Description: Maranoa Logo Process

 

Business Paper

 

General Meeting

 

Wednesday 23 April 2014

 

Roma Administration Centre

 

NOTICE OF MEETING

 

Date: 17 April 2014

 

Mayor:                                                   Councillor R S Loughnan

 

Deputy Mayor:                                        Councillor W S Wason

Councillors:                                            Councillor J L Chambers

                                                              Councillor R J Denton

                                                              Councillor P J Flynn

                                                              Councillor W M Newman

                                                              Councillor C J O’Neil

                                                              Councillor M L Price

                                                              Councillor D J Schefe

 

Chief Executive Officer:                          Ms Julie Reitano

 

Senior Management:                               Mr Cameron Castles (Director Infrastructure Services)

                                                              Mr Rob Hayward (Director Development, Facilities & Environmental Services)

                                                              Ms Sharon Frank (Director Corporate, Community & Commercial Services)

 

Officers:                                                 Ms Jane Frith (Coordinator Corporate Communications)

 

Please find attached agenda for the General Meeting to be held at the Roma Administration Centre on April 23, 2014 at 9.00am.

Julie Reitano

Chief Executive Officer

 


Maranoa Regional Council

    

General Meeting -  23 April 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item       Subject

No

 

Reports 

 

11.1       Council Initiated Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

              Attachment 1:        Airport Advisory Committee - Confirmed Meeting Minutes - 05/03/14 3

              Attachment 2:        Bassett Park Advisory Committee Meeting - Confirmed Minutes - 18/02/14 ............................................................................................................... 7

 

12.1       Naming of New Street

              Attachment :           2012/18133 (Approved - C12.386) - Chris Hill C/- Urban & Rural - ROL (1 lot into 14 lots) - Request to change an Existing Approval - 2 South Street, Roma (1RP30965)  -  Amended Site Plan DA.............................................. 11

 

13.2       Mitchell Boat Ramp

              Attachment 1:        Mitchell boat ramp quote..................................................................... 12

              Attachment 2:        riverine permit requirements............................................................... 22

 

13.3       Negotiated Decision Notice - Material Change of Use – “Undefined Use” (Non-resident Workforce Accommodation – 360 units) (File: 2013/18679)

              Attachment 1:        Body of Report.................................................................................... 23

              Attachment 2:        Applicant's Request for Negotiated Decision Notice.......................... 25

 

13.4    Submission of Flood Mitigation Projects under Queensland Government's Disaster Mitigation and Resilience Funding

              Attachment :           Disaster Mitigation Funding Options prepared by Ross Drabble April 2014   28

 

13.5       Material Change of Use to establish Accommodation Units (Two Units) (File: 2013/18803)

              Attachment 1:        Report.................................................................................................. 31

              Attachment 2:        Plans of development......................................................................... 45

              Attachment 3:        Adopted Infrastructure Charges Notice.............................................. 56

 

Status Reports     

 

19.1       Local Builders Group Meeting - 28 March 2014

              Attachment :           Minutes of Meeting - Local Builders Group - 28 March 2014............. 59

 

     


Attachment 1

Airport Advisory Committee - Confirmed Meeting Minutes - 05/03/14

 

 

Meeting:                                 Airports Advisory Committee Meeting

Date:                                       Wednesday 5 March 2014

Chair:                                     Cr. Joy Denton                       

Attendees:                             Cr. Joy Denton, Ben Jones MRC – Manager Airports (Roma, Injune & Surat), Barry McCabe – Roma Aero Club, Greg Shaw, Lyn Kajewski – Roma Tourism Association Inc, Richard Benham  – Commerce Roma, Meryl Brumpton – Flying Surgical and Flying Obstetric Service, 

 

Apologies:                             Cr. Cameron O’Neil, Cr. David Schefe,  Peter Flynn – Maranoa Travel Centre, Adrian Harding – Europcar, Vicki Beitz, Ian Rollinson, Shane Brumby – MI Helicopters, Robert Lethbridge, Keith Chandler, Anthony Partridge – TransLink, Anthony McDonald – Hertz Roma, Christopher Kerr – Care Flight Group QLD, Scott Rodgers – Air BP, Jon Hamer - Qantas

 

 

Minutes:                                 Christina Tincknell

 

Meeting Opened:                                                                                                                       6:00pm

Meeting Closed:                   6:50pm

 

Next Meeting Details

Date:                       2 April 2014                            

Time:                      6pm        

Location:               Council Chambers, Bungil Street           


Meeting Actions

Item

Description

Comments

Action by

When

Item 2

Confirmation of Minutes & Business Arising

Present to Council the proposal of the passenger tax being applied to charter aircraft utilising Injune Airport

Cr. Joy Denton

12th March 2014

Consult with Kelly Rodgers regarding the committee being regarded as a Statuary Body

Ben Jones

By 2nd April 2014

Item 3

Tourism Billboard & Tourism Promotion

Lyn Kajewski to coordinate meeting between Ben Jones and Megan Swords for tourism billboard

Lyn Kajewski

By 2nd April 2014

Item 5

General Business

Present to Council the proposed sale of the council drink vending machine to the Roma Aero Club.

Cr. Joy Denton

12th March 2014

Installation of VASI lights at Roma Airport

Ben Jones

Ongoing

 Follow up with Nektar regarding new menu items for airport kiosk

Ben Jones

10th March 2014

Refund RFDS and Careflight landing charges for Maranoa Regional Council Airports

Christina Tincknell

By 2nd April 2014

 

Discussion Notes:

 

Welcome

Cr. Denton welcomed all present and declared the meeting open at

 

Item 1                     Apologies

The following apologies were noted at the commencement of the meeting;

·      Vicki Beitz

·      Jon Hamer – Qantas

·      Rob Lethbridge

·      Anthony Partridge – TransLink

·      Keith Chandler

 

Item 2                     Confirmation of Minutes and Business Arising

Resolution:           AP/03.2014/09

Moved:                   Greg Shaw            

Seconded:             Barry McCabe

That the Airport Advisory Committee Meeting minutes of 5 February 2014 be confirmed.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The committee requested feedback on the proposal to charge passenger tax for charters at Injune Airport. Ben advised that the item is to be presented at the next Council meeting on 12th March 2014.

 

The Committee requested feedback on the proposed sale of the council drink vending machine to the Roma Aero Club. Ben advised that the item is to be presented at the next Council meeting on 12th March 2014.

