Agenda of Council Meeting

Council Meeting

27 March 2018

Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 13 March 2018

Meeting commenced at 6.33pm

Present:

Darcy Byrne

Julie Passas

Marghanita Da Cruz

Lucille McKenna OAM

Colin Hesse

Sam Iskandar

Tom Kiat

Pauline Lockie

Victor Macri

Rochelle Porteous

Vittoria Raciti

John Stamolis

Louise Steer

Anna York
Rik Hart

Elizabeth Richardson

Mayor

Deputy Mayor

Councillor

Councillor (6.42pm)

Councillor

General Manager

A/Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment

Michael Tzimoulas

Deputy General Manager Chief Financial and Administration Officer

John Warburton

David Birds

Wal Petschler

Nellette Kettle

Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement

Group Manager Strategic Planning

Group Manager Roads, Footpaths, Traffic and Stormwater

Group Manager Civic and Executive Support, Integration,

Customer Service and Business Excellence

John Stephens

Ian Naylor

Darcie Huisman

Manager Traffic and Transport Services

Manager Civic and Executive Support

Business Paper Support Officer (Minute Taker)

APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE:

Motion: (McKenna OAM/Steer)

THAT Council grant leave of absence for Clr Drury and accept apologies for lateness for Clr Porteous.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Absent: Cr Porteous

DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:

Clr Lockie declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 9 - Notice Of Motion: Pride Seats - Celebrating Council’s Support Of Marriage Equality And LGBTQI Rights as she went to school with the Marketing Manager of Street Furniture Australia. Any benefit from this motion is by way of a donation to Council and the community.

Motion: (Hesse/Da Cruz)

That Council note the disclosures of interests.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Absent: Cr Porteous

Clr Porteous entered the meeting 6.42pm

C0318 Item 14 Mayoral Minute: Harmonising Inner West Council Awards Programs

Motion: (Byrne)

THAT:

1. Council review the current arrangements for Awards program, including the Business Environment Awards Program the Inner West Business Awards and the Marrickville Business Association Awards;

2. Council officers produce a report on options for harmonising our Awards Program, while upholding the existing character of local awards and Council’s capacity to hold and judge such a program; and

3. The report include evaluation of categories such as, but not limited to:

a. Ethical Business;

b. LGBTQI Friendly Business;

c. Multicultural Business;

d. Sustainable Business; and

e. Accessible Business.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

C0318 Item 15 Mayoral Minute: Balmain Leagues Club Compulsory Acquisition

Motion: (Byrne)

THAT Council:

1. Oppose any State Government compulsory acquisition of the Balmain Leagues Club site;

2. Write to the Minister for Roads the Hon. Melinda Pavey MP urgently requesting a briefing on plans for the Western Harbour Tunnel and acquisition of the Balmain Leagues Club Site; and

3. Convene a public meeting regarding the Balmain Leagues Club site and other potential construction sites on the peninsula.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Crs Passas and Raciti

C0318 Item 16 Mayoral Minute: Flying the Aboriginal Flag from the Harbour Bridge

Motion: (Byrne)

THAT Council:

1. Endorse the petitions calling for the Aboriginal Flag to be flown from the Sydney Harbour Bridge 365 days a year;

2. Publicise the petitions through regular communications channels including social media and the Council news page in the local Courier newspaper;

3. Provide hard copies of the petition for signatories at Council facilities and major events; and

4. Write to the NSW Premier, the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, the Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight and the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure calling on them to support the push to fly the Aboriginal Flag on the Harbour Bridge permanently.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Crs Passas and Raciti

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

Motion (Porteous/McKenna OAM)

THAT Items 7 and 11 be brought forward and be dealt with at this time.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

EXTENSION OF TIME

Motion (Porteous/Da Cruz)

THAT the speaker be given an extension of time of two minutes.

Motion Tied

For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer

Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Iskandar, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti and York

The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, used his Casting Vote against the MOTION and the MOTION was lost.

ADJOURNMENT

7.24pm – The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, adjourned the meeting for a short recess

7.29pm – The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, resumed the meeting

ADJOURNMENT

7.35pm – The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, adjourned the meeting for a short recess

7.42pm – The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, resumed the meeting

C0318 Item 7 Notice of Motion to Rescind: CO218 Item 2: Cottages at 9 and 11 Marion Street Leichhardt

Motion: (Porteous/Hesse)

THAT Council rescind its resolution of 27 February 2018 - Item 2: Cottages at 9 and 11 Marion Street Leichhardt.

Motion Tied

For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer

Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Iskandar, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti and York

The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, used his Casting Vote against the MOTION and the MOTION was lost.

C0318 Item 11 Notice of Motion: WestConnex Noise and Air Quality Concerns

Motion: (Lockie/Hesse)

THAT:

1. A report be prepared for an Ordinary Council Meeting in April 2018 that:

a) Details the costs and other resources that would be required for Council to monitor noise and air quality in the areas around current and proposed WestConnex construction sites in the Inner West;

b) Reviews and assesses the current noise and air quality monitoring processes being undertaken for the WestConnex projects by the Sydney Motorway Corporation (SMC) and its contractors, the Department of Planning & Environment (DPE), and the Environment Protection Authority (EPA);

c) Identifies any other opportunities that exist for Council to take action to reduce the noise, dust and air pollution residents are being exposed to as a result of WestConnex construction.

2. Council writes urgently to the Premier and relevant Ministers to:

a) Communicate the lack of confidence and trust residents in the Inner West have in the Sydney Motorway Corporation and relevant government agencies to protect them from the severe air quality and noise impacts caused by the WestConnex projects;

b) Explain that Council has been asked by residents and community groups to investigate conducting its own noise and air quality monitoring as a result;

c) Note that responsibility for such monitoring should sit with the state government and its relevant agencies and contractors;

d) Ask that they take urgent action to reduce the unacceptable noise and air quality impacts of the WestConnex projects on residents, and improve the processes responsible for the monitoring and regulatory enforcement of these impacts;

3. That Council staff attend and report on the Community Impact Forums run by the Sydney Motorway Corporation; and

4. That Council write to the ministers for Roads and Health seeking financial support for council monitoring of air quality in the Inner West Council area.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Cr Passas and Raciti

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

Motion: (York/McKenna OAM)

THAT standing orders be resumed.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

C0318 Item 1 Parking Meter Operations in Leichhardt, Rozelle & Balmain

Motion: (Byrne/McKenna OAM)

THAT Council:

Proceed to turn off parking meters at 7pm in the following Mainstreets from Thursday 5 April:

Norton Street, Leichhardt
Darling Street, Rozelle and
Darling Street, Balmain;

Initiate consultation with the community including chamber of commerce, businesses and surrounding residents on the proposal to turn off parking meters at 7 pm in the adjoining side streets and extend 30 minute parking to those streets and receive a report back on the outcome of that consultation;

Fund the program through a miscellaneous 2017/2018 budget savings rather than increasing parking permit fees or parking fees;

That Council review and report back on whether to continue to implement in the previous Leichhardt area and to report on how meters in the previous Leichhardt Council area only would be consistent with a broader Inner West policy, where meters will not be placed in the previous Ashfield and Marrickville Council areas (except for a tiny number in Newtown); and

A report come back after six months on the implementation of time limits on main street parking.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Councillor Kiat left the Meeting.

C0318 Item 2 Boosting the Micro-Brewing Sector in the Inner West

MOTION: (Macri/Passas)

That this matter be deferred;

That Council write a letter to the state government seeking advice on the best options available to increase retail floor space and to clarify the definition of ‘ancillary use’ for micro-breweries; and

That the matter be reported back to council no later than May 2018.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Absent: Councillor Kiat

Councillor Kiat returned to the Meeting.

Councillor Raciti left the Meeting.

C0318 Item 3 Glebe Island Multi-User Facility - Review of Environmental Factors

Motion: (Da Cruz/Porteous)

THAT:

1. Council receive and note this report;

2. Council endorse the submission to the Port Authority of NSW (see Attachment 1) including:

a) The proposal should take into consideration the construction of all major development projects in the immediate vicinity of the proposed multi-user facility over approximately the next ten years, including the following transport infrastructure projects WestConnex, Western Harbour Tunnel and the M4-M5 Link (should the latter two projects proceed);

b) A request for further traffic modelling be undertaken to take in to consideration all the construction and proposed major transport infrastructure projects in the immediate vicinity of the proposed multi-user facility over the next ten years including WestConnex and the Western Harbour Tunnel (should it proceed) and determine full cumulative impact;

c) A detailed Construction Traffic Management Plan for the whole of the Bays Precinct should be prepared in consultation with Inner West and City of Sydney Councils to provide a coordinated and staged approach to the delivery of The Bays Precinct in a manner which minimises detrimental impacts on sensitive areas within Sydney’s Inner West;

d) A coordination group, including representatives from the Inner West and City of Sydney Councils and Transport for NSW/Sydney Buses, should be established to oversee and advise on traffic management measures during the overlapping construction phases of the Bays Precinct, M4-M5 Link and Western Harbour Tunnel (should the latter two projects proceed);

e) No access to the site must be provided via Robert Street, Rozelle;

f) The M4-M5 Link White Bay Marshalling Yard must not gain access to Robert Street under any circumstances due to likely additional heavy vehicle traffic in residential areas in the southern sections of Balmain Peninsula;

g) Ongoing noise and air monitoring mechanisms be put in place to enable

enforcement of conditions of consent should they be required;

h) Further investigation of foreshore public access arrangements for the site be incorporated into the final proposed design;

i) All proposed structures on-site should seek to minimise and mitigate visual

amenity impacts upon surrounding residential and public recreation areas;

k) The impact on safety and amenity on residents from additional trucks from the accumulative projects proposed at White Bay (including the Port, Hanson Cement Batting, the WestConnex marshalling and the Western Sydney Tunnel concrete construction) on Victoria Road Rozelle, the Crescent and Johnston Street Annandale in particular;

l) That a councillor briefing from the Port Authority be arranged;

m) Council’s submission should have an increased and strong focus on community outcomes in regard to the foreshores of the Bays Precinct in the Inner West Council area which includes: public access to the foreshores, increased open space, community activation and public transport; and

n) That Council opposes the Glebe Island multi-user facility the cumulative impacts will extend in to Leichhardt, Annandale, Lilyfield and the Balmain Peninsula and is expected to create significant traffic congestion, all of which needs to be fully assessed.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Cr Passas

Absent: Councillor Raciti

Councillor Raciti returned to the Meeting

C0318 Item 4 Media and Social Media Policies

MOTION: (Stamolis/Macri)

THAT Council:

Adopt the media and social media policies as they relate to council staff;

Defer for consideration at a workshop the councillor-related aspects of the policy; and

Key issues which need to be addressed with regards to the development of new Media and Social Media policies for IW Council are:

a) Councillors and Mayor are elected representatives and as such are required to represent their constituents and communicate with them;

b) Any media/social media policy will need different policies for staff than for the Councillors/Mayor. Volunteers should have also have different media protocol;

c) Any media/social media policy needs to adhere to Freedom of political communications which are recognised under the Australian Constitution. These freedoms mean Councillors must be free to speak to the community through all communication channels including traditional and social media. They also mean Councillors have a right to express their own opinions on any decision of council and to talk freely to the media and constituents;

d) Debate both inside and outside the council chambers is how democracy works. The Media/Social Media policies need to encourage that debate and engagement in local democracy in the media and social media not unintentionally shut it down;

e) The Model Code of Conduct and newly adopted Code of Meeting practice sit alongside the Media/Social Media policies they should not sit within the Media/Social Media policies. Councillors are aware or should make themselves aware of their obligations under the Code of Conduct and Code of meeting practice and adhere to them as required; and

f) Council’s Communication policies need to be focused on developing a rich, respectful democratic environment both inside and outside the council chambers which presents different points of view and encourages dialogue, debate and engagement of the community with Council.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Iskandar, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis and York

Against Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Porteous and Steer

Foreshadowed Motion (Porteous/

THAT Council

1. Do not adopt the Media and Social Media policies as presented in C0318 Item 4;

2. Defer the development of the Media and Social Media policies to a councillor workshop. Key issues which need to be addressed with regards to the development of new Media and Social Media policies for IW Council are:

a) Councillors and Mayor are elected representatives and as such are required to represent their constituents and communicate with them.

b) Any media/social media policy will need different policies for staff than for the Councillors/Mayor. Volunteers should have also have different media protocol.

