proposal is compliant with the PineRiversPlan and that sufficient carrying capacity exists within the road network to safely and effectively service the development and surrounding residential area. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Speeding Vehicles This is a matter for law enforcement and is not a planning consideration. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Neighbours knowledge of the development application

Applicant has lodged an application under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009. Applicant has demonstrated compliance with the requirements of an impact assessable application and provided a notice of compliance satisfying the public notification requirements. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Nuisance from civil works (noise)

Construction practice is regulated by the Environmental Protection Act 1994. Enforcement is governed by Council. Where there is a breach in the legislation, enforcement is a course of action. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Privacy along southern boundary

The applicant has sought to reduce the height of the building pads along the southern property boundary by grading the land northwards towards the proposed new road. No fill is proposed along this shared boundary. Building Envelope Plan 124369-06C prepared by RPS dated the 14 May 2015 also indicates a rear boundary setback of 3.0 metres in accordance with Probable Solution PS 4.1 of the Detached Houses on Small Residential Lots Code. The development will protect the privacy of the existing residents along the southern boundary. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Noise from future residents

Development for Reconfiguring a Lot to create Standard Residential Lots/Detached House Lots and Small Residential Lots is appropriate for the site and consistent with the pattern of development in the surrounding residential area. A reasonable amount of noise generated by a detached house is acceptable. Where noise generation is not at an acceptable level, this will be a matter for law enforcement. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Retaining walls on southern boundary

As part of the information request response provided by the applicant dated the 24 April 2015, retaining structures were removed. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

Restrict to single storey Probable Solution PS 1.1 of the Detached Houses on Small



development Residential Lots Code identifies that buildings shall be restricted to a maximum height of 2 storeys above natural ground surface. A two storey house is therefore consistent with the requirements for development in a residential area and is consistent with expectations based on the PineRiversPlan. This is not sufficient grounds for refusal of the application.

2.7.2 Notice of Compliance The proposed development was required to undertake public notification for a period of thirty (30) business days, in accordance with section 298 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

• A notice was published in the Pine Rivers Press/ North Lakes Times on the 5 February 2015;

• A notice was placed on the land on the 5 February 2015; and • A notice was to all adjoining land owners on the 5 February 2015.

3. Strategic Implications 3.1 Legislative/Legal Implications

The applicant and submitters have appeal rights in accordance with the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

3.2 Corporate Plan / Operational Plan

Strengthening Communities: Development assessment - assessment of development applications and provision of development advice.

3.3 Policy Implications The proposal is consistent with the Mango Hill Local Area Plan and the Desired Environmental Outcomes of the PineRiversPlan 2006.

3.4 Risk Management Implications

The proposal is consistent with the strategic intent of the Mango Hill Local Area Plan. The Preliminary Approval will provide greater certainty of land use consistent with the adjoining allotments. Development occurs efficiently and effectively in the region in a manner that reduces the potential risk implications to Council and the community.

3.5 Delegated Authority Implications

Not applicable. 3.6 Financial Implications

a) In the event that an appeal is made to the Planning & Environment court against Council’s decision, the Council will incur additional costs in defending its position.

b) Permit conditions require infrastructure contributions to Council.

3.7 Economic Benefit Appropriate development supports the growth of the Moreton Bay Region.

3.8 Environmental Implications

New development contributes to sustainable management and protection of the natural environment in the region through compliance with the planning schemes policies and provisions.



3.9 Social Implications Appropriately designed and located development contributes to diverse, vibrant and safe communities and facilities.

3.10 Consultation / Communication Refer to clause 2.7.



3 CORPORATE SERVICES SESSION (Cr Bob Millar) No items for consideration.



4 ASSET CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE SESSION (Cr Peter Flannery) ITEM 4.1 KINSELLAS SPORTS FIELD, NORTH LAKES – FIELD LIGHTING WORKS (VP28243/MBRC003272) - DIVISION 4 Meeting / Session: 4 ASSET CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE Reference: A11996099 : 6 July 2015 - Refer Confidential Supporting Information

A11974422 Responsible Officer: DB, Senior Project Manager (ECM Project Management & Construction) Executive Summary Tenders were invited for the Kinsellas Sports Field lighting project (VP28243/MBRC003272). The tender closed on 5 June 2015, with two conforming tenders and one alternative tender received. It is recommended that Council award the contract to BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd for the sum of $350,000 (excluding GST) as this tender was evaluated as representing the best overall value to Council. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved by Cr Julie Greer Seconded by Cr Mick Gillam CARRIED 11/0 That the contract for the Kinsellas Sports Field, North Lakes - Stage 1 Electrical Works (Field Lighting) (VP28243/MBRC003272) be awarded to BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd for the amount of $350,000 (excluding GST).

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1251 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 4.1 KINSELLAS SPORTS FIELD, NORTH LAKES – FIELD LIGHTING WORKS (VP28243/MBRC003272) - DIVISION 4 - A11996099 (Cont.)


OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION That the contract for the Kinsellas Sports Field, North Lakes - Stage 1 Electrical Works (Field Lighting) (VP28243/MBRC003272) be awarded to BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd for the amount of $350,000 (excluding GST). REPORT DETAIL 1. Background The Kinsellas Sports Field project is located at Memorial Drive, North Lakes. The project is multi-faceted and will be delivered over the 2015/16 to 2016/17 financial years. The project elements will be delivered by a combination of Council and Stockland. Stockland, as part of the Northlake’s Infrastructure Agreement with Council, will provide an irrigated sports field and a small toilet block. These works are underway and due to be completed by late 2015. Council has allocated $890,000 in its 2015/16 Capital projects budget to supply and install sports field lighting to the field being developed by Stockland, as well as the design and construction of a car park associated with the new sports field. The car park construction will be tendered separately and is scheduled to commence early in 2016. The timing of the field lighting works is dependent on the completion of the sports field work by Stockland. Council, in its draft 2016/17 Capital projects budget, has allocated $1.3M to design and construct a clubhouse which is to include change, club, storage and administration rooms plus a kitchen. Council has been successful in securing $722,911 towards the project through the Queensland Government’s ‘Get Playing Plus’ program - $500,000 in 2015/16 and $222,911 in 2016/17. In conjunction with Stockland, the outcome of this project is to deliver an additional fully-functional sport facility for the North Lakes community.

Figure 1 Kinsellas Sports Field location



2. Explanation of Item Tenders for the Kinsellas Sports Field lighting project (only) closed 5 June 2015 with two conforming tenders and one alternative tender received. The tenders were assessed in accordance with Council’s Purchasing Policy and the selection criteria set out in the tender documents. All tenders with their weightings are tabled below (ranked from highest to lowest):

RANK TENDERER EVALUATION SCORE

1 BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd 96.32

2 Erinbowl Pty Ltd Trading As Base Electrical Services 94.71

3 BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd Alternative 87.83

BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd received the highest ranking from the selection panel based upon the selection criteria. Their submission demonstrated the necessary experience, construction methodology and understanding of the project requirements. BRL Electrical Services has completed other works for Council. The program for completion of works is 12 weeks. A tender clarification meeting was held on 18 June 2015 with BRL Electrical Services during which their understanding and comprehension of the project was confirmed. Erinbowl Pty Ltd Trading As Base Electrical Services submitted a comprehensive tender; however their tender price was not as competitive as BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd and therefore received a lower ranking based upon the selection criteria. The program for completion of works is 21 weeks. BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd submitted an alternative tender with an alternative light fitting for the car park and paths; however Council’s specified light fitting is preferred on the basis of warranty and performance on previous projects. The alternative proposed by BRL Electrical Services has therefore received a lower ranking based upon the selection criteria. The program for completion of works is 12 weeks. 3. Strategic Implications 3.1 Legislative/Legal Implications

Due to value of work being greater than $200,000 Council sought tenders through a Vendor Panel arrangement in accordance with the Local Government Act 2009.

3.2 Corporate Plan / Operational Plan This project is consistent with the Corporate Plan outcome - Valuing Lifestyle: Sport and recreation - sport and recreation programs, activities and facilities.

3.3 Policy Implications This project has been procured in accordance with the provisions of the following documents:

• Council’s Procurement Policy 10-2150-006 • Local Government Act 2009 • Local Government Regulation 2012 Chapter 6.

3.4 Risk Management Implications The project risk has been assessed and potential impacts identified as follows:

1. Financial Status: a. A third party review of the financial status of BRL Electrical Services Pty Ltd has been

completed, and was reported as ‘financially capable’ to carry out the works. 2. Construction risks:



a. The proposed works will be undertaken in accordance with the Building Approval to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval.

b. The tendered methodology has been assessed to ensure construction risks associated with the works are understood, and a management plan is in place to manage such risks.

c. The tender document required all tenderers to include allowance for inclement weather within their tendered construction time line. The allowance is based upon the Bureau of Meteorology Rainfall Graph for the Brisbane area.

d. Works are required to be completed under the management of a principal contractor for Stockland and a site specific WHS management plan will be developed for the works to be undertaken.


There are no delegated authority implications associated with this project.

3.6 Financial Implications Council has allocated $890,000 (excl. GST) in the 2015/16 Capital projects budget for the supply and installation of sports field lighting and car park construction. (The car park design is progressing with construction planned to commence early 2016 under a separate tender package.) This project will be debited to project number 42866.

Field lighting tender $ 350,000 Contingency (10%) $ 35,000 Qleave $ 1,829 -------------- Field lighting project cost $ 386,829 -------------- All above figures are exclusive of GST. The estimated ongoing operational/maintenance costs are $500 per financial year for testing and inspection only. The fields are to be leased, with the lessor under the proposed lease agreement responsible for power and luminaire replacement costs. $503,171 remains, from the $890,000, to complete the design and construction of the car park in 2015/16. Council has secured funding revenue of $722,911 towards the project through the Queensland Government’s ‘Get Playing Plus’ program towards the project - $500,000 in 2015/16 and $222,911 in 2016/17. $1.3M has been included in the draft 2016/17 Capital projects budget to undertake the design and construction of the clubhouse.

