Agenda of Council Meeting - Monday, 19 August 2024

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 6

19/8/2024

A meeting of the Open Portion of the Council will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall on Monday, 19 August 2024 at 5.00 pm.

Neil Noye

Acting Chief Executive Officer

The title Chief Executive Officer is a term of reference for the General Manager as appointed by Council pursuant s.61 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas).

ELECTED MEMBERS:

Lord Mayor Reynolds

Deputy Lord Mayor Dr Z E Sherlock

Alderman M Zucco

Councillor W F Harvey

Councillor M S C Dutta

Councillor J L Kelly

Councillor L M Elliot

Alderman L A Bloomfield

Councillor R J Posselt

Councillor B Lohberger

Councillor W N S Coats

Councillor G H Kitsos

APOLOGIES:
Councillor M S C Dutta

LEAVE OF ABSENCE:

Deputy Lord Mayor Dr Z E Sherlock

1. Acknowledgement of Country

2. Confirmation of Minutes

The Chairperson reports that she has perused the minutes of the meeting of the Open Portion of the Council meeting held on Monday, 22 July 2024, finds them to be a true record and recommends that they be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

3. Transfer of Agenda Items

Are there any items, which the meeting believes, should be transferred from this agenda to the closed agenda or from the closed agenda to the open agenda, in accordance with the procedures allowed under Section 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015?

4. Communication from the Chairperson

5. Notification of Council WorKshops

In accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the General Manager reports that the following workshops have been conducted since the last ordinary meeting of the Council.

Date: 29 July 2024

Purpose: Elizabeth Street Vision plan | Urban Design guidelines | Battery Point walkway | Governance Structure

Attendance:

The Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Z Sherlock, Alderman M Zucco, Councillors B Harvey, M Dutta, J Kelly, L Elliot, Alderman L Bloomfield, Councillors R Posselt, B Lohberger, W Coats, and G Kitsos.

Apologies:

The Lord Mayor Councillor A Reynolds

Date: 12 August 2024

Purpose: Pedestrian Scramble Phase Trial - Peer Review | Review of Strategies and Plans | Model Code of Conduct Changes | Conciliation Briefing

Attendance:

The Lord Mayor Councillor A Reynolds, Alderman M Zucco, Councillors B Harvey, J Kelly, L Elliot, Alderman L Bloomfield, Councillors R Posselt, and G Kitsos.

Apologies:

The Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Dr Z Sherlock, Councillor M Dutta.

Leave of Absence:
Councillor W Coats.

6. Public Question Time

Regulation 31 Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.
File Ref: 16/119-001

6.1 Public Questions

6.2 Responses to Public Questions Taken On Notice

“In accordance with the procedures approved in respect to Public Questions Time, the following responses to questions taken on notice are provided to the Council for information.

The Council is reminded that in accordance with Regulation 31(4) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Chairperson is not to allow discussion or debate on either the question or the response.”

6.2.1 Mr Mervin Reed - Works Depot - Giblin Street

File Ref: F24/71515

Report of the Manager City Infrastructure of 19 August 2024.

6.2.2 Mr Chris Merridew - Crowther Statue

File Ref: F24/75120; 16/119-001

Report of the Chief Executive Officer of 19 August 2024.

RECOMMENDATION

That the following responses to public questions taken on notice, be received and noted.

Item No. 10

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 14

19/8/2024

REPORT TITLE: Waste Management - Strategic Review

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Project Manager - Office of the CEO
Acting Chief Executive Officer

1. Report Summary

1.1. The purpose of this report is to propose actions to underpin the future delivery of waste management services and embrace the circular economy.

1.2. The report notes the implementation of, and the need to review, the Council’s Waste Management Strategy 2015-2030.

1.3. Detail is also provided on the strategic analysis of waste management recently prepared by Council officers which details waste volumes, emerging issues, and targets.

2. Recommendation

That:

1. The report detailing the outcome of a strategic review of the City’s waste management services be noted.

2. The City’s Waste Management Strategy 2015-2030 be reviewed and updated to include the identification of new waste volume and diversion targets along with the actions necessary to achieve those targets.

3. Approval be provided for the preparation of plans for the redevelopment of the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre to optimise material recovery from the waste stream, which will be submitted to the Council for final approval.

4. The Chief Executive Officer be authorised to:

(i) Undertake a review of the City’s waste management services including the associated governance arrangements including potential membership of the Southern Waste Solutions Joint Authority.

(ii) Identify external funding opportunities to help meet the costs associated with the redevelopment of the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre.

(iii) Report back to the Council following completion of these actions.

3. Background

3.1. The City of Hobart has made a decision to close the McRobies Gully landfill in 2030 and it is therefore necessary for the Council to undertake a strategic review of waste management options moving forward, as the Council can use this opportunity to propel the community towards best practice waste management practices and processes in the near future.

Strategic Analysis

3.2. A comprehensive strategic analysis of the City’s waste management services has been completed and the report prepared as a result of this analysis is attached.

3.3. The City developed a Waste Management Strategy in 2015 which contains 91 actions, the vast majority of which have either been completed or substantially progressed. The strategy, when developed sought to position the City as a leader in contemporary waste management.

3.4. Implementation of the strategy over its first five years was effective resulting in the introduction of new services and initiatives, that same momentum has not, however, been maintained over the last four years. In addition, the waste management landscape has changed dramatically over the last decade.

Given the circumstances it is time for the City’s Waste Management Strategy to be reviewed and renewed.

Emerging Trends and Challenges

3.5. Waste management and resource recovery operate in a dynamic environment, changing in response to government policy, industry development, market conditions and other circumstances.

3.6. The 2020 National Waste Report identified several issues likely to shape the future of waste management; some of the issues are global and some are national. All either directly impact or have the potential to impact the way waste is managed at the local level in Hobart.

3.7. The attached paper provides details on a range of issues and challenges, all of which should be considered as the City re-evaluates it approach to the management of waste and seeks to embrace the circular economy.

Governance

3.8. A review undertaken by Wise Lord and Ferguson in 2013 considered options for alternative management arrangements for the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre.

3.9. The review identified the continued management of the site under an ‘in-house’ arrangement to be suboptimal, however, the Council rejected a proposal to make changes and the issue has not been formally reconsidered since that time.

3.10. As detailed below, a range of waste services are delivered (and managed) by the City in addition to the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre.

3.11. Options for the future management of waste services include:

· Continuation of services managed by the City of Hobart utilising employees and Council-owned fleet.

· Continuation of services managed by the City of Hobart utilising contractors to deliver services (either kerbside collections, landfill management or other).

· Establishment of a single authority with services delivered via either of the above options.

· Establishment of a new joint authority with other councils in the region to deliver all waste management services.

· Engage with TasWaste South regarding management of waste services delivered by the City.

· Engage with the Southern Waste Solutions Joint Authority regarding the management of waste services delivered by the City.

· Engage with Kingborough Waste Solutions regarding the management of waste services delivered by the City.

· Or a mix of the above.

It is an appropriate time for the City to consider the model for the future management of all its waste services.

Service Delivery

3.12. The City delivers a range of waste management services including:

· Weekly collection of kerbside waste;

· Fortnightly collection of kerbside co-mingled recyclable materials;

· Fortnightly collection of kerbside FOGO materials;

· Public litter and recycling bins;

· McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre encompassing transfer station and landfill;

· Organic composting operation;

· A range of waste reduction and reuse initiatives and programs;

· Community education programs; and

· Support for the resource recovery centre.

3.13. The City also jointly owns a property located at Lutana, the ongoing ownership of which is contingent on the site being dedicated for the use of waste management purposes. This site is currently leased to Southern Waste Solutions.

A comprehensive review of the waste management services provided by the City is proposed.

McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre & Landfill

3.14. The centrepiece of the City’s waste management service is the operation of the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre with 85,000 transactions over the weighbridge each year.

3.15. The McRobies Gully Landfill has operated for many decades. The site operates under the Environmental Protection Notice (EPN 715/1- dated 2004) issued under section 44 of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994. The EPN was amended in 2016 (via permit conditions number 9322) when approval was secured for the landfill’s new filling heights and the proposed closure of the operation in 2030.

3.16. The centre includes a contemporary waste transfer station (WTS) with a walking floor and compactor and a well-managed landfill disposal area.

3.17. The centre was designed in 2012, the original aim was to provide access to a contemporary waste transfer station avoiding the need to visit the (active) landfill face. This infrastructure also provides the opportunity for the relocation of the residual waste (offsite) once the landfill closes.

3.18. The layout of the site and the infrastructure currently provided does not promote an optimum level of material recovery. As a result, the overall site design (whilst good) does not optimise ease of access or traffic flow by those delivering materials suitable for recovery and reuse.

3.19. A range of initiatives have been introduced over the last decade to improve access around the site. Facilities (bins, bays etc) are provided for the recovery of pre-sorted materials; however, their locations do not encourage high utilisation and signage is poor.