This foreshadowed Motion lapsed.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Motion: (Porteous/Stamolis)

That the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on Tuesday, 27 February 2018 be confirmed as a correct record.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

C0318 Item 5 Proposal for the use of parks and open spaces to provide free outdoor recreation programs for the Inner West Community.

Motion: (Hesse/Stamolis)

THAT:

1. Council authorises the use of 36th Battalion Park without charge to Live Life Get Active (LLGA) to deliver free group fitness classes to the Inner West community as outlined in this report;

2. Subject to a positive evaluation of the initial program, Council delegates the General Manager to authorise additional LLGA recreation programs at appropriate locations in the Inner West Council area; and

3. Council supports this program only where sponsorship is blind, and no corporate advertising be allowed.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Crs Passas and Raciti

C0318 Item 6 2017/18 Second Quarter Budget Review.

Motion: (Stamolis/Steer)

THAT:

1. The report be received and noted;

2. Council approves the budget adjustments required; and

3. That an executive summary be provided in future reports.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

C0318 Item 8 Notice of Motion: Donations and Financial Assistance Policy

Motion: (Passas/Raciti)

THAT the General Manager urgently develops a small donations/financial assistance policy with an identified funding source for consideration by the Council at the earliest opportunity.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

MATTER ARISING Major Issues Budget:

Motion (Porteous/Steer)

That there be a line item in the 2018/19 budget that identifies funding for these categories as outlined, such as for donations or financial assistance.

Motion Tied

For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer

Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Iskandar, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti and York

The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, used his Casting Vote against the MOTION and the MOTION was lost.

C0318 Item 9 Notice of Motion: Pride Seats - Celebrating Council’s Support Of Marriage Equality And LGBTQI Rights

MOTION: (Lockie/Byrne)

THAT:

1. Council accepts the donation of five (5) Pride Seats from Street Furniture Australia, with a view to installing one (1) in each ward of the Inner West Council;

2. Council works with Street Furniture Australia to determine the exact specifications required for each Pride Seat;

3. Council determines where Pride Seats should be installed in consultation with our local LGBTIQ community;

4. Each Pride Seat be dedicated to a different person, people, group or organisation from the Inner West LGA that has campaigned for or contributed to LGBTIQ rights (including marriage equality), and that this dedication be recognised with a plaque and/or signage at each seat;

5. The selection process for the dedication of each Pride Seat be open to public nominations through Council’s Your Say Inner West Engagement Portal, and conducted in consultation with members of our LGBTIQ Working Group; and

6. The budgetary implications of this resolution be considered as part of the 2018/19 budget process.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Crs Passas and Raciti

Councillor Passas left the Meeting.

C0318 Item 10 Notice of Motion: Sydney Metro Land Title Issues In Newtown

Motion: (Lockie/Stamolis)

THAT Council writes to the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure and the Minister for Finance, Services and Property to ask them to:

1. Act urgently to ensure the removal of the reference to an ‘unregistered dealing’

that now sits on the land titles of residents in Lord St Newtown and elsewhere as a result of substratum acquisitions that took place under their properties for the Sydney Metro City and Southwest project; and

2. Enact measures that would allow residents who have suffered negative financial

impacts as a result of this issue to be fairly compensated for their losses.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Absent: Councillor Passas

Councillor Passas returned to the Meeting.

C0318 Item 12 Notice of Motion: Delegations of Inner West Council

Motion: (Porteous/Byrne)

THAT a briefing on delegations be held during April for Councillors followed by a report with recommendations on the delegations that the elected Inner West Council should adopt to come to the first available council meeting, following the briefing.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

C0318 Item 13 Bangla New Year's Day Festival - Request to Hold Event at Tempe Reserve - Further Report

Motion: (Iskandar/Hesse)

THAT the festival be approved and be supported by council officers in any way necessary to ensure a safe event.

Motion Tied

For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer

Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti and York

The Mayor, Councillor Byrne, used his Casting Vote against the MOTION and the MOTION was lost.

Foreshadowed Motion (Byrne/York)

THAT this matter be deferred until the next council meeting.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, Porteous, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Crs McKenna OAM, Passas and Raciti

Foreshadowed Motion (Passas/

THAT Council:

Not sign Owner’s Consent on the application for the Bangla New Year’s Day Festival to be held at Tempe Reserve; and

Staff meets with the Event Organisers of the Bangla New Year’s Day Festival to provide assistance on locations and how to best manage the event for 2019.

The foreshadowed Motion lapsed.

Urgency Motion – Speedy Shoe Repairs

The Deputy Mayor, Clr Passas requested that the meeting consider an urgency motion with regards to Speedy Shoe Repairs.

Motion: (Passas/Raciti)

THAT the motion be considered as a matter of urgency.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

The Mayor, Clr Byrne, declared the matter to be urgent.

Motion: (Passas/Raciti)

THAT a plaque be installed in the footpath to recognise Speedy Shoe Repairs for 43 years of service to the Ashfield community.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Clr Passas retired from the meeting 11.03pm.

Urgency Motion – Earthquake In Papua New Guinea

Clr McKenna OAM requested that the meeting consider an urgency motion with regards to the Earthquake in Papua New Guinea.

Motion: (McKenna OAM/Byrne)

THAT the motion be considered as a matter of urgency.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Absent: Cr Passas

The Mayor, Clr Byrne, declared the matter to be urgent.

Motion: (McKenna OAM/Byrne)

THAT:

Council make a donation of $5,000.00 to the UNICEF Papua New Guinea Children’s Earthquake appeal;
The Mayor write to the Ambassador or Consul expressing the concern of our community; and
Council make the details of the relief appeal available on the Council page in the Inner West courier and on the Council website so that members of the community who wish to donate can do so.

Motion Carried

For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York

Against Motion: Nil

Absent: Cr Passas

Meeting closed 11.05pm.

CHAIRPERSON

The Mayor, Councillor Darcy Byrne

Public Speakers:

Item #

Speaker

Suburb

Item 7:

John Lozano

Cherie Thompson

Alice Kershaw

Haberfield

Dulwich Hill

Rozelle

Item 11:

Anne Picot

Ngaire Worboys

St Peters

Council Meeting

27 March 2018

Item No: C0318 Item 1

Subject: A Healthier Inner West

Prepared By: Cathy Edwards-Davis - Group Manager Trees, Parks and Sports Fields and Josephine Bennett - Group Manager Recreation and Aquatics

Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment

SUMMARY

This report addresses the Council resolution to investigate opportunities for the Inner West Council to improve the health of our residents by increasing opportunities to engage in community sport and recreation.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council invest $65 million in park and aquatic capital facilities over the next three years, subject to the development and adoption of the 2018/2019 Budget;

2. Council appoint an Office of Sport Coordinator to assist and partner local sporting clubs and organisations to strategically address community health and wellbeing and actively promote this service and that the position be funded as part of the 2018/2019 budget process;

3. The Recreation & Aquatics Service Unit and Office of Sport Coordinator strategically partner with the sporting clubs and key partners to increase participation of girls, women, people from lower socio economic backgrounds and people with disabilities as informed by the Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West;

4. Council progress the Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West to investigate the need and best location for hockey and netball facilities; and

5. Council progress the development of the Inner West Sporting Ground Allocation Policy, in consultation with the sporting clubs and that the draft Policy be reported back to Council for adoption.

BACKGROUND

At the Extraordinary Council Meeting on the 31 October 2017 it was resolved:

THAT for the February 2018 meeting the General Manager provide reports on how Council can:

1. Invest $65 million over the next 3 years in sporting fields, parks, playgrounds and pools to deliver the highest-quality facilities for local families and clubs and that this be informed by the results of the Inner West Council Recreation Needs Study;

2. Establish an Inner West Office of Sport to provide assistance to clubs and transform the Council’s relationship with sporting clubs from one based on ground hire only into a strategic partnership to improve the health and wellbeing of our community;

3. Work with clubs to identify bold targets for increasing the participation of women and girls across all sports and implement ways of increasing participation from people from lower socio-economic backgrounds;

4. Establish new netball courts, of which there are too few, and the first hockey field in the Inner West Council area; and

5. Provide for longer tenure on home grounds to allow clubs and Council to jointly apply for state and federal grants to upgrade sporting fields and to have a revised booking field system that acknowledges clubs have longer lead times in preparation for seasons.

These five matters are addressed in the report below.

1. Invest in High Quality Facilities

Council’s Operational Plan identifies the following investment in parks and recreation facilities over the next three years:

Capital Program	2017/18 (‘000)	2018/19 (‘000)	2019/20 (‘000)	2020/21 (‘000)
Park Capital Program
Parks Capital and Assets Capital	6,418	6,482	4,592	7,484
Steel Park Priority 1 and 2, paths, lighting and landscaping	0	450	0	0
Cooks River Foreshore and Warren Park water and biodiversity	0	380	0	0
Petersham Park entry, path, seating and landscape upgrade	316	0	0	0
Camperdown Park picnic, play area, basketball court upgrade	280	0	0	0
Sydenham Green Stage 2 basketball court and lighting upgrade	706	0	0	0
Glover Street Playing Field - Field and baseball Cage upgrade	43	0	0	0
Illoura Reserve Upgrade	356	93	75	0
Mort Bay park Upgrade	215	130	0	0
Playground Upgrades and Improvements	0	0	140	960
Waterfront Drive Upgrade	440	1,260	0	0
Hammond Park - Fencing renewal/upgrade	30	0	90	103
Darrel Jackson Gardens - New Irrigation/drainage	170	0	0	0
Ashfield Park Lighting upgrade	0	590	0	0
Petersham Park staged upgrade	871	0	0	0
Greenway capital budget	300	6,421	3,200	1,800
Greenway Missing Links N, J, H and I	580	1,470	0	0
Skate Park in Callan Park - Construction	484	400	0	0
Way Finding through the Gadigal-Wangal	60	240	0	0
Camperdown Park seating terraces and bleacher renewal	327	0	0	0
Sea Walls Capital	241	69	614	554
Wharves Capital	234	0	96	87
Total Parks	12,071	17,985	8,807	10,988
Aquatic Capital Program
Leichhardt Park Aquatic Centre redevelopment works	0	0	300	2,808
Dawn Fraser Pool upgrade works	534	1,082	758	41
Ashfield Aquatic Centre - Upgrade works	5,000	14,000	4,500	0
Total Aquatic	5,534	15,082	5,558	2,849
TOTAL Parks & Aquatic Recreation Facilities	17,605	33,067	14,365	13,837

Over the next three years, Council intends to invest over $65 million in parks and aquatic recreation facilities. The above program of works may change somewhat, following community engagement and subject to Council adoption of future budgets.

2. Assistance and Partnership Development with Sporting Clubs

The Council resolution identifies the need for Council to lead the development of a Healthier Inner West by providing the following:

· Advance the health of our residents by increasing their opportunities to engage in community sport and recreation to combat the threat of increasing incidence of lifestyle related diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease and obesity.

· Promote and encourage a healthy lifestyle for school age children specifically and the community generally through sports participation. Work with local community sporting bodies to increase participation levels in sport for people from lower socio-economic backgrounds to remove economic or social barriers.