 

Committee discussed the Terms of Reference for the committee, all members in attendance agreed that they do not wish for the committee to be classified as a statutory body.  Ben is to consult with Kelly and receive in writing the current status of the committee. This is to be presented at the next meeting for the committee to review the Terms of Reference for amendment.

 

Item 3                     Tourism Billboard & Tourism Promotion

Lyn Kajewski met with Megan Swords Coordinator – Tourism, to develop a tourism billboard to be placed at the baggage collection area of the Roma Airport. It is intended that the billboard will promote events and services in the region. The committee discussed the concept at length and agreed the Megan and Ben will need to meet to discuss further and decide on the best location for signage. Lyn advised that she would coordinate the meeting.

 

Item 4                     General Business

Greg Shaw asked if there had been any further progress on the installation of the VASI lights for Roma Airport. Ben advised that he is currently awaiting quotes on the equipment and the management of the installation. Ben is aiming that pending receiving the requested quotes in a timely manner, installation should commence this month. From there Ben anticipates approximately 1 month to complete the project, however this will depend on feedback provided when installation commences. Ben advised that he will keep the committee updated on the progress.

 

Greg Shaw noted that the congestion at the Roma Airport for air traffic has increased significantly; he suggested that Council consider building a taxiway to the end of runway 36 so aircraft can avoid back tracking along the runway. 

 

Ben advised the committee on the recent Office of Transport Security (OTS) audit at Roma Airport. The audit included reviewing the Visitor Identification Card records, management records and a systems test at the screening point.

 

The audit was successful and the systems test was passed again. This is the fifth systems test conducted since February 2013 and each one has been a 100% pass.

 

Cr. Denton asked Ben if he had been able to resolve the complaint that was in the Western Star. Ben advised that he has not been able to contact the passenger as yet. Ben has been consulting with Wayne Bryant, the Baggage Handling Agent Manager for QantasLink at Roma Airport and as yet has not been able to identify the passenger.

 

Ben advised the committee on the recent Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) level two surveillance at Roma Airport. There was one item noted in the surveillance, a runway light located at the cross strip did not meet requirement as it sat to low. The light has been levelled with the runway and meets the required standard.

 

Ben advised the committee that a drain has been installed in the vicinity of the Aero Club to stop rain water flowing under the Aero Club building. Airport staff will be monitoring the area to ensure that no further leak is occurring.

 

Ben provided committee members an update on reportable incidents over the past month since the committee last convened.

 

The committee requested an update on the terminal and car park design. Ben advised that the preliminary designs should be received by 13th March; this will be both the terminal and the car park designs. Once the designs have been received then an engineering review will be completed and the designs will be presented to council.

The committee requested feedback on the possible Qantas lounge to be included in the terminal. Ben advised that he has had no further contact from Qantas after a discussion several months ago. Qantas requested a price for the lounge and Ben asked them to provide a list of what they required within the lounge, such as amenities, water etc.

 

The committee requested an update on the new menu items that were to be provided by Nektar at the airport kiosk. The committee were advised that the new menu items were intended to begin from approximately 20th February but as yet have not commenced. The committee did not think this was satisfactory and requested follow up on this.

 

Ben advised the committee of the recent announcement regarding the Roma - Brisbane, Roma - Charleville route. The route will continue to be regulated with QantasLink the current service provider – the route will be retendered in 2015. The committee discussed the route regulation at length.

 

The committee requested feedback on the progress of refunding RFDS and Careflight for landing charges at Council’s airports. Ben advised that the process has not yet been finished due to unexpected leave of staff working on the issue. It is intended that this will be completed by the end of the month.

 

Meryl Brumpton requested that action items still in progress be carried over to the next meeting so that committee members know when an action item is still on-going. The committee agreed this was a beneficial method of keeping track of outstanding meeting actions.

 

Item 5                     Next Meeting Date & Close

The Committee scheduled the next meeting for 2 April 2014 commencing 6pm, to be held at the Council Chambers. Greg Shaw noted that he would be an apology for the next meeting. The meeting was closed at 6:50pm.        

 

 

 

...............................................                                                                                         .............................................

Chair                                                                                                                                               Date

 


Attachment 2

Bassett Park Advisory Committee Meeting - Confirmed Minutes - 18/02/14

 

 

Meeting:                     Bassett Park Master Planning Advisory Committee Meeting

Date:                           18 February 2014

Chair:                         Cr. Cameron O’Neil   

Attendees:                 Cr. Cameron O’Neil, Cr. Peter Flynn, Rob Hayward, Fiona Vincent, Emily Rogers, Carla Cosgrove, Kevin Pope, Mark Brandt, Jackie Erickson, Jim Schefe, Paul Robertson, Fay Robertson, John Mulcahy, James McAuley, Ranald Ferrier, Tina Hamilton, Shirley Ayers.           

 

Apologies                  Alistair Brown, Lorinda Otto, Cassandra Elder, Bill McClean, Lucy Warby, Loretta Thomas, Yoland Thomas, Sussan Evans, Angela Lorenz, Linda Arnold, Jason Coonan, Craig Smith, Greg Stewart, Sandy Wendt, , Kathy Mitchell, Shirley Ayers, Dayle Little & Tina Hamilton.

 

Minutes:                     Robert Hayward

 

Meeting Opened:      6.10pm

Meeting Closed:        7.30pm

 

Next Meeting Details

 

Date:                           Tuesday 15 April 2014

Time:                          6.00pm           

Location:                    Bassett Park Members Bar

 

 

 

 

Meeting Actions

 

Item

Description

Comments

Action by

When

2.0

Confirmation of Minutes

Meeting minutes to be signed by Chair, placed on Council’s website and presented to Council at the second General Meeting 26/03/14.

Kelly Rogers

26/03/14

3.0

Terms of Reference

Terms of Reference are updated to adjust meeting schedule to ‘Bi-monthly & the committee name be adjusted to “The Bassett Park Advisory Committee.”

Kelly Rogers

12/04/14

4.0

&

5.0

Prioritisation of Bassett Park Master Plan Implementation

That: The existing building/structure housing the Bar be retained;

Each of the clubs to provide feedback on potential the following items for return to Council Officer’s by Friday 14 March 2014:

 

Proposed main bar upgrade – consideration to be given to ergonomics for workers and workable flow for patrons

Staging of Equestrian Complex – what comes first (if applicable to your group)

Items for consideration in a User Agreement between your group and Council

Fiona Vincent/Emily Rogers/All

14/03/14

Facility lighting upgrade and upgrade of the P.A. system (including portability) be escalated to a “high” priority project.

