NOTICE OF THE CITY LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE
Date: Wednesday, 19 May, 2021 Time: 9:00 am Location: Logan Meeting Room Level 3, Logan City Council Administration Centre
Councillor Koranski (Chairperson) Councillor Hall (Deputy Chairperson) Councillor Bradley Councillor Lane Councillor Russell Councillor Raven Committee Members: Councillor Frazer Councillor Heremaia Councillor Bannan Councillor Stemp Councillor Willcocks Councillor Murphy His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Power
Pages
1. Acknowledgement of Country
2. Welcome
3. Leave of Absence
4. Sport, Leisure & Facilities
4.1. Local Infrastructure Program (LIP) - Special Consideration Projects via Sport Leisure 4 and Facilities Branch
4.2. Logan Metro Sports Park Management Options 8
4.3. Covering Report - Basketball Queensland Proposal 88
4.4. Covering Report - Further Update on Nerida Street Community Centre and 90 Pensioner Units
5. Confidential Documentation This section includes any supporting confidential documentation relating to specified Committee reports.
5.1. Confidential Report - Basketball Queensland Proposal
5.2. Confidential Report - Further Update on Nerida Street Community Centre and Pensioner Units
Page 2 of 97
Logan City Council Committee Business Papers - Use of Information by Councillors
Please retain the attached Business Paper as it will be considered in conjunction with the recommendations of the relevant Committee meeting by Council. Councillors are reminded that if a person is convicted of an offence against the following section 171 of the Local Government Act 2009 (Use of information by councillors), that penalties apply. 171 Use of information by councillors (1) A person who is, or has been, a councillor must not use information that was acquired as a councillor to— (a) gain, directly or indirectly, a financial advantage for the person or someone else; or (b) cause detriment to the local government. Maximum penalty—100 penalty units or 2 years imprisonment. (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to information that is lawfully available to the public. (3) A councillor must not release information that the councillor knows, or should reasonably know, is information that is confidential to the local government. Note— A contravention of subsection (3) is misconduct that is dealt with by the tribunal.
Page 3 of 6797 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
4.1 LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM (LIP) – SPECIAL CONSIDERATION PROJECTS VIA SPORT LEISURE AND FACILITIES BRANCH
REPORT OF: Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager
REPORT OVERVIEW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY To seek endorsement of expenditure under the Local Infrastructure Program (LIP) for 2020/2021. Criteria: Direction - It requires Council to make a decision of a strategic nature; or Council has specifically requested it CORPORATE PLAN PRIORITY Quality Lifestyles
RECOMMENDATIONS
IT IS RECOMMENDED: 1. That the Special Consideration Local Infrastructure Program for Division 3: 36 Fawkner Street, Logan Central Respite Centre - Playground Improvements, as identified in the report of the Sport, Leisure and Facilities Branch Manager dated 19 May 2021, be approved. 2. That the Sport, Leisure and Facilities Branch Manager be requested to process all Special Consideration payments to the approved organisation, as identified in the report of the Sport, Leisure and Facilities Branch Manager dated 19 May 2021.
REPORT DETAILS
INTERESTED PARTIES The interested parties are summarised in the table below:
Table 1: Interested Parties in LIP Special Considerations Stakeholder Level of Engagement/Interest Logan Central Respite Centre Association Inc. Special Consideration LIP Funding Recipients Councillor Mindy Russell Divisional Councillor Councillor Teresa Lane Divisional Councillor Councillor John Raven Divisional Councillor
PURPOSE OF REPORT/BACKGROUND As an initiative of the 2020/2021 Annual Budget adopted by Council on 21 July 2020, Council resolved to establish the Local Infrastructure Program (LIP). Funds have been allocated, via the Budget, to each Division of Council for local infrastructure works. The process to manage the allocation of LIP funds was adopted by Council at its meeting on 26 August 2020. As part of the 2020/2021 Annual Budget, Council approved $970,000 per division to the Local Infrastructure Program (LIP).
Report Page 1 of 4 Page 4 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
Local Infrastructure Program Purpose The purpose of the program is to provide Council with the ability to respond to and implement divisional based infrastructure programs that address the specific local needs of each division. These projects are generally not currently listed as approved projects on the Council capital works program. The projects within the Local Infrastructure Program will be delivered by the relevant Branch Manager within their area of responsibility. Local Infrastructure Program Guidelines The Local Infrastructure Program Guidelines (Version 2), dated 12 October 2020, was finalised following the Councillor Briefing Session of 7 October 2020 by the Road & Water Infrastructure and Community Services Directorates. In addition to the general guidelines, provisions are provided: Special Consideration: whereby, any project proposals that do not comply with the Local Infrastructure Program Guidelines must be submitted to Council for Special Consideration. DISCUSSION In accordance with the LIP guidelines, this project received funding from multiple Councillors with a total of $30,000.00. These funds were allocated to the Sport, Leisure and Facilities Branch. The table below identifies the allocations: Table 1: Funding allocations Councillor Division Amount ($) Councillor Teresa Lane 2 $ 10,000.00 Councillor Mindy Russell 3 $ 10,000.00 Councillor Jon Raven 5 $ 10,000.00
Report Page 2 of 4 Page 5 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
The table below presents relevant information for consideration of this project for Special Consideration:
Table 2: Special Considerations 36 Fawkner Street, Logan Central Respite Centre – Playground Improvements Description In November 2020 LIP funding was received for improvements to 36 Fawkner Street, Logan Central Respite Centre. The funding was based on a quote sourced by the lessee. The proposed works involve replacing a section of lawn with artificial turf. The funds are currently sitting with Sport, Leisure and Facilities Branch. LIP funding 2020/2021 – total of $30,000.00 Division 3 Organisation Logan Central Respite Centre Association Inc. Location 36 Fawkner Street, Slacks Creek Ownership Logan City Council (trustee) Special Consideration The Councillors would like this project to be delivered by the lessee. Key Considerations This facility is subject to an agreement with the State Government whereby Council must advise if there are any changes to the facility. As this proposal does not do that no advice is required. The lessee is to ensure that all work is carried out to their satisfaction and meets their requirements. The lessee is to ensure all WH&S requirements are met. The lessee is to ensure that the works do not cause damage to the facility. The lessee is to undertake all project management including any required approvals. This project is supported by Sport Leisure and Facilities officers and is considered a low to medium risk project.
ANY PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECISIONS Council at its meeting, 26 August 2020, endorsed the following in relation to establishing the Local Infrastructure Program: 1. That the process, as detailed in the report of the Directors of Road & Water Infrastructure and Community Services dated 18 August 2020, in relation to the management of the Local Infrastructure Program, facilitating Councillor involvement in the identification and allocation of divisional funds, be approved.
2. That the Directors of Road and Water Infrastructure and Community Services be requested to develop guidelines, in consultation with Councillors, to support the Local Infrastructure Program, as detailed in Clause 1 above. FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS The transfer of the LIP funding allocations to the clubs will be managed by the Sport and Recreation Program upon completion of an application by the clubs through the SmartyGrants platform.
Report Page 3 of 4 Page 6 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS The table below presents the risk implications identified with this project: Table 3: Risk Implications Risk Impact - Mitigation
The lessee does not use the LIP The funding requirements are clearly advised on the basis by fund as agreed upon. which the funding is being provided.
The lessee will be required to complete an acquittal form through SmartyGrants to acquit all funding.
The project does not provide The lessee is to ensure that the contractor addresses their the long-term benefit required. specific requirements and provides warranties to that effect.
LEGAL/POLICY The allocation of any funds made directly to the clubs will be managed in consideration of Council’s Grants to Community Organisations Policy and existing and established Sport, Leisure & Facilities Branch external funding management processes, forms and procedures. COMMUNITY AND OTHER CONSULTATION The Lessee and Councillors have been consulted in relation to this project. CONCLUSION The Local Infrastructure Program has been designed to respond to and implement divisional based infrastructure programs that address the specific local needs of each division. This report outlines Special Consideration matters for the project described as 36 Fawkner Street, Logan Central Respite Centre - Playground Improvements.
ATTACHMENTS TABLE
No attachments.
Report Page 4 of 4 Page 7 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
4.2 LOGAN METRO SPORTS PARK MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
REPORT OF: Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager
REPORT OVERVIEW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Logan Metro Sports Park Management Project Reference Group (PRG) was established in February 2021 to provide direction and leadership in the development and analysis of future management model(s) for Logan Metro Sports Park (LMSP) Northern & Southern Precincts and Administration Building. This report provides an overview of the benefits or otherwise, of potential management options as well as a proposed preferred approach for Council to consider. Criteria: Direction - It requires Council to make a decision of a strategic nature; or Council has specifically requested it CORPORATE PLAN PRIORITY Quality Lifestyles
RECOMMENDATIONS
IT IS RECOMMENDED: That the Sport, Leisure and Facilities Manager be delegated authority to undertake an Expression of Interest (EOI) for Logan Metro Sports Park Northern Precinct, Southern Precinct and Administration Building, in accordance with Council’s Policy ‘Licence or Lease of Council Owned or Controlled Land to Sporting, Recreational and Community Organisations’.
REPORT DETAILS
INTERESTED PARTIES The table below presents the key parties in the LMSP Management that have shown interest to date: Table 1: Interested Parties in LMSP Management Stakeholder Level of Engagement/Interest Mayor and Divisional Councillors Elected members representing the community Logan City Council – Sport, Leisure and Leasing, operations and maintenance of sporting Facilities Branch facilities Park Ridge Panthers Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Logan Metro Football Club Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Marsden State High School Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Southside Football Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Queensland Rugby League Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Ninjas Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Queensland Christian Soccer Association Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Southern Districts United Football Club Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Qld PNG Rugby League Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house Football Queensland Interest in the facility/ies Queensland Police Service - Project Booyah Interest in the facility/ies - Attended open house
Report Page 1 of 7 Page 8 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
PURPOSE OF REPORT/BACKGROUND
Logan Metro Sports Park Logan Metro Sports Park (LMSP) is a metropolitan sports park within the City and caters for the whole of the city. LMSP has been progressively developed over the past fifteen (15) years with the construction and operation of the following facilities: Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre (LMSEC) featuring a three (3)-court indoor facility, a gym, meeting rooms and administration area; Logan Metro Sports Park – Northern Precinct featuring one (1) premium rectangular field, a clubhouse, administration offices and four (4) change rooms; Logan Metro Sports Park – Southern Precinct featuring three (3) senior rectangular fields, a clubhouse, administration offices and four (4) change rooms; and the renovation/repurposing of administration buildings associated with the previous use (Waste Services).
The development of LMSP to date represents approximately 15ha of the open space area identified to be developed for sport and recreation purposes. LMSP will ultimately be a 100ha of sport and recreation areas. Once fully developed, LMSP will represent one (1) of the City’s premier sporting destinations. A functionally sound operation and governance structure will assist in positioning the precinct as a regional hub for Logan City Council and as a potential leading destination for events, training, industry development and innovation relating to sport and recreation.
LMSP Northern & Southern Precincts and Administration Building (LMSP Precincts) The Northern & Southern Precincts and Administration Building (LMSP Precincts) were previously tenanted in 2018 until the tenants vacated respectively in late 2020 and early 2021. The vacancy of the precincts presented an opportunity to review and analyse suitable management options for their future operation.
Management of LMSP to date Various management options for the LMSP were analysed and presented as part of the original Logan Metro Sports Park development Project Control Group (PCG) in 2014/15. The analysis focused heavily on governance/financial concerns and formed the basis for the Tender process that secured the previous tenants. The Northern and Southern Precincts were subsequently leased to two (2) sporting entities (with separate tenure arrangements). The facilities have since been vacated, creating an opportunity for Council to review the management models for the precincts.
Logan Metro Sports Park Management Project Reference Group In February 2021, a Councillor Project Reference Group (PRG) was established to: 1. Provide input and guidance on the key drivers and potential overarching principles used to contextualise management options; 2. Review and endorse the analysis of the management options using those principles developed; 3. Provide advice in the approach to informing all Elected Members of the benefits, or otherwise of potential management options; and 4. Positively promote the Project and its undertakings.
Report Page 2 of 7 Page 9 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
The membership of the PRG comprised of:
Chairperson: o Councillor Mindy Russell Division 3 (February/March 2021) o Councillor Tony Hall, Division 6 (April 2021 onwards) Members: o Deputy Mayor Jon Raven, Division 5 o Councillor Teresa Lane, Division 2 o Councillor Scott Bannan, Division 9
The PRG met as follows:
4 February 2021 – Inception meeting and site visit 18 March 2021 – Management models and market analysis: an overview 20 April 2021 – Leasing overview
Management models investigated Council engaged Dean Hassall Consulting (DHC) to support the PRG and provide the following insight:
1. Analysis of various governance, management and operational models applied within similar local government areas that are relevant to the subject facilities of Logan Metro Sports Park; and 2. A methodology designed to effectively evaluate each management model from a wide range of perspectives.
DHC undertook a review of industry practices and identified that five (5) management models predominantly exist for local government-owned sport, recreation, aquatic and cultural facilities. These five (5) models of management and governance that may be considered for a facility such as LMSP are:
Fully in-house; Lease; Committee of management; Commercial operator; and/or Beneficial enterprise.
The evaluation of the management models undertaken by DHC provides the highest scoring ‘In-house’ model, closely followed by ‘Lease’. These two (2) models provide a realistic option for the management of LMSP Precincts.
Following PRG meetings, it was noted that Council may have little-to-no appetite for pursuing the option of entirely in-house management across the site. Therefore, the ‘Lease’ model is considered the preferred option by the PRG for recommendation to Council for consideration.
Report Page 3 of 7 Page 10 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
The table below presents a summary of the evaluation for the two (2) highest ranking models:
Table 2: Summary of management model evaluation results and implications as identified by DHC (Adapted from Dean Hassall Consulting report, April 2021) Management model Implications for Council In-house (Council) Score=114 Ensures fair and equitable access for a Increased human resourcing required variety of users for operations and Council would be Allows sports/recreation/community groups solely responsible for all operating and to focus on programming for activation as maintenance costs well as upskilling of providers (for example coaches, officials) while not burdened with day-to-day venue management and associated financial risks Ensures no constraints on attracting major events to precinct Ensures sound maintenance plans and safety frameworks Lease Score=81 Common model in market for similar Often resourced by personnel (or facilities volunteers) unqualified in venue Encourages and fosters community management, without full development opportunities for participants understanding of WH&S, and broader Logan community members environmental and other risk Transfer of some operating costs (for management obligations example maintenance and grounds) from Financial burdens become financial risk Council to Lessees to organisations to meet lease obligations Venue management responsibilities often detract from core focus of programming and development NOTE - For the full assessment of the management model options by DHC, refer to Attachment 1.
Tenure Management If Council supports the ‘Lease’ model, the facility would be leased in accordance with Council’s adopted policy ‘Licence or Lease of Council Owned or Controlled Land to Sporting, Recreational and Community Organisations.’ The PRG is seeking Council consideration to proceed to undertake an Expression of Interest (EOI) process to test the market interest. The EOI will assess interested proponents’ capacity to manage either the whole and/or part of the site. In line with the evaluation criteria suggested by DHC, the EOI will request interested parties to submit (at a minimum) the following information: • relevant experience in the management of sports parks and similar facilities; • financial capacity of organisation; • experience of proposed personnel; and • how the organisation will engage with the community to ensure diverse usage.
Report Page 4 of 7 Page 11 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
Table 3: Expression of Interest summary Eligibility: Not for profit organisation incorporated under the Associations Incorporation Act 1981 (Qld) or similar legislation (i.e. Company Limited Guarantee under the Corporations Act). Options: Applicants to identify their preference for:
Whole of site; or Part of the Site - Northern Precinct and/or Southern Precinct and/or Administration Building. Due diligence Applicants to provide: items: Certificate of Incorporation; Evidence of public liability insurance (minimum value of $20 million); Most recent Financial Statement (audited if applicable); Latest AGM minutes; Constitution; and Strategic Business/ Club Development Plan Delegation: The preferred applicant is approved via:
the Lease Advisory Group, if the lease(s) terms are in accordance with the ‘Licence or Lease of Council Owned or Controlled Land to Sporting, Recreational and Community Organisations’ Policy; or Council resolution, where the proposed lease(s) is not in accordance with the ‘Licence or Lease of Council Owned or Controlled Land to Sporting, Recreational and Community Organisations’ Policy. Timeframe: EOI will be open to the public for three (3) weeks.
Timeframe for appointing a successful proponent is subject to any requests for information that may be required from the applicants and other Council requirements and processes.
ANY PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECISIONS At its meeting of 30 September 2020, Council received a Report on Logan Metro Sports Park (Southern Precinct) Football Brisbane - Lease Update from which Council resolved (Minute 133/2020):
1. That the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager be requested to provide a report for a future City Lifestyle Committee Meeting identifying opportunities for the future use of the Logan Metro Sports Park (Southern Precinct).
