AGENDA R

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Council Meeting

 

TUESDAY 26 JULY 2016

 

6:30pm

 

 


Pre-Registration to Speak at Council Meetings

 

Council is encouraging members of the public to pre-register their interest to speak at Council Meetings as the Meeting venues have a maximum number they can hold. Members of the public can pre-register up until 2pm of the day of the Meeting.

If you wish to register your interest please fill in a Register to Speak Form, available from the Inner West Council website, including:

·      your name;

·      contact details;

·      item on the Agenda you wish to speak to; and

·      whether you are for or against the recommendation in the agenda.

 

Members of the public who pre-register will be asked to show photo ID upon entry to verify the pre-registration application.

 
What happens after I submit the form?

Your request will then be added to a list that is shown to the Chairperson on the night of the meeting.

 

Are there any rules for speaking at a Council or Committee Meeting?

The following rules apply when addressing a Council or Committee meeting:

·      keep your address to the point, the time allowed for each speaker is limited to three minutes with one extension of not more than three minutes with the approval of the Council/Committee. This time limit applies, no matter how many items are addressed by the speaker;

·      when addressing the Meeting you must speak to the Chairperson;

·      the Chairperson may curtail public participation where the information being presented is considered repetitive or irrelevant.


Where Items are deferred, Council reserves the right to defer speakers until that Item is heard on the next
occasion.

 

Accessibility

Inner West Council is committed to ensuring people with a disability have equal opportunity to take part in Council and Committee Meetings. If you have any access or disability related participation needs and wish to know more ring 9335 2222.

 

 

 

Persons in the public gallery are advised that under the Local Government Act 1993, a person may NOT tape record a Council meeting without the permission of Council.

 

Any persons found recording without authority will be expelled from the meeting.

 

“Record” includes the use of any form of audio, video and still camera equipment or mobile phone capable of recording speech.

 

An audio recording of this meeting will be taken for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the minutes.

 

 

 


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

 

INDEX

 

 

1          Acknowledgement of Country

2          Disclosures of Interest (Section 451 of the Local Government Act
and
Council’s Code of Conduct)

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                       Page

Minutes of 5 July 2016 Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                4

4          Minutes of Committee Meetings

ITEM                                                                                                                                    PAGE #

C0716 Item 1      Minutes of Implementation Advisory Group Held on 14 July 2016            13

C0716 Item 2      Minutes of Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee Meeting Held on 12 July 2016     16

5          Staff Reports

ITEM                                                                                                                                    PAGE #

C0716 Item 3      WestConnex - Status Update - July 2016 and Determination of Applications/Notices for Project Works                                                                                              23

C0716 Item 4      Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy                                   423

C0716 Item 5      Street Tree Pruning by Ausgrid - Update                                                  429

C0716 Item 6      Development Application - 230 Victoria Street, Ashfield                          432

C0716 Item 7      Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 7 July 2016                             479

C0716 Item 8      Operational Land Classification                                                                507

C0716 Item 9      Marrickville Arts and Culture Grants 2016                                                508

C0716 Item 10    Marrickville Independent Artist Grants 2016                                             532

C0716 Item 11    Marrickville Recreation Grants 2016                                                        546

C0716 Item 12    Draft Expenses and Facilities Policy for IAG and LRAC Committee Members   555

C0716 Item 13    Inner West Council Investments as at 30 June 2016                               563

6          Reports with Confidential Information

 

Reports appearing in this section of the Business Paper are confidential in their entirety or contain confidential information in attachments.

ITEM                                                                                                                                    PAGE #

C0716 Item 14    Annette Kellerman Aquatic Centre - Mechanical Works Tender             603

C0716 Item 15    Tender 07/16 Security Surveillance, Patrols and Services                      605

C0716 Item 16    Hiring Agreement for the Wests Tigers to use Leichhardt Oval No. 1     607  

 

 

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

 

Minutes of Extraordinary Council Meeting
held at Ashfield Service Centre on Tuesday 5 July 2016

 

Meeting commenced at 7.16pm

 

Present:

 

Richard Pearson

Administrator (Chairperson)

Darryl Watkins

Strategic Advisor

Vanessa Chan

Interim General Manager

Nellette Kettle

Director Innovation and Strategy

Simone Schwarz

Director Service Delivery

Matthew Phillips

Director Corporate Services

Phil Sarin

Director Planning and Environment

Cathy Edwards-Davis

Director Public Works

Peter Gainsford

Director Major Projects and Engineering

Judy Clark

Manager Development Assessment, Marrickville

Popy Mourgelas

Manager Corporate Governance, Ashfield

Tanya Whitmarsh

Manager Governance and Risk, Marrickville

Rad Miladinovic

Coordinator Governance and Administration, Marrickville (Minute Taker)

Helen Tola

Manager Customer Service and Corporate Planning, Leichhardt

David Murray

Manager Financial Services, Leichhardt

Pav Kuzmanovski

Chief Financial Officer, Marrickville

 

 

Public speakers:   see last two pages of these minutes.

 

Apologies:       Nil

 

1.         Acknowledgement of Country by Chairperson:

We meet tonight on the traditional land of the Cadigal people of the Eora nation.  I acknowledge the terrible wrongs committed against the Aboriginal peoples of this country and their care of the land over many generations.  I celebrate their ongoing survival and achievements in today's society.

 

2.         Disclosures of Interests:        Nil

 

3.         Tabling of Pecuniary Interest Return:

The Administrator determined that Council receive and note the Pecuniary Interest Disclosure tabled by the Administrator, Richard Pearson, for lodgement in accordance with requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

4.         Confirmation of Minutes:

The Administrator determined that the Minutes of the Extraordinary Council Meetings held on 24 May and 30 June 2016 be confirmed.

 

5.         Minutes of Committee Meetings:

C0716 Item 1  Minutes of Implementation Advisory Group

 

The Administrator determined that the Minutes of the Implementation Advisory Group held in June 2016 be received and the recommendations be adopted.

 

 

 

 

C0716 Item 2      Minutes of Local Representation Advisory Committee Meetings held in June 2016

The Administrator determined that the Minutes of the Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville Local Representation Advisory Committees held in June 2016 be received and that the recommendations be adopted, except for the recommendation from the Ashfield LRAC that all members be remunerated equally.

 

 

6.         Administrator’s Minutes:

 

C0716 Item 3      Administrator's Minute: Ratifying Council’s Position on Westconnex

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.         Inner West Council formally adopts a position of continued opposition in the strongest terms to the WestConnex project, both approved and future stages, consistent with the positions of the former councils of Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville;

2.         Council establishes a central WestConnex Response Unit to coordinate Council responses to resident concerns regarding impacts associated with the construction of approved stages of WestConnex, as well as submissions and representations on future stages;

3.         Council continues to press the immediate need for the Department of Planning and Environment to fund and establish a dedicated WestConnex compliance officer in the local area to respond promptly to resident issues;

4.         Council establish a regular monthly forum chaired by the Administrator with representatives of all the inner west WestConnex resident action groups and key community members to discuss concerns with the project and opportunities for their resolution;

5.         a report from staff be brought forward to the next meeting of Council outlining a community engagement plan to elicit views of the broader community with regards to ways the Council can assist them with concerns regarding WestConnex;

6.         a report from staff be brought forward to the next meeting of Council which summarises the outstanding resolutions of the previous Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville Councils regarding WestConnex and action being taken to implement;

7.         Council has engaged Tim Robertson SC to advise on prospects of legal challenge to the WestConnex project across the new LGA and that advice will be sought at utmost urgency, including an injunction on the current demolition works;

8.         Council notes that the Inner West Council Local Representation Advisory Committees (LRACs) will further discuss Inner West Council’s position on WestConnex at a future joint meeting;  and

9.         Council supplement the previous short term funding provided to No WestConnex Public Transport for a part time community organiser position, to provide sufficient funding to enable the community organiser to be employed full-time for 2016/17.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 4      Administrator's Minute: Condolence Motion - Dr Stefania Siedlecky AM

The Administrator determined that Council writes to the family of Dr Stefania Siedlecky AM, expressing our condolences and sadness for their loss.

 

 

 

7.         Staff Reports:

 

C0716 Item 5    Evaluation and Proposed Outcomes of Trial Off Leash Areas at Laxton Reserve, Petersham Park and Sydenham Green

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       the report be received and noted;

2.       the trial dog off leash areas at Petersham Park, Petersham and Sydenham Green, Sydenham are made permanent under the same conditions used during the trial period;

3.       Council ceases the off leash trial at Laxton Reserve, Dulwich Hill;

4.       Council implements a trial off leash area at Johnson Park, Dulwich Hill subject to the following time restrictions:

-    6am to 9am, 6pm to 8pm during daylight saving, and 5pm to 7pm during non-daylight saving time;

5.       Council implements a trial off leash area at Morton Park, Lewisham; and

6.       all residents who have provided feedback during the trial and evaluation process are notified of Council’s decision.

 

 

C0716 Item 6      Development Application - 412-416 Liverpool Road, Croydon

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.      Council as the consent authority pursuant to Clause 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) grant deferred commencement consent to Development Application No. 10.2015.264.1 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a 3 storey residential flat building comprising 22 dwellings above 2 levels of basement car parking on Lot 100, DP 1124619, known as 412-416 Liverpool Road, Ashfield, subject to conditions appearing on pages 130-156 of the business paper;  and

 

2.      the deferred commencement plans shall be publicly notified to local residents for comment prior to approval of the plans and release of the operational consent.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 7      Development Application - 132 Church Street, Croydon (Centenary Park)

The Administrator determined that Development application No. 10.2014.94.1 for the demolition of the existing amenities building, erection of new amenities building at 132 Church Street, Croydon be modified in accordance with section 96(1a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, subject to conditions appearing on pages 226-227 of the business paper.

 

 

C0716 Item 8      Development Application - 76 Alt Street, Ashfield

The Administrator determined that Council as the consent authority pursuant to Clause 80(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) approve Development Application No. 10.2015.188, subject to conditions appearing on pages 273-288 of the business paper.

 

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 10.41pm for a short period of recess.

The meeting resumed at 10.48pm.

 

 

C0716 Item 9      Development Application - 30 Llewellyn Street, Marrickville

 

The Administrator determined that the development application No. 201600053 to carry out alterations and additions to an existing mixed use building to construct an additional first floor dwelling be APPROVED subject to conditions appearing on pages 330-341-of the business paper.       

 

 

 

C0716 Item 10    Development Application - 575 King Street, Newtown

 

The Administrator determined that the development application No. 201500750 to demolish existing structures and construct a 3 storey mixed use development comprising a retail tenancy on the ground floor and 7 dwellings above, with associated car parking be APPROVED subject to conditions appearing on pages 359-378 of the business paper.       

 

 

 

C0716 Item 11    Draft Operational Plan and Budget 2016-17

The Administrator determined that Council:

 

1.       adopts the exhibition copy of the Inner West Council Draft Operational Plan 2016/17, as its adopted Operational Plan 2016/17, subject to the minor amendments detailed in this report;

2.       makes and levy the Rates for 2016/17 as contained in this report for each former Local Government Area, having given public notice of its Draft Operational Plan in accordance with section 405 of the Local Government Act 1993;

3.       adopts the Business Rate - Airport lands as the basis for determining equivalent rate payments (for the former Marrickville LGA);

4.       adopts the rate of 8% as the interest rate to apply on outstanding rates, in accordance with section 566(3) of the Local Government Act 1993; and

5.       adopts the Schedule of Fees and Charges, annexed to the Operational Plan 2016/17 as amended in terms of this report, as Council’s Fees and Charges for 2016/2017 for each of the former Council areas of Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville.

 

 

 

The Administrator moved an extension of time to continue the meeting until midnight.

 

 

C0716 Item 12    Expenses and Facilities Policy for Administrator

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       the Expenses and Facilities Policy for the Administrator as shown attached to the report, be placed on public exhibition in accordance with Section 252 of the Local Government Act; and

2.       after the conclusion of the public exhibition period, Council receive a further report on submissions received during the public exhibition period.

 

C0716 Item 13    Expenses and Facilities Policy for LRAC and IAG Committee Members

The Administrator determined that the item be deferred pending review at the next joint LRAC Meeting to be held on 12 July 2016.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 14    Delegations to the Interim General Manager

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       the Council delegates to the Interim General Manager all functions that by virtue of section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 may be so delegated; and

2.       the Administrator signs the Instrument of Delegation provided at Attachment 2.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 15    Delegation of Authority to the General Manager for Determination of Councillor Legal Costs

The Administrator determined that the Administrator delegates his powers to determine this request for reimbursement to the General Manager.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 16    Proposed Schedule of Council Meetings 2016

The Administrator determined that:

 

THAT the schedule of Ordinary Council meetings for 2016 is as follows:

 

Date - Time 6.30pm

Meeting

Location

26 July 2016

Ordinary Council

260 Liverpool Road Ashfield

23 August 2016

Ordinary Council

260 Liverpool Road Ashfield

27 September 2016

Ordinary Council

260 Liverpool Road Ashfield

25 October 2016

Ordinary Council

7-15 Wetherill Street Leichhardt

22 November 2016

Ordinary Council

7-15 Wetherill Street Leichhardt

13 December 2016

Ordinary Council

7-15 Wetherill Street Leichhardt

 

 

 

The Administrator moved into closed session at 11.52pm to consider items of business containing confidential information. 

 

The Administrator returned to open session at 11.58pm to resolve as follows in relation to Items 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22.

 

 

 

 

 

8.         Reports with Confidential Information:

 

C0716 Item 17    Interim Executive Structure

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.    information contained in Confidential Attachment 1 of this report be classified as confidential under the provisions of Section 10A (2) (a of the Local Government Act 1993  for the following reason:

a.  personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors);

2.    in accordance with Section 333 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council’s Organisational Structure be re-determined, as contained in the business paper report;  and

3.    Council authorise the Interim General Manager to commence progressive implementation of the new structure.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 18    Haberfield Bay Run Shared Walk/Cycleway Upgrade - Project Update

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.    the information contained in Confidential Attachment 1 of this report be classified as confidential under the provisions of Section 10A (2) (c) and (d) of the Local Government Act 1993  for the following reasons:

c.         information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business;

d (i)      commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it;

d (ii)     commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council;

d (iii)    commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed reveal a trade secret;

2.    pursuant to section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, tenders not be required for a contract to complete the Project due to extenuating circumstances (namely, the voluntary administration of the preferred tenderer, Hargraves, and the fact that the tender was only recently completed) which would mean a satisfactory result would not be achieved by inviting new tenders;  and

3.    the Interim General Manager be authorised to enter into a contract with an alternate contractor.

 

 

C0716 Item 19    Tender for Mainstreet Improvement Works at the Intersection of Johnston Street and Booth Street, Annandale, outside the Village Church

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       Confidential Attachment 1 to the report be treated as confidential in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 – Sect 55 (3) as they relate to a matter specified in Section 10A (2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993; and

2.       the tender submitted by Civil Works (NSW) be accepted for the Mainstreet Improvement Works at the Intersection of Johnston Street and Booth Street, Annandale, outside the Village Church.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 20    Tender 4/16 St Peters Town Hall Roof Renewal and Improvements

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.         the report be received and noted; and

2.         Council accepts the lump sum tender from Murphy’s Group Pty Ltd of $449,380.80 (excluding GST) for the St Peters Town Hall Roof Renewal and Improvements T4/16.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 21    SSROC Tender for the Supply & Delivery of Sodium Hypochlorite (Bulk Liquid Chlorine)

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.       Council resolves that Confidential Attachment 1 to the report be treated as confidential in accordance with Section 10A (4) of the Local Government Act 1993, as they relate to a matter specified in Section 10A(2)(c) and 10A(2)D(i) of the Local Government Act 1993; and

2.       Council enters into a supply contract with Ixom Operations Pty Ltd to supply Sodium Hypochlorite to Council Pools for 3 years with an option to extend for a further 2 x 1 years.

