Soil disposal cost for Coffs Harbour Council’s Cultural and Civic Space still unclear

Despite requests by councillors to receive a ‘detailed and comprehensive report’ on the matter, one of the key issues – the cost – is still buried.

A late decision to send potentially contaminated soil to Queensland has been explained in a Council report, but the estimated total cost of the change is still unclear.

It was revealed in May that instead of disposing of 23,000 tonnes of potential acid sulfate soil from the Cultural and Civic Space at the former Sawtell Sewage Treatment Plant, it would be carted to Queensland at what is believed to be a significantly higher cost.

Immediately there were concerns from councillors. Some were worried about the implications of Council being forced to dip into the CCS project’s contingency fund so early on.

Others raised questions about how the decision could have been made without their approval given there are limits on staff authority over certain financial decisions worth more than $250,000.

(Insert obligatory picture of the Cultural and Civic Space here)

Cr Sally Townley, who called an extraordinary meeting over the revelation, said it was a “radical change in direction” and councillors voted to receive a “detailed and comprehensive report” regarding the changes.

The subsequent report to be tabled at Thursday’s council meeting sets out a clear timeline of events and staff explain that while there was, in effect, a $250,000 limit on accepting tenders, the Project Board were authorised to endorse additional expenditure via an approved variation method.

A variation would not have to come back to councillors provided it did not breach the total project budget limit of $81.265 million. Which council staff say it did not.

Remarkably, the report does not make clear the estimated cost of the carting the soil to Queensland, nor how much of a variation was approved by the Project Board.

It does however state the option for disposal and treatment in Queensland in March could cost “in the order of $65-$70” per tonne. If those estimates provided by the contractor, Lipman, are correct, it puts the cost somewhere in the vicinity of $1.5 – $1.7 million.

When questioned on the figures, a council spokeswoman said they were an estimate and the final cost would be dependant on the actual tonnage excavated.

As for the how much the cost varied from the Sawtell option the spokeswoman said “this a question for the head contractor”.

The community has been bitterly divided over the $81.25 million project.

Council were also asked why there was no mention of the actual cost in the report.

“For the sole reason that the report is a direct response to very a specific resolution of council and the information provided in the Report is limited to the elements that meet the resolution requirement,” the spokeswoman said.

According to the Council’s timeline of events, the Queensland option was, in effect, its third choice. In January, the Airport Enterprise Park was ruled out over concerns, dating back to October 2020, about the nature of the soil as fill.

At the same time the initial concerns over the Airport Enterprise Park were raised, Sawtell STP became an option as it already received fill from other council projects.

Head contractors Lipman consulted with NSW EPA and Queensland Department of Environment and Science over a plan to cart acid sulfate soil to Queensland.

However, concerns arose in March about the Sawtell site’s size, that it may not be approved by the EPA and the financial impact on other planned projects forced to dispose of soil elsewhere.

The report also mentions the community opposition to the proposal which was the stated reason for the change on the council’s Heart of Coffs Facebook page. A reason that Cr Sally Townley questioned at the extraordinary meeting back in May.

According to the report it was the head contractor of the CCS, Lipman, who investigated the Queensland option which involves transporting the soil to a licensed receiving facility to be placed under water for 24 hours.

In April, Lipman submitted a formal variation request and it was approved by the Board.