Subsequently, it was identified that the report should provide an overview of the LMSP Precincts as a whole.
Report Page 5 of 7 Page 12 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS The table below presents some key financial implications for the two (2) highest ranking models of management. Table 4: Financial implications for two highest ranking management models as identified by DHC (Adapted from Dean Hassall Consulting Report, April 2021) Management model Implications for Council In-house (Council) Fully reliant on Council funding. Further resource assistance shared through Council’s general structure (finance, administration, marketing, asset management) which may result in lower operating costs for the venue. • Ability for Council to generate and retain income from a variety of sources (for example hire fees, events, catering) to assist in reducing level of operating subsidies. Lease Heavy reliance upon Council towards ongoing operating subsidies or budget allocations to facility and maintenance costs, to remain financially viable. Model may allow for income generation for sports or clubs (for example from venue hire fees or catering sales) to be directed back into sport development programs. Lessees likely eligible for a range of grants to assist with improving ability to manage or run organisation (for example training of resources, equipment); and maintenance or special projects (including capital works).
RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS Dean Hassall Consulting identified the following risks for the Project (Refer to Confidential Attachment 1).
Table 5 - Risk management implications for the management of Logan Metro Sports Park as identified by DHC (Adapted from Dean Hassall Consulting Report, April 2021) Risk category Example of potential issues or considerations leading to risk Governance Poor ongoing due diligence by Council (as venue owner) Ineffective or poorly managed KPI’s upon venue operator Sub-standard lease or operating contract Health and Safety Poor asset and grounds management Lack of understanding of WH&S legislation and obligations Lack of operational risk assessment Financial Lack of funding for asset management Rudimentary cash handling/point of sale Hiring costs prohibiting diverse usage Operational Lack of industry-standard documentation Inexperienced and/or insufficient staff or volunteers Poor stakeholder and market engagement
Report Page 6 of 7 Page 13 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
Table 5 - Risk management implications for the management of Logan Metro Sports Park as identified by DHC (Adapted from Dean Hassall Consulting Report, April 2021) Risk category Example of potential issues or considerations leading to risk Reputational Domination by particular user groups Negative publicity (and embarrassment) due to under-utilised assets Inability to attract major events or users due to poor state of facilities Social Conflicts between user groups or lessees Anti-social behaviour by particular user groups Traffic and transport congestion in local area from large events Environmental Noise pollution from activities Inappropriate HAZCHEM practices Excessive water usage for horticulture
The implementation of a range of effective governance, due diligence and management practices by Council are key factors in ensuring the above risks are monitored accordingly and mitigated against, in a timely and efficient manner.
LEGAL/POLICY The management of Council facilities is in accordance with the adopted Policy “Licence or Lease of Council Owned or Controlled Land to Sporting, Recreational and Community Organisations”. COMMUNITY AND OTHER CONSULTATION The PRG members have been consulted in relation to the preparation of this report, specifically the management options to be presented to Council for consideration. The Mayor of Logan, Councillor Power and Chairperson of City Lifestyles Committee, Councillor Koranski were consulted in the preparation of this report. CONCLUSION The Logan Metro Sports Park Management PRG comprising of appointed councillors, has investigated several management models that could be considered for the LMSP Precincts. The evaluation of management models for LMSP Precincts against Council’s key strategic imperatives found that highest scoring ‘In-house’ model was closely followed by ‘Lease’. The leasing model is a very common management approach for similar facilities to LMSP within a variety of local governments around Australia. The leasing model is proposed by the PRG members as the preferred management model for LMSP going forward.
ATTACHMENTS TABLE
Number Attachment Title Final Report – Management Models Analysis Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Attachment 1 Management Models & Development of Evaluation Methodology
Report Page 7 of 7 Page 14 of 97
FINAL REPORT
Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models and Evaluation Methodology Development and Application
Prepared for Logan City Council
27 April 2021
Disclaimer
No representation or warranty, express or implied, is or will be made in respect to the fairness, accuracy or completeness of any of the information provided or to be contained herein.
The recommendations and observations in this report may raise issues for consideration. These are neither definitive nor exhaustive. They are to demonstrate areas felt to require further investigation, related planning and or action.
No liability for loss, damage or lost opportunity whatsoever suffered or incurred by Logan City Council or any third party, howsoever arising is or will be accepted by Dean Hassall Consulting Pty Ltd for the fairness, accuracy or completeness of the information contained herein or in any other information or advice supplied or made available, in writing or orally.
Page 15 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Contents
1. Preface ...... 4 Introduction 4 Alterations to project scope 5 Provision of objective information for good Council decision making 6 Work undertaken to date: DHC engaged consultant 7
2. Project background ...... 8 Site overview 8 Previous LMSP management and operations 11 Project catalyst and need 11 Clarification of scope 12
3. Requirements for venue operations good practice ...... 13 Appropriate governance 13 Robust management to drive effective venue operations 14 Risks for consideration for future management model 16
4. Market sounding of venue management models ...... 18 Industry research and benchmarking 18 Management models evidenced 19 Observations from management models industry research 30
5. Evaluation of venue management models ...... 31 Project purpose: finding an ideal management scenario 31 Evaluating models to determine best match for LMSP 32 Conceptual design of evaluation methodology 32 Explanatory notes/disclaimer 36 Results: application of evaluation methodology 36 Summary analysis of evaluation results 38
6. Conclusion ...... 40
Appendix 1: Minutes of LMSP PRG Meeting #2 held 18 March 2021 ...... 43
Appendix 2: Project Reference Materials ...... 44
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 2 Page 16 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Glossary and Abbreviations
CSO community service obligation DHC Dean Hassall Consulting Pty Ltd KPI key performance indicator LMSEC Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre LMSP / the Park Logan Metro Sports Park MMA Management Models Analysis NFP not for profit PRG Project Reference Group (Logan Metro Sports Park Management) SLF Sport, Leisure and Facilities Branch WHS work health and safety
List of Tables and Figures
Table 1. Disclosure of stakeholder interaction and engagement during project Table 2. Summary of common facility operational models in Australia (Local Government‐owned venues) Table 3. Top‐level benchmarking findings – select example Australian facilities Table 4. Key strategic priorities of Council converted into evaluation measures: Logan Metro Sports Park context Table 5. Evaluation of management models: Logan Metro Sports Park context Table 6. Brief summary of management model evaluation results
Figure 1. Indicative site area developed for sport and recreation purposes (noting, depiction not to precise form) Figure 2. Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre – indicative exterior and interior Figure 3. Northern Precinct exterior and interior, indicative of high quality, contemporary design and components Figure 4. Waste services administration building – indicative exterior and interior Figure 5. Logan Metro Sports Park site components under review to determine their potential future management model (noting, depiction not to precise form) Figure 6. Key operational requirements essential to good practice venue operations/facility management Figure 7. Facilities (and municipalities) studied during DHC industry benchmarking of management models Figure 8. Purpose and process depiction: Logan Metro Sports Park Management Model Analysis
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 3 Page 17 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
1. Preface
Introduction The following report is designed to fulfil two milestone deliverables required of engaged consultant Dean Hassall Consulting Pty Ltd (DHC) in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021 – Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park.
Specifically, Logan City Council’s Sport, Leisure and Facilities Branch (SLF) has sought DHC’s venue management and operational planning expertise in order to inform and deliver upon the following required outcomes: Milestone 2a – A summary report that describes and analyses various governance, management and operational models applied within similar local government areas that are relevant to the subject facilities of Logan Metro Sports Park (LMSP; ‘the Park’); and
Milestone 2b – A report detailing DHC’s approach to the curation of principles, metrics and application thereof, which underpin a methodology designed to effectively evaluate each management model from a wide range of perspectives. These considerations include but are not limited to: — appropriateness and market feasibility for Logan City Council and LMSP‐specific contexts; — gauge of alignment with Council’s vision, strategic priorities and endorsed plans; — benefits and disadvantages of each model across a spectrum of social, environmental, financial, governance, safety and reputational considerations and risks; and — capacity to facilitate industry good practice venue management and operations.
Notwithstanding a pre‐determined project schedule1, it is key to mention that this paper also brings forward: Milestone 2c – a summary report outlining the evaluation of each management model discovered through the application of the (above) approved methodology (principles and application).
(Rationale for this change is explained in the following section, ‘Alterations to project scope’.)
All three deliverables (Stages 2a, 2b and 2c) are addressed within this singular report.
As with all assigned deliverables and DHC’s overall contribution towards project objectives, this Milestone paper should be considered neither exhaustive nor definitive but demonstrates areas felt to require further investigation, related planning and or action. As the first of several reports1 to be delivered by DHC within an agreed LMSP Management Models Analysis scope of works, this consolidated research and methodology‐design paper aims to provide a foundation, upon which,
1 Project plan with key milestones is current at time of writing. DHC has been made aware of potential alterations to project scope. These are yet to be fully explored and negotiated with Council. See discussion under ‘Alterations to project scope’.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 4 Page 18 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021 subsequent DHC presentation and report commitments will build. Matters documented herein are consequently a prelude to further project stages, which DHC anticipates delivering throughout March to May 2021.
Alterations to project scope On Thursday, 18 March 2021 DHC attended a scheduled meeting of the LMSP Project Reference Group (PRG). DHC presented an overview of industry‐benchmarked management models and introductory market analysis of models applied at facilities similar to LMSP, and participated in discussions where appropriate.
Further to enquiries directed from PRG members to DHC and ensuing discussions, the PRG members decided that the ‘Leasing’ model would be the preferred model for Council to pursue for LMSP. As a consequence, PRG members requested that SLF review project scope with a view to potentially altering the original project plan process and corresponding deliverables requested from DHC. (Minutes of PRG meeting # 2 are attached at Appendix 1.)
SLF and DHC are continuing discussions regarding project scope.
Until such time as other alterations to project scope are confirmed, the future deliverables expected from DHC (as originally contracted but now subject to change) involve: Milestones 2c‐2f – a consolidation of interdependent reports, encompassing: — Stage 2c ‐ Evaluation of Management Model Report (brought forward and completed by DHC; included in this report consolidating stages 2a–2c; see explanation over page) — Stage 2d ‐ Potential Management Scenario Report — Stage 2e ‐ Management Scenario Evaluation Methodology Report — Stage 2f ‐ Evaluation of Management Scenario Report Milestone 3 – Delivery to the PRG via an interactive workshop, a facilitated discussion that communicates the findings of the previous stages comprising management model and scenario discovery, and presents results of the applied evaluation methodology. DHC will engage stakeholders to discuss and capture their feedback, which will contribute to Milestone 4. Note — DHC’s participation in meetings (or workshops) with the Logan Metro Sports Park Management Project Reference Group (PRG) comprises three key milestones of the project plan, which shall occur monthly during the project timeframe.
Milestone 4a – Draft and final versions of a report with working title “Ongoing Management Options Analysis Draft & Final Report – Logan Metro Sports Park”. This report shall contain appropriately‐targeted synopsis narrative and illustrative content to concisely articulate the scaffolded project stages, process and methodology, plus key findings of the project. It is Council’s expectation that DHC’s project summary will reflect all stakeholder input and feedback received throughout the project stages.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 5 Page 19 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Milestone 4b – Presentation of a concise overview of the project’s outcomes and key considerations to a full Council forum (keeping to 15‐minute duration).
With regard to early completion of Stage 2c (evaluation of management models) during delivery of Milestones 2a and 2b, it has logically arisen for DHC to bring forward the application of evaluation methodology. This decision evolves further to the PRG‐minuted decision that a Leasing model is likely to be Council’s preferred option. Putting the designed methodology into practice—application of the evaluation concept created by DHC, in consultation with Council representatives—becomes timely to ascertain whether the PRG’s predicted outcome of evaluation does in fact match a fair and objective comparison of models. (For further detail on methodology design and application, see ‘Section 5. Evaluation of venue management models’.) Consequently, DHC has delivered altered scope, which consolidates and completes Milestones 2a–2c.
Provision of objective information for good Council decision making DHC is acutely aware that Council’s decision making on the future management of LMSP should reflect the ‘principles based’ provisions under the Local Government Act 2009. Consequently, project information reported upon by DHC, developed in collaboration with Council staff and elected representatives, shall aim to uphold five key principles of equal importance:
transparent and effective processes, and decision‐making in the public interest; sustainable development and management of assets and infrastructure, and delivery of effective services; democratic representation, social inclusion and meaningful community engagement; good governance of, and by, local government; and ethical and legal behaviour of councillors, local government employees and councillor advisors.
(source: The State of Queensland [Department of Local Government, Racing and Multicultural Affairs], 2020.)
DHC’s engagement will be undertaken in the knowledge that Council’s ultimate intent is to ensure the City of Logan community realises the greatest benefit from private and public funding invested in Logan Metro Sports Park – historically and well into the future. DHC’s investigations shall therefore reflect the overall master planned development for LMSP and encompass opportunities for Council’s continual improvement of venue governance based on industry benchmarking, market investigation and literature review.
Notwithstanding any potential change of scope after delivery of this first (consolidated) milestones report, it is intended that the information generated through DHC’s collaboration with Council on research, analysis, comparison and critique of various management models will assist to support Council in making informed decisions relating to the future management of LMSP.
DHC looks forward to discussing this report’s content with Council officers representing SLF as well as Councillors serving as members of the PRG, full Council and any additional key stakeholders.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 6 Page 20 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Work undertaken to date: DHC engaged consultant Up to time of submitting this report, work undertaken by DHC has included: detailed briefings and ongoing update meetings and consultations with key SLF points of contact (as outlined in Table 1 below); guided site visit and inspection of LMSP; review of a suite of project reference materials provided by Council (refer Appendix 2); review of Logan City Council strategies, plans and other publications available in the public domain, which may have relevance for the project (refer Appendix 2); review of key literature held by DHC, sourced from a range of industry sectors, which related to the scope of the exercise; and scheduled engagement with members of the PRG (per Table 1 below) at their meeting held on Thursday, 18 March 2021.
Table 1. Disclosure of stakeholder interaction and engagement during project
Name Title Council Nature of Contact Branch ‐Council’s project manager/primary contact for DHC Sport, ‐project inception & site visit Sport & Recreation Leisure and ‐clarifications & ongoing liaison Helene Windels Planning Coordinator Facilities ‐regular check‐in/status meetings (SLF) ‐scheduled PRG meeting ‐detailed review/feedback on each DHC deliverable Sports & Recreation ‐project inception & site visit Francis Mills SLF Program Leader ‐oversight/high‐level feedback on DHC deliverables ‐Project Owner (PRG structure) Sport, Leisure and Nigel Brown SLF ‐scheduled PRG meeting Facilities Manager ‐oversight/high‐level feedback on DHC deliverables A/Leisure Centres Matt McKee SLF ‐ scheduled PRG meeting Program Leader Inez Penrose Advisor to Cr Russell ‐scheduled PRG meeting LOGAN METRO SPORTS PARK MANAGEMENT PROJECT REFERENCE GROUP (PRG) MEMBERSHIP
Name Title Role/Relationship within PRG Structure ‐PRG Chair Cr Mindy Russell Councillor, Division 3 ‐scheduled PRG meeting
‐PRG member Cr Jon Raven Deputy Mayor, Division 5 ‐scheduled PRG meeting
‐PRG member Cr Teresa Lane Councillor, Division 2 ‐scheduled PRG meeting
‐PRG member Cr Scott Bannan Councillor, Division 9 ‐scheduled PRG meeting
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 7 Page 21 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
2. Project background
Site overview Logan City Council is landowner and custodian of a 108‐hectare masterplan development located in Heritage Park, known as Logan Metro Sports Park. This development was conceptualized in 2005 by Council’s appointed consultant, ROSS Planning Pty Ltd, and documented in their Logan Metro Sports Park Master Plan further to extensive stakeholder (including community) consultation and investigative research. Situated on land that has served (and, in part, continues to serve) the community as the Logan Waste Services Landfill site, it was envisioned that Council and park users would achieve the following aspiration over a 10 to 20 year timeframe:
“A metropolitan sport park servicing the needs of Logan residents and visitors for high quality sport, recreation and physical activity participation in a safe and inviting environment.”
(suggested vision for Logan Metro Sports Park; cited ROSS Planning, 2005, Master Plan – Logan Metro Sports Park)
Key features of the master plan for Logan Metro Sports Park (at the time) included: sporting fields and facilities for football, rugby league, rugby, AFL, cricket and touch football (and sports that can use same‐shaped fields) as part of first stage developments;
a central Village Green for daylight recreation and community events;
recreation elements including playground, model boat and car areas, and dog off–leash area;
provision for a tennis centre;
linked walking tracks/cycle tracks, bushland trails and lookout;
buildings suitable for indoor sports and recreation (e.g., gymnastics);
potential licensed club facility and additional clubhouse/s;
requisite traffic (roadways, parking) and utilities (water, electricity) infrastructure; and
potential turf farm until settlement occurs to a stage suitable for sport field construction (in subsequent stage/s of the master plan development).
