Agenda of Transport and Infrastructure Advisory Committee Meeting

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

What is a “Conflict of Interests” - A conflict of interests can be of two types:

Pecuniary - an interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person or another person with whom the person is associated.

Non-pecuniary – a private or personal interest that a Council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Local Government Act (eg. A friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a financial nature).

Remoteness – a person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to a matter or if the interest is of a kind specified in Section 448 of the Local Government Act.

Who has a Pecuniary Interest? - a person has a pecuniary interest in a matter if the pecuniary interest is the interest of the person, or another person with whom the person is associated (see below).

Relatives, Partners - a person is taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter if:

§ The person’s spouse or de facto partner or a relative of the person has a pecuniary interest in the matter, or

§ The person, or a nominee, partners or employer of the person, is a member of a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter.

N.B. “Relative”, in relation to a person means any of the following:

(a) the parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descends or adopted child of the person or of the person’s spouse;

(b) the spouse or de facto partners of the person or of a person referred to in paragraph (a)

No Interest in the Matter - however, a person is not taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter:

§ If the person is unaware of the relevant pecuniary interest of the spouse, de facto partner, relative or company or other body, or

§ Just because the person is a member of, or is employed by, the Council.

§ Just because the person is a member of, or a delegate of the Council to, a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter provided that the person has no beneficial interest in any shares of the company or body.

Disclosure and participation in meetings

§ A Councillor or a member of a Council Committee who has a pecuniary interest in any matter with which the Council is concerned and who is present at a meeting of the Council or Committee at which the matter is being considered must disclose the nature of the interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.

§ The Councillor or member must not be present at, or in sight of, the meeting of the Council or Committee:

(a) at any time during which the matter is being considered or discussed by the Council or Committee, or

(b) at any time during which the Council or Committee is voting on any question in relation to the matter.

No Knowledge - a person does not breach this Clause if the person did not know and could not reasonably be expected to have known that the matter under consideration at the meeting was a matter in which he or she had a pecuniary interest.

Participation in Meetings Despite Pecuniary Interest (S 452 Act)

A Councillor is not prevented from taking part in the consideration or discussion of, or from voting on, any of the matters/questions detailed in Section 452 of the Local Government Act.

Non-pecuniary Interests - Must be disclosed in meetings.

There are a broad range of options available for managing conflicts & the option chosen will depend on an assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of the interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with. Non-pecuniary conflicts of interests must be dealt with in at least one of the following ways:

§ It may be appropriate that no action be taken where the potential for conflict is minimal. However, Councillors should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict does not exist.

§ Limit involvement if practical (eg. Participate in discussion but not in decision making or vice-versa). Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.

§ Remove the source of the conflict (eg. Relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the conflict)

§ Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the provisions in S451 of the Local Government Act apply (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary interest)

RECORDING OF VOTING ON PLANNING MATTERS

Clause 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 – Recording of voting on planning matters

(1) In this section, planning decision means a decision made in the exercise of a function of a council under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

(a) including a decision relating to a development application, an environmental planning instrument, a development control plan or a development contribution plan under that Act, but

(b) not including the making of an order under Division 2A of Part 6 of that Act.

(2) The general manager is required to keep a register containing, for each planning decision made at a meeting of the council or a council committee, the names of the councillors who supported the decision and the names of any councillors who opposed (or are taken to have opposed) the decision.

(3) For the purpose of maintaining the register, a division is required to be called whenever a motion for a planning decision is put at a meeting of the council or a council committee.

(4) Each decision recorded in the register is to be described in the register or identified in a manner that enables the description to be obtained from another publicly available document, and is to include the information required by the regulations.

(5) This section extends to a meeting that is closed to the public.

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services

Report No. 4.1 Road Capital Works Performance

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Blyth Short, Asset Management Coordinator

File No: I2018/1098

Theme: Community Infrastructure

Asset Management

Summary:

The purpose of this report is to present the level of road reseals and road reconstructions (capital renewals) achieved over the last three years compared to the target levels adopted in the Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP E2018/30888).

The TAMP sets detailed targets based on the Austroad Guides of 39km of combined asphalt and bitumen reseals and a reconstruction target of 6km for each financial year. This broadly equates to an annual budget allocation of $3.8 million for reseals and $6 million for road reconstruction.

The report highlights that the level of road reseals and reconstructions over the last three years was significantly less than the target levels and that unless increased funding for road renewals is achieved, the overall condition of the road network in Byron Shire will continue to decline.

The report concludes that the Long Term Financial Plan and associated 10 Year capital plan should be reviewed such that funding for road reseals and reconstructions progressively increases so that the target levels are achieved within three years.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the draft 2019/20 capital budget prioritise road renewals with a minimum of $2 million for reseals and $4 million for road reconstructions in a bid to work towards increasing this in future years as modelled in the Special Rate Variation application to IPART.

Report

Every customer survey conducted by Byron Shire highlights that the very poor condition of the road network is the issue of greatest concern to the community and is causing the highest dissatisfaction rating. The survey statistics and clear community priority underpinned Council’s successful Special Rate Variation (SRV) application.

