591 591 591 - city of gold coast · 591 591 adopted report ... bus stop upgrades – ... to advise...

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 1 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Report

591 591

Adopted Report Adopted Report of the of the

Engineering Services Committee Meeting


held on held on

Wednesday, 23 February 2011 Wednesday, 23 February 2011

at at

09:00 am 09:00 am

G6 Committee Room Nerang Administration Centre

Nerang Southport Road Nerang

G6 Committee Room Nerang Administration Centre

Nerang Southport Road Nerang

Our positioning statement Working for our future - today Our city vision Defined by our spectacular beaches, hinterland ranges, forests and waterways, the Gold Coast is an outstanding city which celebrates nature and connects distinct communities with the common goal of sustainability, choice and wellbeing for all.

Our mission Leading the way towards a bold future that can sustain growth and economic development while retaining a lifestyle that is uniquely ‘Gold Coast’.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 2 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report

Index 591

Adopted Report


Wednesday, 23 February 2011

Item Direct. File Page Subject

1 ES FN334/375/01(P6) 5 2010/2011 CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM - APPROVALS

2 ES FN334/375/01(P6) 8 2010-11 LOCAL AREA WORKS PROGRAM - MINOR WORKS

3 ES RD16066/16/-(P4) 12 PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH

4 ES RD2118/46/01/09(P1) 21 BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION

5 ES WFB600/648/-(P1) 33 TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - STATUS REPORT

6 ES RD20001/16/-(P1) 65

PETITION REGARDING U-TURN FACILITY REMOVED FROM WEST BURLEIGH ROAD & TABILBAN STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS

General Business

7 ES RD16066/16/-(P4) 72 REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF SPOTTED GUM TREE ON THE CORNER OF PINE RIDGE ROAD AND LAE DRIVE, COOMBABAH

KEY: CEO - Chief Executive Officer BI - Business Improvement CG - City Governance CMS - Community Services EDMP - Economic Development & Major Projects ES - Engineering Services OS - Organisational Services PET - Planning Environment & Transport WR - Water Reform

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 3 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ATTENDANCE Cr D M Crichlow Chairperson Cr D Gates Cr M Grummitt Cr E L Shepherd Cr E Sarroff Cr G Pforr Mr W E Day Director Engineering Services APOLOGIES Nil ADOPTION BY COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 RESOLUTION G11.0228.008 Moved Cr Crichlow Seconded Cr Gates That the Report of the Engineering Services Committee Meeting held on Wednesday, 23 February 2011 covered by Recommendations numbered ES11.0223.001 to ES11.0223.007 be received, with the following correction to be recorded in the Report: ITEM 5 TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/- MOTION Moved Cr Sarroff Seconded Cr Pforr That the officers recommendation be adopted with the deletion of Part 7. Cr Grummitt declared she could reasonably be taken to have a conflict of interest in the matter for the reason that she owns property on the canal and requested the Committee to determine whether she had a conflict of interest or could reasonably be taken to have a conflict of interest. PROCEDURAL MOTION Moved Cr Crichlow Seconded Cr Shepherd

That Cr Grummitt does have a conflict of interest and should leave the room and not participate in discussion and voting on the matter.

Cr Grummitt did not vote. CARRIED

Cr Gates declared she could reasonably be taken to have a conflict of interest in the matter for the reason that she owns property on the canal and requested the Committee to determine whether she had a conflict of interest or could reasonably be taken to have a conflict of interest. PROCEDURAL MOTION Moved Cr Crichlow Seconded Cr Shepherd

That Cr Gates does have a conflict of conflict of interest and should leave the room and not participate in discussion and voting on the matter.


ITEM 5 TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – status report WFB600/648/- Cr Gates did not vote.

CARRIED Cr Pforr declared he could reasonably be taken to have a conflict of interest in the matter for the reason that a family member owns property on the canal and he would be leaving the room and not taking part in discussion or voting on the matter. Cr Pforr left the room. Note - As a result of a lack of quorum this matter is to be discussed at the Council meeting to be held on Monday 28 February 2011. RESOLUTION G11.0228.001 Moved Cr Crichlow Seconded Cr Shepherd That the Report of the Engineering Services Committee’s Recommendations of Wednesday 23 February 2011, numbered ES11.0223.001 to ES10.0223.007, be adopted with the exception of:- Recommendation Number ES11.0223.005 which was specifically resolved.

CARRIED

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 5 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 1 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY GROUP 2010/2011 CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM – APPROVALS FN334/375/01(P6) 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY Not Applicable. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Not Applicable. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT To advise Council of projects issued for construction having final estimates within the preliminary allocations. 4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS Not Applicable. 5 DISCUSSION The following list details internal delivery documents that have been prepared for projects approved in Council’s 2010/2011 Capital Works Program. The list details projects within the preliminary funding allocations and is presented for Council’s information. Construction documents are issued as soon as they are available for the projects below.

ENGINEERING SERVICES – APPROVALS (Final Estimates within Preliminary Allocations -

Documents Issued for Construction) CONTACT OFFICER

DIV FUNDING SOURCE

PROJ NO

LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRELIMINARY ALLOCATION

$

FINAL ESTIMATE

$ P Raath 1 WOC W717 Mirambeena Drive,

Pimpama Channel restoration works within parklands from the railway line north of Binnowee Way to Creek Street

420,000 371,800

K Reynolds

1 WOC EM23 Heathwood Drive, Coomera

Bus stop upgrades – construction of north and southbound bus indents adjacent to Catalina Way

317,200 317,200

G Wilks 1, 13

WOC WG01 York Creek Crescent, Reedy Creek

2010/11 GPT Improvement Works: Install two metal sleeved bollards opposite #3

100,000 74,200

Barden Ridge Road, Reedy Creek

Install boom gate opposite #2

Observatory Drive, Reedy Creek

Installation of turf cells adjacent to #80

Bella Boulevard, Pimpama

Construction of reinforced concrete footpath opposite #24

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 6 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 1 (Continued) 2010/2011 CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM – APPROVALS FN334/375/01(P6)

ENGINEERING SERVICES – APPROVALS (Final Estimates within Preliminary Allocations -

Documents Issued for Construction) CONTACT OFFICER

DIV FUNDING SOURCE

PROJ NO

LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRELIMINARY ALLOCATION

$

FINAL ESTIMATE

$ J

Varughese 7 WOC RP36 Tedder Avenue,

Main Beach Bus stop upgrades adjacent to #23 and #11 Hughes Avenue

53,100 53,100

M Jaric 13 WOC RR17 Angelica Street, Elanora

Construction of pedestrian access ramps and connecting footpaths at the intersections with Walnut Street and Burdock Street

24,500 24,500

Sufficient funds are available for construction of the above. 6 ALIGNMENT TO BOLD FUTURE VISION, CORPORATE PLAN, OPERATIONAL

PLAN These projects satisfy Key Focus Area 3 – A city connecting people and places: 3.1.5 Extend the network of oceanways, walkways and bikeways, ensuring these connect

across the city 3.3.2 Implement a road program which caters for the city’s growth and directs traffic flows

in the appropriate traffic corridors 7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS Funds are available within the relevant budgets to cater for construction of the works listed in this report. 8 RISK MANAGEMENT Engineering Services’ project teams will mitigate risk through project development and delivery phases in accordance with the risk management procedure 2-40 which is aligned with the Risk Management Standards AS/NZS 4360:2004.

9 STATUTORY MATTERS Not Applicable. 10 COUNCIL POLICIES Not Applicable. 11 DELEGATIONS Not Applicable.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 7 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 1 (Continued) 2010/2011 CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM – APPROVALS FN334/375/01(P6) 12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION Name and Title of the Stakeholder Consulted

Directorate or Organisation

Is the Stakeholder Satisfied With Content of Report and Recommendations (Yes/No) (comment as appropriate)

Mark Ash, Manager Engineering Assets & Planning

Engineering Services Yes

M Jaric, Project Officer, Engineering Services Yes P Raath, Senior Project Manager


K Reynolds, Senior Project Manager


J Varughese, Project Manager Engineering Services Yes G Wilks, Project Manager Engineering Services Yes 13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS Not Applicable. 14 TIMING Construction of works included in this report will be carried out in accordance with Council’s approved Construction Program. 15 CONCLUSION Not Applicable. 16 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: That Council note that internal delivery documents for the above projects will be issued for construction as soon as they are available. Author: Authorised by:

YSK Perera Warren Day Executive Coordinator Capital Works Director Engineering Services 9 February 2011 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ES11.0223.001 moved Cr Sarroff, seconded Cr Gates That Council notes that internal delivery documents for the above projects will be issued for construction as soon as they are available. CARRIED

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 8 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 2 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY GROUP 2010/2011 LOCAL AREA WORKS PROGRAM – MINOR WORKS FN334/375/02(P18) Refer 1 page attachment 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY Not applicable. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Not Applicable. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT To advise Council of projects with final estimates up to $10,000 and to include those projects as part of the 2010/2011 Local Area Works Program as detailed in Attachment 2.1. 4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS Not Applicable. 5 DISCUSSION Council officers in conjunction with Councillors have suggested that the projects in Attachment 2.1 be added to the 2010/2011 Local Area Works Program and are presented for Council’s information. 6 ALIGNMENT TO BOLD FUTURE VISION, CORPORATE PLAN, OPERATIONAL

PLAN These projects satisfy Key Focus Area 3 – A city connecting people and places: 3.1.5 Extend the network of oceanways, walkways and bikeways, ensuring these connect

across the city. 7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS Funds are available within the various Local Area Works allocations to carry out the works as indicated in Attachment 2.1 within the 2010/2011 financial year. Details of the additional annual operational/maintenance costs, estimated new/upgrade and renewal costs and estimated useful life of the new assets created are shown in Attachment 2.1. The new/upgrade cost is the cost to create or upgrade the asset. The renewal cost is the cost to renew the asset in today’s dollars and includes disposal costs and design costs as required at the end of the asset’s estimated useful life. The works proposed in this report can be maintained and operated adequately based on the current 10 year financial plan's growth factors and maintenance budgets. These assets have been included in the relevant Asset Management Plans currently being developed.

8 RISK MANAGEMENT Engineering Services’ project teams will mitigate risk through project development and delivery phases in accordance with the risk management procedure 2-40 which is aligned with the Risk Management Standards AS/NZS 4360:2004.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 9 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 2 (Continued) 2010/2011 LOCAL AREA WORKS PROGRAM – MINOR WORKS FN334/375/02(P18) 9 STATUTORY MATTERS Not Applicable. 10 COUNCIL POLICIES The policy applicable to the inclusion of Local Area Works projects listed for endorsement by Council is the Divisional Program Policy (iSPOT #22891397) which is currently under review. 11 DELEGATIONS Delegation 393 is applicable to Local Area Works – Minor Works projects. 12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION Name and Title of the Stakeholder Consulted



Mark Ash, Manager, Engineering Assets & Planning


Councillor D Gates Councillor, Division 1 Yes Councillor D McDonald Councillor, Division 13 Yes Councillor C Robbins Councillor, Division 14 Yes D Bruen, Senior Project Manager


D McNeilage, Coordinator Transport Assets


13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS The community, ratepayers and visitors to the Gold Coast will benefit from the new and improved facilities funded from the Local Area Works Program as listed in Attachment 2.1. 14 TIMING Minor works projects are being arranged through the various contact officers and will be implemented in conjunction with other priority works contained in Council’s Capital Works Program. 15 CONCLUSION The proposed additions to the Local Area Works Program – Minor Works as suggested by Divisional Councillors in conjunction with Council Officers for notation by Council are listed in Attachment 2.1. These minor works projects are being arranged through various contact officers and have been actioned or will be actioned within the next few weeks under delegation.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 10 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 2 (Continued) 2010/2011 LOCAL AREA WORKS PROGRAM – MINOR WORKS FN334/375/02(P18) 16 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: That Council note that the minor works listed in Attachment 2.1 have been added to the 2010/2011 Local Area Works Program and internal delivery documents are issued as soon as they are available. Author: Authorised by: YSK Perera Warren Day Executive Coordinator Capital Works Director Engineering Services 9 February 2011 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ES11.0223.002 moved Cr Sarroff, seconded Cr Shepherd That Council notes that the minor works listed in Attachment 2.1 have been added to the 2010/2011 Local Area Works Program and internal delivery documents are issued as soon as they are available. CARRIED


Attachment 2.1

ENGINEERING SERVICES – MINOR WORKS

Estimated Capital Costs

$

Contact Officer

Div

Project

No

Location

Description

Renewal

Proposed Local Area

Works Allocation

New / Upgrade

Additional

Annual Operations & Maintenance

Costs $

Estimate

Useful Life

Years

D McNeilage CR188344

1 DWA1 Ford Road/Shipper Drive, Coomera

Installation of double span park gate to prohibit illegal dumping

3,000 3,000 Minimal 15

D McNeilage CR188345

1 DWA1 Foxwell Road, Coomera Installation of double span park gate to prohibit illegal dumping adjacent to 42 SP207812

3,000 3,000 Minimal 15

D Bruen CR185937

13 DWB4 Tahiti Avenue, Palm Beach

Installation of seat and concrete slab adjacent to #65

5,500 5,500 Minimal 20

D Bruen CR189454

14 DWB5 Lansell Avenue, Currumbin

Installation of a powder-coated fence at each end of retaining wall to restrict access adjacent to #19

7,300 7,300 Minimal 10

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 12 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 ENGINEERING ASSETS & PLANNING PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/- Refer 1 page attachment 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY Not applicable. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Not applicable. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT For Council to approve the planning report that recommends $38 Million be invested to duplicate the southern section of Pine Ridge Road from the Suntown Landfill to Harbour Quay Road and to approve the allocation of $28 Million for construction of Stage One from the Suntown Landfill to Pine Ridge Caravan Park. Attachment 3.1 details the location and extent of the project. 4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS Ex Minute No. ES09.0128.010: “1 That Council notes the contents of this report, which identifies the need to acquire

land for road purposes for Captain Cook Drive and Pine Ridge Road. 2 That Council commences the land acquisition of the privately owned land, subject to

detailed survey, as detailed in Tables 1 and 2 and Attachment 10.1 for road purposes. 8 The cost associated with the resumption of land is to be funded from Project RG38 –

Pine Ridge Road – Coombabah.”

