Works Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 10 September 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Works Committee                                                                                          10 September 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Works Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Works Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, 30 Frances Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 10 September 2013 at 6:00 p.m.

 

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor (T Bowen), Andrews, Belleli, D’Souza (Deputy Chairperson), Garcia, Matson, Moore, Nash, Neilson, Roberts, Seng, Shurey, Smith, Stavrinos and Stevenson (Chairperson)

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members

 

NOTE:    At the Extraordinary Meeting held on 28 September 2004, the Council resolved that the Works Committee be constituted as a committee with full delegation to determine matters on the agenda.

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Works Committee Meeting - 13 August 2013

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Privacy warning;

In respect to Privacy & Personal Information Protection Act, members of the public are advised that the proceedings of this meeting will be recorded for the purposes of clause 66 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

Urgent Business

Works Reports

W40/13     Lifeguard Service Levels....................................................................... 1

W41/13     Update on the construction of the Des Renford Leisure Centre................... 53

W42/13     Parking Task Force............................................................................. 59

W43/13     Tree Removal - Outside 3 Athol Street, South Coogee.............................. 61    

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Works Committee                                                                                          10 September 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W40/13

 

 

Subject:                  Lifeguard Service Levels

Folder No:                   F2004/07113

Author:                   Reece Heddle, Manager Aquatic Services     

 

Introduction

 

Council, at its Ordinary Meeting held on 26 February 2013, resolved:

 

“(Smith/Seng) that the Director of City Services investigate and determine whether Lifeguard services should be extended to cover Gordon’s Bay, Malabar and Little Bay in the busy Christmas/New Year Period. “

 

Background

 

Randwick City Council Beach Lifeguards currently utilise a number of accepted best practice guidelines to ensure that the Lifeguard service level is adequate for all beaches in the local government area. Annually, a Risk Assessment is conducted on all council beaches utilising methodology developed by Surf Lifesaving and Statewide Insurance to ensure Council is providing the safest environment along the coastline.

 

Nevertheless, a review of the inhouse annual risk assessment, Australian CoastSafe, a division of Surf Lifesaving Australia, was engaged to provide a Lifeguard Service Level report for all Randwick City Council beaches.

 

The report received from Australian CoastSafe (Attachment 1) has been developed utilising industry best practice procedures. This accepted best practice procedure incorporates a number of guidelines including the Australian Beach Safety and Management Program (ABSAMP) Beach Hazard Rating, Surf Life Savings Lifesaving Service Level Calculator and Facility Visitation Rates. Randwick City Council Beach Lifeguards currently utilise this same methodology.

 

Issues

 

Randwick City Council currently employ 8 fulltime Lifeguards, 8 seasonal Lifeguards (September to April) and casual Lifeguards engaged as required (based on patronage, water conditions and weather). The following table outlines the current Lifeguard service level:

 

Table 1:   Lifeguard Service Level 2012-13

 

Beach

Time of year

Patrol times

Staffing level

Clovelly

Summer

(daylight savings)

8.00am to 6.00pm

2

Summer

(non-daylight Savings)

8.00am to 5.00pm

2

Winter

(Late April to late September)

 

No Patrol

0

Coogee

Summer

(daylight savings)

7.00am to 7.00pm

2

Summer

(non-daylight Savings)

7.00am to 5.00pm

2

Winter

(Late April to late September)

7.00am to 5.00pm

2

Maroubra

Summer

(daylight savings)

7.00am to 7.00pm

4

Summer

(non-daylight Savings)

7.00am to 5.00pm

4

Winter

(Late April to late September)

7.00am to 5.00pm

2

Gordon’s Bay

Year Round

No Patrol*

0

Little Bay

Year Round

No Patrol*

0

Malabar

Year Round

No Patrol*

0

Yarra/Frenchmans

Year Round

No Patrol*

0

 

*NOTE:     Lifeguards are engaged at these locations for known events from time to time.