Rob Hayward/Fiona Vincent

TBC

6.0

General Business

Attending Camp draft members requested a weather proof cover be installed around the bar area.

Fiona Vincent

TBC

Toilet block locations and portability at the facility be reviewed;

Fiona Vincent

TBC

It was requested that access during events be considered through the distribution of a calendar of events & that this be issued 1 month in advance to trainers.  It was suggested that track work be completed by 7.00am on event days.

Fiona Vincent

TBC

It was requested that top dressing be supplied in the Rodeo Arena and that the replacement of blown bulbs be completed to restore lighting capability.

Rob Hayward

TBC

Cr. Flynn recommended that the male toilets next to the viewing area be upgraded/painted.

Rob Hayward

TBC

Cr. O’Neil requested the northern end of the Wool Pavilion be painted and a check done with respect to the presence of any asbestos sheeting that is damaged and requires removal.    

Cr. O’Neil requested the signage on the sheep yard be restored/painted.

Rob Hayward

TBC

Discussion Notes:

 

Item 2               Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution Number BP.01.14

 

Moved  Carla Cosgrove                                                                                     Seconded Jackie Erickson

 

That the minutes of the Bassett Park Advisory Committee Meeting held on 16 September 2013 be confirmed as presented.

 

CARRIED

 

Item 4               Proposed Bar Upgrade

 

Chair, Cr. Cameron O’Neil provided outline of option to retain the existing structure and refit, as an alternative to building a new one.

 

Resolution Number BP.02.14

Moved  Mark Brandt                                                                                          Seconded Carla Cosgrove

 

That:

 

1.   The existing building/structure housing the Bar be retained; and

2.   Each of the clubs provide feedback on potential the following items for return to Council Officer’s by Friday 14 March 2014:

 

·      Proposed main bar upgrade – consideration to be given to ergonomics for workers and workable flow for patrons

·      Staging of Equestrian Complex – what comes first (if applicable to your group)

·      Items for consideration in a User Agreement between your group and Council

 

CARRIED

 

 

Item 5               Prioritisation of Bassett Park Master Plan Implementation

 

Attending members reviewed and broadly discussed the Council prioritised list of projects as part of the endorsed Bassett Park Master Plan.

It was agreed that Council Officer’s consult with each of the user groups to determine each group’s priorities and in consideration of the Council prioritised list. 

 

 

Resolution Number BP.03.14

 

Moved  Carla Cosgrove                                                                                     Seconded John Mulcahy

 

That facility lighting upgrade and upgrade of the P.A. system (including portability) be escalated to a “high” priority project.

 

CARRIED

 

 

Item 3               Committee Membership/meeting frequency & Terms of Reference Review

 

Those in attendance discussed the current Terms of Reference for the committee, determining that meeting frequency be adjusted as agreed below:

 

Resolution Number BP.04.14

 

Moved  Kevin Pope                                                                                           Seconded Jackie Erickson

 

That the committee meeting frequency be adjusted to a ‘bi- monthly’ occurrence, and the committee be named “The Bassett Park Advisory Committee.”

 

CARRIED

 

 

Item 6               General Business

 

·      Attending Camp Draft members requested a weather proof cover be installed around the bar area.

·      Toilet block locations and portability at the facility be reviewed;

·      It was requested that access during events be considered through the distribution of a calendar of events & that this be issued 1 month in advance to trainers.  It was suggested that track work be completed by 7.00am on event days.

·      It was requested that top dressing be supplied in the Rodeo Arena and that the replacement of blown bulbs be completed to restore lighting capability.

·      Cr. Flynn recommended that the male toilets next to the viewing area be upgraded/painted.

·      Cr. O’Neil requested the northern end of the Wool Pavilion be painted and a check done with respect to the presence of any asbestos sheeting that is damaged and requires removal.    

·      Cr. O’Neil requested the signage on the sheep yard be restored/painted.

 

Chair:  ..........................................................                                                                            Date:            ..........................................

 


Attachment 1

2012/18133 (Approved - C12.386) - Chris Hill C/- Urban & Rural - ROL (1 lot into 14 lots) - Request to change an Existing Approval - 2 South Street, Roma (1RP30965)  -  Amended Site Plan DA

 

 


Attachment 1

Mitchell boat ramp quote

 











Attachment 2

riverine permit requirements

 


Attachment 1

Body of Report

 

Background Information

 

An approval for a Material Change of Use - ‘Undefined Use’ (Non-resident Workforce Accommodation – 360 Units) was approved on 22 January 2014.  On 21 February 2014, the applicant requested amendments to the conditions of approval.

 

The requested amendments focus on two issues identified below, renaming responsible entities within the approval, and the onsite power generation.

 

Renaming the responsible entities

 

The applicant wishes the conditions of approval to state that the developer or landowner is not necessarily responsible for a particular condition, and that instead an ‘operator’ or ‘relevant contractor’ is to be named as responsible for that condition.

 

‘The proposed Accommodation Camp will be constructed and operated by separate contractors, which will be engaged as the project progresses.  As such, we request that a number of conditions be amended to reflect this arrangement given that the ‘developer’ will not be the entity who will be constructing and operating the accommodation facility.’

 

The following conditions are requested to be changed (the changed responsibility is noted against the condition):

 

(i)       Condition 4,     developer to ‘accommodation facility operator’;

(ii)       Condition 7,     developer to ‘responsible contractor’;

(iii)      Condition 8,     developer to ‘responsible contractor’;

(iv)     Condition 16,   developer to ‘responsible contractor’;

(v)      Condition 23,   developer to ‘responsible contractor’;

(vi)     Condition 24,   landowner to ‘responsible contractor’;

(vii)     Condition 26,   applicant to accommodation facility operator or relevant contractor’;

(viii)    Condition 31,   developer to ‘responsible contractor’;

(ix)     Condition 45,   developer to ‘accommodation facility operation or responsible contractor’; and

(x)      Condition 47,   developer to ‘accommodation facility operator or responsible contractor’.

 

While the suggested terms may at times be more accurate than the generic term ‘developer’, it would be difficult for Council to predict who may be the best party in the construction and operation of a development to carry out particular activities, and then to name these within the development permit.  As a general principle such descriptions might limit the actions of a developer unnecessarily.