5 DISCUSSION 5.1 Project Overview The southern section of Pine Ridge Road, Coombabah, connects Brisbane Road to Oxley Drive via Harbour Quay Road as detailed in Pine Ridge Road, Coombabah Road Upgrade Planning Report. Council’s Transport Planning Branch recommends the duplication of this southern section of Pine Ridge Road. The northern section of Pine Ridge Road continues from Harbour Quay Road to Lae Drive and it is not proposed to duplicate this northern section. The southern section of Pine Ridge Road (two lanes) currently carries 18,000 vehicles each day and provides access to residential, education and light industrial land. The southern section of Pine Ridge Road is identified as a distributor road in the planning scheme. There is congestion during peak times at the Brisbane Road intersection. Fifty (50) accidents were recorded along southern Pine Ridge Road between January 2004 and March 2008. Thirty-four (34) of these accidents were at the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Brisbane Road. An additional 16 accidents occurred along Pine Ridge Road between Brisbane Road and Harbour Quay Road.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 13 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 (Continued) PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/- The accident history and traffic volumes are considered sufficient to justify the investment necessary to duplicate the southern section of Pine Ridge Road to improve safety and reduce traffic congestion. The duplication of Pine Ridge Road from Brisbane Road to Harbour Quay Road to a four lane urban standard could also: Reduce traffic congestion, Improve road safety, Provide cycling infrastructure (both on and off road) and To cater for forecasted increases in traffic volumes. The Planning Report recommends two stages for construction. Stage 1 includes duplication from the Suntown Landfill to the Pine Ridge Caravan Park. It includes duplication of the northern end of Captain Cook Drive, new intersections at Kendor Street, Brisbane Road, Lensgate Road and the entrance to the Pine Ridge Caravan Park. Stage 2 continues duplication through to Harbour Quay Road and includes the frontage of Coombabah State High School and a new intersection for Rain Tree Glen and Harbour Quay Road. The existing road reserve width is not sufficient to cater for the proposed four lane construction. Land resumptions are necessary to accommodate the proposed four lanes. Council resolved to proceed with necessary land resumption in January 2009 (ES09.0128.010). The preliminary design broadly incorporates the following works: Both Stages 1 and 2 Land resumptions, Water and wastewater relocations, Communication and electricity relocation, On road bike lanes, Shared off road pathways, Bus stops, Improved access to private properties and Tree planting and compensatory planting. Stage 1 980m of four lane duplication from Suntown Landfill (Chainage 0) to Pine Ridge Caravan

Park (Chainage 980), Drainage upgrade on Captain Cook Drive, Improvements to traffic queing at Pine Ridge Road and Brisbane Road intersection, New roundabout at the Pine Ridge Caravan Park entrance and New traffic signals at Lensgate Road.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 14 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 (Continued) PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/- Stage 2 685 m Of four lane duplication from Pine Ridge Caravan Park (Chainage 980) to Harbour

Quay Road (Chainage 1665), Upgrade of the carpark at Coombabah State School and Upgrading of the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Harbour Quay Road. A full copy of the planning report for duplication of Pine Ridge Road is available on Council’s file RD16066/16/-. 5.2 Consultation: Community consultation was conducted in February 2008 for a period of six weeks to obtain comments from residents and other road users. Some of the issues identifed for consideration in the design included provision for on-street parking, safe pedestrain access and clear zones for business access. The information received from the public was reviewed and the appropriate amendments made to the concept design. Meetings were held with the Department of Education regarding the impact on Coombabah High School carpark and the proximity of the new road design to the school. Improvements to the design have been included for student safety, traffic noise and car parking. Further details about comments received and changes to the design are available on Council’s file. 5.3 Light Rail Brisbane Road is currently identifed as a likely future extension for the Gold Coast Rapid Transit route. Planning of the Pine Ridge Road upgrade has considered a future light rail route. If Brisbane Road is confirmed as a light rail extension, then the Brisbane Road intersection at Pine Ridge Road will require additional land acquisition and reconfiguration as part of the light rail program works. 6 ALIGNMENT TO BOLD FUTURE VISION, CORPORATE PLAN, OPERATIONAL

PLAN Key Focus Area 3 – A city connecting people and places Key Outcome : 3.3

The transport Network is well maintained and meets relevant safety standards.

Action Statement : 3.3.1 Maintain the road network and other transport facilities to an acceptable standard for all users.

Key Focus Area 6 – A city shaped by clever design Key Outcome : 6.3

Infrastructure is planned and delivered to meet the needs of a growing community.

Action Statement : 6.3.2 Deliver Council’s capital works program to keep pace with community growth and needs.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 15 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 (Continued) PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/- 7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS 7.1 Proposed Funding The planning report estimates that $38 Million (2011) will be necessary for duplication of Pine Ridge Road from Suntown Landfill to Harbour Quay Road. The Planning Report identifies two stages for construction. Stage 1 is from the Suntown Landfill (chainage 0) to the Pine Ridge Caravan Park and has a preliminary estimate of $28 Million. Stage 2 continues through to Harbour Quay Road for an additional estimate of $10 Million. Land acquisitions for both Stage 1 and 2 are included in the Stage 1 estimate. Funds of $3 Million were allocated in the 2010-11 Major Roadworks program to allow necessary acquistions to proceed. Acquistions will be finalised as the project progresses and as funds become available. City Property and project managers are continuing to negotiate with the affected property owners regarding land acquisition. The total cost of land acquisitions for both Stage 1 and 2 is estimated at $8.4 Million.

Note: the cost in Table 1 do not include funds already spent on drafting of the planning report for Pine Ridge Road

Table 1: Stage 1 Preliminary Estimate (Suntown Landfill to Pine Ridge Caravan Park)

(2011 $)

1 Detailed, Design and Documentation $1.0 Million

2 Property Acquisitions (includes both stages) $8.4 Million

3 Services Relocations $5.4 Million

4 Construction Costs $9.6 Million

Includes Contingencies (25%) $3.6 Million

Total Stage 1: $28.0 Million

It is recommended that Council consider the following funding allocation within Funciton 257.6893 Major Roadworks for Stage 1 duplication from Suntown Landfill to Pine Ridge Caravan Park is as follows: 2010-11 $3.0 Million (current year allocation for land acquisition) 2011-12 No extra funds required, design funds will be allocated from forward planning 2012-13 $10 Million (land acquisitions and services) 2013-14 $10 Million (roadworks) 2014-15 $5 Million (roadworks) Total: $28 Million

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 16 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 (Continued) PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/-

Table 2: Stage 2 Preliminary Estimate (Pine Ridge Caravan Park to Harbour Quay Road (2011 $)

1 Detailed, Design and Documentation $0.6 Million

2 Services Relocations $1.8 Million

3 Construction Costs $5.8 Million

Includes Contingencies (25%) $1.8 Million

Total Stage 2: $10.0 Million

It is recommended that timing for Stage 2 works be reconsidered following completion of Stage 1. 8 RISK MANAGEMENT The significant issues with attached risks include:

Significant land acquisition, Service relocations, Environmental issues regarding vegetation, Preliminary estimate uncertainty (The project cost includes a 25% contingency to cover unforeseen issues and cost increases.This allowance is considered reasonable in this instance because of factors such as services relocations), Construction of the Brisbane Road intersection prior to confirmation of the Gold Coast Rapid Transit route along Brisbane Road and Construction of the Captain Cook Drive section where it is to match into the upgrading of Captain Cook Drive in front of the Suntown Landfill site.

These risk factors will be mitigated with appropriate research and planning. All risks will be reviewed at each stage of the project. The Planning Report documents preliminary designs that reduce congestion, improve traffic flow and reduce or eliminate accident risks for businesses, residents and the school community accessing Pine Ridge Road. 9 STATUTORY MATTERS Not applicable. 10 COUNCIL POLICIES Not applicable. 11 DELEGATIONS Not applicable.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 17 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 (Continued) PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/- 12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION The table below identifies stakeholder consultation. Title of the Stakeholder Consulted



Manager of Transport Planning Planning Environment and Transport

Yes.

Councillor Grant Pforr City Governance Yes Program Coordinator – Roads Infrastructure Delivery

Group Yes

Senior Communication Officer – Engineering Services

Corporate Communications

Yes

Senior Project Officer Engineering and Infrastructure

EDMP Gold Coast Rapid Transit Project

Yes

Executive Coordinator Asset Planning


13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS Land Owners, local residents and local businesses

Land acquisition has commenced. Land holders were given opportunity to comment in

January 2010. Objections have been considered and where appropriate, changes have been included within the concept design.

There has been concern about increase in noise due to increased traffic. Some stakeholders have requested that Council install noise barrier fencing along Pine Ridge Road. Council does not install noise barriers as part of Local Government roads. Lowering of the current speed limit through the intersections has been included in the concept design to assist noise mitigation for nearby homes.

Some stakeholders have expressed concern about new locations for bus stops. Nearby home owners are concerned about inconvenience, and disturbance to their amenity. Where possible, bus stops will be located to minimise their impact on nearby homes.

Some stakeholders are concerned about the loss of right turn movements into and out of their driveways and side streets. It is considered that growing traffic along Pine Ridge Road will make many right turns difficult and unsafe. The project has included a roundabout to facilitate access to properties that avoids right hand turns. The additional travel distance to homes to replace right hand turns via the new roundabout will be no more then 200m, which is considered reasonable.

Coombabah High School There is concern that Stage 2 works will move the traffic closer to classrooms at

Coombabah State High School. The installation of additional air conditioners for affected classrooms is proposed as part of the project to assist to mitigate the concerns. There will be some loss of carparks along Pine Ridge Road for the High School. Some funding has been included to construct some additional car spaces within the school grounds and to also air condition some of the class rooms. This is to be undertaken in consultation with the High School community.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 18 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 (Continued) PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/- Environment The park located on Lot 901 on SP 130386 has remnant urban Blackbutt Forest

stands, screening the existing road from the unit development Casa Bella. The removal of trees will be offset with plantings in other areas.