At time of writing, Council has progressively developed an approximate 15‐hectare east‐north east section of the landfill site to create a premier precinct providing for sport and recreation (indicatively pictured over page).
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 8 Page 22 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
The subject site, which is bounded by natural bushland (Crown land) of Grosvenor Park to the north west and Bayliss Park to the east, continues to house Browns Plains Waste and Recycling Facility and Logan Recycling Market. The collective developed area (to date) represents approximately one‐third of the open space identified in the concept master plan for such active purposes, with ambitions for the site (upon its full development, as noted in the vision statement above) being provision of a leading destination for events, training, industry development and innovation relating to sport and recreation.
Figure 1. Indicative site area developed for sport and recreation purposes (noting, depiction not to precise form)
Staged development of Logan Metro Sports Park over the past 16 years, has maximized available space on the site for active use while factoring requisite road, parking, electrical and other essential infrastructure. These capital works have been achieved further to gradual availability of investment by Council and leveraging State and Federal Government grants and co‐contributions from State Sporting Organisations. Up to time of writing, investment has enabled construction and operation of the following facilities:
(i) Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre (pictured left) – opened in 2009, this multi‐purpose international standard venue located in the north‐east corner of the site comprises: three international standard indoor courts with 2,100 persons capacity; health and fitness centre; versatile function rooms (for conferences, business meetings and other events); cocktail lounge, bar, and balcony function space; café with full commercial kitchen; and vehicle parking (including overflow parking) areas;
Figure 2. Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre – indicative exterior and interior
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 9 Page 23 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
(ii) Northern Precinct (pictured below), featuring one premium rectangular field, a contemporary clubhouse with administration offices and meeting spaces, semi‐commercial kitchen and servery, and four change rooms;
(iii) Southern Precinct featuring three senior rectangular fields and contemporary clubhouse (with similar inclusions and specifications as Northern Precinct amenities); and
Figure 3. Northern Precinct exterior and interior, indicative of high quality, contemporary design and components
(iv) buildings historically used for administration supporting Council waste services functions (hereafter referred to as waste services administration building), noting: buildings were renovated for use associated with office functions; and although well‐presented, functional and versatile, design does not match the contemporary architecture of the buildings associated with the Northern and Southern Precincts.
Figure 4. Waste services building – indicative exterior and interior
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 10 Page 24 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Previous LMSP management and operations In keeping with the concept master plan, which took a view of the first development stage providing for rectangular football sports (such as soccer, rugby league, rugby union, touch football) both the Northern and Southern Precincts have been predominantly utilised to facilitate football (soccer). In July 2018, Council unveiled its newly constructed premier outdoor sporting facilities, officially welcoming Brisbane Roar Football Club and Football Brisbane to the Park as tenants of the Northern Precinct and Southern Precinct (respectively). It is believed Brisbane Roar, as nearby Northern Precinct tenant, also utilised the additional facility of the waste services building for overflow administration area. Under those arrangements, Council retained ownership of the facilities and broad governance oversight, with the tenants equally assuming assigned (contractual) responsibilities for day‐to‐day operations and maintenance (e.g., fields horticulture, buildings general maintenance). LMSEC has always been fully managed in‐house by Council.
Project catalyst and need The two tenants of both the Northern and Southern Precincts vacated their leases in late 2020 and early 2021, respectively. DHC understands the waste services administration building has also been vacant since the Brisbane Roar’s exit. Departure of the two tenants necessitated Council’s immediate resumption of full responsibility for site management, maintenance and activation. Since this time, the site has lacked activation due to Council undertaking significant maintenance such as field recovery and rectification works, and interior building rectification and restoration works, further to tenancy departures. Activation of the venue to its fullest potential use, at the earliest achievable time, is a key priority for Council. However, prior to LMSP components being leased or otherwise managed, for due diligence purposes it has been deemed prudent to ensure that Council’s decision makers are well‐informed relating to the future management options of the facilities. This project therefore intends to provide Council with an overview of the different benefits and disadvantages associated with various management models that exist for the facilities comprising LMSP. By analysing the potential outcomes of combinations of different management models across site components (‘management scenarios’) against Council’s vision and corporate strategies (scope proposed under later stages of project), this information will assist to support the most strategically sound management of the Park, in the immediate future and as the master plan continues progressing.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 11 Page 25 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Clarification of scope The scope of management model analysis under investigation by DHC relates to three (3) components of the current LMSP site development only, as depicted in the sketch below. These site components under enquiry are predominantly:
the Northern Precinct;
the Southern Precinct; and
the waste services administration building.
No change of management model is expected for LMSEC in the immediate future. Briefed direction to DHC is that LMSEC will be retained as Council‐operated. However, project workings must factor the role of the indoor sports and events facility (site component) within the overall Park management structure and its relationship within different scenarios as management options for other facilities of the Park evolve. Figure 5. Logan Metro Sports Park site components under review to determine their potential future management model
Note—Notwithstanding proposed retention of LMSEC management in‐house, and the Minuted decision of PRG members that the ‘Leasing’ model would be the preferred model (refer Appendix 1 for Minutes of PRG meeting held 18/03/2021), it should be noted that DHC has approached this assignment without pre‐ conceived notions for management of any of the three above‐noted LMSP components. This project aims to treat each management model objectively. It will involve research, comparison and critique of various management models with each analysed independently for their relevance and suitability for the ongoing management of the Park against alignment to Council’s vision for the City of Logan and endorsed objectives. Detail will continue to be presented to Council to support informed decisions relating to the future management of the facilities. Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 12 Page 26 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
3. Requirements for venue operations good practice
Appropriate governance Venue owners constantly face the ongoing challenge of how to best service their communities whilst balancing the commercial realities of financing their venue provision and generating tangible and intangible returns on investment. Arguably, the complexities of owning a public facility are multifaceted. Venues are expensive to operate; hirers and patrons both expect and demand state of the art facilities; safe, secure and inclusive environments are essential; and facilities that offer convenience, high service standards and positive experiences are those that thrive, not merely survive. Therefore, detailed and contemporary business plans, maintenance and capital plans, and operating systems are crucial contributors within a framework designed to meet these major objectives. With regard to LMSP specifically, whatever future management scenario is adopted it is imperative that – above all – appropriate governance is implemented to ensure the long‐term success of the entire Park in meeting Council’s objectives. As with all types of government‐owned sport and recreation facilities, the ongoing challenge for Council will be to ensure that the selected management scenario not only meets the industry and community needs but is sustainable in the long term by generating ongoing market interest, long‐term commitment by a range of stakeholders, and sufficient commercial returns from each facility to assist in minimising Council’s ongoing operational subsidies. Consideration of management options for the LMSP (as depicted right), needs to be undertaken particularly in respect of the issues and relationships between: achieving broad‐based usage and activation targets in line with Council’s strategic plans;
ensuring accessibility to a diverse community market for primary purposes of sport and recreation development and participation, training and education;
providing safe fields, buildings, amenities and general surrounds for players, coaches, staff, volunteers, spectators and other visitors; and
ensuring a balanced financial outcome for Council and any operator with a fair and reasonable delineation of responsibilities between parties as it relates to cost responsibilities and commercial frameworks.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 13 Page 27 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Any operating entity — and it may eventuate that there are multiple entities/parties entrusted with this role across defined site components – must have the knowledge, skills and capacity to manage facilities of this scale, whilst ensuring they work with Council to achieve community activation objectives and financial viability. Consequently, it is essential to ensure up‐to‐date best‐practice governance systems and processes are in place and upheld, as an ongoing risk management strategy for Council. For example, as it applies to Council owning and making accessible to the community a sport and recreation precinct such as LMSP, it will be vital to make certain of:
Ongoing consultation with stakeholders and the operator (if not direct management by Council); Performance monitoring and evaluation of all operational and financial aspects against established key performance indicators and agreed objectives under contract or lease; Rigorous monitoring of risk management frameworks established, including review, updating and providing assistance, where required; and Ensuring compliance with all statutory obligations, including required permits and licences for operation, via periodic (albeit rigidly‐scheduled) review.
Robust management to drive effective venue operations The ultimate aim of good venue management practice is to provide destination facilities for both locals and visitors to the region; in other words, venues that – by reputation – are destinations people want to visit and experience. Consistent with this notion and based on DHC’s research and consultations to date, Council’s aspirations for LMSP may be broadly interpreted via the graphic at right. Regardless of the type of public facility that caters for broad‐ ranging community participation, activation and patronage, there are a range of key venue management and operational considerations that are required to be managed and implemented by an operator that contribute to the facility’s ongoing success. When practiced effectively, the appropriate delivery and fulfilment of these interdependent functions ultimately enables venue owners and operators to contribute to (or achieve) the vision for their venue offering. To demonstrate these essential venue operating requirements further, as they would apply to a facility such as LMSP, Figure 6 over page depicts this range of functional responsibilities as an interconnected chain surrounding – and thereby safeguarding – the vision for LMSP.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 14 Page 28 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Figure 6. Key operational requirements essential to good practice venue operations/facility management
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 15 Page 29 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Risks for consideration for future management model As referenced in the previous discussion, venue management may be regarded as an interconnected chain of governance and operational responsibilities. When practiced to strong standards, a range of risks may be mitigated (to varying degrees) via effective venue operations, risk analysis and appropriate policies. However, poor management with sub‐standard fulfilment of duties may lead to weaknesses or ‘weak links’ between venue operational responsibilities and, ultimately, an inability to achieve aspirations for the facility. It is vital therefore that a range of broad operational risks that exist for any future management of LMSP should be considered within analysis of management model options for the site. Many of these risks can (and have been) experienced by local government authorities for similar type facilities associated with differing management options. Although neither exhaustive nor definitive, examples of such risks are demonstrated at a high level below.
Risk category Example of potential issues or considerations leading to risk Poor ongoing due diligence by Council (as venue owner) GOVERNANCE Ineffective or poorly managed KPIs upon venue operator Sub‐standard lease or operating contract Poor asset and grounds management HEALTH & SAFETY Lack of understanding of WHS legislation and obligations Lack of operational risk assessment Lack of funding for asset management FINANCIAL Rudimentary cash handling/point of sale Hiring costs prohibiting diverse usage Lack of industry‐standard documentation OPERATIONAL Inexperienced and/or insufficient staff or volunteers Poor stakeholder and market engagement Domination by particular user groups REPUTATIONAL Negative publicity (and embarrassment) due to under‐utilised assets Inability to attract major events or users due to poor state of facilities Conflicts between user groups or lessees SOCIAL Anti‐social behaviour by particular user groups Traffic and transport congestion in local area from large events Noise pollution from activities ENVIRONMENTAL Inappropriate HAZCHEM practices Excessive water usage for horticulture
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 16 Page 30 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
These example risks are merely pointed out for benchmarking and informative purposes. DHC considers that the implementation of a range of effective governance, due diligence and management practices by Council (whichever management model is implemented) are key factors in ensuring the above risks are monitored accordingly and mitigated against, in a timely and efficient manner. As alluded to earlier, such governance practices would include (at a minimum):
appropriate reporting, meeting and review frameworks; ability for Council to undertake audits and regular inspections; oversight of and input into risk management frameworks; regular review of leasing and contractual frameworks and policy; agreed financial terms under any contract or lease; and performance appraisal against a range of key performance indicators (KPI’s).
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 17 Page 31 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
4. Market sounding of venue management models
Industry research and benchmarking The purpose of this report is for DHC to assist Council in further understanding the current industry practices for governance and management frameworks, and considerations, as it relates to comparable local government‐owned premier sport and recreation precincts. To support Council in making informed decisions relating to the future management of LMSP, it is aimed at providing a comprehensive snapshot of the current industry environment as benchmarked against operations of like‐for‐like facilities. Industry benchmarking by DHC, specific to this project, has extended to studying Council‐owned leisure facilities in most Australian States and Territories. (Coverage is indicated in the diagram below.) This benchmarking augments DHC’s existing industry knowledge possessed through delivering projects across Australia on an extensive listing of multi‐use, often multi‐tenanted, community sport, recreation, entertainment, cultural and civic facilities. Such consultancies are aimed at assisting venue owners and operators with optimising major public facility management and operational performance. The collective has contributed to information summarised for Logan City Council in the following section, in particular the detail contained in Table 2 (pages 20–24). Benchmarked venues are cited in Table 2 with further details expanded upon in Table 3 (pages 25–29) for five select venues, which were presented as benchmarking examples to the PRG at its meeting held on 18 March 2021, plus one further example selected for its relevance.