 

 

 

C0716 Item 22    SSROC Tender for the Provision of Agricultural Products

The Administrator determined that:

 

1.   Council resolves that Confidential Attachment 1 to the report be treated as confidential in accordance with Section 10A (4) of the Local Government Act 1993, as they relate to a matter specified in Section 10A(2)(c) and 10A(2)D(i) of the Local Government Act 1993; and

2.   Council enters into a supply contract with Globe Australia Pty Ltd to supply Agricultural Products for 3 years with an option to extend for a further 2 x 1 years.

 

 

 

Meeting closed at 12.04am.

 

 

 

 

CHAIRPERSON

 

 

 

 

 

Public speakers:

 

 

Items 1 and 2:

Lucille McKenna, Ashfield LRAC

Ashfield

 

Darcy Byrne, Leichhardt LRAC        

Leichhardt      

 

Victor Macri, Marrickville LRAC

Belmore

 

Rochelle Porteous     

Balmain          

 

Linda Kelly, Leichhardt LRAC           

Leichhardt

 

Frank Breen, Leichhardt LRAC         

Balmain

 

Ted Cassidy, Ashfield LRAC

Haberfield

 

John Stamolis, Leichhardt LRAC

Balmain

 

Paul Green

Leichhardt

 

 

Item 3:

Darcy Byrne, Leichhardt LRAC        

Leichhardt      

 

Frank Breen, Leichhardt LRAC         

Balmain

 

Jo Haylen       

Marrickville

 

Gabrielle Brown         

Ashfield

 

John Hyde

Ashfield

 

Russell Hermann

Leichhardt

 

Vincent Crow

Haberfield

 

Adrienne Shilling

Petersham

 

Rhea Liebmann

Marrickville

 

Rick Williams

St Peters

 

Rob Davidson

Leichhardt

 

Therese-Ann O’Leary

Leichhardt

 

Jo Alley

Ashfield

 

John Lozano

Haberfield

 

 

Item 4:

Linda Kelly, Leichhardt LRAC           

Leichhardt

 

 

Item 5:

Carl Broockmann      

Petersham

 

Gillian Thomas

Dulwich Hill

 

Joanna Mendelssohn

Dulwich Hill

 

Rachel Thomas

Ashfield

 

Jo Haylen       

Marrickville

 

 

Item 6:

Peter Nube     

Croydon

 

Vanessa Nube

Croydon

 

Lucinda and Claudia (children)

Croydon

 

Madeleine Thomas

Croydon

 

Katherine Ruschen

Croydon

 

David Clarke

Croydon

 

Elizabeth McMullen

Croydon

 

Linda Kelly, Leichhardt LRAC

Leichhardt

 

Mark Drury, Ashfield LRAC

Croydon

 

Georgina Fernandez

Croydon

 

Morris Mansour, Ashfield LRAC

Ashfield

 

Omar Abdul-Rahman

Croydon

 


 

 

Item 7:

Rene Holmes

Ashfield

 

Leon Cieitella

Ashfield

 

Mark Drury, Ashfield LRAC

Croydon

 

 

Item 8:

Anna Panagakos

Ashfield

 

Monica Wangman, Ashfield LRAC

Ashfield

 

 

Item 11:

Michelle McKenzie, Leichhardt LRAC

Lillyfield

 

Linda Kelly, Leichhardt LRAC           

Leichhardt      

 

Mark Drury, Ashfield LRAC

Croydon

 

Ted Cassidy, Ashfield LRAC

Haberfield

 

Darcy Byrne, Leichhardt LRAC        

Leichhardt      

 

Simon Emsley, Leichhardt LRAC

Leichhardt      

 

John Stamolis, Leichhardt LRAC

Balmain

 

 

Item 13:

Linda Kelly, Leichhardt LRAC           

Leichhardt      

 

 

Item 14:

Darcy Byrne, Leichhardt LRAC        

Leichhardt      

 

Mark Drury, Ashfield LRAC

Croydon

 

Ted Cassidy, Ashfield LRAC

Haberfield

 

 

Item 17:

Simon Emsley, Leichhardt LRAC

Leichhardt      

 

 

 


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 1

Subject:         Minutes of Implementation Advisory Group Held on 14 July 2016  

File Ref:         16/4718/81970.16         

Prepared By: Helen Tola - Manager Customer Service and Corporate Planning, Leichhardt  

Authorised By: Matthew Phillips - Director, Corporate Services

 

SUMMARY

The report presents the minutes of the Implementation Advisory Group meeting held on the 14 July 2016 for consideration by the Administrator.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the Minutes of the Implementation Advisory Group held on 14 July 2016 be received and the recommendations adopted.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

To present to Council the Minutes of the Implementation Advisory Group held on 14 July 2016.

The minutes of the meeting of the Implementation Advisory Group are provided as Attachment 1.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Nil.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Copies of the Minutes have been circulated to Advisory Committee Members and placed on the Inner West Council website for perusal by members of the public.

 

 

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the Minutes of the Implementation Advisory Group held on 14 July 2016 be received and the recommendations adopted.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Minutes of the Implementation Advisory Group (14 July 2016)

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 2

Subject:         Minutes of Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee Meeting Held on 12 July 2016  

File Ref:         16/4718/81978.16         

Prepared By: Helen Tola - Manager Customer Service and Corporate Planning, Leichhardt  

Authorised By: Matthew Phillips - Director, Corporate Services

 

SUMMARY

The report presents the minutes of the Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee (JLRAC) meeting held on the 12 July 2016 for consideration by the Administrator.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the Minutes of the Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee (JLRAC) meeting held on the 12 July 2016 be received and the recommendations adopted.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

To present to Council the minutes of the JLRAC held on 12 July 2016. The minutes of the meeting of the JLRAC are provided as Attachment 1.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Nil.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Copies of the minutes have been circulated to Advisory Committee Members and placed on the Inner West Council website for perusal by members of the public.

 

 

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the minutes of the JLRAC held on 12 July 2016 be received and the recommendations adopted.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Minutes of the Joint Local Representation Advisory Committee (12 July 2016)

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 3

Subject:         WestConnex - Status Update - July 2016 and Determination of Applications/Notices for Project Works  

File Ref:         16/4718/81116.16         

Prepared By: Phil Sarin - Director, Planning and Environment  

Authorised By: Simone Schwarz - Director, Service Delivery

SUMMARY

Stages 1 and 2 of the WestConnex Motorway project have been approved and the Environmental Impact Statement for Stage 3 is likely to be exhibited during the first quarter of 2017. 

Council is in receipt of several notices and applications concerning works associated with the Westconnex project seeking either comment or consent for road openings. These fall into two categories:

·    notices inviting Council comment; and

·    applications requesting Council consent.

The former Marrickville Council has previously resolved that applications for activities and works related to the Westconnex are to be determined by Council.

This report provides an update on various project stages of Westconnex and seeks Council’s determination on several notices and applications Council has received relating to Westconnex project works.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council:

1.       not grant approval for geotechnical investigations to occur at the Cove Street Depot, Cove Street, Haberfield;

2.       staff review and provide technical comments in response to the Technical Report –Flood Mitigation Strategy: Project Wide – Permanent Works Final Design (FD) (M4E-AEH-TR-00-120-100001_D_00);

3.       staff review and provide technical comments in response to the Technical Report – Flood Mitigation Strategy: WS – Temporary Works Final Design (FD) (M4E-AEH-TR-40-120-100001_D_00);

4.       officers continue to liaise with Sydney Motorway Corporation in an effort to protect the interests of the Inner West Community and continue to demonstrate the resolute position of the Inner West Council on the WestConnex Motorway project;

5.       reiterate to the Joint Venture that Vehicles exiting the Northcote Street site (C7) must not utilise Wattle Street and Dobroyd Parade. They must exit the site directly onto Parramatta Road, in a westerly direction;

6.       staff review and provide technical comments in response to the Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Wattle Street Temporary Works Site Final Design (FD) (M4E-AEH-TR-40-120-106001_D_00);

7.       staff review and provide technical comments in response to the Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Parramatta Road Temporary Works Site Final Design (FD) (M4E-AEH-TR-50-120-106001_D_00);

8.       remain opposed to the closure of footpaths on Parramatta Road, Dobroyd Parade and Wattle Street;

9.       in relation to those notices inviting Council comment, Council lodged a submission outlining its expectations for the protection of infrastructure, specifications for infrastructure restorations and traffic management;

10.     determines the applications requesting Council consent and, if approved, any such approvals be subject to the conditions suggested in the report. Further, that the General Manager be given the authority to include such other technical conditions considered necessary to safeguard Council’s infrastructure;  and

11.     determine application for a Road Opening Permit for new electricity main for Westconnex Interchange Site at St Peters.

 

 

 

 

UPDATE ON VARIOUS PROJECT STAGES OF WESTCONNEX

 

1.0       STAGE 1 – M4 EAST

1.1.1    Utility Works, Ramsay Street, Haberfield

RMS has advised that they will be utilising their powers under the Roads Act 1993 to undertake utility works in Ramsay Street, Haberfield.

An existing 900mm Sydney Water water main needs to be relocated as part of the WestConnex project.  Part of the works will be occurring at the intersections of Ramsay Street/ Dobroyd Parade and Ramsay Street/ Alt Street.

RMS advised that the works will commence 4 July 2016 and take two to three works to completed, however, at the time of preparation of the report

To facilitate the works at the intersection of Ramsay Street/ Alt Street, it is proposed that westbound traffic on Ramsay Street will remain on Ramsay Street. Eastbound traffic will be diverted onto Bland Street, Denman Avenue, Allum Street and Walker Avenue.

Eastbound and westbound buses will remain on Ramsay Street.  Pedestrian access will be largely maintained.  Some pedestrian access will be under the direction of traffic controllers.

RMS has advised that temporary Variable Message Signs (VMSs) will be in place and residents will be letterbox dropped. Attachments 1 and 2 contain further information.

 

1.1.2    Geotechnical Investigation Cove Street Depot, Haberfield

Ventia Boral Amey Joint Venture (JV), Sydney SMC has requested permission to undertake geotechnical investigations in the Cove Street Depot, Cove Street, Haberfield. They have stated that the works are for the pinch point project which will occur at the intersection of Parramatta Road and Great North Road.

Further, they have asked that the investigations occur at night, from 5pm to 1am.

It is unclear why the geotechnical investigation has to occur on Council’s property.  It would appear that there is nearby RMS land which could readily be utilised for this purpose.

 

1.1.3    Flood and Stormwater WestConnex M4 East

The Joint Venture has provided Council with a number of flood and stormwater reports for the WestConnex M4 East, as follows:

·     Technical Report – Flood Mitigation Strategy: Project Wide – Permanent Works Final Design (FD);

·     Technical Report – Flood Mitigation Strategy: WS – Temporary Works Final Design (FD);

·     Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Northcote Temporary Works Tunnel Site Final Design (FD).

 

These reports are provided in Attachments 3, 4 and 5.

 

1.1.4    Technical Report – Flood Mitigation Strategy: Project Wide – Permanent Works Final Design (FD)

This addresses the Planning Minister’s Conditions of Approval (MCoA) B14 (Flood Mitigation Strategy).

This Flood Mitigation Strategy Report provides a summary of the flood assessments undertaken for the permanent works in all zones as well as a discussion on proposed mitigation measures to meet Condition B14.

The report states:

The eastern end of the Wattle Street Interchange in Zone 40 is affected by both creek flooding and major overland flows. Flood impacts have been minimised by upgrading the Sydney Water box culvert and providing overlapping noise walls with gaps to prevent ponding behind. Minor flood level impacts of up to 0.02 m are estimated outside the project boundary. Floor levels for properties affected by these impacts were checked for inundation and none were found to be inundated as a result of increases in flood levels of up to 0.02 m.

An on-site detention basin is proposed at the western end of the Wattle Street Interchange to mitigate impacts and prevent surcharging into the future M4 South tunnels.

The Parramatta Road Interchange in Zone 50 is only affected by overland flows near Chandos Street. An on-site detention basin has been proposed to mitigate flood impacts. Minor flood level impacts of up to 0.03 m are estimated outside the project boundary. Floor levels for properties affected by these impacts were checked for inundation and none were found to be inundated as a result of increases in flood levels of up to 0.03 m.

 

1.1.5    Technical Report – Flood Mitigation Strategy: WS – Temporary Works Final Design (FD)

This addresses the Planning Minister’s Conditions of Approval (MCoA) B14 (Flood Mitigation Strategy).

The content of this report relates specifically to the Zone 40 construction sites: Northcote Tunnel Site (C7), Parramatta Road Ventilation Facility (C8) and Wattle Street Civil Site (C9).

This Flood Mitigation Strategy Report provides a summary of the flood assessments undertaken for the temporary works in Zone 40 as well as a discussion on proposed mitigation measures to meet Condition B14.

The report states:

The Northcote Tunnel Site (C7) is not flood affected in events up to and including the PMF and no flood mitigation measures are required.

The Parramatta Road Ventilation Facility (C8) is not flood affected in events up to and including the PMF and no flood mitigation measures are required.

The eastern end of the Wattle Street site (C9) is flood affected through both flooding from Iron Cove Creek, as well as overland flows from the catchment to the south of Wattle Street/Dobroyd Parade. The western end of the site is not flood affected except for a small overland flow path that runs to the west of Allum Street, and crosses Wattle Street at Ash Lane. A local drainage system runs north along Ash Lane. Wattle Street/Dobroyd Parade was assessed as having low flood immunity, with the low point near Waratah Street overtopping in as little as a 1-2 year ARI storm event.

The proposed G-Loop through Reg Coady Reserve would need to be built up no higher than the existing road level on Wattle Street, preferably as close to existing ground level as possible.

 

1.1.6    Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Northcote Temporary Works Tunnel Site Final Design (FD)

This report outlines the stormwater drainage assessment undertaken to address the requirements of Ministerial Conditions of Approval (MCoA) B20 (Stormwater Drainage Reports).

To facilitate the proposed construction and design program, separate Stormwater Drainage Reports (SDRs) are being prepared for each temporary works site and also for each permanent works zone. The content of this report relates to the Northcote Street Tunnel Site temporary works.

The report states:

The assessments undertaken generally found that there will be minor to negligible changes to the drainage patterns. These changes are small enough to be accommodated by the existing drainage systems.

 

Council staff have previously provided comments on this report.

 

1.1.7    Works on Public Roads WestConnex M4 East

 

RMS has advised that they will be utilising their powers under the Roads Act 1993 to undertake substratum works. The works include permanent projects works. Works will occur in the following roads:

·    Portion of Wattle Street, east and west of Martin Street

·    Portion of Northcote Street, north of Parramatta Road

·    Portion of Allum Street, east of Wattle Street

·    Portion of Martin Street, east of Wattle Street

·    Portion of Chandos Street, south of Parramatta Road

 

Further information, including the area of works is in Attachments 7 - 10.

 

1.1.8    WestConnex M4 East Northcote Street Tunnel Site (C7) Temporary Haulage Route

 

The Northcote Street Tunnel Site (C7) haulage route approved in the TAMP and SMP comprises the use of a temporary G-loop to be constructed within Reg Coady Reserve, at the intersection of Dobroyd Parade and Waratah Street.  A change to the G-loop temporary works design and construction methodology has meant that it may not be constructed by the commencement of site tunneling activities at the Northcote Street Tunnel Site.

CSJ propose a temporary, contingency haulage route for Northcote Street Tunnel Site in the event that the G-loop is not complete when spoil haulage commences in September 2016. At most, the temporary route would be used for three months until December 2016. The temporary haulage route would use the City West Link, Victoria Road, Concord Road and Homebush Bay Drive and would not require the use of any local roads within the Council.

The peak heavy traffic generation at the Northcote site prior to December 2016 is expected to be approximately 22 vehicles per hour, including spoil trucks and concrete agitators, during day and evening periods (from 7am to 10pm). No night haulage is proposed during the specified time frame, however, concrete agitators would use this route at night (between 10pm to 7am).

At noted at the time of the EIS, the most appropriate methodology to manage spoil from the Northcote Street site would be to have trucks turn immediately right onto Parramatta Road, to head in a westerly direction.

Further information is in Attachment 11.