Council has implemented an asset management system based on best practice and objective data. Council has responded to the community priority through detailed assessment and planning as articulated in the TAMP. In order to stop the current decline in the condition of the road network, Council has set the target of 39km (average 13 year frequency) of combined asphalt and bitumen reseals and a capital renewal reconstruction target of 6km (average 84 year frequency) for each financial year. This has not been previously achieved and will not be achieved in 2018/19.

The TAMP states that the Bring to Satisfactory backlog (capital renewal) for road assets is $24 million. To address this it is forecast to take 20 years of long term commitment to capital renewal of road reseals and reconstructions. Capital renewal for sealed roads needs to grow to $10.4 million in 20 years to maintain the overall condition of the road network. This work is for replacement of existing assets only and does not account for new assets such as roundabouts and new footpaths.

Ideally the 2019/20 Capital Budget would include a combined $9.8 for road reseals and reconstructions. This may not be achievable and Predictor modelling has been used recently to see what would be required to hold the average overall condition rating of roads across the Shire. A reseal budget of $2 million and road reconstruction of $4 million as a minimum total of $6 million is needed to attempt to hold the road pavement condition over 10 years. This could be considered the absolute minimum starting point for the 2019/20 budget with a view to progressive annual increases until the TAMP targets can be achieved in line with SRV increased revenue.

Definitions:

Resealing is placing a new layer of bitumen or asphalt over the existing pavement called the wearing surface (Figure 1). The purpose of a reseal is to seal the base and sub-base to extend the life of the road. Resealing also involves new line marking, if required, and often guide post replacement, shoulder/side drain works or vegetation management. This work can only be undertaken on roads with a strong base and sub base i.e. they are not showing signs of fatigue failure.

Re-constructing is tearing up the existing pavement, base course and often also the sub-base and replacing with new material. The typical cross section of a road and the names of the different components are detailed in Figure 1. This also involves the reconstruction of shoulders and often side drains, or where there is kerb and gutter. It often includes vegetation management and working around or with other utility services in the road reserve, for example telecommunications, electricity, water or sewer services.

Figure 1 Road Pavement cross section

Road Reseals

In the Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) council has set the target of 39km of combined asphalt and bitumen reseals for each financial year. This is based on the seal design life of approximately 12 years for bitumen and 15 years for asphalt (Austroads AGPT05‐11). Using our road network this calculates at 28km for bitumen and 11km for asphalt. The reseal unit rates for bitumen are $11/m² and asphalt $23.50m². Heavy patching averages at $88m² and is required to address failed areas less than 10% of the overall segment length. Refer to Table 1.

Table 1 Reseal Unit Rates m²

Seal Type	Unit Rate m²
Reseal bitumen (single/single spray seal & preparation)	$11.00
Asphalt overlay (40mm)	$23.50
Heavy patching (profiling and 100mm deep)	$88.00

Note: Table 12 TAMP

Unit Rates per kilometre for previous years are in the Table 2 below. Council has typically not reached the target of 39km per year (bitumen and asphalt combined).

Table 2 Reseal unit rates / km

YEAR	RESEALS $/km	Resealed km	Seal Target km
2015/16	$47,384	32.9	39
2016/17	$73,464	11.4	39
2017/18	$54,916	16	39
2018/19 Proposed	$57,210	20.4	39

The reseal unit rates can vary depending upon:

· Heavy patching required for the individual segment (limited to <10%)

· Extent of shoulder grading required

· Drainage works e.g. pipe culvert replacement

· Guide posts required

· Line marking undertaken

· Vegetation management required e.g. tree pruning or roadside slashing

· Width of seal e.g. 6m wide at Possum Creek compared to 12m Lawson Street

· Amount of asphalt sealed is much more expensive, note Table 1

The reseal actual budgets sometimes have not been achieved for a range of reasons. Figure 2, demonstrates the budget and actuals for the last 3 financial years with the 2018/19 proposed budget. The chart clearly demonstrates that the target of $3.8million for reseals is not being achieved.

Figure 2 Reseals Proposed and Actual Budgets

Road Reconstructions

The capital renewal reconstruction target from the TAMP is 6km. The term reconstruction is kept simple in this report, however, incorporates a few approaches from stabilisation (e.g. Broken Head Road south of Midgen Flat Road) to full depth reconstruction (e.g. The Terrace, Brunswick Heads). The reconstruction unit rates average for rural at $167.32m² and urban at $179.30m²(Table 3).

Table 3 Reconstruction unit rates / m²

Reconstruction type

Unit Rate/m²

Reconstruction rural (300mm pavement, bitumen seal, table drains,

driveways, & pipe culverts)

167.32

Reconstruction urban (300mm pavement, AC seal, kerb & uttering)

170.30

Note: Table 12 TAMP

The capital renewal reconstructions target of 6km per year is not being consistently achieved. This is demonstrated in Figure 3. In 2018/19 the proposed length is 940m.

Figure 3 Road pavement reconstructions budgets

Transport and drainage proposed budgets 2018/19

Table 4 details the breakdown of the total budget for transport and drainage of $18,443,400. The reseals are $1,167,100 and reconstructions $1,147,000 which totals 12% of the overall capital budget. This information is depicted in Figure 4 chart. The rural causeways and culverts projects totalling $3 million (loan funded) is to address critical renewal of condition 4 and 5 assets along with the $5.6million (grant funded) for bridges.