14 TIMING The proposed timeframe for delivery of Stage 1 roadworks to duplicate Pine Ridge Road from the Suntown Landfill to Pine Ridge Caravan Park is as follows: 2011-12 Continue detailed design 2012-13 Continue land acquisition and service relocations. 2013-14 Commence Stage 1 Roadworks 2014-15 Complete Stage 1 Roadwork. Timing for Stage 2 roadworks will be reconsidered following completion of Stage 1 works. 15 CONCLUSION Council’s Transport Planning Branch recommends duplication of the southern section of Pine Ridge Road from the Suntown Landfill to Harbour Quays Road in two stages to reduce traffic congestion and improve road safety. It is recommended that Council approve the allocation of $28 Million towards stage one works to duplicate to four lanes from the Suntown Landfill to Pine Ridge Caravan Park within Funciton 257.6893 Major Roadworks as follows: 2010-11 $3.0 Million (current year allocation for land acquisition) 2011-12 No extra funds required, design funds will be allocated from forward planning 2012-13 $10 Million (land acquisitions and services) 2013-14 $10 Million (roadworks) 2014-15 $5 Million (roadworks) Total: $28 Million It is recommended that Stage 2 works for duplication to four lanes from the Pine Ridge Caravan Park to Harbour Quay Road be reconsidered following completion of Stage 1 works.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 19 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 3 (Continued) PLANNING REPORT FOR DUPLICATION OF PINE RIDGE ROAD COOMBABAH RD16066/16/- 16 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: 1 That Council note the contents of the planning report that recommends duplication of

the southern section of Pine Ridge Road Coombabah from the Suntown Landfill to Harbour Quay Road for a preliminary estimate of $38 Million.

2 That Council note within Function 257.6893 Major Roadworks the proposed allocation

of an additional $25 Million towards stage one works to duplicate the road between the Suntown Landfill and the Pine Ridge Caravan Park as follows:

2010-11 $3 Million (current year allocation) 2012-13 $10 Million (land acquisition and services) 2013-14 $10 Million (road works) 2014-15 $5 Million (road works)

3 That the timing for allocation of additional funding (estimate $10 Million) for Stage 2

works to duplicate Pine Ridge Road from Pine Ridge Caravan Park to Harbour Quay Road be reconsidered following the completion of Stage 1 works.

Author: Authorised by:

Garry Miller Warren Day Transport Planning Technical Officer Director Engineering Services Peter Cramp Coordinator Transport Planning 11 February 2011 Changed Recommendation COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ES11.0223.003 moved Cr Pforr, seconded Cr Sarroff That the matter be deferred for further investigation into traffic concerns and land acquisition. CARRIED


Attachment 3.1

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 21 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 4 ENGINEERING ASSETS & PLANNING BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION RD2118/46/01/09(P1) Refer 6 page attachment 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY

Not Applicable. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Not Applicable. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to summarise the findings of major drainage investigations in the vicinity of Bunyip Street, Burleigh Heads and to recommend works to improve the performance of the stormwater drainage system. 4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS Prioritising of drainage projects in the Capital Expenditure Program (refer ex Minute No E02.0411.010). Adoption of the Stormwater Drainage Management Strategy as the basis for the implementation of stormwater drainage standards of service throughout the city (refer ex Minute No E02.1205.013). 5 DISCUSSION PROJECT BACKGROUND The Bunyip Street stormwater drainage project was created following major rainfall events and flooding that occurred during 2004 and 2005. Lower areas of Bunyip Street, Banjo Street, and Matilda Street are inundated during storm events more intense than the Q5 storm. During a Q20 event 7 overfloor flooding, 9 garage flooding and 22 property flooding were noted. Attachment 4.1 reflects Councils record of reported property flooding within the study area going back to 2004-05 major rainfall events. The existing pipe drainage system in this area has limited capacity to remove stormwater during periods of intense rainfall. Additionally, West Burleigh Road forms a barrier to overland conveyance of excess stormwater away from the area to the north. The result for properties within the trapped sag is an increased vulnerability to building, property and street flooding for rainfall events exceeding a Q5 storm. The actual extent of flood risk may vary from that reported by property owners in any area. A key element of urban drainage investigation, including that undertaken within the Bunyip Street study area, is the systematic assessment of flood risk for a range of design events using flood modelling. This modelling, together with detailed site assessment forms the basis of the options considered below and further summarised in Appendix 2.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 22 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 4 (Continued) BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION RD2118/46/01/09(P1) OVERALL FINDINGS A detailed analysis of the Bunyip Street study area has shown that flooding from intense local rainfall events exceeds the regional flood height used to establish minimum floor levels for new development. Worst affected is an area bounded by West Burleigh Road, Tabilban and Matilda Streets, Burleigh Heads which forms a ‘trapped sag’ ie. no overland flow path away from the area. Properties in this area are susceptible to varying degrees of building, property and street flooding. Additionally it has been identified that the crown of West Burleigh Road at its intersection of Dunlin Drive would be overtopped by more that 300mm during a Q100 local rainfall event with depths at the road shoulder of 600mm. A number of design solutions were investigated, with findings summarised in the table below. Further detail on each option has been included in Attachment 4.2.

Option Description Estimate Conclusions 1. Detention Basin

Augmentation of existing detention basin at Herbert Park, relieving pressure on the pipe system in the Bunyip and Banjo Street area for the short duration storms.

$50,000 Modest reduction in flood levels in lower Bunyip Street for a Q100 event ie. 80mm. However relatively inexpensive option for some tangible benefit.

2. Lower open drain invert at Dunlin Drive

Lower invert of the open below Dunlin Drive to reduce flood levels at its intersection with West Burleigh Road.

- Due to the inadequacy of the existing pipe system, it was determined that no improvement in upstream drainage system performance could be achieved by lowering invert levels in the open drain.

3. Lower West Burleigh Road at Dunlin Drive intersection

Regrading and lowering the road at this intersection would increase the stormwater discharge capacity over the road.

- - Limitations posed by underground services,

- Impact not enough to lower flood levels at Bunyip Street.

- Detrimental impacts on traffic safety.

4. Major pipe upgrade

Major pipe upgrades extending from Fleay Court, to the south of the Reedy Creek and West Burleigh Road intersection, to the open drain at Dunlin Drive. Would enable the existing pipe network to be fully utilised in draining the Bunyip Street trapped sag area.

$7.5 Million (plus contingencies)

- Offers greatest potential reduction in flood peak: 300mm in Bunyip Street trapped sag for Q100.

- Small number of benefited properties compared to total cost.

- Reduced flooding at the intersection of West Burleigh Road and Dunlin Drive.

- High probability of contingencies and significant cost escalation.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 23 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 4 (Continued) BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION RD2118/46/01/09(P1)

Option Description Estimate Conclusions 5. Property acquisition and re-sale

Acquisition the worst affected properties in the area for removal of existing improvements on the land. Reset development floor levels above the Q100 flood level then resell properties for development.

$4 Million (net)

- Estimate based on 8 properties. - More immediate reduction in flood

impacts for the area. - Cheaper than the major pipe

system upgrade. - Avoids depreciation and ongoing

asset maintenance costs, - Major social disruption for affect

owners / residents. - Politically difficult

6. Minor system improvements

Includes upgrading of all gully pits in this area to improve inlet capacity and installation of new pipes as required to support gully pit augmentation. Benefits maximised through concurrent improvements to the detention basin identified at Option 1.

$500,000 - Relatively inexpensive compared to major pipe upgrade.

- Low risk in terms of project delivery and cost escalation.

- Some benefit for smaller, short duration rainfall events (up to Q5).

- Bunyip Street trapped sag properties will remain vulnerable to flooding in larger rainfall events.

- Floor levels to be revised in redevelopment.

7. Fill and raise street and properties

Filling and raising property and road profiles in stages as redevelopment progresses.

- In the absence of well defined overland flow paths this may not solve all flooding issues and transfer impacts to adjoining areas. Not considered viable without concurrent improvements for pipe drainage system.

The major pipe upgrade (option 4) represents a very large potential investment for an outcome that only achieves Q20 flood immunity for those properties in the Bunyip Street trapped sag. Investigations show that option 4 is a high risk construction project due to the large quantities of underground services that cross the proposed stormwater pipe upgrade alignment and the impact the work will have of Hungry Jacks and the shopping centre. The construction of option 4 may require the temporary closure of Hungry Jacks due to the close proximity of the proposed pipeline. No cost associated with the likely disruption to Hungry Jacks business operations has been accounted for in this option. The high degree of uncertainty associated with conflict with existing underground services along the proposed upgrade alignment represents further risk of cost escalation and project delay. Engineering staff consider the best combination of works and benefit presents in the form of minor system improvements (Option 6), detention basin enhancements (Option 1) and the implementation of appropriate redevelopment controls within the Bunyip Street trapped sag. Combined, these actions offer both short and long term benefits to flood affected properties within the study area at reasonable a cost to Council and the community. Implementation of options 1 and 6 will enhance the efficiency of the Q5 system and ultimately address overflow flooding in the area through redevelopment.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 24 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 4 (Continued) BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION RD2118/46/01/09(P1) 6 ALIGNMENT TO BOLD FUTURE VISION, CORPORATE PLAN, OPERATIONAL PLAN Corporate Plan 2009-14

Key Focus Area 6: 6.3 Infrastructure is planned and delivered to meet the needs of a growing community.

Operational Plan 2010-11

Major Initiatives and Key Operational Activities Capital Works Program - Stormwater Drainage: This initiative focuses on reducing the risk and occurrence of flooding in areas of the city identified as high risk and to mitigate the impact of stormwater and related pollution to our waterways.

7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS Total costs for the major drainage upgrade are likely to exceed $7.5 million. This does not include compensation claims by Hungry Jacks Restaurant for probable disruption to their business operations during construction. The major pipe upgrade represents a large potential project investment of relatively limited benefit. While, theoretically, the project could be accommodated within base capital budgets for the drainage and flooding service, the estimated cost of >$7.5 Million cannot be justified at this point in time. Minor project works (estimate $500,000) can be accommodated within existing budgets subject to endorsed prioritisation and funding availability. 8 RISK MANAGEMENT Engineering Services Directorate projects are assessed against and delivered in accordance with Engineering Services, Risk Management Procedure 2-40. This procedure has been modelled on and incorporates elements of ISO 31000 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines. Option specific risks have been identified within the discussion section of this Agenda Item. 9 STATUTORY MATTERS Not applicable. 10 COUNCIL POLICIES Public Funding Involving Private Property Policy:

The objective of this policy is to ensure accountability in assessing the net public benefit of proposals, which seek Council funds or services where privately owned property is involved. This policy is relevant to Option 5 involving property acquisition and re-sale as a means of reducing flood risk and impacts within the study area.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 25 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 4 (Continued) BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION RD2118/46/01/09(P1) 11 DELEGATIONS Not applicable. 12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION This project has had input from: Title of the Stakeholder Consulted



Technical Services Branch Engineering Services Yes Construction Services Branch Engineering Services Yes City Property Branch GCCC Yes Gold Coast Water GCCC Yes Planning Environment and Transport (PE&T)

GCCC Yes

Councillor Greg Betts GCCC Refer below PE&T have been consulted regarding this project investigation and are aware a localised flooding map is required in the Planning Scheme (upgrade OM 18 Maps) to ensure any redevelopment of ‘at risk’ properties have a minimum of 300 millimetres of freeboard between the 1 in 100 year local flood height and the habitable floor height. The Divisional Councillor Greg Betts has been advised of the relative cost and benefit issues associated with major versus minor drainage project works for Bunyip Street. 13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS Currently residents living within the Bunyip Street trapped sag are impacted by varying degrees of street, property and building flooding for rainfall events greater than a Q5 storm. Only Option 4 - major pipe upgrade, offers a significant reduction in flood levels for the Bunyip Street trapped sag ie. 300mm for the Q20 rainfall event. Property and street flooding would continue to occur in the area, but to a lesser degree. Option 5 - property acquisition and re-sale, provides a means of reducing flood impact on the worst affected properties within the study area. This approach would however result in considerable social impact for affect owners and residents, with a corresponding level of political attention and controversy. 14 TIMING Proposed minor system improvements, incorporating Options 1 and 6, have the potential to be deployed fairly rapidly subject to endorsed priority and funding availability within the 4 year capital works budget.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 26 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 4 (Continued) BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION RD2118/46/01/09(P1) 15 CONCLUSION The Bunyip Street Stormwater Drainage Project was initiated to assess the potential for relief drainage works to reduce flood risk in the study area. Many potential options were evaluated to overcome physical and development constraints associated with amendments to the existing pipe drainage system. A 300 mm reduction in flood levels for a Q20 rainfall event could be achieved by installing upgraded pipes at a cost of approximately $7.5 Million. This major capital works option is also accompanied significant risk of cost escalation, compensations claims and delay associated with a highly constrained West Burleigh Road project alignment. This large potential investment is accompanied by comparatively limited benefits in terms of reduced flood impact within the worst affected area around lower Bunyip Street. Minor system improvements include replacing old inlet gullies to improve drainage capacity and installing additional gullies will reduce flooding impacts during smaller rainfall events. The benefits of this approach can be maximised by modifications to the existing stormwater detention basin at Herbert Park, adjoining West Burleigh Road to the south. The risk associated with minor works delivery are comparatively low. It is therefore recommended to carry out minor system improvements to the existing network within the study area, and forego any major upgrades. Proposed improvements include the following: Replacement of kerb gullies to current standards to improve inlet capacity. New Installation of several kerb gullies to the existing stormwater drainage system. Enhance function of the stormwater detention basin at Herbert Park Reserve and Set floor levels for redevelopment about the Q100 land flood level. All possible solutions would benefit from placing redevelopment restrictions on floor levels for properties within the Bunyip Street trapped sag. Design data associated with major pipe upgrade option should be placed in MapInfo as a virtual project to restrict further diminishment of future drainage project opportunities along the proposed alignment and flag the availability of investigation works to support future network planning and project investigations. 16 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: 1 That minor works be undertaken to improve the performance of the stormwater

drainage system in the vicinity of the Bunyip Street trapped sag, and that these works shall include:

(i) Upgrading kerb gullies to current standards, (ii) Installing additional kerb gullies as required, (iii) Improvements to the function of the stormwater detention basin at Herbert Park Reserve.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 27 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 4 (Continued) BUNYIP STREET, BURLEIGH HEADS - CAPITAL DRAINAGE WORKS INVESTIGATION RD2118/46/01/09(P1) 2 That the localised flooding identified in this report be referred to Planning Environment & Transport to define redevelopment floor levels for properties identified in Attachment 4.3. 3 That residents in the area be informed about the outcomes of major drainage

investigations and appraised of Councils proposed actions to reduce the impact of flooding on the worst affected properties in the area.