3.20. There is the opportunity to install new contemporary infrastructure where the comingled residual waste can be sorted, and reusable material recovered.

A comprehensive review and reconfiguration is required to facilitate increased material recovery.

3.21. To ensure licence compliance which meet reporting requirements, the McRobies Gully Landfill area is surveyed each year. The annual survey also monitors the progression of the landfill towards its final close out heights and levels.

3.22. The most recent survey was undertaken in August 2023. The survey identified the following:

Cell	Date of Survey	Design Volume (m3)	Total Volume Used	Void Space Remaining in Cell
Western Cell (In Active)	11 November 2022	327,500	4,800	285,100
Active Cell	20 August 2023	983,500	342,100	581,400

3.23. The void space in each cell has been discounted to all space for the application of the final capping as will be required.

3.24. The survey identifies the opportunity for the landfill to operate longer than originally thought.

3.25. Progressive closure of the landfill and rehabilitation of the site will enable consideration to be given to the future use of the area involved. The location, topography and site access are all challenging and may restrict potential community usage of the area.

3.26. It will be essential for the extraction of methane gas from the former landfill area to be optimised. This extraction helps reduce emissions and provides income for the City. Additional revenue might be available through the implementation of additional infrastructure to generate electricity, through solar or wind generation.

3.27. Site planning will be required to establish if there could be opportunities for the former landfill area to be used for other recreational activities.

Waste Volumes and Targets

3.28. The attached paper provides detail on Global, National and Local waste generation trends.

3.29. Some countries record waste volumes as low as 303kg per capita with diversion rates of up to 100%. Complete diversion, however, includes the use of waste to energy technology to avoid residual waste going to landfill.

3.30. The 2020 National Waste Report provides detail on waste generation in Australia. The report notes that during the financial year 2020–21 Australia generated an estimated 75.8 million tonnes (Mt) of waste including 25.2 Mt of building and demolition materials, 14.4 Mt of organics, 12.0 Mt of ash, 7.4 Mt of hazardous waste (mainly contaminated soil), 5.8 Mt of paper and cardboard, 5.7 Mt of metals and 2.6 Mt of plastics.

3.30.1. This is equivalent to 2.95 tonnes (t) per capita.

3.31. The 2018 National Waste Policy: Less Waste, More Resources was agreed by all Australian governments and sets a path for Australia’s waste and resource recovery to 2030 and beyond.

3.32. The policy is implemented through the 2019 National Waste Policy Action Plan, which guides investment and supports policy reform to better manage Australia’s waste and resource recovery.

3.33. The Action Plan identifies seven targets underpinned by eighty actions, to be delivered collaboratively between governments, industry, and the community. A Resource Recovery Reference Group oversees delivery of the Action Plan and advises environment ministers on progress and amendments needed to ensure the Action Plan remains ambitious and relevant.

3.34. The National Waste Policy Action Plan 2019 set national targets for waste and resource recovery. The targets were:

· Reduce total waste generated in Australia by 10% per person by 2030;

· Fifty percent recovery across all waste streams by 2025 and 80% by 2030;

· Halve the amount of organic waste sent to landfill by 2030;

· Make comprehensive, economy-wide, and timely data publicly available to support better consumer, investment, and policy decisions;

· A phase out of problematic and unnecessary plastics by 2025; and

3.35. The national target of 50% recovery across all waste streams by 2025 was ambitious for some materials, particularly for smaller jurisdictions that did not have landfill levies and policies in place to improve recycling rates.

3.36. These targets are measured against baselines for the 2016–17 financial year reported in National Waste Reports. The attached paper provides detail on the progress being made against the targets in the National Waste Policy Action Plan.

3.37. Both the National Waste Policy and Action Plan are now 5 years old, and it is clear the targets set in 2019 are not being met. A review of the Action Plan is underway.

3.38. Whilst the outcome of the review is not yet known, the Australian Government has been developing a new circular economy framework. This Framework might have similarities to the EU version (although this is not confirmed) and was due to be released to the Environmental Ministers when they met in June 2024.

3.39. Historically, variations in Tasmanian waste data between reporting years has been affected by inconsistencies in reporting. As a result, it has been difficult to discern meaningful trends in waste data, which has, until now, largely been reported voluntarily.

3.40. The introduction of the landfill levy has seen a significant improvement in both the quality and frequency of reporting.

3.41. The volume of waste generated in Hobart in 2023 totalled 43,075 tonnes. This equates to just over 737kg per person. These volumes include the commercial waste delivered to the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre. Some of this waste is derived from outside the Hobart Municipal Area.

An essential component of the City’s new waste management strategy will be the identification of targets to ensure the progressive reduction of volumes of waste produced in the City.

3.42. Recovery rates in Hobart have been stagnant (sitting around 50%) over the last decade, despite the introduction of initiatives such as the FOGO service.

3.43. The redevelopment of the McRobies Waste Management Centre will be a key step in this process to enable significant material diversion and significantly lessen the volume of material currently deposited on the walking floor in the transfer station.

3.44. An audit of kerbside (household) bins undertaken in May 2023 identified the relatively low levels of contamination in the City’s co-mingled recycling of 5.36% (up marginally from previous years) and the very low contamination in the FOGO bin of just .23%.

3.45. Importantly however, the audit found the content of the general waste bin contained 59% of material that could (and should) be placed elsewhere and avoid landfill - almost 46% of this material could have been placed in the FOGO bin whilst the other 14% was misplaced comingled recyclables.

3.46. Whilst the level of food waste (in the waste bins) has reduced since the introduction of the FOGO service (44% down to 38%), there remains significant opportunity to achieve better results in this area.

3.47. The audit identified that the content of the FOGO bin was predominantly vegetation. There is a significant opportunity for this service to include more food waste.

Arrangements are in place for this audit to be undertaken again this year. The new audit will also review and assess the material delivered to the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre.

Collaboration and Advocacy

3.48. The City is well placed to establish itself as a regional (and state) leader in best practice waste management practices and processes. The revision of the City’s waste management strategy and the proposals contained within this report will help to achieve this goal.

3.49. The City’s direct responsibilities do not extend beyond the Municipal Area, and it will be essential for the City to collaborate with others to achieve optimal outcomes for the region.

3.50. Such collaboration could include partnerships or membership of regional authorities. The City is a member of the Southern Tasmanian Regional Waste Authority, trading as TasWaste South. Ongoing support of that Authority to enable it to be strong and effective is essential.

3.51. Opportunities may also exist for the City to consider membership of other waste authorities in Southern Tasmania.

3.52. In addition, it will be necessary for the City to be a strong voice and advocate effectively with the LGAT, industry, government, and service providers. This approach is essential to ensure the ongoing availability of facilities to process recovered material in the region. Examples are regional organic processing facilities, a modern high functioning material recovery facility (MRF) and glass processing facilities.

4. Capital City Strategic Plan

4.1. The Capital City Strategic Plan 2023 identifies the following relevant action:

6.3.1 Implement significant waste reduction actions and programs to ensure the City’s objective of zero waste to landfill by 2030 is achieved.

5. Financial Viability

5.1. Avoidance of waste has significant environmental benefits and results in direct cost saving. This will particularly be the case when residual waste is relocated from McRobies Gully following the closure of the City’s landfill.

5.2. It will, however, be necessary for the City to invest in infrastructure, programs, and initiatives to achieve the required level of waste avoidance.

5.3. The funds required will be a mix of operational and capital with investment required in the following areas:

· Community education and initiatives to promote waste avoidance and material recovery.

· Redevelopment of the McRobies Gully Waste Management Centre (including flood mitigation work).

· Progressive rehabilitation of the McRobies Gully Landfill.

· Transport and processing of residual waste from McRobies Gully following the landfill closure.

5.4. The City raises operational revenue through the imposition of rates and charges on properties and the collection of gate fees at McRobies Gully. The review of services proposed earlier in this report may provide opportunity for the identification of efficiencies to help offset increasing operational costs.

5.5. Optimisation of material recovery (particularly at McRobies Gully) will provide commercial opportunities for the City to sell the recovered material, rather than meeting the costs associated with its burial in landfill.

5.6. The landfill rehabilitation levy currently collected by the City provides funding to meet the costs associated with the rehabilitation of the area used for landfill.

5.7. The installation of infrastructure at the former landfill site to generate energy (gas extraction and other) will also provide a revenue source.

5.8. An assessment of the future of the organic composting operation at McRobies Gully could result in a decision to divest the operation which would generate funds for reinvestment at the site.

5.9. The implementation of the landfill levy by the Tasmanian Government has resulted in the establishment of new grant funding opportunities that could be accessed to help meet the capital costs.

5.10. Additional grant funding opportunities are also available from various programs administered by the Australian Government.