Table 4 Proposed Transport and Drainage budgets for 18/19 (Excludes previous financial year expenditure for Bayshore Roundabout)

Transport and Drainage Projects	Budget	Funding
Bridge Renewals	$5,608,000	Grant $4,168,000, Loans $1,205,000, $235,000 SRV
Bayshore Dr Roundabout	$3,816,300	Grant $1,908,900, Section 94 $1,848,100
Rural causeways/culverts	$2,968,000	Grant $274,000, Section 94 $200,000, Loans $1,154,000
*Cycleways - New	$1,183,300	Grant $635,700, Section 94 $547,600,
Road Reseals	$1,167,100	Reserves $316,800, SRV $645,600, Existing SRV $ 190,900K, Revenue $13,800
Road Reconstruction (The Pocket Rd & Broken Head Rd – carryover 17/18)	$1,147,000	Reserves $108,000, SRV $390,000, Section 94 $642,000
Safer Roads Programs 2 sites	$542,100	Grant $542,100
Urban Drainage Upgrades	$360,900	Reserves $305,000, Revenue $55,900
Regional Roads RMS	$304,500	Grant $152,300, Reserves $152,200
Footpaths/shared paths Renewal	$212,100	Section 94 $170,000, Reserves $42,100
Sealed Roads Heavy Patching	$200,000	SRV $200,000
Unsealed Roads Re-sheeting	$200,000	Revenue $95,000, SRV $100,000, Revenue $5,000
Road Batter Renewal	$152,100	SRV $152,100
Sealing 2 unsealed roads	$137,000	Revenue $137,00
New Sealed Rd (Bangalow Sports Field)	$110,000	Section 94 $110,000
Road intersection safety upgrades	$110,000	Section 94 $30,000, Reserves $80,000
Road Renewal forward designs	$90,000	SRV $90,000
Transport Strategy	$75,000	Reserves $75,000
Bus Shelter Renewals	$60,000	Revenue $60,000
TOTAL	$18,443,400

Figure 4 Proposed Transport and drainage budget chart (Note: *Grant funding)

Summary

The road reseals and reconstructions have historically been underfunded and Council is not achieving road renewal investment targets. Figure 5, depicts the reseal target of 39km and reconstruction target of 6km against the outcomes for the last 4 years.

Figure 5 Reseals and reconstruction vs targets

Council is not improving the overall condition of the road network. It is not addressing the increasing number of potholes and rough patches on top of patches. If Council does not begin to invest in the road pavement further declining levels of service will result in terms of higher risk, reduced safety, increasing vehicle operating costs, worse travel times, more vehicle accidents, increased noise, and adverse impacts on the environment. The declining levels of service will negatively impact all road users including cyclists, buses, and motor bikes.

Ideally the 2019/20 Capital Budget would include a combined $9.8M for road reseals and reconstructions in accordance with the TAMP targets. This may not be achievable and Predictor modelling has been used recently to see what would be required to hold the average overall condition rating of roads across the Shire. A reseal budget of $2 million and road reconstruction of $4 million as a minimum total of $6 million is needed to attempt to hold the road pavement condition over 10 years. This could be considered the absolute minimum starting point for the 2019/20 budget with a view to progressive annual increases until the TAMP targets are achieved.

It is recommended the Long Term Financial Plan and associated 10 Year capital plan should be reviewed such that funding for road reseals and reconstructions progressively increases so that the target levels are achieved within three years.

Financial Implications

The financial implications are detailed in this report. The long term and continuing under investment in road renewals has resulted in the very poor and declining condition of our roads. This has many implications, including financial, for the community Council serves.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

This report seeks to assist Council in the process of achieving targets articulated in the adopted Transport Asset management Plan.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.2

Report No. 4.2 Review of Tourist, Street Name, Community Facility and Service Signs (Policy07/102)

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Andrew Pearce , Traffic Engineer

File No: I2018/1783

Theme: Infrastructure Services

Local Roads and Drainage

Summary:

A previous report to the June TIAC meeting (I2018/924) highlighted a number of concerns in relation to Council’s current Policy 07/102 – Tourist, Street Name, Community Facility and Service Signs. As a result, Council resolved the following:

18-465

Resolved that Council adopt the following Committee Recommendation(s):

Report No. 4.6 Tourist, Street Name, Community Facility and Service Signs - Policy 07/102.

File No: I2018/924

Committee Recommendation 4.6.1

1. That further investigation of the issues relating to the Tourist, Street Name, Community Facility and Service Signs commence including a review of Policy 07/102 with a view to reporting outcomes to the 15 November 2018 meeting of the Transport and Infrastructure Advisory Committee.

2. That the investigation within point 1 include consideration of commercial / event / community signage within road reserve.

3. That innovation in digital way finding be considered.

(Richardson/Ndiaye)

This report will address the three above items.

Please leave the text format throughout this whole report as “left justification”

<<Type text here>>

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council’s Policy 07/102 Tourist, Street Name, Community Facility and Service Signs be updated to address the following:-

a) Be in accordance with current AS1742 series, RMS Tourist Signposting and Geographical Name Board requirements;

b) Incorporate a Flowchart and / or Checklist outlining the signage design, application and installation process and fees;

c) Provide clarity on fees and application process;

d) Improve Policy clarity through improved document structure; and

e) Incorporate a section on wayfinding and incorporate wayfinding principles to Council’s signage network.