Figure 7. Facilities (and municipalities) studied during DHC industry benchmarking of management models
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 18 Page 32 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Management models evidenced A review of industry practices has identified that five (5) management models predominantly exist for local government‐owned sport, recreation, aquatic and cultural facilities. These five models of management and governance that may be considered for a facility such as LMSP are described in Table 2 (pages 20–24). DHC has made every attempt to provide descriptions of each management model on the basis of being impartial, objective, and free from bias. However, in order to present a succinct yet thorough picture of the state of the industry and options that may be available to Council, DHC has also included information for each model presented as positives or ‘pros’ (strengths, benefits, advantages) and negatives or ‘cons’ (weaknesses, disadvantages, drawbacks). No singular or collective remark/s within such presented information should be perceived as favouring one model (or aspect thereof) and any such emergence should be regarded as inadvertent and unintentional. As explained in prefacing comments, a major component of this project (original process under an agreed scope of works) involves objective evaluation of management models and their suitability as options for Council to implement at LMSP (see Section 5 of this report). The following table is therefore intended to succinctly present each model’s differentiating features in a consistent, transparent and clear manner. It is delivered purely for information sake as a foundation for Council’s decision making.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 19 Page 33 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Table 2. Summary of common facility operational models in Australia (Local Government‐owned venues)
Fully In‐House Managed Lease Committee of Management Commercial Operator Beneficial enterprise (Incorporated Association)
Overview – Venue owned by Council Venue owned by Council Venue owned by Council Venue owned by Council Venue owned by Council what does this Fully staffed and operated by Council Council grants a formal lease, trustee lease, Council enters into a formal lease, licence or Management contract entered into between Council establishes an ‘arms‐length’ entity, model look like Full internal Council management with in‐ licence or management agreement (to one management agreement with an association Council and Operator for a defined period which (by some measure) is legally separate in practice? house staff performing strategic oversight, or more parties) that articulates usage and incorporated in Queensland (regulated by Contract generally includes financial from Council but also publicly owned (either management, operational and maintenance occupancy rights and responsibilities for the Office of Fair Trading) considerations such as a management fee, wholly or in part) roles defined areas of site Association operates with an elected operating subsidy or profit share Corporate form/structure of company Council manages all activation and Lessees provide all staffing and responsible management committee and must maintain arrangement established under the Corporations Act 2001 programming for day‐to‐day operational requirements for proper financial and membership records Key Performance Indicators, review clauses influenced by several factors and subject to their contractually allotted tenancy areas and registers (legislative and regulatory and reporting frameworks included to reflect considered legal/financial advice (case‐by‐ and functional responsibilities compliance) Council’s strategic aspirations and targets case) May involve appointing multiple separate Management committee comprises a Operator provides all staffing to fulfil day‐to‐ Company structure may be either ‘Limited entities as Lessees of different facilities President, Secretary and Treasurer day responsibilities around strategic by guarantee’ or ‘Limited by shares’ but within the one precinct (i.e., different (minimum) and possible other positions oversight, management, operations, strictly in accordance with Queensland leaseholders for separate facilities); different appointed at an annual general meeting, maintenance, activation and programming legislative framework applicable to Local Lessees may have no prior relationship with which often are on a volunteer basis Government each other Some program delivery may be outsourced The association provides all staffing and by commercial operator to specialist service Council likely sole shareholder (single owner) Lessees largely manage activation and responsible for day‐to‐day operational providers (more common with aquatic Independent skills‐based Board with programming, ideally in consultation with requirements – for their contractually‐ centres, indoor sports centres and health & members appointed on merit for mix of other site stakeholders (Council & other allotted tenancy areas and functional fitness centres) professional expertise to govern entity and Lessees) responsibilities ensure performance against objectives In larger incorporated associations, salaried Evidence of Council appointing a councillor workforce (different to management or employee of a local government to Board committee) may provide day‐to‐day of directors or only as ‘observer’ of meetings management; whereas in smaller associations key volunteers may be Company provides all staffing to fulfil day‐to‐ responsible for making decisions about the day responsibilities around strategic day‐to‐day running of the Association, based oversight, management, operations, on the strategy decided by the committee maintenance, activation and programming The association manages all activation and Some program delivery may be outsourced programming (but works closely with by commercial operator to specialist service Council to adhere to strategic aspirations providers and targets) Typical term N/A 3, 5 or 10 years 5 or 10 years 5, 10 and 20 years are evidenced in market 5 or 10 year initial terms NB. Logan City Council standard term is However, 5 and 10 years most common; 5 years 20‐year term generally based on significant capital contributions from the appointed Operator
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 20 Page 34 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Fully In‐House Managed Lease Committee of Management Commercial Operator Beneficial enterprise (Incorporated Association)
Financial Fully reliant on Council Heavy reliance upon Council ongoing Somewhat reliant upon Council ongoing Some reliance on Council as Operator Initially will be heavily reliant on Council reliance upon operating subsidies or budget allocations to operating subsidies or budget allocations to assumes operating responsibility for operating subsidies and community service Council facility and maintenance costs, to remain facility and maintenance costs, to remain financial performance obligations (CSOs) to achieve break‐even financially viable financially viable Generally contributed in form of operating results subsidy or management fee paid by Council Varies depending on establishment ‐ Council Council budget allocation may still be made may finance the operation of the company to the venue each year for maintenance and through operating grants or other funding capital works arrangements, or (less commonly) it may be self‐funding or (least commonly) it generates surplus funds or a dividend to the Council Other financial Further resource assistance shared through Model may allow for income generation for All funds raised by trading must be directed Commercial operator may have capacity to Company limited by guarantee must not pay considerations Council’s general structure (finance, sports or clubs (e.g., from venue hire fees or back to furthering the incorporated generate equity and raise capital through a dividend to its members administration, marketing, asset catering sales) to be directed back into sport association's mission or objective (its operating profits or private investment to Company must undertake financial statutory management etc) which may result in lower development programs purpose) assist with capital works (generally reliant on reporting requirements operating costs for the venue a long‐term contract) Lessees likely eligible for range of grants to Incorporated association must not secure a Company may invest any profit generated Ability for Council to generate and retain assist with improving ability to manage or profit for its members (or divide a profit into further facility development income from a variety of sources (e.g., hire run organisation (eg, training of resources, among members or distribute profit to fees, events, catering) to assist in reducing equipment); and maintenance or special members) level of operating subsidies projects (including capital works) Association likely eligible for range of grants to assist with improving ability to manage or run organisation (eg, training of resources, equipment); and maintenance or special projects (including capital works) Maintenance Council generally responsible for all Lessees responsible for varied levels of Association responsible for varied levels of Specific assignment of expense and Company responsible for maintenance, maintenance maintenance responsibilities and outgoings maintenance responsibilities, operating maintenance responsibilities between however, may involve direct contribution pending the Lessors’ leasing policy costs and outgoings Council and Operator from Council as part of a Community Service requirements (e.g., Logan City Council Council generally responsible for structural Council generally responsible for structural Obligation Lessees are responsible for general day‐to‐ type maintenance type maintenance day maintenance and horticulture) Council generally responsible for structural type maintenance Capital Full responsibility for capital works Pending type of venue Lessee/s may Association likely eligible for grants to assist Pending type of venue Operator may Likely company would fund and proactively investment contribute to capital works (but generally with special projects/capital works and contribute to capital works (generally reliant plan/manage capital works reliant on long‐term lease tenure) equipment on long‐term contract tenure) Council may have rights of approval on any (as above) Lessee likely eligible for grants to Council would have rights of approval on any Council would have rights of approval on any capital works as owner of company assist with special projects/capital works and capital works and generally assist with capital works but Operator would possibly equipment capital works planning and delivery proactively drive and collaborate with Council would have rights of approval on any Council on capital works planning capital works and generally assist with capital works planning and delivery
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 21 Page 35 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Fully In‐House Managed Lease Committee of Management Commercial Operator Beneficial enterprise (Incorporated Association)
Governance Generally within responsibility of a Council Requires diligent/robust Council lease Council governance conditions built into KPIs, review clauses and reporting Council permitted to establish a company model senior manager role to govern and oversee management with regular reporting and KPIs terms of management agreements such as frameworks generally included within under the beneficial enterprises provisions performance based on a range of KPI’s and monitored, and regular review meetings reporting requirements, insurances and contract (BEP) of the Local Government Act 2009 reporting frameworks Council resources must appropriately other legislative and regulatory compliance Requires diligent/robust Council contract Local government must ensure that the Accountability for venue performance oversee areas of contract management and Association must comply with the management with regular reporting activity will be conducted with better clearly rests with Council governance, reporting and compliance, asset Associations Incorporation Act 1981 and monitored and review meetings economy, effectiveness, efficiency and management and administration Associations Incorporation Regulation 1999 Council resources must appropriately accountability in the ‘company form’ Accountability for venue performance to fulfil a raft of administrative obligations oversee areas of contract management and Company registered and regulated under ultimately rests with Council but Accountability for venue performance governance, reporting and compliance, asset the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) operationally shared with Lessees ultimately rests with Council but management, and administration (Corporations Act), which is administered by operationally shared with association Statutory reporting requirements will apply the Australian Securities and Investments to registered and regulated company (per Commission range of legislative responsibilities) Company statutory reporting requirements Accountability for venue performance (per range of legislative responsibilities) ultimately rests with Council but Accountability for venue performance operationally resides with Operator ultimately rests with Council but visibly resides with company Formal Wholly Council documentation (such as May be combination of Council and Lessee Likely to be more Association‐branded Operator’s documentation (such as Company’s documentation (such as documentation agreements, guidelines, conditions of site documentation documentation (than Council) issued to agreements, guidelines, conditions of site agreements, guidelines, conditions of site handled entry and rules of use) issued to venue hirers Lessee responsible for articulating and venue hirers and users as core business is entry and rules of use) issued to venue hirers entry and rules of use) issued to venue hirers and users upholding Council guidelines, conditions of dedicated to operation of facility and users and users site entry and rules of use when granting Association responsible for articulating and Operator responsible for articulating and Company would set conditions of site entry access to venue hirers and users upholding Council guidelines, conditions of upholding Council guidelines, conditions of and rules of use when granting access to site entry and rules of use when granting site entry and rules of use when granting venue hirers and users in line with their access to venue hirers and users access to venue hirers and users strategic intent Accountability Council wholly responsible for all risk Lessee assumes some level of operating risk Assoc. assumes some level of operating risk Operator accountable for large levels of Entity accountable for large levels of for risk management and liability from operational If leasing entity fails, Council is left with sole If management entity fails, Council is left operating risk in relation to their systems, operating risk in relation to their systems, delivery responsibility for the facility’s management, with sole responsibility for the facility’s services and practices services and practices May be exceptions in acts of negligence by risk and liability, except in acts of negligence management, risk and liability, except in acts Council as the asset owner must ensure Council’s ultimate risk profile is subject to venue hirers, users and visitors by the lessee (or other venue hirers, users of negligence by the association (or other appropriate levels of due diligence over the the type of company set up and associated and visitors) venue hirers, users and visitors) Operator’s performance legislative responsibilities under company Council as the asset owner must ensure Council as the asset owner must ensure law appropriate levels of due diligence over the appropriate levels of due diligence over the Lessees’ performance management associations’ performance Evidence of Stadia Sport and recreation reserves Sport and recreation reserves (incorporating Aquatic centres Events/Entertainment Centres Council‐owned Sport and recreation reserves Aquatic centres indoor sports centre) Stadia Performing arts centre/cultural venues venues where Aquatic centres Indoor sports centres Health and fitness centres Stadia model is Indoor sports centres Indoor sports centres Indoor sports centres applied Event/Entertainment venues Event/Entertainment venues Sport and recreation reserves Amphitheatres/stages Major cultural/civic venues Aquatic centres Performing arts centre/cultural venues Amphitheatres/stages Civic venues
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 22 Page 36 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Fully In‐House Managed Lease Committee of Management Commercial Operator Beneficial enterprise (Incorporated Association)
Example Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre Hibiscus Sports Complex (Brisbane City South Pine Sports Complex (owned by range of Logan City Council, Brisbane City HOTA Gold Coast Pty Ltd (City of Gold Coast) Australian Townsville Riverway Stadium (Townsville City Council) Moreton Bay Regional Council, run by South Council and Sunshine Coast Council aquatic Empire Theatres Pty Ltd venues or Council) Shaw Road Sports Complex (Brisbane City Pine Sports Association Inc.) centres (Toowoomba Regional Council) management Pimpama Sports Hub (City of Gold Coast) Council) Mackay Aquatic and Recreation Complex Sunshine Coast Events Centre Pty Ltd entities (Mackay Regional Council) Carrara Sports and Leisure Centre (City of James Drysdale Reserve (Moreton Bay (Sunshine Coast Council)
Gold Coast) Regional Council) The Concourse Performing Arts Centre Blacktown Venue Management Limited – (Willoughby City Council) Coffs Coast Sport and Leisure Park (Coffs Moreton Bay Central Sports Park (Moreton operation of Blacktown International Harbour City Council) Bay Regional Council) Sportspark Sydney (Blacktown City Council) Balinger Sports Park Complex (Sunshine Coast Council) Positives (pros) Council maintains full control of governance, Supports community engagement focus Structure typically established as a cost‐ No direct Council staffing or operational Entrepreneurial approach to business management and operations Some maintenance responsibilities placed effective solution for locally‐focused not‐for‐ costs activity High awareness and focus on strategic on Lessees reducing Council maintenance profit community groups with limited Ability to operate more commercially ‘Arms length’ to Council processes but direction and priorities of Council costs capacity to meet reporting obligations and focussed structure also ensures Council retains an groups with limited funds and resources Full understanding of operating performance Transfer of day‐to‐day staffing and Operating risk placed on Operator appropriate level of control over and requirements around Council priorities administrative costs from Council Facilitates recruitment of independent management so that legal/financial/strategic committee/Board membership and specific Potential to transfer some financial risk to outcomes are monitored and adhered to for community use Some level of operating risk passes to Operator with annual agreed budgets with workforce with connection to the Reduces Council’s direct operational Ensures community engagement and Lessees community Operator equitable and diverse access responsibilities therefore transfer of day‐to‐ Empowerment of community organisations Encourages a volunteer workforce which Pending contract arrangements and tenure day staffing and administrative costs from Capacity for Council initiative co‐promotion in management/operations role aimed at may supplement a salaried workforce – Operator may invest capital into facilities Council and leveraging (other events, programs, building capability (skill sets, experience, opportunities for meaningful roles and Council can still determine maintenance Ability to source professional venue campaigns and opportunities planned by systems) thereby delivering upon Council empowerment of community members responsibilities and standards under Council & key stakeholders) strategies management staff under industry based helps build capability (skill sets, experience, contract contracts and performance incentives Opportunity of Council support for Encourages clubs’ volunteer support for systems) thereby delivering upon Council Ability to source professional venue attraction of major events to meet broader operations and activation strategies Company can independently undertake management staff under industry based financial transactions such as borrowing tourism/destination marketing and If Lessee form/structure is Incorporated Association membership composition may contracts and performance incentives economic impact goals of the City support community engagement and Council as only ‘shareholder’ with powers to Association, financial affairs must be audited Operator’s resources (human, IT Administrative support from broader Council or verified annually and financial statements activation focus of Council – stakeholders monitor performance and appoint or replace and members have voting rights systems/applications, and directors departments lodged, supporting Council’s governance machine/equipment) typically benchmarked Council can performance‐manage own staff needs Financial affairs must be audited or verified to high skill/standard, contemporary and Ability to appoint highly experienced, and contractors If appropriately overseen/governed by annually and financial statements lodged, often innovative to ensure Operator remains credentialled and respected community Council, facilitates organisational capacity in supporting Council’s governance needs competitive in facility management and members to independent Board, ideally with Council resources (human, IT skill sets beneficial to the company eg, systems/applications, and community via increased level of trust, Council can provide direction on governance maintenance market community pride and social inclusion systems and practices accounting, legal, marketing, facility machine/equipment) typically of well‐ Generally a good to very good appreciation management regulated skill/standard to ensure facility is Via appropriate lease agreement and Flexibility as precinct grows – association has for and resourcing applied to environmental adequately managed and maintained monitoring, Council can ensure diversity of opportunity to transfer incorporation into management, sustainability, WHS and risk Over time (or in time) a high‐performing Board with good focused strategic direction, Generally very good appreciation for and use and other obligations aligned with company limited by guarantee, which may management practices Council strategic direction/priorities suit larger associations community engagement, and staffing resourcing applied to environmental flexibility via appropriate controls may assist management, sustainability, WHS and risk to drive financial self‐sufficiency, in turn may management practices lead to reducing operating subsidies relied upon from Council
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 23 Page 37 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Fully In‐House Managed Lease Committee of Management Commercial Operator Beneficial enterprise (Incorporated Association)
Negatives Majority of operating risk retained by Council still has to resource for oversight of Council still has to resource for oversight of Commerciality may impact on realising Council generally remains financially liable (cons) Council lease and performance monitoring lease/agreement and performance Council’s aspirations ‐ potential to be profit Company objectives may not always align Likely increased resources (staff and Lack of experienced individuals can increase monitoring driven over diverse community use with Council policies operating costs) liability and risk exposure to both Relies heavily on volunteer services Could be domination by particular user Council still has some level of governance Pressure placed on Council from community Association and Council Susceptible to conflicts of interest groups responsibilities constituents or user groups Venue maintenance, operating pressures Lack of experienced individuals can increase Needs clear delineation of risk responsibility Potential political conflicts of interest Length of time for Council approval and reporting requirements on Lessee liability and risk exposure to both Limited marketplace appetite (or between Board/ Council/particular user processes may delay action/progress (at organisations may have a negative impact Association and Council competition) for operators of outdoor groups and financial implication times) Venue maintenance, operating pressures community sports facilities Company may not deliver consistent with Restrictions surrounding Council policy Responsibilities may impact on key focus of and reporting requirements on association Generally, still requires ongoing operational Council vision and strategies alignment (i.e., human resources and participation and sports/recreational may have a negative impact and financial subsidies or management fee paid by development Liability of directors with respect to legal industrial relations considerations) to match implication Council as well as major maintenance costs compliance, WHS, risk management can be business needs Potential focus on own requirements/needs Susceptible to high turnover of staff and Risk of business failure by Operator onerous at expense of other user groups requires Less flexibility in dealing and negotiating volunteers Poor maintenance practices and risk Potential to be profit driven over diverse with community organisations clear direction under lease/s to ensure diversity of use Legal liability risks may be onerous for standards by Operator due to cost community use Council systems can lack the flexibility to volunteers implications Could be domination by particular user operate in a dynamic environment Non‐performance of clubs/sports to expected and agreed standards (or Inadequate governance oversight by Council Lack of Council control with programming groups Perception of excluding community inadequate governance oversight by may inadvertently lead to failure of and service standards organisations from management/operations Council) may inadvertently lead to failure of association and non‐delivery upon several role (not building capability) thereby not Lessees and non‐delivery upon several Council priorities delivering upon Council strategies Council priorities Potential for asset deterioration and lack of Potential for asset deterioration and lack of proactive forward asset planning (built proactive forward asset planning (built structures and fields) resulting in Council structures and fields) resulting in Council having to rectify and fund having to rectify and fund Reduced opportunity for attraction of major Reduced opportunity for attraction of major events to meet broader tourism/destination events to meet broader tourism/destination marketing and economic impact goals of the marketing and economic impact goals of the City due to contractual conditions agreed City due to lease conditions with Association Potential lack of understanding of political Environmental management, sustainability, sensitivities WHS and risk management practices may be low or non‐existent focus for time‐poor Environmental management, sustainability, (potentially volunteer) workforces WHS and risk management practices may be low or non‐existent focus of time‐poor (largely volunteer) workforces
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 24 Page 38 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Table 3. Top‐level benchmarking findings – select example Australian facilities
Notes preceding Table 3: 1. The following table is not intended to be exhaustive. Select information has been presented as benchmarking is intended only to provide an indicative snapshot of how each situation varies, hence the type and quantity of information presented under each column heading may be inconsistent from one example venue to the next. 2. Data is based on information available to DHC either through industry privilege or public domain and a discerning level of disclosure has been applied so as to not reveal any confidential information. Content is presented as a reasonable scope across that which would be available in the public domain.
