Singleton Council Meeting 2016

NOTICE OF MEETING
Notice is hereby given, in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government
Act 1993 that a Meeting of Singleton Council will be held in the Council
Chambers, Queen Street Singleton, on Monday 20 June 2016, commencing at
5.30pm.
EM ERGE NC Y EV AC U ATI O N F OR CO U NCI L M EETI NGS HEL D IN THE CO UN CI L C H AM BE RS
In case of an emergency, for example a fire, please evacuate the building via the marked exit
doors (Mayor points to the doors). The order to evacuate may be signified by an alarm siren or
by a Council officer or myself. Please proceed to the green emergency assembly area signs
either near the cycleway on Queen Street (Mayor points in direction of Queen Street) or at the
other side of the carpark towards the Gym & Swim (Mayor points again). An instruction to
evacuate to a marked area should be followed without delay to assist Council in ensuring the
Health and Safety of all staff and visitors.
All electronic equipment (excluding Council laptops and iPads), including mobile telephones of
Councillors and Council Officers shall be switched off during the meeting. Recording of the
proceedings is not to be carried out without the prior authority of Council.
AGENDA
PAGE
Opening of Meeting and Acknowledgement of Country

Apologies
Confirmation of Minutes
1.
16/05/2016
Matters Arising from Minutes

Disclosures of Interest
Mayoral Minute
Notice of Withdrawal of Items and Late Items of Business
Presentation Items
PR3/16
United Wambo Joint Venture Project ............................................... 4
Public Access Session

General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision)
GM20/16
Community Satisfaction Survey ....................................................... 5
GM21/16
Potential Commercial Tourism Opportunity ................................... 10
Community and Infrastructure Services Report (Items Requiring Decision)

DC&IS68/16 Minutes - Roads Advisory Committee - 28/04/2016 ....................... 11
DC&IS69/16 Wallaby Scrub Road ...................................................................... 28
DC&IS70/16 Glass Parade Rectification Works ................................................. 33
DC&IS71/16 Minutes - Local Traffic Committee - 26/05/2016 ............................ 48
DC&IS72/16 Tender for Organics (Green Waste) Collection .............................. 58
DC&IS73/16 Milbrodale Mountain Classic - Traffic Control .............................. 59
Corporate Services Report (Items Requiring Decision)
DCS45/16
Proposed Lease to Gore Electrical & Data - 189 John

Street Singleton ............................................................................. 66
DCS46/16
Local Government Remuneration Tribunal .................................... 71
DCS47/16
Request for Financial Assistance Towards Legal

Expenses ....................................................................................... 86
DCS48/16
Tender for the Supply and Delivery of Ready Mix

Concrete ........................................................................................ 92
DCS49/16
Acquistion of One Parcel of Land on Hermitage Road as

Part of the Hermitage Road Upgrade Project ................................ 93
Planning and Sustainable Environment Report (Items Requiring Decision)

DP&SE24/16 Finalisation of the draft Branxton Subregional Land Use
Strategy ......................................................................................... 98
DP&SE25/16 Adoption of the 2016/17 Operational Plan and Budget ................ 105
DP&SE26/16 Request to Remove Section 88b Restriction as to User .............. 113
DP&SE27/16 Association of Mining Related Councils - Proposed MoU
for Negotiating Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPAs) .............. 135
General Manager's Report (Items for Information)
GM22/16
Minutes - Arts Upper Hunter Board Meeting - June September - December 2015....................................................... 143
GM23/16
Minutes - Association of Mining Related Councils 13/05/2016 ................................................................................... 156
Corporate Services Report (Items for Information)

DCS50/16
Disclosures by Councillors and Designated Persons April and May 2016 ...................................................................... 168
Planning and Sustainable Environment Report (Items for Information)

DP&SE28/16 Minutes - Wambo Coal Community Consultative
Committee (CCC) - 12/04/2016 ................................................... 169
DP&SE29/16 Minutes - Mount Thorley Warkworth Community
Consultative Committee (CCC) - 09/11/2015............................... 175
DP&SE30/16 Public Health Act 2010 - Statutory Review Submission ............... 185
DP&SE31/16 Minutes - Hunter Valley Operations Community
Consultative Committee (CCC) - 10/03/2016............................... 191
Questions Given
QG3/16
Questions of Which Notice Has Been Given................................ 206
Questions of Which Notice has been Given
Closed Council
CC16/16
Potential Commercial Tourism Opportunity
CC17/16

Concrete
CC18/16
Tender for Organics (Green Waste) Collection
..
GENERAL MANAGER
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016
Presentation Items - PR3/16
3.
United Wambo Joint Venture Project

Author: Cheryl Smith
FILE: M17-3
Gary Wills - United Wambo Project Manager, Scott Elliot Glencore NSW Projects
Manager, Bret Jenkins Glencore NSW Approvals and Cultural Heritage Manager, Aislinn
Farnon United Wambo Project Approvals Manager and Michael Alexander Peabody
Project Director from Glencore will give a presentation on the United Wambo Joint Venture
Project.
SINGLETON COUNCIL
General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision) - GM20/16
20.
Community Satisfaction Survey

Author: Salena Avard
FILE: 16/0237
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the findings of the Community Satisfaction
Survey undertaken in April 2016 and recommend actions to address the issues identified
by our community as being important but of low satisfaction.
RECOMMENDED that Council:
1. Note the 2016 Community Satisfaction Survey Report.
2. Use the comparative data between the 2016 survey and the 2011 survey to inform the
End of Term Report.
3. Use the 2016 data to inform engagement for the purpose of reviewing the Community
Strategic Plan.
4. Use the 2016 data to inform service level reviews across the organisation and
implement an action plan to address the top 10 priority areas.
Background
Earlier this year Council engaged Micromex Research to undertake a community
satisfaction survey of 504 residents. The survey report is shown as Attachment 1 - Under
Separate Cover. Community satisfaction surveys are used to measure satisfaction with
Councils performance overall, assess importance and satisfaction with Council provided
services and facilities and identify current community priorities. Council last commissioned
a community satisfaction survey in 2011 during development of the first Singleton
Community Strategic Plan (CSP). The 2011 survey report is also shown Attachment 2 Under Separate Cover.
As the current local government term is coming to an end in September 2016, Singleton
Council is required to prepare an End of Term report, outlining its achievements against
the outcomes of the current CSP. The End of Term report must be adopted by Council at
its last meeting in August 2016. Council is also required to review the CSP and endorse
the revised CSP by March 2017.
To assist with the preparation of the End of Term Report and the review of the CSP, the
2016 community satisfaction survey was structured in a similar fashion and sampled a
similar size of the community to the survey conducted in 2011. This allows for sound
comparisons to be drawn from the two data sets. The 2016 results were also compared to
normative data from other local government areas.
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Results
The results showed that overall 83 per cent of residents were at least somewhat satisfied
with Councils performance in 2016. This result is similar to 2011 and in line with
comparative benchmarks.
Of the thirty-five (35) measures included in the survey, Micromex has normative data for
Twenty-three (23). Five (5) of the comparable measures received satisfaction ratings
above the norm. These were: maintaining the local road network; Gym & Swim facilities;
managing industrial and commercial development; managing residential development and
provision of cycleways.
Seven (7) of the measures received satisfaction ratings below the norm. These were:
stormwater drainage; environmental monitoring and protection, Council responsiveness to
community needs, car parking in the town centres, waste collection and disposal,
maintenance of parks, playgrounds and reserves and; informing the community of Council
decisions.
The importance of car parking in the town centres increased from 2011 to 2016, while
there were significant decreases in the importance of youth services; environmental
education; sewerage and wastewater services; managing residential development;
development and building processes; social planning; library hours, collection and service;
Gym & Swim facilities, appearance of the town centre; and cycleways.
Satisfaction levels increased from 2011 to 2016 across 12 measures being library hours,
collection and service; Gym & Swim facilities; health and hygiene of local food outlets;
Council-run community events; environmental education; companion animal control;
heritage identification and management; appearance of the Singleton town centre; social
planning; development and building process; and maintenance of public toilets.
There was a significant decrease in satisfaction levels for car parking in the town centres;
and maintenance of parks, playgrounds and reserves.
Commentary
The changes in importance and satisfaction levels can be attributed to some direct activity
by Council while others are likely a reflection of current community attitudes. For example,
Council would expect satisfaction levels with the appearance of the Singleton town centre
to increase following completion of the town centre revitalisation project. Similarly, Council
embarked on an ambitious community events calendar since 2012, delivering up to six
major community events per annum where there had previously been none, contributing to
increased satisfaction.
Council would also expect the importance of some measures to decrease following
significant investment from Council over the past four years. For example, the importance
of social planning has decreased but satisfaction has increased and this reflects the
development and adoption of major strategies for youth, children, community safety,
ageing and accessibility.
SINGLETON COUNCIL
The perceived lack of parking in the town centre remains contentious since the
revitalisation of the town centre was completed last year and this is reflected in current
satisfaction levels. This issue has been reviewed on several occasions by Council.
At the time the 2016 survey was undertaken, Council had recently closed Burdekin Park
due to the impact of the little red flying fox colony and this is likely reflected in the
communitys decreased satisfaction level with the maintenance of parks.
Priority areas
The survey report includes a performance gap analysis. This establishes the gap between
importance and satisfaction. The greater the gap, the greater the difference is between the
provision of that service by Council and the community expectations for that service.
The 2016 survey report identifies ten (10) services that have the largest performance gaps
meaning these were rated as being high to extremely high in importance but have low to
moderate satisfaction levels.
These services are:
Council responsiveness to community needs
Informing the community of Council decisions
Car parking in the town centres
Consulting the community
Maintenance of Councils public toilets
Maintaining the local road network
Stormwater drainage
Maintenance of parks, playgrounds and reserves
Environmental monitoring and protection
Provision of services and facilities for youth
It is recommended that these priority areas are used as the basis of conversations during
consultation for the review of the CSP. These conversations would help Council
understand in more detail:
What the community expects in terms of consultation and engagement what do they
want to hear about, through which channels, how often etc
Explore other community concerns such as parking availability, maintenance of roads
and parks, stormwater drainage etc.
It may be that Council is already delivering in these areas but is failing to adequately
communicate their successes with the community.
Community Strategic Plan
The Community Strategic Plan is a reflection of the vision and aspirations of its
community. Its important this is measured periodically to ensure Council activities align to
community desires. The community satisfaction survey is one of the indicators used to
measure Councils achievements against all four pillars of the CSP.
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Delivery Program/Operational Plan

Nil.
Council Policy/Legislation
Nil.
Financial Implications
The results of the survey will be used to inform consultation for the purpose of reviewing
the Singleton Community Strategic Plan. Funding for consultation activities has been
included in the 2016/17 budget.
The review of the Community Strategic Plan will inform the activities of the new Delivery
Program and Operational Plan and these may have financial implications that will be
addressed in these documents and considered by Council at the appropriate time.
Consultation/Social Implications
The Community Satisfaction Survey was undertaken by Micromex Research for the
purpose of examining community attitudes and perceptions towards current and future
services and facilities provided by Council. A total of five hundred and four (504) resident
interviews were completed between 7 and 14 April 2016.
Four hundred and thirty-one (431) of the five hundred and four (504) respondents were
selected by a means of a computer-based random selection process using the electronic
White Pages. The remaining seventy-three (73) respondents were number harvested via
face-to-face intercept at a number of public spaces around Singleton to capture
respondents without landlines.
The sample size of five hundred and four (504) respondents provides a maximum
sampling error of plus or minus 4.4% at 95% confidence. This means that if the survey
was replicated with a new sample of five hundred and four (504) residents, nineteen (19)
times out of twenty (20), the results would be the same.
The sample was weighted by age and gender to reflect the 2011 ABS Census data and
38% of respondents were from villages or rural areas.
A more detailed engagement with a sample of participants is being undertaken in the form
of two workshops. These workshops will be facilitated by Mircomex and will aim to provide
Council with more specific information on the topics which have been identified as having
the greatest disparity. The results of these workshops will further inform the Community
Strategic Plan document.
Environmental Consideration
Two of the top ten (10) priorities identified in the survey relate to environmental issues
such as stormwater drainage and environmental monitoring and protection. These will be
addressed in the service level reviews and feature in discussions as part of the review of
the Community Strategic Plan.
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Risk Implications
There is a level of reputational risk if Council does not take action to address the areas
identified in the survey as being of high importance and low satisfaction. The purpose of
the survey is to improve the delivery of Council services and better align Council services
with community desires. To ignore the findings or not take action could be perceived by
the community as Council not being responsive to community needs.
Options
The following options are available to Council:
1. Council take no action on the findings of the community satisfaction survey.
2. Council use the findings of the community satisfaction survey to inform consultation for
the review of the CSP and inform service level reviews across the organisation.
Option one is recommended.
Conclusions
It is recommended that Council use the data provided in the survey report to inform
consultation with the community for the review of the CSP. Community satisfaction
surveys are one method of ensuring Council services align with community desires and
this is in keeping with Councils strategic direction for business improvement.
Jason Linnane
General Manager
Attachments
AT-1
Community Satisfaction Survey - Final Report - 2016
AT-2
Community Survey Report 2011 - IRIS - IPRF
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
SINGLETON COUNCIL
21.
Potential Commercial Tourism Opportunity

Author: Salena Avard
FILE: 16/0370
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the progress of a
potential commercial tourism opportunity in Closed Council with the press and public
excluded, as the report contains information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed
(i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a
commercial advantage on a competitor of the council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.
RECOMMENDED that the report on a potential commercial tourism opportunity be

considered in Closed Council with the press and public excluded in accordance with
Section 10A(2) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report
contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i)
prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial
advantage on a competitor of the council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.
Jason Linnane
General Manager
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report
10
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Community and Infrastructure Services Report (Items Requiring Decision) - DC&IS68/16
68.
Minutes - Roads Advisory Committee - 28/04/2016

Author: Rabiul Awal; Peter McMurray
FILE: 16/0167
Executive Summary
The Roads Advisory Committee held its ordinary meeting on 28 April 2016. The minutes
are shown as Attachment 3 for Councils consideration.
1.
Adopt the Roads Advisory Committee Terms of Reference Attachment 1.
2.
Note the minutes of the Roads Committee held on 4 February 2016 and 28 April 2016
Attachments 2 and 3.
3.
Adopt the following recommendations in relation to the minutes of 4 February 2016

and 28 April 2016:
4 February, 2016
Update on Access Way at 1419 Mirannie Road, Reddy Creek
1. Accept the maintenance responsibility of the 30m long sealed access way area at
1419 Mirannie Road.
2. Authorise Manager Infrastructure Strategy and Planning to write to Mr Chick,
advising the subject 30m long sealed access way area will be resealed every time
Councils Work Crew undertakes any reseal and rehabilitation works in front of
1419 Mirannie Road.
3. Authorise Manager Infrastructure Strategy and Planning to include 30m long
access way area as part of Councils 2016/2017 Rural Reseal Program (reseal will
be undertaken in October/November 2016).
Maintenance of Lane off 336 McMullins Road, Branxton
1. Not accept the routine maintenance responsibility of the 505m long laneway off 336
McMullins Road.
2. Include 505m section of this road in Councils low maintenance road list.
3. Authorise the Manager Infrastructure Strategy and Planning to write to Mr & Mrs
Hemsworth advising the subject lane will be included in Councils low maintenance
public road list.
Allocation of Roads to Recovery Funds 2016
1.
2.
An amount of $1,100,000 from 2016/17 Roads to Recovery is allocated to the

upgrade of Hermitage Road.
The remaining $723,731 is allocated to the 2016/17 Capital Works Program.
Capital Works Program 2016/2017