Report

Item 1 – Further Investigation of Policy 07/102

Policy Compliance

As addressed in the initial report to the June TIAC meeting it is agreed there are many examples of cluttered signage across the shire. It is considered that many of the problems are because the design and installation of signage has often not been in accordance with Council’s current Policy 07/102.

Many of the signage issues will not be adequately addressed through a policy update unless compliance with the policy is enforced during design and installation. Therefore, it is recommended to incorporate within the policy a Flowchart and / or Checklist for signage design, application and installation to help Council and developers with compliance.

Policy Out of Date

Since Council’s current signage policy was written in 2007 most parts of the AS1742 series, the RMS Tourist Signposting guideline and the Geographical Names Board - Road Naming application process have been updated.

Therefore, it is recommended to update Council’s signage policy to more accurately reflect the current standards, guidelines and regulation requirements.

Fees

The current policy provides no information in relation to fees and minimal information in relation to the application process. There is a significant opportunity provide greater clarity in this area.

It is currently unclear what fees to charge applicants for signage as there are no items within Council’s Fees and Charges 2018/19. Until such an item is included and in regards to signage application and installation, it is recommended to apply fees associated with a Section 138 “Roadwork within public road reserve”, namely: $316. Where a request is made to change or inspect a sign it is recommended to charge a fee equal to Road Act – Activities, Works In, On or Over a Public Road – “Asset inspection fee” $180.

It is also recommended to clarify when applicant may be exempt from fees.

Approval Process

The current policy provides minimal information in relation to the approval processes. It is recommended to provide a section clarify which roads authority is to be contacted, depending on whether the sign is located on a state road, classified road or local road.

If Council is the roads authority more detail should be given in relation to Councils assessment and installation process, such as: which form to fill in, where to find the form, who to send it to and who to pay fees to and when.

In addition, it is recommended to provide a section for Council members outlining the advertising and assessment process required when assessing a sign application.

Improve Policy Clarity

The greatest improvement to Council’s current signage policy is the opportunity to improve the structure. The ability to assess and enforce Councils signage policy is significantly reduced due to the current policy’s difficult structure. Therefore, one of the most significant reasons to update Councils signage policy is to improve the document clarity through improving its structure.

Item 2 - Commercial / event / community signage within road reserve

The current policy incorporates a section on Community Facilities and Service Signs. This section is considered to cover the same issues associated with Commercial, event and community signage. However, while the current policy already incorporates a section on Community Facilities and Service Signs it is recommended to update this section in accordance with RMS Tourist Signposting and the relevant parts of the AS1742 series and to state explicitly that it covers commercial, event, community and service facilities.

Item 3 – Digital Wayfinding

Digital wayfinding typically refers to the use of technology to help pedestrians navigate their way through an unfamiliar environment. Examples of digital wayfinding systems are:

· Interactive touch screens at strategic locations to aid pedestrians (such as information screen at shopping centres);

· Google maps with key locations and landmarks highlighted to aid journey planning;

· Mobile apps that read QR codes or display bike paths and tourist walks;

· Programmable LED street signs that can change message and direction depending on programming or what button on the pole is pressed.

Image result for placemaking wayfinding

It is considered there is significant opportunity to incorporate wayfinding into an updated signage policy given its ability to assist in place making and the current number of strategic plans currently being undertaken or finalised by Council, such as: Byron Bay Access and Movement Strategy and Byron Shire Bike Plan. However, it is considered that specifically digital wayfinding should not be incorporated within the updated policy and should instead have its own policy given such a system will be very different from traditional signage and highly dependent on technology as well as Council’s IT and Communications team.

Introducing a general wayfinding framework and signage to Council’s policy will help Council and the community view individual signs not as isolated stand alone signs. Instead, introducing a wayfinding framework helps to view signs as working together to form a communication network that can be both functional, aesthetic and place making.

Related image

Financial Implications

Staff time to undertake the research and write the report.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

Will ensure Councils policy complies with AS1742 and RMS requirements.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.3

Report No. 4.3 Status Update - Bike Plan and PAMP

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Daniel Strzina, Project Engineer

File No: I2018/2014

Theme: Infrastructure Services

Local Roads and Drainage

Summary:

This report provides a status update on the development of the Bike Strategy and Action Plan (Bike Plan) and Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP).

PSA Consulting have been engaged to develop the Bike Plan and PAMP concurrently. This status update is part of a commitment to provide regular updates to every ordinary TIAC meeting.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the status update on the development of the Bike Strategy and Action Plan (Bike Plan) and Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP) be noted.

Report

The PAMP and Bike Plan are in early stages of development. The previous status report to TIAC provided draft report structures and informed of the revised Consultation and Engagement Plans for both projects.

Draft versions of Chapters 1 & 2 of both the PAMP and Bike Plan have been submitted, reviewed and revised. PSA Consulting require the information generated by Consultation Stages 1 and 2 to further progress with the development of the plans.

Consultation Stage 1: WalkRollRide Campaign – Complete

The WalkRollRide campaign involved an online survey using Council’s HaveYourSay platform and engaged members of the public by first educating them of the plans and the development processes involved, then inviting them to contribute their ideas on how we can best improve cycling and pedestrian facilities around the shire. The response to the survey was excellent with over 700 responses. A significant number of responses included suggestions and requests for specific facilities that would improve the pedestrian and cycleway networks in their area. The engagement was successful in that the data generated was high quality and useful.