· Transform the Council’s relationship with sporting clubs from one based on ground hire only into a strategic partnership to improve the health and wellbeing of our community. Work with local clubs to set ambitious targets for increasing the participation of women and girls in sport.

· Drive participation in community sport, which helps to build our community, community cohesion and social wellbeing. Encourage community sports clubs, which are the largest network of volunteers in our community, and ensure they get the recognition, support and investment they need.

It is proposed to create the position of Office of Sport Coordinator to work strategically with sporting clubs to achieve these operational and strategic objectives. The Office of Sport Coordinator will liaise with local sporting clubs and relevant Council officers, regarding:

· Using Parks and Sportsgrounds

- Seasonal Hire

- Casual Hire

- Commercial Fitness Training

- Lighting

- Sportsfield maintenance

- Building maintenance

· Assistance for Clubs

- Council grants

- Assistance applying for grants

- Club development including volunteer support, capacity building

· Sports Forum

· Policy and Planning

- Recreation Needs

- Sports Ground Allocation Policy

· Other resources

- ClubSpot

- RecPost

· A liaison point to Trees, Parks & Sportsfields – sportsfields allocations (seasonal and casual bookings), sportsfield lighting, parks planning and master planning, capital works within parks, assistance with the preparation of grant applications to external bodies.

· A liaison point to Recreation & Aquatics – water-based sports activities, strategic recreation matters including increasing participation in sports and the need for new facilities, and awareness of and assistance with grant funding opportunities.

· A liaison point to Properties, Major Building Projects & Facilities – maintenance matters for buildings within parks, cleaning of buildings/ facilities within parks, and leasing and licencing of parks/ sportsfields (greater than one season).

In order to promote the newly appointed Office of Sport Coordinator, , it is proposed that the Coordinator develop and implement a community engagement strategy, which will allow the Office of Sport to reconnect and build stronger relationships with the clubs, including:

· Dedicated section on Inner West Council website;

· Mail out to all local sporting and recreation organisations promoting the service in detail;

· Follow-up meetings with clubs;

· Updates through the Inner West Sports Forum, which meets at least twice per year; and

· Dedicated online resource providing email support, training for volunteers and template documents (checklists, letters etc.)

It is proposed that the Office of Sport Coordinator be temporarily appointed for a trial period of two years initially. The effectiveness and success of the Office of Sport will be evaluated at the end of the two year period to determine whether to continue the service.

3. Targets to Increase Participation

Council is currently working with CRED Consulting on the Inner West Recreation Needs Study. It is proposed that this study be titled ‘Inner West Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West’ and be used to provide the evidence base for the Inner West Recreation Policy: A Healthier Inner West. The Policy and Strategy would detail Council’s commitment to and plan for the development of programs and services to meet the needs of identified target groups including a focus on increasing participation for girls, women, people from lower socio economic backgrounds, people with disabilities.

In conjunction with the Recreation and Aquatics team, the Office of Sport Coordinator would work strategically with local sports clubs and other key partners to actively increase the participation of girls, women, people from lower socio economic backgrounds and people with disabilities.

The Office of Sport Coordinator will also develop a calendar of grant funding opportunities and promote awareness of this to sporting clubs and assist them with the development of applications for projects consistent with Council’s strategic objectives.

4. New Netball & Hockey Courts

There is $782,000 allocated in the budget for new netball courts at Richard Murden Reserve, Haberfield (formerly Darley Road). Community engagement on this project has been undertaken, and a report will be presented to Council shortly with a view to commence construction in early 2018/2019.

It is noted that the Tempe netball courts, within Tempe Reserve, are currently under-utilised. It is recommended the new Office of Sport Coordinator work with Netball NSW to investigate increased use of these facilities

The Inner West LGA does not currently have any hockey fields.

The Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West will include further investigation into the need and location for hockey fields and any additional netball courts.

Without wishing to foreshadow the outcome of the Recreation Needs Study, it is noted that rather than specialised hockey fields, a better outcome may be multi-purpose synthetic fields (hockey, soccer and other sports). This has been discussed with Hockey NSW who has indicated that this approach is consistent with their strategic direction and is supported by the Glebe Hockey Club. Staff will recommend that $200,000 be allocated in the 2018/2019 budget for the purposes of synthetic turf investigations.

5. Club Tenure on Home Grounds

There were various arrangements and policies across the three former Councils regarding the allocation of sportsfields. Some clubs have long term licences, including up to 21 years. Other clubs make park bookings on a seasonal basis. Some clubs in the Inner West have a history of playing at their home ground for over 100 years.

The Inner West has 297 hectares of open space (including Ballast Point and Callan Park) containing 29 publically accessible sporting grounds.

The Inner West Council has an average of 1.5 hectares per head of population. By comparison, the City of Sydney has 1.8 hectares per 1,000 residents and Canada Bay has 2.4 hectares per 1,000 residents.

The population of the Inner West is increasing, making it ever harder to meet the open space needs of the residents. This is of particular concern given the growing population living in high density housing and apartments.

In the context of the above statistics, there is a significant shortage of training space for clubs and a high level of demand for access. Many clubs have expressed that their desire for increased access to sporting grounds and this was expressed at the recent Sports Forum in November 2017 and through the recent winter allocation process.

Parks Planning & Engagement staff have commenced the preparation of an Inner West Sporting Ground Allocation Policy. The objective of the Policy is to provide the community with equitable access to sporting facilities through best practice governance standards, transparent decision making and a strong ethical culture. The first step in the development of this Policy is the development of a discussion paper which will outline the objectives. Councillors and the clubs will be engaged on this and a draft Policy developed and placed on public exhibition. Following the resulting amendments, it is intended that the Policy will go to Council for formal adoption.

The Inner West Sporting Ground Allocation Policy will look at issues such as club history at a ground, potential longer tenure for clubs and the process/ timing for seasonal bookings.

Former Marrickville Council had a Sports Ground Allocation Policy in place which allowed for longer club tenure proportionate to capital contribution toward facility upgrades. A similar provision will be investigated for the Inner West Policy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The position of Office of Sport Coordinator will cost approximately $120,000 including on costs per annum. It is recommended that the position be funded as part of the 2018/2019 budget process.

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

This report has been prepared in collaboration by Trees, Parks and Sportsfields and Recreation and Aquatics staff. Properties, Major Building Projects and Facilities has been consulted in the development of this report.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

As above, it is proposed that the Sports & Recreation Service Team meet individually with the various sports clubs and form strong collaborative relationships. There will be separate, specific engagement for the Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West and for the Inner West Sporting Ground Allocation Policy.

CONCLUSION

The report outlines a number of methodologies for Council to advance the health of Inner West residents by increasing their opportunities to engage in community sport and recreation. Some of these key methodologies include capital expenditure on park and aquatic recreation facilities, establishment of the Sport and Recreation Service Team, development and implementation of the Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West, and the Inner West Sporting Ground Allocation Policy.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil.

Council Meeting

27 March 2018

Callan Park Public Meeting – analysis of community Q&A

Thursday 15 February 2018 – Centurion Lounge Leichhardt Oval

The Callan Park public meeting, attended by 200 members of the community, was opened by Inner West Mayor Darcy Byrne, and consisted of a presentation by Council’s Group Manager Trees, Parks and Sports Fields, followed by a community Q&A session. The community questions and comments with Council responses are summarised below.

Overview

There were fifty-one community comments or questions on a wide range of subjects. The key themes were:

· Continue to push for State Government consideration of the Callan Park Master Plan 2011

· Concerns about the lack of a process for involving the community in the development of a Landscape Structure Plan by NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH)

· Focus on the importance of mental health and wellbeing services at Callan Park

· Consider alternative sites for a skate park if Callan Park is not possible, taking into account skate parks planned by City of Sydney

· Additional themes were natural values, arts, recreation, memorialisation, community spaces and facilities, funding models and advocacy

Actions arising from meeting:

1. Formal report to Council summarising the community Q&A session

2. Formal submission to OEH by Council to inform the Landscape Structure Plan

3. Council will raise with OEH:

o Process for community involvement in the development of the Landscape Structure Plan including a timeline for submissions and expected exhibition of the Plan

o Importance of using the Master Plan to inform OEH’s work, and highlight community support for multiple uses of Callan Park including mental health and wellbeing, recreation and community facilities, open space and heritage preservation

o Tree management including heritage listed trees

o Success of revegetation of Callan Point

o Companion animals policy

o Need for seating such as benches for older people

o Investigation of unmarked graves

4. Council will:

o Update the presentation call to action to contact Gabrielle Upton MP to explicitly include mental health facilities

o Promote the OEH process for developing the Landscape Structure Plan once information received from OEH

5. Council will also consider other items arising including:

o Potential for registration of Callan Park on the National Heritage List

o Alternative location for skate park

o Advocating for Callan Park with the NSW Ministry of the Arts - Create NSW, Minister for Health and Minister for Arts and establishing a Callan Park Community Consultative Committee

o Advocating for artists’ spaces

o Educational resources for teachers

Summary of questions, comments and responses.

(Similar subjects have been grouped)

Question/Comment

Council officer response

OEH process for developing the Landscape Structure Plan

· Community and Council should call on the Minister to hold public meeting; clarify process; and provide timeline of public exhibition of the Plan

· Councillor will move a Council motion calling on State Government to clarify and publicise process. Council also has a role in informing our residents.

· Details of OEH pop-up engagement on 25 Feb requested

· Speaker attended last week’s pop-up and describes it as “dodgy”. Calls on Council to push for formal submission with headings and closing date

· Requests Council upload closing date for OEH consultation and further information on the website when known

· OEH consultation is insulting.

· What is a Landscape Structure Plan?

Noted

OEH pop-up

Bay Run – Waterfront Drive bottom of Wharf Road - 8.30am to 12.30pm

Similar to a Master Plan though not as detailed – named by OEH.

Context

· Two significant successes following the restructure of Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority include:

o Callan Park in the care, control and management of OEH rather than NSW Property and Finance

o Ministerial guarantee that the State Government will not commercially develop or build apartments on this land.

· NSW Health owns the site and argues against a trust model as a financial contribution would be required. Speaker understands the purpose of the OEH Landscape Structure Plan is to plan for the aspects of Callan Park within OEH control.

Noted

Mental health and wellbeing

· Mental health facilities not included in the call to action to Gabrielle Upton yet this was a key focus of the Master Plan and the extensive community engagement that informed it.

· What is Council’s position on the establishment of mental health services at CP?

· Historically mental health facilities have been lacking for young women – would like to see a wellness centre for women to the age of 45 years incorporated in the new plan

· Council seems not to be focusing on mental health and wellness aspects of Master Plan; suggests using buildings for exhibitions and events such as the Anxiety Festival

· Note that the Master Plan agreed a site of a Museum of the Mind compatible with mental and arts.

· Mental health heritage has historical relevance at Callan Park; accept people with mental health as part of our community – series of social enterprises needed. Keep mental health at Callan Park central.

Council’s position is as per the Master Plan, an integral part of which is establishment of mental health facilities.

The presentation will be updated to explicitly include mental health in the call to action.

Skate park

· If you don’t get support for the second location, what will Council do in terms of providing desperately needed facilities in the area?

· If OEH state it’s not good for the heritage of the site then suggests Council consider a site between Lilyfield Road and City West Link above the light rail workshops.

· If the current location can’t be used what other skate park locations are proposed? What deems them suitable for use?

· The LSP has several locations for a skate park, one of them near Waterfront Oval near the bowling green; one closer to the water and one further to the east.

· Clover Moore is building a skate park at the Crescent less that 2km walk, there is Sydenham Green and City of Sydney is also building another large skate park in Sydenham near Mitchell Road; why should my rates pay for another one?

Council’s research has identified additional need for local facilities.

Locations need to take into account proximity of residents, noise associated with the skate park, be physically large enough and preferably on council-owned land.