 

The primary issue however, is that it is necessary for Council to identify a single party to which appeal may be made when activities during the construction or operation of the site contravene the existing approval.  The term ‘developer’ is accepted as the description of this primary contact.  It would probably be better if the existing approval did not use the term ‘applicant’ in Condition 26 and ‘landowner’ in Condition 24.

 

On balance, it is recommended that the request for a change to the description of the responsible entity in the above listed conditions be refused.

 

Onsite power generation

 

The applicant requests that Condition 22 be amended so that electricity supply to the development may be by on site generation, rather than by connection to the electricity supply service.  As such supply is becoming common for camp developments that are established outside Council jurisdiction, and as the site is relatively remote, it is considered reasonable to allow onsite power generation.  Any noise created by electricity generators is managed by Condition 36, which requires onsite machinery to not exceed a 5db noise level above the background noise level.

 

It is recommended that Condition 22 be changed to ‘The development is to be connected to a camp generator room or an alternative electricity supply service’, as has been requested by the applicant.

Figure 1: Subject Site (Source: SARA mapping online)

 

Figure 1 shows the subject lot (Lot 22 on SP248280) and the approximate location of the Accommodation Camp within the site.

 

 


Attachment 2

Applicant's Request for Negotiated Decision Notice

 




Attachment 1

Disaster Mitigation Funding Options prepared by Ross Drabble April 2014

 




Attachment 1

Report

 

1.0 Background Information

 

Proposal

 

The applicant has proposed the establishment of two accommodation units on vacant land at 13 Major Street Roma.  The subject site is within the Residential  Zone of the Roma Town Planning Scheme. There are no previous approvals at the site, although the site was previously occupied by a single dwelling.

 

The proposed use is considered to be appropriately defined as ‘Accommodation Units’ within the Scheme. The definition for ‘Accommodation Units’ is as follows;

 

"Accommodation Units" - means any premises comprising an integrated development of dwelling units and/or rooming units. The term includes multiple dwelling units, retirement villages and apartment houses.

 

Total Gross Floor Area of both units is 310.2m².  Site coverage, including the carport, is 36.6%, which is below the 40% maximum specified in the code.  Adequate private open space is provisioned and fully fenced with a solid 1.8 metre fence.

 

Four parking bays are provided under separate carports, plus one visitor bay within the front boundary setback. Parking for Unit 2 is provided in tandem, which is considered acceptable for a private residence.

 

Assessment of the Site

 

The development site is located within the Residential Zone and surrounded by existing residential land uses including single detached dwellings and multiple dwelling units.  The site comprises an area of 935m2.

 

Bungil Creek is less than 250 metres away to the north, and the site is subject to minor flooding (200mm) during the defined flood event (post Levee 1 levels). The buildings are above ground, on stumps and well above this flood level, however a condition for the floor to be above the defined flood event flood level (to 300mm) has been included.

 

A preliminary landscaping plan has been included in the application which includes appropriate species and adequate landscaped area. Conditions requiring irrigation during establishment and ground cover planting have also been included.

 

Design and Use of the Units

 

Each unit is designed with three bedrooms and three bathrooms.  This is a characteristic pattern of house-style buildings that are designed for the accommodation of non-resident workers.  The implications of this are an increased demand for parking on site, and that the occupants may be in the units on a short term basis. The Planning Scheme does not contain definitions that can be easily applied to non-resident workforce accommodation patterns, or even short term accommodation (apart from Hotel and Motel), so the defined use ‘Accommodation Units’ is considered the most appropriate definition.

 

It is proposed to set Unit 2 (the front unit) 6.5 metres back from the front boundary.  It is considered that this will not compromise the character or amenity of the area. The applicant has requested this reduced setback as the available building envelope is reduced by the sewer mains crossing the site to the rear, which prevents Unit 1 being any closer than 8.1 metres from the rear boundary.

 

Onsite Sewer

 

The site contains a sewer main traversing the rear and the side of the lot. The approval conditions the development to provide a minimum of 1.5 metres clearance between the sewer and any building foundation.

 

Public Notification and Referrals

 

As the development is impact assessable, public notification is required in accordance with Section 297 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.  The application was publically notified between 25 February 2014 and 24 March 2014. No submissions were received during this period. No referrals to other agencies are required.

 

Infrastructure Charges

 

Accommodation Units fall within the State Planning and Regulatory Provision charge category ‘Multiple Dwelling’ under the MRC Adopted Infrastructure Charges Resolution 2012. Infrastructure Charges will be charged at the rate of $21,000 per unit (for a three or more bedroom dwelling). The development will be credited with a discount of $21,000 for the previous (now demolished) dwelling.

 

Further Approvals

 

Subsequent approvals for Building Works and Plumbing and Drainage Works will be required. 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1 - Locality and Zoning Plan

 

 

IMG_6360.JPG

 

Figure 2 – View of site from Major Street

 

 

2.0      Assessment Against the Planning Scheme

 

Desired Environmental Outcomes

 

The Desired Environmental Outcomes (DEOs) are based on ecological sustainability established by Integrated Planning Act 1997, and are the basis for the measures of the planning scheme. Compliance with the DEOs is examined below:

 

(a)   Environment

 

(i)     The areas of high scenic amenity, remnant vegetation, wetlands, fauna habitats and wildlife corridors and regionally significant open space in the town are protected.

 

The site is situated within a developed urban area and its development will not result in any adverse impact on environmentally significant areas. The site contains no significant vegetation, so the proposed planting of trees as part of the development will ultimately contribute to the locality.  

 

(ii)     Places, areas or sites identified as being susceptible to land degradation, including contamination, erosion, salinity and landslip, are protected and further degradation is minimised.

 

The subject site is flat, within an urban area and not identified as being susceptible to land degradation. The site is mapped as within the defined flood event, but the landscaping and driveway treatments proposed will prevent contamination or erosion from the site during a flood event.

 

(iii)    Ecological sustainability is achieved by maintaining and improving biodiversity, water and air quality.

 

The development involves the intensification of a residential use within a developed urban area.  The proposal will not compromise biodiversity, water or air quality.

 

(iv)    Places of historical and indigenous cultural heritage and social significance are protected, maintained and enhanced.

 

The subject site is not identified as being in proximity to, or a place of, historical, cultural or social significance. 

 

(b)    Economic

 

(i)     Business and commercial development shall be located within the Commercial Zone to promote and strengthen the existing central Business District.

 

(ii)     The Central Business District (CBD) or inner core of the Commercial Zone is intended to contain the more intensive commercial uses.  Entertainment facilities and tourist accommodation will also be favoured within and adjacent to the CBD to provide a central focus of activity and promote vitality after office hours.