Author: Authorised by:

Ron Patrick Warren Day Drainage AND Foreshore Planning Technical Officer.

Director Engineering Services

28 January 2011 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ES11.0223.004 moved Cr Gates, seconded Cr Shepherd 1 That minor works be undertaken to improve the performance of the stormwater

drainage system in the vicinity of the Bunyip Street trapped sag, and that these works shall include:

(i) Upgrading kerb gullies to current standards, (ii) Installing additional kerb gullies as required, (iii) Improvements to the function of the stormwater detention basin at Herbert Park Reserve.

2 That the localised flooding identified in this report be referred to Planning Environment & Transport to define redevelopment floor levels for properties identified in Attachment 4.3. 3 That residents in the area be informed about the outcomes of major drainage investigations and appraised of Councils proposed actions to reduce the impact of flooding on the worst affected properties in the area. CARRIED


Attachment 4.2 Study Area, Method, Analysis, Options STUDY AREA The total catchment area is 95 ha. Urban residential is 40% of the area, 35% is reserves covered with natural vegetation and the balance is industrial and commercial development and roads. METHOD A MikeStorm drainage model was constructed to analyse the existing drainage system performance and to determine the impact on property flooding and what improvements are necessary to alleviate the flooding. All overland flow paths along local streets are well represented in the model. As-built information on the existing pipe system is used to represent the existing pipe system. The MikeStorm model was run for three storm scenario’s Q10, Q20 and Q100. Attachment 1 reflects the anticipated extent of the Q100 flood level within the study area. The Bunyip Street catchment is part of the Nerang River main catchment. The 100yr ARI critical storm duration for the Nerang River catchment is 72 hours, whereas the critical storm duration for the Bunyip Street catchment is less than 1 hour. ANALYSIS Lower parts of Bunyip, Banjo and Matilda Street are inundated during storm events more intense than a Q5 storm. During a Q20 event 7 overfloor flooding, 9 garage flooding and 22 property flooding were noted. A greater extent of local flooding is expected for more intense events. The Bunyip Street trapped sag has no effective overland flow path and drainage from the area is completely reliant on underground pipes. Re-establishing the overland flowpath is not practical due to the constraints of existing development. Existing pipe drainage for the catchment outlets into a large open drain at the Dunlin Drive, West Burleigh Road intersection. This drain ultimately discharges in to Burleigh Lake. The Dunlin Drive, West Burleigh Road intersection is overtopped by more than 400mm above the crown during a Q100 local storm and by 300mm during a Q100 regional event. This indicates that local flood may result in greater interruption to traffic flow at this intersection than the regional flood. OPTIONS 1. Detention Basin

Any drainage improvement that captures flow from the catchment area south of Matilda Street would allow more stormwater to enter the downstream system at Bunyip Street during short, intense, storm events. Herbert Park is a large reserve area between West Burleigh Road and Tanjenong Place. A steep catchment of 20ha drains into the low point of this reserve which acts as a stormwater detention basin. There is potential to increase the capacity of this detention basin and throttle back outflow into the downstream pipe system. This would relieve pressure on the pipe system in the Bunyip and Banjo Street area for the short duration storm and help lower flood levels at the Dunlin Drive, West Burleigh Road intersection.


Modelling indicates that even where zero outflow from the detention basin is assumed, a drop in flood levels in Bunyip Street during a Q100 storm is approximately 80mm. This indicates that modifications to the detention basin alone offer only a limited reduction in flood risk at the Bunyip Street trapped sag.

2. Lower invert at Dunlin Drive open drain

The pipe system within the Bunyip Street catchment ultimately discharges into a wide open drain on the western side of the Dunlin Drive, West Burleigh Road intersection. Consideration has been given to the benefit of lowering the open drain invert in order to reduce flood levels at the Dunlin Drive, West Burleigh Road intersection. However, due to the inadequacy of the existing pipe system, it was determined that no improvement in upstream drainage system performance could be achieved by lowering invert levels in the open drain.

3. Lowering of West Burleigh Road at Dunlin Drive intersection

Overtopping of the road at Dunlin, West Burleigh Road intersection also occurs during intense storm events. A peak discharge of approximately 9 m3/s spills over the road during the Q100 storm. Regrading and lowering the road would increase the discharge capacity over the road but not enough to lower flood levels at Bunyip Street. Aside from the limitations posed by underground services, lowering the road would also increase the frequency of road inundation with detrimental impacts on traffic safety.

4. Major pipe upgrade

Two primary alignments for a major pipe system upgrade between Bunyip Street and Dunlin Drive were considered. After detailed service and pothole investigations this was narrowed to one viable alignment as all other alternatives require major service relocations and expensive traffic management. The deliverable option is identified as Option 4b in the design investigation report. This approach incorporates a new pipeline to divert stormwater from the southern part of the catchment away from the Bunyip Street trapped sag. Detailed design for this option includes major pipe upgrades extending from Fleay Court, to the south of the Reedy Creek and West Burleigh Road intersection, to the open drain at Dunlin Drive. This additional relief drainage would enable the existing pipe network to be fully utilised in draining the Bunyip Street trapped sag area only. The cost to construct this major pipe upgrade is however estimated at $7.5 Million, not including contingencies. The main concern with this alignment is the probable disruption of the driveway and carpark belonging to Hungry Jacks restaurant within the Stocklands development on West Burleigh Road. It was noted that any disruption to Hungry Jacks routine business activities may lead to a claim situation. Installation of the pipes by jacking under Hungry Jacks would avoid such disruptions, however due to shallow ground cover of less than 1.5m, the risk of ground settlement and damage to the service area of Hungry Jacks is high. Unfortunately, the extent of existing development and underground services means there is no practical alternative to passing through the Hungry Jacks premises for this option. No allowance has been made in the above figure for possible claims by Hungry Jacks.


The proposed works would help to lower flood levels in the Bunyip Street trapped sag by approximately 300mm providing immunity from overfloor flooding up to a Q20 rainfall event. Property and street flooding will however continue to occur in the area, but to a lesser degree. To provide 1 in 100 year flood immunity an overland flowpath is required. This is not achievable owing to the obstruction created by West Burleigh Road. The major pipe upgrade would further alleviate overtopping of the West Burleigh Road and Dunlin Drive intersection during the Q100 local storm. The outer lanes of West Burleigh Road would still be subject to inundation during a Q100 local storm, however the centre lanes would remain serviceable for traffic operations along West Burleigh Road. Ultimate cost and other constraint impacting on the delivery of this option greatly depends on satisfying the requirements of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, Stocklands, Hungry Jacks and underground utility service providers.

5. Property acquisition and re-sale

In light of the above, Council might also wish to consider the acquisition the worst affected properties in the area. This might provide an opportunity for Council to remove existing improvements on the land, reset development floor levels to above the Q100 flood level and resell those properties for development. This approach offers a more immediate reduction in flood impacts for the area. Based on 8 properties, Council might invest and initial $6 Million in property acquisition at $750,000 per property. Assuming demolition costs of $50,000 per property and resale of vacant lots at $300,000 each, the net cost for this option to Council would approximate $4 Million. It would also be necessary to confirm the reliability of these figures prior to any final decision on the viability of this option. While this option presents as considerably cheaper than the major pipe system upgrade and also avoids significant asset depreciation and maintenance costs, it would be associated with major social disruption for affect owners / residents. This, in all probability, would be matched by corresponding level of political controversy and potential for legal dispute.

6. Minor system improvements

Another option involving minor improvements to the existing pipe system in the vicinity of the Bunyip Street trapped sag has been considered. This approach includes upgrading of all gully pits in this area to improve inlet capacity and installation of new pipes as required to support gully pit augmentation. Improvements in drainage system performance in the trapped sag would be further enhanced by the concurrent augmentation to the detention basin identified at Option 1. A preliminary estimate for delivery of these combined system improvements is $500,000. The works could be placed within the 4 year capital drainage program and prioritised according to the existing Engineering Services categorisation system and available funding. Project outcomes would also be enhanced by placing redevelopment floor level restrictions, within the trapped sag area.

7. Fill and raise street and properties

Filling and raising property and road profiles in stages as redevelopment progresses has also been considered. In the absence of well defined overland flow paths however, this may not solve all flooding issues and transfer impacts to adjoining areas. For this reason the approach is not considered viable without concurrent improvements in the performance of the pipe drainage system.


Attachment 4.3 Bunyip Street Burleigh - Recommended Floor Level Restrictions

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 33 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 ENGINEERING ASSETS & PLANNING TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Refer 20 page attachment 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY Not applicable. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Not applicable. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT To advise Council of the status of the development of the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy which addresses items originating from the Maintenance Responsibilities in Gold Coast Tidal Waterways report to Council. The report proposes an improved maintenance standard and resources required to implement the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy. 4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS Ex minute G10.0326.038 (in part): 4. That Council’s Engineering Assets and Planning branch in consultation with Health

Regulatory and Lifeguard Services branch and any other relevant branch be instructed and funded to prepare:

a) a Maintenance Standard for the proper functioning and Operation of the Canal systems in Council’s local government area, taking into account the existing standards applied and any further matters raised by the City Solicitor’s Report,

b) Criteria and parameters in which Council may consider conducting i emergency works, ii or other works on private lands adjoining a canal (to prevent a system failure).