 

 

1.1.9    Stormwater WestConnex M4 East

The Joint Venture has provided Council with a number of stormwater reports for the WestConnex M4 East, as follows:

·    Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Wattle Street Temporary Works Site Final Design (FD);

·    Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Parramatta Road Temporary Works Site Final Design (FD).

 

These reports are provided in Attachments 12 and 13.

 

1.2.0    Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Wattle Street Temporary Works Site Final Design (FD)

This addresses the Planning Minister’s Conditions of Approval B20 (Stormwater Drainage Report).

The report states:

The assessments undertaken generally found that there will be minor to negligible changes to the drainage patterns. These changes are small enough to be accommodated by the existing drainage systems.

 

1.2.1    Technical Report – Stormwater Drainage Report: Parramatta Road Temporary Works Site Final Design (FD)

This addresses the Planning Minister’s Conditions of Approval B20 (Stormwater Drainage Report).

The report states:

The assessments undertaken generally found that there will be minor to negligible changes to the drainage patterns. These changes are small enough to be accommodated by the existing drainage systems.

 

1.2.2    WestConnex M4 East Northcote Site Pedestrian Management during Acoustic Shed Construction

Council staff have advised the Joint Venture that the closure of the footpath on Parramatta Road is not supported. There are serious concerns that pedestrian safety will be compromised and that some people may choose to walk in the road carriageway. To date, it is understood that RMS support the position of Council staff.

The Joint Venture has advised that the construction of the acoustic shed requires temporary closure of the footpath. The acoustic shed is to be built to the Parramatta Road frontage. They have stated that the cladding will need to be installed from the footpath, which requires temporary equipment on the footpath.

They have stated that the temporary footpath closure is required to protect members of the public and to provide a suitable work area for personnel to access outside face of western wall during critical acoustic shed construction works. Lane closures are also required due to proximity to Parramatta Road, hence works will be carried out on night shift.

 

1.2.3    Intermittent and Temporary Closures

The Joint Venture is proposing intermittent and temporary closures as follows:

Intermittent closures with the following controls in place:

·    Security Guard or Traffic Controller at each end of closed section, communicating with work crews for when to halt pedestrians.

·    Pedestrian traffic stopped for short period, and advised of alternate route around work area.

·    Intermittent closure period minimised at all times, approximately 20 minute maximum duration of any one period.

·    Pedestrians have right of way wherever possible.

 

Temporary footpath closures with the following controls in place:

·    Temporary footpath closure required for approximately four week period, on night shift only.

·    Footpath will be re-opened on day shift and intermittent closures will then apply.

·    Security Guard or Traffic Controller at each end of closed section, communicating with pedestrians advising of closure and alternate pedestrian route around work area.

 

Further information is in Attachment 14.

 

1.2.4    DPE Compliance Unit Meetings

Three meetings have been held with officers from the Department of Planning & Environment’s Compliance Unit over June/July. The unit has completed random inspections of the various construction sites, discussed issues with local residents (mainly in the Haberfield area) and met with the JV on a number of occasions to discuss complaints and compliance matters.

The Unit has inspected a facility where heritage salvage items are currently being stored and spoken with the heritage consultant advising the JV on which items and materials from identified heritage items should be salvaged. The Unit is currently considering Council’s request for a compliance officer to be based, full time at the IWC.

 

1.2.5    Heritage Demolitions

The development consent instrument has been reviewed and after discussions with the DPE Compliance Unit the consensus, at least at an officer level, is that the wording of the instrument only requires hand salvage work to be carried out to ‘individually listed heritage items’ – i.e. those buildings specifically and individually listed in council LEPs. In the former Ashfield LGA context this would represent three individually listed items in Ashfield LEP 2013. However, in further discussions with the SMC the scope of salvaged items has been established as being broader than just these items. A copy of the Heritage Salvage Report for the WestConnex M4 east project, which identifies the specific items to be salvaged, is included in Attachment 15. The report includes photographs of the type of items being salvaged from properties noting that multiple examples (e.g. fireplaces, doors, etc) may be collected from the one property.

Once salvaged, these items are being transported to a secure site by the demolition contractors, wrapped for protection and placed in secure shipping containers. The filled containers are then transported to a secure site.

All salvaged items are being catalogued and when the final assembly of items has been completed a comprehensive list will be compiled and published on the WestConnex website and in hard copy at council service centres and the WestConnex Community Centre at Burwood. Property owners in localities where demolition has taken place will then have an opportunity to lodge an interest in an item(s) over a defined timeframe. Where multiple parties are interested in an item a ballot system will be used to determine the recipient. Successful recipients will be informed and advised of the location of the item(s) and the process by which collections can be made – bona fides of proof of property ownership will need to be provided to release the item(s).

While the finer points and details of the salvage strategy are still being worked through, the above outline represents the likely process.

 

 

 

1.2.6    Legal Advice

As has been advised previously, legal advice is being sought from Tim Roberston SC, and will be brought to Council for consideration as soon as it is received. The brief includes consideration of the heritage demolition issue, however, as noted above, Council officers have not seen any evidence to suggest that the current activities around demolition and salvage of heritage items is occurring in breach of the development consent. Notwithstanding this view, the advice being sought will also consider this matter.

 

 

2.0       STAGE 2 – NEW M5

2.1.1    Early Works

The Joint Venture Company (JVC) that has been appointed by SMC to construct Stage 2 has met with Council representatives twice (as of 06/07/16) to discuss matters including site establishment & fencing, road geometry, community consultation, investigation works, drainage & flooding, Camdenville Park and road condition surveys.

Meetings are scheduled to take place monthly and include a range of representatives from JVC, from across Council and also from SMC.

The proponent is in the process of responding to all construction and operational matters that require further design work and documentation as per the conditions of the Stage 2 approval.  Various pieces of documentation have been received by Council to date in this regard; these are placing huge pressure on existing internal resource.

Initial road geometry designs of Campbell Street/Road and St Peters Interchange, including flooding & drainage, has been presented to Council by JVC; these designs did not incorporate any of the conditions of consent. Initial commentary has nonetheless been provided on these designs

 

2.1.2    Works on Public Roads WestConnex M5 East

RMS has advised that they will be utilising their powers under the Roads Act 1993 to undertake works on Albert Street, St Peters. The works include permanent projects works.

Further information is detailed in Attachment 6.

 

2.1.3    Camdenville Park

Council allocated funds in the 2015/2016 budget for the upgrade of Camdenville Park. The upgrade involves extensive improvements across the park to implement priority actions of the Camdenville Park Plan of Management and Master Plan. 

After Council invited tenders for its park works, RMS submitted an acquisition notice for the lease of an area of over 1/3 of the park at its south western end to use as a construction compound for WestConnex.  Consequently, works for the western portion of the site, including the wetland area and the proposed BMX pump track, have been deferred pending determination of the impacts of the WestConnex works by their contractors, CDS.

WestConnex works involve increasing the capacity of the Camdenville Park storm water detention basin and realigning Bedwin Road.  Upgrading of the stormwater detention basin is required to accommodate higher discharges as a result of road widening for WestConnex enabling works.  SMC has offered to build Council’s BMX track at its cost following completion of their works. WestConnex expects to occupy the site from January 2017 for a period of 42 months. This matter is still subject to ongoing negotiations with the RMS.

Council’s proposal for the upgrade of Camdenville Park includes a number of essential principles from the Park Master Plan.  These are to provide both access and visual surveillance of the western end of the park, particularly the BMX track from the adjoining public roads.  Further, the detention basin upgrade works should naturalise the basin, incorporating the proposed wetland in the south west corner to deliver bioremediation, biodiversity, amenity and recreation outcomes.

Officers are concerned that the terms of the Acquisition Notice provide for the basin to be handed back to Council, once WestConnex vacates the area, in the same condition as preconstruction.  This is contrary to agreements reached with WestConnex in discussions about the design of the basin.  WestConnex has advised that it prefers to allow the RMS acquisition notice to stand, but for WestConnex and Council to negotiate a more practical arrangement for shared access to the site and for the form in which the basin will be handed back to Council.

Officers continue to meet with personnel from SMC and RMS to negotiate these matters.

At the present time, the Camdenville Park upgrade works have been deferred pending the completion of the design of the detention basin by WestConnex.

 

2.1.4    Sydney Gateway

This project is likely to connect the St Peters Interchange to Sydney Airport (and a new expanded, relocated Qantas Drive) via an at-grade motorway that will carve through Tempe Container Lands and adjacent industrial land along the Alexandra Canal. Council’s IGM is to be briefed by SMC on this project in July 2016.

 

2.1.5    King Street Gateway

Emanating from Council discussions with SMC during Stage 2 of WestConnex, the King Street Gateway project is being progressed in parallel to Stage 2 works and is being led by RMS in conjunction with Inner West Council and the City of Sydney. The proposal focuses on the potential to reduce traffic along Sydney Park Road and Princes Highway as a result of the increases in vehicular movement on the upgraded Campbell Street and Euston Road.  This would reduce pressure on King Street, Newtown and increase connectivity between Sydney Park & the adjacent growing residential/commercial precincts of St Peters and Ashmore.

An RFQ has been prepared and distributed and the appointment of urban design consultants to undertake initial design work and traffic modelling is planned for July/August 2016.

 

2.1.6    Water Detention

Besides the proposed upgrade of the Camdenville basin, the only potential detention ponds Council officers are aware of are those that may be constructed within the SPI boundary – this was indicated at a previous meeting with the Joint Venture (responsible for constructing Stage 2), where an overview was provided of the interchange design.

 

2.1.7    Silver Street

Proposals have been submitted identifying the removal of the footpath and trees along the length of Silver Street (which runs between Princes Highway and Unwins Bridge Road) for electrical works.  These would likely be the first to be undertaken upon receipt of Federal approval for WestConnex.  Additional trees could also be removed along Unwins Bridge Road and May Street in order for these works to take place.

 

2.1.8    VMS Signs

One VMS sign is proposed along the Princes Highway near Barwon Park Road. Another further south along Princes Highway is now no longer viable.  The JV was notified that installation on the footpath is not supported and that alignment with the King Street Gateway Project must be realised.

 

2.1.9    School Zone – Campbell Street

A request to SMC for consideration of a school zone along Campbell Street (given the proximity to St Peter’s school) was not submitted to RMS. The SMC has advised that it does not wish to apply for a school zone as this may slow the flow of traffic along Campbell Street.

 

2.2.0    Traffic Modelling

A request made to RMS for access to traffic modelling (to assist Council to undertake the work proposed as per recent Notice of Motion on traffic modelling) was refused, however, the RMS has indicated a willingness to meet Council to discuss elements of the model.  This is currently being arranged.

 

3.0       STAGE 3 – M4-M5 LINK

3.1       Project Timeline

SMC has initiated a series of meetings with Council officers aimed at informing the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). At this time it is anticipated that the timeline for Stage 3 will be:

·    initial survey and Geotechnical investigations                        April–July 2016

·    community consultation                                                          to commence mid 2016

·    preliminary draft alignment and portal locations                     last quarter of 2016

·    Environmental Impact Statement exhibition                          first quarter of 2017

·    Environmental Impact Statement determination                    late 2017

·    construction to commence if approved                                  late 2018 or early 2019

 

3.2       Geotechnical Investigations

Current activities in relation to Stage 3 also include Geotechnical investigations (core sample drilling), at numerous locations across the LGA, to assist in determining the alignment of the proposed tunnels.  As indicate above, this activity was anticipated to continue until the end of July 2016; however, recent discussions with SMC have indicated that these works may continue into August.

Since commencement of the investigations, local residents have expressed concern over a number of issues including:

·  disturbance of acid sulphate soils

·  potential impact on trees

·  general environmental impacts

·  potential impact on property values

·  general disruption to open space

 

Council officers continue to liaise with SMC on behalf of the residents, particularly seeking reassurance regarding environmental aspects of the operations.

 

3.3       Noise Monitoring

Council was recently informed that SMC will establish a noise monitoring station in Hutcheson Street, Rozelle. This station will be used to establish baseline noise levels for the Stage 3 EIS. Council has responded to this notification, both verbally and in writing, informing SMC that it considers the location inappropriate as it is within 500m of the construction site for the CBD & SE Light Rail Maintenance Facility. Council considers that proximity to this site during its construction phase will result in artificially high noise baselines for the EIS and has requested SMC meet to discuss alternative locations for the noise monitoring station.

SMC have responded to Council’s concern regarding the proposed noise monitoring station in Hucheson Street, Lilyfield by indicating that the noise levels likely to be produced by construction of the CBD & SE Light Rail Maintenance Deport will be lower than the noise produced by City West Link Traffic.  They have also committed to undertaking operator-attended noise monitoring so that the various noise sources can be identified.

 

 

4.0       ADDITIONAL LIAISON WITH COUNCIL

Project Directors for Stage 1 and 2, as well as the company CEO, briefed Council’s Administrator in June 2016.  Additionally, the Project Director for Stage 3 and other representatives briefed Council’s Administrator on progress with this stage on 13 July2016.

SMC has also enhanced its communication with Council for Stage 3 and is currently in contact with Council officers in an effort to take account of Council priorities and to alert Council of any critical issues as soon as they arise.

 

5.0       WESTCONNEX RESPONSE UNIT

Work has commenced on preparation of a structure and position objectives for a specific team of officers to manage WestConnex related matters for the IWC. It is envisaged that three officers will make up this unit which will be responsible for liaison with the JVs, DPE Compliance Unit, key stakeholders and the community on WestConnex enquiries, project works, and other related matters. Recruitment of this team will be progressed through secondment and/or expressions of interest from existing staff over the next few weeks.

 

 

6.0       COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

In response to the resolution of Council regarding the exploration of further engagement opportunities with the broader community on the WestConnex project the following aims and engagement tools are recommended.

Council’s Communication and Engagement Plan for the WestConnex project aims to:

·     Inform the IWC community about Council’s efforts to oppose and mitigate the impacts of WestConnex.

·     Assist the community in reporting breaches or concerns about approved WestConnex works undertaken by contractors.

·     Promote the WestConnex Response Unit to be established by Council.

·     Support the local community groups who oppose WestConnex.

·     Publicly hold WestConnex to account in responding to Council and community concerns.

·     Seek the community’s input into design aspects of WestConnex adjunct works over which Council may influence (e.g. works in local roads such as the Green Link along Campbell Road, as part of stage two).

·     Promote individual community submissions and seek the community’s input into Council’s response to the Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed stage three (St Peters to Haberfield), expected to be released in early 2017 for exhibition and consultation.

 

Council will use the following channels and tools to communicate and engage with the community:

·     Dedicated WestConnex web page on IWC website with links from the three former Councils’ websites.

·     Letterbox distribution of an LGA-wide flyer addressing the three stages of WestConnex.

·     On-going monthly meetings with Westconnex action groups and community leaders. 

·     Support for direct community advocacy and events through funding community based role.

·     Regular information and updates to Council and the community from Council's new dedicated Westconnex Response Unit and NSW Department of Planning Compliance Officer.

·     Regular e-news, Inner West Courier, media and community newsletters updates.

 

Your Say Inner West project page with activated engagement tools during stages where community input is sought, supplemented by face-to-face and/or site-specific engagement.

 

 

7.0       WESTCONNEX TRAFFIC MODELLING

In April 2016 The former Marrickville Council resolved as follows:

 “That  Council undertakes urgent traffic modelling to ascertain the specific impacts on local streets in the St. Peters and Enmore areas which will be directly affected by the proposed WestConnex St Peters Interchange”.

 

Council officers recommend that the best course of action is to review the detailed data that has been developed in the RMS traffic model. Accordingly Council officers have requested this information. RMS  have confirmed that it is not practical to provide the entire traffic model to Council  but  they are prepared to meet Council to discuss the model and can provide outputs from the model at locations requested by Council. Council has put together a group of traffic engineers and transport planners to follow through on this matter with a view of gathering the data across the entire West Connex route so a review can be undertaken to  look at what can be done to minimise impacts on the residential streets throughout the LGA. Further information will be provided following the meeting with the RMS.