5.11. Detailed assessment and planning will be required as the various plans are developed.

6. Community Engagement/Communication

6.1. The provision of infrastructure and services to optimise material recovery will only be effective if the community is aware of the opportunities available, as such the establishment of campaigns to encourage the reduction of waste is urgently needed.

6.2. Such a campaign should be supported by a program to target the reduction of food in the waste stream, particularly the placement of food (and other organic material) in waste bins.

6.3. Significant amounts of promotional and educational materials have been developed and are available. In Tasmania the regions established a platform known as ReThink Waste this platform provides significant opportunity for the delivery of consistent, statewide campaigns.

6.3.1. The platform has not however realised its full potential and is currently the subject of a review by the three regions in conjunction with the Tasmania Waste and Resource Recovery Board.

6.4. To ensure messaging consistency TasWaste South should be encouraged to give priority to the completion of the ReThink Waste Review.

6.5. The State Government is also developing educational material for use in schools, this process is positive and should be encouraged.

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

Glenn Doyle

Project Manager - Office of the CEO

Neil Noye

ACTING CHIEF EEXECUTIVE OFFICER

Date: 2 August 2024

File Reference: F24/71640

Attachment a: Strategic Overview - Waste Management (Supporting information)

Item No. 11

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 1

19/8/2024

REPORT TITLE: Street-Side Dining Project - Evaluation and Next Steps

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Principal Advisor Design & Project Coordination - Placemaking

Acting Director City Futures

1. Report Summary

1.1. This report provides Elected Members with a post-occupancy evaluation of the Street-Side Dining project and seeks approval of a recommended proposition for the next stage of the project.

2. Key Issues

2.1. This project was part of the City’s response to COVID-19 in building the resilience of our local traders and business operators as they worked their way through the ongoing impacts of the pandemic.

2.2. As context, the Council at its meeting of Thursday, 20 January 2022 resolved to: "Prepare an Outdoor Dining Program across the City in consultation with local traders, including a 'pop up' night-time economy program that facilitates restaurateurs to provide dinner service during summer on footpaths, road reserves and local parks in accordance with appropriate safety standards."

2.3. The authority to enact this resolution was delegated to the CEO.

2.4. In response to this, officers worked with business owners to create expanded outdoor dining spaces in locations where the footpath is too narrow and constrained to allow for this.

2.5. Providing more outdoor seating options broadly benefits local businesses and the City by adding greater vibrancy to our streets and increasing the number of visitors to an area. The project has sought to support businesses in the city through:

2.5.1. The development of higher quality amenities for visitors and locals.

2.5.2. Empowering our business community to improve our public spaces in a collaborative, responsive and equitable way.

2.5.3. Improving the accessibility of Hobart's footpaths by removing obstructions from the building edge.

2.5.4. Testing a low maintenance wicking bed planter watering system that could be used elsewhere by the city.

2.6. Three next stage options were considered at an Elected Member Workshop on 1 July 2024.

2.7. Taking account of the discussion at the 1 July 2024 Elected Member Workshop it is proposed that the three current Street-Side Dining placements be reinstalled using precast concrete kerb and hotmix infill, as utilised in the widened footpaths in the Midtown area of Elizabeth Street.

2.8. It is further proposed that these would remain in place for an extended period, initially for five years.

2.9. Officers would concurrently work on preparing a formal Street-Side Dining program going forward, including guidelines for those traders and community organisations that may want to establish their own extended on-street dining zones. This would include upgrading the current Street-Side Dining ‘kit of parts’ for ongoing use as part of this program. This policy work would also respond to a number of business and property owners that have already expressed interest in the extension of the Street-Side Dining approach to other areas in the city.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. Subject to confirmed trader commitment to participate and fully utilise and activate the spaces, all three current Street-Side Dining installations: Simple Cider (189 Elizabeth Street), Straight Up Coffee + Food (202a Liverpool Street) and Pilgrim Coffee (54 Liverpool Street) be reinstalled using precast concrete kerb, and hotmix infill as used in the widened footpaths in Midtown Elizabeth Street, with these remaining in place for an extended period, initially five years.

2. The installation of the area associated with Simple Cider be subject to the owner of that business being in receipt of an occupancy permit that is not for a temporary period.

3. Each participating business be charged for the full cost of installation per site of $10,000, payable in yearly instalments of $2,000, an annual planter box hire and maintenance fee of $800, plus the applicable outdoor dining fee, all figures being exclusive of GST.

4. The cost of removing the current installations (estimated to be $15,000) and an allocation for the occasional maintenance of the extended footpaths ($3,000), be met by the City of Hobart.

5. A further report be presented to the Council with a view to establish an ongoing Street-Side Dining Program, supported by Policy and Guidelines including for those traders and others that may want to establish extended on-street dining or activity spaces of their own.

4. Background

4.1. The method chosen for the current installations was subject to detailed risk analysis and technical assessment, including independent Road Safety Audits (RSA) for each site by GHD, prior to rollout. The installation locations are:

· Simple Cider (189 Elizabeth Street). Operational February 2023.

· Straight Up Coffee + Food (202a Liverpool Street). Operational March 2023.

· Pilgrim Coffee (54 Liverpool Street). Operational April 2023. Dumpling World was a participant for a period, but after a change in ownership chose not to the occupy their space.

Post-occupancy performance

4.2. After the infrastructure was installed, the City undertook the following assessments of the post-occupancy performance of the installation:

· Traffic and pedestrian movement observation report for the Simple Cider site undertaken by Sage Automation.

· RSA (Road Safety Audit) for the Simple Cider site undertaken by GHD.

· City Mobility additional design and safety advice.

· Community engagement surveys for all three sites.

4.3. The report by Sage Automation considered traffic density, park space utilisation, pedestrian activity and interactions with the Simple Cider installation on Elizabeth Street over a month period. The data for this study was derived from camera footage of the street captured by temporary cameras, with the analysis using computer vision.

4.4. Taking account of the data collected, the GHD RSA, and in-line with the iterative and adjustable intent of the Street-Side Dining project, City Mobility has provided detailed additional design guidance (effective from 1 September 2024) to further improve the functioning of this 'kit of parts' solution for its ongoing and temporary use (up to 12 months at any one location).

4.5. This includes the addition of concrete kerbing, a larger concrete planter box on the traffic facing edge of the installation, more extensive line markings (channelised on-street chevrons) and the application of the decking system used at Straight Up Coffee + Food.

4.6. The universal application of a 40km/h or lower at each location will also need to be applied. In this case only the Straight Up Coffee + Food site would require a reduction in speed from 50km/h to 40km/h. These changes would need to be undertaken if the current installations were to be retained.

Community engagement surveys

4.7. Three different surveys were undertaken using the Your Say engagement tool. Each of these surveys targeted a different stakeholder group. These were:

· General public (largely patrons or users). 97 respondents.

· Surrounding businesses. 9 respondents.

· Participating businesses. 3 respondents.

4.8. The surveys sought to understand community sentiments about and attitudes towards the project. The surveys were promoted through social media and onsite signage and flyers, and City staff dropped in to surrounding and participating businesses to discuss the surveys in person.

· 94% of the public was either happy or very happy with the project.

· 88% of surrounding businesses were supportive of the trial and the same amount would support the project expanding to other parts of the city.

· Participating businesses strongly agreed that having the trial has contributed positively to their businesses.

· Participating hosts indicated that their business would be negatively commercially affected by the removal of the installations.

· All the surrounding businesses either strongly agreed or somewhat agreed that the Street-Side Dining had created a positive 'vibe' in the area.

· There were no significant concerns raised by surrounding or participating businesses, with no surrounding business indicating a negative impact on their business.

4.9. The Community Engagement Report is attached (Attachment A).

Other technical performance considerations

4.10. The wicking bed system installed in the planter boxes requires monthly water cell top-ups. It has performed very well, with all plants flourishing.

4.11. There have been no adverse stormwater performance issues.

4.12. Advice from the City's accessibility team indicates that the installations, and in particular the relocation of outdoor dining away from the building line, in principle could be seen to improve pedestrian movement and accessibility outcomes by providing improved shore-lining for persons who have low vision or who are blind.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. Very detailed risk assessment was undertaken for this project as noted above in Section 4 of this report.

6. Discussion

6.1. Three next stage options were considered by ELT at its meeting of 13 June 2024 and an Elected Member Workshop on 1 July 2024.

6.1.1. Remove the current Street-Side Dining installations after the staging of the 2024 Festival of Voices, with this 'kit of parts' being enhanced in-line with the City Mobility design guidance and then redeployed to another three businesses.

6.1.2. All three installations be reinstalled in-line with the City Mobility design guidance for a further 12 months, after which they could be redeployed to another three businesses.