5. That a further Report be prepared by Engineering Assets and Planning in consultation with Health Regulatory and Lifeguard Services branch and any other relevant branch to Council to advise on the completion of the Maintenance Standard and any further budgetary requirements arising from it. 6. That Council endorse the inclusion of a Standard Drawing for Rock Armour and Gravel Blanket for specific canal systems in Council’s Land Development Guidelines and that Technical Services and Flood Management be instructed to undertake the necessary studies and prepare the necessary reports and drawings for this purpose. Ex minute G08.1208.014 (in part): 1. That a report be brought back on the level of maintenance works in canals, with particular reference to rock pitching and dredging.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 34 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) 5 DISCUSSION 5.1 BACKGROUND Legal Report The legal report to Council on 26 March 2010, Maintenance Responsibilities in Gold Coast Tidal Waterways (G10.0326.038) herein referred to as the ‘Legal Report’, addressed the scope of Council’s legal responsibilities in maintaining canals and other tidal waterways. The report gave particular consideration to the impacts of aging infrastructure across the City. Schedule 1 of the legal report included a table that summarised the tidal waterways maintenance obligations, responsible parties of those obligations, current works being undertaken and recommendations of further steps to be taken for Council to comply with its legal obligations to maintain tidal waterway systems. A copy of this table and comments on Engineering Services’ progress to date is included in Attachment 5.1. For the purpose of this report, the terms ‘tidal waterways’ and ‘canals’ are used interchangeably. Revetment Wall Working Group Meetings to enable inter-directorate coordination of issues relating to revetment walls began in December 2008. This led to the formation of the Revetment Wall Working Group which includes members from Engineering Assets and Planning (ES), Legal Services (CG), Implementation and Assessment (PET) and Strategy and Environment Planning and Policy (PET). The Terms of Reference for the group is provided in Attachment 5.2 and the group has been actively working to resolve issues relating to revetment walls across the City including: waterway maintenance, legal roles and responsibilities, education of private revetment wall owners, and Council system and process improvements. Significant outcomes coordinated through the Revetment Wall Working group include the completion of the Legal Report and progression of subsequent actions, the development of the Revetment Wall Fact Sheet and Revetment Wall Frequently Asked Questions advertised in both the January 2010 and July 2010 rates notices (refer: http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard2.aspx?pid=8085). 5.2 CANAL MAINTENANCE STANDARD AND BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS Current Maintenance Standard and Budget Council’s current maintenance standard and budget allocations (provided in function 255.9400 Tidal Waterway Operations) for maintaining tidal waterways includes: A three year cycle Whole of City dredge program to reinstate sand canal profiles to their

original design profile. The current waterways dredging program is summarised in Engineering Asset and Planning’s (EAP) standard operating procedure 9-1-12 Waterways Dredging Maps (see Attachment 5.3). In the efforts of equity, the program offers the same level of service for all canal areas and is not currently prioritised according to risk. Current annual allocations are split into four projects to maintain the canal profiles in the northern, southern, central and western canal areas at a three year cycle (total $1,956,000),

http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard2.aspx?pid=8085

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 35 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Allocations to maintain the flow capacity for flood events and navigation functionality at

the entrances of canal systems and allowance for canal storm / tidal event response in these areas ($89,200),

An allocation to maintain entrance flow capacity for flood events, navigation functionality

and allowance for canal storm / tidal event response in navigable waterways discharging to the Broadwater ($105,500),

An allocation for dredging to maintain the Southport Parklands foreshores ($160,000), An allocation for public revetment wall maintenance ($46,200) and A revetment wall allocation to accommodate targeted priority investigations and urgent

dredge and rock works ($250,000). Storm events over the 2010-11 summer period, coinciding with extreme tidal events has increased the number of community requests to provide additional dredge services outside the three year cycle. In some cases the requests include concerns that an eroded canal profile may be affecting private revetment wall stability. However in most cases Council inspections have revealed that the most common fault in revetment wall stability is not the canal profile, but issues with either maintenance, design or construction of the private revetment walls. Where requests to reinstate the canal profile outside of the three year dredge cycle is deemed legitimate and urgent (compromising revetment wall stability), emergency variations to the dredge program have been implemented. Specifically this has occurred at Duet Drive, Mermaid Waters, Allambie Canal, Broadbeach Waters, Paradise Waters and Pine Lake, Elanora. It must be further noted that such urgent variations have caused issues and complaints from communities whose canal system dredging has been delayed to accommodate the diversion to emergency areas, as this approach is contrary to the current equity-based three year Whole of City maintenance standard. Current budgets and available resources are not sufficient to accommodate both urgent variations and the regular three year maintenance standard. Additionally, Council’s technical staff are aware of priority canal areas in the City and a program has already been implemented to undertake detailed survey and address concerns in these areas outside of the three year dredge maintenance standard. A second program to visually assess the state of canals to inform a targeted priority area program has commenced. Both programs are discussed below. ‘State of the Canals’ Program Council has commenced a State of the Canals program to visually assess all of the City’s tidal waterways and report on areas where canal profiles, against both private and public revetment walls, appear to be deviating from the design profile. This program will help Council identify targeted priority areas for further investigation, detailed survey and any required dredging or emergency works to ensure Council is meeting its legal waterway obligations.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 36 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Targeted Priority Areas Council has completed detailed hydrographic survey works in several priority areas to assess the need for re-profiling works (ie sand dredging or rock work). Priority area issues, completed surveys and corresponding works currently being completed include: Paradise Quays: Existing rock profile was low and required top up. Rock work is

complete. Area is on a monitoring program. Lake Intrepid: Survey showed some profile slumping. The profile does not need sand

replenishment at this point in time. Minor rock work completed. The lake is very deep and some sand has been pumped to fill the hole in the hope to reduce the likelihood of further profile slumping. Area is on a monitoring program.

Runaway Bay Islands: Survey complete. Minor rock work is required to re-establish

slumped profiles. Works will commence in January 2011 and be completed in March 2011.

Allambie Canal (adjacent to bridge): Survey complete. Profile appears to be stable. No

re-profiling is required at this point in time. Area is on a monitoring program. Calypso Bay: Survey complete. Comparison to as-constructed information is required.

Funds have been provided in 2010-11 for this work and Council is working in cooperation with Maritime Safety Queensland to rationalise dredging required.

Sovereign Islands: Survey complete. Comparison to as-constructed information is

underway. Assessment will determine future work requirements and budget. Paradise Point: Survey complete. Comparison to as-constructed information is required.

Assessment will determine future work requirements and budget. Currumbin Waters: A work request for survey has been submitted. Comparison to as-

constructed information is required. Assessment will determine future work requirements and budget.

Burleigh Lake: A priority area identified for investigation. Survey is to be completed by

March 2011. Comparison to as-constructed information is required. Assessment will determine future work requirements and budget.

Clear Island Waters: Priority area identified for investigation. Survey to be completed by

March 2010. Comparison to as-constructed information required. Assessment will determine future work requirements and budget.

Paradise Waters: Priority area identified for investigation. Council responsibilities need to

be confirmed by Legal Services as the canal system adjoins the Nerang River.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 37 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Proposed Maintenance Standard and Budget Following receipt of legal opinion on Council’s responsibility to: “…maintain a canal…as a physical whole…in accordance with [Section] 121 of the [Coastal Protection and Management Act]…” Engineering Services is in the process of implementing the following improvements to the current maintenance standard (with estimated costs to be provided in function 255.9400 - Tidal Waterway Operations): Prioritised Dredge Program:

It is proposed to provide a higher level of service in the Whole of City canal maintenance program from a three year dredge cycle to a prioritised program of dredging whereby canal area dredging is prioritised according to risk and needs. This requires an additional allocation to the sand dredge portion of the funding, which corresponds to approximately $650,000 for the 2011-12 and subsequent financial years. Additional funds would also be required this year if Council wishes to implement the increased level of service for the remainder of the 2010-11 financial year. The source of these funds would initially need to be from Whole of City funds until such time as a benefitted levy or other appropriate funding source can be established. The progression of the latter task was identified in the Legal Report and is being progressed through the Revetment Wall Working Group. Approximately $50,000 is required to obtain legal advice regarding the establishment and implementation of a benefitted levy.

Canal Status Program:

Establish data on the existing state of all City canals through the continuation of the ‘State of the Canals’ program, targeted priority area program and accelerating the population of hydrographic canal survey data for the whole city. This will require an initial non-recurrent allocation of $400,000 in 2011-12 to establish the status quo scenario and a recurrent allocation of $150,000 per annum from 2012-13 to maintain the data and inform the proposed prioritised dredge cycle.

Emergency Canal Maintenance Response - Dredging:

Provide a new annual emergency canal maintenance (dredging) allocation of $60,000 in function 255.9400 (Tidal Waterway Operations) to enable emergency dredge works to be undertaken outside the proposed prioritised canal dredging program. This is required to respond to storm and other unforseen erosion events. The proposed allocation will fund four to five additional weeks of dredging to address emergent profile problems.

Emergency Canal Maintenance Response – Rock Armour / Gravel Blanket:

Provide a new annual emergency canal works (revetment rocking) allocation of $100,000 to allow Council to provide emergency response to emergent rock profile problems.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 38 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Canal Entrances:

Increase allocations to maintain the flow capacity for flood events, navigation functionality at the entrances of canal systems and allow for canal storm / tidal event response in these areas (2010-11 allocation: $89,200; 2011-12 allocation required: $110,000).

Broadwater Entrances:

Increase allocation to maintain entrance flow capacity for flood events, navigation functionality and allow for canal storm / tidal event response in navigable waterways discharging to the Broadwater (2010-11 allocation: $105,500; 2011-12 allocation required: $126,600).

Southport Broadwater Parklands Dredging:

Increase the allocation for dredging to maintain the Southport Parklands foreshores (2010-11 allocation: $160,000; 2011-12 allocation required: $162,000).

Public Revetment Wall Maintenance: Increase the allocation for public revetment wall maintenance to accommodate any identified works to public walls as informed by the State of the Canals Program (2010-11 allocation: $46,000; 2011-12 allocation required: $70,000).

Resource Requirements In order to continue progressing the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy and proposed increase to the level of service in the maintenance standard, internal resources and industry service providers must be available. Internal Resources Additional Council resources are required to develop and implement the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy in order to meet legal obligations. Resources required in Engineering Services include: Maintenance Services (MS):

Maintenance Services has recently appointed a Technical Officer – Canal Dredging and Auditing to ensure effective implementation of the canal dredging and emergency response program. Specific responsibilities of the Technical Officer currently include:

- Canal dredging program being delivered within the required timeframes and budget, - Identifying defective revetment walls, develop a rehabilitation program for public revetment walls and advise owners of their responsibility for private revetment walls, - Respond to customer requests regarding canal profiles and revetment wall concerns, - Assistance in the development of audit and condition assessment program for revetment walls, - Assisting hydrographic survey teams in the collection of canal profile data, - Identifying and rectifying deviations from canal as-constructed profiles, - Arranging emergency works and dredging as required and - Providing technical advice at various Council forums such as Revetment Wall Working Group and for insurance / legal claims.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 39 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Engineering Assets and Planning (EAP):

The development of a new maintenance standard, developing a new management strategy, implementing a priority based dredging program and managing emergent works requires an additional technical officer to manage these tasks. Existing waterways staff in EAP do not have the capacity to complete these tasks. This resource will be requested as part of the 2011-12 labour budget.

Technical Services (TS):

The primary resource impacts will be to the hydrographic survey team. Resource levelling will need to be undertaken by Survey Services to accommodate the required tasks under the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy and additional internal or contracted resources secured, if required. Technical services design staff and certified engineers will also be required in the preparation of standard drawings for rock armouring and site assessments to substantiate legal claims.

Industry Service Providers It has been recognised that the availability of suitably qualified industry resources may be a limiting factor in the proposed changes to the maintenance standard and demand for private works. Industry resources essential to the effective management of tidal waterways include: Dredging contractors, Barge contractors, Registered Professional Engineers (RPEQ) experienced in revetment wall construction

and waterway development, Private certifiers skilled in the requirements of revetment walls and canal systems and Materials for the construction of revetment walls and emergency rock protection. Anecdotal advice from industry indicates it would be able to expand to accommodate the increased demand however this is unlikely to be a rapid expansion. Council’s dredge contractors have verbally advised that they have the resources to accommodate moving from a three year to a prioritised dredging program. 5.3 MATTERS RAISED IN CITY SOLICITORS REPORT TO COUNCIL:

MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES IN GOLD COAST TIDAL WATERWAYS The Legal Report summarised the tidal waterways maintenance obligations, responsible parties of those obligations, current works being undertaken and recommendations of further steps to be taken for Council to comply with its legal obligations to maintain tidal waterway systems. A copy of this table and comments on Engineering Services’ progress to date is included in Attachment 5.1.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 40 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) 5.4 CRITERIA AND PARAMETERS FOR EMERGENCY WORKS Criteria and parameters for emergency works are being resolved in consultation with stakeholders as part of the Revetment Wall Working Group. Factors for consideration, and matters to be resolved collaboratively in determining whether emergency works should be undertaken include: Percentage of variation of the canal profile from the design profile, Multiple concerns leading to an identified systemic failure of the canal, Whether a public revetment wall or other waterway asset is facing imminent failure or

damage, Presence of illegal waterway structures contributing to the need for emergency works, Evidence of illegal behaviour contributing to the need for emergency works (eg evidence

of ‘motor washout’ from vessels where owners are deliberately trying to increase the draught for larger vessels),

Scheduled timeline for funding the renewal of public assets and Other contributing factors. 5.5 CRITERIA AND PARAMETERS FOR OTHER WORKS ON PRIVATE LANDS TO

PREVENT A SYSTEM FAILURE Criteria and parameters for other works on private lands is being resolved in consultation with stakeholders as part of the Revetment Wall Working Group. Factors for consideration, and matters to be resolved collaboratively include those listed above for general emergency works and: Percentage contribution of Council’s assets to the imminent private revetment wall / asset

failure or damage (eg canal profile, neighbouring council asset influences such as public revetment walls, stormwater assets and transport infrastructure),

Process for recovering funds when emergency works are undertaken to save private assets and

Claims of hardship by the property owner. 5.6 STANDARD DRAWING FOR ROCK ARMOUR AND GRAVEL BLANKET The Legal Report to Council recommended: “That Council endorse the inclusion of a Standard Drawing for Rock Armour and Gravel Blanket for specific canal systems in Council’s Land Development Guidelines…” Research and progress since the recommendation has revealed that a separate rock armour and gravel blanket standard drawing would need to be prepared for each specific canal system and as-constructed canal / revetment design. By way of example, a rock armour standard drawing has been prepared for an area of Runaway Bay Islands, however this standard drawing would only be technically suitable for a quarter of the properties at the Runaway Bay development due to differing design methodologies. Nonetheless, there is merit in continuing the project and establishing a library of: As-constructed canal development plans, Rock armour / gravel blanket standard drawings suitable for each specific canal system

design and

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 41 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) An acceptable solution, or solutions, for the reconstruction of revetment walls on private

property.