3.7 Economic Benefit N/A.

3.8 Environmental Implications An Environmental Management Plan will be submitted to Council for approval by the successful tenderer, detailing how the existing fields and waterways will be protected during construction, and how sediment run-off will be managed.

3.9 Social Implications

The new sporting facility will provide a well-planned space for the local community to utilise.

3.10 Consultation / Communication Community Facilities Sport and Recreation officers have been involved in the planning and design phase of the project. The Divisional Councillor has been consulted and is supportive of this project.



5 PARKS, RECREATION & SPORT SESSION (Cr Gary Parsons) No items for consideration.



6 LIFESTYLE & AMENITY SESSION (Cr Julie Greer) ITEM 6.1 PROJECT SPONSOR ARRANGEMENTS - GREEN ARMY ROUND 2 – DIVISION 1 Meeting / Session: 6 LIFESTYLE & AMENITY Reference: A10309872 : 30 June 2015 - Refer Supporting Information A12067500;

A12067498; A12067501 Responsible Officer: GM, Coordinator, Environment and Projects (CES Environmental Planning &

Compliance) Executive Summary The Federal Government’s Green Army programme employs Australians 17 – 24 years to gain training and experience in the fields of environmental and heritage conservation. Under Round 2 of the Green Army programme, Council has approved four projects to be carried out on Council-owned or managed land, three of which are located within Division 1. This report seeks Council approval to undertake the role of project sponsor for all three projects located in Division 1 with the view to maximising project efficiencies and participant outcomes. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved by Cr Gary Parsons Seconded by Cr James Houghton CARRIED 11/0 1. That Council accept the role of project sponsor for Green Army – Round 2 projects as

detailed in Supporting Information #3 of this report.

2. That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a legal agreement with the Federal Government for Green Army – Round 2 projects where Council is the project sponsor.

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1256 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 6.1 PROJECT SPONSOR ARRANGEMENTS - GREEN ARMY ROUND 2 – DIVISION 1 - A10309872 (Cont.)


OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council accept the role of project sponsor for Green Army – Round 2 projects as detailed in

Supporting Information #3 of this report. 2. That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a legal agreement with the Federal

Government for Green Army – Round 2 projects where Council is the project sponsor. REPORT DETAIL 1. Background The Green Army programme is a Federal Government initiative which aims to provide young people aged between 17 and 24 years with the opportunity to gain valuable training and experience in the fields of environment and heritage protection. Participants engaged in the program partake in activities such as plant propagation, weeding, revegetation and maintenance over project periods lasting 20 to 26 weeks. In December 2014, Council considered and approved five projects under Round 1 of the Green Army programme, to be carried out on Council-owned or managed land (Supporting Information #1). The following resolution appears on Minute Page 14/2354 of the General Meeting of Council held 9 December 2014: Ex. Coordination Committee Meeting held 9 December 2014 (MP14/2373). COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council approve the Green Army projects to be conducted on Council-owned or managed land,

as described in the Supporting Information. 2. That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a legal agreement with the Federal

Government for Green Army projects where Council is the project sponsor, as described in the Supporting Information to this item.

In March of 2015, Council considered and approved a further four projects on Council-owned or managed land under Green Army - Round 2 (see Supporting Information #2). The following resolution appears on Minutes Page 15/482 of the General Meeting of Council held 31 March 2015: Ex. Coordination Committee Meeting held 31 March 2015 (MP15/494). COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council approve the four Green Army projects to be conducted on Council-owned or managed

land, as described in the Supporting Information. 2. That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a legal agreement with the Federal

Government for Green Army projects where Council is the project sponsor, as described in the Supporting Information.

2. Explanation of Item Each project approved under the Green Army programme requires the nomination of a project sponsor. The project sponsor is responsible for managing site approvals, site access and the development and approval of a detailed work plan.



At its meeting of 31 March 2015, Council approved the following Green Army – Round 2 projects and respective project sponsors: Project Division Project Sponsor 1 Hays Inlet, Clontarf Division 6 The Redcliffe Environment Forum 2 Caboolture and Tea Tree Creek Division 1 Moreton Bay Regional Council 3 Buckley’s Hole Division 1 Bribie Island Environmental Protection Association Inc. 4 Woorim Beach Division 1 Friends of Woorim Beach The Federal Government has appointed Manpower Australia, in partnership with Landcare Australia Ltd, as the service provider for projects 2, 3 and 4. The service provider is responsible for recruiting participants and team supervisors, managing workplace health and safety requirements, providing training, paying allowances and delivering the project in accordance with the detailed work plan.