11
SINGLETON COUNCIL
1. Adopt the draft Capital Works Program 2016/2017.

Lot 103 Wollombi Road Broke
1. Support an investigation of the Crown Road to determine if owners of Lot 3
DP777632-712 Wollombi Road, Broke are able to purchase the section of Crown
Road in question.
2. A report be prepared for the Roads Committee.
28 April 2016
Maintenance of Ironbark Lane
1. Accept the maintenance responsibilities of 850m long section of Iron Bark Lane
between Mirannie Road and Franks Road, Sedgefield;
2. Include 850m section of this road in Councils maintained unsealed road list;
3. Allocate $5,000 from 2016/17 financial year for the maintenance of 850m long
section of Iron Bark Lane.
4. The Manager Infrastructure Strategy Planning and Programming write to Mr
Cruickshanks and Councillor Rogers advising the subject 850m long section of Iron
Bark Lane will be included in Councils maintained unsealed road list.
Maintenance of Sanitary Pit Lane, Whittingham
1. Not to accept any maintenance works along 1800m long section of Sanitary Pit
Lane;
2. The Manager Infrastructure Strategy Planning and Programming write to Councillor
Scott advising the subject lane is a Right of Carriageway and residents using the
ROW are responsible for maintaining it.
Maintenance of Swain Street, Belford
1. Write to NSW Department of Lands to transfer the control and care of Swain Street
to Singleton Council.
2. Accept the transfer of Swain Street as a Council owned Public Road.
3. Include Swain Street as a low maintenance road;
4. Allocate $5,000 from 2016/17 Low Maintenance Road Safety Program for the
maintenance of Swain Street.
5. The Manager Infrastructure Strategy Planning and Programming write to Mr Paul
Brown and Les Conrad advising Swain Street will be included in Councils low
maintenance public road list.
Update of Gresford Road Bridge
1.
Note Gresford Road Bridge Update and a report to Councils May 2016 meeting.
12
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Update on 712 Wollombi Road, Broke

1.
This matter be deferred pending a further report to the Roads Committee.
Update on Blaxland Street & Harrowby Street, Broke

1.
Note the transfer of Blaxland Street and Harrowby Street Broke to the care and
control of Singleton Council.
Update on Glass Parade, Hunterview

1.
Note that a report, providing details on the status of Glass Parade upgrade, will be
submitted to Council at its meeting on 20th June 2016.
Gary Thomson
AGM/Director Community & Infrastructure Services Group
Attachments
AT-1
Terms of Reference - Roads Advisory Committee
AT-2
Minutes - 4 February 2016
AT-3
Minutes - 28 April 2016
13
Attachment 1
14
Attachment 1
15
Attachment 1
16
Attachment 2
17
Attachment 2
18
Attachment 2
19
Attachment 2
20
Attachment 2
21
Attachment 3
22
Attachment 3
23
Attachment 3
24
Attachment 3
25
Attachment 3
26
Attachment 3
27
SINGLETON COUNCIL
69.
Wallaby Scrub Road

Author: Peter McMurray
FILE: 15/0271
Executive Summary
Council has received a request from Coal and Allied (Warkworth Mining Ltd)) for Council,
as the roads authority for Wallaby Scrub Road, to apply to the Minister for Roads, Maritime
and Freight to close the road.
It is acknowledged that, there is a complex history of applications lodged for modification
and extension of mine operations at the Mount Thorley/Warkworth Mine site.
If Council refuses to consent to the closure of the road, it is possible for the RMS to
exercise the Councils functions as the appropriate roads authority for the road and provide
consent. The road, once closed, would still vest in Council, and Council, provided it agreed
to the sale, would still be entitled to the proceeds of any sale of the land comprising the
former public road. Should Council choose to not sell the road, it is possible that under
s.177 of the Roads Act, 1993 (the Act), for the RMS to compulsory acquire the public
road. The details and implications of which are further discussed later in this report under
Council Policy/Legislation.
It is intended that this report, taking into consideration any other issues raised by Council,
seeks approval for commencement of the process to close Wallaby Scrub Road, which will
then trigger the start of the consultation process.
Should the closure of Wallaby Scrub Road be approved, the road remains vested in
Councils ownership until Council determines a proposed use. Clearly, with the consent
granted specifically approving mining through Wallaby Scrub Road Council will need to
seriously consider the sale of the road.
RECOMMENDED that:
1.
Council apply to the Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight to close Wallaby Scrub
Road under s.34(1)(b) of the Roads Act, 1993.
2.
A further report be brought back to Council at the completion of the consultation

process related to the road closure for the Council to consider whether to consent to
the closure of the road under s.37(2)(b) of the Roads Act, 1993.
Background
Warkworth Mining Limited, in 2014, lodged a new Development Application (DA), to
extend the Warkworth Mine, classified as the Warkworth Continuation Project (SSD 6464).
Councils position in respect of the 2014 Project DA was determined at its meeting on 18
August 2014 (refer Item 40 Warkworth Mine Extension - DP &SE40/14 - Attachment 1)
and the report concluded as follows:
28
SINGLETON COUNCIL
This submission highlights a number of issues of concern to be raised with the Department
of Planning, particularly in respect of biodiversity, air quality, visual amenity and the future
of Wallaby Scrub Road.
The NSW Planning Assessment Commission (PAC), in November 2015, determined that
the Project be approved, subject to stringent consent conditions, aimed at addressing the
key environmental, economic and social impacts of the project. It did not however propose
any alternate options for Wallaby Scrub Road other than full closure. It is clearly stated by
the Department of Planning, in its Determination Report, dated 26 November 2015, under
Section 4.6.1, page 19, Wallaby Scrub Road .the Commission considers that the
relocation of Wallaby Scrub Road is not feasible and notes there is sufficient road capacity
to service detoured traffic
In its Executive Summary of the Planning Assessment Commission Determination Report
Warkworth Continuation Project dated 26 November 2015, the Commission noted that
the project has been the subject of a comprehensive development assessment process
over the past 18 months, including several assessment reports by the Department and two
reviews undertaken by the Commission. There has also been extensive public
consultation, including two public hearings, one public meeting and multiple opportunities
for written comments from the general public.
The PAC, in its assessment of the DA, determined that it was satisfied that the project was
consistent with current government policy, and noted that the conditions of consent were
progressively strengthened through the development assessment process in order to
address the six main issues of concern incorporating the Village of Bulga; biodiversity;
noise and air quality; socio-economic; final void; water quality and other issues (Wallaby
Scrub Road).
A further report adopted by Council on 21 March, 2016 (refer Item 11- Draft Mount Thorley
Warkworth Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) DP &SE 11/16), noted that a proposed
VPA had been drafted and the proposed draft Agreement was consistent with the
conditions of consent granted by the PAC. While it is acknowledged that the quantum of
the draft VPA will go some way to reflect the extent of impacts, as highlighted in Councils
submission to the PAC dated August 2014, it does not provide any potential benefits in lieu
of a proposed closure of Wallaby Scrub Road or payment for the sale of the land
comprising the (former) public road. Notwithstanding, the future of Wallaby Scrub Road
must be considered separately of any Voluntary Planning Agreement.
The decision to close Wallaby Scrub Road will not impact on the principles as outlined in
Councils Community Strategic Plan.
Our Places
Infrastructure is Sustainable
The decision to close Wallaby Scrub Road will not impact on the principles as outlined in
Councils Delivery Program and Operational Plan.
29
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Road and Infrastructure meets community needs

This report provides an overview of the likely impacts associated with the proposed
closure of Wallaby Scrub Road.
On the basis that 2014 DA was determined, Council sought legal advice on what could be
possible impacts of changes to the Act, on any decision not to approve the road closure.
The explanatory note in the Act, relating directly to the change, and substantiated in
responses to Council by three (3) separate law firms states:
The proposed amendment to the Roads Act, 1993 expands the purposes for which the
Roads and Traffic Authority (which is to be replaced by Roads and Maritime Services) may
exercise the functions of a roads authority under that Act to include the exercise of those
functions for the purpose of carrying out State significant development for which
development consent has been granted under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act, 1979.
Accordingly, the power of the RMS under s.64(1A) of the Act, would now seem to extend
to enabling RMS to provide the consent of the Council, under s.37(2)(b) of the Act, to the
closure of a road if such consent is for the purposes of enabling the carrying out of State
significant development for which development consent has been granted, under Part 4 of
the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.
Given the recent changes to the Act, the RMS can now, in the event Council refuse to
consent to the closure of a road, act as the roads authority for road closures associated
with State significant development, such as the Warkworth Continuation project.
Council needs to address the application for the closure of Wallaby Scrub Road in an
objective and lawful manner considering its role as the road authority. There is a high risk
that the RMS could usurp Councils role if Council failed to consider the application
appropriately.
Should Council choose to not sell the road, there is also the possibility, under s.177 of the
the Act, for the RMS to compulsory acquire, the public road. It would then cease to be a
public road as a consequence of its compulsory acquisition (refer s.41 of the Act). While it
is considered highly unlikely for the Crown to compulsory acquire a public road (if it is not
closed), under s.204 of the Act, Council would still be entitled, to compensation. Given the
amount that can be potentially negotiated on any sale of Wallaby Scrub Road it is strongly
recommended that Council maintain its control, as the road authority, to maximise any
benefits to the community in this regard.
Consultation/ Social Implications
The closure of Wallaby Scrub Road would result in current traffic (1100 vehicles per day),
being detoured via Putty Road, potentially Charlton Road and the Golden Highway. The
detoured traffic would be subject to some increased daily travel times (6 minutes).
Traffic studies assessed as part of the determination indicate that detoured traffic would
not significantly impact the capacity and level of service (LoS) of the detoured roads,
including Charlton Road, and relevant intersections.
30
SINGLETON COUNCIL
An emergency access road/fire trail will be constructed between Putty Road and the
Golden Highway to allow emergency vehicles to access areas west of Wallaby Scrub
Road. The Rural Fire Service (RFS) has accepted the proposed emergency access road,
provided it is constructed in accordance with the RFSs access standards. Furthermore,
the conditions of consent would require MTW to consult with Council, the RMS and RFS
prior to closure of the road, and develop a protocol for ongoing access and use of the
emergency access track.
The process of s.138 Road Closure Application will allow for 28 day public exhibition
process seeking public submissions and community input. The results would be reported
to Council at the October 2016 Council meeting.
Environmental Considerations
The road closure will not directly impact the local environment. The impacts of mining
generally and particularly through Wallaby Scrub Road have been considered by the PAC.
Risk Implications
As indicated above, if Council fails or refuses to apply to the Minister to close Wallaby
Scrub Road, it is possible for another public authority, such as the RMS, to apply to the
Minister to close the road. Under this scenario, it is possible for the RMS to exercise the
Councils functions as the roads authority for Wallaby Scrub Road and provide consent to
the closure of the road on behalf of Council. This is the case whether the Minster proposes
the closure or another public authority, such as the RMS, applies for the road to be closed.
Once closed, the land comprising the former public road is owned by the Council. If
Council resolves to dispose of the land, the proceeds of the sale are to be paid to Council.
However, as highlighted in the Policy/legislation section of this report, should Council
choose to not sell the road, there is also the possibility, under s.177 of the the Act, for the
RMS to compulsory acquire, the public road, potentially impacting on the proceeds of sale.
If, on the other hand, the Council initiates the road closure process, the Council would be
given another opportunity to consider whether to consent to the closure after public
submissions have been made. If Council refuses consent at that time, there would still be
the possibility for RMS to intervene and provide that consent, as highlighted above.
Other risks associated with detouring traffic have been assessed as low, with regard to
both LoS and traffic safety, on all detoured roads and relevant intersections.
There are no financial implications relating to the processing of the application. There will
be financial implications if, following an approved road closure, Council choose to sell the
road. Any decision to sell the road would be subject to a further report to Council.
31
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Options
1.
Endorse the draft recommendations.
2.
Not endorse the draft recommendations. This is not considered to have merit as it will
potentially result in Council being disempowered in the consideration of the proposed
road closure.

Conclusion
The determination by the NSW Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) of the
Warkworth Continuation Project (the Project) has placed stringent conditions, aimed at
addressing the key environmental, economic and social impacts of the project. It does not
however propose any alternate options for Wallaby Scrub Road other than full closure. It is
clear the intention of the approval was for mining through Wallaby Scrub Road.
In order for Council to retain its control over the road closure process the processing of the
s.138 application is deemed to be the best outcome under the circumstances. Once the
application has been considered a further report will be brought to Council in October 2016
indicating the feedback from the advertising process. It will also consider Councils options
regarding the future of Wallaby Scrub Road.
Gary Thomson
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
32
SINGLETON COUNCIL
70.
Glass Parade Rectification Works

Author: Sam Walker; Peter McMurray
FILE: RD02774
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to highlight options regarding the rectification of Glass Parade
and advise on the recommended option and time frame for pavement rectification.
1. Proceed with the Full Depth Asphalt rectification works on the section of Glass Parade
between Bridgman Road and Pioneer Road.
2. Approve the reallocation of roads funding from the Local Roads Capital Works Program
to undertake this work.
3. Direct the funds associated with the retained security bond to this project.
Background
Singleton Council entered into a commercial agreement with Bridgman Ridge Holdings P/L
to develop Council land for residential and commercial use in accordance with the terms
and conditions of the agreement.
The development of land within Bridgman Ridge Estate, created the need for the
construction of Glass Parade between Bridgman Road and Pioneer Road (the section
known as the Pioneer Road extension). In accordance with the terms and conditions of the
Agreement, Bridgman Ridge Holdings developed designs for Glass Parade and Council
advertised the tender for the construction of the road. The construction costs were to be
shared between Singleton Council and Bridgman Ridge Pty Ltd.
Civil Edge Contracting Pty Ltd (Civil Edge), was the successful tenderer and Council
awarded the tender for the construction of Glass Parade at the Council meeting of 5
December 2011. A condition of the tender contract, amongst numerous technical, financial
and legal conditions, included the payment to Council of a security bond. The physical
construction of Glass Parade road works were completed on 19 December 2012 and
practical completion process was completed in January 2013. It was noted, soon after the
construction works were completed, that cracks had started to appear in the new
pavement. By July 2013, the cracks reached a point, that major rectification works were
identified and required to enable the continued use of Glass Parade.
In order to identify the causes of the failure, Council commissioned Cardno Geotech
Solution Pty Ltd to undertake a detailed investigation of the pavement and surface
structure and to advise Council on the causes and proposed options for repair. The
Cardno report dated October 2013 indicated that the causes of the pavement failure were
directly attributed to poor quality of base material used by Civil Edge in the pavement
construction.
33
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Council provided a copy of the report to Civil Edge before the expiry of the defect liability
period ending on the 19 December 2013 and requested a meeting to rectify the defective
pavement. Council has been negotiating with Civil Edge since 2013 in an attempt to rectify
the matter and there has been various meetings since. Council has also engaged Local
Government Legal to assist with these negotiations. No resolution had been determined
between Council and Civil Edge over this period.
It was originally envisaged that Civil Edge would come back to complete the rectification
works however, due to the inability of Civil Edge to provide a reasonable and workable
solution to the problem, and Councils concerns in respect of entering into any further
contractual arrangement with Civil Edge, this was not recommended. Civil Edge had
raised with Council the issue of return of the security bond in exchange for completing the
rectification works. Negotiations between Council and Civil Edge have been extensive and
a scope of works could not be agreed upon and is unlikely to be reached in a short term
period. The negotiations have been drawn out as both parties could not agree on a scope
of works and to what extent each party would contribute in terms of the rectification works.
Council had also indicated it did not consider any return of the security bond warranted
and that this bond would be used to contribute toward costs.
Cardno were again engaged by Council in April 2016 to prepare an options report for the
pavement rectification. It was at this point that Council Officers determined that the
rectification works would proceed, based on a review of the Cardno report. A copy of this
report is shown at Attachment 1.
The most appropriate and cost effective solution was identified as Option 2 in the Cardno
report which incorporated a full depth asphalt replacement on Glass Parade.
It is proposed that Council does not proceed with entering into any further arrangement
with Civil Edge regarding rectification works, and that the security bond should be used to
contribute to funding for the completion of any works. A meeting was conducted between
representatives of Council, Civil Edge and Cardno in May 2016 where the matter was
discussed. Written notification was then also forwarded to Civil Edge advising of the intent
to proceed with the rectification works using the security bond funding.
Concerns had also been raised with Council from the community with regard to the
removal of the centre concrete median on Glass Parade. This matter was investigated by
Councils Local Traffic Committee at its meeting in October 2014 (Attachment 2). Council,
at its meeting on 17 November 2014 adopted the recommendations of the October Local
Traffic Committee report, which recommended that: Council endorse the removal of the
two chicanes on Glass Parade (Pioneer Road extension) and the retention of the existing
median as shown on drawing PS028-RevA (Attachment 3).
Work associated with the removal of the chicanes will be included as part of the
rectification works. There are no plans to remove the centre concrete median as it
performs a necessary traffic safety role.
Rectification Evaluation
The failed base material used by Civil Edge has caused the wearing surface to crack, this
in turn had resulted in water penetrating the pavement damaging other layers of the
34
SINGLETON COUNCIL
pavement. In April 2016, Cardno, as part of its report recommendations, highlighted three
separate options for rectification. The costs provided in the Cardno report were indicative
only, and a more detailed cost estimate analysis was obtained using an asphalt paving
contractor. Please refer to Attachment 1 for the Cardno report summary for each option.
Summary
While the recommended option constitutes a change of pavement design, this treatment is
considered the preferred option in terms of time of construction and having minimal impact
on the community.
Selection of any of the other Options 1 or 3, would result in significant time delay and
would pose further potential disputes and delays. Furthermore, if Council decided to move
forward, with full reconstruction or stabilization this would require a full tender process,
which again would delay delivery of final rectification works.
Full Depth Asphalt possesses many advantages compared to the other options with the
main advantages being associated with rapid construction time, longer pavement life, no
need to go out for tender or design and visual inspection of sub base for pavement
construction.
Council has the ability to, under the regional procurement contract conditions engaged
asphalt contractors to complete the full depth asphalt (FDA) works, at predetermine rates.
Subject to Council approval of this report, a nominated contractor will be available to
commence work on site in July 2016, with a 10 day project completion period.
As indicated previously, the removal of the chicanes will also be incorporated into this
scope of works.
The project once finalised will contribute to Councils adopted Community Strategic Plan
by:
Our Community
Ensuring Singleton is a safe place to live.
The Community have raised numerous concerns with Council about the delay in
rectification works and the lack of action associated with the repairs to Glass Parade.
While the prescribed asphalt works are not the cheapest option, this method of
rectification will enable a quick construction time completion period and have the
least impact on the community. This method of rectification also provides a long
pavement life and cause fewer defects in the future. Given the background of this
project:
Completing repairs to the road will make our community feel supported and
cared for through the provision of services and facilities
Strengthen the sense of place and identity of the locality of Bridgman Ridge
35
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Our Places
Roads and transport are safe and infrastructure is sustainable.
Through the construction and completion of the works, our community will be:
Safer through a safer road
Has sustainable assets
Well planned sustainable, accessible, affordable
Well connected
Attractive for locals and visitors
Promoting healthy activity and public safety in the newly developed area
Improving access to the proposed shopping centre and Bridgman Road and
Town Centre
Our Places plan for a sustainable and safe community.
Our Places road and infrastructure meets community needs.
Council has adhered strongly to its legal advice and has at all times, been transparent and
accountable in making decisions impacting on the time frames and costs associated with
this project. The recommendations do not impact on any Council policy relating to its
Capital Works Program or tender procurement processes.
Council is able to engage asphalt contractors under the regional procurement tender
without having to go out to an open tender.
The proposed works adhere to the principles of Councils Asset Management Plans.
There is a community expectation that the road will be repaired. The Bridgman Ridge area
is newly developed and the road accessing the newly developed area is need of urgent
repair. The community has a high expectation that Council will complete these repairs in
the very near future. It is recommended that Glass Parade is repaired as a matter of
priority.
Any road closures will be advertised with alternative routes identified.
Environmental impacts will be addressed in applicable project management plans by the
contractor carrying out rectification works.
36
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Risk Implications
Council could be exposed to potential increased risk of public liability if Glass Parade is left
to deteriorate further.
There may be the possibility of legal action by Civil Edge. Any pending legal issues will be
actioned using the appropriate legal resources and advice.
Financial
Works for the rectification of Glass Parade can be funded from the 2015/16 Local Roads
Capital Works Program and the use of the retained security. There is no impact on funding
for other projects listed in the 2015/16 Local Roads Capital Works Program.
Options
1. Endorse the proposed recommendation to proceed with the Full Depth Asphalt
rectification works on the section of Glass Parade between Bridgman Road and
Pioneer Road.
2. Not proceed with the rectification works. This option is not considered to have merit as
it would significantly add cost to any future repairs of Glass Parade and create a
negative perception of Council.
3. Consider use of either Option 1 or 3 as the preferred pavement rectification option. This
is not considered to have merit as either option would add significant time delay for the
completion of any works, and for Option 1, would add significant costs to the project
which could not be met in Councils 2015/16 Local Roads Capital Works Program.
Conclusions
Full depth pavement replacement for Glass Parade provides the most cost effective
solution for Council in terms of time for construction, minimal impact on the community
during construction, pavement life and decreased risk of public liability.
Gary Thomson
Attachments
AT-1
Glass Parade - Cardno Evaluation - Rectification Options
and costings 2016
AT-2
Glass Parade (Pioneer Road extension) Removal of
chicanes
AT-3
Action Sheet - Council Meeting - Glass Parade (Pioneer
Road Extension)
37
Attachment 1
Glass Parade - Cardno Evaluation - Rectification Options and costings