6.1.3. All three installations be reinstalled using precast concrete kerb, and hotmix infill as used in the widened footpaths in Midtown Elizabeth Street. These would remain in place for an extended period of at least five years plus. Some planter boxes and other elements of the 'kit of parts' may be reused in this context. This approach would also allow the redeployment of the 'kit of parts' as detailed at 6.1.1.

6.2. The Elected Member Workshop was advised by officers that taking account of cost and operational benefits, including the opportunity to recover construction costs over time, ELT suggested that the third option be pursued.

6.2.1. This proposal also takes account of City Mobility advice that the construction of a temporary arrangement utilising precast concrete kerb, and hotmix infill is the most appropriate for a medium term (greater than 12 months) arrangement for footpath widening.

6.3. There was general alignment with this proposal at the Elected Member Workshop, though there was considerable discussion around cost recovery, including interest in reclaiming the full cost of construction/provision from traders.

6.4. Elected Members were also keen to ensure that participating traders are fully committed to use and fully activate the installations in the best way possible, and that the trader occupation areas would be kept clean and well maintained.

6.5. At the workshop Elected Members also sought information on the outcomes of the Midtown footpath extension outdoor dining trial. Officers provided a commitment to include this information as part of this report to Council on Street-Side Dining.

6.6. The outcomes of the Elizabeth Midtown footpath extension outdoor dining trial were presented to an Elected Member Workshop on 13 June 2023.

6.6.1. A briefing paper for this Workshop is shown at Attachment B. This paper also included:

6.6.1.1. A comprehensive place experience assessment of Elizabeth Street between Melville and Brisbane streets undertaken by Place Score which tracked a positive change in community and customer perceptions, capturing the social impact of investment in the area.

6.6.1.2. An analysis of on-street parking occupancy data in Elizabeth Street (between Bathurst and Patrick streets), Melville Street (between Argyle and Murray streets) and Brisbane Street (between Argyle and Murray streets), as well as sampling parking data before and after the installation of the footpath extension.

6.6.1.3. Sage Automation observations and analysis of bike usage, including the frequency and timing of the temporary uphill bike lane installed during the trial, the encroachment of vehicles, both parked and in the loading zone, onto the bike lane, and the interactions between parked and parking vehicles and cyclists.

6.6.1.4. Considerations of the installation’s accessibility, potential stormwater impacts, and functional performance.

6.6.2. The PowerPoint presentation, briefing paper, and the notes of the Workshop were then provided to all Elected Members on the Hub. Elected Member Bulletin were advised of this on 26 June 2024.

6.6.3. In this material, Elected Members were advised that ELT considered at its meeting of 8 June 2023, to continue the trial until the completion of the Elizabeth Street Vision Plan.

6.6.4. Property owners, businesses and community members were advised of this in early October 2023.

6.6.5. As a project update, the Midtown planter boxes now include the wicking system trialled as part of the Street-Side Dining project.

6.6.6. The kerb formation of the top part of the smaller footpath extension near ‘The Knife Shop’ (177 Elizabeth Street) has also been adjusted to prevent the ‘stormwater spouting’ (where the stormwater goes over the kerb and onto the footpath) observed during two heavy rainfall events in March 2021 and August 2022.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. This report responds to the following Pillars in the Hobart Community Vision:

Pillar 1: Sense of Place.

Pillar 4: City Economies.

Pillar 5: Movement and Connectivity.

Pillar 7: Built Environment.

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. This report responds to several key actions in the Capital City Strategic Plan 2023:

4 3.3: Support opportunities for businesses to test new ideas and explore how creative regulation can support innovation.

5.4.1: Gather and appropriately manage relevant data that can be used to guide decision-making, monitor trends and measure progress.

7.3.5: Measure, manage and support the effective use of city facilities, infrastructure and public spaces.

9. Financial Viability

Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

Costs:

9.1. The removal of all three current installations would cost a total $15,000.

9.2. Modification of the current installations in line with City Mobility Unit design guidance for an additional 12 months would cost $45,200.

9.3. If the installations were to be reinstalled using precast concrete kerb, and hotmix infill, as utilised for the widened footpaths in Midtown of Elizabeth Street, an expenditure of $48,000 would be required.

9.4. This is made up of:

· A total $15,000 required to remove all three current installations.

· Hotmix and kerbing: $10,000 per site.

9.5. As part of the option to convert the current three installations to a kerb and hotmix configuration, it is proposed that each trader would pay the City $2,000 (plus GST) per annum over 5 years for a total of $10,000 (plus GST).

9.6. This would meet the full cost of installation of the new extend footpaths.

9.6.1. Officers propose however, that the cost of removing the current installations ($15,000) be met by the City, given that these installations were part of the initial project, and that many of these assets may be reused as part of future City projects.

9.6.2. At this time, it is also proposed that possible occasional maintenance costs (estimated at $3,000 over the 5-year period) for the extended footpath areas also not be included as part of the cost recovery.

9.7. There is an allocation of $55,000 in the 2024/25 budget for the Street-Side Dining project, with current costs likely to be in the order of $45,000.

Parking Income:

9.8. Only two paid (ticketed) parking spaces were converted to Street-Side Dining as part of the project. The income foregone for these specific locations was around $553 per month for both parking spaces during the 23/24 financial year.

9.9. The total number of non-ticketed parking/loading zones where infringement can be imposed that have been converted to outdoor dining spaces is four. The income foregone for these specific locations was around $6,820 per month for the four non-ticketed parking/loading zones in 23/24.

9.10. Based on previous parking income and infringement records for the parking spaces/loading zones repurposed as part of the project, the total income foregone was around $7,373 per month, or around $88,476 for the full 23/24 financial year.

9.11. While no specific parking use data has been collected and analysed as part of the Street-Side Dining project, based on the attached data analysis for the Midtown project, it could be reasonably assumed that parking demand and utilisation has been displaced to other available locations in nearby streets, with these available spaces working harder and more efficiently.

9.12. As a reference in the Midtown project:

9.12.1. Overall, on-street parking occupancy increased by 5%, from 56% to 61%, indicating that more people have used the on-street parking in the area surrounding Midtown after installation.

9.12.2. More on street parking bays became occupied (50%-75%) up from less than 50% occupied after installation.

9.13. Accordingly, while a possible foregone parking related income is noted above, this is not included in the table below, as it is anticipated that this will be substantially offset by greater use of other City of Hobart parking options.

Trader Fees and Charges:

9.14. Participating traders would have to pay the City $2,000 (plus GST) per annum over five years to meet the capital cost of the new installations.

9.14.1. As noted above, it is proposed that the cost of removing the current installations (around $15,000) be met by the City, given that these installations were part of the initial project, and that many of these assets may be reused as part of future City projects.

9.14.2. If the cost of removing the current installations ($15,000) and the maintenance costs for the extended footpath areas (estimated at $3,000 over the five-year period) were to be transferred to the participating traders, it would increase their contribution by $1,200 per annum over five years.

9.15. Participating businesses would also need to pay the occupation licence fees in the line with scheduled City of Hobart fees and charges.

9.15.1. The outdoor dining site fee income for the full 23/24 financial year for the three installations was in the order of $3,864.

9.16. Traders would also be provided with the opportunity to hire boxes (including plants). This rental, inclusive of maintenance, would have a cost of $800 per annum per participating business.

Impact on Current and Future Years’ Financial Results

9.17. The above information also does not capture the potential economic uplift associated with place-based improvements.

9.18. Taking account of a triple bottom line approach, in addition to the economic benefits for businesses and residents, there is the social capital, social inclusion and social equity value uplift generated through the creation of desirable places, where the identity and reputation of the city is enhanced.

9.18.1. As an example, the City of Melbourne commissioned Urbis to undertake an evaluation of City's Extended Outdoor Dining (EOD) program to quantify the economic benefit and community sentiments toward the program in 2021.

9.18.2. The economic assessment indicated a range of positive results for the broader economy and individual businesses. Businesses and general community were overwhelmingly positive about the program with 88% of residents, business owners/operators and students stated that they felt that the EOD program was a good addition to the city. Furthermore, 75% of businesses generated at least an additional $1,642 per week from the extended outdoor dining areas.

9.18.3. A similar project in the City of Sydney, when undertaking a survey among the participating businesses, highlighted that 74% of them employed additional staff.

9.19. Taking account of the above discussion, the following table only shows the net impact of the direct costs and offsetting income streams over the first 5 years of the project.

· Total estimated income (including outdoor dining revenue): $65,780.

· Total estimated expenditure: $60,000.