Through consultation with Council and the two community group project sponsors, Manpower Australia has identified various opportunities to improve participant outcomes and achieve efficiencies across the three projects. It is proposed that under a single project sponsor, Green Army teams would be provided the opportunity to work across all three sites for the next 18 months (3 x 6 month projects), maximising their learning opportunities. Project administration (e.g. paperwork, travel and meeting times) would also be significantly reduced under such as arrangement. As an organisation with considerable expertise and experience in the area of environmental project management, Council has been requested to also take on the role of project sponsor for projects 3 and 4 - Buckley’s Hole and Woorim Beach projects. This change is supported by the Federal Government and the currently assigned project sponsors - Bribie Island Environmental Association Inc. and Friends of Woorim Beach (Supporting Information #3). Council would continue to work collaboratively with both community groups to ensure the success of all three projects. 3. Strategic Implications 3.1 Legislative/Legal Implications

The recommendations of this report will see Council assume responsibility for the delivery of two additional Green Army projects: Woorim Beach and Buckley’s Hole. Council is already the project sponsor for three other projects within the region: Round One: • Samford: Ecological Restoration of South Pine River at Uralba Park and Undambi Reserve; • Brendale: South Pine River Complex Ecological Restoration; and Round Two: • Caboolture: Rehabilitation of disturbed land at Boundary of Lagoon Creek and Tea Tree Creek. Green Army project sponsors are required to enter into a Project Agreement with the Federal Government. All Project Agreements entered into by Council will be reviewed and approved by the Legal Services department prior to execution.

3.2 Corporate Plan / Operational Plan Valuing Lifestyle: Environmental initiatives - plan, monitor, report and educate on environmental and conservation outcomes.

3.3 Policy Implications Green Army projects align with Council’s Koala Conservation Policy (No: 35-2150-003) and will contribute to an increase in koala corridors or enhance habitat quality in key areas.



3.4 Risk Management Implications Risk assessments are completed for all Green Army projects sponsored by Council. As the service provider for all three projects, Manpower is responsible for managing identified risks throughout the projects.

3.5 Delegated Authority Implications N/A

3.6 Financial Implications The Federal Government will provide the service provider (Manpower, in partnership with Landcare Australia Limited) project funding totalling $211,500 (inclusive of GST) for the delivery of Green Army Projects 1, 2 and 3 within Division 1 for which Council will be the project sponsor. In the 2015/16 budget, Council has allocated $15,000 in addition to federal govement funds to support these projects.

3.7 Economic Benefit There are no economic benefits associated with this report.


Green Army projects address locally relevant conservation priorities including: • Propagation and planting of native seedlings; • Weed control; and • Habitat protection and restoration.

3.9 Social Implications

The Green Army programme aims to increase community participation in environmental and heritage conservation outcomes through the employment of young people aged 17 – 24 years.

3.10 Consultation / Communication Internal:

• Council Workshop (6 May 2014) • Legal Services; • Accounting Services (Insurance); • Parks and Recreation Planning; • Property and Special Projects; • Engineering, Construction and Maintenance – Operations team; Natural Areas team and

Drainage, Waterways and Coastal Planning team; and • Waste Management.

External:

• Federal Government - Green Army Project Team; • Manpower; • Landcare Australia Limited; • Bribie Island Environmental Protection Association; • Bribie Island Community Association Inc.; and • Friends of Woorim Beach.



7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM SESSION (Cr Allan Sutherland, Mayor) ITEM 7.1 TENDER FOR SUPPLY AND SERVICE OF BULK INDUSTRIAL BINS (MBRC004425) - REGIONAL Meeting / Session: 7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM Reference: A11990634 : 23 June 2015 - Refer Confidential Supporting Information

A11990675 Responsible Officer: BM, Coordinator Waste Operations (EDCS Waste Services) Executive Summary Tenders were called for the supply and service of bulk industrial bins on Saturday 11 April 2015 and closed on Tuesday 9 May 2015. Three conforming tender submissions were received and a late tender was received from Transpacific Cleanaway. The tender submissions were assessed in accordance with Council’s Purchasing Policy and the selection criteria set out in the tender documents. Tenderers were requested to submit a schedule of rates for various sized bulk industrial bins for general waste and recyclable waste at nominated locations in the Moreton Bay region. It is recommended that Council award the contract to Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd for their submitted schedule of rates for a period of three years from 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2018. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved by Cr Adrian Raedel Seconded by Cr Peter Flannery CARRIED 11/0 That the tender for the Supply and Service of Bulk Industrial Bins (MBRC004425), as detailed in the submitted schedule of rates, be awarded to Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd for a period of three years from 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2018 subject to a yearly rise and fall adjustment.

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1260 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 7.1 TENDER FOR SUPPLY AND SERVICE OF BULK INDUSTRIAL BINS (MBRC004425) - REGIONAL - A11990634 (Cont.)


OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION That the tender for the Supply and Service of Bulk Industrial Bins (MBRC004425), as detailed in the submitted schedule of rates, be awarded to Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd for a period of three years from 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2018 subject to a yearly rise and fall adjustment. REPORT DETAIL 1. Background The supply and service of bulk industrial bins is required throughout the region for properties such as residential multiple dwellings, community facilities, Council facilities and temporary locations used for Council and community events. A schedule of rates was requested for bulk industrial bins made of steel in sizes of 1m3 up to 5m3 and plastic-moulded bins in 600 and 1100 litre sizes to ensure the availability of appropriate sized bulk bins to suit the requirements of each location. Specific bins are required for different locations depending on the size of the complex, site conditions, accessibility and general waste and recyclable waste requirements. As at 30 April 2015 there were 215 properties in the region utilising a total of 688 bulk industrial bins as detailed in Table 1. Of this total, 88 Council properties and 127 Residential Multiple Dwellings utilised the number and types of bins and services as detailed in Table 2: Table 1

NB: Total properties in Table 1 are based on general waste bulk industrial bin numbers. Not all properties have recyclable waste bulk industrial bins. Bin totals are for both general waste and recyclable waste. Table 2

Properties Serviced Properties Bins

Total Council Properties utilising Bulk Bins 88 131

Total Residential Multiple Dwellings utilising Bulk Bins 127 557

Totals 215 688

Types of Bins Serviced Properties Bins Services / month

Total Waste Bulk Bins 215 462 3,007

Total Co-mingled Bulk Bins 100 225 784

Total Paper & Cardboard Bulk Bins

1 1 4

Totals 215 688 3,795



The evaluation of the tenders was based on the following methodology covering mandatory criteria, qualitative criteria, weightings and price as detailed in Table 3 below: Table 3 Mandatory Criterion Pass One Financial Details Mandatory

Financial Capacity Mandatory

Insurances Mandatory

Referees Mandatory

Qualitative Criterion Pass Two Weighting

100%

Company Profile including Management, Staff and Resources; Current Commitments and Referee outcomes.

25%

Management Systems including proposed Bin Changeover Plan and Customer Service Responsiveness

25%

Work Health and Safety Management Plans including any prohibition notices, training, compliance with legislation, WH&S Hazard Register and Management Systems.

25%

Vehicles Plant and Equipment including Bulk Bin specifications; specialised bulk bins; Recyclable Waste Processing Facility: Extent, Type and Standard of Vehicles Plant and Equipment and GPS technology.

25%

Price Pass Three Tendered Rates Value for

Money and best overall

offer to Council

2. Explanation of Item The tender return document included a schedule of rates for the following services:

• general waste, recyclable (co-mingled) waste and recyclable (paper and cardboard) waste; • services carried out on a regular (daily, weekly, fortnightly) and temporary basis; • weekend rates to deliver, service and remove temporary event bins; • nominated locations within the defined service region and outside the defined service region; • transportation and disposal of general waste and transportation and processing of recyclable

waste.



The schedule of rates submitted by tenderers to supply and service bulk industrial bins within the defined collection service was selected for the evaluation. All conforming tenders were evaluated against the selection and qualitative criteria, and the assessment and ranking of the tenders as set out in Table 4 below. The Evaluation Panel determined that the late tender would not be accepted and was not included in the evaluation process. Table 4 Company Qualitative

Score % Pass One - Mandatory

Pass Two - Weighted

Pass Three - Price

Ranking Ranking J.J. Richards & Sons Pty Ltd, 20 Parramatta Road, Underwood

80.50 Pass 1 3

Sita Aust Pty Ltd T/A Suez Environment Recycling & Waste Recovery, 20 Weyba Street, Lower Nudgee

69.25 Pass 2 2

Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd, 815 Boundary Road, Coopers Plains

66.75 Pass 3 1

Tendered rates and the tender assessment are detailed in the Confidential Supporting Information document attached to this report. All tenderers attained a level three pass for the evaluation. All tenderers currently carry out these types of services for other councils and businesses. All tenderers have the relevant experience, management systems, required insurances, work health and safety management systems, plant and equipment to carry out the services. JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd submitted a conforming tender that contained relevant information within the tender schedules to enable an adequate assessment of the tender. They addressed the selection criteria satisfactorily by providing information about current commitments, management systems, insurances, work health and safety, plant and equipment. JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd carry out similar waste services for a number of Queensland local authorities including Gold Coast, Redlands and Logan Councils. The company has an extensive number of vehicles available to complete the services. The company received the highest qualitative score, however submitted the highest overall price. Sita Australia submitted a conforming tender that contained the relevant information within the tender schedules to enable an adequate assessment of the tender. They addressed the selection criteria satisfactorily by providing information about current commitments, management systems, insurances, work health and safety, plant and equipment. Sita Australia carries out similar waste services for Brisbane City Council and the University of Queensland. The company received the second highest qualitative score. Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd submitted a conforming tender that contained relevant information within the tender schedules to enable an adequate assessment of the tender. Tox Free addressed the selection criteria satisfactorily by providing information about current commitments, management systems, insurances, work health and safety, plant and equipment. Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd carry out similar waste services in Western Australia. They received the third highest qualitative score and provided the best overall price. Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd provided the most advantageous tender to Council.



3. Strategic Implications 3.1 Legislative/Legal Implications

This tender has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2009, Local Government Regulation 2012 and Council’s Procurement and Disposals Policy, therefore all legal risks and implications have been minimised.

