Mitcham agreed to defer the motion and debate it at their next meeting. This buys a little time for the lobbying and politicking in Unley to continue. The motion I intend to put reads;
That the Report be received.
2.
That Council receives the report
titled ‘Consultation Findings on the Brown Hill Keswick Creek Stormwater
Project: Part B Report’ dated August 2015 from the Brown Hill Keswick Creek
Stormwater Project Group (the Project) contained within Attachment A of this
report.
3.
That Council notes that the
Consultation Findings report in Attachment A makes no recommendations related
to the project, but provides a comprehensive summary of the feedback received
during the May/June 2015 consultation process.
4.
That Council, having regard to the
Notice issued by the Stormwater Management Authority dated 19 May 2015 which
requires the Cities of Adelaide, Burnside, Unley, Mitcham, and West Torrens to
prepare a revised Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) in respect of the Brown Hill
Keswick Creek Catchment by 30 September 2015; the Part B report; and community
consultation and feedback, hereby determines that Option B2 (including further opportunities for water harvesting) –
Creek Capacity Upgrade is the recommended solution for Part B Works under the
Stormwater Management Plan (SMP 2012) given:
4.1. The most recent consultation gave little direction
from creek owners to inform Council’s decision;
4.2. Option B2 is likely to have the lowest
capital cost, the lowest annual maintenance cost and the lowest present
value whole of life cost when compared against the other available options when the true cost of obtaining easements
in Option D are calculated;
4.3. Option B2 provides in excess of the required level (100 year ARI) of flood protection;
4.4.
That for the most likely rain events in the future, especially
given the effects of climate change, Option B2 the highest ARI level of flood
protection;
4.5 Option
B2 provides the best environmental protection solution in that the creek bed
and riparian zones will be least affected, allowing for the continuation of a
wildlife corridor along the creek
4.6. Option
B2 does not require bypass culverts in suburban streets;
4.7. Option
B2 preserves sites of cultural and heritage significance;
4.8
Option B2 provides the greatest opportunity to detain and harvest
water, during any rain event, and thus protect the aquifer and marine
environment.
5.
That the Chief Executive Officer is
delegated authority to do all things necessary to prepare a revised Stormwater
Management Plan in respect of the Brown Hill and Keswick Creek Catchment for
submission to the Stormwater Management Authority for approval.
6. That in the event that all five
catchment Councils are not able to agree on Option B2, the Chief Executive Officer is authorised to write to
the Stormwater Management Authority and advise the Presiding Member that
Council would like further investigation
into;
a)
Detailed design and costing associated
with both the B2 and D Options to allow a better understanding of the impact of
the proposed work on creel owners properties
b) Quantitative (megalitres) and financial benefits and the opportunities
for water harvesting and reuse (as per UCC resolution of August 2012)
c)
The potential impact of both Option B2 and D to the marine
environment
7.
That the project Councils continue to investigate a Regional
Subsidiary as the vehicle for project delivery and ongoing care and management
of the Brown Hill Keswick Creek flood mitigation scheme.
8.
That in respect of funding for implementation of the finalised and gazetted
Stormwater Management Plan, Council reaffirms the cost sharing proposal between
the three spheres of government as described in the SMP 2012.
9.
That in the event that the cost
sharing proposal involving the other levels of Government as referred to in
paragraph 7 above is not materialised, the catchment Councils reserve their
rights to review the scope of work, delivery timelines and funding model under
the SMP 2012. This should prioritise the
essential clearing work in the creek at the earliest possible time so as to
reduce impacts of flooding on selected properties within the Brown Hill Keswick
Creek catchment.
10.
Unley Council expresses concern to the
Minister responsible and the Chair of the Natural Resources Management Board
that the NRM has abrogated its responsibility in the flood management in Brown
Hill and Keswick Creeks in that it has not exercised its legislative powers to
require creek owners to maintain the creek in good condition.
11 We
believe that Councils are best placed to make a decision and that a further
report should be bought to all five councils after additional costings and
investigations have been completed.
12. This
report is presented to Councils by April 2016.
This is what people have been telling me they want, I hope it is? I just need to convince my fellow Councillors that it is time to make decision, and the best decision is a dam (Option B2)
No comments:
Post a Comment