 

The proposal is for residential development in a residential area and will not compromise the location of business and commercial development with the Commercial Zone and CBD, and will increase population densities immediately surrounding the Commercial Zone.

 

(iii)    Beautification and improved parking facilities will enhance the efficiency, attractions and vitality of the Town CBD.

 

Car parking spaces will be provided to cater for the intensification of the existing land use, and landscaping is proposed as part of the application. This appropriately intensified residential use close to the CBD, will enhance the vitality of the CBD.

 

(iv)    Tourism will be promoted with significant economic and social benefits to the town as a regional centre with close association with the oil and gas industry and the proximity of the Carnarvon National Park.

 

The proposal is for residential development within the Residential Zone and will not adversely impact on tourism within the region. 

 

(v)     Industry, business and employment opportunities are improved and appropriately located to service the community and region, and encourage economic activity within the local area.

 

The development will support industry, business and employment opportunities in the local area by increasing the range of accommodation available within Roma.

 

(c)    Community Well-Being & Lifestyle

 

(i)     Convenient access to roads and services is achieved through well located land uses and the efficient use and timely provision of infrastructure such as water, sewerage and roads walkways and cycling facilities.

 

The development site is located within an established residential area that provides convenient and efficient access to infrastructure and services.  

 

(ii)   Infrastructure networks such as road and rail, water cycle and electricity infrastructure are protected from encroachment by sensitive land uses which may adversely affect or limit the normal operation of that infrastructure.

 

The development site is not located in proximity to major water cycle, rail or electricity infrastructure.  The development is appropriately located within a residential area and will not adversely impact on the normal operation of the local road network.

 

(iii)   Rural residential and urban residential development occurs in distinct localities that provide a sense of community, amenity, services, and a safe, affordable living environment, whilst maintaining the rural amenity of the Town Area.

 

The development site is located within an established residential area, with infrastructure and services available to provide a suitable living environment for residents of the dwelling units. The proposed units are comparable to the neighbouring residential dwelling and integrate with the built form of the town. The development will have minimal impact on the streetscape as the development will incorporate landscaping and privacy fencing along the property boundaries, and is single storey and of the same form as the surrounding dwellings.

 

(iv)  The adverse effects from natural and other hazards, including bushfires are minimised.

 

The site is not identified as being susceptible to bushfire, flooding or other hazards. 

 

(v)    The range of housing types, services and facilities meets the needs of the community and other uses.

 

The proposed development will increase the range of housing types available to the community, by offering additional smaller dwelling units.

 

(vi)    Community well being is not compromised by inappropriate development that impacts upon noise levels, traffic volume, lighting levels, local amenity.

 

The development is consistent with the existing land uses in the locality and will not have an adverse impact on noise levels, traffic volume, lighting levels or the local amenity.

 

Overall Outcomes for Urban Area Code

 

The Urban Area Code identifies overall outcomes, providing direction about relevant assessment issues.  The overall outcomes are examined below:

 

(a)     Roma is a focus for a range of business, industrial, tourist, community and recreational activity in the local government area;

 

The proposed development will provide residential accommodation which will compliment a range of other established uses in the centre of Roma.

 

(b)     Business and commercial development is located primarily in the CBD to provide central and accessible services to the local government area;

 

The development does not involve business or commercial activities, and increases the need for services in the Roma CBD.

 

(c)     The residential and heritage character and amenity of the Urban Area is retained;

 

The proposed units are single storey and consistent with the scale and character of residential development in the area.  Landscaping and screen fencing will be established along site boundaries to enhance the visual amenity of the site and ensure privacy for occupants and adjoining residences. 

 

 (d)    Safe and convenient access for pedestrians and cyclists is maintained and enhanced;

 

The development will not adversely impact on the safety and convenience of cyclist or pedestrian movements near the site.   Conditions of approval require the provision of vehicle manoeuvring areas within the site, to ensure vehicles can exit in a forward direction for improved visibility and safety. 

 

(e)    Residential (including Rural Residential) development occurs where there is no adverse impact on Good Quality Agricultural Land;

 

The development site is located within the Roma Town area and is not situated in proximity to Good Quality Agricultural Land.

 

(f)     Residential development is buffered from the existing and proposed road and rail corridors to minimise any detrimental impact;

 

The development is not located near a rail corridor.  Access to the site is obtained via a local access street which is designed to cater for residential land uses. 

 

(g)     Residential development accommodates a range of housing types and allotment sizes, and provides a safe and pleasant living environment, with adequate access to community services and is located in the residential preferred areas shown on the Urban Area Maps in the appendices;

 

The development site is located in an established residential area with access to community services.  The development will increase housing diversity in Roma Town, by providing additional higher density housing.

 

(h)     The expansion of residential development occurs in areas where it is most cost effective to supply physical infrastructure, such as water, sewerage, roads and electricity;

 

The proposed development will increase the efficient use of existing urban infrastructure by adding an additional dwelling to the Priority Infrastructure Area.

 

(i)     Efficient and equitable access to social infrastructure, such as schools, neighbourhood shopping, community services, public transport services, and parks are provided in residential areas;

 

The development site is appropriately located in an established residential area and encourages efficient and equitable access to social infrastructure.

 

(j)      Industrial development is located in the Industrial Zone of the town (see maps in appendices);

 

(k)     Impacts of industrial uses are required to be within acceptable limits and uses are undertaken in sustainable manner consistent with the amenity and character of the area concerned;

 

The proposal does not involve industrial development.

 

(l)      Small scale business, community and emergency services are provided for the needs of the local community;

 

The proposed development does not involve any business, community or emergency services.

 

(m)    All Areas other than the Commercial Zone are protected from shopping centre and other forms of commercial development.

 

The proposal is for a residential use in the Residential Zone and does not involve commercial development. 

 

Performance Criteria of the Urban Area Code

 

The relevant Performance Criteria of the Code is examined below to provide more detailed consideration of relevant issues -

 

 Performance Criteria

Assessment Responses

 A.    For all of the Town Area

 Infrastructure

PC 1 Electricity

Premises are provided with a supply of electricity adequate for the activity.

 

The proposed development is located in an established urban area with access to electrical infrastructure.

PC 2 Water supply

Premises are provided with an adequate volume and supply of water for the activity.

 

The proposed development is located in an established urban area with reticulated water supply available.

PC 3 Effluent disposal

To ensure that public health and environmental values are preserved, all premises provide for the treatment and disposal of effluent and other waste water.