This library should be made available to the public to increase public awareness, encourage industry capability and capacity, and undertaking of appropriate solutions by private landholders. The provision of an initial allocation of $100,000 to design and complete ‘rock armour and gravel blanket’ standard drawings for each of the City’s canal systems would be required in function 255.9400 (Tidal Waterway Operations) to continue with establishing the library of technical waterway documents. This allocation will be requested in the 2011-12 budget process. 5.7 ADDITIONAL TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT MATTERS Engineering Services intends for a variety of additional matters to be incorporated into the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy to ensure the strategy holistically guides the management of the City’s waterways. Such matters currently being considered and progressed separately include: Operational Maintenance Consideration of Council’s responsibilities for, and involvement in the management of

natural tidal waterways, Progression of formal approvals and programs for waterway foreshore nourishment in

partnership with Maritime Safety Queensland to improve amenity of the city’s foreshores, Investigations regarding the establishment of an erosion management program in

conjunction with Catchment Management Unit to identify options for bank stabilisation and short term treatments of bank erosion and failures,

Establishing routine asset inspection and monitoring programs for waterway assets (implemented as part of Asset Management Plan development), and

Incorporation of policies and practices to minimise impacts to water quality, ecology and other environmental factors.

Safe Practice Liaison with Maritime Services Queensland on implementing and policing a ‘No

Dangerous Wash’ policy and Establishing an enforcement program (based on the planned local law) for private owners

to maintain their revetment walls, pontoons and jetties.

Development Controls for Temporary Works and Acceptable Solutions Creation of a library of standard drawings to be made publicly available including the

sourcing and/or development of: - as-constructed profiles for specific canal systems - standard drawings for rock armouring / gravel blankets to suit systems - recommended solutions for revetment wall replacement to suit specific systems,

Assessing impacts of various protective wall treatments on flood storage in each canal, and

Incorporation of standard drawings in Council’s Land Development guidelines.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 42 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) 6 ALIGNMENT TO BOLD FUTURE VISION, CORPORATE PLAN, OPERATIONAL

PLAN Bold Futures “A safe city where everyone belongs”: Increasing our community spirit, enriching our quality of life and enjoying a wide variety of

cultural and recreational activities. “A city shaped by clever design”: Intentionally directing the city’s development and providing the infrastructure to enhance

our environment and lifestyles while promoting sustainable living choices through coastal, urban and rural settings.

Corporate Plan 2009-2014 KEY FOCUS AREA 4 – “A safe city where everyone belongs”: 4.5 Adequate social infrastructure meets the diverse needs of the community: Plan and commence the delivery of social infrastructure including human services,

libraries, community and youth centres and sports and recreational facilities, Plan activity centres to provide good access to social infrastructure and networks,

working collaboratively with land use, transport and environmental planners, Increase the utilisation and accessibility of the city’s social infrastructure. KEY FOCUS AREA 6 - “A city shaped by clever design”: 6.3 Infrastructure is planned and delivered to meet the needs of a growing community: Develop and implement long term infrastructure plans that are driven by the priorities of a

growing city, Deliver Council’s capital works program to keep pace with community growth and needs, Collaborate with State Government and adjoining local governments to ensure timely

delivery of essential regional infrastructure, Advocate for increased resources for social housing and supporting social infrastructure

from State and federal Governments. 7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS Cost Centre 255 - Function 9400 Tidal Waterways allocates approximately $2 Million to fulfil the current dredging program and maintenance of canals. The proposed improvements to the maintenance standard and progression of other actions arising from the Legal Report to meet Council’s obligations will require increased funding allocations. These funds will be sourced from Whole of City funding initially, with the identification of future funding sources such as recoverable works and benefited levies to be investigated through the Revetment Wall Working Group and Waterway Local Law Working Group. Additional funds required to meet the proposed service improvements to meet Council’s tidal waterway obligations will be requested in the 2011-12 financial year operational budget process and are summarised in the table below:

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 43 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Current Service Proposed Service

Level to Meet Tidal Waterway Obligations

Current (2010-11) Budget Allocation

Required Budget Allocation to Meet Proposed Service Levels

Canal maintenance dredging – 3 year cycle

Prioritised dredging program

$1,956,000 $2,606,000

Canal investigations and hydrographic survey

Obtain profile status for Whole of City

$116,000 $400,000

Canal entrance works Maintain current $89,200 $110,000 Broadwater entrance works

Maintain current $105,500 $126,000

Southport Broadwater Parklands

Maintain current $160,000 $162,000

Public Revetment Wall Maintenance

Increase to meet works requirements from survey program

$46,200 $70,000

New Benefitted Levy Legal Advice

$0 $50,000

New Emergency canal maintenance (dredging)

$0 $60,000

New Emergency canal works (revetment rocking)

$0 $100,000

New ‘Rock armour and gravel blanket’ standard drawings

$0 $100,000

8 RISK MANAGEMENT Engineering Services risk in terms of project development and delivery is mitigated by the risk management procedure 2-40 which is aligned with the Risk Management Standards AS/NZS 4360:2004. 9 STATUTORY MATTERS A local law is being progressed by the Waterway Local Law Working Group (facilitated by Legal Services) to control and maintain development adjacent to canals and waterways. Section 121 of the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 outlines Council’s legislative responsibility to maintain canal systems as a whole. 10 COUNCIL POLICIES Policy 11: Land Development Guidelines, Section 3 – Engineering Infrastructure – Design Requirements: 3.6 Design Requirements – Waterfront Development 3.6.2 Waterways (Canals, Lakes, Tidal Waters, Creeks, Rivers and Other Waterways) 3.6.5 Tidal Waters 11 DELEGATIONS Not applicable.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 44 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) 12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION Title of the Stakeholder Consulted



Coordinator Drainage and Foreshore Planning

EAP, ES Yes

Senior Development Compliance Officer

Implementation and Assessment, PET

Yes

Senior Lawyer Legal Services, CG Yes 13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS

Community The Tidal Waterways Management Strategy will assist Council in regulating and managing the operational, development related issues and private owner responsibilities in accordance with the obligations outlined in the Legal Report. Council The Tidal Waterways Management Strategy will direct Council operations and controls relating to the management and maintenance of canals and tidal waterways. 14 TIMING The development of the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy is underway. Progress for the various elements of the strategy including improvements to the current maintenance standard has already commenced to address high priority risks. Submissions for the 2011-12 budget will include a proposal to increase canal maintenance funding for employing a prioritised dredging program and funds for emergent works. The provision of an additional technical officer in EAP will allow the Tidal Waterways Strategy to be completed by December 2011 and facilitate a higher service level in the management of canals. 15 CONCLUSION Council has been proactive in the maintenance of canals with its: Three year dredging program, ‘State of the Canals’ program, Targeted priority hydrographic surveys and related works, Response to urgent / emergency issues, Proposing improvements to the current canal maintenance standard, Recruiting a Technical Officer – Canal Dredging and Auditing in Maintenance Services

and The formation of the Revetment Wall Working Group which is actively progressing issues

relating to revetment walls across the City.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 45 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) Council should be proactive and use its regulatory powers to encourage land owners to maintain structures in canals and waterways. The Waterways Local Law Working Group has been established to develop a local law and progress the needs to implement and enforce this instrument. Education of private landholders as to their responsibilities has also commenced. The development of the Tidal Waterways Management Strategy is underway and an additional resource is required in EAP to continue with strategy development and coordinate implementation of the various components such as: The new maintenance standard, A new management strategy, Implementing and managing a priority based program, Resolving emergent issues with canals and revetment walls and Development of a standard drawings library. Funding requirements have also been identified to enable an improved maintenance standard and level of service to meet Council’s tidal waterway management obligations. Further reports will be prepared to include the following: The planned completion of the Tidal Waterway Management Strategy, Works resulting from the State of the Canals Program, Ongoing targeted priority investigations, Results of the improved maintenance standard (subject to funding and resource

allocations), and Progress on other items identified in the Legal Report to Council on Maintenance

Responsibilities in Gold Coast Tidal Waterways. 17 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: 1 Council note the contents of this report. 2 Council considers increasing the canal maintenance standard from a three year

Whole of City dredge cycle to a prioritised dredging program and increasing the total annual allocation for canal dredging in the 2011-12 budget process to accommodate the program.

3 Council considers providing funds for a program of canal investigations and hydrographic survey in the 2011-12 budget process. 4 Council considers providing funds for emergent canal maintenance and revetment

wall repairs in the 2011-12 budget process. 5 Council considers an additional permanent FTE resource to further develop Tidal Waterways Management Strategy and coordinate canal maintenance actions to meet legal obligations in the 2011-12 budget process.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 46 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 5 (Continued) TIDAL WATERWAYS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – STATUS REPORT WFB600/648/-(P1) 6 Council considers providing funds to design and complete ‘rock armour and gravel blanket’ standard drawings for each of the City’s canal systems in the 2011-12 budget process. 7 That legal advice be sought on the introduction of a benefitted rate/special levy to

fund the proposed prioritised dredging program. Author:

Authorised by:

Nikki Bourke Warren Day Coordinator Drainage and Foreshore Assets Director Engineering Services 8 February 2011 Changed Recommendation PROCEDURAL MOTION ES11.0223.005 moved Cr Sarroff, seconded Cr Pforr That the matter be referred to the Council Meeting to be held on Monday 28 February 2011 due to lack of a quorum and that it be requested that Part 7 of the recommendation be deleted.

CARRIED

ADOPTED AT COUNCIL 28 FEBRUARY 2011 THE MOTION WAS CARRIED RESOLUTION G11.0228.009 1 Council note the contents of this report. 2 Council considers increasing the canal maintenance standard from a three year

Whole of City dredge cycle to a prioritised dredging program and increasing the total annual allocation for canal dredging in the 2011-12 budget process to accommodate the program.

3 Council considers providing funds for a program of canal investigations and hydrographic survey in the 2011-12 budget process. 4 Council considers providing funds for emergent canal maintenance and revetment wall repairs in the 2011-12 budget process. 5 Council considers an additional permanent FTE resource to further develop

Tidal Waterways Management Strategy and coordinate canal maintenance actions to meet legal obligations in the 2011-12 budget process.

6 Council considers providing funds to design and complete ‘rock armour and

gravel blanket’ standard drawings for each of the City’s canal systems in the 2011-12 budget process.


Attachment 5.1 Report Parag. No.

Obligation Responsible Party

Current Works Report Recommends Further Steps be taken for Council to comply with its legal obligations

Actions Completed, Underway, Yet to Commence

1 3 4

Maintain a Canal as an entirety in an operating condition and keep it clean

Council Rubbish Collection and removal

Vegetation Management (land and aquatic)

Sedimentation Management: Dredging and beach profile replenishment to at or near “as constructed “ profile*

Banks and wall/floor Profile Maintenance by way of rock armour and gravel blanket protection*

Sedimentation/ Silt removal and disposal to generally maintain navigable access*

Maintenance of rock training walls

Flood Storage Monitoring Removal of Significant

Debris placed by flood or storm-tide

Water Quality Monitoring Program following events with adverse impacts, such as flooding leading to fish kills

*Carried out on a three year cycle

1. Erosion Management Program - canal profile bathymetric Survey Program; with support works/ rock replenishment works undertaken for eroded areas

2. Canal Profile Maintenance

Program for bed and banks of rock walled canals as well as beach canals

3. Revetment Wall Condition

Inspection and Monitoring Program

4. “GCCC Canal Maintenance

Standard” to be formalised with supporting reasons and documented, setting out maintenance health indicators, and standards required to keep a functioning and structurally sound canal system

5. Budgets adjusted to meet staffing

requirements for application of GCCC Maintenance Standard

6. Carry out system-wide preventive

maintenance works o to maintain a functioning

canal system and avoid system failure

1. 7 priority canals completed (Paradise Quays, Lake Intrepid, Runaway Bay Islands, Allambie Canal, Calypso Bay, Sovereign Islands, Paradise Point); survey completed; rectification works underway. Next 4 identified; survey locations underway. Emergency works and dredging being undertaken as required (e.g. Duet Dr, Paradise Quays).