3.2 Corporate Plan / Operational Plan This project is consistent with the Corporate Plan outcome - Valuing Lifestyle: Waste collection, reduction and recycling - the collection and disposal of waste, and programs and strategies to reduce and recycle waste.

3.3 Policy Implications This contract has been procured in accordance with the provisions of the following documents:

• Council’s Procurement Policy 10-2150-006 • Local Government Act 2009 • Local Government Regulation 2012 Chapter 6.

3.4 Risk Management Implications The awarding of this contract to Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd has been evaluated as a higher risk to Council, mainly due to the number of vehicles available to conduct the services. The company’s resources/vehicles were discussed at a meeting with the company representatives and they advised that they have the ability to access back-up vehicles in their fleet and they propose to purchase a new vehicle for this contract. The company representatives gave assurances that they have evaluated the service runs and are able to meet the service requirements of the contract. The tendered prices submitted by Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd are considerably lower than the other two tenderers.

A third party review of the company’s financial status was carried out and the report revealed that Tox Free Australia Pty Ltd has a very strong financial capacity to undertake the contract. An extract of the report is contained in the Confidential Supporting Information.

3.5 Delegated Authority Implications There are no delegated authority implications relating to this tender.

3.6 Financial Implications The current charges for the supply and service of bulk industrial bins is $563,287 per year and the tendered rates for the same number of services is an estimated $560,023 per year (excluding GST). This is a saving of $3,264 per year. Provisions have been made in the 2015/16 financial year budget for supply and service of bulk industrial bins. This project will be mainly debited to project numbers 20142 and 20143. The budget amounts for these projects are sufficient.

3.7 Economic Benefit The contract for the supply and servicing of bulk industrial bins for the collection of general waste and recyclable waste across the region will allow for a more efficient, effective and flexible collection system for residential multiple dwellings, Council facilities and Council and community events.

3.8 Environmental Implications The supply of bulk industrial bins to nominated locations for recyclable waste increases the amount of recyclable waste streams able to be diverted from landfill.



3.9 Social Implications The supply of bulk industrial bins to nominated locations minimises the need to supply varying numbers of wheelie bins to specific properties reducing any issues with the visual impact and amenity on the region on service days.

3.10 Consultation / Communication Consultation was held with the Procurement Services to ensure the documents were consistent with Council’s requirements and compliant with Council’s Procurement and Disposal’s Policy and tender evaluation process.

ATTENDANCE Brad Page attended the meeting at 10.50am for discussion on Item 7.2.



ITEM 7.2 2015/16 SCHEDULE OF FEES & CHARGES – ADDITIONAL FEES CABOOLTURE POOL AND GYM - DIVISION 3 Meeting / Session: 7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM Reference: A12060810 : 29 June 2015 - Refer Supporting Information A12060825 Responsible Officer: BP, Aquatic and Leisure Centres Coordinator (EDCS Property & Commercial

Services) Executive Summary This report seeks Council approval to the addition of product/service pricing fees for the new Caboolture gym to ensure the pricing is fair and equitable for all users. The new gym at the Caboolture pool is due to be opened in July 2015. A schedule of fees and charges for the 2015/16 financial year was adopted by Council on 31 March 2015. Subsequent to these fees being adopted, a number of omissions have been identified. The fees proposed in this report are designed to ensure equitable entry pricing for seniors, pensioners and disabled users in addition to providing combined pool and gym entry fees for all groups. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved by Cr Greg Chippendale Seconded by Cr Mick Gillam CARRIED 11/0 That the following fees and charges for operations of the Caboolture Pool and Gym be adopted and included in the 2015/16 Schedule of Fees & Charges in addition to the fees and charges adopted on 31 March 2015:

Adult entry - gym & pool $8.00 Aged & disability concession entry – gym & pool $6.80 Aged & disability concession entry - gym only $5.00

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1266 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 7.2 2015/16 SCHEDULE OF FEES & CHARGES – ADDITIONAL FEES CABOOLTURE POOL AND GYM - DIVISION 3 - A12060810 (Cont.)


OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION That the following fees and charges for operations of the Caboolture Pool and Gym be adopted and included in the 2015/16 Schedule of Fees & Charges in addition to the fees and charges adopted on 31 March 2015:

Adult entry - gym & pool $8.00 Aged & disability concession entry – gym & pool $6.80 Aged & disability concession entry - gym only $5.00 REPORT DETAIL 1. Background At its meeting of 31 March 2015, Council adopted the 2015/16 Schedule of Fees & Charges including fees and charges for the operations of the Caboolture Pool, as detailed in supporting information #1 (excluding the fees highlighted in green). To overcome potential concerns from future user groups, including the aged and disability concession holders, the inclusion of other fees and charges are proposed for the Caboolture Pool and Gym facilty as detailed in supporting information #1 (highlighted green). 2. Explanation of Item The adopted schedule of fees did not consider a discounted entry fee for aged and disability concession holders for access to certain packages for gym and pool usage. Also, the schedule did not consider a price for combined gym and pool casual entry for adults. The proposed additional fees will allow for an approximate discount of 15% (for both adult and concession) compared to paying full pool and gym casual entry fees separately. 3. Strategic Implications 3.1 Legislative/Legal Implications

Nil

3.2 Corporate Plan / Operational Plan Valuing Lifestyle: Sport and recreation - sport and recreation programs, activities and facilities.