Street-Side Dining (3 sites)	2024-25	2025-26	2026-27	2027-28	2028-29

Revenue

Installation recovery	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000	6,000
Planter box hire	2,400	2,400	2,400	2,400	2,400
Revenue from outdoor dining fees	4,304	4,519	4,745	4,982	5,231

Total Revenue	12,704	12,919	13,145	13,382	13,631

Expenditure

Cost of removal of existing installations	15,000	0	0	0	0
Cost of new installations	30,000	0	0	0	0
Possible extended footpath maintenance	0	0	3,000	0	0
Planter box maintenance	2,400	2,400	2,400	2,400	2,400

Total Expenditure	47,400	2,400	5,400	2,400	2,400

Net cost to be covered through Rates	(34,697)	10,519	7,745	10,982	11,231

Asset Related Implications

9.20. There would be no substantial asset implications for the City.

10. Sustainability Considerations

10.1. The innovative use of wicking systems, co-designed with the Nursery team has been highly effective in reducing watering and associated maintenance costs. This could be more widely deployed across the City’s planter box displays.

10.2. The project also offers another means to help green the city in its narrower urban streets where tree planting can be more difficult to deliver due to constrained widths and underground services.

11. Community Engagement

11.1. The Community Engagement Report for the Street-Side Dining program trial is shown at Attachment A.

11.2. Straight Up Coffee + Food, Simple Cider and Pilgrim Coffee have been consulted on the cost contribution approach and have expressed very strong interest in continuing to participate.

11.3. Straight Up Coffee + Food expressed the need for shading provision as part of the upgrade, and Simple Cider noted that electrical supply and permanent furniture is important to them. Officers would work through these matters at the design stage

12. Communications Strategy

12.1. Officers will work with the Communications team to promote the next stage of the project.

13. Innovation and Continuous Improvement

13.1. Conducting this adjustable on-street experiment has allowed the City to devise a tested and repeatable way of providing more flexible on-street dining solutions, which could provide more options available to businesses in the context of the City’s Outdoor Dining Policy and Guidelines which are currently in development.

13.2. Further design work may need to be undertaken in collaboration with the Waterways team to ensure the optimal stormwater performance in some locations. These designs could lead to innovative stormwater solutions while increasing the width of the city’s many narrow footpaths.

13.3. Further, the learnings from the project will also support a response to the Notice of Motion dated 21 September 2016 which sought a review of the Council’s assessment and approvals process for dealing with requests for ‘dining decks’ from restaurants and cafes. A report titled ‘Development of a Parklet Policy’ was considered by the City Infrastructure Committee on 24 May 2017, but was deferred.

13.3.1. This Notion of Motion would be closed out by the proposal to establish an ongoing Program and Policy and Guidelines for Street-Side Dining, including for those traders and others that may want to establish extended on-street dining or activity spaces.

14. Collaboration

14.1. This project has involved collaboration across the organisation, including with the Community Engagement, Communications, City Mobility, Roads, Open Space, Economic Development and Waterways teams.

Qian Pei Choi

Principal Advisor Design & Project Coordination - Placemaking

Philip Holliday

Acting Director City Futures

Date: 13 August 2024

File Reference: F24/64071

Attachment a: Community Engagement Summary Report Street-Side Dining Program Trial (Supporting information)

Attachment b: EM Workshop Briefing Paper - Midtown June 2023 (Supporting information)

Item No. 12

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 1

19/8/2024

REPORT TITLE: School Access Travel Plans

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Senior Transport Engineer

Manager City Mobility

Acting Director City Futures

1. Report Summary

1.1. The City of Hobart has developed School Access Travel Plans, in partnership with school communities, to form part of the City’s ongoing transport strategy and planning to support and encourage active travel modes (walking, scootering, cycling or catching the bus) and improve the health and liveability of Tasmania’s capital city.

1.2. Developing these School Access Travel Plans are a key initiative as outlined in the Hobart Transport Strategy 2024 (HTS2024) (A30).

1.3. Plans, programs and projects can be identified in a School Access Travel Plan to improve routes for students arriving at and leaving school and to encourage and promote active travel within the school community (A7 in the HTS2024). A School Access Travel Plan provides the City of Hobart with the necessary inputs to identify and prioritise projects for resourcing and grant applications.

1.4. The pilot program to trial a methodology to develop these plans was supported in part by a Community Road Safety Partnership grant from the Department of State Growth for the Goulburn Street Primary School, New Town Primary School and South Hobart Primary School.

1.5. The final plans, supported by the schools, are presented here (Attachments A, B &C) and Council is requested to consider them for endorsement.

2. Key Issues

2.1. The City of Hobart has 20 schools catering for primary school children. The enrolment of Tasmanian government primary schools in the City of Hobart is estimated at over 3500 students.

2.1.1. Independent and Catholic Schools, High schools, TAFE and University campuses are also present in the City of Hobart with a student headcount estimated at around 20,000 persons.

2.2. There is a wide diversity in school populations, their catchment areas and the respective transport demands.

2.3. In recent decades, in many parts of Australia, there has been a profound decrease in children walking or cycling to school, with a range of resultant issues, including a very large number of children not getting the daily 60 minutes of physical activity which is recommended for good health and an increased reliance on motor vehicle trips to school with a range of attendant issues created.

2.4. The recognition that each school is unique with its own issues and opportunities to improve school access, and where possible increase active travel modes to school, creates the need for individual School Access Travel Plans.

2.5. There is a wide variety of guidance material in other Australian States relating to the creation of School Travel Plans. There is however no specific Tasmanian program or guidance material for school travel plan creation.

2.5.1. In recognition of this, the City of Hobart was successful in an application for grant funding through the Tasmanian Community Road Safety Partnership scheme to assist with a pilot program to create a School Active Travel Plan.

2.5.2. The pilot program was structured to work with three Tasmanian government primary schools in the City of Hobart to produce Active Travel Plans tailored for each school.

2.6. A School Active Travel Plan allows for Council and the School to focus efforts on agreed priorities to co-operatively work towards improving school access and improving rates of participation in active modes of travel to school.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council endorse the School Active Travel Plans (marked as attachments A, B and C) for:

(i) Goulburn Street Primary School;

(ii) New Town Primary School; and

(iii) South Hobart Primary School

2. The Council notes that projects and programs identified in these plans will be progressively considered through the annual budget process.

3. The Council note that the program will continue with other schools within the Hobart Local Government Area as funding becomes available.

4. Background

4.1. In recent decades, in many parts of Australia, there has been a profound decrease in children walking or cycling to school, with a range of resultant issues, including a very large number of children not getting the daily 60 minutes of physical activity which is recommended for good health and an increased reliance on motor vehicle trips to school with a range of attendant issues created.

4.2. The recognition that each school is unique with its own issues and opportunities to improve school access, and where possible increase active travel modes to school, creates the need for individual School Access Travel Plans.

4.3. The need to create plans with key transport demanders (such as schools) for improved active travel facilities has been recognised in the 2024 Hobart Transport Strategy.

4.4. There is a wide variety of guidance material in other Australian States relating to the creation of School Travel Plans. There is, however, no specific Tasmanian program or guidance material for school travel plan creation.

4.4.1. In recognition of this, the City of Hobart was successful in an application for grant funding through the Tasmanian Community Road Safety Partnership scheme to assist with a pilot program to create a School Active Travel Plan.

4.4.2. The pilot program was structured to work with three Tasmanian government primary schools in the City of Hobart to produce Active Travel Plans tailored for each school.

4.5. For the pilot program, School Access Travel Plans were completed for Goulburn Street Primary School, New Town Primary School as well as South Hobart Primary School.

4.6. The methodology developed key steps such as:

· Identifying schools who wished to partner and work collaboratively with the City of Hobart. Noting not all schools, due to a range of pressures, may have the resources to commit to such a project at a particular time.

· Undertake background research and demographic research for the school.

· Present key information and produce engagement documentation to assist in developing a shared understanding of current conditions.

· Creating survey materials for students, parents, carers and the school community to gather an understanding of issues and opportunities.

· Documenting survey responses and seeking further comment from school communities on the feedback results.

· Analysing, inspecting, considering, classifying and prioritising the issues and projects arising from the feedback report.

· Creating a consolidated report with an action plan for consideration by the school and seeking endorsement for the report.

4.7. The pilot project has generated School Access Travel Plans for the three schools and these plans have been endorsed by the schools.

4.8. The pilot project has generated a range of valuable learnings and understandings for City of Hobart officers which will assist in the undertaking of future plans at other Hobart schools.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. The School Access Travel Plans are planning documents, any resultant projects which will address any relevant legal, risk or legislative considerations as part of the project cycle.

5.2. During the course of the pilot project, the Child and Youth safe Organisations Act 2023 came into effect.

5.2.1. Schedule 2 of the act lists Councils as an entity which must comply with Child and Youth Safe Standards from 1 January 2024.

5.3. Future School Active Travel Plan projects, and the undertaking of the projects and programs outlined in the plans documented in Attachment A, may require City of Hobart Staff and associated consultants or contractors to have specific training or hold appropriate registrations.

5.4. Work in this space to ensure appropriate compliance with the new legislation is ongoing.

6. Discussion

6.1. Working with Schools to identify key issues and barriers affecting student access to schools allows officers to consider and co-create projects and programs to address these.