 

The report received from Australian CoastSafe (attachment 1) supports the current service level at all Council beaches and recommends that Council continue to maintain Coogee, Maroubra, South Maroubra and Clovelly beaches before additional services are provided at other locations. It should be noted that the Lifeguard Service level is significantly supplemented during peak usage times (weekends and public holidays) with Surf Lifesaving Volunteers at Clovelly, Coogee, Maroubra and South Maroubra Beaches. These well trained volunteers work in very well with Council Lifeguards to ensure that Council can maintain the recommended service levels for increased patronage. Council Lifeguards consistently review weather conditions and regularly increase lifeguard levels beyond those mentioned in table 1 to ensure public safety; particularly during school holiday periods.

 

Australian CoastSafe have made the following conclusions on the lifeguard service levels at Gordon’s Bay, Little Bay and Malabar beaches.

 

A.     Gordons Bay

Australian CoastSafe have advised against providing a lifeguard service at Gordon’s Bay. They have stated that providing a Lifeguard service at Gordon’s bay would promote the location as a place to swim under surveillance and encourage residence to a location which is not a suitable environment due to the limited area, limited accessibility and challenging geography of the location.  

 

Lifeguards and Surf Life Saving Sydney Branch Support Operations provide a roving water based patrol of Gordon’s Bay to monitor usage and provide education and awareness at Gordon’s Bay. Australian CoastSafe recommend that surveillance should be continued through Councils Jetski patrols and Off Shore Rescue Boat patrols and council do not encourage increased usage of this location.

 

B.     Little Bay Beach

Australian CoastSafe have advised that a Lifeguard Service is not required at Little Bay due to the low level of beach hazardousness at this location and the low level on incident occurrence. They have concluded that having a lifeguard service at Little Bay would not have been able to prevent recent rock fishing incidents due to the distance from the patrol area to the rock platforms.

 


C.     Malabar Beach

Australian CoastSafe have advised that a Lifeguard Service is not required at Malabar due to the low level of beach hazardousness at this location and the low level on incident occurrence. Malabar beach is considered one of the safest beaches in the City.

 

Other risk mitigation strategies available have been identified as part of ‘Project Blue Print’ and will be reported to Council as part of a separate report for consideration. This report identifies hazards and the associated risks of the entire Randwick City Council coastline and takes a more holistic view including signage, car parks, access tracks, service provision, geographical hazards, user groups, conflicting activities and usage. Risk mitigation strategies of the entire Randwick City Council coastline have been identified within this report and Council is currently reviewing the recommendations. Implementing the recommendations of this report will further increase the safety of the Randwick City Council coastline.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6C:     The safety of our community is paramount and is acknowledged and supported through proactive policies, programs and strategies.

Direction:                  Develop and implement regulatory environmental, public health and safety services and programs to maximise public safety and anti-social behaviour of buildings and spaces.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no increase in financial impact due to the recommendations in this report.

 

Conclusion

 

Council has been utilising ‘best practice’ indicators to ensure that Lifeguard service levels are maintained at all Council beaches. The Australian CoastSafe report supports Councils current service level and does not recommend providing Lifeguards at Gordon’s Bay, Little Bay or Malabar.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council:

 

a)     maintain the current Lifeguard Service levels at all beaches.

 

b)     continue to monitor beach patronage at all Council beaches and ensure that ‘best practice’ service levels are maintained at all times.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Service Level Analysis of Beach Lifeguards

 

 

 

 


Service Level Analysis of Beach Lifeguards

Attachment 1

 

 


















































Works Committee                                                                                          10 September 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W41/13

 

 

Subject:                  Update on the construction of the Des Renford Leisure Centre

Folder No:                   F2012/00401

Author:                   Jorde Frangoples, Director City Services     

 

Introduction

 

Council is finalising the construction of the new Des Renford Leisure Centre gym.  This project, along side with Bunnerong Road and Chifley Reserve, is one of the biggest capital works projects undertaken by the Council in recent years.  Under the contract practical completion is due 11 September 2013. It is projected that the final completion will be approximately 4 weeks later hence 7 October 2013.