2016
38
Attachment 1

2016
39
Attachment 1

2016
40
Attachment 1

2016
41
Attachment 1

2016
42
Attachment 2
Glass Parade (Pioneer Road extension) Removal of chicanes
43
Attachment 2
44
Attachment 2
45
Attachment 2
46
Attachment 3
Action Sheet - Council Meeting - Glass Parade (Pioneer Road Extension)
47
SINGLETON COUNCIL
71.
Minutes - Local Traffic Committee - 26/05/2016

Author: Paul Smith
FILE: 16/0149
Executive Summary
The Singleton Local Traffic Committee held its ordinary meeting on 25 May 2016. The
minutes are shown as Attachment 1 for Councils consideration.
1. Note the minutes of the Singleton Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 25 May
2016.
2. Adopt the following recommendations made by the Local Traffic Committee:
1. Hermitage Road Upgrade Project
Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approves the installation of the
traffic control devices associated with the Hermitage Road Upgrade Project per
drawings 3695C5564-1, 3695C6500-1 to 3695C6531-1, 3695C593-1 to 3695C5951, 3695C8007-1 to 3695C8008, 3695C8011, 3695C8024, 3695C8034-1,
3695C8044-1, 3695C8061-1, 3695C8071-1, 3695C8072-1 & 3695C8080-0.
2. Pioneer Road Upgrade Project
Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve the installation of the
signs and line marking as shown on design drawing P1-RD00067-LTC01 to P1RD00067-LTC06 attached as APPENDIX A to item 3.2 of the meeting agenda, with
the addition of flood warning signs and depth indicators and the retention of the
existing speed hump.
3. Glendonbrook Road Rehabilitation Project
Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve the installation of the
signs and line marking as shown on design drawing P1-RD00067-LTC01 to P1RD00067-LTC06 attached as APPENDIX A to item 3.3. of the meeting agenda.
4. Singleton Town (Area 1) Scheme STOP Signs
Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve the implementation of 22
STOP signs as part of the installation of the Singleton Town (Area 1) Road Safety
improvement scheme as shown on drawing numbers 22-18150-C010 Rev D, 2218150-C011 Rev D, 22-18150-C018 Rev D & 22-18150-C019 Rev D attached as
APPENDIX C to item 3.4 of the meeting agenda.
5. Singleton Town (Area 1) Scheme William Street
Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council do not install the speed humps
on William Street at this time, install the kerb build-outs and change the GIVE WAY
signs and line markings to STOP signs and monitor the accident level at the
intersection and if accidents continue to occur look at installing measures in the
future.
48
SINGLETON COUNCIL
6. Cranky Corner Road (South) / Stanhope Road Intersection improvements

Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approves the implantation of the
proposed improvements to the intersection as per drawing PS16-027 Cranky
Corner Road (South) and Stanhope Road STOP sign and vegetation removal
attached as APPENDIX B to item 3.6 of the meeting agenda.
7. Lake St Clair Charity Bicycle Ride
Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council note the Traffic Management
Plan as submitted by the Rotary Club of Singleton and approve the event in
accordance with this plan.
8. Lydes Lane Gated road closure ELECTRONIC MEETING
Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approves the closure of Lydes
Lane at Golden Highway by means of erection of a gate as per the drawing attached
as APPENDIX C to item 3.8 of the meeting agenda.
3. Allocate funds as follows to undertake the works recommended by the Local Traffic
Committee:
Item
Title
Source of funds
Hermitage Road Upgrade

Project
NSW Resources
for Regions
Council
Contribution
Council Funding
Regional Road
Funding from
RMS
Transport for
NSW Safer
Roads
2
3
5
6
7
8
Pioneer Road Upgrade Project

Glendonbrook Road
Rehabilitation Project
Singleton Town (Area 1)
Scheme STOP Signs
Singleton Town (Area 1)
Scheme William Street
Cranky Corner Road (South) /
Stanhope Road Intersection
improvements
Lake St Clair Charity Bicycle
Ride
Lydes Lane Gated road
closure ELECTRONIC
MEETING
N/A
Council Funding
Est.
amount
$9.3m
$100,000
$50,000
$400,000
$435,00
N/A
$1,000
N/A
N/A
N/A funded by
Warkworth
Mining Limited
N/A
All proposed works can be funded from existing Council budgets or external funding.
49
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Gary Thomson
Attachments
AT-1
Local Traffic Committee Meeting Minutes 26/05/2016
50
Attachment 1
Local Traffic Committee Meeting Minutes

Thursday 26th May 2016
Table of Contents
FORMAL AGENDA ITEMS
Item
Subject
Page(s)
3.1
Hermitage Road Upgrade Project
3.2
3.3
Glendonbrook Road Rehabilitation Project
3.4
Singleton Town (Area 1) Scheme STOP signs
3.5
Singleton Town (Area 1) Scheme William Street
3.6
Cranky Corner Road Intersection Improvements
3.7
Lake St Clair Charity Bike Ride Traffic Management Plan
3.8
Lydes Lane Gated Closure (ELECTRONIC MEETING)
51
Attachment 1
Local Traffic Committee Meeting Minutes

The meeting of the Singleton Local Traffic Committee was held in the Council Chambers on 26 May 2016
at 9:30am.
NOTE: These minutes are to be read in conjunction with the Local Traffic Committee meeting agenda
of the above meeting.
PRESENT
Committee Members:
Cr Sue Moore (Singleton Council) (Chairperson)
Bob Winter (representative for The Honourable Joel Fitzgibbon MP)
Nick Trajcevski (Traffic Engineering Officer, RMS)
Senior Constable Steve Murrell (Traffic Officer, Singleton Police)
Other attendees:
Mayor John Martin (Singleton Council)
Jason Linnane (General Manager, Singleton Council)
Paul Smith (Traffic Engineering and Road Safety Officer, Singleton Council)
Michael Hector (Major Projects Investigation Officer, Singleton Council)
Alicia Christe (Infrastructure Administration Officer, Singleton Council)
APOLOGIES
Gary Thomson (AGM/Director Community and Infrastructure Services, Singleton Council),
Senior Constable Chris Dengate (Hunter Valley Local Area Command)
Peter McMurray (Manager Infrastructure Strategy, Planning & Programming, Singleton Council)
1. Confirmation of Minutes:
The minutes of meeting held on 25 February 2016 were confirmed. (Murrell/Winter)
2. Business Arising:
None
52
Attachment 1
3. Items to be Recommended to Singleton Council by the Local Traffic Committee for Consideration:
Item 3.1
Subject: Hermitage Road Upgrade Project
From: Ralf Metzner, Major Projects Contracts Manager, Singleton Council
Reason for report: For the approval of the installation of the traffic control devices associated with the
Hermitage Road Upgrade Project.
Discussion:
Nick Trajcevski queried the use of the proposed pedestrian warning sign with flashing lights near Mistletoe
Lane. He does not feel the flashing lights are necessary as they lose their effectiveness over time when
continuously flashing.
Council advised that the flashing lights are proposed due to the high number of pedestrians crossing the
road at this point and to highlight this to motorists. The lights could be timed to coincide with peak crossing
times.
Cr Sue Moore suggested that it would be better to start with the flashing lights and then stop using them,
rather than not having them and then getting requests to install them.
Nick Trajcevski advised that he has carried out an initial speed limit assessment on the road and at this
stage feels that the speed on the 100km/h section could be brought down to 80km/h and that the section
near Mistletoe Lane could come down to 60km/h. Nick advised that he hopes to have a final decision by
August 2016.
Council requested that the outcome of the speed limit review be made known ASAP as if changes to the
speed limit will affect the layout of the line marking and potentially the locations of the signage.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approves the installation of
the traffic control devices associated with the Hermitage Road Upgrade Project per drawings 3695C5564-1,
3695C6500-1 to 3695C6531-1, 3695C593-1 to 3695C595-1, 3695C8007-1 to 3695C8008, 3695C8011,
3695C8024, 3695C8034-1, 3695C8044-1, 3695C8061-1, 3695C8071-1, 3695C8072-1 & 3695C8080-0
Mover and seconder: Trajcevski/Winter
53
Attachment 1
Item 3.2
Subject: Pioneer Road Upgrade Project
From: Phillip Oakley, Engineering Design Officer, Singleton Council
Reason for report: For the approval of the installation of the signs and line marking associated with the
Discussion:
Nick Trajcevski suggested that the right angle curve sign may be more appropriate on sheet no. 4 of 6.
Council will review.
Cr Sue Moore advised that the area near to the existing speed hump often floods during storms and
queried as to if flood warning signs/depth indicators will be provided. Council advised that these signs are
currently not planned however they will now be included.
PC Steve Murrell asked if the speed hump currently in place will be retained. Council advised that it is
planned to be removed as part of these works. Steve requested that it be retained as prior to it going in the
Police received a lot of complaints due to speeding and anti-social behaviour and these stopped once it
went in. Council advised that it will be retained.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve the installation of
the signs and line marking as shown on design drawing P1-RD00067-LTC01 to P1-RD00067-LTC06 attached
as APPENDIX A to item 3.2 of the meeting agenda, with the addition of flood warning signs and depth
indicators and the retention of the existing speed hump.
Mover and seconder: Trajcevski/Moore
Item 3.3
Subject: Glendonbrook Road Rehabilitation Project
From: Phillip Oakley, Engineering Design Officer, Singleton Council
Reason for report: For the approval of the installation of the signs and line marking associated with the
Glendonbrook Road Rehabilitation Project.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve the installation of
the signs and line marking as shown on design drawing P1-RD00067-LTC01 to P1-RD00067-LTC06 attached
as APPENDIX A to item 3.3. of the meeting agenda.
Mover and seconder: Winter/Trajcevski
54
Attachment 1
Item 3.4
Subject: Singleton Town (Area 1) Scheme STOP signs
From: Paul Smith, Traffic Engineering and Road Safety Officer, Singleton Council
Reason for report: To consider changing 22 of the 24 proposed GIVE WAY signs in the Singleton Town (Area
1) scheme to STOP signs in line with the RMS Situation Diagram referred to in the RMS Australian Standards
Supplement to Australian Standard AS1742 Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Parts 1 15.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approve the
implementation of 22 STOP signs as part of the installation of the Singleton Town (Area 1) Road Safety
improvement scheme as shown on drawing numbers 22-18150-C010 Rev D, 22-18150-C011 Rev D, 2218150-C018 Rev D & 22-18150-C019 Rev D attached as APPENDIX C to item 3.4 of the meeting agenda.
Mover and seconder: Trajcevski/Moore
Item 3.5
SUBJECT: Singleton Town (Area 1) Scheme William Street
FROM: Paul Smith, Traffic Engineering and Road Safety Officer, Singleton Council
Reason for report: For a decision on the proposal to install 3 speed humps on William Street following
public consultation.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council do not install the speed
humps on William Street at this time, install the kerb build-outs and change the GIVE WAY signs and line
markings to STOP signs and monitor the accident level at the intersection and if accidents continue to occur
look at installing measures in the future.
Mover and seconder: Winter/Murrell
Item 3.6
SUBJECT: Cranky Corner Road (South)/Stanhope Road Intersection improvements
Reason for report: To consider changes to the intersection of Cranky Corner Rd (South)/Stanhope Rd.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approves the implantation
of the proposed improvements to the intersection as per drawing PS16-027 Cranky Corner Road (South)
and Stanhope Road STOP sign and vegetation removal attached as APPENDIX B to item 3.6 of the meeting
agenda.
Mover and seconder: Moore/Winter
Item 3.7
55
Attachment 1
SUBJECT: Lake St Clair Charity Bicycle Ride