3.3 Policy Implications The proposal is consistent with Council’s provision for discounted fees for the aged and disability concession holders.

3.4 Risk Management Implications Nil

3.5 Delegated Authority Implications Nil

3.6 Financial Implications There will be minimal impact as the numbers of aged and disability concession holders represent a low percentage of anticipated users of the facility.

3.7 Economic Benefit It is expected that the minor drop in fees for these users will be offset by increased usage by these groups as a result of appropriate pricing

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1267 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 7.2 2015/16 SCHEDULE OF FEES & CHARGES – ADDITIONAL FEES CABOOLTURE POOL AND GYM - DIVISION 3 - A12060810 (Cont.)



Nil 3.9 Social Implications

The price amendments ensure consistency in Council’s discounted entry fees for aged, disabled and concession holders and will provide an opportunity to improve well-being of the target user group.

3.10 Consultation / Communication Divisional Councillor - Cr Greg Chippendale and officers from Council’s Community Facilities, Sport and Recreation department were consulted regarding the proposed new fees.

ATTENDANCE Mr Brad Page left the meeting at 10.51am after consideration of Item 7.2 and Mr Doug Fraser attended for consideration of Item 7.3.



ITEM 7.3 REPORT ON UNIVERSITY PROJECT MANAGER'S ATTENDANCE AT NABCA CONFERENCE - REGIONAL Meeting / Session: 7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM Reference: A11862839 : 6 May 2015 Responsible Officer: DF, University Project Manager (EDCS Property & Commercial Services) Executive Summary At the Coordination Committee meeting held 15 March 2015, Council’s University Project Manager (UPM) was given approval to attend the US National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) annual conference in Quad Cities Illinois from 15 to 18 April 2015. In accordance with Council Policy, upon return from the conference, a report is to be furnished to Council listing the learning experiences gained. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved by Cr Bob Millar Seconded by Cr Adrian Raedel CARRIED 11/0 That Council receive and note the report on the University Project Manager’s attendance at the US National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) annual conference held in Quad Cities Illinois 15 to 18 April 2015.

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1269 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 7.3 REPORT ON UNIVERSITY PROJECT MANAGER'S ATTENDANCE AT NABCA CONFERENCE - REGIONAL - A11862839 (Cont.)


OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION That Council receive and note the report on the University Project Manager’s attendance at the US National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) annual conference held in Quad Cities Illinois 15 to 18 April 2015. REPORT DETAIL 1. Background The following resolution appears at Minute Page 15/404 of the General Meeting of Council held 17 March 2015: Ex. Coordination Committee Meeting held 17 March 2015 (MP. 15/439): COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: 1. That Council endorse the attendance of the University Project Manager at the US National

Association Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) Conference in Quad Cities Illinois from 15-18 April 2015, and agrees to fund the conference registration and accommodation costs, and authorise him to present on the topics detailed in this report.

2. That Council note that the cost of travel associated with the conference will be met by the

participating officer. 2. Explanation of Item As previously approved by Council, the University Project Manager presented on two topics being ‘Choosing an optimum university campus management model’ and ‘The head of campus dilemma’. Both presentations referenced the reasoning behind the Moreton Bay Regional University Precinct (MBRUP) and how it seeks to resolve significant issues with satellite campus operations. The general presentations at the Conference were not particularly relevant to the establishment of the MBRUP, but did highlight that the issues of centralisation by parent campuses and the subsequent negative effects on local communities at satellite campuses are universal, reinforcing the reasoning behind the Moreton Bay Regional Council (MBRC) approach. There was no knowledge by other Conference attendees of a model similar to the MBRUP being proposed or utilised in America. It was identified that a shared campus model, in which four universities participated under a collaborative arrangement had been instituted at one location. Initially this had been successful until one university decided to maximise its enrolments at the expense of the other universities, leading to a collapse of the collaborative nature of the campus. This reinforced the importance of having an independent overarching governing body and clear Anchor Educational Partner (AEP) as proposed under the MBRUP. The Conference included a site visit of the new Western Illinois University-Quad Cities Campus. The programs offered at the campus are likely to be similar to those offered at the MBRUP. The approximate size of the campus built form was 10,500sqm GFA, which is anticipated to cater for 3,000 students. This roughly aligns with the planned student numbers (3,000) and teaching areas (12,000sqm) of the MBRUP Hub Building proposal (excluding the theatre and campus wide library) and the student to GFA ratio of USQ Springfield. It was noted that there are proportionally more Federal university structures and high-autonomy Faculty management campuses in the US than in Australia.

Moreton Bay Regional Council COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE 15/1270 14 July 2015 Report ITEM 7.3 REPORT ON UNIVERSITY PROJECT MANAGER'S ATTENDANCE AT NABCA CONFERENCE - REGIONAL - A11862839 (Cont.)