Location details Management model & Example tenants/users Operational funding Venue Description resourcing & activation model Gold Coast Sports Precinct State/Territory: QLD Precinct comprises premier outdoor and indoor sport and recreation Council owns indoor sports venues, Head office of Gold Coast Basketball located at Council responsible for all facilities: Gold Coast Suns Elite Training and Carrara Indoor Stadium operating and maintenance Suburb: Carrara ‐ Gold Coast Sports and Leisure Centre Administration Facility and fields Metricon Stadium and Elite Training and Admin costs at indoor sports centres ‐ Carrara Indoor Sports Stadium Metricon Stadium is owned by Facility are home of Gold Coast Suns and fields Municipality: Council of the ‐ Community and elite fields Stadiums Queensland (State Community (non‐commercial) and Council and Gold Coast Suns City of Gold Coast ‐ Metricon Stadium (25,000 seat capacity) Government) commercial/business hirers such as: shared responsibility for
Served as the signature venue precinct for the Gold Coast 2018 Metricon Stadium managed by operating and maintenance Land area (approx.): 21ha ‐ AFL Gold Coast Juniors Commonwealth Games, hosting the opening and closing ceremonies, Gold Coast Suns under lease ‐ Gold Coast Basketball costs of Elite Training and athletics, badminton, weightlifting, powerlifting and wrestling agreement with Stadiums ‐ Gold Coast Volleyball Club Administration Facility Queensland Outdoor sport facilities comprise northern precinct, southern precinct east, Other regular and occasional/casual hires and Gold Coast Suns responsible for southern precinct west and green space, incorporating: All Council‐owned facilities and bookings all operating costs and land (*exception below) are fully maintenance of Metricon ‐ 9 community fields (rectangular) City of Gold Coast prohibits subletting of any managed in‐house by Council Stadium under lease agreement ‐ 2 elite fields/one AFL field with additional 3.5 hectares of field space venue or facility (not approved under any with Stadiums Queensland ‐ around 1000 car parking spaces *Gold Coast Suns Elite Training and circumstance) Administration Facility managed by Stadiums Queensland Gold Coast Sports & Leisure Centre features: Council claims sporting field bookings are limited Gold Coast Suns under lease with responsible for major capital ‐ retractable 5000 seat arena and recommends booking a year in advance or Council works at Stadium or new ‐ 15 basketball courts (across two halls 5.98m2 and 6.0m2) ‐ used for multi‐year bookings. Council human resourcing developments basketball, netball, futsal, volleyball and martial arts Variety of bookings from national, state and structure in area of ‘Major Venues’ ‐ full liquor license and range of functions and meeting spaces to host district/local sports and recreation organisations significant and ongoing topic of corporate functions, trade shows & gala dinners for major events in 2021 at GCS&LC, e.g.: review for City administration ‐ al fresco café located on first floor overlooking the elite sporting fields ‐ Australian Gymnastics Championships Some services outsourced (e.g., behind the Centre ‐ South Coast School Sports Volleyball cleaning, security, catering) by both ‐ co‐location with Gold Coast Suns Elite Training and Administration ‐ Winterfest ‐ Cheer and Dance Facility Council and Gold Coast Suns Carrara Indoor Sports Stadium has 4 multi‐purpose sprung‐wooden floor courts and recently underwent seating, technology and design upgrades Pimpama Sports Hub State/Territory: QLD Built on Council‐owned land used as former rifle range for the Defence Precinct owned by Council Due to multiplicity of Precinct stakeholders, Council responsible for all Force Fully managed in‐house by Council much work has been done by Council on operating costs of facilities Suburb: Pimpama $80 million project – construction began 2019 and due for completion late except for Netball facility which is appropriate governance structure and (except netball clubhouse), 2021 leased to Netball Queensland programming and activation collaboration maintenance and renewal of all Municipality: Council of City of Stage 1 completed early 2021 ‐ netball centre, a community park with a Key service areas such as Health needed for seamless branding across precinct facilities Gold Coast nature‐based theme and an outdoor event space with a natural and Fitness, Learn To Swim and Netball Queensland has leased the clubhouse However, Netball Qld (as
amphitheatre general precinct staffing from Council Lessee) must demonstrate Land area (approx.): 14ha Precinct to eventually comprise: requirements to be undertaken by Netball courts use is managed via Council’s Right ability to manage building Council‐employed resources maintenance requirements ‐ Aquatic centre including leisure pool of Use (ROU) program assigned under lease ‐ Health and fitness centre Services to be outsourced for the Hire of tennis courts will be managed through ‐ Netball facility precinct likely to include swim Council‐staffed Precinct operating team (front Lighting of netball courts to be ‐ Tennis facility coaching, cleaning, and delivery of desk/reception/customer service roles) – funded by Netball Qld as the ‐ Multi‐purpose community centre (meeting, function and activity spaces) food and beverage including the possibly via remote access facilitated through main user group/lessee on‐site ‐ Playground on‐site café technology applications ‐ Green space with natural amphitheatre and temporary infrastructure Council’s Community Venues & Small tennis clubhouse room within building zones (for events and activation) Service branch has ‘Asset footprint lends itself to a community club or Custodian’ role and responsible for delivering objectives for aquatics
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 25 Page 39 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Location details Management model & Example tenants/users Operational funding Venue Description resourcing & activation model Sustainable design features 100% on‐site energy self sufficiency and on‐site (learn to swim, lifeguards, swim coaching provider leasing space/becoming a water and solar PV harvesting coaching and programs), and tenant (unknown at this time) Health & Fitness Centre Community Centre not a ‘programming’ programming responsibility of Council as such; essentially Council branch (above) also space is provided for NFP or small business to responsible for overall coordination book and deliver their programs (with high‐level of outsourced contracts, precinct oversight for appropriates and other conditions activation, utilisation and bookings Council right of approval) Separate Council branch ‐ Parks Netball facility with12 courts, clubhouse and Recreational Services ‐ a amenities and event space capacity for 3000 heavily invested stakeholder patrons enables establishment of a new regional responsible for: netball competition ‐ coordinating maintenance of horticulture, landscaping, paths, roadways, toilet amenities and other elements; ‐ facilitating netball court hire Right of Use; ‐ optimising variety of indoor & outdoor spaces when designing ‘Active & Healthy’ program with community providers in fitness, health, sport, recreation and wellness
James Drysdale Reserve State/Territory: QLD Remediated landfill site Site owned by Council Pine Hills Lightning Baseball Club Shared funding responsibilities Believed to be Council‐owned land Specific areas operated under Pine Hills Dirt Racing for maintenance between Suburb: Bunya Master‐planned sport and recreation reserve catering for: individual community leases with Pine Hills Football Club Council and lessees under lease ‐ baseball Council agreements (DHC not privy to Pine Hills Hockey Club ‐ dirt racing (remote controlled cars) Tenants of a leased facility must lease terms) Municipality: Moreton Bay Pine Hills Netball Club ‐ football (soccer) submit an improvement works Council significantly invested in Regional Council ‐ hockey application to obtain Council site development and
‐ netball approval for any proposed maintenance, e.g., in 2019/20 Land area (approx.): At least 23ha ‐ fenced dog off leash recreation area improvements within the lease, funded: Precinct sports fields supported with built amenity of clubhouses or other licence or permit area ‐ $5.1 million upgrading of minor infrastructure baseball fields as part of Extensive paved roadway and parking infrastructure across site Master Plan; and Significant (collectively multi‐million dollar) capital works projects ‐ $290,000 on sports field undertaken across site in recent years include [but not limited to]: surface renewal ‐ construction (underway) of community‐use building (multi‐purpose Other one‐off grants financed meeting and activity spaces for art, craft, seniors and youth activities) by Council for capital works, ‐ baseball field upgrade (new diamond, dugouts, field lighting, irrigation, e.g.: in 2019/20 Hockey Club car parking and access road) received Council grant of ‐ field surface renewal to improve drainage and reduce closures after $50,000 (for lighting upgrade) heavy rainfall under “COVID‐19 Community ‐ lighting upgrade for hockey fields Infrastructure Revitalisation”
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 26 Page 40 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Location details Management model & Example tenants/users Operational funding Venue Description resourcing & activation model South Pine Sports Complex State/Territory: QLD Home to more than 14 sporting clubs and one commercial beach volleyball Site owned by Council SPSA members/regular users: Council pays an annual fee centre Land and facilities are managed by ‐ Albany Creek Cricket Club (undisclosed) to SPSA Suburb: Brendale Master‐planned sport and recreation reserve with fields and significant built South Pine Sports Association ‐ Albany Creek Excelsior Netball Club All site users are members of amenity catering for: (SPSA/Association) on Council’s ‐ Albany Creek Excelsior Soccer Club SPSA and they pay fees to the Municipality: Moreton Bay ‐ AFL behalf ‐ Albany Creek GPS Rugby Union Club Association (generally based on Regional Council ‐ basketball SPSA is an Incorporated Association ‐ Albany Creek Gymnastics Club membership and usage levels) ‐ beach volleyball headed by a three‐person ‐ Albany Creek Junior Rugby League Club Other occasional or regular Land area (approx.): 28ha ‐ cricket independent Board of Directors ‐ Aspley Australian Football & Sporting Club hirers pay fees to SPSA Indoor centre runs at a profit ‐ dog agility sports Association is responsible for the ‐ Australian Futsal Association Outdoor fields (on aggregate) ‐ netball day‐to‐day management of the ‐ Brisbane Indoor Beach Volleyball Centre run at a loss ‐ football (soccer) complex ‐ Moreton Bay United Football Club SPSA has self‐funded reasonably ‐ futsal SPSA administrative staff handle all ‐ Northern Brisbane Rollers ‐ gymnastics ‐ Northside Wizards Basketball significant equipment and maintenance matters, oversee fixtures, with assistance of ‐ hockey mowing contract and manage all ‐ Pine Agility Dog Sports Club ‐ netball ‐ Pine Rivers St Andrews Hockey Club Queensland Government grants booking requests for indoor and Council funds major building ‐ rugby league outdoor use ‐ South Pine Touch Football Association ‐ rugby union ‐ Taekwondo Australia Queensland Branch upgrades and new facilities SPSA reportedly awarded ‐ taekwondo (e.g., $14.5m upgrades to Queensland Government funding Other non‐specific occasional or regular hirers ‐ touch football indoor centre) to employ staff in programming Hosts major regional/district competition events Council heavily subsidises Extensive paved roadway and parking infrastructure across site role maintenance (e.g., reportedly Site includes $18m Women’s Centre of Excellence and Youth Academy Believed to be a highly successful $530,000 in 2015/16 renewing (relocation home for Brisbane Roar W‐League) with high performance example of Incorporated sport fields) facility, clubhouse and 3 new fields to be ready for 2023 season Association/Management In 2020, several SPSA members Significant (collectively multi‐million dollar) other capital works projects Committee managing venue on received Council grants (from undertaken across site in recent years include commencement of upgrades Council’s behalf ‐ significantly $35k to $50k) under “COVID‐19 to indoor centre and other works designed to provide the complex with the lower expense option than Council Community Infrastructure infrastructure to host club, regional, state and international level (in‐house) management Revitalisation”; total investment tournaments for variety of groups, e.g.: Strong buy‐in from members/users across upgrades $169,000 ‐ 3 multi‐purpose indoor sports courts another contributor to successful Additionally to capital works ‐ canteen and spectator areas operational model and SPSA subsidy, evidence of ‐ offices, multipurpose function room/event space with supporting servery Council sponsoring Murri Rugby facilities League Carnival (5‐day ‐ retractable grandstand seating, storage areas, universal change rooms, competition event) held at officials' rooms, compliance and first aid rooms and spectator amenities Complex ‐ new Rugby Union clubhouse Kawana Sports Precinct State/Territory: QLD Precinct encompasses: Owned by Sunshine Coast Regional Fields are regularly used for rectangular sports Council responsible for all ‐ Sunshine Coast Stadium Council such as rugby union, rugby league, soccer, touch operating and maintenance Suburb: Bokarina ‐ High performance training facility Council manages all facilities at football and to myriad community sports costs for Stadium, fields and ‐ Western Fields precinct organisations Lake Kawana Municipality: Sunshine Coast ‐ Lake Kawana Venue management fully staffed by Home of Sunshine Coast Falcons Rugby League Aquatic Centre operator Council ‐ Kawana Aquatic Centre, located on the south side of the stadium Council except: team in the Intrust Super Cup (affiliated with responsible for majority of
‐ Venue 114 (diverse performance and function space) ‐ Aquatic Centre, which is Queensland Rugby League) aquatic venue operating costs Land area (approx.): 45ha Stadium field flexible to accommodate oval sports such as cricket and AFL outsourced to a commercial For Stadium activation, Council has proactively and general maintenance but mostly used for rectangular football and music/entertainment events operator under a lease attracted major sport and entertainment events, Council provides funding for Current Council project underway for expansion of Sunshine Coast Stadium, agreement e.g.: major structural maintenance with aspirations (branding) focused on creating a holistic ‘sports, health and ‐ some spaces within the high ‐ NRL trial games and capital upgrades at Aquatic wellbeing precinct’ linked with nearby University Hospital and Sports Hub (a performance training facility are ‐ NRL regular season matches Centre health and wellness sports club and high‐performance sports and medical leased to commercial sports ‐ Women’s NRL State of Origin Sports medicine/health and centre medicine/health and fitness ‐ A‐League games fitness practitioners responsible Precinct currently hosts international, national, state and local sport and organisations ‐ Super Rugby matches for outgoings and general recreation competitions/matches, training camps, and community events Council outsources some services ‐ Nitro Circus maintenance for their leased High Performance Training Facility is a multi‐functional gymnasium which is for major events at the precinct ‐ International touring artists such as areas within high performance fully equipped for national and international sporting teams such as cleaning, security and some Sir Elton John centre Outdoor (fields) facilities in precinct encompass: catering ‐ Under the Southern Stars ‐ Stadium field ‐ Other major community festivals/activations ‐ 7 fully‐lit rectangular fields
‐ 4 further rectangular fields
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 27 Page 41 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Location details Management model & Example tenants/users Operational funding Venue Description resourcing & activation model Western fields include 3 football size fields and one warm‐up field, clubhouse, change rooms, referees room canteen and function space Lake Kawana is a 2km stretch of waterway and relevant tower and pontoon infrastructure suitable for triathlons, dragon boat racing, outrigging, stand up paddle boarding and open water swimming
Ballinger Park Sports Complex State/Territory: QLD Located on Council‐owned land (freehold) Site owned by Council Council recently/currently leasing land areas to a Shared funding responsibilities Master plan (2011 – 2026) reviewed in 2020 with revisions arising Land and facilities are leased to range of community user groups with varying for maintenance between Suburb: Buderim Council and Lessees under lease (Buderim) Site caters for: range of not‐for‐profit (local sport, tenure arrangements in place, some with expiry recreation and youth) 18 years from now, e.g.,: agreements (DHC not privy to ‐ archery Municipality: Sunshine Coast organisations to manage lease terms) ‐ cricket ‐ Sunshine Coast Square Dance Centre Council Since endorsement of Master ‐ dance (expiry 2039) Plan in 2012, Council has ‐ dog obedience ‐ Buderim Cricket Club (2028) Land area (approx.): 63ha expended over $2.6M on new ‐ hockey ‐ Fusion Sunshine Coast (to 2027) ‐ Sunshine Coast Archery Club (to 2026) and upgraded infrastructure ‐ pony club ‐ soccer ‐ Sunshine Coast Dog Obedience Club (to Amount excludes expenditure ‐ tennis 2024) by user groups (self‐funded or ‐ youth organisation 'Alcooringa/Fusion' Other leas‐holders include: via non‐Council means) There are four other district or higher level multi‐sports facilities within the ‐ Buderim Horse and Pony Club Revised Master Plan capital same catchment of 5km: ‐ Sunshine Coast Hockey Association works recommendations now to 10+ years estimated $8.69M ‐ Elizabeth Daniels Sports Complex ‐ Buderim Wanderers Football Club (requiring mix of public and ‐ University of the Sunshine Coast Sports Precinct ‐ Ballinger Park Tennis Club private funding) ‐ Maroochydore Rugby League Sports Facility Majority of facilities receive year‐round usage; ‐ Palmview Sports Complex (due 2020/21) peak is during Qld winter competition periods, Several Lessees are recent however usage increasing over summer ‘off‐ recipients of Council funding season’ as social and reduced player allocations (2019/20, 2018/19) competitions (e.g., 6‐a‐side) increase in for minor facility upgrades, e.g.: popularity ‐ Buderim Wanderers Football Club (incl. $25,000 for plumbing and drainage works) ‐ Buderim Horse and Pony Club Blacktown International Sports State/Territory: NSW BISP is a legacy from the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games for which athletics, Site (and all venues) owned by Home of 5 national sporting teams and affiliated Funding for Blacktown Venue baseball and softball facilities were constructed Council organisations: Management Ltd is by way of Park (BISP) Suburb: Blacktown Master planned site – multi‐purpose sporting facility (grassroots to high Council assumed responsibility for ‐ Western Sydney Wanderers FC A‐League (plus revenue generated from (Sydney) performance/centre of excellence) and envisioned to include a public square, BISP in 2001/02 W‐League and National Youth league teams operations and a subsidy from
hotel, athlete hostel, food and beverage facilities, transport, and traffic Venue operator is Blacktown Venue for training and administration) Council Municipality: Blacktown City connections Management Ltd (BVM) ‐ Sydney Blue Sox Australia Baseball League In 2019/20 BVM was funded to Council Site caters for: Council established BVM as a Team tune of $10.5m by Council ‐ AFLW GWS Giants (plus GWS Giants Academy, (noting BVM responsible for Land area (approx.): 30ha ‐ AFL separate legal entity responsible for ‐ Athletics the operational management of the Western Magic and Blacktown Suns AFL Clubs) portfolio of 11 venues across ‐ Baseball venue ‐ WBBL Sydney Thunder and NSW Breakers whole of City – not just BISP) (plus being training ground for Cricket NSW ‐ Cricket BVM (T/A Blacktown Key Venues) Council provides a contribution Blues squad) ‐ Football (soccer) oversees 11 major sports and to BVM to operate, which Facilities include: leisure facilities – including BISP and Headquarters for Baseball NSW and Softball NSW represents the variance between operating revenue ‐ Athletcs centre synthetic track, infield and long jump pits WSW Centre of Football Small commercial enterprises/sole‐traders generated by BVM and expenses ‐ NSW Softball centre with 4 softball diamonds operate out of several facilities, e.g.,:
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 28 Page 42 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Location details Management model & Example tenants/users Operational funding Venue Description resourcing & activation model ‐ NSW Baseball centre with 3 baseball diamonds BVM is a public company limited by ‐ Athletics facility ‐ base for commercial less amounts released from ‐ 2 AFL/Cricket ovals guarantee and is fully owned by business, Super 6 High Performance – a reserves ‐ Indoor practice centre for cricket and outdoor wickets Council physical and emotional development program Council fully responsible for all ‐ Purpose‐built goal‐keeping field Chairman of Board is Mayor of for athletes in areas of speed, fitness, debts of BVM should it be Western Sydney Wanderers ‘Centre of Football’ (training, club and Blacktown City Council; role since strength, conditioning and mindset unable to meet its obligations administrative facility) was opened in 2019/20; located on land within and on 2004 has always been filled by a ‐ Football facility ‐ Progressive Goalkeeping, Facilities added to site over time land adjacent to BISP Councillor coaching and development service are result of commitments by $98m International Centre of Training Excellence (ICTE) in development and Board of 9 Directors, 4 are During 2019/20 reportedly hosted: other sporting bodies/teams as due for opening 2022; designed as a cutting edge training, physio, recovery, Councillors ‐ 13 international teams for training and well as Council rehabilitation, education, catering and sports science research facility with The company Board of Directors competition – softball, baseball, cricket and Council & Western Sydney 100‐bed ‘academy style’ accommodation oversees the strategic direction of soccer Wanderers financed the Sports Park and its facilities ‐ 3,915 events construction of the new Centre Significant human resourcing Regular and occasional uses include sporting of Football structure of BVM across range of competitions, training sessions, corporate events, Under terms of agreement venue management and support community festivals and activations between Council and WSW, business functional areas, led by BISP alternative income stream ‐ hired Council is responsible for field Chief Executive Officer (noting BVM commercially as a filming/photography location maintenance/preparation for all responsible for portfolio of 11 for several TV advertisements, reality series/TV WSW elite sides and receives an venues across whole of City – not programs and catalogue shoots annual payment from WSW just BISP)
Arena Joondalup State/Territory: WA Opened in 1994 HBF Arena is owned and operated Reportedly home to: VenuesWest fully responsible Known as HBF Arena under a commercial rights agreement by VenuesWest (State ‐ 30+ sporting clubs for all operating and Suburb: West Perth (known as HBF Arena) Described as a multi‐purpose sporting, fitness and entertainment hub for Government) ‐ 2,500 Health and Fitness Club members maintenance costs of HBF Arena
Perth’s northern suburbs VenuesWest owns and manages ‐ 1,000 Learn to Swim members West Perth FC fully responsible Municipality: City of Joondalup Site caters for: Western Australia’s premier sport ‐ 150 community sporting teams for operating and general and entertainment venues on maintenance of training and ‐ aquatics, Swimming and Water Polo (50m pool, leisure pool) Land area (approx.): 35ha behalf of the Western Australian administration areas ‐ AFL Government ‐ Athletics West Perth FC retains all ‐ basketball West Perth Football Club leases revenue from their match days ‐ football training and administration (e.g., ticketing, catering, ‐ futsal facilities at HBF Arena from sponsorship etc) and pay small ‐ hockey VenuesWest; lease term was 20 lease fee to VenuesWest under ‐ junior/introductory age sporting clinics years at time of contract execution separate licence agreement ‐ karate West Perth FC plays their home AFL VenuesWest pays a percentage ‐ netball matches at the venues’ adjoining of naming rights revenue (HBF) ‐ rugby union oval, under a separate licence to WPFC to assist with their ‐ soccer agreement with VenuesWest ongoing operating expenses ‐ tennis Aside from West Perth FC leased ‐ theatre school/entertainment activities components, VenuesWest ‐ triathlon runs/resources all other facilities Indoor facilities include gym with group fitness studio, crèche, café and and services in‐house function spaces Outdoor facilities include tennis courts, hockey pitches, rectangular fields, AFL field space and netball courts
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 29 Page 43 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Observations from management models industry research Several points of interest have been observed with regard to management models researched, with key learnings for Council highlighted as follows (in no particular order).