Further, more than half of the respondents expressed a desire to be further involved in the development of the Bike Plan and/or the PAMP. PSA consulting is currently processing the responses and summarising the findings. Figures 1-4 below illustrate some of the available data that came out of Stage 1.

Figure 1 – Online survey result to the question, ‘What are the biggest challenges you face when cycling in Byron Shire?’

Figure 2 – Online survey result to the question, ‘What improvements could be made that may encourage you to cycle more in Byron Shire?’

Figure 3 – Online survey result to the question, ‘What are the biggest challenges you face when using the footpath network in Byron Shire?’

Figure 4 – Online survey result to the question, ‘What improvements could be made that may encourage you to use Byron Shire’s footpath network more?’

Consultation Stage 2: Design Workshops – Underway

Staff are in the process of holding a series of design workshops (previously referred to as charrettes) that involve the collaboration of PSA Consulting, stakeholders and community members to develop a priority list of cycling and pedestrian infrastructure projects for their area.

A total of eight workshops will be held; one for the PAMP and one for the Bike Plan for each of the four focus areas. The workshops have been scheduled to take place on four separate nights over four weeks, with two workshops (one for the Bike Plan and one for the PAMP) planned for each night, and each night focussing on a separate geographical area (see schedule below).

Day	Time	Workshop	Focus Area	Location
Tuesday 23 October 2018	5:30pm – 7:00pm	Bike Plan	North Western Towns: Mullumbimby, The Pocket, Middle Pocket, Main Arm, Palmwoods, Wilsons Creek, Goonengerry, Myocum and neighbouring areas.	Byron Shire Council Conference Room 70 Station St, Mullumbimby
	7:15pm – 8:45pm	PAMP
Tuesday 30 October 2018	5:30pm – 7:00pm	Bike Plan	South Eastern Towns: Byron Bay, Suffolk Park, Belongil, the Industrial Area, Ewingsdale, Broken Head, Coopers Shoot, Hayters Hill, and neighbouring areas.	Byron Bay Community Centre 69 Jonson St, Byron Bay
	7:15pm – 8:45pm	PAMP
Thursday 08 November 2018	5:30pm – 7:00pm	Bike Plan	South Western Towns: Bangalow, Talofa, McLeods Shoot, Coorabell, Federal, Eureka, Nashua, Binnna Burra, Possum Creek and neighbouring areas.	Moller Pavilion, Bangalow Show Grounds Entry via Market St, Bangalow
	7:15pm – 8:45pm	PAMP
Wednesday 14 November 2018	5:30pm – 7:00pm	Bike Plan	North Eastern Towns: Billinudgel, Yelgun, New Brighton, South Golden Beach, Ocean Shores, Brunswick Heads, Tyagarah and neighbouring areas.	Ocean Shores Country Club Orana Rd, Ocean Shores
	7:15pm – 8:45pm	PAMP

At the time of writing, two of the four nights have taken place with successful outcomes. The Mullumbimby and Byron Bay sessions resulted in the generation of quality data for both the Bike Plan and the PAMP in the form of:-

· Identified critical issues/existing network deficiencies,

· Identified locations for the improvement of existing infrastructure,

· Identified opportunities to improve the existing network, and

· Prioritisation of the infrastructure projects identified.

Once the workshops are complete, the data collected will be collated and incorporated into the draft PAMP and Bike Plan for submission to TIAC for review.

Byron Bay to Suffolk Park Cycleway

The Byron Bay (Browning St) to Suffolk Park (Clifford St) Cycleway Investigation Report and Preferred Option Concept Design (Attachments 1-8) will be placed on public exhibition for comment by formal submission for a period of 28 days from 16 November 2018.

This public exhibition is in anticipation of the announcement of Round 2 of the Stronger Country Community Fund (SCCF) grant scheme, to which a submission was made for the southern section of this project - from Byron@Byron through to Clifford St. The submission requests $500,000 in funding to supplement $110,000 of identified Council revenue for a total project budget of $610,000. The rest of the project scope is currently unfunded, however all potential funding streams will continue to be investigated.

It should be noted that this project was identified and given high priority by all of the groups in the Byron Bay Bike Plan workshop.

Financial Implications

As previously advised, the additional Consultation and Engagement scope will require additional budget allocation to both projects. Further budget adjustments are required to account for staff time that was not allowed for in the originally allocated budget. As such, budget adjustments of $44,000 for the Bike Plan and $49,000 for the PAMP have been included in the September 2018 quarterly financial review, which will be reviewed by the Finance Advisory Committee at their meeting on 15 November 2018.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

There are no negative statutory or policy compliance implications at this time.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 4.4

Report No. 4.4 Development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Daniel Strzina, Project Engineer

File No: I2018/2035

Theme: Infrastructure Services

Local Roads and Drainage

Summary:

The purpose of this report is to:-

· Provide background information on the development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy;

· Summarise the outcomes of the first two TIAC workshops on the development of the Shire-wide Transport Strategy, held on 20 April 2018 and 22 June 2018; and

· Identify any useful existing strategies developed by other Councils, regional bodies and other sources of information for TIAC to continue to workshop the development of the Shire-wide Transport Strategy.