There are pros and cons associated with alternative areas in Callan Park. Council has $1milion budgeted for a skate park at an alternative location if Callan Park is not possible.

Memorialisation and heritage

· Where are the unmarked grave on the site?

· Locate the memorial sites, aboriginal heritage and where patients with mental illness are buried without names, and note these sites in the Landscape Structure Plan

· Why is Callan Park on the State Heritage Register but not on the National Heritage List?

Council does not know; if substantive works were undertaken an archaeologist would be required to ensure nothing is damaged.

Raise with OEH

Natural values

· Trees in conflict with heritage buildings – larger trees damaging building and a lot of saplings growing into buildings.

· Hardly any trees opposite Cecily Road have survived – what happened to the original heritage listed trees?

· Bush care group active on site for over twenty years and achieved beneficial change including revegetation of Callan Point. Requests Council put great weight on the value of this area in their submission and takes into account the detailed vision for these two hectares along the foreshore in the Master Plan. Notes Bay Run conflicts.

· Reiterate Master Plan goal to triple the size of the community gardens.

· No small birds in CP anymore as feral cats are lovingly fed by some people. Why is dealing with the feral cats such a difficult problem?

· Exquisite unallocated, green spaces in Callan Park are not ‘leftover’ spaces for groups that don’t have a place elsewhere but are for services or people that need the sanctity of such open space

Noted

Raise with OEH

Arts

· Inner West Council area has a higher than average proportion of practising artists. Keep alive the idea of renting of art spaces/studios managed by Council and continuing the work of the previous councils.

· Concerns from Writers’ Centre about Sydney College of the Arts leaving. Inner West Council has one of the highest percentages of artists and creators; importance of affordable cultural space for artists and arts organisations

Noted

Funding models

· Is there a problem with the Ambulance and nursing areas being left with Department of Health, and the rest of area being looked after by OEH?

· In a trust model the ambulance service and nurses’ quarters could potentially provide a revenue stream. Issues is occupants who are a cost to Callan Park but make no contribution.

· Were any of the models self-funding?

· None of the models are fully self-funding from day one; all the models have elements of funding, moving from subsidised toward self-funding. Depends on activities - organisations are either paying no rent, or peppercorn rent, or paying rent to another government department rather than OEH – a lot of issues to be resolved there

Former Leichhardt Council appraisal on the rating base found there would be a $3000 increase to ratepayers if Callan Park were handed over to Council. Centennial Parklands is self-funding and to be financial has to generate revenue in a

Trust Model.

Four models were independently audited before the Master Plan was adopted by Leichhardt Council. None of the four models are fully self-funding.

Advocacy

· Calls on Council to partner with Create NSW

· Requests Council advocate to Minister for Health and Minister for Arts before the state election.

· Request for establishment of Community Consultative Committee as required by the Callan Park Act, bringing together community leaders, mental health consumer groups and local Aboriginal leaders.

· Calls on Council to provide educational resources for local teachers to educate kids on the heritage cultural and sustainability of the area to get some great advocates on board.

Noted

Community spaces and facilities

· Requests benches placed for passive activities for older citizens

· Were any reasons given for the refusal of the para-rowing and Men’s’ Shed?

· Has Council received a Development Application for the Wharf Road Cottages, and if so when will it be occupied, who is the tenant and what will be the use

· Bower Reuse Repair Centre may need to move from Addison Road Centre Marrickville and seeks information on possible reuse space in Callan Park

Raise with OEH

Due to Landscape Structure Plan development

OEH has verbally informed Council of a NSW Health proposal to reactivate one of the cottages. Council has not received a DA at present and has no information on the proposed tenant or use.

Master Plan on display on the back wall. Master Plan has a number of layers - cultural overlay, artist precinct, sustainability etc. State Government should work with Council and the community.

Recreation

· Improve the ovals we have before building more.

· Balmain District Football Club 50-year anniversary in 2019, including 20 years at Callan Park’s Waterfront Oval. Provide active recreation with over 2600 community members, 1900 of them are under the age of 18. Will IWC recognise and advocate for heritage stakeholders such our Football Club, and the Cricket Club, and ensure our facilities and access to these facilities will not be diminished or restricted in anyway during the process and whatever comes from that?

· How wide is the Bay Run? Rangers stopped people with dogs playing near the beach area at Callan Point as they said it is all part of the Bay Run. It is very unclear.

Discuss ideas for improvements with Council.

Council is developing a sportsground allocation policy which will consider heritage and length of association of clubs with grounds.

Bay Run is 3 to 5 metres wide. Callan Point is part of Callan Park not King Georges Park. OEH has not issued a directive to make Callan Park off leash. Council has advocated for dog walkers to be the ‘eyes and ears’ of the park which would assist with security.

Council will work with OEH toward a companion Policy for CP.

General comments on Master Plan

· Community wants multiple uses in Callan Park sporting grounds and heritage preserved

· Refreshing that Council is reinforcing the vision of the MP and the importance of it as an arts, mental health and community owned concept.

· Speaker requests that all communications and submissions about Callan Park include the message “Preserving every aspect of the mental health heritage of CP, Aboriginal, Council and historical, for recognition of the past, support of the present and benefit of the future.”

· Is the State Govt failure to adopt the MasterPlan a deliberate subversion so the public land protections may be challenged?

Noted

Council can’t comment on State Government motives.

OEH recruitment

· OEH has advertised for a “Senior Project Officer for Callan Park” (12 months temporary contract) - why is OEH resourcing a position like that for $120,000?

· OEH is trying to build up resources to implement something.

Council has no information about this.

Summary of meeting

· Call for summary of Q&A to be reported to Council meeting

· Call for summary of main points stated here tonight.

Noted. A report to Council will outline points made tonight.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Background to the Plan

Figure 1: Yeo Park/Gough Reserve Location Map

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve Today

Located within the suburb of Ashfield, Yeo Park and Gough Reserve is greatly valued by the community as an open space area that provides multiple uses including passive recreation, informal sporting opportunities, relaxation and play for children.

The Park is a triangular shaped allotment, bounded by Old Canterbury Road in the east and Victoria Street in the west. The Park adjoins Trinity Grammar School on the northern boundary and Yeo Park Infant’s School on the southern boundary. .

Prior to the arrival of European settlers in 1788, the area of land now known as Ashfield was home to the Wangal and Cadigal people of the Eora Nation.

It is part of the first land grant in the Municipality, made in 1793 to Richard Johnson and was named after former Mayor John Yeo (1917-1918).

Today, the Park comprises a central bandstand, amenities facility, BBQ shelters, garden beds and a children’s play area.

Why the Plan is Needed

There has been no plan of management prepared for Yeo Park and Gough Reserve. Therefore a plan is required to respond to a range of emerging issues including changing demographics, competing park uses, increased population and development.

Plans of Management must be prepared for all community land. An interim review should be conducted every 5 years and a major review every 10 years. This is a legal requirement under the Local Government Act 1993

A Plan of Management has been developed to guide Council and the community in the future objectives, maintenance and management of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve. The Plan of Management provides the basis for managing Yeo Park and Gough Reserve in a manner that respects the values and significance of the Park.

The Plan of Management is also needed to respond to increasing pressures associated with Ashfields population and the impacts this will have on open space usage.

What is a Plan of Management

A Plan of Management is the principle document that guides Council’s long-term future planning, design and management of public land.

Relationship to other Plans, Policies and Documents

The Plan of Management forms the overall guiding document for the future management and future directions for Yeo Park and Gough Reserve.

The Plan of Management reinforces the objectives and issues outlined in Ashfield Council’s Parks Strategy as well as supporting objectives identified in other Council policies that relate to planning open space and other initiatives to increase open space, enhance community wellbeing and improve the natural environment.

While the Parks Strategy provides the strategic framework and long-term direction for Ashfield’s open space areas, the Plan of Management provides specific objectives and direction for each individual Park.

Figure 2: Relationship to other Plans, Policies and Documents

How the Plan was Undertaken

Preparation of the Plan

The preparation of a Plan of Management has involved extensive fieldwork, document review and liaison with a wide range of stakeholders, members of the community and Council officers. The process is summarised below:

1) Extensive document and archive review, including Council and State archive searches;

2) Detailed site audit investigations in the park were carried out during weekdays;

3) Comprehensive stakeholder consultation including workshop with advisory committees, drop in sessions, stakeholder workshops and a park survey; and

4) Co-ordination meetings and workshops involving Council staff.

Stakeholder Consultation Undertaken for the Plan

A comprehensive stakeholder consultation process was undertaken for the broader Parks Strategy and Plans of Management by Tract Consultants and Council. The consultation process comprised:

1) Community Advisory Committee sessions with Seniors Committee, Access Committee and Youth Committee;

2) User/Resident Surveys at Drop in Sessions, online and mailed to Council;

3) Drop in Sessions at Richard Murden Reserve, Ashfield Park, Darrell Jackson Gardens and Yeo Park and Gough Reserve with interactive mapping exercises and surveys;

4) Briefings with key Council staff and information meetings; and

5) Stakeholder workshop with sporting groups, associations, clubs and societies.

The findings of the consultation have been summarised in a Community Consultation Outcomes Report, which is attached as an Annexure within the Parks Strategy.

Structure of Plan

The Plan of Management is set out in the following format:

Introduction – defines what a Plan of Management is and why it is needed. It also details changes and improvements made to Park over the past 10 years as well as identifying the purpose and life cycle of the Plan.

Background – describes the Park and its broader context. It outlines ownership of the Park and the legislative requirements impacting its management and usage.

Site Analysis – details the Park and its historical context including key demographic features and accessibility to key services. It explores the Park in detail and identifies existing facilities, vegetation and features.

Basis for Management – explains the management of the Park including objectives, values existing and proposed uses. It also outlines arrangements of leases and licenses of the Park.

Themes – explores the themes associated with the Park and details the issues, opportunities, constraints and directions to address these themes.

Implementation

The Action Plan section of this Plan details the summary of proposed capital improvement works along with the recommended priorities for implementation. The recommended works will be costed based on Council’s capital expenditure and will permit Council to prepare a program and budget for progressive implementation of the works.

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 What is a Plan of Management?

A Plan of Management (PoM) for a park is the principal document that guides Council’s future planning, design and management of the Park. It consolidates information about the park and its uses.

It provides directions and key actions to achieve what is envisioned for the Park. These actions are largely formed through research, site auditing and consultation with the community to identity future uses of the Park and management of the varied and changing needs of the users.

1.2 Why Prepare a Plan of Management?

A Plan of Management provides the basis for long-term management of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve in a manner that respects the values and significance of the Park. It also sets out directions and provides a framework for the strategic and operational use of the Park.

There has been no Plan of Management created for Yeo Park and Gough Reserve. As a result, there needs to be a document that outlines the framework for managing the Park and identifying appropriate uses for the Park.

As Ashfield’s population and housing increases so will the pressure on existing open space and the ability for Parks to cater for a range of growing user demands and needs. A Plan of Management therefore provides guidance as to how to best manage the Park in the long-term and promote equitable and fair use of the Park to meet community needs.

Factors influencing the need to prepare a Plan of Management include:

1. Increasing population and the need to balance expectations and fair use for open space;

2. Ageing population will impact the need to provide accessible and equitable open space for elderly;

3. Changes to local demographics and increases in medium-high residential will influence access to open space and facilities;

4. Expectations of quality recreational experiences; and

5. Ageing infrastructure and the need to provide a safe and high quality environment.

1.3 Relationship to Parks Strategy

A Plan of Management reinforces the vision, issues and recommendations stipulated in Ashfield’s Parks Strategy. While the Parks Strategy intends to provide the broad strategic framework and long-term direction for Ashfield’s open space, the Plans of Management provide specific management objectives and highlights issues specific to individual parks.