A. All models researched remain reliant on varying levels of asset owner subsidies and/or ongoing maintenance contributions to maintain standards and services, and ensure safe and effective operations.
B. No clear guidelines or reasons for particular model preferences are evident. A ‘horses for courses’ approach appears prevalent. Consequently, there are no consistent conditions for the operation of Council‐owned facilities and each specific facility is taken on a case‐by‐case basis with the aim of achieving the best outcome for both the user groups and Council.
C. Decisions on operational models for Council‐owned facilities/venues appear to be influenced by key factors such as:
particular business cases undertaken in relation to financial performance of the venue and the particular programs and services offered; location of venue (city versus regional);
structure of commercial terms able to be negotiated with commercial operators or lease/licence terms with sporting/not‐for‐profit bodies;
ensuring ongoing access for grass roots sport and community organisations;
the ability to transfer some levels of operating risk to operators when outsourcing;
ensuring Councils maintain the flexibility to attract and host major events that have spin‐off tourism/destination marketing and economic impact benefits; reluctance of some local governments to increase employment numbers and associated award wage, Local Area Agreements or Enterprise Bargaining Agreement issues (industrial relations issues) for governments; and
potential for third parties to contribute to the development or redevelopment of venues/facilities through capital contributions.
D. Analysis of various models has served as a timely reminder that the chosen management model doesn’t mitigate all of the risk. A combination of diligent governance and oversight and effective management and operations is critical within Council’s risk management strategy.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 30 Page 44 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
5. Evaluation of venue management models
Project purpose: finding an ideal management scenario DHC understands that the ultimate objective of this project is to contribute information aimed at assisting Council in their decision‐making process for the most appropriate governance and management scenario for LMSP in the immediate future, while being mindful of the intended expanded site development. Figure 8 below depicts this aim. Via sound process, Council is seeking to reach consensus on a management scenario that ensures the City of Logan community realises the greatest benefit from private and public funding invested in Logan Metro Sports Park – historically and well into the future.
Figure 8. Purpose and process depiction: Logan Metro Sports Park Management Model Analysis
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 31 Page 45 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Evaluating models to determine best match for LMSP Armed with theory, attention must now turn to the attributes of each model. Each must be appraised equitably to assist Council in determining options for management of LMSP that are not only realistic, but best align with (and thus optimise) Council’s potential to achieve its vision, strategic objectives and – indeed, Council’s obligations and commitments. In this section of the report, DHC will provide brief commentary on key observations from the management models described (in the previous section) and outline progress on performing a rudimentary evaluation of the models by designing and applying quantitative scoring across a range of metrics. As previously mentioned, it is important to highlight that DHC has taken the liberty of bringing forward the application of evaluation methodology in its consultancy engagement (Stage 2c of the originally‐ agreed project plan) further to the PRG‐minuted decision that a ‘Leasing’ model is likely to be Council’s preferred option. Evaluation is timely to ascertain whether the PRG’s predicted outcome of evaluation does in fact match a fair and objective comparison of models. PRG members will be provided opportunity for feedback and further input into evaluation metrics and overall methodology at PRG meeting #3 to ensure strategic imperatives in particular — as gleaned by DHC through desk top research and consultations — truly align with the views, beliefs and direction of Council.
Conceptual design of evaluation methodology To formulate perspectives on each different management model discovered, consideration must be given to:
appropriateness and market feasibility for the LMSP venue mix and site specific location (e.g., outdoor sports park in a suburban location) and industry benchmarking; gauge of alignment with Council’s vision, strategic priorities and endorsed plans especially in relation to community‐based physical activity and participation in sport and recreation;
benefits and disadvantages of each model across the spectrum of social, environmental, financial, governance, safety and reputational considerations and risks; and
capacity to facilitate reasonable industry‐good‐practice venue management and operation, based on DHC’s significant industry experience.
By way of top‐level summary to describe a process that has encompassed the above considerations, DHC’s approach to designing an evaluation method is as follows.
1. Conceputalisation of a matrix, which provides a reasonable mechanism to compare each management model against specific criterion.
2. The matrix will be designed to capture opinion on the extent to which each model has potential to help Council realise specific strategic imperatives (essentially, the evaluation criterion). These
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 32 Page 46 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
strategic imperatives of Council are as determined by DHC further to a review of Council literature; consideration of the principles behind good venue management practice; and an appreciation for trends in physical activity participation and implications for community sport and recreation infrastructure provision.
3. Mapping of strategic imperatives has manifested into ten (10) succinct statements that DHC believes best reflect the aspirations and issues discussed in lead‐up sections of this paper. Again, these act as evaluation criteria where each strategic imperative will be transferred to an opinion statement that is easily related to a scaled response option. The matrix will rely upon a consistent ‘rating’ or ‘scoring’ system for responses.
4. For the first nine (9) criterion, DHC will implement a widely‐used unidimensional, psychometric scale known as the ‘Likert scale’. Each strategic imperative will be transferred to an opinion statement that is easily related to Likert scale response options to ensure appropriate/relevant context and application of ratings (see Table 4 on page 35). In this way, each of the first 9 statements will be prefaced with the following: “To what extent does the respondent agree that the management model has the capacity to … “
5. The Likert scale is based explicitly on the strength and intensity of a respondent’s agreement or disagreement level with a particular option statement or question. DHC is applying an odd 5‐point Likert scale as it includes a neutral answer option. Responses will have a corresponding value from 1 (negative extreme ‘strongly disagree’) to 5 (positive extreme ‘strongly agree’) so that the opinion (or score) will reflect the quality perception of the model from low to high/worst to best.
6. For each model, the individual scores against the first 9 criterion statements will be tallied into sub‐totals.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 33 Page 47 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
7. The final and 10th criterion (see Table 4 on page 35) will deviate from the above Likert scale because it does not strictly belong among Council strategic imperatives. Rather, it reflects an industry opinion on whether the management model presents a realistic market option for LMSP. As DHC believes model feasibility to be a critical consideration, the criterion will act as a weighted measure. Its scaled scoring will be multiplied by the sub‐total of the first 9 criterion to produce a grand total.
8. The grand total (being the 10th criterion score multiplied by the sub‐total scores of criterion 1‐9) will provide an indication of overall suitability of the model for Council’s needs. In other words, the highest grand total will indicate the most‐suitable match overall and a model that is capable of facilitating the best potential for Council to realise its goals.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 34 Page 48 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Table 4. Key strategic priorities of Council converted into evaluation criterion: Logan Metro Sports Park context Strategic imperatives of Logan City Council Corresponding criterion to enable (as it relates to LMSP) measurement via 5‐point Likert scale
1. Maximising utilisation and activation opportunities and ensuring inclusive options for … maximises community usage the Logan community 2. A destination of choice to facilitate … fosters community development opportunities for community development and opportunities social interaction 3. Good practice operations and suitably … reflects experienced and qualified experienced personnel for effective, safe and venue management personnel efficient venue management 4. Ensuring a focus on maintenance, WHS and risk … ensures sound safety and risk management to reduce risk exposure to hirers, frameworks and implementation users, patrons and Council
5. Decreasing Council’s direct resourcing and ...decreases operating costs for Council operating costs
6. Provides a stable financial model between … decreases financial risk exposure for Council and user groups community sport and recreation groups
7. Ability to attract large sporting or community … optimises opportunities for major events to Logan to showcase the region and event attraction to Logan provide economic activity/stimulus
8. A focus on good practice environmental and … encourages environmental and sustainability initiatives sustainability focus
9. Optimising opportunities for community and … enables community groups’ core sport and recreation organisations to further focus on programming and skill develop their programs and skill sets development Final weighted strategic imperative… Corresponding criterion to enable measurement via weighted 3‐point scale 10. Evidence of success of model at ‘like for like’ … presents a realistic market option for venues and prevalence in market LMSP
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 35 Page 49 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Explanatory notes/disclaimer (i) It is important to note that when creating a quantitative analytical tool of any kind, data may be measured, sorted or ‘sliced and diced’, countless different ways with layers of complexity to eradicate various flaws and weaknesses in methods. Design will almost always influence the outcome. However, DHC asserts that while rudimentary in its sophistication, the methodology described above maintains integrity to capturing Council’s strategic objectives as well as industry‐ benchmarked good venue management practices. It is therefore justified as a foundation from which further appraisal can proceed.
(ii) All results (and corresponding reporting) should be considered neither definitive nor exhaustive but demonstrates areas felt to require further investigation, related planning and or action.
(iii) Council — via PRG members — will be provided opportunity for feedback and further input into the evaluation metrics at PRG meeting #3 to ensure strategic imperatives (as gleaned by DHC through desk top research and consultations) genuinely align with the views, beliefs and direction of Council.
(iv) Despite all efforts to design an analytical tool that enables efficient and reasonable interpretation of findings, the Likert scale is fundamentally an ‘opinion‐gauging’ device. Subjectivity and room for error cannot be eliminated entirely. For avoidance of doubt, however, it is emphasized that ratings/scoring has been undertaken by an experienced, highly‐credentialled and respected venue management industry practitioner who is a long‐serving member of professional industry peak body, Venue Management Association Asia and Pacific, and who has earned the elite credential of the International Association of Venue Managers. As much as can be reasonably expected, scoring has been undertaken from the perspective of this extensive industry practice, knowledge and skill, while being underpinned by impartiality, objectivity and freedom from bias.
(v) The evaluation herein gives thoughtful attention to selection and application of principles that effectively measure the attributes, value and appropriateness of each discovered management model individually. It does not investigate attributes, value and appropriateness when models are implemented in various combinations (‘management scenarios’). This topic may be further investigated in future stages of the project, pending Council’s instructions to DHC following submission of this report.
Results: application of evaluation methodology
The management model evaluation scores and outcome are recorded in Table 5 over page.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 36 Page 50 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Table 5. Evaluation of management models: Logan Metro Sports Park context
MANAGEMENT MODELS
Management Commercial Beneficial In‐house Lease Committee Operator enterprise STRATEGIC IMPERATIVES FOR LMSP On a scale of 1 to 5 (with 5 indicating “Strongly Agree”) — to what extent does the respondent agree that the management model has the capacity to … 1) Maximises community usage 5 4 4 3 4
2) Fosters community development 4 5 5 3 3 opportunities 3) Reflects experienced and qualified venue 4 2 3 5 5 management personnel 4) Ensures sound safety and risk frameworks 5 3 4 5 5 and implementation
5) Decreases operating costs for Council 1 3 4 4 3
6) Decreases financial risk exposure for community sport and 5 2 3 4 4 recreation groups 7) Optimises opportunities for major event 4 3 3 4 4 attraction to Logan 8) Encourages environmental and 5 3 3 4 4 sustainability focus 9) Enables community groups' core focus on programming and 5 2 4 4 4 coaching development SUB‐TOTAL: 38 27 33 36 36
10) Presents a realistic Yes Yes Maybe No No market option for LMSP sub‐total score sub‐total score sub‐total score sub‐total score sub‐total score x 3 x 3 x 2 x 1 x 1 GRAND TOTAL: 114 81 66 36 36 Ranking 1st 2nd 3rd Equal 4th Equal 4th (highest to lowest):
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 37 Page 51 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Summary analysis of evaluation results
Based on the rudimentary methodology designed by DHC, an evaluation of management models demonstrates that either the ‘In‐house’ (fully Council owned and operated) or ‘Leasing’ models—in this particular order—arise as the two front‐runners for suitability as management options, specific to the context of LMSP as owned by Logan City Council. Across the five models described in this paper, grand total scores were staggered from 114 (greatest) to 36 (equal lowest shared by two models). A brief overview and interpretation of each management model’s evaluation is presented in Table 6 below. While the highest scoring ‘In‐house’ model (grand total of 114) was closely followed by ‘Lease’ (grand total of 81) a ‘Committee of Management’ model is positioned only slightly behind the above two options, achieving a grand total of 66. A point of interest is that without the final weighted criterion applied and based only on the sub‐total of the first 9 criterion, ‘Management Committee’ scored greater than ‘Lease’ (33 versus 27) but less than ‘Commercial Operator’ or ‘Beneficial Enterprise’ models (equally scoring 36 versus 33 for ‘Management Committee’). With both weighted grand total and un‐weighted sub‐total results arriving at ‘Commercial Operator’ and ‘Beneficial Enterprise’ models sharing a score of 36, it may be inferred that neither ‘Commercial Operator’ or ‘Beneficial Enterprise’ models could reasonably be recommended for LMSP as a stand‐alone venue.