 

The progress can be viewed on http://www.drlc.com.au/index.php/about/drlc-image-gallery/ .

 

This report deals with expenditure on the project and discusses the changes to the scope and the proposed soft opening/testing period.

 

Issues

 

It is proposed to utilise the 4 week period after practical completion to test the building, equipment, and software and staff readiness to open for business on          7 October 2013.  Monday, 7 October is a public holiday and the last day of the school holidays and hence allows us to undertake a large promotion of the opening. The testing will be done by having volunteer council staff acts as customers of the Gym for that period to effectively shake out any issues prior to paying customers utilising the facility.

 

During the construction of the Gym council has undertaken works that where brought forward from the Heffron Park Master plan works. These are;

 

·      Existing car park upgrade

·      The construction of a new off street and on street car park in Jersey Road

·      Site remediation, and

·      Sewer Upgrade

 

The total costs of these works were $980,476 and have been funded from the Heffron Park Master plan funds.

 

Additionally there have been some changes to the scope of the Gym project. These include;

 

·      The provision of Parent Rooms (so fathers/mothers can accompany children into change rooms)

·      Upgrade of the existing Disabled Toilets

·      Upgrade of fire services

·      Upgrade of the existing foyer between the old and new facility

 

The additional cost above the original budget allocation is $348.269.  Since this work relates to existing pool facility it is proposed to fund it from the Des Renford Leisure Centre Reserve.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:       Excellence in Recreation and Lifestyle Opportunities

Direction 5b:      A range of sporting and leisure activities.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The variation of $348,269 on the budget relating to the existing pool building facilities will be funded from the Pool reserve.  The works relating to Heffron Park have previously been funded in the Master plan funding.

 

Conclusion

 

The variations on the budget for the Gym are $348,269 which represents approximately 3.8% of the total construction costs.

 

Recommendation

 

That the $348,269 for the parent Rooms, Upgrade of disabled toilets, fire services and existing foyer be funded from the Des Renford Leisure Centre Reserve.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Des Renford Leisure Centre - photos of the new facility

 

 

 

 


Des Renford Leisure Centre - photos of the new facility

Attachment 1

 

 

 

Des Renford Leisure Centre – photo showing the building frontage

 

 

 

 

 

Photo showing the building interior – first floor gym room

 

 

 

 

Children’s crèche (ground floor) – interior photo

 

 

 

Photo showing first floor cardio room – interior features

 

Ground floor aerobics room – photo taken facing north

 

 

 

 

Ground floor interior – photo showing centre’s reception and first floor gym


Works Committee                                                                                          10 September 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W42/13

 

 

Subject:                  Parking Task Force

Folder No:                   F2004/06137

Author:                   Jorde Frangoples, Director City Services     

 

Introduction

 

At its Ordinary Council Meeting held on 23 April 2013, Council resolved:

 

“(Stavrinos/Moore) that Council:

 

(a)    maintains the current penalty notice review process carried out by the SDRO, in consultation with Councils and in accordance with the SDRO Guidelines, Council’s Enforcement Policy and the NSW Ombudsman recommendation;

(b)    investigate and consider a report on ways to explain the infringement process and highlight the rights of residents in appealing such penalty notices;

(c)    investigate setting up a parking taskforce and refer this issue to them for advice on how to deal with the issue of communication between Council and the residents; and

(d)    write to the State Government to include information on their tickets advising residents of their various rights of appeal.”

 

Issues

 

Council is to set up a task force to consider parking related issues across the City.  The task force could include:

 

·      Interested Councilors

·      Police

·      RMS Representative

·      Director City Services

·      A Traffic Consultant.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 9:       Integrated and Accessible Transport.

Direction 9e:      Parking is managed to balance convenience against reduced car reliance.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Interested Councillors should decide on the terms of reference for the task force and then consider the schedule of meetings, composition and reporting structures.

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)  interested Councillors meet with the Director City Services, to consider the scope, composition and terms of reference of the task force.