1.4 Changes to Park Since 2005

The following improvements have been made to Yeo Park and Gough Reserve over the past 10 years:

- Replaced one BBQ station;

- One new shelter;

- New playground and shade sail; and

- Refurbishment of toilet block.

1.5 Purpose of this Plan

The purpose of the Plan is to provide an integrated approach to the management of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve to ensure its place as a valued recreational space within Ashfield Council (former) and the Inner West Council.

The Plan seeks to recognise the significance of the Park, particularly its passive recreational significance in the local setting. Community consultation has indicated strong interest in the Park and how it is used and managed in the long-term.

The Plan aims to set out a way to appropriately manage the Park and improve recreational facilities to meet these demands over the next 10 years.

The Plan of Management has a number of purposes. These include:

1) Identification of Park values;

2) Detailed site analysis of the Park;

3) Broad management objectives for the Park;

4) Identification of existing and potential park uses; and

5) Identification of opportunities for acquiring additional land to expand Council’s open space areas and enhance recreational opportunities; and

6) Identification of issues, opportunities and threats associated with Park uses.

1.6 Life of the Plan

The Plan of Management should be reviewed every 5 years and a major review and update should be taken every 10 years. However, it is noted that the nature and extent of changes to parks can vary within a time period shorter than the ones proposed.

Annual priorities should be determined and included in Council’s Annual Operational Plan. Progress on their implementation should be reviewed annually in conjunction with the review of the Annual Operation Plan.

The Plan of management may also be reviewed in the event that changes occur to the principles underpinning the management objectives or if matters arise that are not accounted for in this plan.

This Plan of Management constitutes the first for Yeo Park and Gough Reserve and provides guidance over the next 5 years.

With the recent amalgamation and formation of the new Inner West Council (IWC), the Plan of Management will be reviewed in the broader context of open space areas in the new local government boundary. This may see revisions and amendments in park priorities according to the needs of the broader community that are captured in future policies.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 Location and Description

Figure 3: Yeo Park and Gough Reserve - Location Map

Yeo Park/Gough Reserve is triangular in shape and is bound by Victoria Street in the west, Old Canterbury Road in the east and Trinity Grammar School in the north. The area of the park is 37,000 square metres.

Pedestrian pathways are provided along all Park boundaries. Pathways located in the northern portion of the Park provide an inner and outer pathway around the bandstand area, while a central pathway provides connections to the children’s play area and amenity building.

There is also a pathway dissecting the Park from Old Canterbury Road to Yeo Park Infants’ School.

The northern portion of the Park provides a formal landscape with flower beds, historic pathway layouts and a bandstand area. The bandstand was built in 1929 and was later refurbished in 1988 as part of the Australian Bicentenary Celebrations.

The playground area is located south of the main central pathway and north of the Infants’ School. The playground provides shade sails, swings, slippery slide and associated climbing equipment and is set within wood mulch bed.

The southern portion of the Park, which is also known as Gough Reserve, provides Yeo Park Infants’ School and an undersized active recreation area. The recreation area provides a mini cricket pitch. This portion of land is owned by the Department of Education and is not in the ownership or management of Council

Towards the southern tip of the Park is a community facility, which can be hired out for community events and functions. This land was a disused Baby Health Centre (approved by the then Minister for Education in July 1946).

The Park provides no onsite parking. Users park their vehicles around the perimeter of the Park.

Figure 4: Yeo Park and Gough Reserve

The Park comprises three individual allotments identified as:

Lot	Deposited Plan (DP)
7020	93165

Table 1: Lot and Deposited Plan

2.2 History of the Park

Figure 5: Yeo Park/Gough Reserve in 1943 (Source: SixMaps)

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve was officially opened in September 1925. It was part of the former Hurlstone Agricultural College, which was later bought by Trinity Grammar School in an exchange with the Department of Education. It is part of the first land grant in the Municipality, made in 1793 to Richard Johnson and was named after former Mayor John Yeo (1917-1918).

The Bandstand, located centrally within the Park was built in 1929 and was later refurbished in 1988 as part of the Australian Bicentenary Celebrations. The bandstand is used today for occasional musical events and for special celebrations including weddings and concerts.

There is a plaque on the bandstand, commemorating Alderman Yeo, who served as an alderman for 18 years prior to becoming Mayor and obtained the Park for the people in November 1929.

In 1935, all the area south of the school site was excised and granted to Ashfield Council, in which the Council agreed to pay rent of £1 per year. Most of this became Gough Reserve.

Gough Reserve.

Most of the parks former pathways and buildings appear to be intact and are currently used as facilities and pathways within the Park. There also appears to be flower beds located adjacent to the pathways in the north, which have been retained to this present day.

2.3 Ownership and Management

Full details relating to the ownership of the Park are detailed in the table below:

Park	Yeo Park and Gough Reserve
Address	Victoria Road and Old Canterbury Road, Ashfield
Ownership	State of NSW as dedicated land. Administered by Department of Lands
Management	Ashfield Council (former)/Inner West Council
Trust Name	D500212 - Reserve Trust
Appointed Manager	Ashfield Council (former)/Inner West Council
Area	3.7ha
Lot	Lot 7020 DP 93165, Lot 11 DP 1002099
Land Category	Park
Purpose	Public Recreation
Zoning	RE1 Public Recreation – Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013
Leases	None
Park Hierarchy	Neighbourhood Park

Table 2: Ownership Summary

2.4 Crown Lands Act

The Crown Lands Act 1989 ensures that Crown Land is managed for the benefit of the people in New South Wales.

On 9 November 2016 the NSW Parliament passed the Crown Land Management Bill 2016 which will deliver modern, streamlined and transparent management of the state’s vast Crown lands.

The Act introduces the requirement for a Community Engagement Strategy to be developed and adhered to for key decisions concerning Crown land. The Government will engage with community and stakeholders during the development of the Community Engagement Strategy in 2017, with the amendments to the legislation to commence in early 2018.

2.4.1 Principles

Part 1 Division 1.1 Section 1.4 of the Crown Lands management Act 2016 No 58 sets out principles of Crown Land management for all Crown Land Reserves and forms the basis for management of the Park by the reserve trust, Ashfield /Inner West Council as the Trust Manager.

The guiding principles of these are as follows:

a) that environmental protection principles be observed in relation to the management and administration of Crown land, and

b) that the natural resources of Crown land (including water, soil, flora, fauna and scenic quality) be conserved wherever possible, and

c) that public use and enjoyment of appropriate Crown land be encouraged, and

d) that, where appropriate, multiple use of Crown land be encouraged, and

e) that, where appropriate, Crown land should be used and managed in such a way that both the land and its resources are sustained in perpetuity, and

f) that Crown land be occupied, used, sold, leased, licensed or otherwise dealt with in the best interests of the State consistent with the above principles.

2.5 Local Government Act

The Local Government Act 1993 identifies that Council’s must prepare and adopt Plans of Management for all community land.

The Act states that the Plan must identify the following:

1) Category of land;

2) Objectives and performance targets of the Plan with respect to land;

3) Means by which Council proposes to achieve the plans objectives and performance targets;

4) Manner in which Council proposes to assess its performance with respect to the Plan’s objective and performance.

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve are classified as community land and categorised as Park.

The purpose of categorising land is to ensure the essential nature of the land and how that may best be managed. It also enables community land to be managed more appropriately as to achieve a responsible balance between protection of relevant values and use of the land by the community.

2.5.1 Objectives of Park

The core objectives for management of community land categorised as a park are:

a) to encourage, promote and facilitate recreational, cultural, social and educational pastimes and activities, and

b) to provide for passive recreational activities or pastimes and for the casual playing of games, and

c) to improve the land in such a way as to promote and facilitate its use to achieve the other core objectives for its management.

2.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Division 12 of State Environmental Planning Policy (infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP) identifies that certain works are permitted without consent where it is carried out by or on behalf of a council on a public reserve under the control of or vested in the Council.

Division 12 of ISEPP is provided in the Annexures.

2.7 Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013

Ashfield Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2013 is the principle document that guides planning, development and sets the framework and land use structure for Ashfield. It ensures that land is appropriately used to meet the needs of the community through land zoning, development standards and heritage protection.

With the formation of the Inner West Council, it is anticipated that Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013 will need to be consolidated with both Leichhardt and Marrickville’s Local Environmental Plans.

Some of the Plans main aims and objectives are:

a) to promote the orderly and economic development of Ashfield in a manner that is consistent with the need to protect the environment,

b) to retain and enhance the identity of Ashfield as an early residential suburb with local service industries and retail centres,

c) to identify and conserve the environmental and cultural heritage of Ashfield,

d) to protect the urban character of the Haberfield, Croydon and Summer Hill urban village centres while providing opportunities for small-scale, infill development that enhances the amenity and vitality of the centres,

e) to ensure that development has proper regard to environmental constraints and minimises any adverse impacts on biodiversity, water resources, riparian land and natural landforms,

f) to require that new development incorporates the principles of ecologically sustainable development.

2.7.1 Zoning

Figure 6: Yeo Park/Gough Reserve Land Zoning (Source: Ashfield LEP 2013)

Pursuant to the Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013, Yeo Park and Gough Reserve are zoned RE1 Public Recreation.

The Land Use Table for the RE1 Public Recreation Zone provides objectives and types of development permitted without consent, permitted with consent and prohibited:

1 Objectives of zone

· To enable land to be used for public open space or recreational purposes.

· To provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land uses.

· To protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.

· To ensure that development has proper regard to environmental constraints and minimises any adverse impacts on biodiversity, water resources, riparian land and natural landforms.

· To allow land to be used for a limited range of facilities that are compatible with or will complement the specific recreational use for which it is zoned.

2 Permitted without consent

Nil

3 Permitted with consent

Boat launching ramps; Boat sheds; Building identification signs; Child care centres; Community facilities; Emergency services facilities; Environmental facilities; Environmental protection works; Information and education facilities; Jetties; Kiosks; Markets; Recreation areas; Recreation facilities (indoor); Recreation facilities (major); Recreation facilities (outdoor); Research stations; Respite day care centres; Restaurants or cafes; Roads; Water recreation structures; Water recycling facilities; Water storage facilities

4 Prohibited

Any development not specified in item 2 or 3

In accordance with the land use table, works proposed within the Park must be permissible with consent pursuant to Ashfield LEP 2013 and satisfy the objectives of the RE1 Public Recreation Zone.

2.7.2 Heritage Conservation

Clause 5.10 of Ashfield LEP 2013 provides objectives and development standards to conserve the environmental heritage of Ashfield. The objectives of this clause are:

a) to conserve the environmental heritage of Ashfield,

b) to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views,

c) to conserve archaeological sites,

d) to conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places of heritage significance.

Figure 7: Yeo Park/Gough Reserve Heritage Map (Source: Ashfield LEP 2013)

As shown in Figure 7, Yeo Park/Gough Reserve is an item of local heritage significance, identified in Ashfield LEP 2013 as “Yeo Park and Gough Reserve (public reserve)”.

3 SITE ANALYSIS

3.1 Context

Figure 8: Yeo Park/Gough Reserve Context (Source: OneMap 2016)

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve is located in the suburb of Ashfield and is located south of Ashfield and Summer Hill Town Centres. The surrounding area comprises largely low residential suburban dwelling houses and medium density residential flats.

The Park is an item of local heritage significance, identified as “Yeo Park and Gough Reserve *public reserve” under Ashfield LEP 2013.

The Park is located approximately 1.19 kilometres south west of Summer Hill Station and 1.52 kilometres south east of Ashfield Station. Land to the south of the Park along Old Canterbury Road comprises mixed use and commercial development, while the Park adjoins Trinity Grammar School to the north.

The Park is accessible by public transport, with bus stops located around the perimeter of the Park along Old Canterbury Road.