Reason for report: To consider the TMP associated with the Lake St Clair Charity Bicycle ride due to take
place on 20th August 2016.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council note the Traffic
Management Plan as submitted by the Rotary Club of Singleton and approve the event in accordance with
this plan.
Mover and seconder: Winter/Moore
Item 3.8
SUBJECT: Lydes Lane Gated road closure ELECTRONIC MEETING
Reason for report: To consider the installation of a gated closure on Lydes Lane by Warkworth Mining Ltd
as part of State Significant Development Approval for the Warkworth Continuation Project.
Recommendation to Council: Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council approves the closure of
Lydes Lane at Golden Highway by means of erection of a gate as per the drawing attached as APPENDIX C
to item 3.8 of the meeting agenda.
Mover and seconder: Unanimous support via email
4. Other Business
4.1 Mayor John Martin queried why the LEFT TURN ON RED sign that was in place at the traffic signals at the
intersection of John Street and Ryan Avenue (south) has been removed.
UPDATE: Council contacted RMS after the meeting and the sign was removed as part of the two phase site
pedestrian protection upgrade program which is a state wide programme to upgrade signalised intersections that
also have pedestrian lights. The upgrade means that rather than the green light being given to motorists and
pedestrians waiting to cross the road at the same time, pedestrians get the green man around 4 seconds before the
green light comes on for traffic. This gives pedestrians a head start in crossing the road. The benefit of the head
start is that it is thought that after pedestrians have entered the intersection, vehicles are less likely to try to preempt their right-of-way when making turns.
LTOR signs have to be removed at these sites as having this sign in place would allow motorists to turn on the red
light which would make the head start redundant.
56
Attachment 1
4.2 PC Steve Murrell advised that during the Anzac Day parade there were instances of motorists entering the parade
area. Council advised that 2 road closures were missing from the TCP but were installed once the traffic
management company realised. There were also some instances of motorists going past ROAD CLOSED signs.
Council advised that next year it is planned to use a Police rolling closure rather than the traffic control that has
been used to date as it is very difficult to manage all of the road closures to ensure people do not drive past. This
will be discussed with the Police well before next Anzac Day.
4.3 Council raised the suggestion to have a LTC meeting every 2 months rather than every 3 months as per the current
arrangement. The LTC members do not feel the need to have a meeting every 2 months and as such the 3 month
meeting schedule will be retained with any urgent issues to be dealt with via email or by an extraordinary meeting.
There being no further business the meeting concluded at 11:30am.
57
SINGLETON COUNCIL
72.
Tender for Organics (Green Waste) Collection

Author: Angelika Hesse
FILE: T2015.020
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to advise Council that a report has been prepared for
Councils consideration in Closed Council which contains commercial information of a
confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person
who supplied it (the Tenderers).
Tenders for the collection of Organics (greenwaste) were called by Maitland City Council
on behalf of Singleton and Cessnock Councils on 1 March 2016 and tenders closed at 2.00
pm on 26 April 2016.
RECOMMENDED that the report on the tender for organics (greenwaste) collection
services for Cessnock, Maitland and Singleton Councils be considered in Closed Council
with the press and public excluded in accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local
Government Act 1993 , on grounds that the report contains commercial information of a
confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person
who supplied it.
Gary Thomson
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
58
Attachment 1
73.
LTC Report - Milbrodale Mountain Classic - Special Event - 9-6-2016
Milbrodale Mountain Classic - Traffic Control

Author: Paul Smith
FILE: 16/0149
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the traffic control plan proposed for the
30th Anniversary Hedweld Milbrodale Mountain Classic 2016.
RECOMMENDED that Council endorse the Traffic Control Plan as submitted by HVORRA
and approve the temporary closure of Welshs Road in accordance with this plan.
Background
The 30th Anniversary Hedweld Milbrodale Mountain Classic 2016 is due to be held on 2 & 3
July 2016. The Event is being run by Hunter Valley Off Road Racing Association Inc.
(HVORRA).
The racing will be conducted on private property at Milbrodale, NSW however the vehicles will
cross Welshes Road, which is a Council owned public road, at two separate points along the
road. Traffic controllers will be used to temporarily stop traffic when vehicles cross the road.
The attached Local Traffic Committee (LTC) report outlines the event in more detail and
includes a copy of the proposed Traffic Control Plan.
If Council wishes to regulate traffic for purposes other than those specified in Division 1 of Part
8 (Section 115) of the Roads Act, 1993 (road works, public safety etc.) it must seek the advice
of its LTC.
The function to regulate traffic under Division 2 of Part 8 Sections 116 to 119 of the Roads Act
1993 (i.e. for special events) is delegated to Council in the Delegation to Councils
Regulation of Traffic (Delegation). Council may not sub-delegate this item.
The Delegation requires Council to seek the advice of the NSW Police and the RMS prior to
exercising their delegated functions. This is usually done via the LTC. The LTC has no
decision-making powers.
The Local Traffic Committee recommends that Council endorse the Traffic Control Plan as
submitted by H.V.O.R.R.A. and approve the temporary closure of Welshs Road in accordance
with this plan.
Gary Thomson
Attachments
AT-1
LTC Report - Milbrodale Mountain Classic - Special Event 9-6-2016
59
Attachment 1
60
Attachment 1
61
Attachment 1
62
Attachment 1
63
Attachment 1
64
Attachment 1
65
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Corporate Services Report (Items Requiring Decision) - DCS45/16
45.
Proposed Lease to Gore Electrical & Data - 189 John

Street Singleton
Author: Larissa Bourke
FILE: 15/0635
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the lease of the workshop at 189 John
Street, Singleton to Gore Electrical & Data.
RECOMMENDED that:
1.
Council endorse the lease of the workshop at 189 John Street, Singleton to Gore
Electrical & Data for a two year term with an option to renew for a further one year
term.
2.
The rental amount be $26,000 per annum plus GST.
3.
The rent be waived for the first six months.
4.
The Mayor and General Manager be authorised to sign and seal any documents
associated with the lease.
Background
Gore Electrical & Data currently lease property in Walter Street, Singleton and they are
seeking a larger property to allow for expansion of the business. Mr Gore has approached
Council to lease the old Sutton Ford Workshop (not including the showroom) located at
189 John Street, Singleton.
Gore Electrical & Data was established in April of 2010 and services the local Singleton
area. Since that time, Gore Electrical & Data has grown to employ more than ten full time
employees, several casual staff and continually engages the services of subcontractors
throughout the Hunter Valley for projects. In early 2014 due to expansion Gore Electrical
relocated to their current location in Walter Street, Singleton (near the Singleton train
station) in the Walter Street Complex, which houses other local businesses.
A copy of a letter from Gore Electrical & Data requesting consideration of the lease is
shown as Attachment 1 and an aerial photograph of the site is shown as Attachment 2.
It is proposed that the lease will commence on 1 August 2016 and be for a term of two
years with an option of a further one year period. Upon agreement by Council a draft
lease will be prepared by one of Councils legal services providers.
66
SINGLETON COUNCIL

Our Community
The adopted Community Strategic Plan identifies that Our Community feels
supported and cared for through the provision of services and facilities.
Outcome 1.1.3 specifies that Council supports planning, development and implementation
of programs and services to meet the needs of our diverse community.
The proposed lease has been prepared in accordance with relevant legislation. The
subject land is Operational Land and as such there are no special Local Government Act
restrictions.
Any required Development Consents will be sought in accordance with the relevant
planning requirements.
The proposed lease site is currently unused and is being considered for future
redevelopment. Council is responsible for maintaining this property.
A valuation has been provided by Tew Property Consulting which has placed the current
market rental value of the site at $57,000 per annum.
Gore Electrical & Data have written to Council requesting that the rent be $26,000 per
annum plus GST and be waived for the first six months of the lease term to assist with
compensation for the decommissioning, new connection/MSB and electrical upgrades. A
copy of this request is shown as Attachment 1.
The lease proposal has been considered by relevant staff and has been endorsed by
Councils Executive Leadership Team.
Upon approval by Council a lease will be drafted by one of Councils legal services
providers and will be finalised in consultation with Gore Electrical & Data.
Nil.
Risk Implications
Minimal risk for Council will result from the implementation of this lease.
67
SINGLETON COUNCIL
The site is currently vacant and requires a reasonable amount of maintenance work. The
use of this site which will include internal upgrades by the Lessee will assist with the
maintenance of the site and will also minimise the risk for vandalism. The proposed lease
will not impact on planning for future development of the site.
Options
1. That the proposed lease of the workshop at 189 John Street, Singleton to Gore
Electrical and Data be approved.
2. Not approve the proposed lease of the workshop at 189 John Street, Singleton to Gore
Electrical and Data.
Conclusions
This report recommends that Council approve the lease of the workshop at 189 John
Street, Singleton to Gore Electrical and Data.
Anthony Egan
Director Corporate Services Group
Attachments
AT-1
Gore Electrical and Data Proposal for Lease
AT-2
Aerial - 189 John Street
68
Attachment 1
Gore Electrical and Data Proposal for Lease
69
Attachment 2
Aerial - 189 John Street
70
SINGLETON COUNCIL
46.
Local Government Remuneration Tribunal

Author: Anthony Egan
FILE: 16/0390
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to advise Council that the Local Government Remuneration
Tribunal has concluded its review for the year 2016/2017 and set the annual fees payable
to the Mayor and Councillors for the 2016/2017 year.
RECOMMENDED that the Mayoral fee be increased to $24,630 and the Councillor fees be
increased to $11,290 in accordance with the Local Government Remuneration Tribunals
decision for the financial year commencing 1 July 2016.
Background
The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal has concluded its review for the year
2016/2017 and determined that an increase in fees of 2.5% for Mayors and Councillors is
appropriate.
Attachment 1 is a copy of the report and determination from the Local Government
Remuneration Tribunal in which Singleton Council is classified as Rural.
The increases are effective from 1 July, 2016 and the minimum and maximum fees per
annum for Council are as follows:
Year
2015/2016
2016/2017
Mayor
Minimum
Maximum
$8,860
$24,030
$9,080
$24,630
Year
2015/2016
2016/2017
Councillors
Minimum
Maximum
$8,330
$11,010
$8,540
$11,290
The Mayor and Councillors were paid the maximum fees for 2015/2016 and it should be
noted that the Councillor fee is paid to the Mayor in addition to the Mayoral allowance.
The 2016/2017 draft budget makes provision for a 2.5% increase to the maximum fees
payable.
On 20 January 2016, the Tribunal wrote to all mayors advising that given the limitations
placed on the Tribunal in respect of determining increases in fees no general submissions
from individual councils were required for the 2016 review. The Tribunal notes in their
report that they will be required to undertake a review of councillor remuneration during
2016 as part of the local government reforms. The Tribunal states that in undertaking this
review the Government may wish to consider the impact of the Governments wages policy
on increases in mayoral and councillor fees and the limitations this may impose on any
future remuneration model.
Council needs to fix the remuneration level for the period 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017 for
the Mayor and Councillors by way of resolution. Should Council not determine or fix an
71
SINGLETON COUNCIL
annual fee, then in accordance with section 248 (4) and 249(4) of the Local Government
Act, 1993 the minimum remuneration levels as determined by the Tribunal will apply.
The adoption of the recommendation will not have an impact on the Community Strategic
Plan.
The adoption of the recommendation will not have an impact on Councils Delivery
Program and Operational Plan.
Pursuant to Section 241 of the Local Government Act, 1993 the NSW Local Government
Remuneration Tribunal determines in each category of Council, the maximum and
minimum amount of fees to be paid to Mayors and Councillors of Councils.
In determining the minimum and maximum fees payable to each of the categories, the
Tribunal is required, pursuant to Section 242A of the Local Government Act 1993, to give
effect to the same policies on increases in remuneration as those that the Industrial
Relations Commission is required to give effect to under Section 146C of the Industrial
Relations Act 1996, when making or varying awards or orders relating to the conditions of
employment of public sector employees.
The current Policy on wages pursuant to Section 146(1)(a) of the Industrial Relations Act
1996 is articulated in the Industrial Relations (Public Sector Conditions of Employment)
Regulation 2011. The effect of the Regulation is that public sector wages cannot increase
by more than 2.5%, and this includes the minimum and maximum fees payable to
councillors and mayors.
The 2016/2017 draft Budget makes provision for a 2.5% increase in fees and payment of
the maximum fees.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Risk Implications
Not applicable.
72
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Options
1. Council increase the fees to the Mayor and Councillors for the 2016/2017 year
commencing 1 July, 2016 by the recommended 2.5%.
2. Council approve the payment of another fee amount to the Mayor and Councillors for
the 2016/2017 year commencing 1 July, 2016 in line with the determination from the
Tribunal.
3. Council maintains the Mayor and Councillors fees at the 2015/2016 maximum level.
Conclusions
It is recommended that Council approve the payment of the maximum fees to the Mayor
and Councillors which is in line with past practices.
Anthony Egan
Attachments
AT-1
2016 Annual Determination - Local Government
Remuneration Tribunal - 29 March 2016
73
Attachment 1
2016 Annual Determination - Local Government Remuneration Tribunal 29 March 2016
74
Attachment 1
75
Attachment 1
76
Attachment 1
77
Attachment 1
78
Attachment 1
79
Attachment 1
80
Attachment 1
81
Attachment 1
82
Attachment 1
83
Attachment 1
84
Attachment 1
85
SINGLETON COUNCIL
47.
Request for Financial Assistance Towards Legal

Expenses
FILE: 15/0506
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a request for a voluntary contribution
towards legal expenses incurred by Bathurst Regional Council.
RECOMMENDED that Council makes a voluntary contribution towards legal expenses
incurred by Bathurst Regional Council for the sum of $853.58.
Background
Council is in receipt of correspondence from the Chief Executive of Local Government
NSW (LG NSW) seeking a voluntary contribution towards legal expenses incurred by
Bathurst Regional Council. Refer to Attachment 1.
As described in the attached letter, Bathurst Regional Council defended a matter in the
NSW Court of Appeal which has now been resolved. The LGNSW Board considered the
matter to be of importance to local government throughout the State, as the proceedings
related to the ability of councils to enter into contracts that include fees for services.
A copy of the Judgement Summary from the NSW Court of Appeal is shown as
Attachment 2 and full details of the Judgement can be viewed at
https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/554aaa5fe4b0a12bb9730761.
Councils financial contribution towards this matter has been calculated at $853.58
including GST.
This matter will have no impact on Councils Community Strategic Plan.
This matter will have no impact on Councils Delivery Program or Operational Plan.
Council has no policy in place in relation to making contributions to other local councils via
LG NSW. Each matter should be determined on its merits with consideration as to whether
the outcome will benefit all NSW councils.
86
SINGLETON COUNCIL
There is no legal obligation on Council to support the request, however LG NSW has
resolved to support the request and seeks Councils voluntary contribution. Council last
received a request for legal cost assistance in June 2013 on behalf of Mid-Western
Regional Council for the sum of $2,939.03 which was approved by Council for payment.
Council has not provided a budget allocation for these requests and each matter should be
considered on its merits.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
Risk Implications
Providing financial support to other NSW councils is appropriate to such cases which will
have a major benefit for all councils in relation to the clarification of legislation.
Options
1. Resolve that Council makes a voluntary contribution towards legal expenses incurred
by Bathurst Regional Council for the sum of $853.58.
2. Resolve that Council makes a contribution towards legal expenses incurred by Bathurst
Regional Council for a lesser amount to be determined by Council.
3. That Council not make a voluntary contribution towards legal expenses incurred by
Bathurst Regional Council.
Conclusions
As indicated in the correspondence from LG NSW it is believed that this matter is of
importance to local government. Given the presence of mining within the Singleton Local
Government Area, due consideration should be given to this request.
Anthony Egan
87
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Attachments
AT-1
Request for Legal Assistance approved - Bathurst Regional
Council - Local Government New South Wales (NSW)
AT-2
Adrenaline Pty Ltd v Bathurst Regional Council
88
Attachment 1
Request for Legal Assistance approved - Bathurst Regional Council Local Government New South Wales (NSW)
89
Attachment 1
Request for Legal Assistance approved - Bathurst Regional Council Local Government New South Wales (NSW)
90
Attachment 2
Adrenaline Pty Ltd v Bathurst Regional Council
91
SINGLETON COUNCIL
48.