 

 

8.0       Westconnex Related Utility Works and Requests for Road Opening Permits

Council is in receipt of several notices and applications concerning works associated with the Westconnex project seeking either comment or consent for road openings. These fall into two categories:

·     notices inviting Council comment; and

·     applications requesting Council consent.

 

At its Infrastructure, Planning and Environmental Services Committee meeting of 3 February 2016, Council resolved that any future decisions or applications for work relating to WestConnex or the Sydney Gateway will be brought to the elected Council for decision, rather than be determined through delegation or by staff”.

Pursuant to this decision, at its meeting of 19 April 2016 Council considered a report on an application from UAE Electrical for a Road Opening Permit for works associated with a new electricity main for the Westconnex St Peters Interchange site. Council resolved to refuse the application on the grounds that there was no planning approval for WestConnex New M5 Stage 2 and because Council is opposed to the WestConnex project.

Council further resolved to advise WestConnex and relevant known sub-contractors that Council will consider future applications made after such time as the project has been approved and key details are known, if in fact it is approved in the future. The project has since been given consent.

The following notices and applications have been submitted to Council:

1.         Notification by Poles & Underground Pty Ltd of proposed electrical works for Westconnex Stage 2. Notification is provided as required under the Electricity Supply Act 1995 and State Environmental Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. Works, as depicted on the plans in Attachment 16, involve:

a.   Decommissioning of overhead wires, street lights and property services in Holland Street, Campbell Lane and Harber Streets, St Peters.

b.   Removal of a power pole and street light on Princes Hwy, between Campbell Rd and Albert St, and the relocation of overhead power lines.

c.   Decommissioning of substations in Campbell Rd and Albert Street, St Peters.

The notice invites Council to review and make a submission in relation to the proposed asset relocation works. Council does not provide consent for these works as utilities are able to execute such works under their own legislation. The notification provides Council with the opportunity to make submissions to which the network operator must give due consideration.

2.         Request by CDS Joint Venture, Westconnex New M5, for a Road Opening Permit and Council’s agreement to construct a temporary noise wall approximately 2.5 metres in height on the Princes Hwy footpath extending from 316 Princes Hwy approximately 52 metres. Details of the proposed wall are shown in Attachment 18. The wall is expected to be in place until late 2019. Council would generally issue a hoarding type permit for such a structure.

Figure 1. Proposed Location of Noise Wall

 

3.         Request by CPB Dragados Samsung (CDS) Joint Venture, Westconnex New M5, for Road Opening Permits to undertake various works on footpaths and roads in St Peters as tabulated in Attachment 17. Works include:

a)         Locating services

b)         Coring for road pavement testing

c)         Soil sampling

d)         Foundation and services for Variable Message Signage

e)         Diversion of existing services.

 

4.         Submission by CPB Dragados Samsung Joint Venture, Westconnex New M5, seeking Council comment on design plans for the installation of permanent Variable Message Signs to support the construction of the Westconnex New M5. Signs impacting Council’s area are located at:

a.   Princes Hwy between Frederick Street and Yelverton Street, St Peters.

b.   Princes Hwy at Barwon Park Rd intersection.

Design plans for these locations are shown in Attachment 19.

 

Under normal circumstances, Council officers process notifications and applications from contractors /public authorities, in categories such as these, as operational matters.

Conditions attached to Road Opening Permits typically require matters such as traffic management, tree protection measures, maintaining suitable access for road users and satisfactory restoration of Council’s infrastructure on completion to be addressed by the applicant.

As Council was advised in April, provided the work is done in compliance with any conditions imposed, it is considered there would be no relevant grounds for Council to refuse the issuing of a Road Opening or Hoarding Permits. The same applies to the application for a noise wall and the variable messaging signage.

Should Council resolve to approve the applications, typical conditions which would be incorporated into Council’s response depending on the circumstance may include the following:

1.         This permit relates to the carriageways and footways in the Local and Regional Roads set out in the application and the footways of any State Roads. Separate permits for opening of the carriageways of State Roads should be obtained from NSW Roads and Maritime Services.

2.         Compliance with the terms and conditions contained in Council’s “Application for Road Opening Permit”. (Attachment 25).

3.         A Road Occupancy Licence being obtained from the NSW Roads and Maritime Service (RMS).

4.         No openings at all shall be made in Council’s depression era concrete road pavements. Transverse road crossings of these are to use trenchless construction techniques.

5.         No Works permitted within the carriageways during the sign posted ‘Clearway’ operating hours.

6.         The applicant shall be responsible for the permanent restoration of road, footpaths and other infrastructure disturbed by the work. Restoration can be done either by:

·    the applicant at its cost and under Council’s supervision. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of the relevant application and inspection charges; or

·    Council at the applicant’s cost.

 

7.         Further to condition 6, the relevant application, inspection and restoration charges are included in Council’s published Fees and Charges and are reviewed annually as part of Council’s budget.

8.         Restoration of Council’s infrastructure is to be completed to Council’s requirements and in conformance with AUS-SPEC #2 – “Roadworks Specifications”.

9.         Council approval to be obtained for any proposed full closure of the road carriageway temporarily preventing vehicular access.

10.       Suitable notification being provided to all properties near or adjacent to the works. This shall include letter box drops and notices in local newspapers.

11.       Suitable access is to be maintained for road users and residents and businesses accessing private properties.

12.       Site works shall be staged in a manner to limit the loss of on-street parking.

13.       Work impacting residential areas is to be restricted to the hours of:

·    7:00am to 6:00pm Mondays to Fridays; and

·    8:00am to 1:00pm Saturdays.

            No work is to be carried out on Sundays or Public Holidays.

 

14.       Work impacting trees must comply with AS4970-2009 Protection of Trees on Development Sites and AS 4373-2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees. The Applicant must engage a Project Arborist with minimum AQF Level 5 qualification for the duration of the Work to:

·    Provide an Aboricultural Impact Assessment Report, prepared in accordance with Council’s DCP Part 2.20, to record & document tree health prior to commencement of work and submit for Council approval. This Plan shall provide recommendations for any compensatory or replacement tree planting.

·    Provide a Tree Protection Plan, prepared in accordance with Council’s DCP Part 2.20, and submit for Council approval prior to commencing work near trees.

·    Advise on and supervise work near trees to minimize impacts on tree health.

·    Provide written report to Council on any breaches of tree protection measures, impacts on tree health and proposed remedial measures for implementation by the applicant, for Council approval.

 

It is also recommended that the General Manager be given the authority to include such other technical conditions considered to be necessary to safeguard Council’s infrastructure.

 

 

Resubmitted Application for Road Opening Permit for New Electricity Main for Westconnex Interchange Site, St Peters

 

Following the granting of development approval for the project on 21 April, the Project Director from Westconnex New M5 has submitted a fresh application for the electricity mains project for Council’s consideration. It is recommended that Council consider and determine the matter.  A route plan is shown in the figure below.

 

 

 

A copy of the letter from the Project Director, Tim Orpen, from the CBP Dragados Samsung Joint Venture is included with this report as Attachment 20. While this letter advises that the works will be undertaken “within the road corridor and on Council owned land including footpaths’ inspection of the submitted details indicates that, in reality, no private land owned by Council is affected and that all works are in carriageways and footpaths of public roads.

 

 

 

The application from UEA Electrical is included as Attachment 21. It is understood that UEA is acting on behalf of Ausgrid, the local energy authority. The Electricity Supply Act 1995 empowers the State’s energy authorities to undertake works such as these without approval from local councils. Nevertheless, the network operator is required to give due consideration to any submission made by Council. Further, Westconnex has advised that, while the Roads and Maritime Service (RMS) has issued a Road Occupancy Licence for the project, it is subject to a Road Opening Permit being obtained from Inner West Council.

Attachment 22 to this report comprises 13 sheets of design details for the project and Attachment 23 sets out the project timeline. The remaining Attachment 24 is details of traffic control proposed to be implemented during the work (10 sheets).

Under normal circumstances, Council officers process applications such as these from public utility authorities as operational matters. Notification from the public utility does not necessarily trigger intervention by Council staff until such time that the Utility is ready to commence site work or seeks a site meeting with Council officers. It is not normal practice for Council to issue a road opening permit to a public utility authority because they generally act under their own legislation. In this case, the RMS has included a condition on the Road Occupancy Licence that the Applicant is to obtain a Road Opening Permit from the Council.

Conditions attached to Road Opening Permits typically require matters such as traffic management, maintaining suitable access for road users and satisfactory restoration of Council’s infrastructure on completion to be addressed by the applicant.  Road Occupancy Licenses issued by the RMS usually include requirements such as provision for traffic, hours of work and times of day at which road traffic can be detoured away from the work site.

As Council was advised in April, provided the work is done in compliance with any conditions imposed, it is considered there would be no relevant grounds for Council to refuse the issuing of a Road Opening Permit.

Should Council resolve to issue a Road Opening Permit, it is recommended that the conditions as outlined previously in this report be included in the Permit.

Council has recently been notified that these works for the new electricity main will commence on Monday 25th July 2016 and will be ongoing for approximately 12 weeks.

 

Proposed WestConnex M4-M5 Link, involving an interchange at Rozelle and possible tunnel from Iron Cove Bridge

 

There were recent reports in the media  about a possible tunnel from the Rozelle interchange to Iron Cove Bridge. The reports confirmed the serving of notices on a number of properties along Victoria Road within the Inner West Local Government Area about potential property impacts to enable the widening of Victoria Road. Immediately Council became aware of the proposal, Council officers contacted Sydney Motorways Corporation and were informed that there is no information on the proposed alignment publically available .

Accordingly the Administrator has written to Duncan Gay, Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, requesting urgent advice regarding when the community will be consulted on this link and the manner of that consultation. While both the Inner West Council and community are strongly opposed to WestConnex, including this element of it, it is vital that the community has the opportunity to review detailed information in order to understand the likely impacts, as well as any alternative options which might be under consideration.  The Administrator has also requested to meet with the Minister in order that Council’s concerns are clearly understood.

 

 

Financial Implications 

Applicable charges relating to road opening permits are applied in accordance with Council’s adopted fees and charges.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Letter from RMS, 28 June 2016

2.

Piling Works - Short Term

3.

Flood Mitigation Strategy - Project Wide Permanent Works

4.

Stormwater Drainage Report

5.

Flood Mitigation Strategy - Temporary Works

6.

Letter from RMS, 10 June 2016

7.

Letter - WestConnex M4E -  Construction of M4 East Motorway - Use of Powers under Roads Act 1993 - Substratum

8.

Sketch A - Part A -X003

9.

Sketch A - Part B -X004

10.

Letter Local Roads Ashfield Council

11.

M4E-ES-LET-PWD-01339-01 Inner West Council Northcote Haulage

12.

M4E-AEH-TR-40-120-106001_D­_00

13.

M4E-AEH-TR-50-120-106001_D_00

14.

Northcote Shed - Pedestrian Management1

15.

Heritage Salvage Report - Westconnex M4 East Project

16.

Electrical Relocation Works

17.

Proposed Road Opening Locations, St Peters

18.

Proposed Noise Wall

19.

Proposed VMS Installations

20.

Letter from CBP Dragados Samsung Joint Venture

21.

Application Letter from UAE Electrical

22.

Design Details (13 sheets)

23.

Proposed Project Timeline

24.

Traffic Control Plans (10 sheets)

25.

Standard Application for Road Opening Permit

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 4

Subject:         Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy 

File Ref:         16/4718/81648.16        

Prepared By: Leah Chiswick - Executive Strategic Planner, Leichhardt 

Authorised By: Phil Sarin - Director, Planning and Environment

SUMMARY

 

UrbanGrowth NSW is currently finalising the Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy in preparation for its consideration by the NSW Government. While there is to be no further public consultation on the Strategy, a submission is currently being prepared which reinforces the key concerns of the Inner West Council, as outlined in previous reports to the former Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville Councils. The major issues are outlined below and others will be detailed in the submission. It is recommended that the submission be sent to UrbanGrowth for consideration. 

 

A presentation from UrbanGrowth on the strategy was made to the combined LRAC meeting held on 12 July 2016.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council:

 

1.       provide feedback to UrbanGrowth NSW prior to finalisation of the Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy highlighting key issues with the proposed Strategy as it affects the Inner West LGA; and

2.       request that UrbanGrowth NSW re-exhibit the draft Strategy prior to it being presented to the NSW Government for endorsement.

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

The draft Strategy is an integrated transport and land use plan prepared by UrbanGrowth NSW which aims to revitalise Parramatta Road by delivering future housing, employment, public transport, open space and amenity needs. The corridor is expected to deliver 40,000 new homes and 50,000 new jobs over 30 years. The draft Strategy proposes that the renewal will be focused in eight strategic precincts at Granville, Auburn, Homebush, Burwood, Kings Bay (part of Five Dock), Taverners Hill, Leichhardt and Camperdown. The Taverners Hill, Leichhardt and Camperdown precincts and associated frame areas are located entirely within the Inner West LGA, with the exception of the frame area to the east of Camperdown which is located within the City of Sydney. A small portion of the Kings Bay precinct and the eastern frame area are also located within the LGA.

 

The draft Strategy and supporting documentation were released for public consultation between 17 September and 18 December 2015. The former Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville Councils made submissions on the draft Strategy. UrbanGrowth released a Consultation Outcomes Report in May 2016 summarising the feedback received.

 

The former Ashfield and Marrickville Councils had signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with UrbanGrowth which enabled them to participate in the development of the draft Strategy. While the former Leichhardt Council did not sign the MoU, in March and May 2016 it approved a suite of its own Parramatta Road corridor studies (Parramatta Road/Norton Street Heritage Study; Parramatta Road and Norton Street Urban Design Study; Commercial and Retail Study: Norton Street and Parramatta Road; Leichhardt Industrial Precinct Planning report and urban design study).

 

These studies were forwarded to UrbanGrowth as they were completed and following Council approval officers met with UrbanGrowth to discuss their implications for the Strategy.

 

UrbanGrowth recently informed the seven councils along the corridor that the final Strategy is being developed for endorsement by the NSW Government later this year. In light of this information, Council officers would like to make a submission to UrbanGrowth reiterating a number of key concerns which should be addressed prior to the Strategy’s finalisation.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Staff resources.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

 

Loss of industrial zoned land

The loss of all IN2 Light Industrial zoned land in the Taverners Hill and Camperdown precincts, as identified in the draft Strategy, is of grave concern given the substantial deficits identified in the 2014 Leichhardt Industrial Lands Study completed by SGS Economics and Planning. The Study concluded that in light of future population and employment growth in the former Leichhardt LGA there would be a deficit in industrial floor space of between 7,500sqm and 55,000sqm by 2036.

 

The subsequent Leichhardt Industrial Precinct Planning report, approved by the former Leichhardt Council in April 2016, included two alternate options:

1.    No loss of industrial zoned land within the LGA and strengthening of the role of the existing industrial precincts.

2.    Re-conception of the future roles of the industrial precincts within the Parramatta Road corridor (Tebbutt Street/Parramatta Road and Camperdown) to facilitate additional uses while enabling retention of industrial uses.

 

With regard to the Tebbutt Street/Parramatta Road precinct, Option 2 would largely align with the land use future presented in the draft Strategy. The introduction of B4 Mixed Use and B6 Enterprise Corridor zones would permit residential accommodation, which would benefit from the precinct’s location and transport access, while retention of some IN2 zoned land would allow for industrial uses to continue. Figure 1 below is an excerpt of the Structure Plan for the Tebbutt Street/Parramatta Road precinct, developed as part of the Leichhardt Industrial Precinct Planning process, showing Council’s proposed zoning configuration under Option 2. 