The Park is located approximately 850 metres west of Dulwich Hill Town Centre, which provides a range of mixed use, commercial and residential development as well as light train transport and bus routes.

There are a number of schools located within the locality including Trinity Grammar School, Canterbury Boys’ High School and Summer Hill Public School.

3.2 Demographic Analysis

3.2.1 Dwelling Density

Figure 9: Dwelling Density (Source: OneMap 2016)

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve is surrounded by a range of low and medium density residential development, with areas providing a mix of traditional suburban housing and apartments.

Areas to the west provide lower densities ranging between 12-14 dwellings per hectare. Land to the east towards Dulwich Hill Town Centre provides much higher densities, with densities ranging from 22-157 dwellings per hectare.

It is anticipated that increasing development in existing town centres will result in additional pressures relating to the use of open space in the area. This may result in the need to consider a passive recreational zone in association with the formal landscaping and bandstand to the north of the Park, and a more active recreational zone in Gough Reserve.

3.2.2 Household Size

Figure 10: Household Size (Source: OneMap 2016)

The area of land surrounding Yeo Park and Gough Reserve has ranging household sizes. Land to the east provides lower household sizes of 2.2 and 2.4 persons, which would suggest couples without children, while land to the west provides more nuclear families up to 2.8 and 2.7 persons.

The implications for Yeo Park and Gough Reserve may include the need to maintain facilities and amenities including children play areas, benches and BBQ facilities and to ensure the Park provides quality passive recreational opportunities for its users.

3.2.3 Median Age

Figure 11: Median Age (Source: OneMap 2016)

The area of land surrounding Yeo Park and Gough Reserve provides varying ages. Areas west provide age groups of 41 and 44, while areas east provide age groups of 33 and 34. Older age groups are located in more suburban environments, while younger age groups are located along major transport corridors and near town centres precincts.

The implications for Yeo Park and Gough Reserve are to ensure the Park provides appropriate accessibility for children, families and the ageing population including maintenance of footpaths, drinking fountains, seating and tables. It would also suggest the need to consider two clear zones within the Park, with an active zone in the south towards Gough Reserve and a passive zone in the northern portion.

3.3 Facilities and Assets

3.3.1 Bandstand

There is a plaque on the bandstand, commemorating Alderman Yeo, who served as an alderman for 18 years prior to becoming Mayor and obtained the Park for the people in November 1929.

The Bandstand will require further maintenance to preserve its condition. Additionally, the clock and moat located at the rotunda does not function.

There is also a formal staircase in the north west portion of the Park that provides access to the bandstand area, which is located on a levelled plane.

Figure 12: Bandstand and Staircase

3.3.2 Playground Area

The playground area is an open playground shaded by two sails and is used by local families within the area and Yeo Park Infants’ School. Shrubs and garden beds are located around the playground.

The playground is located north of Yeo Park Infants’ School and provides a wood mulch bed, two slippery slides, forts, bridge, climbing structures and equipment. There are also two swings provided south of the children’s play area and north of the Infant’s School. The swings are set within synthetic turf and may require upgrading.

Figure 13: Playground Area

3.3.3 Garden Beds

A number of garden beds are located in the northern portion of the Park along major footpaths. These garden beds largely comprise rose beds and are generally in good condition and are well maintained.

Garden beds could introduce seasonal/companion planting to make them more vibrant and attractive throughout different times of the year. This would provide stronger delineation of the Park as well.

Figure 14: Garden Beds

3.3.4 BBQ Area and Rotunda

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve has a BBQ area located in the northern portion of the Park. The BBQ has been recently installed and is y covered by a colourbond roof structure and are situated on a concrete pad.

There is a rotunda also located south of the children’s play area and provides seating and shelter for users.

Figure 15: BBQ Area and Rotunda

3.3.5 Toilet Block

There is a toilet block located in the central portion of the Park, east of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve Infants’ School.

Figure 16: Amenity Block

3.3.1 Yeo Park Infants’ School

Yeo Park Infants’ School is located in the central portion of the Park adjoining Victoria Road. It is a small infants’ school, catering for the education of children from Kindergarten to Year 2.

The school occupies a brick building and is set within large mature trees and the children’s play area, located north of the school. South of the school is Gough Reserve and a undersized cricket pitch. This portion of land is owned by Department of Education.

3.3.1 Undersized Cricket Pitch

South of the Park towards Gough Reserve is an undersized cricket pitch, which appears to have been used by children and families in the local area for informal sporting games and recreation. This portion of land is owned by Department of Education.

Figure 17: Undersized cricket pitch

3.3.2 Community Facility

There is a community facility located at the southern point of the Park in Gough Reserve. The facility was previously used as a Former Baby Health Centre. A Heritage Study Review prepared by Council in 2004 identifies the building as very good example, indeed one of the earliest, of professionally designed post-World-War II International-style architecture in Ashfield. It is an excellent and early example of a purpose-built Baby Health Centre.

The building is part of a Development Application prepared by Council for a proposed café.

Figure 18: Community Facility

3.4 Landform and Topography

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve provides a fall of approximately 8 metres from the northern boundary adjoining Trinity Grammar School to the central portion of the Park adjoining the Infants’ School.

The land is relatively flat in Gough Reserve and then gradually rises to the southern tip by approximately 6 metres towards the community facility.

Figure 19: Yeo Park and Gough Reserve Slope

3.5 Existing Vegetation

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve provides a range of flora and fauna, which is largely located along the perimeter of the Park.

Along Old Canterbury Road, species generally comprise Brush box (Lophostemon confertus) in avenues along the intentional paths.

New plantings of Brush box (Lophostemon confertus) is located at the cross paths.

Street trees along Victoria Street comprise Largerstroemia indica. The gardens beds include a range of species including ficus hillii, butia capitata, eucalyptus, plantanus orientalis, wisteria and roses.

The Park adopts a formal design, characterised by a rectangular path system, which connects to the street footpath network. A rotunda has been constructed within the central portion of the site and acts as a focal point.

Figure 20: Existing Vegetation

3.6 Asset Inventory Assessment

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve currently has a number of existing assets on site including seating, water fountains, play equipment and associated facilities, shade structures and pole top perimeter lighting throughout pedestrian areas.

The inventory assessment concluded that all facilities and amenities within the Park were in either excellent or good condition (refer to Annexure).

4 BASIS FOR MANAGEMENT

4.1 Values

The principal values of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve are:

· The aesthetic characteristic of the Park including the flower beds and bandstand;

· Well utilised destination for passive recreation and relaxation;

· Proximity to local residents, accessibility to bus routes and schools;

· Landscaping character and pathways contribute to historic fabric of the Park;

· Children’s play area to promote passive recreation;

· Presence of seating, BBQ and picnic shelters, which contribute to passive use of the Park; and

· Central meeting place and establishing a strong sense of community.

4.2 Objectives

The following objectives are designed to achieve the Purpose of the Plan of Management:

· Ensure Yeo Park and Gough Reserve maintains its role as a passive recreation destination, as well as investigate opportunities for active recreation;

· Ensure any active and passive use is clearly delineated in the northern and southern portions of the Park;

· Maximise public usage of the Park while maintaining a variety of uses and catering to a diversity of users;

· Improve and maintain existing facilities and amenities in accordance with need and funding availability;

· Provide an accessible environment within the Park that ensures physical and social equity of access;

· Develop policies and practices that promote the history of the Park;

· Have a safe and secure Park for visitors; and

· Improve and maintain the natural amenity of the Park.

4.3 Community Consultation

Basis of the Parks Plan of Management has considered the needs of the community. As described earlier, Ashfield Council undertook consultation with the community through a series of drop in sessions, user surveys and stakeholder workshops to identify aspects of the Park they would like improved.

Figure 21: Pin Board Exercise Example

Consultation also assisted with the creation of long-term strategies for the Park. Council’s annual Yardstick Survey was also reviewed as part of the consultation and indicated that most residents were satisfied with the quality of amenity and maintenance of the Park.

The outcomes of consultation suggested the following improvements could be made to Yeo Park and Gough Reserve:

· A dog park within the park, for example having an off-leash area;

· Fencing around the eastern side along Old Canterbury Road;

· More tables, seating and BBQ areas throughout the park;

· More taps and bubblers; and

· More tables and upgrade water features.

Figure 22: Community Consultation 'Have Your Say - Survey'

4.4 Existing and Potential Park Uses

Park activities and uses must be first and foremost, permissible within the Zone objectives of the RE1 Public Recreation Zone in accordance with Ashfield LEP 2013 and consistent with the objectives of Park categorisation under the Local Government Act 1993.

The following table provides a list of existing and potential uses for Yeo Park and Gough Reserve, which can be facilitated through the future directions of the Plan of Management.

Existing	Potential
Passive recreation	Café (subject to DA approval at Community Facility)
Children playground activities
BBQ/Picnics
Events (subject to Council booking)
On leash dog walking
Art and Cultural initiatives (Council booking)

Table 3: Existing and Potential Park Uses

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve has been well utilised by the community and serves its main function as a Park. To ensure the Park continues to provide a range of uses and provide for the needs of increasing populations for passive use.

If a use is proposed by a community or organisation within the Park that does not fit the descriptions above, then they are to write to Council requesting clarification if a proposed use can be undertaken with the Park. Council will advise the person if that use is deemed acceptable within the Park.

Council will consider the objectives, values, zoning, categorisation and future directions of the Park outlined in this Plan of Management.

4.5 Ecologically Sustainable Development

The Plan of Management reflects, and is consistent with, Council’s Ecologically Sustainable Development Policy. This policy has as its vision statement:

“Ashfield as a community which protects and enhances its existing flora and fauna and contributes to the wider responsibilities for the whole community to preserve the earth’s environment.”

Under Ashfield 2023, the community acknowledges the need to promote public open spaces, reserves, bushland and ecological areas where necessary.

Towards 2023, Ashfield Council will focus efforts towards addressing ESD and resilient environmental planning strategies in the following key areas:

- The Built Environment – encouraging buildings to incorporate sustainable design features and energy efficient outcomes;

- Climate change – reducing energy consumption on Council facilities;

- Biodiversity – encouraging residents to use native species, supporting bushcare groups and increasing awareness; and

- Waste – reduce incidence of littering and illegal dumping and enable greater provision of local recycling.

5 thEMES

This chapter identifies the current status of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve in relation to a number of themes that are considered relevant to the Parks management and use. The themes were developed as part of the request from the community feedback and the input received during the consultation sessions. Under each theme there is a common format of analysis, which is structured as:

- Aims and Objectives – adopt goals and principles for each theme;

- Issues, Opportunities and Constraints – establish key issues that inform Plan of Management recommendations; and

- Future Directions – summarise plan moving forward and identify strategies for implementation.

If a future direction is proposed that is not identified in the Plan of Management, Council will consider whether or not it satisfies the aims and objectives of the relevant theme, as well as consider the Park’s values, objectives, zoning and categorisation.

Figure 23: Yeo Park and Gough Reserve - Management Map

5.1 Grounds, Leases and Infrastructure

5.1.1 Aims and Objectives

· Apply minimum standards to ensure grounds are properly maintained (mowing, weed removal, irrigation and aeration, building repairs, painting, rubbish collection and addressing vandalism);

· Ensure all pathways, facilities and associated amenities within the Park are accessible for People with Disabilities;

· Ensure appropriate allocation of leases and licenses within the Park to promote fair and equitable use;

· Maintain, preserve and promote the aesthetic, historic and social values of the Park; and

· Enhance the quality and safety of built structures, access and play surfaces.

5.1.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

Currently dog walking, children activities, walking and cycling coexist satisfactorily. However, there is an increasing use of the Park by personal trainer, which will need monitoring in the future in terms of wear and tear on the grass and potential conflict of use with other users.