 

b)  interested Councillors nominate to be on the task force.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Works Committee                                                                                          10 September 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W43/13

 

 

Subject:                  Tree Removal - Outside 3 Athol Street, South Coogee

Folder No:                   F2004/07359

Author:                   Bryan Bourke, Tree Management Officer     

 

Introduction

 

On 5 May 2013 Council’s Tree Management Coordinator received a request from Council’s insurer to investigate a claim by the owner of 3 Athol Street, South Coogee, that large roots from the Council owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing on the grass verge outside the front of that property were causing a range of damage to both private property and public infrastructure.

 

Issues

 

The owner of this property has been experiencing a range of problems directly associated with the Ficus ‘Hillii’ growing in the grass verge area outside his property for well over a decade and these problems have become progressively worse over the past five-six years. They range from tree roots damaging the driveway crossover running between the eastern side of the property and the kerb and gutter to serious structural damage being caused to the brick garage and front fence. There is also cracking and lifting of the concrete footpath slabs at the front of the property which have to be replaced on a regular and increasing basis. In addition, for nearly two decades tree roots have entered and blocked the stormwater and sewer pipes within the property and these have to be cleared by Council’s plumbers on a regular basis.

 

The subject tree is approximately twenty metres in height with a canopy spread of around sixteen metres. It is in good health and contributes significantly to the visual amenity of the streetscape. The canopy has to be regularly pruned well back from the roof of the residence and the amount of property overhang means that the roof gutters and front yard area have to be cleared of copious amounts of leaf litter and debris all year round.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 10:      A Healthy Environment.

Direction 10b:    Environmental risks and impacts are strategically managed.

 

Financial impact statement

 

It is estimated that the removal of this tree and its replacement with a super-advanced alternative species would cost in the vicinity of $5,000. The required funds would come from Council’s annual tree management budget.

 

Conclusion

 

The Council owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ growing outside 3 Athol Street, South Coogee, is in good health and is one of several trees of this species growing within the street. It is estimated to be approximately fifty years old and up until now every effort has been made to retain it, despite the fact that associated tree root damage has progressively increased in both frequency and severity. The issue of major tree root damage caused to private property by the roots of this tree was brought to Council’s attention by the owner of the adjacent property in mid-2007.

 

On 22 August 2007 Council’s Tree Gang excavated and trenched along the residential frontage and severed as many fig tree roots as possible without compromising the health and stability of the tree. However, it was noted at that time that roots appeared to have cracked the front brick fence of the property and that the driveway had also been uplifted and damaged by fig tree roots.

 

The subject tree has been assessed as having important scenic and amenity value and with providing habitat and food source for a variety of fauna. Because of the range and increasing severity of damage being caused by its roots, the impact of removal on land degradation would be negligible. Due to the size and amount of root material required to be removed from the tree to effectively deal with the increasing damage being caused by its roots, root pruning is no longer a viable option. This is supported by the findings and recommendations of Council’s Tree Gang arborists when excavation and trenching were recently undertaken adjacent to where the street tree is located. The only feasible long-term management option would be to remove the tree entirely and to replace it with a more appropriate tree species – as nominated in Council’s Street Tree Masterplan. Because no trees of this species have been removed from Athol Street, South Coogee, within the past twelve months the removal of this fig would not contravene Council’s resolution that where Ficus ‘Hillii’ constitute the predominant species in any street and where those trees have recognised historic and heritage significance, no more than five (5) percent of vegetative canopy cover is to be removed in any one calendar year.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)  the Council owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing outside 3 Athol Street, South Coogee, be removed.

 

b)  an advanced Cupaniopsis anarcardioides (Tuckeroo), nominated in Council’s Street Tree Masterplan, be planted outside 3 Athol Street, South Coogee.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Photographs detailing the size of the subject Council owned street tree and the range of damage being caused by its roots

 

 

 

 


Photographs detailing the size of the subject Council owned street tree and the range of damage being caused by its roots

Attachment 1