Figure 1:    Tebbutt Street/Parramatta Road precinct Structure Plan showing the zoning configuration under Option 2 of the Leichhardt Industrial Precinct Planning report

 

 

Under Option 2, land on the periphery of the Camperdown precinct would be rezoned to B5 Business Development while the core of the precinct would retain its IN2 Light Industrial zoning. The rationale for the rezoning to B5 is that the precinct’s location in relation to the CBD and institutions such as the University of Sydney and RPA means it is well positioned to accommodate supporting industries. A B5 zone would permit a more commercial focus while enabling retention of many of the existing industrial uses. It would also capture much of the existing land use profiles, such as Bulky Goods Retail, that currently line this section of Parramatta Road. The proposed zoning configuration also aims to retain as much industrial floor space as possible, ensuring that land remains available for the range of light industrial uses that require a location close to the CBD. The retention of the IN2 zoning in the centre of the precinct acknowledges the desire to limit operational impact on the industrial core by locating non-industrial uses on the periphery. Figure 2 below is an excerpt of the Structure Plan for the Camperdown precinct, developed as part of the Leichhardt Industrial Precinct Planning process, showing the proposed zoning configuration under Option 2. 

 

 

Figure 2:    Camperdown precinct Structure Plan showing the zoning configuration under Option 2 of the Leichhardt Industrial Precinct Planning report

 

Any further loss of industrial zoned land in these key industrial precincts or the introduction of additional land uses, such as residential accommodation in Camperdown, would jeopardise the industrial precincts and their ability to adequately provide for the future population of the LGA, which is likely to increase substantially as a result of major urban renewal projects proposed in the vicinity.

 

This position is largely consistent with the desire of the University of Sydney/Sydney Local Health District partnership to facilitate the development of a Camperdown Biomedical and Biotechnology Hub. Central to the partnership’s stance is concern that if the Camperdown precinct is turned over to residential, the opportunity for expansion of the health and education precinct, including the provision of a biotechnology hub, would be jeopardised.

 

The partnership engaged SGS to provide detailed advice on potential employment and economic outcomes of a hub. The report states that while residential development is flexible enough to locate along a number of stretches of Parramatta Road, the Camperdown precinct, close to RPA and Sydney University as well as the CBD, should be considered for its wider employment potential. The report acknowledges but does not address in detail the critical shortage of industrial lands to meet future demand identified by the Industrial Lands Study prepared for the former Leichhardt Council. It notes that if the development of a biotechnology hub is to proceed, then it should be predicated on production and fabrication so that it can complement the existing industrial uses. The report also warns against the introduction of residential to the precinct as it will likely lead to land use conflicts and price-out remaining industrial uses in the short to medium term. 

 


 

Retention of existing zoning in Kings Bay and Taverners Hill precincts/frame areas

The R2 Low Density zone should be retained along Dalmar and Scott Streets and in the frame area to the east in order to maintain the integrity of the existing neighbourhoods. Furthermore, building heights along Parramatta Road should not cause undue winter overshadowing of existing residential properties.

The B6 Enterprise zone along Parramatta Road within the former Ashfield LGA must be retained to ensure that employment, local business and local services can be adequately accommodated.

 

Competition with existing centres

The widespread rezoning of industrial land to business zones in the precincts and frame areas (if the Strategy extends to these areas) may encourage retail and commercial uses away from existing centres. Of particular concern is the impact that this might have on efforts to revitalise Norton Street that were identified in the Commercial and Retail Study: Norton Street and Parramatta Road undertaken by SGS for the former Leichhardt Council. While the Study acknowledges the need to allow for additional retail and commercial floor space to meet future demand, it states that, given the existing surplus in the Norton Street/Parramatta Road study area, additional floor space should only be delivered in the medium-to-long term, once supply and demand are in balance. If introduced earlier, it may exacerbate vacancy rates and further erode Norton Street’s retail character. This floor space should be focused in existing high streets rather than create new strips.

 

Reliance on reduction in vehicular traffic

The vision for Parramatta Road and the precincts, comprising environmental, amenity, streetscape and active and public transport improvements, is reliant on a reduction in traffic facilitated by WestConnex which has not been demonstrated. WestConnex’s own modelling shows that if there are tolls on Stage 2, and to a lesser extent on Stages 1 and 2, traffic and congestion will actually increase on Parramatta Road thereby diluting the financial viability of redevelopment and reducing the ability of the Strategy to achieve its renewal objectives.

 

Infrastructure provision

While the draft Urban Amenity Improvement Program (UAIP) – a $200 million State government funded initiative under the draft Strategy to stimulate the transformation of the corridor – identified public domain and open space improvements within the Inner West LGA precincts, it is insufficient and additional works should be implemented through more substantial funding to ensure the adequate provision of facilities under the Strategy. For example, The GreenWay should receive an adequate allocation of funds under the UAIP to facilitate the embellishment and augmentation of public open space. The Draft UAIP notes that “much more amenity improvement or local infrastructure will be needed over time, funded from local government contributions systems or other funding programs”.

There must not be an over-reliance on limited section 94 funds to deliver additional infrastructure to cater for the substantial increases in resident and worker populations. UrbanGrowth must identify alternate funding programs/sources and ensure that the financial burden associated with the provision and embellishment of infrastructure does not fall unduly on local councils, especially as section 94 contributions for residential development in the Inner West LGA are tightly capped. Where land is rezoned, allowance must be made for value capture to provide for physical and social infrastructure, including affordable housing.

Furthermore, implementation of the Strategy must ensure development in the corridor is staged so that infrastructure is provided ahead of additional populations. For example, there must also be commitment to the Burwood to Sydney CBD On-Road Transit project being operational before redevelopment of the eastern end of the corridor occurs.

 

 

The draft Strategy outlined that “the staged rezoning of land, alongside the delivery of infrastructure and services will be documented in the Short-Term Implementation Plan”. Council is supportive of a clear mechanism which ensures that the appropriate timing and staging of changes to the planning framework within the corridor is achieved. The timing of land use change and development should not only accord with the delivery of infrastructure and services but allow for any supporting work, such as studies and the development of provisions, to be undertaken in the short term. Specifically, a process should be established to ensure that councils are not required to consider planning proposals ahead of infrastructure provision or the completion of further work.

 

Built form guidelines

Additional innovative built form guidelines and examples need to be included to support and encourage the development of fine grained building form typologies appropriate for areas with fine grained and fragmented ownership subdivision patterns (allowing narrow frontage buildings and minimising the need for lot amalgamation). This can allow development outcomes to reinforce this aspect of heritage and character, create rich variation, reduce the cost and time associated with amalgamating land and minimise amenity and financial impact on existing remaining landholders. This will be particularly underpinned by use of unbundled car parking, car share and shared parking management of car parking provision. Appropriate building massing, scale, setback and articulation guidelines are required to reflect the fine grained and fragmented ownership typology, particularly prevalent to many areas within the Inner West Council.

 

Re-exhibition

Given that the Strategy will have updated planning provisions for the frame areas and precincts which have not been exhibited previously it would be desirable for the final document to be re-exhibited for public comment prior to its formal adoption by the State Government.

 

Consultation with the Greater Sydney Commission

The draft Strategy states that the coordinated delivery of planning and transport actions will be the responsibility of a cross-agency committee led by the Department of Planning and Environment or the Greater Sydney Commission. The Greater Sydney Commission is now preparing the District Plans for each Greater Sydney District. Prior to finalisation of the Strategy, any revised documentation should be provided to the Commission for review and feedback. The Commission’s commitment to the vision for the corridor, its expression and means of implementation will be essential for the success of the Strategy. 

 

 

CONCLUSION

UrbanGrowth NSW is currently finalising the Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy in preparation for its consideration by the NSW Government. It is recommended that a submission reinforcing the key concerns of the Inner West Council be sent to UrbanGrowth with a request that the Strategy be re-exhibited prior to finalisation. 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Nil.


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 5

Subject:         Street Tree Pruning by Ausgrid - Update 

File Ref:         16/4718/83045.16        

Prepared By: Cathy Edwards-Davis - Director, Public Works 

Authorised By: Vanessa Chan - Interim General Manager

 

SUMMARY

Council and the community are concerned that there has been excessive pruning of street trees in the past six weeks in the Inner West Council area. The extent of pruning seems to be much more significant than in previous years. Further, there appears to have been a lack of community consultation regarding these works.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

1.       Council’s arborists provide oversight of Ausgrid’s street tree pruning in the Inner West area over the final few weeks of their current program of works; and

2.       Council works collaboratively with Ausgrid to develop a fit for purpose agreement to manage future urban tree pruning and associated works in the Inner West Council area, including a review of the guidelines and improved notification and consultation with the community.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

Council and the community are concerned that there has been excessive and severe pruning of street trees in the past few weeks in the former Leichhardt and Ashfield Council areas. The extent of pruning seems to be different and much more significant than in previous years.  Further, Council’s arborists are concerned that Ausgrid have not been complying with the relevant Australian Standard and Ausgrid guidelines.

Council is also concerned about poor communication and interaction with the community by Ausgrid's contractor.  Council has received over 100 complaints from residents.  There appears to have been a lack of community notification.

Most of the recent Ausgrid complaints concern the following:

·    Lack of notification prior to carrying out the works;

·    The over pruning and perceived vandalism inflicted on our trees;

·    The poor pruning practices carried out;

·    Lack of respect for the heritage values of the trees and LGA;

·    The poor customer service response received from Ausgrid staff and contractors.

 

It is understood that this is the first year of the contract for the new Ausgrid contractors operating in the former Ashfield and Leichhardt areas.  This is a new cut period for clearance, with ongoing pruning in future years.  Council staff have estimated that approximately 14,850 trees in the former Ashfield and Leichhardt areas have been impacted by the pruning activities of Ausgrid contractors. 

The former Marrickville LGA is under a separate Ausgrid contract and the works were completed in in January 2016.

 

 

Legislation and Guidelines

Ausgrid carries out the pruning of trees for clearances to overhead electrical wires according to their statutory requirements of Electricity Supply Act 1995.  This pruning work is scheduled once each 12 months.

This work should be carried out in accordance with the Australian Standard AS4373 Pruning of Amenity Trees, the Ausgrid Tree Safety Management Plan (December 2015) and ISSC – 3, Guideline for Managing Vegetation Near Power Lines (Integrating Community, Safety and Environmental Values) December 2005.

 

Staff Response

In response to these complaints and concerns, Parks and Trees staff met with Ausgrid and their contractor’s representatives, on Friday 17June 2016. At this meeting, Ausgrid’s arborist agreed to increase their monitoring of the contractor’s work.  They also agreed to discuss any issues or complaints received within Inner West Council with the contractor. 

Ausgrid has been sending Council weekly schedules of proposed works, and this has been put on Council’s Website and kept updated.  Links have been provided to the Ausgrid’s Tree Trimming web form and their contact centre on 13 13 65, for residents to lodge their enquiries and complaints.

 

Meetings with MPs

The Administrator and Director Public Works met with Jamie Parker MP, Member for Balmain and residents on the 19 July 2016 to discuss community concerns regarding the Ausgrid pruning of street trees.

The Director Public Works met with Jo Haylen MP, Member for Summer Hill and residents on the 19 July 2016 to discuss community concerns regarding the Ausgrid pruning of street trees.

 

Meeting with Ausgrid CEO

The Administrator, Interim General Manager, senior and technical staff met with the Ausgrid Chief Executive Officer and senior staff on the 19 July 2016 to again express serious concerns regarding the severe pruning within the Inner West.

At this meeting, Council expressed the following concerns:

·    The standard being used by Ausgrid is not appropriate to the urban situation in the Inner West;

·    Lack of notification and consultation with Council and the community;

·    The excessive pruning may have a long term impact on the health and viability of the street trees;

·    The excessive pruning is particularly an issue in heritage conservation areas.  Council has a significant interest and commitment to heritage matters;

·    Recreational and green space is highly limited in the Inner West area.  Street trees therefore provide high value to the community.

 

Short Term Actions

As a result of the meeting with the Ausgrid CEO, Ausgrid have agreed to a more collaborate approach with Council.  Ausgrid will allow Council’s arborists to oversight their works in the Inner West area over the final few weeks of their current program of works so that Council staff can scrutinise whether they are adhering to the relevant standards.

Ausgrid will provide Council with a weekly contract report which identifies the work locations for the coming week.

Ausgrid agreed to have a follow-up meeting in the short term with senior staff from both organisations, to discuss the ongoing collaboration between Ausgrid and Council.

 

 

Medium Term Actions

At the meeting Ausgrid agreed to develop an approach with Council that will include a review of the current “one size fits all” approach and options to try to extend the overall life of the trees.  It will also include improved notification and consultation with the community.

Moving forward in the medium term, IWC expects that Ausgrid will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding or tree management plan with Council to manage works in the LGA.  IWC will allocate arborists/ technical experts to work collaboratively with Ausgrid.  The discussion should include:

·    Review of the Guidelines with the standards team at Ausgrid;

·    Improved notification and consultation with the community;

·    Options to try to extend the overall life of the trees;

·    Developing a partnership approach;

·    A replacement strategy for older trees;

·    Tree management plans for significant trees.

 

Council will be seeking a remediation strategy for trees and areas that have been particularly adversely affected by the latest works.  Ausgrid acknowledged that there is the possibility for tree plantings, to replace trees which have to be pruned such that they are no longer viable.

Ausgrid undertook to provide advance notice to Council when they would be entering the Inner West local government area.  This allows Council staff to identify any particularly significant trees, which require specialised treatment and a tree management plan.

 

Vegetation Management Working Group

Ausgrid have taken steps to establish a Vegetation Management Working Group to improve collaboration and consultation with Council and the community.  Council and community representatives have been invited to participate in this Group.  Council has nominated two experienced technical staff to be on this Working Group.  It is understood that a number of community groups and representatives from the Inner West have also nominated themselves.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil.  There will be some Parks and Trees staff time associated with collaboration and overview of the Ausgrid works.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Council’s Parks and Trees staff have been significantly involved in this matter.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Council has received a large amount of feedback from the community on this matter.  Ausgrid will be setting up a Vegetation Management Working Group, which will allow community representatives to have input into future pruning matters and standards.

 

 

CONCLUSION

Council and the community are concerned that there has been excessive pruning of street trees in the past six weeks in the Inner West Council area. Council has met with Ausgrid to express these concerns.  Council and Ausgrid have agreed to work in a collaborative manner on short and medium term actions.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Nil.


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 6

Subject:         Development Application - 230 Victoria Street, Ashfield 

File Ref:         16/4718/81177.16        

Prepared By: Planning Consultant

Authorised By: Phil Sarin - Director, Planning and Environment

SUMMARY

This proposal involves alterations to the existing building located in Yeo Park, which was formerly known as the Baby Health Centre, and its use as a cafe.

The premises will operate between the hours of 7.00am and 6.00pm seven days per week and provide both dine in and take away services. The premises will have a total seating capacity of 46 people (32 indoor and 14 outdoor).

The works to the building are summarised as:

·    Removal of internal walls

·    Provision of a disabled toilet

·    Installation of commercial kitchen

·    Replace existing roof and roof waterproof membrane

·    Replace external tiling to the outdoor dining area

·    Replace awning cladding

·    Replace window joinery

·    Replace down pipes

·    Repair and clean brickwork

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

PART A

THAT Council as the consent authority pursuant to Clause 80(1) (a) of the environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) approve Development Application No. 10.2016.53.1 for the carrying out of alterations to the existing building for use as a cafe on Lot: 11 DP: 1002099, known as Yeo Park 230 Victoria Street, Ashfield subject to conditions outlined in Attachment 6.

 

PART B

THAT Council investigate and consider the following:

1.       the erection of signage in Yeo Park notifying users of Council’s smoking policy within parks;

2.       the erection of additional signage in Yeo Park outlining leash requirements for dog owners and the provision of additional litter bins; and

3.       the erection of speed limits signs outside Yeo Park Infants School.

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

1.0       Application Details

 

Applicant                                 :           Cathy Edwards-Davis C/- Inner West Council - Ashfield

Owner                                     :           Inner West Council – Ashfield

Value of work                          :           $198,368.00

Lot/DP                                     :           LOT: 11 DP: 1002099

Date lodged                             :           16/03/2016

Date of last amendment         :           NA

Building classification              :           6             

Application Type                     :           Local

Construction Certificate          :           No

Note: As this application involves a Council initiated project on Council land the development application has been externally assessed by a planning consultant, which is consistent with the former Ashfield Council ‘Processing of Specific Applications Policy’.