Currently, Trinity Grammar School uses the Park for sporting activities including fitness and sport training. The focus of this usage is largely along main pathways within the Park. This use is impacting on the park in the afterhours for local residents who use the pathways for cycling and walking.

The use of the Park by Trinity Grammar School has raised concerns from local residents in relation to potential conflicts of use with people who have children, walk dogs, cyclists and walkers who use the main paths, coming into conflict with these sporting users.

There is an opportunity in the long term to consider delineating the Park into two areas, which would comprise a passive recreational zone in Yeo Park and Gough Reserve, and an active recreational zone in Gough Reserve. This would enable Yeo Park and Gough Reserve to retain its passive recreational qualities, while ensuring there is space that allows for more active recreation away from these spaces.

The existing Infants’ School appears to coexist with the surrounding uses, particularly in relation to the children’s play area and Gough Reserve.

There may be opportunities to explore implementing additional BBQ shelters and picnic tables throughout the Park.

5.1.3 Future Directions

· Ensure use of the Park by Trinity Grammar School does not impact on passive recreation by introducing an appropriate Park use booking system;

· Continue to maintain lawns, edges, paths, seating, tables, buildings and shelters to maximise the Park as a safe and attractive place to visit and walk;

· Upgrade and maintain bandstand structure;

· Review leasing and licensing arrangements to ensure it provides fair and equitable use of sportsgrounds for new and existing clubs and informal users;

· Provide new seating and drinking fountains where considered appropriate;

· Conduct annual audits of the Park to inform management plans, budget and allocations;

· Design equipment and designate new facilities based on needs analysis and changing demographic; and

· Future leases and licenses to meet requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

5.2 Access

5.2.1 Aims and Objectives

· Enhance access to and from the Park, as well as improve connections within the Park;

· Ensure footpaths and buildings comply with Disabilities Discrimination Act and AS1428;

· Minimise impact of local traffic generation and parking in surrounding streets; and

· Encourage access to the Park through public transport, cycle routes and street connections.

5.2.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

Footpaths provide important connections and movement through the Park. Access is available along all Park boundaries, as well as paths connecting the northern area of the Park to the southern area. These pathways provide important connections to key features in the park including the children’s play area, amenities building and the Infants’ School.

Inspection of the pathways revealed they are in good condition however, there are areas that have cracks and damages. The Park should be inspected regularly for cracks, trips and damage by roots.

5.2.3 Future Directions

· Investigate existing pathways for cracks, trips and roots;

· Ensure emergency vehicles have unhindered access to the Park;

· Promote awareness of access to the Park via public transport;

· Design of access arrangements should consider the existing and future demographic users of the park;

· Park utilities and furniture should be located to ensure no obstructions to movement of pedestrians.

5.3 Landscape Character and Visual Amenity

5.3.1 Aims and Objectives

· Provide opportunities for perimeter landscape planting along the southern boundary of the Park;

· Provide consistent landscape palette across the Park;

· Improve visual presentation of the Park along pathways, street frontages and open areas;

· Manage the Park in accordance with Council’s principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development; and

· Plant additional vegetation to improve local amenity and shading where appropriate.

5.3.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve is highly valued by the community as a place that provides high quality landscaping amenity and vegetation. This includes a combination of native mature perimeter trees, garden beds along the pathways as well as exotic within the Park.

5.3.3 Future Directions

· Avoid removing large trees that contribute to the heritage significance of the Park including trees that are home to birds, animals and nesting sites;

· Investigate where appropriate to provide seasonal plants in the garden beds;

· Priorities weed control programs; and

· Consider the impacts of events and activities on the Parks flora and fauna.

5.4 Personal Trainers

5.4.1 Aims and Objectives

· Ensure that personal trainers and boot camps operate in accordance with appropriate licenses and insurance;

· Undertake measures and practices to mitigate impacts associated with personal trainers and boot camps; and

· Provide appropriate guidelines to minimise park use conflicts with other users.

5.4.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

Council currently does not have a formal leasing procedure in place for personal trainers, which has resulted in an unregulated use of public parks by personal trainers.

There is a potential conflict of use with personal trainers and other users of the Park. This can relate to noise control, occupied space and movement within the Park and displacement of casual and informal park users.

Personal trainers may also degrade existing grass cover and occupy key connection points or footpaths for exercise use.

There is opportunity for the Park to be used for personal training and boot camps. This could potentially be situated within Gough Reserve, which would ameliorate impacts associated with the passive and formal landscaping of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve.

5.4.3 Future Directions

· Investigate potential use of the Park for boot camps and personal trainers;

· Ensure that any use of the Park for personal trainers and boot camps adheres to Council requirements for relevant licenses and insurance;

· Personal trainers will need to apply for an application to use the Park for personal training and boot camp purposes;

· Council to permit personal trainers and boot camps in consideration of location within the Park to nearby residential zones, type of fitness activities, size of groups, frequency and relevant certification.

5.5 Dogs in Parks

5.5.1 Aims and Objectives

· Recognise the increase in off-leash and on-leash dog use in Parks; and

· Consider the rights and safety of other users in the Park when a dog is on-leash and off-leash.

5.5.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

Increased demand for off-leash dog areas has potential to impact on existing grass cover and result in over-capacity spaces dedicated to existing off-leash and on-leash dog walking.

Yeo Park and Gough Reserve is an on-leash dog area. Problems can arise from dog waste being left on the Parks lawn, footpaths and flower beds. This creates potential of conflict between different users of the Park, as well as health and safety considerations. There has also been reported use of users having their dogs’ off-leash within the Park.

Appropriate penalties will be enforced for dog owners who do not keep their dogs leashed where required.

5.5.3 Future Directions

· Monitor the control of dogs in the Park;

· Install dog waste bins where needed; and

· Ensure dog bag dispensers have a constant supply of dog bags.

5.6 Children’s Playgrounds

5.6.1 Aims and Objectives

· Provide play areas that encourage children to learn, socialise, imagine, create and play;

· Ensure play areas provides a range of diverse activities and that incorporate both play facilities and natural play environments; and

· Inspect and maintain play equipment regularly to ensure equipment is safe and secure for use.

5.6.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

The existing playground area is relatively large and provides a range of swings, climbing equipment, forts, slides and other interactive equipment. The play area overall is well integrated with the Infants’ School.

While there is a provision of adequate play facilities for the size and usage of Yeo Park and Gough Reserve, there appears to be an absence of play equipment and areas for children with a disability. Council should consider where possible, incorporation of play equipment for persons with a disability in any future upgrades.

Council should consider replacing the mulch ground cover with soft fall bark chips and upgrade the existing shade sails, which appear to be damaged.

5.6.3 Future Directions

· Maintain children’s playground in current location with improvements to play equipment;

· Ensure shade sail and appropriate shading is maintained around the playground;

· Investigate opportunity for accessible play equipment as part of future upgrades; and

· Repair, upgrade and provide a diverse range of additional play equipment in current playground location as required.

5.7 The Arts

5.7.1 Aims and Objectives

· Support artists and develop new ways to promote and sustain their practice in Parks; and

· Provide opportunities for cultural development for local artists and the broader community.

5.7.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

Parks are venues for events, places for Public Art, homes for cultural venues and precincts, and opportunities for place making. Parks are for the people to create places of meaning and relevance alongside nurturing and supporting creatives to embellish place and space that is inclusive for all.

There may be opportunity to investigate integrating some Art programs or installations in the Park, when considered appropriate by Council. Public art should consider the artwork within the context of Ashfield and the suitability of the art for the Park.

5.7.3 Future Directions

· Encourage growth of public art where appropriate in line with Council’s Public Art Policy;

· Explore opportunities to integrate art installations within the Park, subject to Council approval;

· Support initiatives in the Park that enhance community cohesiveness.

5.8 Culture and Heritage

5.8.1 Aims and Objectives

· Recognise and maintain the significance of the Park, including existing features, facilities and vegetation;

· Recognise and reflect Park configuration dating back to its early history; and

· Interpret the Parks history through signage and education boards where appropriate.

5.8.2 Issues, Opportunities and Constraints

While there is not known to be any areas of high cultural or archaeological heritage significance within the boundary of the Park, the Park is located within an area that could have been a habitable place for the Cadigal and Wangal peoples.

Council should investigate ways to enhance the communities understanding of the Parks relationship to indigenous history and heritage. Specifically, the bandstand could be utilised as a focal point for conveying history of the Park to the visitors.

Additionally, the bandstand requires repairs and upgrades to a satisfactory condition. There are opportunities to use the bandstand for live music, events and festivals when deemed appropriate.

5.8.3 Future Directions

· Maintain all mature trees in the Park and engage Arborist to undertake health check on trees on a regular basis, as appropriate;

· Council will develop as a matter of urgency a Park Tree Strategy and Park Tree Management Plan;

· Upgrade and maintain the existing bandstand to a satisfactory condition;

· Investigate opportunities to utilise the bandstand as a focal point for live music, events and small festival, where deemed appropriate;

· Explore potential of the Park to host small events oriented towards enhancing and promoting the areas diverse culture; and

· Modify or relocate the rose gardens as appropriate from under the shade of the established trees, to improve the floral displays in Yeo Park and Gough Reserve.

6 ACTION PLAN

The Action Plan below identifies management objectives, strategies and associated actions and priorities. The actions aim to:

· Improve the Park;

· Repair past damage;

· Prevent further degradation;

· Maintain and enhance the amenity of the area;

· Continuously improve and maintain facilities;

· Manage the planned sharing of the Park by organisations involved in passive (and active) recreation; and

· Preserve the Park as a place for relaxation, passive recreation and a place of significant heritage.

The implementation of the actions in Action Plan will be coordinated on a yearly basis in accordance with the assigned priorities. These priorities are linked to the following time frame:

High Commenced within the next 2 years

Medium Commenced in 2 – 5 years

Low Commenced after 5 years

It should be recognised, however, that the commencement and completion of the actions will be dependent on available Council resources and funding and on Council priorities in its yearly program. The priority of each action will need to be reassessed annually to determine its continuing relevance.

Aims and Objectives

Future Directions

Priority

Grounds, Leases and Infrastructure

1. Apply minimum standards to ensure grounds are properly maintained (mowing, weed removal, irrigation and aeration, building repairs, painting, rubbish collection and addressing vandalism);

2. Ensure all pathways, facilities and associated amenities within the Park are accessible for People with Disabilities;

3. Ensure appropriate allocation of leases and licenses within the Park to promote fair and equitable use;

4. Maintain, preserve and promote the aesthetic, historic and social values of the Park; and

5. Enhance the quality and safety of built structures, access and play surfaces.

- Ensure use of the Park by Trinity Grammar School does not impact on passive recreation by introducing an appropriate Park use booking system;

- Continue to maintain lawns, edges, paths, seating, tables, buildings and shelters to maximise the Park as a safe and attractive place to visit and walk;

- Upgrade and maintain bandstand structure;

- Review leasing and licensing arrangements to ensure it provides fair and equitable use of sportsgrounds for new and existing clubs and informal users;

- Provide new seating and drinking fountains where considered appropriate;

- Conduct annual audits of the Park to inform management plans, budget and allocations;

- Design equipment and designate new facilities based on needs analysis and changing demographic; and

- Future leases and licenses to meet requirements of the Local Government Act 1993

Ongoing

Low

High

Access

6. Enhance access to and from the Park, as well as improve connections within the Park;

7. Ensure footpaths and buildings comply with Disabilities Discrimination Act and AS1428;

8. Minimise impact of local traffic generation and parking in surrounding streets; and

9. Encourage access to the Park through public transport, cycle routes and street connections.

- Investigate existing pathways for cracks, trips and roots;

- Ensure emergency vehicles have unhindered access to the Park;

- Promote awareness of access to the Park via public transport;

- Design of access arrangements should consider the existing and future demographic users of the park;

- Park utilities and furniture should be located to ensure no obstructions to movement of pedestrians.