 

The proposed development is located in an established urban area with reticulated sewerage available.

 

 

PC 4 Stormwater/Inter-allotment Drainage

Stormwater is collected and discharged so as to:

(a)  protect the stability of buildings or the use adjacent land;

(b)  prevent the waterlogging of  nearby land; and

(c)  protect and maintain environmental values.

 

Conditions of approval will require stormwater from the development site to be collected and discharged to the street to ensure no increase in post-development flows to adjoining properties and no adverse environmental impacts.

PC 5 Vehicle Access

Vehicle access is provided to a standard appropriate for the use.

 

The development will gain access to Major Street via a 6m two-way concrete crossover.  This will be imposed as a condition of approval.

 

The site access is currently obstructed by a fire hydrant and water meter. This will be conditioned to be relocated further along the site.

 

PC 6 Density

The density of residential activities does not impact adversely on the residential amenity of the town.

 

The density of the development is appropriate for the location and will contribute to the residential amenity of the town.

PC 7 Parking and manoeuvring

Vehicle parking and service vehicle provision is adequate for the use whilst ensuring both safe and functional operation for motorists and pedestrians.

                         

The development incorporates provision for five onsite car parking spaces which is compliant with the minimum requirement of 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit. 

 

The proposed car parking arrangement includes the provision of a duel carport for unit 1 and a single carport with a tandem undercover park for unit two.  A single visitor parking space is provided at the front of the site.

 

PC 8 Roads

All weather road access is provided between the premises and the existing road network.

 

The development proposal does not require the creation or upgrade of new roads.  Conditions of approval will require the construction of a sealed vehicle crossover to provide all weather access from the site to the roadway.

PC 9 State Controlled Roads

State Controlled Roads are maintained and enhanced as a link between major centres.        

The development site is located on a local access street which is intended to cater for residential land uses.  The development site is not located in proximity to State-controlled roads and will not impact on their function as a link between major centres.    

PC 10 Development Adjacent to State Controlled Roads

Development adjacent to State Controlled Roads is located to ensure safe and efficient use of the highway and maintain the integrity of the highway as a commuter link.

 

Not Applicable - The development site is not located adjacent to a State controlled road.

 

 

PC 11 Noise Sensitive Development

Noise sensitive developments (residential, educational and community) must ensure that road traffic noise levels are appropriately managed to achieve acceptable levels of amenity.

 

The proposed development is located on a local residential access street and is surrounded by residential land uses.  The proposal will not be adversely impacted by noise generated from road traffic.

PC 12 Development in the Vicinity of Aerodrome

Development

(a)     does not adversely affect the operation of the aerodrome;

(b)     is designed and located to achieve a suitable standard of amenity for the proposed activity; and

(c)     does not restrict the future operational demands of the aerodrome.

 

Not Applicable - The proposed development is not in the vicinity of the aerodrome.

PC 13 Development in the Vicinity of Aerodrome

The development of premises does not cause an obstruction or other potential hazard to aircraft movement associated with the aerodrome by way of:

(a)     the physical intrusion of buildings or other structures into the Obstacle Limitation Surface;

(b)     attracting birds or bats to the area which could cause or contribute to bird strike hazard;

(c)     providing very bright lighting or lighting similar to aerodrome lighting which can distract or confuse pilots;

(d)     interfering with navigation or communication facilities;

(e)     emissions that may affect pilot visibility or aircraft operations; or

(f)     transient intrusions into the aerodromes operational space.

 

Not Applicable - The proposed development is not in the vicinity of the aerodrome.

PC 14 Gas and Oil Pipelines

Buildings are located at an appropriate distance from pipelines to ensure community safety and operation of the use is not compromised.

                         

The site is situated in an established residential area and is located an appropriate distance from gas and oil pipelines.

 

PC 15 Refuse Tips and Effluent Treatment Plants

Premises are located at an appropriate distance from refuse tips and effluent treatment plants to ensure community safety and operation of the uses are not compromised.

                         

The site is not located in proximity to refuse tips or effluent treatment plants.

PC 16 Rail Corridors

Development is at an appropriate distance from the rail corridor so as not to prejudice safety, speed or intended role of the existing and proposed rail corridors.

 

The proposed development is not located in proximity to the rail corridor. 

PC 17 Noise Attenuation

Development adjoining the rail corridor is protected from the impact of noise.    

 

Not Applicable – The site does not adjoin a rail corridor.

2. Environment

PC 18 Watercourses

Development ensures the maintenance of riparian areas and water quality including protection from off-site transfer of sediment.

 

Not Applicable – The site is not located in proximity to watercourses.

PC 19 Protected Areas

Development is undertaken to ensure areas of significant biodiversity and habitat value are protected.

 

Not Applicable – The site is not located in proximity to areas of significant biodiversity or habitat value.

 

PC 20 Flooding

Premises are designed and located so as:

(a) not to be adversely impacted upon by flooding;

(b) to protect life and property; and

(c) not to have an undesirable impact on the extent and magnitude of flooding.

The site is impacted by the defined flood event, at a depth of 200mm.  The units to be constructed with a finished floor level 300mm above this height.

PC 21 Air Emissions

Air emissions from premises do not cause environmental harm or nuisance to adjoining properties or sensitive land uses.

 

The development is a residential use and is not of a nature to cause environmental harm or nuisance through air emissions.

PC 22 Noise Emissions

Noise emissions from premises do not cause environmental harm or nuisance to adjoining properties or sensitive land uses.

 

The development is a residential land use that is consistent with the intent of the area within which it is proposed.  The development is not anticipated to generate noise levels in excess of what would normally be expected in a residential area.

PC 23 Water Quality

The standard of effluent and/or stormwater runoff from premises ensures the quality of surface water is suitable for:

(a)  the biological integrity of aquatic ecosystems;

(b)  recreational use;

(c)  supply as drinking water after minimal treatment;

(d)  agricultural use; or

industrial use; and

(e)  Minimises nuisance or harm to adjoining land owners

 

The development will incorporate appropriate stormwater disposal for the proposed use.  This will be imposed as a condition of approval.

 

PC 24 Excavation and Filling

Excavation and filling of land ensures:

(a)     that both the amenity and safety of users of the site and adjacent land holdings; and

(b)     soil erosion is kept to a minimum with remedial works.

 

Conditions of approval will require any earthworks to be undertaken in accordance with Schedule 7: Standards for Construction Activity and the CMDG Design Guidelines.