 

2.0       Site and Surrounding Development

 

The subject site is located at the southern end of Yeo Park in the suburb of Ashfield. The site has frontage to Victoria Street to the west and Old Canterbury Road to the east.

 

The development application relates to the use of a relatively small single storey Council owned building within the park grounds. The building is located to the south of the playing field and Yeo Park Infants School.

 

Single detached residential housing is located opposite the subject site on the western side of Victoria Street. Residential development including detached housing and residential flats is located opposite the site on the eastern side of Old Canterbury Road. Schools are located north of the site and separated from the subject building by the playing field.

 

Refer to Attachment 2 for a locality map.

 

3.0       Development History

 

Previous building and development applications submitted to Council for the subject site include:

 

NO.

DATE

PROPOSAL

DECISION

40/98

17 July 1998

Construction of a Long Day Child Care Centre with associated playground and Shade Facilities

Approved

 

The heritage impact assessment report identifies that the subject building was originally constructed as a baby health centre as part of a joint venture between a number of local Councils and the Health Department (circa 1949).

 

The site has more recently been used by YWCA NSW.

 

4.0       Zoning/Permissibility/Heritage

 

The site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation under the provisions of Ashfield LEP 2013 and not located within a Conservation Area.

The property is a heritage item (item 587 under LEP 2013) and is located within the vicinity of a heritage conservation area (C7 is located opposite the site on the western side of Victoria Street).

 

·                    The proposed development is defined as a ‘restaurant or cafe’ use under the ALEP 2013 and is permissible with Council consent.

 

5.0       Section 79C Assessment

 

The following is an assessment of the application with regard to the heads of consideration under the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

5.1       The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instrument

 

5.1.1    Local Environmental Plans

 

Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013

 

It is considered that the proposal generally complies with the provisions of the Ashfield LEP 2013. 

 

5.1.2    Regional Environmental Plans

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

 

An assessment has been made of the matters set out in Clause 20 of the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005.  It is considered that the carrying out of the proposed development is generally consistent with the objectives of the Plan.

5.1.3    State Environmental Planning Policies

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of land

 

There was nothing observed on the site that was indicative of potential site contamination. Remediation of the site is not required prior to the carrying out of the proposed development.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

 

There is no signage proposed under the development application.

 

5.2       The provisions of any Draft Environmental Planning Instrument that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority.

 

5.3       The provisions of any Development Control Plan.

 

The proposal is considered to meet the aims and objectives AIDAP 2013. Specifically to the following Parts: -

 


C1

ACCESS ADAPTABILITY AND MOBILITY

 

The application is accompanied by an Accessibility Review report. The report includes a number of recommendations (e.g. door widths, toilet design) to ensure compliance with relevant standards. A condition of consent addresses the recommendations of the report.

 

C2

ADVERTISEMENTS AND ADVERTISING STRUCTURES

Not applicable. There is no advertising proposed under this development application.

 

C3

 

ASHFIELD TOWN CENTRE

Not applicable.

C4

ASHFIELD WEST AREA

Not applicable.

C5

 

MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN RESIDENTIAL FLAT ZONES

Not applicable.

C6

41-51 ELIZABETH STREET

 

Not applicable.

C7

HABERFIELD HERITAGE CONSERVATION AREA

 

Not applicable

C8

140A HAWTHORNE PARADE

Not applicable.

 

C9

11-13 HERCULES STREET

Not applicable.

 

C10

HERITAGE CONSERVATION

The subject site is identified as being of local heritage significance under the LEP. The Harland Estate Conservation Area is located on the western side of Victoria Street. There are a number of other heritage items and conservation areas in the broader locality.

The proposal is essentially for the internal fit-out of the existing building with external cosmetic upgrades.

The recommendation to this report includes the following conditions:

1.    The physical works to the property (alterations) are to be overseen by a qualified conservation architect to ensure that damage and changes to the fabric of the building are minimised and that all works are undertaken to a high standard of finish.

2.    All roof top plant including exhaust vents and the air conditioning condensers are to be located centrally on the building roof area and screened and shall not exceed a height of 1.2 m above the roof face.

The proposal is not likely to have an adverse impact on the heritage significance of either the building or the conservation area.

Council’s heritage advisor has raised no objection to the proposal subject to the above conditions (see Attachment 4).

 

C11

PARKING

There is no on site car parking servicing the existing building.

The proposal is essentially for the change of use of the existing building. There is no increase in floor space. The proposed use is not expected to result in significant parking demands or traffic generation in the locality.

Councils Traffic Engineer has raised no objection to the proposal (see Attachment 5).

 

C12

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION IN THE PLANNING PROCESS AND ALL ASPECTS OF LAND MANAGEMENT

 

 

The development application was placed on notification from 18 March 2016 to 13 April 2016.

4 letters objecting to the proposal and 1 letter raising no objection to the proposal were received.

The matters identified in the submissions are discussed in section 5.7.1 of this report.

The matters raised in submissions are discussed in section 7.7 of this report.

 

C13

191 RAMSAY STREET

 

Not applicable.

C14

SUMMER HILL URBAN VILLAGE CENTRE

 

Not applicable.

 

C15

HOUSES & DUAL OCCUPANCIES

Not applicable.

D1

PLANNING FOR LESS WASTE

An internal garbage room is provided.

A waste management plan accompanies the development application.

 

E2

OUTDOOR DINING AND FOOTPATH TRADING POLICY

The proposal is consistent with the policy. The following matters will be required as conditions of consent:

·      The number of tables and chairs which can be used for outdoor dining is 3 tables and 14 chairs.

·      No freestanding A-frame style advertisements or ‘menu boards’ are permitted to be displayed external of the building.

·      Outdoor furniture must be strong, durable, and weather resistant and designed for commercial outdoor use.

·      Umbrellas must be secured to withstand strong winds and have a minimum ground clearance of 2.2 metres. 

·      Umbrellas must be of a market style (i.e. not beach umbrellas) and be manufactured from fire retardant materials if used in conjunction with heating devices.

·      Heating devices must be secured in place and have the ability to automatically turn off in the event that they are overturned.

·      All tables, chairs, umbrellas and any other equipment must be stored inside the restaurant/cafe premises when the business is closed. 

·      All outdoor furniture must be maintained in a sound and aesthetically acceptable condition to the Council’s satisfaction.

 

It is considered the application complies with the parts as indicated and ultimately achieves the aims and objectives of the AIDAP 2013.

 

5.4       Any matters prescribed by the regulations that apply to the land to which the development application relates.

 

Fire Safety - the building will comply with the requirements of the BCA.

 

5.5       The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts on the locality.

 

These matters have been considered as part of the assessment of the development application.  It is considered that the proposed development will have no significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts upon the locality.

 

Access, Transport and Traffic

 

The subject building was purposely built as a Baby Health Centre in 1949 then more recently used for programs run by YWCA NSW. 

 

The following parking rates of IDAP 2013 are relevant to consideration of the parking demands of the proposed and previous uses of the building.

 

Building area: 114sqm

Baby Health Centre (medical centre equivalent):      1space/25m2 = 5 spaces

Office:                                                                         1 space per 40m2 = 3 spaces

Public Buildings:                                                          1 space per 40m2 = 3 spaces

Café:                                                                           1 space per 40m2 = 3 spaces

 

(Note: all rounded up)

 

There is no on site car parking or loading available to the building. All previous uses have relied upon street parking and delivery parking. The proposal is for a change of use and the provision of on-site car parking cannot be practically achieved in this instance.

 

The IDAP identifies that the provision of car parking for cafe/restaurant uses may be varied in certain circumstances including whether a change of use only is proposed that means only limited on-site parking can be provided”. The proposed use is considered to be acceptable on a merits basis because:

 

1.   The building was lawfully constructed without car parking; it must be reasonably expected that the building can be used/occupied for some purpose.

2.   The intensity of the proposed cafe use in terms of the IDAP car parking requirements is less than or equal to the various uses of the building over time. The use of the subject building would generate 5 spaces if operated as a baby health centre (being the original use) and 3 spaces if used as offices or a public building (interim YCMA use). The proposed cafe use would require 3 spaces. In terms of the IDAP numeric standards there is no increase in reliance on street parking.

3.   The development application is accompanied by a Traffic and Parking Assessment Report. The report concludes that there is adequate street car parking available to service the use and that the proposal will not have a significant adverse impact of traffic in the locality. Council’s Traffic Engineer has raised no objections to the proposal.

4.   The proposal relates to a relatively low intensity cafe use (114sqm and 46 seat capacity). The cafe will operate during daytime hours (7.00am-6.00pm). It would be expected that a proportion of the patrons of the premises would be local residents walking to the cafe or persons otherwise attending the park for recreation activities rather than cafe specific trip generation. Given these characteristics and relying on the expert advice of Council’s Traffic Engineer, it would not be expected that vehicle movements and parking would result in any significant adverse impact on the amenity of residents in the locality.

 

Public Domain

 

The proposal provides for the adaptive reuse of a historically significant building that is in fairly poor condition. The proposed external works essentially amount to maintenance and cosmetic upgrade and will have a favourable visual impact on the public domain.

 

The proposed use will encourage pedestrian activity and integration within the park grounds contributing to a vibrant public environment. In addition, the proposal encourages the public use and enjoyment of a publicly owned heritage building.

 

Utilities

 

All services are available to the building.

 

Heritage

 

The subject site is identified as being of local heritage significance under the LEP. There are a number of other heritage items and conservation areas in the broader locality including The Harland Estate Conservation Area, Yeo Park and the Rotunda, 229 Victoria Street, Trinity College and Service Avenue Conservation Area.

 

The proposal is essentially for the internal fit-out of the existing building with external cosmetic upgrades and maintenance.

 

The development application is accompanied by a Statement of Heritage Impact that concludes that the proposal is acceptable in respect of the conservation of the building, its setting and significance.

 

Council’s heritage advisor has raised no objection to the proposal and has recommended that physical works to the property (alterations) are to be overseen by a qualified conservation architect to ensure that damage and changes to the fabric of the building are minimised and that all works are undertaken to a high standard of finish. An appropriately framed condition of consent is included in the recommendation of this report.

 

The proposal is not likely to have an adverse impact on the heritage significance of either the building or the conservation area.

 

Air and Microclimate

 

The proposal is for a small scale use essentially with ‘day time’ operating hours. The subject building is sufficiently separated from residential uses such that adverse odour impacts would not be anticipated to arise.

 

 

Flora and Fauna

 

There is no tree removal associated with the proposal.

 

Waste

 

A waste storage room is located on the southern side of the building. Waste will be taken kerbside and collected by a private contractor.

 

The operators of the cafe will be responsible for the placement and return of bins from the kerb to the waste storage room. A condition of consent will require the bins to be taken from the waste store room and returned from the kerb promptly after collection. A further condition will require the operator of the cafe to ensure that adequate waste receptacles are available for customer use and that the outdoor dining area be kept in a clean and tidy state.

 

Noise and Vibration

 

The proposed cafe will operate during daytime hours (7.00am-6.00pm) and is physically distant from residential properties. The operating hours and small scale of the development are not likely to result in significant adverse noise impacts.

 

Conditions of consent will:

 

·    Restrict the seating capacity to 46 people including a maximum of 14 outdoors

·    Restrict the hours of operation to 7.00am- 6.00pm seven days per week.

·    Prohibit the amplification of music internal or external of the building.

 

Natural Hazards

 

There are no known natural hazards.

 

Technological Hazards

 

There are no known technological hazards.

 

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

 

The proposal provides for the replacement of the existing security grills and promotes

activity within the park grounds assisting safety and security through casual observation.

 

The following will be required as conditions of consent:

 

·    All tables, chairs, umbrellas and any other equipment must be stored inside the cafe premises when the business is closed.

 

·    Any graffiti on the building is to be promptly removed.

 

Social Impact in the Locality

 

The proposed development provides for the adaptive reuse of a heritage listing building promoting its longer term conservation and encourages public use and enjoyment of such a building.

 

The proposal provides a service to the local community and the users of the park and is likely to assist safety and security through activity and casual surveillance.

 

The proposal is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on the amenity of nearby residences.

 

Economic Impact in the Locality

 

The proposal will provide employment opportunities for the broader community and there is no evidence to suggest that such a use would have an adverse economic impact on other similar cafe uses in the locality.

 

 

 

Cumulative Impacts

 

No significant adverse cumulative impacts are likely to arise.

 

5.6       The suitability of the site for the development

 

These matters have been considered as part of the assessment of the development application. The proposal provides for the adaptive reuse of a heritage item facilitating its conservation. The proposal is for a small scale use and the building is physically well isolated from residential properties and no significant adverse amenity impacts are anticipated.

 

There are no natural hazards or other site constraints that are likely to have a significant adverse impact upon the proposed development.  The proposed development is considered suitable for the site.

 

5.7       Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Councils policy.

 

5.7.1    Summary of submissions

 

The development application was placed on notification from 18 March 2016 to 13 April 2016.

 

Four (4) letters objecting to the proposal and one (1) letter raising no objection to the proposal were received (see Attachment 3).

 

Submissions

1

Yeo Park Infants’ School Parents and Citizens’ Association

Robert Claxton - Ashfield (support)

Michael Durkan and Tracy Arundel - Ashfield

The Principal - Yeo Park Infants School

Christine Yusef - Ashfield

 

   

The matters identified in the submissions and relevant planning comments follow.

 

·    Requesting confirmation of the operating hours.

 

The hours as identified in the development application are 7.00am-6.00pm seven days per week. A condition of consent will restrict the use to these hours.

 

·    A child care centre would be preferable to a café.

 

The cafe is permissible within the zone and is suitable for conditional approval. The consideration of potential alternate uses of the premises is a matter Council as owners of the property rather than a matter that fits within the parameters of S79(C) of the Act for the assessment of the proposed ‘cafe’ use.

 

·    Requesting clarification on whether the premises are to be licensed.

 

The applicant has advised that development consent is not sought for licensed premises. A condition of consent will prohibit the sale or consumption of alcohol on the premises.

 

Should a future tenant of the building wish to sell alcohol then separate approval would be required.

 

·    Concerns that increased traffic may necessitate the fencing of the school grounds (to which the P and C organisation would object).

 

There is no element of the proposal that requires or suggests the fencing of the school grounds.

 

·    Traffic and parking needs to consider both the school and café use operations. The local roads are already operating beyond capacity. (L and E Trinity Grammar V Ashfield Council 2015). Unacceptable traffic impacts will result.

 

·    There may be a need for a Traffic Plan that includes signage, speed humps, etc.

 

·    Increase in traffic in Victoria Street resulting in parking, access and safety impacts.

 

·    Increased parking on Old Canterbury Road disrupting flows in peak hour.

 

·    Increased road traffic causing safety issues around the road crossing.

 

·    Increase difficulty parking during school drop off and pick up times, appointments, and events.

 

·    Request for School Speed Limit sign outside Yeo Park Infants School.

 

The concern of the objectors is the cumulative impacts of various activities in the area (including the school).

 

The traffic and parking aspects of the proposal have been considered previously in this report. Council’s Traffic engineer has raised no objection to the proposal.

 

The request for a Speed Limit Sign outside Yeo Park Infants School is a matter that Council could consider separately as it is not a direct requirement from this development (see Part B of recommendation).

 

·    There is potential for an increase in the number of people smoking in the area. Request for more signage notifying park users of the Ashfield Council policy of June 2011 prohibiting smoking within 10 metres of cafes, sports grounds, and YPIS.

 

Smoking laws apply to dining areas (including outdoor). The request for the erection of signage notifying of Council smoking policy is a matter that Council could consider separately as it is not a direct requirement from this development (see Part B of recommendation).

 

·    Cafe patrons would increase the number of dogs in the park. Request for more dog litter bins and Council leash policy signage is required.

 

There is nothing to substantiate that there will be an increase in the number of dogs in the park arising from the cafe use. The request for additional dog signage and litter bins is a matter that Council could consider separately as a matter of the broader park management (see Part B of recommendation).

 

·    Increase in noise pollution from traffic and patrons.