· Recommend the engagement of a specialist consultant to build upon and complete the Shire-wide Transport Strategy.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the Committee adopt recommendations to Council for the following sections of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy:-

· Scope and context

· Vision

· Principles

· Issues and challenges

2. That the Committee review recommendations to Council for the following sections of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy:-

· Targets and desired outcomes

· Key actions to achieve objectives

3. That the Committee develop recommendations to Council for the following sections of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy:-

· Community and stakeholder engagement

4. That an RFQ be prepared and issued for the engagement of a specialist consultant to undertake the preparation of the Shire-wide Transport Strategy, using the outcomes of Workshops and meetings to date as a foundation for the development of the Strategy.

Background

The previously considered reports referred to in the following pages contain information significant to the progression and development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy. As such, they have been summarised in this section for reference and guidance moving forward.

Council, at its meeting of 10 October 2016, resolved in support of the 16 August 2016 Transport Advisory Committee (TrAC) recommendation as follows:-

Resolution 16-516

Report No. 5.1 Development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy

File No: I2016/884

Committee Recommendation 5.1.1

1. That the Committee develop a Shire-wide Transport Strategy which includes:

a) CONTEXT to include consideration of:

· congestion

· high tourist numbers

· lack of local public transport connectivity and regional integration

· high carbon emissions

· safety

· high costs of running private vehicles

· road condition and the cost of maintenance

· demographics – (difficult for people who can’t drive or don’t have a licence)

· access - mobility

· lack of cycleway connectivity

· lack of connectivity in general

· poor location of services – making them more distant than they could otherwise be

· high growth area – need to plan for future

· transport costs to community from planning and commercial decisions

· impact of future technological and social developments

b) OBJECTIVES to include consideration of:

· reduce the need for and/or dependency on private motor vehicle trips

· improve public transport

· support community transport

· increase the bike network and/or use

· improve pedestrian and residential amenity

· support advocacy, partnerships and/or community involvement

· improve road user safety

· improve integration and regional connectivity

· support climate change adaptation and mitigation

· further defining and obtaining of these objectives will be the role of the proposed transport strategy

· support of each objective can be sought via relevant Council instruction through available mechanisms regarding any proposed and/or existing activity, all of which will be explored via development of the proposed transport strategy that will be guided by Council’s vision.

c) ACTIONS to include the consideration of:

· understanding user experience – feedback, surveys

· develop priorities from user feedback, eg improve user experience by means of improved bus shelters, safer road crossings, shorter travel times, for example

· develop measurement methods for baseline and future actions

· integrated land use planning

2. That a draft strategy commence with a review of relevant local, state and federal programs, plans and strategies in efforts to identify funding and partnership opportunities.

3. That Council note staff will apply by 9 September 2016 to meet the RMS Active Transport Funding deadline and it will include seeking 2017/18 funding for the revision of Council’s bike plan and PAMP. (Richardson/Hunter)

TIAC at its meeting on 15 March 2018 considered a report on Development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy (File No: I2018/411) that sought to establish a process to move forward with to develop a Shire-wide Transport Strategy with reference to resolution 16-516 as the basis of the framework for the strategy. Committee recommendations were adopted by Council, who resolved as follows:

Resolution 18-251

Resolved that Council adopt the following Committee Recommendation(s):

Report No. 4.5 Development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy

File No: I2018/411

Committee Recommendation 4.5.1

1. That the Committee have an extraordinary meeting in April 2018 to workshop the development of Shire-wide Transport Strategy.

2. That a report be prepared for TIAC that identify any useful existing strategies developed by other councils, regional bodies and other sources of information.

3. That the Committee members be encourage to research and share ideas (Richardson/Cameron)

At its extraordinary meeting on 20 April 2018, TIAC considered a report in accordance with point 2 of the above resolution (File No: I2018/685) and conducted a workshop on the development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy. Committee recommendations were adopted by Council, who resolved as follows:

Resolution 18-305

Resolved that Council adopt the following Committee Recommendation(s):

Report No. 4.1 Development of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy

File No: I2018/685

Committee Recommendation 4.1.1

That Council note that the Committee develop recommendations to Council for the following sections of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy:

· Scope and context

· Vision

· Principles

· Issues and challenges

· Targets and desired outcomes

· Key actions to achieve objectives

· Community and stakeholder engagement (Richardson/Cameron)

Report

During the first Transport Strategy workshop on 20 April 2018, the following points were initially raised:

· The Shire-wide Transport Strategy will be an overarching, policy-level strategic document that will act at high level to guide how Council proceeds with funding.

· It will be a mechanism by which to support projects and initiatives.

· It will inform other Council plans and strategies.

· It will contain a hierarchy of principles, prioritised by the community.

· Community involvement will be critical to making this an integral document.

· A desired outcome is that it will become a consensus document; high quality data and research to ensure that it is effective in influencing Council.

A discussion was had regarding the potential to engage a consultant to undertake the preparation of the Shire-wide Transport Strategy. It was concluded that a more efficient and cost effective approach would be to workshop the subject matter so as to define the content prior to engaging a consultant.

As such, examples of existing local council Transport Strategies were tabled for analysis The Committee proceeded to workshop the deliverables outlined in Resolution 18-305. The outcomes of this process are detailed in the following section of this report.

Two strategies that were of interest due to the relevance of their content were Noosa’s Transport Strategy (2017) and Hobsons Bay’s Integrated Transport Strategy (2017).