 

PC 25 Construction Activities

Both erosion control and silt collection measures are undertaken so as to ensure protection of environmental values during construction.

 

During construction, soil erosion and sediment will be managed in accordance with Schedule 7: “Standards for Construction Activity”.  This will be imposed as a condition of approval.

PC 26 Bushfire Hazard Area

Development maintains the safety of people and property by avoiding areas of High or Medium Bushfire hazard or mitigating the risk through:

(a) the siting of buildings ensuring setbacks from hazardous vegetation are maximised and elements least susceptible to fire are sited closest to the bushfire hazard; and

(b) the provision of firebreaks to ensure adequate setbacks between Buildings, structures and Hazardous vegetation

 

The development site is located in an urban area and is not identified as a Medium or High Bushfire Hazard Area.

PC 27 Character Buildings

Development adjacent to buildings identified as heritage or character buildings within Schedule 9 incorporates design features, materials and details that blend with the existing character of the adjoining buildings and/or place.

 

Not Applicable – The development is not located near to heritage or character buildings.

PC 28 Cultural Heritage

The significance of known places of indigenous and/or cultural heritage value is retained.

 

The development is not located in proximity to any places of known indigenous or cultural heritage value.

B. For the Residential Zone

a) Residential Development – Dwelling House, Dual occupancy and Accommodation Units

PC 29 Height

The height of residential buildings is compatible with and complementary to the character of the urban environment.

 

The proposed development involves the establishment of two single storey dwelling units on the site.  The maximum building height above ground level will not exceed 4.5 metres, which is consistent with the character of the urban area.

PC 30 Site Coverage and Setbacks

(a) Residential building design and siting maintains the character of the locality in terms of building bulk.

(b) Residential buildings are located to ensure the local amenity and streetscape are protected and enhanced.

 

AS 30.1

The combined footprint of the proposed buildings (including carports) will occupy approximately 370.2m² of the site, equating to 36.6% site coverage, which is below the maximum 40% site coverage for accommodation units.

 

The development is consistent to the local character and amenity in this respect.

 

AS 30.2 – AS 30.4

Not Applicable – The development is not for dual occupancies.

 

AS 30.5 - AS 30.7

The proposed dwelling units are setback 6.5m from the front property boundary. The applicant is seeking a boundary relaxation of 0.5m as there is a sewerage line traversing the property at the rear. It is considered that the reduced setbacks will not compromise the character and amenity of the area.

 

A minimum setback of 3.0 metres will be provided from the proposed buildings to the side boundaries of the site.

 

PC 31 Residential amenity For Dual Occupancies and Accommodation Units:

The location and design of dual occupancies provides for adequate privacy, sunlight, ventilation and open space.

 

The proposed units are adequately setback from site boundaries to ensure adequate sunlight, ventilation and open space is provided for residents.  Screen fencing will be established between the units and along the site boundaries to provide private open space at the rear of the existing and proposed dwelling units.

 

PC 32 Landscaping For Dual Occupancies and Accommodation Units:

Landscaping on the site should be:

(a)  visually pleasing and create an attractive environment;

(b)  located to take account of the direction of the breezes and sun; and

(c)  located to give privacy and buffering from any potential incompatible uses.

(d)  Located to avoid interference with electricity lines and infrastructure.

Landscaping will be established adjacent the site boundaries and in front of the dwelling units.  Site landscaping will contribute to the overall amenity of the development and local streetscape. 

 

 

3.0       Assessment Summary

 

Although the proposed development requires impact assessment, the proposal does not conflict with the intent of the Residential Zone.  The development is consistent with the scale and character of residential development in the Roma Town area and will contribute to the range of housing available within the community.

 

 


Attachment 2

Plans of development

 












Attachment 3

Adopted Infrastructure Charges Notice

 

 

 


ADOPTED INFRASTRUCTURE CHARGES NOTICE

 

Issued by Maranoa Regional Council in accordance with:

 

1.   Section 648F of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009

2.   State planning regulatory provision (adopted charges) 2012

3.   Maranoa Regional Council Resolution to adopt Infrastructure Charges for the Roma Planning Scheme under the State planning regulatory provision (adopted charges), 2012 – effective 26 September 2012

4.   Development Approval 2013/18803 for a Material Change of Use for Accommodation Units (Two Units) on land at 13 Major Street, Roma QLD 4455, described as Lot 2 on RP74877.

 

(a)        The amount of the charge:

 

$21,000.00 is payable as infrastructure charges.

 

This is based on an adopted charge of $21,000.00 per 3+ bedroom dwelling unit.

 

A discount of $21,000 is applicable based on the monetary equivalent of the existing lawful use of the premises.

 

(b)       The land to which the charge applies:

 

This charge is levied in respect of a Development Approval for a Material Change of Use for Accommodation Units (Two Units) on land at 13 Major Street, Roma QLD 4455, described as Lot 2 on RP74877.

 

(c)        The person to whom the charge must be paid:

 

Chief Executive Officer,

Maranoa Regional Council

 

(d)       When the charge is payable:

 

Prior to commencing construction of the approved development.

 

(e)       If the local government has, under its adopted infrastructure charges resolution, provided for the charge to increase, an additional amount, worked out in compliance with section 648D(10)(b) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, is payable on the day the charge is paid:

 

The Maranoa Regional Council Resolution to adopt Infrastructure Charges for the Roma Planning Scheme under the State planning regulatory provision (adopted charges) 2102 – effective 26 September 2012, provides for increases in charges to be made in accordance Section 7 of that Resolution. The increases are related to the Consumer Price Index (all Groups) for Brisbane.


ADVICE ABOUT THIS ADOPTED INFRASTRUCTURE CHARGES NOTICE (AICN)

 

When does an AICN lapse?

 

An AICN lapses if the corresponding development approval or compliance permit stops having effect.

 

Negotiated AICN

 

A person who receives an AICN may make a written representation (e.g. a letter, facsimile or email) about the AICN to the entity that gave the notice (i.e. local government or a water distributor retailer) (Chapter 8, Part 4 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA)). If the entity agrees with any of the representations, the entity will issue a negotiated AICN which replaces the original notice.

 

SPA also provides for representations to be made about decision notices under Chapter 6, Part 8. Where a negotiated decision notice affects the amount of an adopted infrastructure charge, the local government may issue a new AICN to replace the original notice (section 364 of the SPA).

 

A representation about an AICN or a decision notice must be started during the period within which the person may make an appeal about the AICN or the decision notice.