 

The amenity of the locality is influenced to some degree by the Old Canterbury Road noise source.  It is not expected that the proposal would result in significant adverse noise impacts given its small scale and limited operating hours. Conditions of consent will:

 

i.    Restrict the seating capacity to 46 people including a maximum of 14 outdoors

ii.   Restrict the hours of operation to 7.00am- 6.00pm seven days per week.

iii.   Prohibit the amplification of music internal or external of the building.

 

·    There is no need for an additional cafe as the area is already well serviced. Is the proposed cafe economically viable?

 

The cafe is permissible within the zone. The applicant is entitled to make application for a cafe and operate a cafe business subject to the granting of development consent.

 

 

 

The economic viability of the proposal is essentially a matter for consideration by a future owner/operator of the business.

 

·    Increased population densities from recent approvals in the area have increased the demand for green space which should not be compromised by commercial interests.

 

The proposed development does not reduce the quantum of open space within Yeo Park. The proposal provides for the embellishment of the park through the adaptive reuse of the building for a purpose that will serve the surrounding residents and park users.

 

·    Adverse heritage impacts (character and amenity).

 

The proposal is essentially for the internal fit-out of the existing building with external cosmetic upgrades and maintenance. The proposal promotes the conservation of the heritage item and its adaptive reuse for a purpose that promotes access and enjoyment by the community.

 

The development application is accompanied by a Statement of Heritage Impact that concludes that the proposal is acceptable in respect of the conservation of the building, its setting and significance.

 

Council’s heritage advisor has raised no objection to the proposal.

 

·    Loss of property values

 

There is nothing to substantiate that the proposed development will have an adverse effect on local property values.

 

·    The school is unfenced. Increased use/people using the park/cafe may introduce child protection issues. The proposed development should be fenced.

 

The subject building is isolated from the school by the playing field. There is nothing that would substantiate that users of the cafe would compromise the safety and security of children attending the school. Fencing the area of the cafe is not a necessary or a desirable outcome.

 

5.7.2    Mediation

 

Conditions have been included in the recommendation of this report to address issues raised in the submissions.

 

5.8       The public interest

 

No adverse matters relating to the public interest arise from the proposal. The proposal provides community benefits through the adaptive reuse and repair of a community asset that is of heritage significance. The proposed use is complementary to the recreational use of the park and will provide a facility for the enjoyment of the community.

 

6.0       Referrals

 

6.1       Internal

 

Town Planning:                       No objection, subject to conditions.

Building:                                  No objection, subject to conditions.

Heritage Adviser:                    No objection (see Attachment 4).

Engineering:                            No objection, subject to conditions.

Traffic Engineer:                     No objection (see Attachment 5).

Environmental Health:            No objection, subject to conditions.

 

6.2       External

 

There are no external referrals required by the proposal.

 

 

 

 

7.0       Other Relevant Matters

 

There is no current and specific Plan of Management (POM) for Yeo Park. The former Ashfield Council has engaged a consultant to prepare new plans for existing parks that do not have POMs and review existing POMs currently in place.

 

8.0       Building Code of Australia (BCA)

 

Referral to Council’s building surveyor, revealed no objections to the proposed development, subject to conditions (refer conditions of development consent).

 

A Construction Certificate will be required to be applied for by condition of consent.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The proposal relates to the use of a Council property.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

See section 8.0 of this report

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

See section 5.7 of this report.

 

 

CONCLUSION

The application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as amended with all matters specified under Section 79C (1) Clauses (a) to (e) having been taken into consideration.

The proposal is an acceptable adaptive reuse of an historic building in urgent need of repair and maintenance and is therefore recommended for conditional approval.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Plans of Proposal

2.

Locality Map

3.

Submissions

4.

Heritage Advisor Comments

5.

Traffic Comments

6.

Conditions

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 7

Subject:         Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 7 July 2016  

File Ref:         16/4718/82208.16         

Prepared By: Wal Petschler - Manager Design and Investigation, Marrickville  

Authorised By: Peter Gainsford - Director, Major Projects and Engineering

 

SUMMARY

To present the minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 7 July 2016.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 7 July 2016 be received and the recommendations be adopted.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

The first meeting of the Inner West Council Local Traffic Committee was held on 7 July 2016. The minutes of the meeting are shown at Attachment 1.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Nil.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Members of the public attended the meeting to address the committee on specific items.

 

 

CONCLUSION

Nil.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Minutes of Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 7 July 2016

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 8

Subject:         Operational Land Classification 

File Ref:         16/5851/69264.16        

Prepared By: Brooke Martin - Manager Infrastructure Planning and Property, Marrickville 

Authorised By: Peter Gainsford - Director, Major Projects and Engineering

SUMMARY

On 2 May 2016, Council acquired Lot 70 at 362-370 New Canterbury Road, Dulwich Hill (“Land”) as a result of a Voluntary Planning Agreement.

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, it is recommended that the Land be classified as “operational land”.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council classifies land at Lot 70 at 362-370 New Canterbury Road, Dulwich Hill as operational land for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

On 2 May 2016, the Inner West Council (then known as Marrickville Council) acquired the Land as a result of a Voluntary Planning Agreement that was negotiated as part of a redevelopment of 362-370 New Canterbury Road, Dulwich Hill.

Under Chapter 6, Part 2, Division 1 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Land must be classified as either operational or community land.

A community land classification is usually applied to land that is reserved for a public purpose (particularly open space land) as it comes with a number of management consequences under the Act (including plans of management, restrictions on the granting of leases/licenses/easements, selling the land). Such a classification is not considered appropriate for the Land given it is to be used as a library (which requires a more flexible management scheme) and is within a strata scheme.

In order for the Land to be classified as operational, a Council resolution is required to that effect within 3 months of acquisition (ie. by 2 August 2016). This report recommends such a resolution.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil provided that land is classified as operational. Otherwise, there will be some cost associated with managing the land as Community Land including the preparation of a plan of management.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Nil.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

The proposal to classify the Land as operational land was advertised on www.yoursayinnerwest.com.au from 24 June 2016 and closes 22nd July 2016. As at the date of writing this report, namely 18 July 2016, one response in support of the proposal has been received. Any additional submissions received between the date this report was drafted and the date of the meeting will be provided under separate cover.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Nil.


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 9

Subject:         Marrickville Arts and Culture Grants 2016  

File Ref:         16/5126/81079.16         

Prepared By: Josephine Bennett - Manager Culture and Recreation Services, Marrickville  

Authorised By: Simone Schwarz - Director, Service Delivery

SUMMARY

Council is advised of applications received for the Arts and Culture Grants Program 2016. Council received and assessed 42 applications requesting a total of $234,886. 19 projects are recommended, totalling $65,000 funding.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council endorses funding for 19 grant applications as outlined in Attachment 1, totalling $65,000 for the 2016 Marrickville Arts and Culture Grants Program.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

In August 2003 Council endorsed the Arts and Cultural Grants and Guidelines (Item CC17, Meeting No. 07/03) to provide an equitable means of support and promotion for artists and art programs in the local government area and to contribute to the industry's sustainability. In 2007/08 the funding for the Scheme totalled $30,000. Following a Council resolution in August 2006 (Item CC 14, Meeting No. 07/06) there was an extra $10,000 allocated to the Program. In April 2008, Council resolved to increase the figure to $60,000 (CC8) and this figure has since increased by CPI. 

The key objectives of the Arts and Cultural Grants Program are to:

§  support activities which contribute to the development of the arts and culture in the former Marrickville LGA, including participation and engagement;

§  promote strong arts and cultural networks and partnership opportunities;

§  encourage excellence in the content and delivery of cultural activities;

§  provide opportunities for the implementation and development of innovative arts and cultural activities;

§  reflect and promote aspects of the cultural life of the former Marrickville LGA; and

§  support emerging and independent arts related activities;

 

A total of $65,000 is allocated in the 2016/17 budget and available under this program.

The Arts and Cultural Grants Program opened on Wednesday 27 April 2016 and closed on

Wednesday 1 June 2016 at 5pm. Grants information sessions were held on Tuesday 10 May 2016 and Wednesday 11 May 2016 in conjunction with the Independent Artist Grants program. The grants and information sessions were promoted through advertisements in The Inner West Courier, the Council Column, Marrickville Matters, on Council’s website and notices were issued through networks such as Art Post and existing databases.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The grants will be funded from the current Culture and Recreation Operating Budget 2016/17.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

External information about the program was provided through various media. Council officer support was available via telephone, email and face to face as required throughout the application period.

CONCLUSION

Of the 42 applications received, two grants were deemed more suitable for assessment by the Community Grants Assessment Panel. A further two applications were transferred to the Independent Artist Grants Assessment Panel. One application from Recreation Grants and one application from Independent Artist Grants were deemed more suitable for assessment under the Arts and Cultural Grants program.

The panel considered 40 applications totalling $224,411 in requests.  All applications were assessed by the Selection Panel comprised of arts industry professionals including Justin Macdonnell (Arts Consultant and Director of Anzarts); Jo Banno (Community Development Officer – Youth Services, Inner West Council, Leichhardt) and Sue Andersen (Independent Producer). Arts and Culture staff including the Acting Arts and Cultural Development Coordinator and the Arts and Culture Project Officer attended the meeting. 

Applications could apply for a grant under one of two categories:

§  Arts: for arts and cultural projects that demonstrate a high level of artistic merit and innovation; and

§  Community Cultural Development for arts or cultural projects that engage communities, encourage participation in the arts and support cultural diversity.

 

The projects were assessed against the following pre-determined selection criteria:

§  level of innovation;

§  the level of skills and experience of the applicant;

§  the budget, including all sources of project income;

§  the benefit to the Marrickville community and/or the artist’s professional development;

§  how the project reflects life in Marrickville including access, diversity and equity;

§  previous assistance received by Council including grants and in-kind support in recent years;

§  the merit of the application in comparison to the other applications; and

 

Of the 40 applications assessed, 19 applications, requesting $93,911 in support are recommended for funding to a level of $65,000, as outlined in Attachment 1. Not all projects are recommended to receive the total amount requested; however, the selection panel believe the projects are still achievable within the funding amounts recommended.

The recommended projects represent a range of art forms including music, visual art, theatre, community events, film and physical theatre and are located in a range of locations around the Inner West Council LGA.

21 applications are not recommended for funding as outlined in Attachment 2. The reasons for which applications were not recommended include:

§  the applications were not as strong as the recommended applications in one or more assessment criteria;

§  applicants had received recent funding or in-kind support from Council;

§  suggested outcomes did not strongly benefit the local community;

§  the project is better suitable to the objectives of the Community Grants or Independent Artist Grants;

§  the project is still viable without Council funding;

§  the project did not take places within the LGA; and

§  the application was ineligible due to project timing.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Arts and Culture Grants 2016 - Recommended for Funding

2.

Arts and Culture Grants 2016 - Not Recommended for Funding

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 10

Subject:         Marrickville Independent Artist Grants 2016  

File Ref:         16/5187/81088.16         

Prepared By: Josephine Bennett - Manager Culture and Recreation Services, Marrickville  

Authorised By: Simone Schwarz - Director, Service Delivery

 

SUMMARY

Council is advised of applications received for the Independent Artists Grants Program 2016.  Council received 20 applications requesting a total of $98,704 and 10 projects are recommended for funding for a total of $30,000.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council endorses funding for the 10 applications as outlined in Attachment 1, totalling $30,000 for the 2016 Independent Artist Grants Program.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

Marrickville Council’s Independent Artist Grants Program provides financial support to emerging artists working in any art form who are seeking to maintain an independent art practice. In April 2010, Council resolved to re-allocate the funds from the existing Marrickville Cultural Festival Grants Program budget of $30,000 to support local artists to mount events (Item C0410 Item 8 Meeting 04/10). This amount was increased by $1,500 in 2013 to reflect CPI. In 2014 $32,500 was available to this program.  In the 2016 grant round the amount available for distribution was $30,000.  Since 2013, a priority area for the Independent Artist Grants has been set annually. 

The key objectives of the Independent Artist Grants are to:

·      encourage emerging artists to maintain an independent practice, exploring new ways of working in and across art forms;

·      nurture art practices that may not be readily supported by other funding institutions for reasons such as falling outside of art form categories or being in the early stages of development;

·      support activities which contribute to the development of the Marrickville arts and cultural community;

·      encourage excellence in the content and delivery of arts and cultural activities;

·      encourage participation by and engagement with local communities; and

·      support the cultural diversity of the Marrickville LGA.

 

The Marrickville Independent Artist Grants Program for 2016 opened on Wednesday 27 April and closed on Wednesday 3 June 2016 at 5pm.  The grants information sessions were held on Tuesday 10 and Wednesday 11 May for prospective applicants in conjunction with the Marrickville Arts and Cultural Grants Program 2016.  The grants and information sessions were promoted through advertisements in The Inner West Courier.  They also featured in the Council Column, Marrickville Matters, on Council’s website and notices were issued through networks such as Art Post and existing databases. 

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The grants will be funded from the current Culture and Recreation Operating Budget 2016/17.

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

External information about the program was provided through various media, Council officer support was available via telephone, email and face to face as required throughout the application period.

 

 

CONCLUSION

Council received 20 applications requesting a total of $98,704.  One application from the Independent Artist Grants Program was moved to the Arts and Cultural Grants Program as it was deemed more suitable, and two Arts and Cultural Grants Program applications were moved to the Independent Artist Grants Program.  After the internal transfers of grants, the number of applications assessed was 21 and the amount requested considered by the Independent Artist Grants assessment panel was $90,697.  The priority area for the 2016 Independent Artist Grants Program was makers in the community.

Applications were assessed by an expert panel comprising of Council’s Acting Arts and Cultural Coordinator and Team Leader Community, Culture and Events and external experts Hugh McKid from Splinter Workshop and Clayton Ries from the Live Music Office.  The assessment was consistent with the guidelines adopted by Councils including the following pre-determined criteria:

·      projects showcase an innovative, thought provoking and high calibre creative or cultural approach;

·      the capacity to deliver a well-planned project including concept, project, plan and experience;

·      realistic budget, including all sources of project income;

·      benefits to the Marrickville community and/or the artists professional development;

·      previous assistance received by Council including grants and in-kind support in recent years; and;

·      the merit of the application in comparison to the other applications.

 

Of the 21 grants assessed requesting $90,697, 10 grants are recommended for funding to a level of $30,000, as outlined in Attachment 1. Not all projects are recommended to receive the total amount requested; however, the selection panel believe the projects are still achievable within the funding amounts recommended.

The recommended projects represent a range of art forms including music, visual art, theatre, community events, film and physical theatre and are located in a range of locations around the Inner West LGA.

11 applications are not recommended for funding as outlined in Attachment 2. The reasons for which applications were not recommended include:

·      the applications were not as strong as the recommended applications in one or more assessment criteria;

·      applicants had received recent funding or in-kind support from Council;

·      suggested outcomes did not strongly benefit the local community;

·      the project is better suitable to the objectives of the Community Grants or Arts and Cultural Grants;

·      the project is still viable without Council funding;

·      the project did not take places within the LGA; and

·      the application was ineligible due to project timing.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Independent Artist Grants 2016 - Recommended for Funding

2.

Independent Artists Grants 2016 - Not Recommended for Funding

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 11

Subject:         Marrickville Recreation Grants 2016  

File Ref:         15/4712/81092.16         

Prepared By: Josephine Bennett - Manager Culture and Recreation Services, Marrickville  

Authorised By: Simone Schwarz - Director, Service Delivery

SUMMARY

Council is advised of applications received for the Recreation Grants Program 2016. Council received and assessed 25 applications requesting a total of $62,571 and 17 projects are recommended for funding totalling $30,000.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council endorses funding for 17 grant applications as outlined in Attachment 1, totalling $30,000 for the 2016 Marrickville Recreation Grants Program.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

In April 2013 Council endorsed the Recreation Grants Program and Guidelines (File (4208/23501.13) to provide financial support to community sporting and recreation groups, and not-for-profit, non-government community and commercial recreation organisations that offer recreation programs and services to residents in the Marrickville local government area (LGA). 