Concrete
FILE: T2016.012
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to advise Council that a report has been prepared for
consideration in Closed Council which contains commercial information of a confidential
nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who
supplied it [the Tenderers].
Regional Procurement acting on behalf of nine Hunter councils invited tenders for the
supply and delivery of ready mix concrete to the participating councils.
RECOMMENDED that the report on the tender for the supply, delivery and placement of
roads resurfacing be considered in Closed Council with the press and public excluded in
accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, on the grounds
that the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if
disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.
Anthony Egan
Attachments
92
SINGLETON COUNCIL
49.
Acquistion of One Parcel of Land on Hermitage Road as

Part of the Hermitage Road Upgrade Project
Author: Ralf Metzner
FILE:
PRO15/1/P/01-02
Executive Summary
The upgrade to Hermitage Road requires the acquisition of various parts of land along
Hermitage Road to enable the upgrade works to be undertaken.
1.
Acquire a total of 115.9 m of Lot 1 DP 844544, Hermitage Road for public road use
and after acquisition, the land be dedicated as public road as per Section 10 of the
Roads Act 1993 for the total compensation sum as specified in the Assessment of
Compensation undertaken by Tew Property Consultants.
2.
Be responsible for all associated valuation, survey and legal fees in relation to the
acquisitions.
3.
Give authority to the following Council Officers to discuss with land owners and obtain
all necessary signatures on Permit to Enter documents, Land Acquisition Agreements
and any other documentation required to finalise the Land Acquisition Agreements:
Major Projects Contracts Manager
Contracts and Property Officer
Major Projects Investigations Officer
Director Corporate Services
4.
The Mayor and General Manager be authorised to execute under seal all documents
required for the acquisition of land as detailed in this report.
Background
On 19 February 2015, Deputy Premier, Minister for Trade and Investment, Minister for
Regional Infrastructure & Services Troy Grant MP announced that $16.734 million has
been allocated to Singleton and Cessnock City Councils for the upgrade of Hermitage
Road and Broke Road Pokolbin under the third round of the Resources for Regions
program. Councils share of this funding totals $8.12 million.
As part of the initial upgrade design and realignment of Hermitage Road, approximately 88
land encroachments were identified; however the amount has now been reduced
significantly to approximately 33 potential encroachments.
Due to the large amount of bulk acquisitions required, it was decided that the valuations for
each potential encroachment would be split up into batches. The first batch of 20 potential
encroachments was reported to Council at the meeting held 18 April 2016 the second
batch was reported to Council at the last meeting held 16 May 2016.
93
SINGLETON COUNCIL
The potential encroachment in this report is shown below:

Lot 1 DP 844544
115.9m
A preliminary land acquisition plan has been prepared by Council Officers for the above
proposed encroachment. A copy of the preliminary land acquisition plan is shown in
Attachment 1. It is proposed that the last remaining two plans will be presented to Council
in the near future, as soon as possible.
The owners of the property affected by the works have given their consent to allow access
to the property to undertake valuation and survey works. Additionally, the owners have
indicated their willingness to sell their affected portions of the land to enable the upgrade
to proceed.
In accordance with Councils Land Acquisition Procedure, independent valuations have
been obtained from Mr Robert Tew of Tew Property Consultants. A copy of the confidential
valuation summary/table will be circulated to Councillors under separate cover.
It is recommended that the compensation to be paid to the various land owners will be that
which is listed in the confidential valuation summary table/schedule and it is in accordance
with the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.
The Community Strategic Plan provides under Our Places that Our Community is safe.
Safety improvements falls in line with this outcome.
Council may acquire land for road purposes in accordance with the Local Government Act
1993, the Roads Act 1993 and the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.
In 2015 a joint funding Deed between Cessnock City Council, Singleton Council and
Resources for Regions program was entered into for the upgrade of Hermitage Road and
Broke Road Pokolbin. Councils share of this funding totals $8.12 million.
Landowners have been consulted and have provided consent for Council to undertake
survey and valuation works on their property for this project. The compensation
recommended for payment provides adequate compensation for all land concerned. At
this stage, the land owners have not been advised of the proposed compensation amount.
The upgrade works will improve the safety for the road users at this location and will
provide positive impacts to the community by enabling cycling, walking, wayfinding
signage etc.
94
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Council engaged the services of Kleinfielder Ecologist to undertake an ecological
assessment of the entire road corridor. In addition, Kleinfielder engaged the services of an
Aboriginal Heritage Specialist to also undertake an assessment of the entire road corridor.
Both of the reports from the Ecologist and the Aboriginal Heritage Specialist specified
outcomes that any disturbance was deemed not significant therefore no impact will be
made on the environment as a result of acquiring the land for road upgrade.
Risk Implications
There are some risks that Council needs to be aware of regarding the proposed land
acquisition:
1. Should the land owners not accept the offer, Council could acquire the land through
compulsory acquisition, or redesign if possible. This would result in a substantial
increase in timeframe and cost to Council.
2. Should Council offer a higher amount for the land required a precedent would be
established which will have an impact on any future land acquisitions.
Options
1. Acquire a total of 115.9 m of land for road upgrade purposes by agreement.
Acquisition by agreement is the most cost effective and timely method. Acceptance of
the offer by all land owners by agreement for the sum as indicated in the Assessment
of Compensation undertaken by Tew Property Consultants is considered reasonable
and is in accordance with the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.
2. Acquire the land by compulsory acquisition. Should the owner decline the offer,
Council could then resolve to make an application to the Minister to compulsorily
acquire the land. Compulsory acquisition of the required land would ultimately result in
further costs to Council.
3. Should some landowners not agree, a redesign option may be possible, which would
ultimately result in substantial further costs to Council.
4. Not proceed with acquiring the land. This option is not recommended as these
improvements are part of the detailed design.
Option one is the recommended option.
Conclusions
The offer as detailed in the table / schedule to the land owners is in accordance with the
Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 and represents fair and reasonable
compensation.
95
SINGLETON COUNCIL
It is recommended to proceed with the proposed acquisition.
Anthony Egan
Attachments
AT-1
Hermitage Road Preliminary Land Acquisition Plan
HRUP_SK25 Rev A
96
Attachment 1
Hermitage Road Preliminary Land Acquisition Plan HRUP_SK25 Rev A
97
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Planning and Sustainable Environment Report (Items Requiring Decision) - DP&SE24/16
24.
Finalisation of the draft Branxton Subregional Land Use

Strategy
Author: Ken Horner
FILE: 14/0335
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the results of the public exhibition of the
draft Branxton Subregional Land Use Strategy (BSLUS) and to finalise the draft BSLUS in
accordance with feedback obtained from the exhibition.
RECOMMENDED that Council adopt the finalised draft Branxton Subregional Land Use
Strategy.
Background
The draft Branxton Subregional Land Use Strategy (BSLUS) was prepared in consultation
with Singleton and Cessnock Councillors, Singleton and Cessnock Council staff,
representatives of the community and other key stakeholders such as relevant government
agencies.
The draft BSLUS has been developed as a strategic planning tool for Singleton and
Cessnock Councils in addressing cross border issues associated with land use and
development. Further, the strategy is intended to be used by both Councils and the
development community in proposing, assessing and determining planning proposals and
development applications.
The study area for the draft BSLUS straddles the boundary of Singleton and Cessnock
Local Government Areas. Centrally within the study area, and located wholly within the
Cessnock Local Government Area, is the existing urban area and town centre of Branxton
/ East Branxton. The town centre directly adjoins the Singleton Local Government Area
providing community and recreational infrastructure that services the broader community
of residents within both Singleton and Cessnock Local Government Areas.
The project is a joint venture between Singleton and Cessnock Councils. Funding for
consultancy work associated with the BSLUS has been provided by NSW Department of
Planning and Environment via the Planning Reform Fund program.
A community and government agency representative group, referred to as the Branxton
Precinct Working Group, was establish in the early stages of the project comprising of 5
government agency representatives and 12 community representatives relevant to the
project. The Branxton Precinct Working Group provided valuable input into the
development of the draft BSLUS.
98
SINGLETON COUNCIL
The draft BSLUS has three key components:

1 The Land Use Strategy:
- Identifies the supply and demand for housing and employment development
within the Branxton subregion;
- Identifies high level opportunities and constraints for development within the
Branxton Subregion; and
- Provides a strategy for housing and employment development to 2041.
2 The Structure Plan:
- Provides a set of objectives and principles to be used in proposing,
assessing and determining planning proposals and development applications
within the Branxton Subregion;
- Reinforces settlement pattern hierarchies identified in the Lower Hunter
Regional Strategy; and
- Provides a land release program identifying the supply and release of land
over identified periods to 2041.
3 The Branxton Town Centre Masterplan:
- Reinforces the vision for the Branxton Town Centre provided by the Land
Use Strategy and Structure Plan;
- Provides fine grained planning and design guidelines for the Branxton Town
Centre that will be used in developing a precinct specific Development
Control Plan and Public Domain Plan; and
- Identifies costs associated with public domain infrastructure improvements
that may be used in the development of a cross border Section 94
Contributions Plan.
Exhibition of the draft BSLUS was held for a period of six weeks, commencing 27 January
2016 and concluding 9 March 2016.
Council was briefed on the exhibition and finalisation of the draft BSLUS on 2 May 2016.
Chronology
DATE
7 August 2014
10 December
2014
14 July 2015
15 July 2015
23 July 2015
BRIEF DETAILS
Initial Branxton Precinct Working Group Meeting seeking
feedback into consultation brief and scope of works.
Council resolved to accept a Tender from City Plan Strategy and
Development Pty Ltd to develop a strategic land use plan for the
Branxton Subregion (Branxton Subregional Land Use Strategy or
BSLUS).
Council staff workshop to develop the draft Strategy, Structure
Plan and Masterplan.
Councillor briefing and workshop to further develop the draft
Strategy, Structure Plan and Masterplan.
Branxton Precinct Working Group workshop to develop the draft
Strategy, Structure Plan and Masterplan.
99
SINGLETON COUNCIL
12 November
2015
21 December
2015
27 January 2016
to 9 March 2016
23 February
2016
2 May 2016
4 May 2016
Branxton Precinct Working Group Meeting. City Plan presented

draft BSLUS in response to the July 2015 workshop and to seek
further comment on the draft.
Council resolved to exhibit the draft BSLUS at its ordinary
December council meeting (report provided as Attachment 1
under separate cover).
Draft BSLUS placed on public exhibition.
Two community drop-in sessions held, one at Greta and one at
Branxton.
Councillor briefing on comments received during public exhibition
and consequent changes to draft BSLUS.
Meeting with Branxton Greta Business Chamber to discuss its
submission to the public exhibition.

The draft BSLUS provides the strategic direction for land use and development within the
Branxton Subregion, including the road network and open space, recreation and
community facilities.
The draft BSLUS aligns with the Singleton Community Strategic Plan as follows:
Our Community
Strengthens sense of identity and place for the Branxton Subregion;
Promotes services and facilities that meet the needs of the community.
Our Places
Provides for planned, sustainable, accessible and affordable communities;
Promotes and values its heritage;
Provides for vibrant places and spaces;
Promotes better utilisation of existing open space;
Provides for connectivity and improved road network;
Improves attractiveness for locals and visitors;
Plans for a sustainable and safe community;
Promotes revitalisation of community spaces and places;
Plans considering past, present and a sustainable future;
Promotes village living and lifestyle.
Our Environment
Promotes protection and enhancement of natural and built environments;
Promotes sustainable future actions;
Promotes collaboration to protect and enhance our environment.
Our Community Leadership
Promotes creation of spaces and linkages to keep the community connected;
Involves and consults with the community for effective decision making;
Responds to the changing needs of our community.
100
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Other Plans
Other strategic documents linked to the draft BSLUS include:
Cessnock City Wide Settlement Strategy 2010;
Singleton Land Use Strategy 2008;
Branxton Urban Design Framework;
Cessnock City Recreation and Open Space Strategic Plan;
Cessnock City Council Skate and BMX Facilities Needs Analysis;
Branxton Town Centre Upgrade Concept Masterplan; and
Miller Park Masterplan.
The Cessnock City Wide Settlement Strategy 2010 and the Singleton Land Use Strategy
2008 provide the overarching strategic framework for each Council for the Branxton
subregional. The BSLUS provides further detail specific to the Branxton Subregion that is
informed by, and builds upon, the Cessnock Settlement Strategy and Singleton Land Use
Strategy.
Development of the draft BSLUS in conjunction with Cessnock City Council is Action
2.5.2.1 of the Operational Plan. It is scheduled to be completed by 30 June 2016.
Council will be required to consider the BSLUS in the assessment of planning proposals
(which are located within the Study Area) in accordance with Part 3 of the Environmental
Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Funding of $154,000 (incl. GST) has been awarded by the Department of Planning and
Environment NSW to Cessnock City Council and Singleton Council towards the Branxton
Subregional Land Use Strategy consultancy services. The project is being directed by the
Project Control Group, which consists of a staff representative from Singleton and
Cessnock Councils and the Department of Planning & Environment. Project management
and administration of the contract is being executed by Cessnock City Council. Although
no financial contribution have been provided by the Councils, contributions in kind have
been provided by staff resources allocated to participate in the Project Control Group and
administering the contract.
The BSLUS is a joint project between Singleton Council and Cessnock City Council that is
funded by the Department of Planning and Environment. Consequently, strong
representation from Singleton Council, Cessnock City Council and the Department of
Planning and Environment has been provided under the auspice of the Project Control
Group.
101
SINGLETON COUNCIL
The Branxton Precinct Working Group was consulted on three occasions as follows:
1. 7 August 2014 to seek input into drafting the scope of works for the project;
2. 13 August 2015 to seek input into drafting the BSLUS; and
3. 12 November 2015 to seek input into the draft BSLUS to date, and its exhibition,
including where and when would be the best time to hold drop-in-sessions for the
community during the public exhibition.
Results from a community survey of land owners and occupiers of the Branxton Subregion
were used to inform decisions made in drafting the BSLUS. The survey was undertaken in
April 2015. Results are provided on the Councils websites.
Councillors were provided with a workshop/briefing session on 15 July 2015. Cessnock
Councillors have also been briefed on the draft BSLUS. The briefing included an overview
of the Strategy recommendations for future growth management.
The officers from the following internal groups were consulted via a workshop held on 14
July 2015:
Planning and Sustainable Environment Group;
Parks and Facilities Group;
Infrastructure and Strategy Group; and
Community and Cultural Services Group.
The following external agencies were consulted:
Cessnock City Council (joint project partner);
NSW Department of Planning and Environment;
NSW Department of Industry, Resources and Energy;
NSW Department of Education and Communities;
Hunter Water Corporation,
Roads and Maritime Services;
Hunter Local Land Services; and
NSW Rural Fire Service.
Webpages specific to the BSLUS project have been created on both the Singleton and
Cessnock City Councils websites to provide effective communication with the
community. These webpages have been updated by the respective Councils as the
project has progressed.
During the six week public exhibition period (from 27 January to 9 March 2016), Singleton
and Cessnock Councils received a total of twenty-seven (27) written submissions from
thirty (30) submitters (refer Attachments 3-5 under separate cover). Also, 15 Facebook
posts were made collectively between Singleton and Cessnock Councils (5 by Singleton
and10 by Cessnock) reaching an audience of 9,168 people.
Singleton Council sent 633 letters and Cessnock City Council sent 3,570 letters to owners
and occupiers of land within the BSLUS Study Area. During the six (6) week exhibition
period, Singleton Councils BSLUS webpage received 421 hits and Cessnock City
Councils webpage received 4,259 hits.
102
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Collectively, Singleton and Cessnock Councils received the following response to the
exhibition via social media:
104 Facebook interactions (likes, comments or shares) and 373 clicks on hyperlinks to
the BSLUS webpage;
226 visits to the interactive mapping where 10 comments were provided generating 20
likes.
During the public exhibition period, two (2) community drop-in sessions were held, one at
Greta, the other at Branxton. A total of 20 people attended.
Issues and comments raised in submissions (refer Attachments 3-5 under separate
cover) typically related to either the Strategy/Structure Plan component or the Masterplan
component of the draft BSLUS. The following table illustrates the focus of the issues and
comments raised:
Total
No. of submitters
No. change requests
Further information request
Site specific Expression of
Interest
Factual / Mapping anomaly
Issue
Masterplan
30
154
36
25
Strategy &
Structure Plan
19
77
16
25
16
77
13
23
3
54
11
77
20
-
A summary of the issues raised in submissions and Council responses to those issues is
provided as Attachment 2 under separate cover.
Notably, feedback received from a community drop-in session stated:
I feel really comfortable with the process that is the ongoing masterplan for
Branxton. I feel that Council representatives and community representatives have
the town and its people at heart. I will have my say in due course and hope that
other people are as confident of the future design of Branxton as I am.
Amendments to the draft BSLUS (Strategy and Masterplan) consequent to submissions
received during its public exhibition have been made and the final drafts provided as
Attachment 6-7 under separate cover. For purposes of clarity and convenience, changes
to the publicly exhibited draft BSLUS have been highlighted.
Environmental constraints have been mapped and taken into consideration in the
preparation of the BSLUS.
Risk Implications
The BSLUS will be used in managing development growth within the Branxton
Subregion. Further, the BSLUS will be used in developing a cross border section 94
103
SINGLETON COUNCIL
contributions plan with Cessnock City Council. The risk in Council resolving not to finalise
the Draft Strategy includes development growth within the Subregion not being managed,
and the loss of opportunity in developing a cross border section 94 contributions plan that
would assist in funding the proposed Branxton Town Centre public domain improvements.
Options
Options available to Council include the following:
1. Adopt the finalised draft BSLUS as provided at Attachments 6-7 under separate
cover. This is the preferred option;
2. Adopt the draft BSLUS as it was placed on public exhibition. This is not the preferred
option;
3. Not adopt the draft Branxton Subregional Land Use Strategy. This is not the preferred
option.
Conclusions
The draft BSLUS has been prepared to support future orderly development of the
Branxton Subregion, and address cross border issues in the area associated with land use
and development.
The draft BSLUS has been prepared in consultation with relevant stakeholders and an
extensive exhibition was provided from late January to early March this year. The draft
has been finalised taking into account issues raised from the public consultation.
It is recommended that Council adopt the finalised BSLUS as provided at Attachments 67 under separate cover.
Mark Ihlein
Director Planning & Sustainable Environment Group
Attachments
AT-1
Attachment 1 - Report to Council
AT-2
Attachment 2 - Summary of Agency and Public Submissions
AT-3
Agency and Public Submissions - Part 1
AT-4
AT-5
AT-6
Attachment 6 - Land Use Strategy and Structure Plan - rev 5