Table 6. Brief summary of management model evaluation results
Management model & Comment on result evaluation score Ensures fair and equitable access for variety of users Allows sports/recreation/community groups to focus on programming for activation as well as upskilling of providers (e.g., coaches, officials) while not burdened with day‐to‐day venue management and associated financial risks In‐house (Council) Ensures no constraints on attracting major events to precinct = 114 Ensures sound maintenance plans and safety frameworks Key issue is increased human resourcing required for operations and Council would be solely responsible for all operating and maintenance costs
Common model in market for similar facilities Encourages and fosters community development opportunities for participants and broader Logan community members Transfer of some operating costs (e.g., maintenance and grounds) from Council to Lessees Several issues include: Lease — Often resourced by personnel (or volunteers) unqualified in venue management, without = 81 full understanding of WHS, environmental and other risk management obligations — Financial burdens become financial risk to organisations to meet lease obligations — Venue management responsibilities often detract from core focus of programming and development
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 38 Page 52 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Management model & Comment on result evaluation score Whilst management model not as common as ‘Lease’, the ‘Committee of Management’ has proven highly successful at a similar facility Management Encourages strong buy‐in from user groups as (predominantly) site users become members of committee Incorporated Association that runs facility (Incorporated Association) Not for Profit association means revenues are invested back into facilities and activation of facilities = 66 Less direct costs for Council (resources/maintenance) although generally requires some level of operating subsidy to assist incorporated association
Would be considered highly uncommon (and unlikely market appetite) for LMSP as a stand‐alone Commercial venue operator = 36 May detract from diverse usage as operator has greater commercial‐returns focus
Beneficial Would be considered uncommon/unlikely for LMSP as a stand‐alone venue enterprise More likely an option for transfer of all applicable venues (i.e., whole of SLF branch facility portfolio) = 36
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 39 Page 53 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
6. Conclusion
Based on the methodology as outlined in Section 5 of this report and the evaluation of management models for LMSP against Council’s key strategic imperatives, an ‘In‐house’ model (fully Council owned and operated) has rated highest for suitability specific to the context of LMSP. Notwithstanding, DHC would remark that the results of the evaluation conducted herein do not in itself indicate a definitive recommendation for Council’s immediate decision and ensuing action. It is intended that the information generated through DHC’s collaboration with Council on research, analysis, comparison and critique of various management models will assist to support Council in making informed decisions relating to the future management of LMSP. DHC is aware from discussions arising at the LMSP PRG meeting held on 18 March 2021 that Council has little‐to‐no appetite for pursuing the option of entirely in‐house management across the site (refer to Minutes, Appendix 1). Consequently, considering the options of a ‘Commercial Operator’ or ‘Beneficial Enterprise’ are regarded as not suitable for LMSP as a stand‐alone venue, the evaluation outcomes reinforce a ‘Leasing’ model or ‘Committee of Management’ model as two alternative practical options for Council to further investigate. Given the recent PRG meeting at which—following DHC’s introductory presentation on management models with industry examples—attending Councillors indicated their preference towards the ‘Lease’ model, it is reasonable to suggest the outcomes presented in this report assist in highlighting the benefits and disadvantages of pursuing this option moving forward. Although the ‘Leasing’ model is a very common management approach for similar facilities to LMSP within a variety of local governments around Australia, it is important for Council to further consider and analyse its various strengths and weaknesses as there is evidence of the model functioning with mixed levels of success. For example, and as highlighted in an earlier section of this report, the ‘Leasing’ model encourages and fosters community development opportunities and ‘buy‐in’ from local sporting groups. However, the responsibilities of venue management can often place a financial and logistical burden on the lessees, which may be to the detriment of their core purpose to focus on sport/recreation development and programming. Further, many lessees rely on volunteer contributions and resources not specifically skilled in venue management and therefore expose both the lessee and Council to increased risk by not fully understanding specific industry risk management and WHS requirements. In addition, there is the question of LMSP’s leasing configuration. In the case of a ‘Lease’ model, potential exists for Council to enter into multiple agreements with separate lease‐holders across the different LMSP components (Northern Precinct, Southern Precinct, waste services administration building) noting Council’s ongoing operation of the LMSEC. To avoid site utilisation conflicts (among other issues) and ultimately uphold Council’s objective to provide a destination facility for both locals and visitors to the region, there must be robust structure/systems in place for coordinated site governance and operations between management stakeholders where multiple operators exist. This matter is not addressed within the scope of this first‐stage report.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 40 Page 54 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Should Council decide to pursue the ‘Lease’ management model as a preferred outcome, DHC would recommend (as discussed with Council officers) a two‐stage process moving forward as follows: 1. A review of the current leasing framework to ensure a fair and equitable financial model is established between Lessee/s and Council. This could include areas such as a review of maintenance and horticultural responsibilities for the LMSP between parties, to ensure buildings and fields are maintained to expected standards required for a premier‐level sports park and to attract high‐profile events to the Logan region. Ultimately this may mean increased expenditure for Council as compared to the current leasing framework. Further, it will be necessary to ensure the current due diligence provisions within the lease around Council’s oversight of ongoing risk management and WHS practices of the lessee are appropriate. 2. Undertaking an Expression of Interest (EOI) process for interested parties for management rights over either the whole or part of the site, to test the market interest and capacity for appropriate lessee options. DHC would consider that limited organisations would be equipped to hold the lease over the entire site, which would be more suitable for a State Sporting Organisation (e.g., Queensland Rugby League Football Limited) with community sporting groups or clubs more likely interested in either the Northern or Southern Precincts as stand‐alone options. The EOI should request from interested parties, information (at a minimum) on:
relevant experience of managing sports parks and similar facilities;
financial capacity of organisation;
experience of proposed personnel; and
how the organisation will engage with the community to ensure diverse usage. Council may then shortlist a number of parties for a more detailed tender process prior to making final decisions.
As previously alluded to, based on the fast‐tracking of decisions relating to future management model of LMSP against original project scope, it may be necessary to negotiate a change of scope to this project’s original plan. Matters of scope, deliverables required from DHC and project timeframes will be discussed with Council representatives following delivery of this report. At time of writing, however, it has been agreed that the next steps in the LMSP Model Management Analysis project will involve:
(i) delivery of this DHC report;
(ii) feedback conveyed from SLF representatives responsible for this project; and
(iii) PRG members being provided an opportunity for feedback and further input into evaluation metrics at the scheduled PRG meeting #3 in April 2021. This will ensure the strategic imperatives, Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 41 Page 55 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
which were crucial to the evaluation of models and are as gleaned by DHC through desktop research and Council consultation, are verified as aligning with the views, values and direction of the PRG.
DHC looks forward to discussing this report’s content with Council officers representing SLF as well as Councillors serving as members of the PRG, full Council and any additional key stakeholders.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 42 Page 56 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Appendix 1: Minutes of LMSP PRG Meeting #2 held 18 March 2021
Attached
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 43 Page 57 of 97 Logan Metro Sports Park Management Project Reference Group Meeting #2 – Management models and market analysis: an overview
MINUTES Duration: 1h30 Time: 3 to 4.30pm Room: Councillor Meeting Room
MINUTES: HELENE WINDELS
Attendees Cr Russell (MR) Cr Raven (JR) Cr Bannan (SB) Inez Penrose (IP) Nigel Brown (NB) Matt McKee Helene Windels Dean Hassall Carolynne Hassall (MMK) (HW) (DHC) (DHC) Apologies Francis Mills (FM) Cr Lane (TL)
Introduction • Welcome and apologies NB/MR Apologies from Cr Teresa Lane and Mr Francis Mills • Introduction of Consultant NB introduces Dean and Carolynne Hassall from Dean Hassall Consulting Pty Ltd • Minutes and actions from PRG#1 o Any changes to TOR or meeting minutes are to be provided to MR by COB 12/02/2021 Final TOR emailed and endorsed – No further action o Existing calendar appointments for the PRG and other Councillors to attend the Open House on the 10th Feb are to be removed No further action o Ensure on all PRG meeting agendas, a conflict of interest standing item is included within the first items. Governance have advised that it is appropriate that the PRG Members consider and record their COI’s at each meeting. The form currently in use for Committee meetings is suitable for this purpose. Form is provided for members to use. No further action o SLF Branch to seek advice from CEO on the confidentially of the project/process and other matters relating to the project The clarification was about sharing any information of what is being discussed during the PCG with other councillors. Sharing the holding statement after PCG#1 provided the key information for other councillors to use if they were asked questions. SB noted that he had not been asked any information about the PRG. Action: HW to continue to provide key messages from the meeting to the Chair for distribution o MR to provide Holding Statement to all Councillors MR required if the holding statement was shared with other councillors HW clarified that the holding statement was sent to her office and PRG members only. No further action o SB to provide a written statement relating to Conflicts of Interest (CoI) to be included within the meeting minutes. SB noted that he didn’t want to provide a written CoI. No further action Doc Id: 14559621 Page 58 of 97
o IP to advise HW if other Cr Advisors are intending on attending PRG meetings It is understood that Cr Advisors won't be attending. No further action o SLF to strengthen the confidentiality section of the TOR to limit PRG members discussing the project outside of the PRG No further action • PRG Terms of Reference Term of reference circulated and no further amendments requested. • Conflict of interest Councillors present didn’t register any CoI
Presentation Dean Hassall presented venue management model options and market analysis that are currently DHC in place in the venue management industry and those specific and possible for LMSP. Refer to the attachment 1 for a copy of the slides of the presentation • Appreciation for LMSP project • Context • Key risks to consider • Introduction to management models o DH clarified that commercial operators are usually more common for other types of facilities such as indoor sports centres, aquatic centres and stadiums whereby an operating profit is potentially likely. Venues such as LMSP which is more community-based sport and recreation tend to be more operated by sports or associations under a lease model. With an Incorporated Association model, it is a requirement that any profits be reinvested into the operation of the association or the facility for their primary purpose (e.g. operate, manage, maintain, activate). o NB clarified that if a facility is leased, major event procurement would become the responsibility of the lessee and DH suggested unless the event was outside their scope (i.e. Commonwealth Games, Olympic training, community festival etc.). It is important to keep this as an option for the benefit of the city. • Case studies presented relating to management models in place with other state and local government jurisdictions.
Discussion - Questions Testing the interest in LMSP All • SB suggested that it would be important to test the interest for the facilities from the market. • NB clarified that there was an option to go straight to Expression of Interest (EOI) but Council directed SLF to explore options prior to procuring providers. We know that there is interest in LMSP, but it is important for Council to define the preferred model of management and the benefits we are after. Models of management • DH clarified that in the case of LMSP as a stand- alone venue, the Beneficial enterprise and Commercial operator options are unlikely to be a feasible option. • JR clarified that he is not supportive of a committee of management model nor of the in- house model. Council doesn’t not want to employ more staff. He suggested that the only model that would be supported by Council is a lease. • CH explained that this review of management models was important to support council to make an informed decision. • DH explicated that if the lease model is preferred, it is now important to think about ‘who’ can do it. There still needs to be a process that outlines responsibilities between parties for operations and risk and a commercial framework, to test the organisations capacity to meet Council objectives. • JR said that none of the models would fully protect Council from what happened with the
Doc Id: 14559621 Page 59 of 97
Roar from a risk mitigation perspective. NB clarified that further work on the due diligence process at the front end can mitigate these risks. • JR suggested to liaise with Health, Environment and Waste (HEW) Branch on the process they followed for the ‘Sub-regional wastewater’ investigations to test the market. • DH emphasised with any model of management; it is still critical to look at the framework to ensure that. For example, the use is not monopolised, otter groups can access, reduce the reputational risk. The financial framework is also critical. Parameters around the lease conditions and due diligence structure need to be set up and are critical to assess any potential lessee. • NB clarified that it is possible to set up an EOI to test the market and then a tender process to select the future operator from a select short list. Decision • PRG members agreed that the leasing model would be the preferred model following the presentation and discussion. • PRG members requested that SLF reviewed the next step in the process based on the lease being the preferred model. Due Actions 1. NB/HW to liaise with HEW regarding the ‘Sub-regional wastewater’ 1. April 2021 investigations process 2. NB/HW to work with DHC to close out the original process and provide the 2. April 2021 proposed next steps based on the lease model being the preferred management model. 3. HW to continue to provide key messages from the meeting to the Chair for 3. 29 March 2021 distribution 4. DHC to finalise the report on the management models options. 4. April 2021
Doc Id: 14559621 Page 60 of 97 Management models & market analysis: an overview
Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis
Project Reference Group - Meeting #2 Thursday, 18 March 2021 - 3:00pmPage 61 of 97 INTRODUCTION
1. WELCOME & APOLOGIES CR RUSSELL
2. INTRODUCTION OF CONSULTANT NIGEL BROWN
3. MINUTES & ACTIONS FROM PRG MEETING #1 CR RUSSELL
4. PRG TERMS OF REFERENCE CR RUSSELL
5. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST CR RUSSELL
2 MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 62 of 97 PRESENTATION AGENDA
INTRODUCTION TO MANAGEMENT MODELS DHC • Appreciation for LMSP MMA project • Context: good-practice venue operations • Key risks to consider (consequences of poor management) • Introduction to management models & market relevance • Case studies
WHAT TO EXPECT PRG MEETING #3 & DHC NEXT STEPS DHC
OPEN FLOOR – QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION ALL
3 MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 63 of 97 LMSP SITE COMPONENTS* UNDER ANALYSIS
4 Page 64 of 97 PROPOSED PROCESS
Page 65 of 97 VENUE OPERATIONS – ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE
Page 66 of 97 OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR GOOD INDUSTRY PRACTICE STANDARDS
Page 67 of 97 • Emergency Plan • Strategic planning • First aid facilities • Compliance registers • Incident reporting • Policies & procedures • Risk assessments • Reporting frameworks • WHS policies & procedures • Risk assessments • Risk registers • KPI development & reporting • Security functions • Bookings framework & process • Annual budgeting • Event planning & delivery • Financial reporting framework • Monthly forecasting • Equipment/materials inventory, • Payments processing storage & movement • Point of sale (POS) • Accessibility considerations • Cash handling
• Kitchen amenities, infrastructure • Recruitment & onboarding & operations • Workforce communications • Stock control & purchasing • Rostering • Event/function catering • Performance management • Retail food & beverage • Retention operations • Bar services, Liquor Licensing & • External/community stakeholders compliance (if applicable) • Government relations • Venue hirers & users • Venue visitors • Keys & access control • Service contractors • Office accommodation oversight • Cleaning • Bookings of venue spaces & facilities • Waste management • Content pipeline & programming • Sanitary & medical services • Community engagement & • Pest control partnerships • Horticulture • Marketing & promotions campaigns
• Asset registers • Venue hire agreements • Condition audits • User agreements • Asset reporting Page 68 of 97 • On-site tenants/occupants • Reactive & programmed maintenance • Service contracts KEY RISKS TO CONSIDER (POOR MANAGEMENT) HEALTH & SAFETY eg. • Poor asset & grounds management • Lack of understanding of WHS obligations FINANCIAL eg. • Lack of funding • Rudimentary cash handling/point of sale GOVERNANCE eg. • Poor ongoing due diligence by Council • Ineffective or mis-managed KPIs upon venue operator OPERATIONAL eg. • Lack of industry-standard documentation • Inexperienced staff or volunteers REPUTATIONAL eg. • Domination by particular user groups Page• Negative69 of 97 publicity from poor management & incidents Different models of management
(LMSP context)
10 MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 70 of 97 Council owns and fully operates In-house (wholly Council responsibility to manage/activate/maintain facilities
Community organisations access facilities via Lease/s formal leases, licences or management agreements (specific usage rights & responsibilities of user groups & Council)