6.2. Having an agreed plan with identified actions allows for projects to be scoped and developed with confidence that key issues are being addressed.

6.2.1. Having an agreed action plan assists with developing project bids and grant applications to fund initiatives and projects.

6.3. With over 20 educational institutions in Hobart the pilot program has allowed officers to better understand the resourcing effort and key activities required to work with schools to produce the plans.

6.3.1. Given the catchment districts’ for Tasmanian government primary schools are well defined and the higher likelihood that most students at these schools will be coming from the surrounding catchment district, the decision to work with these schools in the first instance was taken.

6.3.2. In contrast, independent schools, high schools, colleges, TAFE and University campuses all source students from much wider catchments presenting much more complex access issues.

6.3.3. There are eleven (11) Tasmanian government primary schools (plus the Sandy Bay Infant School (K-2)) in the City of Hobart. Three (3) schools now have School Access Travel Plans. The Sandy Bay Infant School is not seen as a high priority given the age profile of the school would mean most students would be accompanied or dropped off by carers at the school. It is proposed the remaining eight (8) schools will be progressively offered the opportunity to participate in the program.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. The Community Visions’ Pillar 5, Movement and Connectivity, has a range of strategies which support the creation of School Access Travel Plans to improve student access to their places of learning.

7.1.1. Strategy 5.6.2 states:

“We build smart and creative transport and connectivity solutions through long-term collaborations with all levels of government, education, private industry, and wider communities”.

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. The Strategic Plans Pillar 5 section has a range of strategies which support the creation of School Access Travel Plans to improve student access to their places of learning.

8.1.1. Strategy 5.2.2 states:

“Prioritise and promote opportunities for safe, accessible and integrated active transport.”

9. Regional, State and National Plans and Policies

9.1. The creation of School Access Travel Plans is supported by a range of other State and National Plans and Policies. In particular, reference is made to:

· The Australian and Tasmanian Road Safety Strategies

· The Tasmania Statement (Premier’s Health and Wellbeing Advisory Council)

10. Financial Viability

10.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

10.1.1. Some priority actions have been scoped and included with project budget bids for the 2024-25 Council budget which was approved in June 2024.

10.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

10.2.1. The identified priority actions and projects will be scoped and developed for future year budget bids and grant applications. Any financial implications would be considered as part of the project bid at that time.

10.3. Asset Related Implications

10.3.1. Council assets require periodic renewal and upgrading. Planning for where asset enhancements are required to cater for community needs assists with longer term asset management.

11. Sustainability Considerations

11.1. Supporting and encouraging individuals to use more sustainable, active transport for more of their trips has a range of environmental and health benefits.

11.1.1. Working with primary schools also helps develop conversations amongst young people and their families in respect of the sustainability aspects of transport and movement.

12. Community Engagement

12.1. Extensive school and school community engagement was undertaken with the three schools.

12.1.1. Engagement reports for each school are included with the individual reports as an appendix.

13. Communications Strategy

13.1. The project could be the subject of a press release and wider community communication, in line with the communication strategy being developed as part of the release of the Hobart Transport Strategy 2024.

14. Innovation and Continuous Improvement

14.1. Undertaking a pilot project to develop and trial a methodology and undertake a “learning by doing” approach is an innovative approach to addressing the issues of helping schools improve their student’s physical activity uptake and the more “wicked” problem of improving access and rates of active travel to school.

15. Collaboration

15.1. Collaboration has occurred with the schools involved in the pilot project, the Department of Education and Community Road safety partnership program.

Stuart Baird

Senior Transport Engineer

Daniel Verdouw

Manager City Mobility

Philip Holliday

Acting Director City Futures

Date: 14 August 2024

File Reference: F24/62095; 17/116

Attachment a: Goulburn Street Primary School Access Travel Plan (Supporting information)

Attachment b: New Town Primary School Access Travel Plan (Supporting information)

Attachment c: South Hobart Primary School Access Travel Plan (Supporting information)

Item No. 13

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 1

19/8/2024

REPORT TITLE: 2024-25 New Fees And Charges For Information Requests and New Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Legal and Corporate Governance

Director City Enablers

1. Report Summary

1.1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval to introduce a series of new fees into the City’s Fees and Charges 2024-25 booklet relating to requests for information, marked as Attachment A to this report.

1.2. The new Fees and Charges, and information generally is to occur in accordance with the proposed new ‘Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures’, marked as Attachment B to this report. For completeness, it’s noted that the Ombudsman has reviewed the draft Policy (noting that they cannot give formal advice due to their regulatory role), but have provided ‘feedback,’ which has been incorporated into the Policy. They are broadly supportive of the draft Policy and what it aims to achieve.

1.2.1. Subject to the Council endorsing the new Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures document, this will replace the current Open Data Policy, marked as Attachment C to this report.

2. Key Issues

2.1. Officers wish to flag a series of reforms in addition to these new fees that will seek to further increase transparency and reduce the associated administrative burden (and cost impost) associated with Right to Information Requests (RTIs).

2.2. Officers are presently unable to routinely complete an RTI assessment within the statutory requirement of 20 working days on account of the unprecedented number of applications, which follows an unprecedented level of requests during 2023.

2.3. The existing number of applications and associated workflows significantly exceed that experienced by other councils several times over, (the entire sector only received 153 applications for 2022-23, discussed in detail below).

Rationale for Amending Fees/Charges Schedule

2.4. These new fees relate to requests for information from members of the public previously requested through a Right to Information request.

2.5. Parallel to amending the fees schedule, to provide for increased ‘over-the-counter’ disclosure, the City intends to also formalise a process where certain types of information is provided free of charge. An example would be where an individual is seeking information regarding themself, as provided for under the Personal Information Protection Act. There will be an inflection point where officer discretion will be required on processing ‘simple’ personal information requests free of charge and those requiring significant officer time to search/research, which will be processed on a cost recovery basis.

2.6. Having reviewed all RTI applications received during 2022-23 year the Manger of Legal and Corporate Governance has come to a view that many of the RTI applications could be better (and more speedily) addressed outside of the RTI framework, whereby an applicant simply pays a fee calculated on the average cost of the service and the information is then provided. Or alternatively, the information should have been provided free of charge as a proactive disclosure.

2.7. Under this proposal a cost code would be created where the associated new fee can simply be paid over the phone for simple requests that require the provision of an existing and/or clearly identified document(s). Work is already underway on a ‘payment gateway’ to streamline the processing of RTI fees, which will also help to expedite processing.

2.8. Alternatively, officers can provide an indicative assessment of the likely fee for requests that require significant research/collation – this would ordinarily be only used in exceptional circumstances where significant research was required. Under either approach the public can still request a fee waiver, in accordance with the existing Hardship Policy.

2.9. Documents created in the preceding 12 months would be provided free of charge, (with the exception of those already provided for under the existing Fees and Charges Policy). Many documents are publicly available at the time the relevant Council decision was made and it makes no sense to consider them within the RTI framework. Council has no legal or ethical basis upon which to withhold or redact the materials on account of them having been prepared for a publicly facing purpose (such as a council meeting).

2.10. New ‘over the counter’ disclosures would also be governed by the existing Customer Service Charter, which requires a substantive response within 10 days (for simple requests), cutting the existing RTI timeline (20 days) in half, primarily on account of removing the requirement for complex assessments and redaction of what are public documents, (which should be provided as a matter of course consistent with best governance principles).

Examples of Onerous RTI Applications (Existing Approach)

2.11. An extreme example is whereby an applicant, such as a personal injury lawyer requests CCTV footage of a public place. Currently, officers are required to spend a significant time collating and then viewing the footage (often taking several hours) as part of processing an RTI application.

2.12. At present, there is a standing fee in place in the Fees and Charges booklet for CCTV footage retrieval, however it is unclear as to why RTI requests still are being referred to the Manager Legal and Governance to action as part of an RTI.

2.13. Incident reports are another problematic area where lawyers regularly request ‘all’ incident reports on a specific issue, i.e. footpaths, for the previous 10 years (this is a real-world example). This requires officers to search multiple current and legacy archive systems, potentially consult any third parties named in the reports (a statutory requirement under RTI) and finalise the process within 20 days, for the sum of $46.75.

Existing RTI Framework and Resourcing

2.14. Every year the City of Hobart receives a significant number of requests for information under Right to Information (RTI). During 2022-23 the City received 36 RTI requests, which were in the main processed by a single officer. Officers negotiated a further 4 requests to be considered outside of RTI. By way of comparison the entire local government sector received 152 applications and the Department of Premier and Cabinet only received 11 applications (figures taken from the Justice Department’s 2021-22 Annual Report). It’s also noted that for the week ending 26 July 2024 Council had received six new applications.

2.15. Enhancing the existing Fees and Charges Schedule would allow a significant number of potential RTI applications to be excised from the process and be handled as a simple over-the-counter service. Many requests are uncontroversial, and the information should be provided as part of a best-practice approach to corporate governance.