- markup
Attachment 7 - Town Centre Masterplan - rev 4 - markup
AT-7
104
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
SINGLETON COUNCIL
25.
Adoption of the 2016/17 Operational Plan and Budget

Author: Hamid Arain; Bruce Devonport
FILE: 16/0210
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is for Council to adopt the draft 2016/17 Operational Plan and
Budget.
RECOMMENDED that:
1.
In accordance with Sections 404 and 405 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council
adopt the Draft 2016/17 Operational Plan and Budget;
2.
Council make the following General Rates for the 2016/17 year
Rate Type
Category
Sub-Category
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Ordinary
Residential
Residential
Residential
Residential
Business
Business
Business
Business
Farmland
Mining
Mining
Singleton
Rural Residential
Village
Ordinary
Singleton
Mount Thorley
Village
Ordinary
Ordinary
Coal
Coal Rights
Ad Valorem
Amount Cents in
$
0.4359
0.4141
0.3487
0.2267
0.7436
0.7436
0.7436
0.2974
0.2668
2.7067
0.5168
Base/Min Amount
$
% of
Total
Rate
$225.14
26.18%
$216.09
18.14%
$216.09
37.47%
$233.22
27.39%
$249.38
10.73%
$249.38
8.53%
$249.38
22.97%
$249.38
21.06%
$204.16
12.27%
Total
Yield
3.
Rate Yield
$000
4,732
1,069
189
1,744
1,227
248
33
304
1,586
6,127
0
17,259
Council make the following Domestic Waste Management Services Charges for
the 2016/17 year
DWM Urban / Villages
Occupied Service (240L Waste and 240L Recycling bins)
Occupied Service (240L Waste and 360L Recycling bins)
Occupied Service (360L Waste weekly and 360L Recycling F/N)
Additional weekly Service (240L Waste bin)
Additional fortnightly Service (240L Recycling bin)
Unoccupied minimum
$417.00 pa
$611.00 pa
$715.00 pa
$230.00 pa
$231.50 pa
$250.00 pa
$ 30.00 pa
DWM Rural
Fortnightly Service (240L Waste and 240L Recycling bins)
Fortnightly Service (240L Waste and 360L Recycling bins)
Additional fortnightly Service (360L Waste and 360L Recycling bins)
Additional fortnightly Service (240L Waste bin)
$406.50 pa
$596.50 pa
$670.50 pa
$221.50 pa
$231.50 pa
$250.00 pa
Urban Commercial
Weekly 240 litre waste and fortnightly recycling 240-litre bins
Weekly 360 litre waste and fortnightly recycling 360-litre bins
$450.00 pa
$808.50 pa
105
SINGLETON COUNCIL
4.
Additional weekly waste 240-litre bin

Additional fortnightly Service (240L Recycling bins)
Additional fortnightly Service (360L Recycling bins)
$255.00 pa
$241.50 pa
$280.00 pa
Rural Commercial
Fortnightly waste and fortnightly recycling 240-litre bins
Fortnightly waste and fortnightly recycling 360-litre bins
Additional fortnightly waste 240-litre bin
$460.85 pa
$770.95 pa
$267.65 pa
$241.50 pa
$280.00 pa
Council make the following Stormwater Management Service Charges for the
2016/17 year
For land categorised as residential:
For residential strata lots:
For land categorised as business:
5.
$25.00
$12.50
$25.00, plus an additional $25.00 for each
350 square metres or part of 350 square
metres by which the area of the parcel of
land exceeds 350 square metres up to a
maximum charge of $100.00.
Make the following Singleton Water Supply Charges for the 2016/17 year
Type
Category
Base Charge
Singleton Water Access Charge

Charge
20 mm Service
Residential
25 mm Service
32 mm Service
40 mm Service
50 mm Service
Above Obanvale
$135.50
$135.50
$220.00
$373.40
$594.85
$938.90
$29.60
Singleton Water Access Charge

Charge Non
20 mm Service
Residential
25 mm Service
32 mm Service
40 mm Service
50 mm Service
65 mm Service
80 mm Service
100 mm Service
150 mm Service
$135.50
$135.50
$219.95
$373.40
$594.85
$938.90
$1,599.10
$2,432.70
$3,799.20
$8,549.55
6.
Usage Charge
$ per Kilolitre
Up to
450KL/Above
450KL
1.55/2.65
1.55/2.65
1.55/2.65
1.55/2.65
1.55/2.65
1.55/2.65
1.55/2.65
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
1.60/1.60
Council make the following Mount Thorley Water Supply Charges for the 2016/17
year
Type
Category
Base Charge
106
Usage Charge
$ per Kilolitre
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Mount Thorley
Water Charge
7.
Access Charge
20 mm Service
25 mm Service
32 mm Service
40 mm Service
50 mm Service
65 mm Service
80 mm Service
100 mm Service
150 mm service
$455.00
$455.00
$540.30
$693.75
$915.20
$1,260.25
$1,932.55
$2,755.80
$4,135.00
$8,560.90
Council make the following Jerrys Plains Water Supply Charges for the 2016/17
year
Type
Category
Base Charge
Jerrys Plains
Access Charge
Water Charge 20 mm Service
Residential
50 mm service
Not Connected
$68.55
$135.50
$939.90
$68.55
Jerrys Plains
Access Charge
Non Residential 50 mm service
Not Connected
$68.55
$135.50
$939.90
$68.55
8.
Usage Charge
$ per Kilolitre
Up to
450KL/Above
450KL
1.90/2.60
1.90/2.60
1.90/2.60
2.60/2.60
2.60/2.60
2.60/2.60
Council make the following Broke Water Supply Charges for the 2016/17 year
Type
Category
Base Charge
Broke
Access Charge
Residential
32 mm service
Not Connected
$135.50
$135.50
$373.40
$135.50
Broke Water
Charge Non
Residential
$135.50
$135.50
$373.40
$135.50
9.
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
Access Charge
20 mm Service
32 mm service
Not Connected
Usage Charge
$ per Kilolitre
Up to
450KL/Above
450KL
2.05/2.60
2.05/2.60
2.05/2.60
2.60/2.60
2.60/2.60
2.60/2.60
Council make the following Singleton Sewerage Scheme Charges for the
2016/17 year
Type
Residential Customers
Category
Sewerage Base Charge
107
Amount
$510.00
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Non Residential Customers
Miscellaneous Charges
Annual Sewerage Access

Charge
Sewerage access charge for a
20mm diameter water supply
connection
Sewer Usage Charge
$510.00
Pump Maintenance Charge
$220.50
Annual Liquid Trade Waste

Fee
Trade Waste Usage Charge kl
$510.00
$1.70
$94.50
$1.60
10. Council make the following On Site Sewage Management Charge (OSSM) for
the 2016/17 year
Type
On Site Sewage
Management (OSSM)
Category
Annual Charge
Amount
$63.85
11. In accordance with Part 4 Clause 36 of the Local Land Services Regulation,
2014, as advised by the Hunter Local Land Services, levy in 2016/17 a rate of
0.0118 (zero point zero one one eight) of a cent in the dollar on the current Land
Value of the land within the Council area. By virtue of the provisions of Part 4
Clause 36, of the Local Land Services Regulation, 2014, Council is authorised,
empowered and required to levy the said Catchment contribution rate in respect
of the lands;
12. In accordance with Section 566 of the Local Government Act 1993, that if rates
and charges are unpaid at the due date, the amount shall be increased by a sum
calculated at eight per cent (8.0%) per annum, simple interest, calculated daily
for the year commencing 1 July 2016;
13. The 2016/17 Fees and Charges be adopted;
14. The draft Singleton Council Long Term Financial Plan June 2016 be adopted.
15. The expenditure for the financial year commencing 1 July 2016 as detailed in the
2016/17 Budget and that funds voted to meet expenditure be approved in
accordance with Clause 211 of the Local Government (General) Regulation
2005;
16. The Office of Local Government be advised of Councils adoption of the
Operational Plan 2016/17 within 28 days of adoption by Council.
108
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Background
The public exhibition of Councils draft 2016/17 Operational Plan, shown as Attachment 1,
along with the Fees and Charges Schedule, shown as Attachment 2, concluded on
Monday 23 May 2016, in accordance with the Council resolution of 18 April 2016. The
draft documents were placed on public exhibition for no less than 28 days and were
available for viewing at the Council Administration Centre, Singleton Library and on-line at
www.singleton.nsw.gov.au.
The Operational Plan must be adopted by 30 June each year, after being publicly
exhibited for at least 28 days and following consideration of any submissions received.
The 2016/17 Operational Plan identifies the specific actions to be completed in the new
financial year under each of the four Delivery Program pillars outlined in the Community
Strategic Plan Our Place; A Blueprint 2013. It also contains Councils Revenue Policy
which details the rates, fees and charges that will apply during the new financial year.
The draft Operational Plan, as adopted by Council on 18 April 2016, provided for two
General Rating Structures. The first structure reflected Council's 2016/17 rate yield being
increased by 1.80% in line with the Office of Local Governments rate pegging limit as
determined by Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART). The second
structure incorporates Councils Application to IPART an additional 7.95% Special Rate
Variation. The 2016/17 increase will be the first of four 9.75% increases over the period
from 2016/17 to 2019/20. The additional income generated from the special rate variation
is for the purpose of funding capital expenditure. This Special Rate Variation is consistent
with Councils Council Improvement Plan submitted for the Fit for the Future (FFTF)
assessment conducted in 2015 and Councils resolution from the meeting held 21
December 2015.
On 17 May 2016, IPART advised that it had approved Councils Special Rate Variation
Application. A copy of IPARTs Determination can be viewed at
http://www.ipart.nsw.gov.au/files/sharedassets/website/shared_files/local_government__special_variations_-_applications_for_special_variations_-_determinations_-_201617/lg_determination_-_singleton_councils_application_for_a_special_variation_for_201617_-_may_2016.pdf. The draft Operational Plan has been amended to reflect the Special
Rate Variation Rating Structure only. Councils Long Term Financial Plan June 2016
has been amended to reflect the Special Rate Variation approval (Attachment 3).
Council received one submission on the draft 2016/17 Operational Plan and Budget during
the public exhibition period. The submitter requested that the Operational Plan include an
Action to improve the animal shelter building. Council is aware that the current building is
inadequate and is committed to continuing to look at options to make improvements to the
management of companion animals in the LGA. Accordingly, Action number 2.2.2.6 has
been added to the Operational Plan addressing this issue.
Subsequent, to the Operational Plan being placed on Public Exhibition some minor
amendments to the plan have been instigated by managers. These have been prompted
by updated knowledge on the progress of projects, the service priorities of the new
General Manager and changes in work responsibilities. New Actions for Community
Strategy 4.5 Lead, govern and regulate transparently, equitably and ethically in the areas
109
SINGLETON COUNCIL
of Integrated Risk Management and Organisational Development are the notable

additions.
The 2016/17 Operational Plan establishes the actions Council will undertake in the new
financial year, which establishes Councils Revenue Policy for the year ahead.
The process of preparing the Operational Plan, needs to be carried out in accordance with
Section 405 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act).
Section 535 of the Act requires Council to make (adopt) its rates and charges each year.
Clause 211 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires Council to vote
the funds necessary to meet the expenditure included in the estimates for 2016/17.
Council has complied with all requirements specified under the relevant legislation.
The financial implications of this report are detailed in the 2016/17 Operational Plan, the
associated draft Budget provides for a balanced cash Budget. Total expenditure is
anticipated to be $82.53 million which includes $33.66 million in capital expenditure.
The 2016/17 Operational Plan provides details on what Council plans to achieve during
the coming year to progress the communitys long term objectives. The Operational Plan
details how Councils planned activities will be achieved through the allocation of available
resources and funding. It is supported by information contained in the four year Delivery
Program and the Resourcing Strategy which incorporates the Councils Long Term
Financial, Asset Management and Workforce Plans.
Fees and Charges
Councils Operational Plan provides a full list of Councils proposed Fees and Charges for
the 2016/17 Financial Year.
Whilst the draft fees and charges were on public display, Council staff have also reviewed
and advised of the following fee adjustments to be made to the 2016/17 Fees and Charges
Schedule. The waste disposal fees for Councils Waste Management Facility have been
reduced by $10 per tonne as it is expected that waste levy charges will increase by CPI
only. Waste charges have also been made more flexible for large volumes of general
waste with charges to be by quotation for large volumes, of more than 2 tonnes in a single
load or more than 6 tonnes per week by an individual business.
This change reflects the reduced costs of disposal for larger amounts and passes on
savings to customers for re-useable materials such as soils required for landfill operations.
110
SINGLETON COUNCIL

Fee
Draft Fee
Revised Fee
Municipal general mixed waste - per tonne
$333.40
$323.40
Municipal garden or vegetation waste (uncontaminated)
$239.55
$229.55
per tonne
Municipal garden or vegetation waste (contaminated)
$333.40
$323.40
per tonne
Bricks and concrete per tonne
$333.40
$323.40
C & I General Waste per tonne
$352.85
$342.85
C & I Wood, Trees or Timber (uncontaminated) per
$270.40
$260.40
tonne
C & I Wood, Trees or Timber (contaminated) per tonne
$352.85
$342.85
C & D General Waste per tonne
$352.85
$342.85
C & D Wood, Trees or Timber (uncontaminated) per
$270.40
$260.40
tonne
C & D Wood, Trees or Timber (contaminated) per tonne
$352.85
$342.85
C & D Clean bricks and concrete per tonne
$100.45
$90.45
Waste disposal charges by quote for large volumes, of more than 2 tonnes in a single load or
more than 6 tonnes per week by an individual business.
As detailed previously Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 18 April 2016 considered
the draft 2016/17 Operational Plan and Budget. A resolution to publicly exhibit the
Operational Plan was made, in which the documents were made available at Councils
Administration Centre, Singleton Library and online at Councils webpage for at least 28
days.
The draft Operational Plan addresses environmental matters and due consideration is
given to the environment as part of Councils commitment to sustainability.
Risk Implications
If Council does not make the rates and charges as required under the Local Government
Act 1993, Council may be exposing itself to the possibility of a legal challenge on the
validity of any rates and charges levied in 2016/17.
Options
Council has the following options;
a) Adopt the recommendations within the report without change. This is the preferred
option as council staff have carefully complied with various legislative requirements
during the development and publication of the 2016/17 Operational Plan and Budget.
b) Adopt the recommendations within the report with changes. This is not the preferred
option as certain changes may have financial and legislative implications.
c) Not adopt the recommendations within the report. This is not the preferred option the
as there will be financial and legislative implications for Council in the upcoming year.
111
SINGLETON COUNCIL

Conclusions
The 2016/17 Operational Plan and Budget has presented council staff with a significant
challenge to maintain service levels within current fiscal constraints. However, the
proposed Operational Plan and Budget maintain current levels of service and will continue
to work toward the indicators outlined in the Community Strategic Plan.
Mark Ihlein
Anthony Egan
Attachments
AT-1
Operational Plan 2016/17
AT-2
Draft 2016 - 2017 Fees and Charges Schedule
AT-3
Draft Long Term Financial Plan - June 2016
112
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
Attachment Under
Separate Cover
SINGLETON COUNCIL
26.
Request to Remove Section 88b Restriction as to User