2. 3 year dredging program being revised to a prioritised dredging program according to risk.

3. State of the Canals Report

commenced ECD 30 Jan 2011. Will become an annual activity and supported with more detailed bathymetry survey program.

4. As-con data has been collected.

Foreshore and cross section data from item 3. above will feed into this. ECD Dec 2011.

5. Waterway Condition Assessment

requirements in both EAP & MS to be included in the 2011/12 labour budget submission ECD Jan 2011.

6. A result of items 2, 3, & 4. above,

commencement due July 2011.


Report Parag. No.


Current Works Report Recotaken for legal obligations


mmends Further Steps be Council to comply with its

o to maintain the system in a sound structural condition, in accordance with the adopted GCCC Canal Maintenance Standard

o to be funded by special

levy on benefitted properties

1 Benefitted property owner

Maintain Revetment Walls in a Safe Condition

Owner of dry Lot on which wall is located

Regular Monitoring, including wall toe and foundations which may extend into the canal

Inspections after storm or flood events

Keep Weepholes Clean and open

No super loading by development too close to wall

No anchoring or attaching structures to the revetment wall

Repair/ Replacement of wall when required

If repair or replacement required, make “prescribed tidal works “ development application for Operational Works to Council

7. (Proposed Requirement under Local Law ) : RPEQ Engineer’s report certifying wall stability when offering property for sale

7. PET Development Compliance progressing via Waterway Local Law Working Group (WLLWG) established to implement the proposed Waterway Local Law (next meeting due Mar 2011).


Report Parag. No.


Current Report Recommends Further Steps be taken for Council to comply with its legal obligations


Works

Temporary works such a rock armouring requires “prescribed tidal works” application to Council in accordance with Council’s required standard design

Owner’s RPEQ Engineer’s report on wall stability when proposing development on the lot (Canals and Waterways Code )

(Recommended) : Purchasers obtain RPEQ engineer’s report on wall stability as part of pre-purchase inspections

1. Maintain Revetment Walls located on or benefitting Public Lands

Council As above 8. (Proposed Requirement under Local Law ) : RPEQ Engineer’s report certifying wall stability when offering property for sale

8. EAP to prepare waterway condition assessment data requirements and procedures to give to Maintenance Services or other service providers. ECD June 2011 (to be revised when resource levelling undertaken).

5. Generally Maintain Navigable Access in canal systems

Council - in canals

Council dredges to generally maintain navigable access for vessels of a draught reasonably able to navigate the canal at the time of construction

on a three year cycle, as constrained by

o system wide requirements;

o budget

9. Maintenance Standard to be formally adopted requiring maintenance of navigable access generally for vessels of a draught that were reasonably able to navigate the canal at the time of construction

9. As-con data has been collected. Foreshore and cross section data from item 3. above will feed into this. Rates cards need to be tagged with the depth limitations of the canal adjacent to a given waterfront property – to be progressed with PET. ECD June 2011


Report Parag. No.




Works

Council maintains to “as constructed” form, not to “as designed” form if there is any discrepancy

9. Carry out Emergency Works on private or public lot where is a threat to public safety or property

Council NA- no specific revetment wall or other structures program in place

10. Decide upon and document a threshold standard of physical conditions which would exist whereupon Council would consider itself bound to carry out emergency works in the public interest, being either

o Where a structure poses an immediate threat to public safety or property

o Where non-maintenance of the walls may lead to failure of the maintenance standard (once a local law is in place to this effect )

o Costs can be recovered from an owner where There is a law to that

effect Council is subject to

an action for failing to meet the Maintenance Standard

Building Act or LGA Enforcement proceedings outstanding and Council carries out the work

10, 11. & 12. 7 priority canals completed; survey completed; rectification works underway. Next 4 identified; survey underway. Emergency works and dredging being undertaken. State of the Canals Report has commenced ECD 30 Jan 2011. This will become an annual activity and supported with a more detailed bathymetry survey program where concerns are detected. This program will eventually include a pickup of obvious dilapidated structures once PET Development Compliance are adequately resourced to police waterway dilapidated structures. Need to prepare and document a procedure for the threshold and cost recovery for private situations.


Report Parag. No.


Current Works Repor Actions Completed, Underway, Yet to Commence

t Recommends Further Steps betaken for Council to comply with its legal obligations

11. Works might include removal of dangerous pontoons and jetties, repair of dangerous revetment walls

12. Procedures to be followed should

be formalised in accordance with any other relevant law or Council policy.

7. Carry out Emergency Works on Private Lot under CPMA

Owner In accordance with State laws (s585 Sustainable Planning Act 2009 “SPA”) - See directions from Department of Resources and Mines (DERM) website

13. Owner to advise Council, if possible, of nature and design of emergency works under s585 of SPA, as subsequent development approval from Council as Assessment Manager is required

13. WLLWG progressing this issue (next meeting due Mar 2011).

14. Vessels are controlled so as to create “no dangerous wash” in canal system

Vessel Owner/ State

Maintain moderate speeds to minimise vessel wash

14. Liaise with MSQ to establish whether water police monitoring of “no dangerous wash” policy in canals is available, in accordance with Maritime Safety Queensland Regulations

14. A previous report was submitted to Council on this issue: ES08.1203.010 - ITEM 10 - WAKE FROM VESSELS; Recommendations (& actions): 1 That Council notes the report. 2 That Council considers increasing the annual allocation for reconstruction of revetment walls benefiting public land from $190,000 to $400,000 per annum for Function 251.9400 (Tidal Waterways Operations) as part of the 2009/10 budget process. (requested in 2009/10 budget)


Report Parag. No.




3 That a further report regarding tidal works notice powers and the frequency of Council’s dredging program be presented following completion of the 2009 revetment wall marketing campaign. (tidal waterways legal report to Council - G10.0326.019) 4 That Council places a notification on the land record of properties with revetment walls to alert potential purchasers that it is the responsibility of the property owner to maintain them. (being progressed by PET) 5 That a report be brought back on the level of maintenance works in canals, with particular reference to rock pitching and dredging. (addressed in agenda item - Feb 2011)

Further liaison with MSQ on the issue of vessel wash required. ECD June 2011.

10. Regulation and Enforcement to require private landowners to keep structures such as revetment walls , pontoons and jetties in a safe condition

Council NA – no program Council’s Regulatory Powers can be exercised independently of the State’s tidal works notice powers

15. Instigate monitoring program of o revetment wall stability o conditions of pontoons

and jetties

16. Instigate Enforcement Program to require private owners to properly maintain, repair or replace revetment walls, and other structures such as pontoons and jetties in a safe condition

15. Development Compliance currently developing a strategy to resource this activity.

16. WLLWG (next meeting due Mar

2011).


Report Parag. No.


Current Works Repor ther Steps be Actions Completed, Underway, Yet to Commence

t Recommends Furtaken for Council to comply wlegal obligations

ith its

17. To be done by way of o Enforcement Notice

under the Building Act 1975 As an interim step

(until a local law is passed) for repairs and removal where a development application for the works is not required )

o Under proposed Local Law to be adopted (when available) For reconstruction/

redesign where a development approval is required, and/or repairs and removal )

18. If immediate threat to public

safety or property, Council to carry out works in accordance with its policy/guidelines and recover the cost as a special rate

State Can issue tidal works notices for illegal, abandoned, dilapidated or dangerous works (CPMA s60)

WLLWG and PET Development Compliance.


Report Parag. No.




13. Regulation and Enforcement – Proposed Local Law Regarding Revetment Walls

Council NA – No Local law in Place 19. Proposed Local Law to deal with: 1. Maintenance : requiring

an owner of property on which a revetment wall is located, or

the owner of a lot benefitting from a revetment wall

o To maintain a revetment wall: in a safe condition

and As set out in the

“GCCC Maintenance Standard”

o To maintain the foundations of a revetment wall extending onto the canal in a safe structurally sound condition

o Depending on the level of risk presented, to Immediately

temporarily secure a structure to prevent injury to persons or property, and

At a later date submit a more permanent solution for approval or

Demolish/ remove a

structure o Penalties for Breach

19. WLLWG (next meeting due Mar 2011).


Report Parag. No.


Current Works Report Recotaken for legal obligations


mmends Further Steps be Council to comply with its

o Council has the power to effect any wall maintenance if the owner fails to do so , and recover the cost of doing so from the owner.

o Timing of recovery is discretionary for Council and may be delayed, e.g. until next sale of property, or death of owner , which ever occurs first

2. Seller’s Report to Buyer on condition of the revetment wall prior to entry into contract for Sale

a. Searchable Rates Record to contain notice that a Seller’s report on revetment wall stability is required for this property

13 Regulation and Enforcement – Proposed Local Laws Regarding

Maintenance of private structures in Tidal waterways

Council NA – a further Report will be brought to Council to consider these local laws in detail

20. Owners to maintain pontoons and jetties is a safe condition

21. Owner’s of land adjacent to a waterway to be responsible for removing abandoned/dilapidated structures adjacent to their lots

As above (WLLWG and PET Development Compliance).


Report Parag. No.


Current Repor e Actions Completed, Underway, Yet to Commence

Works t Recommends Further Steps btaken for Council to comply with its legal obligations

7. Facilitation of Development Application Process for Temporary Works – Rock Armour and Gravel Blanket

Council Council’s consent as “owner” (delegated responsibility under the State to maintain canals ) of the waterway is necessary before application is “properly made”

Council will not agree unless:

o design is acceptable to Council ; and

o Applicant’s RPEQ engineer specifies the design is appropriate for specific site conditions

22. Council to make process more streamlined by issuing “ Standard Drawing” for specified canal systems with approved design

23. Obtain confirmation from Flood

Management branch that use of ‘rock armour and gravel blanket’ in particular systems will not adversely impact flood storage for the system, taking into account impacts of climate change

24. When Flood Management sign

off is given, Include a set of Standard Drawings for rock armour and gravel blanket works for specified canal systems in Council’s Land Development Guidelines

22. & 23. PET – Development Compliance and Flood Strategies 24. Standard Drawing for rock armour

created for part of the Runaway Bay system. Other systems need drawings progressed by EAP – to commence June 2011.

Private Land Owner

Makes “prescribed tidal works” development application for rock armour and gravel blanket works

Applicant’s RPEQ Engineer can then certify the use of the standard Design is appropriate for site conditions

PET Development Compliance

11. Control of Foreshores by Council

Council currently controls foreshores of canals existing in Gold Coast under gazettal as at 1984

25. Council to take steps to extend gazetted control of foreshores to all canals in the Gold Coast local government area.

26. If required by Council , Council to enact a Local Law to regulate use of canal foreshores

25. Legal Services has investigated and is satisfied that a local law can now be progressed to regulate activities in the canals as a result of recent changes in the LGA 2009

26. WLLWG (next meeting due Mar

2011). 12. Natural tidal

waterways- Rivers, creeks and streams –

State – Area is not within Council’s local

State can issue “tidal works notices” under CPMA for unsafe/ illegal works

27. State is concerned with a limited number of matters considered to be of “State significance “.

WLLWG and PET Development Compliance.


Report Parag. No.




Works

responsibility for Regulation and Enforcement

government control without further legislation/gazettal

Deals with development approvals for “tidal works” in State owned waterways

This does not usually include general maintenance of prescribed tidal works, unless some area of interest to the State such as a fish or other marine habitat is affected.

28. Council to undertake program of Enforcement under Building Act 1975 until a local law is enacted, and then under the local law

Owner Responsible to keep structures , such as jetties, pontoons and revetment walls in a “safe condition”

PET Development Compliance.

Council Dangerous objects are removed in the public interest

Sometimes with State Funding under State Disaster Management Act Programs

29.If Council has control of the foreshores , and chooses to exercise that control – then such control must be exercised without negligence

29. Waterways cleaning procedures are documented in EAP SOP 9-1-13. Maintenance Services (MS) undertake all dangerous object removal in conjunction with documented risk assessments as specified in the MS Operations Manual.

7. responsibility as assessment manager for prescribed tidal works applications

Council Deals with development applications for “prescribed tidal works “ including :

o Pontoons and jetties o Revetment wall repairs

and reconstruction o Temporary profile

maintenance works such as rock armour and gravel blanket

o Other works within the boundaries of a canal, whether above or below high-water mark.