2.16. If approved, the Legal and Governance Group will implement a program for staff training, as over-the-counter requests would be handled via each Network, with support/advice from the Legal and Governance Group, which would occur in concert with proposed training specific to the RTI framework.

2.17. Under the existing RTI framework Council can only charge the statutory fee of $46.75, noting that it costs Council approximately $80 just to raise the associated invoice, with no consideration of officer time to process the substantive request. To be clear, financial considerations are not the primary driver for this report, but they are considered for completeness.

2.18. At present, RTI requests are generated online and sent into the Council via coh@hobartcity.com.au, and then the City’s Information Management Team use a matrix and redirect requests to the appropriate RTI officer to action within the relevant Network.

2.19. It is now proposed that the Manager of Legal and Corporate Governance would assess all RTI requests after the initial assessment has been carried out by the relevant Network.

2.19.1. The Manager of Legal and Corporate Governance would assess all RTI requests, that’s if it is processed as an RTI, or if in fact it could be handled under the City’s Fees and Charges.

Anticipated Streamlining of RTI Collation and Assessments.

2.20. The Manager of Legal and Corporate Governance is working with the City’s Chief Information Officer to streamline the process for the generation of invoices for RTIs (along with e-services generally),

2.21. Software solutions that can assist staff with the initial identification and collation of relevant information for an RTI application is also being considered.

2.22. Absent from these proposed reforms, Council will continue to struggle to achieve statutory compliance in respect of RTI applications and may need to consider additional resourcing.

2.23. Officers are of the view that the proposed reforms represent a sensible compromise, where users only pay for the actual cost of the service, while simultaneously providing for increased proactive disclosures outside of the RTI and freeing up resources to process matters that are best handled within the RTI framework. These reforms still provide a discretion to waive any fee in addition to being bound by the Customer Service Charter (10 days), which also provides an avenue for review.

2.24. Nothing in this proposal prevents an applicant from electing to submit an RTI if they are dissatisfied with the Council’s over-the-counter service and associated disclosures.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council approve the new fees and charges for the supply of information requests in its 2024-25 Fees and Charges, as set out in Attachment A to this report.

(i) If approved, the City’s 2024-25 Fees and Charges booklet be updated accordingly.

2. The Council approve the new ‘Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures’ document, as marked as Attachment B to this report, and agree to rescind the Open Data Policy, as marked as Attachment C to this report.

4. Background

Right to Information Act 2009 (Tas)

4.1. The City of Hobart receives a large amount of RTI applications every year, and the underlying principle of the Right to Information Act 2009 (Tas) is that all information is eligible for disclosure unless it is otherwise exempt from disclosure under one of the narrow grounds prescribed.

4.2. The City has 20 working days from the acceptance of the application to collate the information and to provide the applicant with a notice of assessment. Acceptance is taken at the moment either by payment of the associated fee or granting of a waiver is made.

4.3. This is problematic as there is presently no automated process to inform the Legal and Governance Group that payment has been received. On some occasions several working days can pass between receipt of payment and notification to the Legal and Governance Group.

4.4. In most circumstances the first few days of the statutory time frame are spent allocating the application to the relevant officer for the collation of relevant information and confirming the fee has been paid.

4.5. Officers propose to provide a further report on how to streamline the processing of RTI payments, noting the existing system is ad hoc at best with crucial time on the statutory clock lost due to delays in being notified that payment has been made.

4.6. As described under point 4.2 above, under the terms of the Act, the City is obliged to complete an assessment of an application for assessed disclosure within twenty (20) working days. Failure to do so could result in:

4.6.1. A complaint to the Ombudsman leading to increased administration;

4.6.2. Potential for the Ombudsman’s Office to table a complaint in parliament against the Council; and

4.6.3. Reputational damage from the above or from the applicant lodging a complaint.

4.7. Of equal importance the proposed reforms will ‘shift the needle’ from the existing situation where officers across the organisation default to directing requests for information into the RTI framework, toward a culture supportive of proactive disclosure where the majority of (uncontroversial) requests can be handled via the payment of a fee (or provided free of charge) and the provision of relevant information in a straightforward manner, with minimal redactions or withholding of documentation. This may require additional resourcing and training.

4.8. Should Council adopt the proposal, additional training will need to be provided to officers (led by the Legal and Governance Group) to help facilitate the new proactive disclosures as individual divisions would be ultimately responsible for managing their own proactive disclosures – with the support of the Legal and Governance Group.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. Pursuant to section 205 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas), Council has the following powers:

(1) In addition to any other power to impose fees and charges but subject to subsection (2), a council may impose fees and charges in respect of any one or all of the following matters:

(a) the use of any property or facility owned, controlled, managed or maintained by the council;

(b) services supplied at a person's request;

(c) carrying out work at a person's request;

(d) providing information or materials, or providing copies of, or extracts from, records of the council;

(e) any application to the council;

(f) any licence, permit, registration or authorisation granted by the council;

(g) any other prescribed matter.

(2) A council may not impose a fee or charge in respect of a matter if –

(a) a fee or charge is prescribed in respect of that matter; or

(b) this or any other Act provides that a fee or charge is not payable in respect of that matter.

(3) any fee or charge under subsection (1) need not be fixed by reference to the cost to the council.

5.2. Pursuant to section 206 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas), council is to keep a list of all fees and charged and make the list available for public inspection during ordinary hours of business.

6. Discussion

6.1. The City is on track to receive around 90 RTI requests this financial year, a number that is considerably higher than requests received at any other council or much of the state service, for instance, the Department of Justice received 19 requests in 2022-23.

6.2. It is proposed that the City’s Fees and Charges booklet for 2024-25 be amended to include a series of new specific fees to cover new general information requests from the public, as set out in Attachment A to this report.

6.2.1 The proposed fees are set on considerations of what other councils charge for a similar service, in addition to calculating the average amount of officer time required as detailed in the attached proposed schedule.

6.2.2 If approved, the City’s fees and charges booklet will be updated accordingly.

6.3. Currently, there is a section in the fees and charges booklet that covers payment for ‘general information requests’, such as copies or plans/documentation, permit information and property searches to name a few.

6.4. It is proposed that the new Fees and Charges, and information generally is to occur in accordance with the proposed new ‘Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures’, marked as Attachment B to this report.

7. Capital City Strategic Plan

7.1. This proposal is consistent with Pillar 8, Outcome 8.5 in the ‘City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2019-29’, namely:

8.5 - Quality services are delivered efficiently, effectively and safely.

7.2. The proposal also reflects the following Pillar 8.5 strategy within the ‘City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2019 – 2029’, namely:

8.5.5 – Optimise service delivery to ensure organisational sustainability and best value for the community.

8. Financial Viability

8.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

6.2.3 It is difficult to determine the income that will be generated by the Council from these new fees for the 2024-25 FY, as it is dependent upon the number of varied requests for information received from the community.

6.2.4 It is envisaged that there could be approximately 70 instances of members of the public requesting information that would have normally fallen under the RTI process per year, based on the number of RTI applications for 2022-23.

6.2.5 The proposed new fees and charges have been created in accordance with the City of Hobart’s Pricing Policy and Guidelines and GST treatment has been applied by the City’s Financial Operations Accountant.

8.2. Asset Related Implications

6.2.6 Not applicable.

9. Communications Strategy

9.1. Should the recommendation in this report be approved, then the City’s Fees and Charges booklet will be updated.

9.2. The Fees and Charges Booklet is made available to view by the public from the City of Hobart’s website every year.

9.3. Should the Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures document be approved, it will be made available on the City’s website.

9.4. Should the Council adopt the proposal for a centralised assessment approach to RTIs and the release of general information requests, additional training will need to be provided to officers (led by the Legal and Governance Group), to help facilitate the new proactive disclosures as individual divisions would be ultimately responsible for managing their own proactive disclosures.

Wes Young

Manager Legal and Corporate Governance

Michael Reynolds

Director City Enablers

Date: 14 August 2024

File Reference: F24/71890; 22/16

Attachment a: Proposed Fees and Charges for Requests for Information (Supporting information)

Attachment b: Draft City of Hobart Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures document (Supporting information)

Attachment c: Rescinded Open Data Policy (Supporting information)

Item No. 14

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 1

19/8/2024

REPORT TITLE: Procurement - Quotation Exemption Report

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Rates, Procurement and Risk

Director City Enablers

1. Report Summary

1.1. The purpose of this report is to provide a listing of exemptions from the requirement to seek three written quotations granted for the period 1 April to 30 June 2024 for the information of Elected Members.

1.2. The community benefit is providing transparency and delivering best value for money through strategic procurement decision-making.

2. Key Issues

2.1. It is a legislative requirement that Council establishes and maintains procedures for reporting by the Chief Executive Officer to Council in relation to the purchase of goods, services or works where a public tender or quotation process is not used.