Author: Joshua Real
FILE: 16/0003
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to consider a request to remove a restriction on the title of Lot
21 DP 1014307, United Service Station on the corner New England Highway and Golden
Highway shown on the aerial photograph at Attachment 1.
RECOMMENDED that Council endorse the removal of Item No. 2 from Folio Identifier
21/1014307.
Background
Singleton Council is in receipt of a letter (Refer to Attachment 2) from Robert Napoli & Co
Solicitors on behalf of their client Mamineli Pty Limited in relation to the removal of a
restriction in section 88b Instrument DP 806861 restricting the vehicular access to their
site known as Lot 21 DP 1014307.
An 88b Instrument is a document issued under section 88b of the Conveyancing Act 1919
(NSW) that sets out the terms of any easements, restrictions or positive covenants in
relation to land use.
Councils investigations in relation to the site revealed the following:
DA450/1999 was approved by Council on 17/12/1999 for the construction of a
service station on Lot 21 DP 1014307
SA2/2000 was approved by Council for the subdivision of Lot 2 DP 80681 into 2 lots
known as Lot 21 and Lot 22 DP 1014307.
The Folio Identifier for Lot 21 (Item No.2 of Folio Identifier 21/1014307) includes the
restriction on the use of land outlined in DP806861.
Item No.2 refers to the following 88b Restriction in instrument DP 806861 applied to
the lot:
(a) No vehicle shall have access from Lot 2 of the abovementioned plan from
or to the New England Highway.
(b) No vehicle shall have access from Lots 1 or 2 of the abovementioned
plan from or to Major Mitchells Road other than by means of the Right of
Carriageway within Lot 2 of the abovementioned plan and the common
access crossing at Lot 2 of the abovementioned plan.
Development Consent DA450/1999 included an approval for vehicular access to the
service station from and to the New England Highway by way of an access road
endorsed by the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority.
The approved vehicular access contradicts the 88b Instrument that was current at
the time of the approval.
The letter received from Robert Napoli & Co Solicitors states that in regards to the removal
of restriction No.2 from Folio Identifier 21/1014307:
113
SINGLETON COUNCIL
This has already occurred by operation of law pursuant to section 28 of the

Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 in conjunction with paragraph 1.9A
of Part 1 of the Singleton Local Environmental Plan.
Section 28 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act enables environmental
planning instruments to override restrictive covenants where development is to be carried
out in accordance with Part 4 of the Act.
Paragraph 1.9A of Part 1 of the Singleton Local Environmental Plan refers to the current
Local Environmental Plan, however at the time of approval of DA450/1999 the Singleton
Local Environmental Plan 1996 (SLEP 1996) was in operation.
Clause 6(1) of SLEP 1996 relates to the effect of covenants in relation to the LEP and
states the following:
1) If any agreement, covenant or similar instrument prohibits a land use allowed by
this plan, then it shall not apply to that land use (to the extent necessary to allow
that land use).
The site Lot 21 DP 1014307 was zoned 4(B) Heavy Industrial Zone under SLEP 1996 and
the construction of a service station was permissible with development consent at the time
of the approval of DA450/1999.
Clause 6 of SLEP 1996 applies where a land use is prohibited by any agreement,
covenant or similar instrument. In regards to restriction of vehicular access to the site,
while not an absolute prohibition of the land use, it would be considered a qualified
prohibition and therefore the local planning laws overrode the operation of the 88b at the
time of approval.
The 88b instrument DP 806861 specifies that Singleton Council is able to release, vary or
modify restrictions referred to in No.4 in the 88b Instrument. As Singleton Council
approved the legal access off and to New England Highway through development consent
DA450/1999 it is recommended that Singleton Council allows the release of Item 2 in the
Second Schedule of Certificate of Title Folio identifier 21/1014307.
Removal of the restriction aligns with the following outcome:
Our Places
Roads & Infrastructure meets community needs
No Impact.
No Impact.
114
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Environmental consideration was given as part of Councils original determination of the
development application.
Risk Implications
Removal of the restriction will confirm the legality of the access arrangements from the
New England Highway. The physical access is governed by the Roads and Maritime
Services as the roads authority.
Options
Councils options are:
1. Resolve to remove Item No. 2 on Folio Identifier 21/1014307; or
2. Resolve to retain Item No. 2 on Folio Identifier 21/1014307.
Option one is recommended
Conclusions
The removal of Item No. 2 Restriction on the use of the land from Folio Identifier
21/1014307 is recommended on the basis that the Council approved DA450/1999 service
station with access to and from New England Highway which makes the restriction
redundant.
Mark Ihlein
Attachments
AT-1
Aerial Map of Robert Napoli Service Station at Lot 21 & 22
DP 1014307
AT-2
Email request from Robert Napoli & Co to Council - Removal
of restrictions on use of land - 3550 New England Highway Lot 21 - 22 DP 1014307
115
Attachment 1
Aerial Map of Robert Napoli Service Station at Lot 21 & 22 DP 1014307
116
Attachment 2
Email request from Robert Napoli & Co to Council - Removal of

restrictions on use of land - 3550 New England Highway - Lot 21 - 22 DP
1014307
117
Attachment 2

1014307
118
Attachment 2

1014307
119
Attachment 2

1014307
120
Attachment 2

1014307
121
Attachment 2

1014307
122
Attachment 2

1014307
123
Attachment 2

1014307
124
Attachment 2

1014307
125
Attachment 2

1014307
126
Attachment 2

1014307
127
Attachment 2

1014307
128
Attachment 2

1014307
129
Attachment 2

1014307
130
Attachment 2

1014307
131
Attachment 2

1014307
132
Attachment 2

1014307
133
Attachment 2

1014307
134
SINGLETON COUNCIL
27.
Association of Mining Related Councils - Proposed MoU

for Negotiating Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPAs)
Author: Mark Ihlein
FILE: 16/0233
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is seek Councils endorsement of a proposed Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) to enable further discussions between the association of Mining
Related Councils and the NSW Minerals Council on a potential framework for the
negotiation of Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPA) by mining proponents and local
government.
The MOU does not bind any party to agree to a particular framework; rather it seeks to
enable the parties to work collaboratively over the next 9 months to develop an appropriate
tool. Individual councils will not be bound by any VPA tool which may be ultimately agreed
upon by the parties. As a member of the Association Council should consider supporting
the Association in by endorsing their endeavours as set out under the MOU.
RECOMMENDED that Council endorses the actions of the Association of Mining Related
Councils in entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with the NSW Minerals Council
to allow further negotiations to potentially develop a framework for the negotiation of
Voluntary Planning Agreements by mining proponents and local government.
Background
The following is the Association of Mining Related Councils resolution and background
relating to a request for Singleton Council to endorse the actions of the Association in
entering into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the NSW Minerals Council to
allow further negotiations to potentially develop a framework for the negotiation of
Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPA) by mining proponents and local government.
Resolution Passed at Association of Mining Related Councils Meeting Held 13th
May 2016-- Memorandum of Understanding with NSW Minerals Council and
Timeline for Completion of Voluntary Planning Agreements.
Moved Councillor John Martin, Singleton Council Seconded Councillor Chris Connor,
Wollongong City Council
29/2016 The member councils be asked to advise the Association by no later than 22nd
July 2016 of their acceptance or, rejection of these documents.
Carried
In November 2015, The Association resolved to enter discussions with the NSW
Minerals Council to see if there were opportunities to develop a closer working
relationship on behalf of members of both organisations particularly in relation to
Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPAS) and related contribution methodology. VPAS for
135
SINGLETON COUNCIL
some member councils in past years had become expensive and time consuming
matters.
The Association approached the discussions by the appointment in November 2015 of a
small advisory Panel with two Councillors and two General Managers as members. This
Panel has now been increased to three Councillors and two General Managers. All
meetings with the NSW Minerals Council are chaired by an independent Association
member council delegate. The Association in November 2015 also appointed a
consultant to assist the Panel in its negotiations. He is Mr Warwick Giblin, Managing
Director, OZ Environmental Pty Ltd who has considerable experience in assisting
Councils with their VPA negotiations with mining companies. The consultancy is being
paid for from the Associations cash reserves built up over past years and set aside for
projects such as the VPA negotiations.
Between November 2015 and May 2016, the Panel has been able to debate and
negotiate a draft Memorandum of Understanding with the NSW Minerals Council to a
point where the Association has resolved it is ready for signing by both organisations.
Another outcome has been the Panels successful negotiations with the NSW Minerals
Council of a Time Line document which sets out an acceptable framework and
methodology for the negotiation of a VPA. The Association has also resolved to accept
this document as a fair and reasonable solution to past problems with negotiations on
this important local issue.
The negotiation process with the NSW Minerals Council is ongoing for the time being,
with the need for an acceptable model for contributions to local social and physical
infrastructure particularly roads. This matter will take some time. In the meantime, The
Association wishes to gain member Councils support to sign the Memorandum of
Understanding and approval of the time line. The Association by resolving to accept both
documents believes the agreements contained therein are in the best interests of
member councils and the adopted processes will assist with future VPA negotiations.
As per a resolution at the recent meeting of the Association (13th May 2016) it is the
intention of the Association to authorise the Chairperson to sign the Memorandum of
understanding if there is positive agreement in returned responses (in writing) by a
majority of member councils (50% plus one).
The Association trusts your Council will be supportive of the actions taken so far to assist
member councils with this important matter.
The draft MoU is appended at Attachment 1 and the Time Line document is appended at
Attachment 2.
Report
Singleton Councils Approach
Singleton Council has a successful track record in negotiating VPAs with mining project
proponents. This success is largely due to the positive relationships that Council has with
its local mining operations; the respect they have for the community in which they operate
and their realistic understanding of mining impacts.
136
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Negotiations have been focused on contributions that meet the following criteria:
The contribution would provide a broad public benefit;
The contribution would either have a sustainable assets management benefit; or
Enable Council to leverage other funds to provide community facilities or assist with
Councils assets maintenance.
Generally VPAs include contributions for the following main elements:
Local community projects

Projects in the Singleton Council Local Government Area
Annual contributions to local community initiatives
Economic development initiatives.
The quantum of a VPA is negotiated around a monetary value representing approximately

1% of capital investment.
Proposed MoU
The MoU sets out the following;
Voluntary Planning Agreement Negotiation Framework
The Parties agree to:
(a) work collaboratively and constructively to establish an agreed framework for the
negotiation of VPAs for Mining Development1 in NSW;
(b) seek to develop a framework which is mutually beneficial to, and better addresses
the interests of the Parties' members;
(c) approach and undertake negotiations in good faith;
(d) establish respective VPA working groups that:
(i) shall meet on a regular basis;
(ii) will be adequately resourced; and
authorise the respective secretariats to take steps to progress the negotiations out of
session.
Methodology to calculate demands on local infrastructure
The Parties agree to work cooperatively together over the next 9 months to develop a
tool that can be used by the Parties to assess the potential impact of a Mining
Development on local government infrastructure and to calculate an appropriate
contribution to be offered by the proponent to offset the potential impacts
Methodology for calculating road upgrade and maintenance contributions
The Parties agree to work cooperatively together over the next 9 months to develop a
tool that can be used by the Parties to:
(a) assess the likely impact of a Mining Development on council roads within a local
government area and to identify which roads will require upgrading and
maintenance;
(b) determine the standard to which a road should be upgraded and maintained;
137
SINGLETON COUNCIL
(c)
develop a formula that can be used to calculate the cost of any necessary road
upgrades and maintenance, using agreed industry guidelines; and
(d) use the above information to apportion the cost of the necessary road upgrades
and maintenance to a particular Mining Development.
The MoU notes that;
Nothing in the MoU obliges either Party to enter a final agreement regarding a
framework for VPA negotiations nor about any of the compenent parts (e.g. economic
impacts calculator and road contribution calculator) of the framework.
Whilst it is suggested that Singleton Council does not need to be encumbered by a formal
VPA negotiation process, it is understandable that other member Councils may not be as
experienced or have successfully negotiated VPAs and would benefit from such a
framework if they ultimately chose to formally participate.
Time Line Document
This document (refer to Attachment 2) sets out a negotiation process together with a
timeframe. It provides for that in event some timeframes are not met and a negotiation
proves unsuccessful, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) may
arbitrate. While the details of this are unclear, it is assumed that this aspect of the project
will become clearer as the parties work together over the next nine months.
There are aspects of this time line and process which are inconsistent with Singleton
Councils dealings in negotiating VPAs. Nevertheless as previously indicated some
member Councils may benefit from this body of work.
Our Community Leadership
Councils endorsement of the Association of Mining Related Councils endeavors to
assist its constituent members in relation to VPA negotiations demonstrates a
broader leadership responsibility on Singleton Councils part to support other
organisations.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
There are no direct financial implications.
138
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Risk Implications
There are no risks identified.
Options
1. Council support the Association of Mining Related Councils in entering into a
Memorandum of Understanding with the NSW Minerals Council to allow further
negotiations to potentially develop a framework for the negotiation of Voluntary
Planning Agreements by mining proponents and local government.
2. Council not support the Association its endeavors.
Conclusions
Singleton Council has been requested to endorse a proposed Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) to enable further discussions between the association of Mining
Related Councils and the NSW Minerals Council on a potential framework for the
negotiation of Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPA) by mining proponents and local
government.
The MOU does not bind any party to agree to a particular framework; rather it seeks to
enable the parties to work collaboratively over the next 9 months to develop an appropriate
tool. Individual councils will not be bound by any VPA tool which may be ultimately agreed
upon by the parties. As a member of the Association the Council should consider
supporting the Association by endorsing their endeavours as set out under the MOU.
Mark Ihlein
Attachments
AT-1
Memorandum of Understanding - NSW Minerals Council
AT-2
Timeline - NSW Minerals Council
139
Attachment 1
140
Attachment 1
141
Attachment 2
Timeline - NSW Minerals Council
142
SINGLETON COUNCIL
General Manager's Report (Items for Information) - GM22/16
22.
Minutes - Arts Upper Hunter Board Meeting - June September - December 2015
FILE: 14/0811
Executive Summary
Arts Upper Hunter Board General Meetings were held on 4 June 2015, 3 September, 2015
and 3 December, 2015. The minutes are shown as Attachment 1 for Councils
information. The minutes of the March 2016 meeting will be ratified at the June meeting
and forwarded to Council for information. The Executive Director Arts Upper Hunter
apologised for the oversight in not forwarding the 2015 minutes.
FOR COUNCILS INFORMATION
Jason Linnane
General Manager
Attachments
AT-1
Minutes of Meeting - Arts upper Hunter - Board Meetings of
June - September - December - 2015
143
Attachment 1
Minutes of Meeting - Arts upper Hunter - Board Meetings of June September - December - 2015
144
Attachment 1
145
Attachment 1
146
Attachment 1
147
Attachment 1
148
Attachment 1
149
Attachment 1
150
Attachment 1
151
Attachment 1
152
Attachment 1
153
Attachment 1
154
Attachment 1
155
SINGLETON COUNCIL
General Manager's Report (Items for Information) - GM23/16
23.
Minutes - Association of Mining Related Councils 13/05/2016

FILE: 16/0233
Executive Summary
Crs Martin and Diemar-Jenkins attended the ordinary meeting of the Association Mining
Related Councils in Narromine on 13 May 2016. The minutes are shown as Attachment 1
for Councils information.
Jason Linnane
General Manager
Attachments
AT-1
Minutes - Association Mine Related Councils Minutes 13/5/2016
156
Attachment 1
Minutes - Association Mine Related Councils Minutes - 13/5/2016
157
Attachment 1
158
Attachment 1
159
Attachment 1
160
Attachment 1
161
Attachment 1
162
Attachment 1
163
Attachment 1
164
Attachment 1
165
Attachment 1
166
Attachment 1
167
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Corporate Services Report (Items for Information) - DCS50/16
50.
Disclosures by Councillors and Designated Persons April and May 2016

FILE: 15/0382
Executive Summary
In accordance with Section 449 of the Local Government Act, 1993 all new designated
staff members of Council must complete and lodge a Disclosure of Interests form within
three months of commencement.
Returns have been received from the following newly appointed designated staff for the
months of April and May 2016:
Project Engineer
Delivery Coordinator
Acting Manager Community & Cultural Services
Open Space & Facilities Project Officer
Returns are tabled for Councils Information in accordance with Section 450A of the Local
Government Act, 1993. Hard copies will be held by the Governance Coordinator for a
period of 12 months.
Anthony Egan
Attachments
168
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Planning and Sustainable Environment Report (Items for Information) - DP&SE28/16
28.
Minutes - Wambo Coal Community Consultative