Attachment 5.2

Terms of ReferenceRevetment Working Group

TERMS OF REFERENCE for

Revetment Working Group

Group Name: Revetment Working Group

Group Mission: (Purpose of the Group)

To improve outcomes for revetment walls in the following situations:

New greenfield revetment walls (new subdivisions, property developments)

New brownfield revetment walls (replacement, redevelopment)

Existing revetment walls requiring maintenance

And through the following mechanisms:

Legal

Education

Regulatory and planning

Asset management and planning

Objectives of Group: (must be realistic, obtainable, measurable) Increase investment into quality revetment walls

Reduce illegal works

Reduce Council’s liability

Produce documents, procedures and guidelines relating to revetment walls

Improve procedures and roles

Ensure appropriate resourcing

Deliver education to householders, certifying engineers, and internal staff

Make revetment wall maintenance and rebuilding more accessible

Improve resilience to disaster and climate change effects

Improve inter-directorate synergies

Establish enforcement regimes

Consult with LGAs and State authorities

Facilitate the integration of revetment wall and waterway stability matters into catchment management plans and flood studies

Streamline end-to-end processes for customers



Group Responsibilities: (Inclusion and Exclusions) Inclusions:

Revetment matters of concern to council

Revetment matters of concern to residents

Revetment walls benefitting natural and constructed waterways, and ornamental lakes

Waterway stability issues that impact on revetment walls

Revetment matters affecting/affected by waterway navigation, ecology and flooding

Exclusions:

Policy in other LGAs

Areas of natural setback

Deliverables: (What will be the tangible things produced by this Group eg. Recommendation, procedure, decision etc) Legal reviews

Public and internal revetment education materials

Revetment guidelines and policies

Improved planning processes and documents relating to revetment walls

Improved regulatory processes relating to revetment walls

Sunset/Review Period: (Estimation of how long Group will be operational – if ongoing then review at least every 12 months. Please specify date of review) Ongoing monthly meetings. Review in September 2010. Membership/Resource: The purpose of this section is to validate reasons for each member selected. Ie Define how

each resource can contribute. In some cases you may wish to list the type of resources required. Eg. Authority, responsibility, accountability. Resource (who) Why this resource is appropriate

or necessary for this Group. (eg previous experience, authority to make decisions etc)

Time required (Eg 1hr/mth)

Environmental Engineer, EAP, ES.

Meeting coordinator and provide specialist advice.

4 hours per month for meeting preparation, attendance and additional time as determined by Action Items.



Executive Coordinator Asset Planning – Transport, Drainage and Foreshores, EAP, ES.

Attend meetings and provide specialist advice.

2 hours per month for meeting preparation and attendance. Additional time as determined by Action Items

Coordinator Drainage and Foreshore Planning, EAP, ES



Coordinator Drainage and Foreshores Assets, EAP, ES.



Senior Foreshores Technical Officer, EAP, ES.



Contributed Asset Technical Officer, EAP, ES.



Contributed Engineering Asset Coordinator, EAP, ES.



Senior Lawyer, Legal Services, CG.



Supervisor Operational Works, I&A, PE&T.



Engineer, Development Assessment, I&A, PE&T.



Supervising Engineer – Hydraulic and Water Quality, I&A, PE&T.



Senior Development Compliance Officer, Development Compliance, PE&T.



Supervisor Development Compliance (building), Development Compliance, PE&T.





Initiator: Nikki Kilpatrick, Environmental Engineer, Engineering Assets and Planning, ES.

Endorsement of Terms of Reference by Directorates

Corporate Governance

Name: David Montgomery

Title: City Solicitor

Signature:

Date:

Planning Environment and Transport Representative

Name: Matthew Hulse

Title: Manager Implementation and Assessment

Signature:

Date:

Engineering Services Representative

Name: Mark Ash

Title: Manager Engineering Assets and Planning

Signature:

Date:


Attachment 5.3

Gold Coast City Council Engineering Services Directorate Engineering Assets and Planning Operations Manual Issue Date 30/07/09 of 3

Waterways Dredging Maps

9-1-12

PURPOSE To show on maps the pattern of dredging completed for Council’s canal dredging program. SCOPE Map of areas and maps of the three year canal dredging program. REFERENCES Nil. DEFINITIONS Nil. ABBREVIATIONS Nil. SOURCE FILE Document2 DOCUMENT ENQUIRIES Position Title: Senior Foreshores Technical Officer Contact Details: 5667 3768 PROCEDURE The canal dredging program follows a 3 year cycle. The following maps designate which area will be dredged in which year. The following table provides detail to the years 1, 2 and 3 provided on the maps. Dredging year Actual year 1 2008/09, 2011/12, 2014/15 2 2009/10, 2012/13, 2015/16 3 2010/11, 2013/14, 2016/17

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 65 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 6 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT & OPERATIONS BRANCH PETITION REGARDING U-TURN FACILITY REMOVED FROM WEST BURLEIGH ROAD & TABILBAN STREET BURLEIGH HEADS RD20001/16/-(P1) Refer 3 page attachment 1 BASIS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY Not Applicable. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Not Applicable. 3 PURPOSE OF REPORT To advise Council of investigations into the petition requesting the reinstatement of a u-turn facility at traffic signals at West Burleigh Road & Tabilban Street, Burleigh Heads. 4 PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS Ex Council Resolution No G10.0719.030: “That the Petition be received and referred to the Engineering Services Committee for consideration and report to Council.” 5 DISCUSSION Council has received a petition from some residents of Bunyip Street, and adjacent streets in Burleigh Heads requesting the reinstatement of the u-turn facility on West Burleigh Road at the traffic signals at Tabilban Street, Burleigh Heads. These traffic signals are controlled by the Department of Transport and Main Roads. A u-turn facility was removed in May 2010 in conjunction with the installation of a left turn arrow in Tabilban Street that was requested by residents. It was anticipated the left turn arrow in Tabilban Street would attract motorists to access West Burleigh Road at Tabilban Street rather than using Bunyip Street to avoid the traffic signals. Council’s Manager of Traffic Management and Operations Branch approached the Department of Transport and Main Roads to fund the change to the traffic signals, however this request was declined on the basis that the works would not benefit traffic flows on West Burleigh Road (State Controlled Road). The work was subsequently funded from the Division 12 Local Area Works. The change to the traffic signals allowed vehicles to turn left from Tabilban Street onto West Burleigh Road and concurrently vehicles to turn right on a green arrow into Tabilban Street from West Burleigh Road (refer Attachment 6.3 for detail). The ability for vehicles to perform a u-turn was removed as allowing both left turn and u-turn movements simultaneously creates a conflict point for vehicles and is not an acceptable Council and Department of Transport & Main Roads practice.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 66 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 6 (Continued) PETITION REGARDING U-TURN FACILITY REMOVED FROM WEST BURLEIGH ROAD & TABILBAN STREET BURLEIGH HEADS RD20001/16/-(P1) A four day automatic traffic survey was undertaken on Bunyip Street in August 2010 to compare current traffic data with previous data collected in August 2007:

Bunyip St Vehicles Per Day 2007 2010

Combined Directions 1775 1803

Eastbound Direction 240 157

Westbound direction 1535 1646

A comparison of the traffic survey data indicates only a small change in the number of vehicles using Bunyip Street therefore the left turn arrow installed in May 2010 has not had a significant impact in reducing traffic in Bunyip Street. Accordingly, Traffic Management and Operations Branch and the Dept of Transport and Main Roads would support the reinstatement of the u-turn facility on West Burleigh Road including the removal of the left turn arrow in Tabilban Street (refer Attachment 6.1 for detail). 6 ALIGNMENT TO BOLD FUTURE VISION, CORPORATE PLAN, OPERATIONAL

PLAN Strategic Priority 8 City Transport Improvements 8.1.4 Improved flow of traffic during peak periods 7 FUNDING AND RESOURCING REQUIREMENTS Estimated cost to reinstate the u-turn facility on West Burleigh Road including the removal of the left turn arrow in Tabilban Street is $9,300. If Council were to resolve to reinstate the u-turn facility as discussed in this report, the work could be funded from CC341 Function 6216 Project No. 9188. 8 RISK MANAGEMENT Not Applicable. 9 STATUTORY MATTERS Not Applicable. 10 COUNCIL POLICIES Not Applicable. 11 DELEGATIONS Delegation 389 – “To approve the installation and removal of official traffic signs on a road”.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 67 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 6 (Continued) PETITION REGARDING U-TURN FACILITY REMOVED FROM WEST BURLEIGH ROAD & TABILBAN STREET BURLEIGH HEADS RD20001/16/-(P1) 12 COORDINATION & CONSULTATION

Name and Title of the Stakeholder Consulted


Is the Stakeholder Satisfied With Content of Report and Recommendations (Yes/No)

Councillor Greg Betts Division 12 Council Aware of the Recommendation

Rod Callaghan Department of Transport

& Main Roads No Objection

“Following review by Director Engineering Service, Cr Betts will be advised” Right to Information (RTI) and Information Privacy (IP) Legislation 2009

Information Type

Definition Example

Personal Information

N/A

-

Routine Personal Work Information for

disclosure

N/A -

13 STAKEHOLDER IMPACTS There are no safety implications in reinstating the u-turn facility on West Burleigh Road and removing the left turn arrow in Tabilban Street. 14 TIMING If Council were to proceed with the works outlined in this report, works would be carried out in approximately 2 months if the Council resolves the recommendations. 15 CONCLUSION Council has received a petition from some residents of Bunyip Street, and adjacent streets in Burleigh Heads requesting the reinstatement of the u-turn facility at traffic signals at West Burleigh Road & Tabilban Street, Burleigh Heads. A previous u-turn facility was removed by Council in May 2010 in response to requests from local residents for a left turn arrow onto West Burleigh Road from Tabilban Street. It was anticipated the left turn arrow would reduce traffic in Bunyip Street. However Traffic Survey data indicates the introduction of the left turn arrow has not reduced the traffic volumes in Bunyip Street. Simultaneous u-turns and left turns are considered dangerous due to vehicle conflict.

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 68 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 6 (Continued) PETITION REGARDING U-TURN FACILITY REMOVED FROM WEST BURLEIGH ROAD & TABILBAN STREET BURLEIGH HEADS RD20001/16/-(P1)

Traffic Management and Operations Branch and the Department of Transport and Main Roads has no objection to reinstate the u-turn facility on West Burleigh Road and remove the left turn arrow in Tabilban Street. 16 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council resolves as follows: 1 That Council supports the reinstatement of the u-turn facility on West Burleigh Road

and the removal of the left turn arrow in Tabilban Street funded from Cost Centre 341, Function 6216, Project No 9188.

2 That the Department of Transport and Main Roads be advised of Council’s decision. 3 That the petitioners be advised accordingly. Author: Authorised by:

Thomas Rosengreen Warren Day Traffic Engineering Officer Director Engineering Services 01 February 2011 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ES11.0223.006 moved Cr Shepherd, seconded Cr Sarroff 1 That Council supports the reinstatement of the u-turn facility on West Burleigh

Road and the removal of the left turn arrow in Tabilban Street funded from Cost Centre 341, Function 6216, Project No 9188.

2 That the Department of Transport and Main Roads be advised of Council’s

decision. 3 That the petitioners be advised accordingly. CARRIED


Attachment 6.1

Site Location


Attachment 6.2

Existing vehicle manoeuvres at intersection


Attachment 6.3

Proposed vehicle manoeuvres at intersection

591st Council Meeting 28 February 2011 72 Engineering Services Committee Meeting 23 February 2011 Adopted Report ITEM 7 GENERAL BUSINESS REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF SPOTTED GUM TREE ON THE CORNER OF PINE RIDGE ROAD AND LAE DRIVE, COOMBABAH RD16066/16/-(P4) Councillor Pforr requested that the spotted gum tree on the north east corner of Lae Drive and Pine Ridge Road, Coombabah, be removed, to facilitate the construction of a pedestrian footpath and for the safety of pedestrians. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ES11.0223.007 moved Cr Pforr, seconded Cr Sarroff That the spotted gum tree on the north east corner of Pine Ridge Road and Lae Drive, Coombabah, be removed to facilitate the construction of a pedestrian footpath to complete the connectivity of footpaths in the local area and for the safety of pedestrians and illumination of the intersection. CARRIED There being no further business the meeting closed at 9.50am .


These Pages

Numbered 1 to 73

Constitute The Adopted Report Of The Meeting

Of The Engineering Services Committee

Held Wednesday, 23 February 2011