2.2. At its meeting on 19 March 2018, the Council resolved that a report of exemptions granted from the requirement to seek three written quotes be presented quarterly as at 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December each year.

2.3. A report is attached for the period 1 April to 30 June 2024.

2.4. It is proposed that the Committee note the exemptions from the requirement to seek three written quotes granted for the period 1 April to 30 June 2024.

3. Recommendation

That the Council note the exemptions granted from the requirement to seek three written quotations for the period 1 April to 30 June 2024, marked as Attachment A to this report.

4. Background

4.1. At its meeting on 19 March 2018, the Council resolved inter alia that:

4.1.1. A report of exemptions granted from the requirement to seek 3 written quotes be presented to the Finance and Governance Committee as at 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December each year.

4.2. A report outlining the quotation exemptions from the requirement to seek three written quotes granted during the period 1 April to 30 June 2024 is attached – refer Attachment A.

4.3. As outlined in the City’s Code for Tenders and Contracts (the Code) where a Council Contract does not exist the City will seek a minimum of three written quotes for procurements between $50,000 and $249,999.

4.4. There may be occasions where, for a number of reasons, quotation(s) cannot be obtained / sought from the market or where doing so would have no additional benefit to the City or the market.

4.5. Therefore, exemptions from the requirement to seek written quotes can be sought from the Divisional Director but only if an acceptable reason exists as outlined in the Code, as follows:

(a) where, in response to a prior notice, invitation to participate or invitation to quote:

- no quotations were submitted; or

- no quotations were submitted that conform to the essential requirements in the documentation;

(b) where the goods, services or works can be supplied only by a particular supplier and no reasonable alternative or substitute goods, services or works exist e.g. a sole supplier situation exists;

(c) for additional deliveries of goods, services or works by the original supplier that are intended either as replacement parts, extensions or continuing services;

(d) where there is an emergency and insufficient time to seek quotes for goods, services or works required in that emergency;

(e) for purchases made under exceptional circumstances, deemed reasonable by the responsible Director;

(f) where a quotation was received within the last 3 months for the same goods, services or works (e.g. a recent value for money comparison was made);

(g) for purchases made under exceptionally advantageous conditions that only arise in the very short term, such as from unusual disposals, liquidation, bankruptcy or receivership and not for routine purchases from regular suppliers; or

(h) for a joint purchase of goods or services purchased with funds contributed by multiple entities, where Council is one of those entities and does not have express control of the purchasing decision.

4.6. For the period 1 April to 30 June 2024 there were four exemptions granted, where expenditure was between $50,000 and $249,999 and therefore three written quotations were required to be sought in line with the Code.

4.7. Three exemptions were granted on the grounds that the goods could only be supplied by a particular supplier and no reasonable alternative or substitute goods exist and one exemption was granted on the grounds that no quotations were submitted to the City for the required services following a request for quotation process.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. Regulation 28 of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2015 states that the Council’s Code for Tenders and Contracts must (j) establish and maintain procedures for reporting by the general manager to the council in relation to the purchase of goods or services in circumstances where a public tender or quotation process is not used.

6. Discussion

6.1. It is proposed that the Council note the exemptions granted from the requirement to seek three written quotes for the period 1 April to 30 June 2024.

6.2. As outlined in the Code, quotation exemptions for a value under $50,000, that is where 1 or 2 written quotations are required to be sought but an exemption from that requirement has been granted by the relevant Divisional Director, have been reported to the Chief Executive Officer.

6.3. All approvals for the exemptions from the requirement to Tender are sought and reported through the formal Council approval processes.

7. Capital City Strategic Plan

7.1. The City’s Code for Tenders and Contracts is referenced in this report as it provides a framework for best practice procurement and sets out how the City will meet its legislative obligations in respect to procurement, tendering and contracting.

7.2. This report is consistent with strategy 8.2.6 in the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2023, being:

7.2.1. Delivery high quality and timely procurement to support the delivery of programs, projects and services while achieving value for money.

8. Financial Viability

8.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

8.1.1. All expenditure noted in the attached listing of quotation exemptions granted was funded from the 2023-24 budget estimates.

Lara MacDonell

Manager Rates, Procurement and Risk

Michael Reynolds

Director City Enablers

Date: 1 August 2024

File Reference: F24/66643

Attachment a: Report - Quotation Exemptions Granted (3 Quotes) 1 April to 30 June 2024 (Supporting information)

Item No. 15

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 1

19/8/2024

Memorandum: Council

Local Government Association of Tasmania -
Motions for September General Meeting

The Local Government Association of Tasmania’s (“LGAT”) General Meeting, to be held on Wednesday, 4 September 2024 at its Annual Conference, is set to consider five motions which have been raised by councils for consideration at the meeting. The Council will need to resolve its position in respect of each of these motions to allow delegates to vote accordingly.

A suggested position and supporting comments can be found at Attachment A.

Background information can be found at Attachment B.

1. Motion on Psychosocial Safety Insurance for Elected Members – Burnie City Council

The Burnie City Council has submitted a motion seeking:

“That LGAT:

1. Lobby the State Government as a priority, to introduce legislation that mandates the need to have workers’ compensation insurance (or equivalent) made available to councillors, to support recent legislative changes regarding psychosocial safety; and

2. The State Government work with the insurance industry to introduce the insurance framework as a priority.”

The full details of this motion are included as Attachment B to this report at Item 2.1

It is recommended Council resolve for its delegates to vote in favour of this motion.

2. Motion on Working with Vulnerable People Card – Eligibility criteria for Councillor Nominees – Devonport City Council

The Devonport City Council has submitted a motion seeking:

“That LGAT request the State Government legislate, that eligibility for nomination as Councillor requires a person to hold a Working with Vulnerable People Card.”

The full details of this motion are included as Attachment B to this report at 2.2

It is recommended Council resolve for its delegates to vote in favour of this motion.

3. Motion on Amendment of Local Government Act 1993, Schedule 5 Councillor Allowances – George Town Council

George Town Council has submitted a motion seeking:

“1. That LGAT calls on the Tasmanian Government to amend Schedule 5 of the Local Government Act 1993, mandating the requirement for councils to have a provision for reimbursement of costs associated with the care of a dependent/s incurred while a councillor is undertaking their duties; and

2. Calling on the Tasmanian Government to draft a model clause for use by councils in allowance policies for the reimbursement of costs for care, to ensure consistent approaches across the sector and to encourage greater diversity in candidates considering becoming elected representatives.”

The full details of this motion are included as Attachment B to this report at 2.3

It is recommended Council resolve for its delegates to vote in favour of this motion.

4. Motion on Substantial Commencement of Work– Circular Head Council

Circular Head Council has submitted a motion seeking:

1. “That LGAT engages in dialogue with the State Planning Office to seek legislative amendment to permit individual councils to define ‘substantial commencement of work’ in the context of local Planning Permit Approvals.”

The full details of this motion are included as Attachment B to this report at 2.4.

It is recommended Council resolve for its delegates to vote against this motion.

5. Motion on Legislative Reform to Effectively Manage the Environmental and Economic Risks Posed by Wild and Nuisance Pigs - Central Coast Council

Central Coast Council has submitted a motion seeking:

“That the Local Government Association of Tasmania lobby the Tasmanian State Government for legislative reform to enable state and local government to manage and control the environmental and economic risks posed by wild and nuisance pigs more effectively.”

The full details of this motion are included as Attachment B to this report at 2.5.

It is recommended Council resolve for its delegates to vote in favour of this motion.

REcommendation

That the Council resolve to instruct its delegates to:

(i) vote in favour of the motion on Psychosocial Safety tabled by Burnie City Council contained in Attachment B at 2.1:

(ii) vote in favour of the motion on Working with Vulnerable People Cards tabled by the Devonport City Council contained in Attachment B at 2.2

(iii) vote in favour of the motion on Councillor Allowances tabled by George Town Council contained in Attachment B at 2.3

(iv) vote against the motion on the Substantial Commencement of Work tabled by Circular Head Council contained in Attachment B at 2.4

(v) vote in favour of the motion on the Wild and Nuisance Pigs tabled by Central Coast Council contained in Attachment B at 2.5

Wes Young

Manager Legal and Corporate Governance

Michael Reynolds

Director City Enablers

Date: 14 August 2024

File Reference: F24/74283

Attachment a: LGAT Motions – Suggested Council Position and Supporting Comments (Supporting information)

Attachment b: Motions for LGAT General Meeting September 2024 (Supporting information)

Meeting date: 22 July 2024
Raised by: Mr Mervin Reed
Topic: Mr Mervin Reed - Works Depot - Giblin Street

Meeting date: 22 July 2024
Raised by: Mr Chris Merridew
Topic: Mr Chris Merridew - Crowther Statue