1. Outcomes of the 1^st Transport Strategy Workshop (for adoption)

The following agreed outcomes are listed below and in the attached working document for adoption during the ordinary meeting of 15 November 2018.

· Italics indicate sections or ideas that have been directly referenced from the original documents with little or no amendment.

· Red text indicates additions or amendments made during workshop 2.

Transport Strategy Scope and Context

1. Shire-wide.

2. Regional links.

3. Interregional and interstate links and influences (border, airports, freight, etc.)

4. Inform future transport use.

5. Write flexibility into strategy.

6. Consider technological change (drones, autonomous vehicles, electric vehicles, etc.).

7. Consider demographical change.

8. 40 year strategy.

9. Review frequency: 3-5 years?

Vision

An integrated, innovative and equitable transport system, providing a range of sustainable, efficient, accessible and safe ways for people and goods to reach their destination.

Purpose

1. Purpose of document is to inform Council on how to implement the vision.

2. Integrate with existing and future planning documents.

3. Ensure infrastructure projects satisfy strategic goals.

4. Support funding applications and opportunities.

5. Support and promote general health and wellbeing.

6. Cultivate environmental stewardship.

7. Foster economic growth.

8. Encourage change in modes.

9. To coordinate with other Councils across the region.

10. How does the document get used? Framework to be developed.

Principles

1. Encourage transport options that meet the needs of both locals and visitors.

2. Prioritise our focus on moving people and goods rather than moving cars.

3. Provide infrastructure and services that are designed to give priority to pedestrians, cyclists, scooters and public transport over private cars.

4. Improve and promote the safety and amenity of pedestrians, cyclists and vulnerable road users in our transport infrastructure. (safety amenities vs behaviour)

5. Address peak time traffic congestion by reducing traffic rather than increasing road capacity.

6. Take advantage of changes in transportation technology.

7. Align transport options and usage with Council’s Emission Reduction Strategy.

8. Design for, encourage and facilitate transport options that reduce the emissions produced by our community.

9. Recognise the need for transport options in rural areas and evoke a sense of equity within transport planning.

10. Integration – Strengthen connections between different forms of transport, land use and transport planning, and to regional and metropolitan networks.

11. Equity – Support a range of accessible and affordable transport options for all people, neighbourhoods and future generations.

12. Efficiency – Build a more reliable and effective transport system that supports skills development, business and employment growth and provides competitive alternatives to private car travel.

13. Encourage the use of ride sharing and car sharing services.

14. Encourage active transport and healthy transport options.

15. Promote behavioural change to improve safety.

Challenges and Opportunities

1. Number of visitors.

2. Congestion at peak times.

3. Car dependence.

o Sedentary issue.

o Love affair with cars.

o Fossil fuel and associated financial, environmental and sociological costs.

o On demand transport.

4. Topography and climate.

5. Funding.

6. Shortfalls in services and infrastructure.

7. Public transport.

o Affordability

o Frequency

o Coverage

o Connectivity

8. Regional, state and federal transport planning, including funding.

9. Demographics (large proportions of younger and older residents in Byron Shire).

10. Lack of population density due to the rural nature of Byron Shire.

11. Disruptive technology.

12. Distinguish differences between different sets of users (e.g. tourist, leisure, resident, commuter, commercial) and their different needs.

13. Internet as a way to avoid unnecessary transport.

14. Support of high speed broadband.

Population Dispersal Discussion

It was highlighted during the workshop that the primary distributors in Byron Shire (Pacific Hwy running North-South and Bangalow/Lismore Rd running East-West) present opportunities to be taken advantage of in preparing the Shire-wide Transport Strategy.

- Different sets of users (e.g. tourist, resident, commuter, business) have different needs.

- Acknowledge that there are different patterns (mapping and demand) for different users.

- Behavioural aspects must be addressed for safety – e.g. dropping kids at school.

2. Outcomes of the 2^nd Transport Strategy Workshop (for review)

The following outcomes are listed below and in the attached working document for review during the ordinary meeting of 15 November 2018. This section contains excerpts from existing relevant local council Transport Strategies (in italics or as images), collated for the purposes of continuing to workshop the development of the Shire-wide Transport Strategy. The full excerpts are available as appendices to the attached working document.

· Italics indicate sections or ideas that have been directly referenced from the original documents with little or no amendment.

· Red text indicates additions or amendments made during workshop 2.

· Highlighted text indicates where review or further work is needed.

1. Targets and desired outcomes

a) Noosa Transport Strategy (2017, page 7).

1. Residents and workers of ~~Noosa~~ Byron Shire are able to go about their everyday business without having to be reliant on private vehicles.

2. The transport network is designed to facilitate and encourage an overall modal shift away from private car use towards more sustainable transport modes including walking, cycling, public transport, electric vehicles and motor scooters/cycles.

Points 1&2 summarise to: Reduce impact and reliance on Transport Infrastructure.

3. The transport system supports the preferred pattern of development including the local centres hierarchy, and is consistent with our planning scheme.

Point 3 – add bike friendly and pedestrian friendly schemes.

Note: Ask Shannon Burt’s staff to help us to develop this document and invite for the next meeting. E.g. SEE planner to discuss future planning DEP/LEP.