Committee (CCC) - 12/04/2016
FILE: 01/0187-2
Executive Summary
The Wambo Coal Community Consultative Committee (CCC) held its meeting on 12 April
2016. The draft minutes of the meeting are shown as Attachment 1 for Councils
information.
Mark Ihlein
Director Planning and Sustainable Environment
Attachments
AT-1
Draft Minutes - Wambo Coal Pty Ltd Community
Consultative Committee (CCC) - 12/04/2016
169
Attachment 1
Draft Minutes - Wambo Coal Pty Ltd Community Consultative Committee

(CCC) - 12/04/2016
170
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 12/04/2016
171
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 12/04/2016
172
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 12/04/2016
173
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 12/04/2016
174
SINGLETON COUNCIL
29.
Minutes - Mount Thorley Warkworth Community

FILE: 03/0283-2
Executive Summary
The Mount Thorley Warkworth Community Consultative Committee (CCC) held its
Ordinary Meeting on 9 November 2015. The Minutes are shown as Attachment 1 for
Councils information.
Mark Ihlein
Attachments
AT-1
Minutes - Mount Thorley Warkworth Community
175
Attachment 1
Minutes - Mount Thorley Warkworth Community Consultative Committee

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
176
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
177
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
178
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
179
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
180
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
181
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
182
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
183
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 09/11/2015
184
SINGLETON COUNCIL
30.
Public Health Act 2010 - Statutory Review Submission

Author: Lucy Packham
FILE: 12/0617
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide information on Councils recent submission on the
Public Health Act 2010 statutory review.
Background
Council received a letter H16/10594 inviting comment by 3 June 2016 on the statutory
review of the Public Health Act 2010 from the NSW Ministry of Health.
Most of the issues raised have operational impacts on Councils Planning & Sustainable
Environment Group. Other departments affected such as Water & Waste and Child Care
Services were consulted through the submission process.
Should the proposed changes take effect, the potential impact on Planning & Sustainable
Environment would be in the additional work load of inspecting private water suppliers.
Council has two of its tourist areas on private water supplies in Broke and Pokolbin.
Currently private water suppliers are self-regulated by submitting a quality assurance
program to NSW Health, however few are complying with their responsibilities.
Proposed changes requiring greater compliance may include transfer of authority to
Council to ensure compliance. A recent audit suggests that there may be at least 15 water
carters and 75 private water suppliers in the Singleton Local Government Area. Council
already inspects a lot of these premises for other reasons such as food safety under the
Food Act 2003 and on-site sewage management under the Local Government Act 1993.
Council does have powers to charge for inspections on a fee for service basis under the
Local Government Act 1993.
Attached is the submission letter that addressed issues within the Public Health Act 2010
which have impacts for Singleton Council.
Mark Ihlein
Attachments
AT-1
Council's submission to Public Health Act 2010 - Review
185
Attachment 1
186
Attachment 1
187
Attachment 1
188
Attachment 1
189
Attachment 1
190
SINGLETON COUNCIL
31.
Minutes - Hunter Valley Operations Community

FILE: 03/0047-3
Executive Summary
The Hunter Valley Operations Community Consultative Committee (CCC) held its ordinary
meeting on 10 March 2016. The minutes are shown as Attachment 1 for Councils
information.
Mark Ihlein
Attachments
AT-1
Minutes - Hunter Valley Operations Community Consultative
Committee (CCC) - 10/03/2016
191
Attachment 1
Minutes - Hunter Valley Operations Community Consultative Committee

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
192
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
193
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
194
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
195
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
196
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
197
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
198
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
199
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
200
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
201
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
202
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
203
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
204
Attachment 1

(CCC) - 10/03/2016
205
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Questions Given - QG3/16
3.
Questions of Which Notice Has Been Given

FILE: 16/0093
Detail
Responses are provided to the following questions from Councillors as attachments:
1.
Cr Sue Moore - 21/03/2016 - Mitchells Flat Road Attachment 1.
2.
Cr Sue Moore - 21/03/2016 - Cranky Corner Intersection with Stanhope Road

Attachment 2.
3.
Cr Ruth Rogers - 23/03/2016 - Main / John Street Attachment 3.
4.
Cr Sue Moore - 18/04/2016 - Waste Vouchers Attachment 4.
5.
Cr Ruth Rogers - 14/12/2015 - Dog Poo Composter Attachment 5.
6.
Cr Ruth Rogers - 18/04/2016 - Storm Water Drain Clearing Attachment 6.
7.
Cr Scott CRF 3381 - 21/03/2016 - By Passing of Councillors Regarding

Development Applications Attachment 7.
8.
Cr Scott - CRF 3368 - 07/12/2015 - Sunday Markets in John Street Attachment 8.
Anthony Egan
Attachments
AT-1
Officer Response - Questions With Notice - Councillor Sue
Moore - 21/03/2016 - Mitchells Flat Road
AT-2
Moore - 21/03/2016 - Cranky Corner Intersection with
Stanhope Road
AT-3
Officer Response - Questions With Notice - Councillor Ruth
Rogers - 23/03/2016 - Main / John Street
AT-4
Moore - 18/04/2016 - Waste Vouchers
AT-5
Rogers - 14/12/2015 - Dog Poo Composter
206
SINGLETON COUNCIL
Questions Given - QG3/16
AT-6
AT-7
AT-8

Rogers - 18/04/2016 - Storm Water Drain Clearing
Officer Response - Questions With Notice - Councillor Val
Scott - 3381 - 21/03/2016 - By Passing of Councillors
Regarding Development Applications
Scott - CRF 3368 - 07/12/2015 - Sunday Markets in John
Street
207
Attachment
1

Moore - 21/03/2016 - Mitchells Flat Road
Response to Questions With Notice

Author:
Peter McMurray, Manager Infrastructure Strategy

Planning & Programming
Response to:
Cr Sue Moore
Request Date:
21 March 2016
Subject:
Mitchells Flat Road
Question:
Can the Roads Committee consider the narrow section of Mitchells Flat Road
(that requires constant grading) with the purpose of allocating funds to seal
the gravel sides of the narrow section.
Response:
This matter will be considered by Councils Roads Advisory Committee, which
is scheduled to be held on 28 July 2016.
208
Attachment
2

Moore - 21/03/2016 - Cranky Corner Intersection with
Stanhope Road

Author:

Response to:
Councillor Sue Moore
Request Date:
21/03/2016
Subject:
Cranky Corner Intersection with Stanhope Road
Question:
Request issues at this location be referred to the Roads Committee for
possible alignment of Stanhope Road to achieve a safer intersection.
With referral to the Traffic Committee as to any improvement in signage or
tree removal that could occur immediately.
Response:
This matter will be considered by Councils Local Traffic Committee at its
meeting on 26 May 2016.
Council at its meeting 20 June 2016 will consider the recommendations of the
May Local Traffic Committee Report.
Pending the outcome of the May Local Traffic Committee Report, this matter
will be considered by Councils Roads Advisory Committee at its 28 July
2016.
209
Attachment
3


Author:

Response to:
Councillor Ruth Rogers
Request Date:
21/03/2016
Subject:
Main Street
Question:
Following up on the Local Traffic Committee Meeting Minutes of 25/02/2016
file no. 16/0149. Can Council revisit the main street 12 months on to identify
the following maintenance issues: Seating, gardens, trees, cleanliness and
parking guidelines eg. Length for larger vehicles?
Implement a follow up in the way of a short survey to all ratepayers with
reference to the upgrade.
Response:
Council Officers have recently completed an inspection of the street furniture
along John Street, with particular emphasis on the street trees and seats and
the amenity of the street area with respect to cleanliness, graffiti etc.
The results of the inspections indicated that there was little to no impact on
the street amenity due to cleanliness issues and/or graffiti.
There was some wear on the street seats on the southern side of John Street
at the western end. Maintenance work has commenced on upgrading the
seats, including sanding back the wooden seat and back panels and restaining. This work has commenced and should be completed within the next
few weeks.
The street is regularly inspected by Councils Works Delivery staff. Should any
damage or upgrades to street furniture be identified, all rectification works will
be scheduled into Councils Routine Street Maintenance Programs.
210
Attachment
3

No additional maintenance works on street furniture in John Street is

considered warranted at this stage.
With regard to the length of carparks on John Street, this matter was
investigated by Councils Local Traffic Committee at its meeting on 25
February 2016. The results of the investigations indicated that all on-street
spaces installed on John Street fully comply with all relevant standards and
guidance relating to on-street parking in Australia.
All representatives on the committee, including Council, the Police and RMS,
expressed no concerns with the current carparking arrangements on John
Street.
The committee recommended that:
The parking arrangements on John Street remain as they are at present
Council, at its meeting on 21 March 2016, adopted the recommendations of
the February Local Traffic Committee report.
211
Attachment
4

Moore - 18/04/2016 - Waste Vouchers

Author:
Gary Thomson
Response to:
Cr Sue Moore
Request Date:
18/04/2016
Subject:
Waste Vouchers
Question:
Given the 2016/17 Revenue Policy Domestic Waste Management Plan no
longer provides a kerbside pick-up for rural areas Can Council give
consideration to providing two vouchers per rate assessment that pays for a
domestic waste service.
Response:
Bulk Waste Collection
Bulk collection of waste is available to all residents paying for the waste
collection service and will occur in September for all urban and rural
customers that receive Councils waste service.
Vouchers
Councils Waste Management Fee includes an annual bulk waste collection,
one free tip voucher for 300 kg waste and the kerbside waste and recycling
collection and disposal charges. Additionally, all recyclables and household
chemicals are accepted free of charge at the Waste Management Facility.
The provision of a second voucher would cost an additional $797,715.00, if all
8,550 households serviced use the voucher. This cost includes a
$196,735.50 waste levy payable to EPA.
The introduction of a second voucher would be expensive and is not currently
proposed for inclusion in the budget.
212
Attachment
5

Rogers - 14/12/2015 - Dog Poo Composter

Author:
Gary Thomson
Response to:
Cr Ruth Rogers
Request Date:
14/12/2015
Subject:
Dog Poo Composter
Question:
With the topic of the dog park, when it is rectified is it possible to install a dog
poo composter for the users of the park? Eg an old red/yellow bin with holes
drilled in and buried into the ground.
The community garden has a lot of dog owners using it and dog droppings not
being picked up. Is it possible to have a bag station installed?
Response:
Dog waste may contain potentially harmful pathogens such as E.coli,
roundworms, tapeworms and hookworms that can be easily transmitted to
people. A strict process is required in composting dog waste. A dog waste
bin is recommended to be installed to collect the waste and composting bins
located away from public access. Dog waste collecting tools (trowel and dust
pan) are recommended to be used in the collection of dog waste and plastic
bags not to be used as they are not fully biodegradable.
Bins would need to be collected every 2 days with the separation of plastic
bags from waste undertaken prior to putting into compost bins. Once the dog
waste is added to the compost, the addition of sawdust at a ratio of 20:1 is
required to ensure active composting. Compost will need to be turned every
48 hours and a temperature of 60oC maintained to kill harmful bacteria. The
maintenance regime will cost Council $1000 to set up and an additional
$14,000 to maintain on an annual basis.
A dog bag station can be installed at the Community Garden but a bin will
also need to be installed for disposal. An installation cost of $1200 will be
incurred and an additional annual cost of $350 for the purpose of bags and
garbage collection fees.
The above actions are not in Councils current or future budgets.
213
Attachment
6

Rogers - 18/04/2016 - Storm Water Drain Clearing

Author:
Gary Thomson
Response to:
Cr Ruth Rogers
Request Date:
18/04/2016
Subject:
Storm Water Drain Clearing
Question:
When in the foreseeable future will the drains in William, Bathurst, Wynyard
and Church Streets be pumped out of silt and waste?
Kelso and Edward are now draining well but some drains are still blocked with
greenery (tomato plants) in Edward Street South.
Response:
The drains mentioned above were inspected at the same time as Kelso and
Edward Streets and were deemed in good/clean condition.
The issue of flooding in the area is being addressed in the Urban Stormwater
Management Plan.
214
Attachment
7

Scott - 3381 - 21/03/2016 - By Passing of Councillors
Regarding Development Applications

Author:
Mark Ihlein, Director Planning & Sustainable

Environment Group
Response to:
Councillor Val Scott
Request No.
3381
Request Date:
21/03/2016
Subject:
By Passing of Councillors Regarding

Development Applications
Question:
Why was the following response made by planning staff as written in the
minutes or overview of meeting of local builders, developers, Council Planning
Department.
Under the heading responses:
The Planning Department is working on getting permission to BY-PASS
Councillor approval where ever possible. This will streamline approval times.
Response:
This comment is not made by Council staff. Some discussion took place
regarding reviewing delegations to staff for the determination of development
applications. It was noted that a very small proportion of Development
Applications are determined by Council, less than 2% on average.
215
Attachment
8

Street

Author:
Salena Avard
Response to:
Councillor Scott
Request No.
CRF 3368
Request Date:
07/12/2015
Subject:
Sunday Markets in John Street
Question:
Would Council please consider allowing the markets (now held at Singleton
Golf Club each Sunday) to be held in John Street on a Sunday?
Whilst attending the Christmas celebrations in the park recently I experienced
many attendees asking why it was not held in the main street.
I believe the block between Pitt and Castlereagh Streets is all that needs
closing to commence with, leaving the footpaths clear for pedestrians and
shop owners to showcase their wares. Marketeers down each side of the
street would be accommodated sufficiently to commence with.
Response:
There has certainly been consideration of holding markets in John Street.
There is currently no capacity for Council to do this, beyond the existing
commitment to the Christmas event in November each year.
In addition, there are mixed views from retailers in the CBD as to the value of
such markets. Some believe bringing external markets in is diluting the
income for business owners. There is also a very positive view regarding
closing the street for markets.
The General Manager and Economic and Community Strategy Manager
recently met with the Retail Collective and the Chamber of Commerce where
this was raised and there has also been approaches from a private event
manager with regard to holding a market.
216
Attachment
8

Street
While it is unlikely that Council will take the lead in managing a new market in
John Street, there is a focus on facilitating this outcome.
217

Singleton Council Meeting 2016

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Singleton Council Meeting 2016

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

NOTICE OF MEETING

Opening of Meeting and Acknowledgement of Country

Matters Arising from Minutes

United Wambo Joint Venture Project ............................................... 4

Public Access Session

Community Satisfaction Survey ....................................................... 5

Potential Commercial Tourism Opportunity ................................... 10

Community and Infrastructure Services Report (Items Requiring Decision)

Proposed Lease to Gore Electrical & Data - 189 John

Local Government Remuneration Tribunal .................................... 71

Request for Financial Assistance Towards Legal

Tender for the Supply and Delivery of Ready Mix

Acquistion of One Parcel of Land on Hermitage Road as

Planning and Sustainable Environment Report (Items Requiring Decision)

Minutes - Association of Mining Related Councils 13/05/2016 ................................................................................... 156

Corporate Services Report (Items for Information)

Planning and Sustainable Environment Report (Items for Information)

Questions of Which Notice Has Been Given................................ 206

Questions of Which Notice has been Given

Potential Commercial Tourism Opportunity

Tender for the Supply and Delivery of Ready Mix

Tender for Organics (Green Waste) Collection

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

Presentation Items - PR3/16

United Wambo Joint Venture Project

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision) - GM20/16

Community Satisfaction Survey

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision) - GM20/16

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision) - GM20/16

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision) - GM20/16

Delivery Program/Operational Plan

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision) - GM20/16

Community Survey Report 2011 - IRIS - IPRF

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

General Manager's Report (Items Requiring Decision) - GM21/16

Potential Commercial Tourism Opportunity

RECOMMENDED that the report on a potential commercial tourism opportunity be

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

Community and Infrastructure Services Report (Items Requiring Decision) - DC&IS68/16

Minutes - Roads Advisory Committee - 28/04/2016

Adopt the Roads Advisory Committee Terms of Reference Attachment 1.

Adopt the following recommendations in relation to the minutes of 4 February 2016

An amount of $1,100,000 from 2016/17 Roads to Recovery is allocated to the

Capital Works Program 2016/2017

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

Community and Infrastructure Services Report (Items Requiring Decision) - DC&IS68/16

1. Adopt the draft Capital Works Program 2016/2017.

Meeting of Singleton Council - 20 June 2016

Community and Infrastructure Services Report (Items Requiring Decision) - DC&IS68/16

Update on 712 Wollombi Road, Broke

This matter be deferred pending a further report to the Roads Committee.

Update on Blaxland Street & Harrowby Street, Broke

Update on Glass Parade, Hunterview

Terms of Reference - Roads Advisory Committee

Terms of Reference - Roads Advisory Committee

Terms of Reference - Roads Advisory Committee

Minutes - 4 February 2016

Minutes - 4 February 2016

Minutes - 4 February 2016