The key objectives of the Recreation Grants Program are to:

§ promote an active and healthy community;

§ increase and/or enhance regular and ongoing participation opportunities in sport, recreation or structured physical activity in a sustainable manner;

§ address barriers to participation in sport, recreation and structured physical activity;

§ build the capacity of the organisation to enhance provision of sport and recreation services;

§ provide accreditation or training to develop the skills of volunteers to enable sport, recreation and structured physical activity programs to be conducted in locations across NSW; and

§ support the implementation of Our Place, Our Vision – Marrickville Community Plan

A total of $30,000 is allocated in the 2016/17 budget and available under this program.

The Recreation Grants Program opened on Wednesday 27 April 2015 and closed on Wednesday 1 June 2015. The grants were promoted through advertisements in The Inner West Courier, the Council Column, Marrickville Matters, on Council’s website, through networks such as Rec Post and existing recreation databases.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The grants will be funded from the current Culture and Recreation Operating Budget 2016/17.

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

External information about the program was provided through various media, Council officer support was available by telephone, email and face to face as required throughout the application period.

 

CONCLUSION

Council received 25 applications requesting a total funding of $62,571. Applications were assessed by a multi-disciplinary panel comprising Coordinator – Recreation Planning & Programs, Strategic Projects Officer – Access and Inclusion and two external panel assessors (current Marrickville Citizen of the Year and president of local netball club and a former representative of Marrickville Council’s Youth Council). The assessment was consistent with the guidelines adopted by Council including the following pre-determined selection criteria:

§ how well the application meets the objectives and criteria for the grants program;

§ the capacity of the individual, group or organisation to deliver a well-planned project, including the degree of measurable outcomes from the project;

§ submission of a realistic budget;

§ benefits for the Marrickville community through recreation related activities;

§ previous assistance received by Council including grants and in-kind support in recent years;

§ the merit of the application in comparison to the other applications; and

§ being reportable within 12 months.

 

Of the 25 applications assessed, 17 applications, totalling $30,000, are recommended for funding as outlined in Attachment 1. Not all projects are recommended to receive the total amount requested, however, the selection panel believe the projects are still achievable within the funding amounts recommended and this has been confirmed with all applicants. The recommended projects represent a range of recreation experiences and target a range of populations identified as priorities through the Recreation Needs Research - Strategic Directions for Marrickville 2012 and the Recreation Policy and Strategy 2013. The projects take place in a range of locations across the former Marrickville Local Government Area (LGA). The panel noted the challenge in deciding the comparative value of each application and was impressed with the range of projects and service providers.

Eight applications are not recommended for funding as outlined in Attachment 2. The reasons for which applications were not recommended include:

§ the applications were not as strong as the recommended applications in one or more assessment criteria – it was a highly competitive grant round;

§ suggested outcomes did not strongly benefit the local community;

§ the project is still viable without Council funding;

§ organisations applied for multiple grants; and

§ the project did not take place within the former Marrickville LGA and/or benefit Marrickville residents or the project represents the core business of the applying organisation.

 

Five applications were transferred to other Council Grants programs as they were deemed a better fit under selected criteria.

One additional application concerning improvements to a community venue was received and was not eligible for the Recreation Grant Programs and referred to the relevant area for follow up.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Recreation Grants 2016 - Recommended for Funding

2.

Recreation Grants 2016 - Not Recommended for Funding

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 12

Subject:         Draft Expenses and Facilities Policy for IAG and LRAC Committee Members 

File Ref:         16/4718/81941.16        

Prepared By: Ian Naylor - Manager Governance and Administration, Leichhardt and Helen Tola - Manager Customer Service and Corporate Planning, Leichhardt 

Authorised By: Matthew Phillips - Director, Corporate Services

 

SUMMARY

The committee members on the Implementation Advisory Group (IAG) and Local Representation Advisory Committees (LRAC) will require facilities and reimbursement of expenses to assist them in carrying out their committee member functions. A policy has been developed to detail these facilities and the process for reimbursement of any expenses.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

1.       the Draft Expenses and Facilities Policy for LRAC/IAG committee members as shown attached to the report, be placed on public exhibition in accordance with Section 252 of the Local Government Act; and

2.      after the conclusion of the public exhibition period, Council receive a further report on submissions received during the public exhibition period.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

A Draft Expenses and Facilities Policy for committee members on IAG and LRAC has been

developed and is shown attached to this report. The Policy makes provision for facilities such

as a mobile phone, computer and transport and reimbursement of expenses for internet and

mobile phone usage as members of these committees.

The Draft Expenses and Facilities Policy for IAG and LRAC Committee Members was deferred from the Extraordinary Council Meeting for consideration by the Joint LRAC meeting held on the Tuesday 12 July 2016 which recommended:

THAT:

1.       the Expenses and Facilities Policy for LRAC/IAG committee members as shown attached to the report, be received and noted;

2.       that following consideration by the Joint Local Representation Advisory Group, any feedback received be considered by the Council, prior to public exhibition of the Policy in accordance with Section 252 of the Local Government Act;

3.       following the conclusion of the public exhibition period, Council receive a further report on submissions received during the public exhibition period;

4.       the same provisions for legal expenses and insurance afforded to the Administrator be included as provisions in the Expenses and Facilities Policy for LRAC and IAG Committee Members; and

5.       meeting rooms be made available to committee members to prepare for committee meetings pending the availability of rooms.

 

 

 

 

In light of the recommendations 4 and 5 above, from the Joint LRAC, the draft Expenses and Facilities Policy for IAG and LRAC Committee Members, has been amended (amendments highlighted in yellow) and is attached for consideration by Council. (Refer to Attachment 1).

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Nil.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Section 252 of the Local Government Act requires that an Expenses and Facilities Policy be

publicly exhibited for 28 days. Following the conclusion of the exhibition period a further report will be provided to Council advising of the submissions received during the public exhibition

period.

 

 

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the draft Expenses and Facilities Policy for IAG and LRAC Committee Members be placed on public exhibition in accordance with Section 252 of the Local Government Act.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Draft IAG and LRAC Provision of Expenses and Facilities Policy

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 13

Subject:         Inner West Council Investments as at 30 June 2016 

File Ref:         16/5386/79326.16        

Prepared By: Caroline Bugg - Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Marrickville 

Authorised By: Pav Kuzmanovski - Responsible Accounting Officer

 

SUMMARY

In accordance with the requirements of clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council is provided with a listing of all investments made pursuant to section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 and held as at 30 June 2016.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that a report be presented to Council each month listing all investments with a certification from the Responsible Accounting Officer (Chief Financial Officer, Marrickville). Attached to this report are further reports from Council’s Investment Advisors, Prudential Investment Services.

 

 

DISCUSSION

The Investment Holdings report (Attachment 1) for the period to 30 June 2016 reflects Council’s holding in various investment categories these are listed in the table below:

 

 

Environmental Commitments

The former Leichhardt Council investment portfolio has 60% of its investments with non-fossil fuel ADIs and the former Marrickville Council investment portfolio has 46% of its investments with non-fossil fuel ADIs.

 

Attachments 1 and 2 to this report summarise all investments held by Council and interest returns as at 30 June 2016.

The portfolio for Inner West Council had a One-Month Portfolio Investment Return (3.04%) was above the UBSWA Bank Bill Index Benchmark (2.02%). Council has a well-diversified portfolio with 97% of the portfolio spread among the top three credit rating categories (A long term / A2 short term and higher).

The Current Market value is required to be accounted for by the accounting standards and are due to the nature of the investment, and are unlikely to impact on the eventual return of capital and interest to Council. The Current Market Value is a likely outcome if Council were to consider recalling the investment prior to its due date.

A Monthly Economic and Investment Portfolio Commentary from Prudential Investment Services, is at Attachment 3.

 

Certificate by Responsible Accounting Officer:

I hereby certify in accordance with Clause 212 (1) (b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 that the investments listed in Attachment 1 have been made in accordance with section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 for each of the Branches of the Inner West Council. There will be a review of the separate investment policies in the coming months with the view to develop a consolidated investment policy for the Inner West Council.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

IWC Investments June 2016

2.

IWC Monthly Interest June 2016

3.

IWC Economic and Investment Portfolio Commentary June 2016

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

 


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 14

Subject:         Annette Kellerman Aquatic Centre - Mechanical Works Tender  

File Ref:         12/4726/78355.16         

Prepared By: William Blunt - Executive Manager Major Projects, Marrickville  

Authorised By: Peter Gainsford - Director, Major Projects and Engineering

 

SUMMARY

This report provides advice and recommendations in relation tenders received for the Phase 3 Mechanical Works at the Annette Kellerman Aquatic Centre (“Tenders”).

 

 

THAT:

 

1.       Council moves into closed session to deal with this matter as the information contained in Confidential Attachments 1, 2 and 3 is classified as confidential under section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993  as it would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business;

And in accordance with section 10A(4) of the Act, that the Chairperson allow members of the public to make representations as to whether this part of the meeting should be closed.

 

OR, WHERE THE MEETING IS NOT CLOSED:

 

THAT:

1.       Council resolves that Confidential Attachments 1, 2 and 3 to the report be treated as confidential in accordance with section 10A(4) of the Act, as it relates to a matter specified in section 10A(2)(c) of the Act;

 

AND, IN EITHER EVENT:

 

2.       Council declines to accept any Tenders and that, in accordance with clause 178(3)(e) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council enter into negotiations with any person with a view to entering into a contract in relation to the subject matter of the Tenders.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

At its meeting of 15 March 2016, Council considered and adopted the recommendation contained in a Confidential report relating to the Annette Kellerman Aquatic Centre.  A copy of that report is included for information as Confidential Attachment 1.

At the Council meeting on 19 April 2016, Council considered an further confidential report regarding required mechanical works.  A copy of that report is included for background information as Confidential Attachment 2.

Council resolved to proceed with a select tender process for the identified mechanical works.

The assessment of the tenders received is discussed in Confidential Attachment 3.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Council at its meeting of 13 March 2016 approved budget allocations for the proposed works which have been incorporated in the 2016/2017 budget.

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

There has been no other consultation with staff regarding this report.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

There has been no public consultation with regard to the contents of this report.

 

 

CONCLUSION

The attached Confidential Attachments 1 and 2 provide background information to Council.  Confidential Attachment 3 provides advice to Council and makes recommendations.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Confidential Report to Council - 15 March 2016 - Confidential

2.

Confidential Report to Council - 19 April 2016 - Confidential

3.

Condifential Report Phase 3 Mechanical Works Tender - Confidential

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 15

Subject:         Tender 07/16 Security Surveillance, Patrols and Services  

File Ref:         16/5851/80980.16         

Prepared By: Brooke Martin - Manager Infrastructure Planning and Property, Marrickville  

Authorised By: Peter Gainsford - Director, Major Projects and Engineering

SUMMARY

 

A Request for Tender Number 07/16 was issued in May 2016 for submission of tenders for a security services provider to meet Council’s security requirements for all Council premises located in the former Marrickville Council LGA.

 

The purpose of this report is to seek a resolution from Council to engage the recommended contractor for Security Services.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

 

1.    Council moves into closed session to deal with this matter as the information contained in Confidential Attachment 1 of this report are classified as confidential under the provisions of Section 10A (2) (C) and (D) of the Local Government Act 1993  for the following reasons:

c.    information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business;

d.    (i)    commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed        prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it;

       (ii)   commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed        confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council;

       (iii)  commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed        reveal a trade secret;

 

And in accordance with Sections 10A (4) of the Local Government Act 1993, that the Chairperson allow members of the public to make representations as to whether this part of the meeting should be closed.

 

OR, WHERE THE MEETING IS NOT CLOSED:

 

THAT:

 

1.    Council resolves that Confidential Attachment 1 to the report be treated as confidential in accordance with Section 10A (4) of the Local Government Act 1993, as they relate to a matter specified in Section 10A(2)(c) & (d) of the Local Government Act 1993;

2.    the report be received and noted; and

3.    Council adopts the recommendation contained in the Confidential Attachment 1 for the duration of the contract.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

Request for Tender Number 07/16 was issued in May 2016 for submission of tenders for a security services provider to meet Council’s security requirements for all Council premises located in the former Marrickville Council LGA. The scope of the tender includes security surveillance and patrol at all Council sites specified, response to security incidents, remotely manage alarms and manage equipment as detailed at each of the sites listed.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The budget is available in the recurring services operational budget from within the Infrastructure Planning and Property section.

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

The Tender Review Panel has assessed all submissions and makes the recommendation within the Confidential Attachment 1.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Nil.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Tender Review Panel Report - Confidential

  


Council Meeting

26 July 2016

 

Item No:         C0716 Item 16

Subject:         Hiring Agreement for the Wests Tigers to use Leichhardt Oval No. 1  

File Ref:         16/4718/81274.16         

Prepared By: Joel Giblin - Property Officer, Leichhardt  

Authorised By: Matthew Phillips - Director, Corporate Services

 

SUMMARY

Pursuant to a Council Resolution of 8 March 2016, Council has been negotiating with Wests Tigers Rugby League Football Pty Ltd for use of Leichhardt Oval for NRL and State Cup Matches and for training.  Hire charges and other matters have been agreed and the Hiring Agreement (Licence Agreement) has been prepared. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

 

1.    Council moves into closed session to deal with this matter as the information contained in Confidential Attachments 1 and 2 of this report are classified as confidential under the provisions of Section 10A (2) (c) and (2) (d)(i) and (ii) of the Local Government Act 1993  for the following reasons:

 

       c.   information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person       with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business;

       d (i) commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed       prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it;

       d (ii)   commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer       a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council;

2.    That authority is delegated to the General Manager to make any minor amendments that may be required and to sign the hiring agreement on behalf of Council.

 

And in accordance with Sections 10A (4) of the Local Government Act 1993, that the Chairperson allow members of the public to make representations as to whether this part of the meeting should be closed.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

Balmain Tigers Rugby League Football Club surrendered its lease and on the 1st April 2015 Leichhardt Council assumed responsibility for the management of Leichhardt Oval. Council gave Wests Tigers use of Leichhardt Oval for four NRL games in 2015 with the same commercial terms as they had in the 2014 season when the Oval was under the control of Balmain Tigers.

At its Ordinary Council Meeting on 28th April 2015, Leichhardt Council resolved:

1.    That Council give in principle support to offering Wests Tigers a 5 year hiring agreement, from 2016 onwards with an additional 5 year option, for use of Leichhardt Oval, with a report detailing possible arrangements and consequences to be brought to the May Policy Meeting.

2.    The terms of the agreement are replicate those offered in the draft 2015 hiring agreement including:

a.    No ground hire fee to be charged to Wests Tigers.

b.    A minimum of four Wests Tigers NRL games to be played at the ground each year.

c.    An entitlement for the hirer to all revenue from the sale of merchandise, ticket sales, broadcast rights or fees and temporary advertising.

d.    That the fees for the 2016 season onwards be determined following the outcome of the consultant’s report into the future venue management for Leichhardt Oval and in consultation with Balmain Tigers.

 

Council engaged Dean Hassall Consulting (DHC) who is a venue management consultant to undertake a review of Leichhardt Oval.

At the Policy Meeting on the 8th March 2016, Leichhardt Council was advised of the proposed hiring arrangements for Wests Tigers’ use of Leichhardt Oval and resolved:

 

1.    To negotiate with Wests Tigers for a licence agreement for Leichhardt Oval no. 1 as outlined in the report.

2.    That the finalised form of the agreement be brought back to Council for adoption. 

 

Council has met with the Wests Tigers and the hiring agreement has been prepared.  It is Confidential Attachment 2 to this report. 

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Council will receive hiring fees from Wests Tigers and catering commission.  Council will incur staff and contractor costs. 

 

 

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Having NRL matches at Leichardt Oval is important to the community.

Other staff comments are in Confidential Attachment 1.

 

 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

There has not been any public consultation on terms of the agreement. 

 

 

CONCLUSION

Council negotiated a hiring agreement with Wests Tigers for NRL Matches at Leichhardt Oval. 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

1.

Hiring Agreement Background - Confidential

2.

Hiring Agreement - Confidential