4. Key regional destinations such as hospitals, airports and universities are readily accessible by public transport from ~~Noosa~~ Byron Shire. Point 4 OK.

5. All schools are safely and conveniently accessible by walking, cycling and public transport. Point 5 OK.

6. Parking is closely managed through effective controls. Point 6 OK.

7. There has been a change in behaviour by people in Noosa with a reduction in the number choosing to drive and park cars in congested coastal areas. Point 7 OK.

8. Park-and-Ride facilities have been provided to assist with managing visitor travel demand where supported by transport services. Point 8 OK.

9. The transport system supports the local lifestyle and also tourism by delivering both active and public transport infrastructure that meets the needs of locals and visitors. Point 9 OK.

10. Local public transport routes offer efficient and frequent services. Point 10 OK – frequency, connectivity etc. Include reference to regional and interregional networks.

NEW: Transport movement associated with events in line with strategies principles. Apply DTA standards.

NEW: Vehicles being flexible to meet emission targets.

NEW: On demand public transport including driverless vehicles.

NEW: Provision of multimodal HUBs with accessible infrastructure footpaths.

11. Road crossings and associated pedestrian networks are safe and accessible for mobility scooters, cyclists and pedestrians.

12. The community at all levels is educated about the costs and benefits of their travel choices, allowing people to make informed decisions.

13. Alternative transport is cost effective for users and providers as compared with private car use.

14. New technologies are being used in our transport solutions.

15. Transport initiatives result in significantly reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

Note: Combine Points 14 and 15 together.

NEW: Add point about the Electrification of transport and provision of renewable energy to match the growth.

b) Hobsons Bay Integrated Transport Plan (2017, page 24-35).

Typical sustainable travel options (Neighbourhood): Add car share/car pool and EV.

Common issues (Regional): Connection issues - add reference to integration. Also add point about cycling facilities, footpath connections, and cycleway connections.

Council’s typical role: What we do is beyond the advocacy, policy support etc.

Typical sustainable travel options: Electrification of transport – encouraging it – add point (we have already charging station).

“Vibrant Activity Centres”

Consider/include points on the following:

· Tourism and management.

· Rail corridor investigation – it is beyond advocacy.

· Carshare/carpool.

· Electrification of transport.

Consider/include points on the following:

· Provide links to jobs, services, industry and recreational activities.

· Consider Employment Lands Strategy

o Location Highway vs Ewingsdale road (congestion?)

o Modal use

o Distribution HUBs – warehouses in the industrial estate – people buy online

o Need for distribution centres – click and collect

· Align transport strategy objectives and outcomes with our Community Strategy/Plan

c) Newcastle Transport Strategy (2016, page 27).

Content considered OK, though not as relevant as Noosa, Hobsons Bay.

d) Northern Rivers Regional Transport Plan (2013, page 44).

Not a good source/reference.

Only good recommendation is a consistent and regular town loop service.

2. Key actions to achieve objectives

Note: It was generally agreed that ‘Key Actions to Achieve Objectives’ are specific and directly related to ‘Targets and Desired Outcomes’. As such, these actions should be developed once the desired outcomes have been finalised. It is recommended that this is undertaken by a specialist consultant with the skills and resources to finalise the desired outcomes and propose a suitable set of actions to achieve them.

a) Noosa Transport Strategy (2017, page 12).

Content is generally OK, actions are specific to desired outcomes.

b) Hobsons Bay Integrated Transport Plan (2017, page 30, 36).

Content is generally OK, actions are specific to desired outcomes.

c) Newcastle Transport Strategy (2016, page 34-51).

Content is generally OK, actions are specific to desired outcomes.

P10, P11, consider lower speed limits as a safety measure (captured in P12).

A12: Review Contributions Plan to include the design for residential subdivisions.

NEW: Explore possible funding options: State, federal, section 94.

A17: Reinvestment of paid parking revenues in transport infrastructure
Identify local, regional and interregional freight corridor and access.

3. Target outcomes of the ordinary meeting of 15 November 2018 (For Development)

For discussion during the ordinary meeting of 15 November 2018:

· Recommendations as to what would be considered suitable community and stakeholder engagement for the development of the Shire-wide Transport Strategy.

· Review of the Path Forward below.

Path Forward

1. Form a Transport Strategy Working Group under the guidance of TIAC to continue to workshop the strategy using a consultant with the goal of finalising recommendations to TIAC then Council in accordance with Resolution 18-305.

2. Invite other skillsets and disciplines to focussed sessions (walking, cycling, public transport, etc.) to assist the Working Group in developing recommendations.

3. Continue to review and consider existing local council Transport Strategies for content and layout.

4. Prepare a document that shows connection into IP&R documents and other internal and external strategies.

5. Research: Scope, context and path forward - Add some graphs about safety, surveys.

4. Recommendation: Engagement of a specialist consultant

It is recommended that an RFQ be prepared and issued for the engagement of a specialist consultant to undertake the further development and preparation of a Shire-wide Transport Strategy using the outcomes above as a foundation for the development of the document.

Financial Implications

Funding of $75,000 has been allocated to this project as part of the 2018/19 budget, of which there is $73,527 remaining (as of 8/11/2018).

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

There are no negative statutory and policy compliance implications associated with this report.

Venue	Conference Room, Station Street, Mullumbimby
Date	Thursday, 15 November 2018
Time	9.00am