While it would appear that there is not a lot to be learnt from US universities in relation to the proposed operations of the MBRUP, the uniqueness in what is being proposed, and its planned ability to address issues of centralisation, are likely to create international interest in the project. Overall the attendance at the Conference was productive, but more so due to the individual discussions with participants rather than the scheduled presentations themselves. 3. Strategic Implications 3.1 Legislative/Legal Implications Section 188 of the Local Government Regulation 2012 states as follows:-

Overseas travel 1. The annual report for a financial year must contain the following information about any

overseas travel made by a councillor or local government employee in an official capacity during the financial year –

(i) for a councillor – the name of the councillor; (ii) for a local government employee – the name of, and position held by, the local

government employee; (iii) the destination of the overseas travel; (iv) the purpose of the overseas travel; (v) the cost of the overseas travel;

2. The annual report may also contain any other information about the overseas travel the local government considers relevant.

3.2 Corporate Plan / Operational Plan

Creating Opportunities: Business development - projects and activities that assist businesses and promote investment and job creation in the region.

3.3 Policy Implications

Council Policy 10-2150-16 Conference, Seminar, Study Tour and Travel – Within 2 months of return from the conference a report is to be furnished to Council listing the learning experiences gained.

3.4 Risk Management Implications

Information gained from the conference reinforced that the risks of satellite campuses not adequately servicing their communities is universal, and that the MBRC strategy of guaranteeing high autonomy campus operations with an accountability mechanism would reduce this risk.


Nil 3.6 Financial Implications

Nil 3.7 Economic Benefit

Nil 3.8 Environmental Implications

Nil 3.9 Social Implications

Nil 3.10 Consultation / Communication

Nil



ATTENDANCE Mr Doug Fraser left the meeting at 10.58am after consideration of Item 7.3.

8 GENERAL BUSINESS ITEM 8.1 RECENT EVENTS – DIVISION 1 (GP) Cr Gary Parsons referred to several events conducted recently in Division 1 at which he had been represented by his Councillor colleagues whilst he was unwell – namely, Movie Night Toorbul, Panyiri Greek Festival Bribie Island, Abbey Medieval Festival. These events were all very well attended and Cr Parsons conveyed his thanks to the organisers and staff involved. Cr Peter Flannery reported that he had been pleased to represent Cr Parsons at the Panyiri Greek Festival Bribie Island and also made mention of the recent Beachmere Sports Reserve redevelopment that was progressing in line with the Master Plan. Cr Adrian Raedel referred to the Abbey Medieval Festival which he had attended on behalf of the Mayor, stating that the event was hugely successful and the food and activities were excellent. The event was supported by 280 volunteers and some thousand reenactors which made for the fantastic medieval atmosphere. ITEM 8.2 SUZUKI CHALLENGE NETBALL CARNIVAL – DIVISION 3 (GC) Cr Greg Chippendale referred to the Caboolture Netball Association’s successful bid to host a State Carnival – the Suzuki Challenge Carnival, that had been successfully conducted from 10-12 July 2015. The Carnival was very well attended and many favourable comments were received. Cr Chippendale had officiated at the opening and presentation ceremonies and reported that the comments received complimented the Caboolture facility and the cooperation from the local netball Executive and council staff. Cr Chippendale expressed his appreciation to staff and recorded his recognition of the Caboolture Netball Association’s Executive.



ITEM 8.3 LOCAL SHOWS – DAYBORO AND SAMFORD – DIVISION 11 (BM) Cr Bob Millar referred to two Rural Shows recently conducted at Dayboro and Samford. The weather was excellent and community participation was commended. These local Shows, with Council’s support both financial and in-kind, have resulted in increased attendance, show facilities and events. Cr Millar extended his congratulations to the respective Show Committees and to the band of volunteers that keep these events alive. ITEM 8.4 2015 PLANNING SUMMIT - REGIONAL (AS) Cr Allan Sutherland (Mayor) referred to an invitation received 29 June 2015, for himself and a colleague to attend the 2015 Planning Summit to be held at the Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre on Tuesday 28 July 2015. The theme of the Summit is “Creating a vision for our cities, towns and communities” and will bring together leaders from various industries including government, development, planning, legal, community and environmental groups that will provide a platform for what should be dynamic dialogue. Speakers will refer to the latest research and insights on future challenges and expertise in what makes for great planning, urban design, community engagement and governance. As briefly discussed at the Council Workshop of 30 June 2015, Council agreed that Cr Mick Gillam, Spokesperson for Planning and Development, be nominated as Council’s delegate to attend this Summit. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Moved by Mike Charlton (Deputy Mayor) Seconded by Cr Bob Millar CARRIED 11/0 That Cr Mick Gillam, Spokesperson for Planning and Development, be nominated as Council’s delegate to attend the 2015 Planning Summit to be held 28 July 2015. CLOSURE There being no further business the Chairperson closed the meeting at 11.10am.