Committee of Council appoints an incorporated association whose elected management committee oversees facility obligations management (Incorporated Association) (Works closely with Council to manage/activate/maintain on Council’s behalf)
Council outsources management responsibilities to commercial Commercial private operator under contract for defined period operator (Operator responsibility to manage/activate/maintain)
Council establishes a company 100 percent owned by Council Beneficial enterprise as sole shareholder. Board of Directors oversees operations. Page (Company’s71 of 97 specific purpose to manage/activate/maintain) MARKET PREVALENCE (LMSP CONTEXT) COMMON In-house Lease/s
Committee of management Beneficial enterprise
Commercial operator LEAST COMMON
12 MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 72 of 97 Committee of Commercial Beneficial In-house Lease/s management operator enterprise
13 MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 73 of 97 MANAGEMENT MODEL OPTION COMMERCIAL OPERATOR (OR HEAD SPORTS LEASE)
Contract management Governance SPORT, LEISURE Government reporting & FACILITIES frameworks KPIs (responsible branch) Audit Asset maintenance – structural works Management contract Major event procurement Pest management LMSEC LMSP Operator (in-house management) (eg. commercial entity or head lessee) General & reactive maintenance Administration Governance & oversight of sub- Grounds maintenance leases WHS General operations & Risk management management Event & general cleaning Programming Waste management Hiring agreement negotiation & Car parking management management Statutory requirements Page 74 of 97 Catering Medical & first aid Asset & patron security Reporting MANAGEMENT MODEL OPTION LEASE MANAGEMENT - MULTIPLE ENTITIES
Contract management Asset maintenance SPORT, LEISURE Governance – structural works Government reporting Major event & FACILITIES frameworks procurement (responsible branch) KPIs Pest management Audit
Contractual lease agreements x 3
LMSEC Lessee - Lessee - Lessee - Waste Northern Southern Stakeholder Committee (in-house management) Services Council & Lessee representation Admin. Bldg Precinct Precinct
Compliance oversight Monitor contractor General day to day operations Administration & reporting Information sharing performance Maintenance of responsible Programming/activation/bookings Policy & procedure (eg security) areas - incl. grounds Medical & first aid review Incident reporting Cleaning & waste management Materials management & handling Activation initiatives & investigation Security Utilisation monitoring WHS & risk management Page 75 of 97 & analysis MANAGEMENT MODEL OPTION COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT (INCORPORATED ASSOCIATION)
SPORT, LEISURE Ownership Reporting Capital works frameworks/review & FACILITIES Contract management KPI’s (responsible branch)
Contractual agreement
LMSEC Incorporated association Governance & Reporting (in-house management) Management Committee oversight Risk frameworks Policy & procedures Funding applications
Incorporated association - administration staff
Bookings User group/ Administration stakeholder liaison Grounds maintenance WHS/Risk Page 76 of 97 General maintenance MANAGEMENT MODEL OPTION BENEFICIAL ENTERPRISE (COUNCIL-OWNED COMPANY)
Company ownership Board appointments/ Strategic direction potential Governance & due representation diligence Operating subsidies
Beneficial enterprise – legal arrangements
LMSEC Ltd/Pty Ltd company Entity’s objectives (in-house (independent legal entity • More efficient & effective service delivery management) established by • Greater flexibility in management, Logan City Council) operations & recruitment • Enhance independent & expert decision making Board of Directors • Increase levels of public accountability Staff Responsible solely for ALL management and operations incl. financial management Page 77 of 97 CASE STUDIES
Page 78 of 97 Pimpama Sports Hub
Carrara Sports and Leisure Precinct
Page 79 of 97 James Drysdale Reserve (Bunya)
South Pine Sports
Page 80 of 97 Complex (Brendale) Kawana Sports Precinct
Page 81 of 97 Blacktown International Sports Park (Sydney)
Page 82 of 97 Arena Joondalup (West Perth)
Page 83 of 97 DETERMINING EVALUATION CRITERIA & WEIGHTINGS: EACH MODEL
WORKSHOP NEXT PRG MEETING #3 Tuesday, 20 April 2021
24 MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 84 of 97 PRESENTATION AGENDA
INTRODUCTION TO MANAGEMENT MODELS DHC
• Appreciation for LMSP MMA project • Context: good-practice venue operations • Key risks to consider (consequences of poor management) • Introduction to management models & market relevance • Case studies WHAT TO EXPECT PRG MEETING #3 & DHC NEXT STEPS DHC
OPEN FLOOR – QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION ALL
25 MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 85 of 97 Thank you for your time
Next PRG meeting #3 Tuesday, 20 April 2021 – 2:00pm
MANAGEMENT MODELS & MARKET ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW Logan Metro Sports Park Models of Management Analysis Page 86 of 97 FINAL Report Management Models Analysis – Logan Metro Sports Park: Potential Management Models (2a) & Evaluation Methodology (2b ‐ Development & 2c ‐ Application) Prepared for Logan City Council in service of Contract Number SLF/Q01/2021
Appendix 2: Project Reference Materials
Reference materials provided by Logan City Council Filename Type 1. LCC_DOCS‐#14408329‐v2‐AGENDA AND MINUTES ‐ LMSP PRG INCEPTION MEETING AND SITE DOC TOUR 2. LCC_DOCS‐#14312739‐v11‐Draft Terms of Reference for the Logan Metro Sports Park DOC Management Options and Considerations Analysis 3. LCC_DOCS‐#13454594‐v1‐FINAL Active Logan Strategy Implementation Plan 2020‐2024 DOC 4. LCC_DOCS‐#12232059‐v1‐COPY Taylor Byrne Valuation ‐ Logan Metro ‐ 10 February 2016 DOC 5. LCC_DOCS‐#9452252‐v1‐(SC2c) Confidential report for covering id 9472372 ‐ logan metro sports park development and management opt 6. LCC_DOCS‐#13862925‐v3‐Facilities Framework‐_text PDF 7. LCC_DOCS‐#14324233‐v2‐Northern_Precinct_‐_Retification_Works_‐ XLS _List_of_expenses_incurred_by_Council 8. Information Pack ‐ Open House Logan Metro Sports Park‐ 10‐02‐2021PDF 9. LCC_DOCS‐#14270967‐v3‐Example of Options Analysis Matrix for LMSP Ongoing Management XLS 10. LCC_DOCS‐#14481186‐v1‐Logan Metro Management Options ‐ Proposed process PPT 11. Active Logan Strategy 2016 – 2028 Print 12. FINAL ‐ Logan Metro Master Plan Report 2005 PDF (ROSS Planning, 2005 Master Plan – Logan Metro Sports Park) 13. Active Logan ‐ Literature Review Methodology Paper FINAL 20200812 PDF (Logan City Council and KPMG Sports Advisory, August 2020)
14. Link to Logan City Community Profile portal URL https://profile.id.com.au/logan 15. DRAFT MINUTES ‐ PRG Meeting #2 Logan Metro Sports Park Management Options DOC
City of Logan strategies and publications (available online or already held by DHC) Corporate Plan 2017–2022 City of Logan Community Infrastructure Strategy 2019 – 2041 Access and Inclusion Plan 2019–2022 Logan Destination Management Plan 2018 – 2022 Executive Summary
Other specific references
Department of Local Government, Racing and Multicultural Affairs, 2020. Webpage. Good decision making. The State of Queensland.
Commercial in Confidence 27 April 2021 44 Page 87 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
4.3 Covering Report Refer to Confidential Agenda in accordance with Section 254J (3) (g) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 BASKETBALL QUEENSLAND PROPOSAL
REPORT OF: Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager
REPORT OVERVIEW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report has been prepared following the receipt of a proposal from Basketball Queensland pertaining to the operations of the Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre. Criteria: Direction - It requires Council to make a decision of a strategic nature; or Council has specifically requested it CORPORATE PLAN PRIORITY Quality Lifestyles
CONFIDENTIAL AGENDA INFORMATION
It is recommended that this report be considered in a closed session pursuant to Section 254J of the Local Government Regulation 2012 (Qld) for the reason(s) that the matter involves: Section 254J (3) (g) negotiations relating to a commercial matter involving the local government for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government It is considered necessary to take the discussion of this report into a closed session as the report contains information of a commercial nature pertaining to a third party and commercial opportunities being considered by Council pertaining to the operation of the Logan Metro Sports and Events Centre.
RECOMMENDATIONS
IT IS RECOMMENDED:- For consideration.
REPORT DETAILS
INTERESTED PARTIES This information is confidential and is included in the confidential report. PURPOSE OF REPORT/BACKGROUND This information is confidential and is included in the confidential report. ANY PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECISIONS Nil
Report Page 1 of 2 Page 88 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 19 MAY 2021
FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS This information is confidential and is included in the confidential report. RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS This information is confidential and is included in the confidential report. LEGAL/POLICY The following policies are relevant to matters considered in this report:
Licence or Lease of Council Owned or Controlled Land to Sporting, Recreational and Community Organisations Remissions to Sporting, Recreational and Community Organisations COMMUNITY AND OTHER CONSULTATION This information is confidential and is included in the confidential report. CONCLUSION This information is confidential and is included in the confidential report.
ATTACHMENTS TABLE
No attachments.
Report Page 2 of 2 Page 89 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 1 9 M A Y 2 0 2 1
4.4 Covering Report Refer to Confidential Agenda in accordance with Section 254J (3) (g) of the Local Government Regulation 2012 FURTHER UPDATE ON NERIDA STREET COMMUNITY CENTRE AND PENSIONER UNITS
REPORT OF: Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager
REPORT OVERVIEW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides Council with an update on the Council-owned property located at 19-31 Nerida Street, Rochedale South. The existing property currently comprises of the Nerida Street Community Centre and the Nerida Street Pensioner Units. Criteria: Direction - It requires Council to make a decision of a strategic nature; or Council has specifically requested it CORPORATE PLAN PRIORITY Quality Lifestyles
CONFIDENTIAL AGENDA INFORMATION
It is recommended that this report be considered in a closed session pursuant to Section 254J of the Local Government Regulation 2012 (Qld) for the reason(s) that the matter involves: Section 254J (3) (g) negotiations relating to a commercial matter involving the local government for which a public discussion would be likely to prejudice the interests of the local government If it is considered necessary to take the discussion of this report into a closed session it would relate to the confidential attachments and discussions pertaining to Council’s commercial interests and obligations under a previous grant deed arrangement. RECOMMENDATIONS
IT IS RECOMMENDED:- For consideration.
Report Page 1 of 5 Page 90 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 1 9 M A Y 2 0 2 1
REPORT DETAILS
INTERESTED PARTIES
Table 1: Interested Parties Stakeholder Level of Engagement/Interest Cr Bradley - Division 1 Councillor Divisional Councillor Logan City Council – Sport, Leisure & Facilities Lessor of the Community Centre and Branch Pensioner Units on the Land Corporate Property Program undertaking Logan City Council – Administration Branch the Reconfiguration of Lot Application process and proceeding to sale of the Land Financial Accounting Program in regard to Logan City Council – Finance Branch financial considerations Development Assessment Program in Logan City Council – Development Assessment receiving a Reconfiguration of Lot Branch Application for assessment City Planning Program in relation to Logan City Council - Economic Development and investigating a potential rezoning under Strategy the Logan Planning Scheme 2015, future amendments register. Current Residential Tenancy Agreements Residents of the Pensioner Units over the Pensioner Units on the Land Future uses of Community Centre portion InvestLogan of the Land The Lions Club contributed funding to The Lions Club of Rochedale Springwood minor infrastructure at the Pensioner Units as part of a community housing project Ongoing enquiries and interest in regard to Logan Ratepayers Association the Nerida Street Pensioner Units and status of residential tenure
PURPOSE OF REPORT/BACKGROUND This report provides Council with an update on the Council-owned property located at 19-31 Nerida Street, Rochedale South (the Property). The Property includes the Nerida Street Community Centre and the Nerida Street Pensioner Units. Table 2: Property Information Property (RPD): Lot 2 on RP 220614 Address: 19-31 Nerida Street, Rochedale South Owner: Logan City Council Division: 2 Zoning: Community Facilities – Community Purpose Total Area: Approximate Total - 5,409m2, comprising: Community Centre & Surrounds – 3,579m2 Pensioner Units & Surrounds – 1,830m2
Report Page 2 of 5 Page 91 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 1 9 M A Y 2 0 2 1
Image 1 – Aerial image of Property
ANY PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECISIONS A previous report was presented to Council’s City Lifestyle Committee on 21 April 2021 titled ‘Update on Nerida Street Community Centre and Pensioner Units’ for consideration. The resolution from City Lifestyle Committee was: 1. That the matter be deferred to the next City Lifestyle Committee meeting to be held on 19 May 2021 for further consideration. The following decision was endorsed by ELT at its meeting on 11 March 2021. 6.1 Update - Nerida Street Community Centre and Pensioner Units The report of the Sport, Leisure and Facilities Manager, Nigel Brown, be received with the following recommendations endorsed: 1. That ELT provide a determination on the preferred Option, that will be subsequently progressed to Council for its consideration, regarding the future operation and management of the Nerida Street Pensioner Units located at 19-31 Nerida Street, Rochedale South
2. That the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager be requested to prepare a future report to City Lifestyle Committee incorporating ELT’s determination, as identified in Recommendation 1 above, as detailed in Sports, Leisure and Facilities Manager ELT Report titled Update – Nerida Street Community Centre and Pensioner Units. Adopted by Council at its meeting of 26/06/2018 Minute No 207/2018: 1. That the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager, in conjunction with the Administration Manager, be delegated authority to enter into negotiations with InvestLogan Pty Ltd regarding the potential disposal of council land, as detailed in the confidential report of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager dated 17 April 2018.
Report Page 3 of 5 Page 92 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 1 9 M A Y 2 0 2 1
Adopted by Council at its meeting of 04/12/2018 Minute No 389/2018, in relation to the Confidential report of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager dated 14 November 2018, resolved 1. That the matter be deferred to a future City Lifestyle & Community Committee meeting for further consideration.” Adopted by Council at its meeting of 30/01/2019 Minute No 16/2019 resolved: 1. That the actions of the Acting Mayor, Councillor C M Dalley, in exercising the Delegation of Authority titled 'Executive Powers of Mayor', as detailed in the report of the Corporate Governance Manager dated 24 December 2018, be endorsed. The adopted resolutions contained within report included: 1. That the sale of Council premises, as detailed in the confidential report of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager dated 5 December 2018, be approved to proceed upon the completion of the Underwood Park Multi Sport Development. 2. That the Finance Manager be requested to provide an internal loan transfer, as detailed in Option 1 of the confidential report of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager dated 5 December 2018, for the purposes of contributing to the Underwood Park Multi Sport Development. 3. That the Finance Manager be requested to ensure that any surplus proceeds associated from the sale, as detailed in clause 1 and 2 go towards other improvements to community infrastructure in Division 1. 4. That the Finance Manager be requested to incorporate the Underwood Park Community Facilities into the Capital and Operational Major Projects Enhancement Schedule in the next budget amendment and future years, as detailed in the confidential report of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager dated 5 December 2018. 5. That the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager be delegated authority to formally write to Hon Mick de Brenni MP, Minister of Housing and Public Works, confirming Council's financial commitments towards the delivery of the Underwood Park Multi-Sport Development, as detailed in the confidential report of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager dated 5 December 2018. 6. That, at the discretion of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager, the Corporate Governance Manager be requested to place the confidential report of the Sport, Leisure & Facilities Manager dated 5 December 2018 and associated background papers into the public records.
FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS This information is confidential and is included in the confidential attachments to this report. RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS There are a number of risks for consideration from the perspective of the tenant and Council. In terms of the tenants it is paramount to ensure their care and support needs are met by suitable qualified professionals and experts in the industry of aged care. Some Council considerations may include reputational, tenancy, financial and human impacts in terms of a social housing service, recognising Council does not specifically employ skilled staff to deliver case management of aged care clients within a Council facility.
Report Page 4 of 5 Page 93 of 97 CITY LIFESTYLE 1 9 M A Y 2 0 2 1
LEGAL/POLICY Section 227 of the Local Government Regulation 2012 (Qld) provides that a local government cannot enter into a contract of sale unless it first invites written tenders or offers on the property for sale by auction. Section 236 of the Regulation provides that if the property is not sold via tender or at auction, a contract can then be entered into provided the purchase price is more than the highest tender or auction bid that was received. Additional information is confidential and is included in the confidential attachments to this report. COMMUNITY AND OTHER CONSULTATION A Councillor Workshop Briefing session was undertaken on this matter on 19 November 2019 to enable all Councillors to be informed on the history of the Property. A report on this matter was submitted to ELT at its meeting of 11 March 2021. The determination by ELT was an identification of the preferred Options, that will be subsequently progressed to Council for its consideration, regarding the future operation and management of the Nerida Street Pensioner Units. In the preparation of this report the Administration; Finance; Economic Development and Strategy; Development Assessment and Sport, Leisure & Facilities branches have been engaged. CONCLUSION This report has been prepared following a Councillor Workshop Briefing Session held on 19 November 2019 and seeks direction from Council regarding its proposed role in the provision of Social Housing.
ATTACHMENTS TABLE
Number Attachment Title Attachment 1 Nerida Street Pensioner Units – Photographic Information
Report Page 5 of 5 Page 94 of 97 BACKGROUND PAPER NERIDA STREET PENSIONER UNIT – PHOTOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
Page 95 of 97
Page 96 of 97
Page 97 of 97