 

Permissible change and an AICN

 

A permissible change, is a minor change to a development approval that would not result in a substantially different development (section 367 of the SPA). An AICN, or negotiated AICN, cannot be issued as part of the process for a permissible change to a development approval. In this regard, a permissible change to a development approval should not result in a change that warrants a new AICN.

 

Making an appeal about an AICN

 

A person, who is given an AICN or negotiated AICN and is dissatisfied, may appeal to the Planning and Environment Court (Court) against the notice, under section 478 of the SPA. An appeal against an AICN or a negotiated AICN can only be about:

 whether a charge in the notice is so unreasonable that no reasonable relevant local government, state infrastructure provider or coordinating agency could have imposed it; or

 an error in the calculation of the charge.

 

A person has 20 business days to start an appeal against an AICN or negotiated AICN.

 

Another way to appeal against an AICN or negotiated AICN is the Building and Development Dispute Resolution Committee (Committee). The Committee provides an accessible, affordable and timely service for members of the public not satisfied with decisions made by local governments and private certifiers. Errors in the calculation of the charge can be appealed to the Committee, under section 535 of the SPA.

 

An appeal against an AICN or negotiated AICN, to either the Court or the Committees, is not an appeal against a development application, development approval, compliance assessment or compliance permit. As such, an appeal does not affect the period in which the corresponding development approval or compliance permit takes effect and lapses.

 

 

FOR YOUR REFERENCE:

 

Extract from the Sustainable Planning Act 2009- Section 478

 

478    Appeals about particular charges for infrastructure

 

(1) This section applies to a person who has been given, and is dissatisfied with—

(a) an infrastructure charges notice, regulated infrastructure charges notice, adopted infrastructure charges notice or regulated State infrastructure charges notice; or

(b) a negotiated infrastructure charges notice, negotiated regulated infrastructure charges notice, negotiated adopted infrastructure charges notice or negotiated regulated State  infrastructure charges notice.

(2) The person may appeal to the court against the notice.

(3) An appeal against a notice mentioned in subsection (1) must be started within 20 business days after the day the notice is given to the person.

(4) An appeal under this section may only be about—

(a) whether a charge in the notice is so unreasonable that no reasonable relevant local government, State infrastructure provider or coordinating agency could have imposed it; or

(b) an error in the calculation of the charge.

To see details of other sections of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, you can go to the legislation section of the Queensland Government website. The following internet link may assist:

http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/S/SustPlanA09.pdf

 

 http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/S/SustPlanA09.pdf

 

 
(5) To remove any doubt, it is declared that an appeal under this section can not be about the methodology used to establish an adopted infrastructure charge or the charge in a relevant infrastructure charges schedule, regulated infrastructure charges schedule or regulated State infrastructure charges schedule.

 

 

 

 

 

     


Attachment 1

Minutes of Meeting - Local Builders Group - 28 March 2014

 

MINUTES

Meeting              Local Builders Group                                                                                       Date      28 March 2014

Attendees          Cr. Schefe (DS), Mandy Schneekloth (MRC) (MS), Ryan Gittins (MRC)(RG), Peter Beitz(PB), Mark Nicholls (MN)

Apologies           Stephen Duff, Les Allwood, Six Mile Building, Tim White, Cr. O’Neil, Cr. Newman, Cr. Wason

Chairperson       Cr. Schefe                                           Minutes               Ryan Gittins                        Venue                  Ernest Brock Room, Roma

Description

Comments

Actions

Who

When

Meeting Commencement

6:53pm Friday 28 March 2014

 

 

 

Introduction

·    Discussion regarding local market & workloads

·    Meeting will be used  to create a voice for industry members to communicate with Council

·    Construction is a pillar of the economy – it’s everyone’s best interest to work collaboratively towards the industry’s development

·    VIC stats indicate that $1million construction investment results in 7 local jobs – significant wealth retained in the local economy.

·    Meetings will be held on a monthly basis

·    Question – Should this meeting be open to local businesses only or local branches? (More discussion next meeting)

·    Ideally the group should nominate a chairperson, council will provide ongoing support (eg. Organisation & minute taking)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Previous Minutes

Nil

 

 

 

Previous Actions

Nil

 

 

 

 

Agenda Items

 

Council Procurement Policy

·    Council is in the process of amending its procurement policy

·    Question – Do local builders have any concerns about the process to do business with Council?

·    Answer – sub-$150,000 work packages (quote system) are not complicated – tender system for bigger jobs is an issue.

·    Department of State Development Infrastructure & Planning (DSDIP) is developing a system that will help to increase the number of work packages provided to local businesses (increased communication and education)

·    Council will be holding a workshop on our procurement and tender process in June 2014 – all businesses welcome.

·    Council will release a ‘guide to doing business with Council’ (approximately June 2014) to help educate the business community on the process and clear up any misconceptions.

 

 

 

 

My Maranoa App

·    Council will release the My Maranoa App in April 2014– A mobile communication tool for residents and visitors.

·    A business directory will exist on the App and free registrations are now available.

·    App will inform local residents and council officers alike – approx. 75% of regional businesses don’t have an online presence; therefore it’s difficult to know what businesses are operating in the region and what their capability is.

 

 

 

Council Procurement – Facilities Department

·    MS has difficulty with getting 3 quotes from local tradespeople for various maintenance/building tasks.

·    MN – it is difficult to find the time to quote.

·    MS – could a local consultancy business (or similar) provide casual office support?

·    Council needs to implement systems for better communication (internally), non- ambiguous specification for work etc.

·    MS is happy to hear from local tradespeople who have capacity to work

 

 

 

Quality Assurance of tradespeople

·    MS has difficulty in vetting potential tradespeople

·    PB/MN – QBSA online provided a history of each builder

·    Registered tradespeople are subjected to annual audits.

·    Avoids duplication of asking for third-party accredited systems & processes, financial information etc. – all information available in one place.

 

 

 

General Discussion

·    Council certifiers are prompt

·    Question – Is there enough land available for development?

·    Answer – This is an issue, developers buy a majority of the lot stock and the cost of land is restricting development

·    Buoyant growth in Roma/ Maranoa – 1%p.a. growth – approx. 138 extra residents per year (regionally)

·    Best night for meetings – Thursday was suggested.

 

 

 

 

Next Meeting   Targeting Thursday 1 May 2014

Venue                  TBC

Chairperson       TBC

Minutes               Ryan Gittins