Ongoing

Landscape Character and Visual Amenity

10. Provide opportunities for perimeter landscape planting along the southern boundary of the Park;

11. Provide consistent landscape palette across the Park;

12. Improve visual presentation of the Park along pathways, street frontages and open areas;

13. Manage the Park in accordance with Council’s principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development; and

14. Plant additional vegetation to improve local amenity and shading where appropriate.

- Avoid removing large trees that contribute to the heritage significance of the Park including trees that are home to birds, animals and nesting sites;

- Investigate where appropriate to provide seasonal plants in the garden beds;

- Priorities weed control programs; and

- Consider the impacts of events and activities on the Parks flora and fauna.

Ongoing

Personal Trainers

15. Ensure that personal trainers and boot camps operate in accordance with appropriate licenses and insurance;

16. Undertake measures and practices to mitigate impacts associated with personal trainers and boot camps; and

17. Provide appropriate guidelines to minimise park use conflicts with other users.

- Investigate potential use of the Park for boot camps and personal trainers;

- Ensure that any use of the Park for personal trainers and boot camps adheres to Council requirements for relevant licenses and insurance;

- Personal trainers will need to apply for an application to use the Park for personal training and boot camp purposes;

- Council to permit personal trainers and boot camps in consideration of location within the Park to nearby residential zones, type of fitness activities, size of groups, frequency and relevant certification.

Dogs in Parks

18. Recognise the increase in off-leash and on-leash dog use in Parks; and

19. Consider the rights and safety of other users in the Park when a dog is on-leash and off-leash.

- Monitor the control of dogs in the Park;

- Install dog waste bins where needed; and

- Ensure dog bag dispensers have a constant supply of dog bags.

Ongoing

Children’s Playgrounds

20. Provide play areas that encourage children to learn, socialise, imagine, create and play;

21. Ensure play areas provides a range of diverse activities and that incorporate both play facilities and natural play environments; and

22. Inspect and maintain play equipment regularly to ensure equipment is safe and secure for use.

- Maintain children’s playground in current location with improvements to play equipment;

- Ensure shade sail and appropriate shading is maintained around the playground;

- Investigate opportunity for accessible play equipment as part of future upgrades; and

- Repair, upgrade and provide a diverse range of additional play equipment in current playground location as required.

Ongoing

Low

Ongoing

The Arts

23. Support artists and develop new ways to promote and sustain their practice in Parks; and

24. Provide opportunities for cultural development for local artists and the broader community.

- Encourage growth of public art where appropriate in line with Council’s Public Art Policy;

- Explore opportunities to integrate art installations within the Park, subject to Council approval;

- Support initiatives in the Park that enhance community cohesiveness.

Low

Ongoing

Culture and Heritage

25. Recognise and maintain the significance of the Park, including existing features, facilities and vegetation;

26. Recognise and reflect Park configuration dating back to its early history; and

27. Interpret the Parks history through signage and education boards where appropriate.

- Maintain all mature trees in the Park and engage Arborist to undertake health check on trees on a regular basis;

- Council will develop as a matter of urgency a Park Tree Strategy and Park Tree management Plan;

- Upgrade and maintain the existing bandstand to a satisfactory condition;

- Investigate opportunities to utilise the bandstand as a focal point for live music, events and small festival, where deemed appropriate; and

- Explore potential of the Park to host small events oriented towards enhancing and promoting the areas diverse culture.

Ongoing

7 ANNEXURES

Division 12 Parks and other public reserves

64 Definition

In this Division:

public reserve has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government Act 1993, but does not include a Crown reserve that is dedicated or reserved for a public cemetery.

65 Development permitted without consent

(1) Development for any purpose may be carried out without consent:

(a) on land reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, if the development is for a use authorised under that Act, or

(b) on land declared under the Marine Parks Act 1997 to be a marine park if the development is for a use authorised under that Act, or

(c) on land declared under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 to be an aquatic reserve if the development is for a use authorised under that Act.

(2) Development for any purpose may be carried out without consent:

(a) on Trust lands within the meaning of the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust Act 1983, by or on behalf of the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust, or

(b) on trust lands within the meaning of the Parramatta Park Trust Act 2001, by or on behalf of the Parramatta Park Trust, or

(d) in the case of land that is a reserve within the meaning of Part 5 of the Crown Lands Act 1989, by or on behalf of the Director-General of the Department of Lands, a trustee of the reserve or (if appointed under that Act to manage the reserve) the Ministerial Corporation constituted under that Act or an administrator,

if the development is for the purposes of implementing a plan of management adopted for the land under the Act referred to above in relation to the land.

(3) Development for any of the following purposes may be carried out by or on behalf of a council without consent on a public reserve under the control of or vested in the council:

(a) roads, cycleways, single storey car parks, ticketing facilities and viewing platforms,

(b) outdoor recreational facilities, including playing fields, but not including grandstands,

(d) lighting, if light spill and artificial sky glow is minimised in accordance with AS/NZS 1158: 2007, Lighting for Roads and Public Spaces,

(e) landscaping, including irrigation schemes (whether they use recycled or other water),

(f) amenity facilities,

(g) maintenance depots,

(h) environmental management works.

66 Exempt development

(1) Development for any of the following purposes is exempt development if it is carried out by or on behalf of a public authority in connection with a public reserve or on land referred to in clause 65 (1), and if it complies with clause 20:

(a) construction, maintenance and repair of:

(i) walking tracks, boardwalks and raised walking paths, ramps, minor pedestrian bridges, stairways, gates, seats, barbecues, shelters and shade structures,

(ii) viewing platforms with an area not exceeding 100m², or

(iii) sporting facilities, including goal posts, sight screens and fences, if the visual impact of the development on surrounding land uses is minimal, or

(iv) play equipment where adequate safety provisions (including soft landing surfaces) are provided, but only if any structure is at least 1.2m away from any fence,

(b) routine maintenance (including earthworks associated with playing field regrading or landscaping and maintenance of existing access roads).

(2) Development of a kind referred to in subclause (1) is exempt development if it is carried out on land referred to in clause 65 (2) by or on behalf of the person specified in respect of that land in that subclause, if the development:

(a) complies with clause 20, and

(b) involves no greater disturbance of native vegetation than necessary, and

(d) for the purposes of implementing a plan of management adopted for the land under the Act referred to in clause 65 (2) in relation to the land.

Council Meeting

27 March 2018

Item No: C0318 Item 6

Subject: Draft Remediation of Land State Environmental Planning Policy and Guidelines (to replace SEPP No. 55 - Remediation of Lands)

Prepared By: Katie Miles - Strategic Planner

Authorised By: David Birds - Group Manager Strategic Planning

SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to seek endorsement of the attached submission (Attachment 1) to the Department of Planning & Environment (DPE) regarding the draft Remediation of Lands State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) and associated Guidelines that affects contaminated or potentially contaminated land across the Inner West LGA. This will replace the existing State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Lands (SEPP 55) and associated Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines published by the NSW Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) introduced in 1998.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council:

1. Support the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP and Guidelines subject to minor changes being made, as outlined in the submission at Attachment 1, and that the submission be made to the DPE;

2. Endorse that the Inner West Development Control Plans be amended upon the finalisation of the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP to align with the SEPP requirements; and

3. Endorse Council's Strategic Planning Group to review Council's Section 149 Planning Certificate Policy (also known as 10.7 Planning Certificates under the amended EP&A Act 1979) in relation to the issues addressed in the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP and Guidelines.

BACKGROUND

Contaminated land is generally considered to be areas or sites that have high concentrations of substances which do not naturally occur in the area and it is anticipated have the potential that to harm the environment or human health. Environmental regulation aims to manage the remediation process of contaminated lands so that the risk of continued harm is removed or contained.

Council regularly encounters contaminated land through the assessment of environmental planning instruments (commonly known as planning proposals or rezoning applications) and development applications under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). When carrying out planning and development functions Council must consider SEPP 55 and now the Draft Remediation of Lands SEPP regarding the potential for land to be contaminated and make decisions as to whether the land should be remediated, or have its intended future use restricted.

The Inner West LGA has large swathes of areas that were historically used for industrial activities and are, or potentially are, contaminated. Council's records indicate that there are around 100 Council-owned properties that are potentially affected by land contamination. Any disruption of the soil or potentially any other disturbance to the site will require consideration of environmental and human health impacts.

In NSW, there are a multiple pieces of legislation that establish the framework for considering land contamination issues and land remediation, such as:

· Sites that are known to be historically contaminated and likely to pose a 'significant' risk to human health or cause environmental harm are managed under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997;

· Land use activities that are likely to pollute and potentially contaminate land are managed under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997; and

· Contaminated lands that do not pose a significant risk to human health or environmental harm, but require land remediation works to be deemed suitable for the future intended use, are governed by the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55).

In 1998, the NSW Environmental Protection Agency established SEPP 55 and the associated Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines. This is still the current planning framework for the management of contaminated land in NSW.

DRAFT REMEDIATION OF LANDS SEPP & GUIDELINES

On 25 January 2018, the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) announced the proposed Remediation of Lands State Environmental Planning Policy (Remediation of Land SEPP) and Draft Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines to replace SEPP 55.

An Explanation of Intended Effect for the remediation of Land SEPP (EIE) and a draft version of the Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines are provided as Attachments 2 and 3 respectively. The DPE has placed the documents on exhibition until 31 March 2018.

The proposed key changes are detailed in the below sections and in summary are:

· The expansion of categories of remediation work which requires development consent;

· A greater involvement of principal certifying authorities, particularly in relation to remediation works that can be carried out without development consent;

· Inclusion of more comprehensive guidelines for councils and certifiers; and

· Clarification of contamination information to be included in section 149 Planning Certifications (known as 10.7 Certificates under the amended EP&A Act).

Changes to Category 1 and 2 Remediation Works

The new Remediation of Land SEPP will continue to make remediation work permissible under the existing SEPP 55 categories: Category 1 and Category 2 remediation works, although changes are proposed to each category. The draft SEPP & Guidelines propose a fuller post-notification process that will be required for both categories of remediation work. The notice of completion for these works must confirm that the works were carried out in accordance with the certified remediation plan, state whether the land is suitable for the proposed use, and whether it is subject to any restriction or ongoing management requirements following remediation.

Category 1 Remediation Works (Development Consent Required)

Category 1 remediation works require development consent and will continue to do so under the new SEPP. The works currently listed as Category 1 will be largely replicated in the new SEPP. However, an additional 16 types of remediation works are proposed to be added to Category 1 (because these works are typically complex requiring specialist expertise or there is significant risk of impact on adjacent land).

Additional categories have also been included where there is a long-term environmental management requirement, post-remediation monitoring or an on-site containment cell. There is no expressed threshold for such types of remediation works, meaning that very small remediation works could be captured by these categories in the future.

Category 2 Remediation Works (Development Consent Not Required)

Under the existing arrangements Category 2 remediation work does not require development consent, instead they require the applicant to notify council before works are carried out. A notice of completion is required for all remediation works. Category 2 remediation works exclude Category 1 remediation works and the draft SEPP will replicate this provision. The most significant change to Category 2 is the expansion of the pre-remediation notification and the introduction of standard operational requirements.

Those carrying out Category 2 remediation works are already required to notify Council with specific details, generally 30 days in advance of works commencing. These details include brief information about the property, the works and the timeline for their completion. In addition to this information, an applicant will now have to provide a remediation plan which must be certified by a certified contaminated land consultant (whose qualifications have been confirmed through a certification scheme recognised by the EPA). Remediation plans were previously only required for Category 1 remediation works.

A new clause will be introduced to specify the matters to be addressed in a remediation plan. Broadly, the remediation plan will need to contain specific details about the proposed remediation methods, procedures, any validation sampling and analysis proposed and plans for reinstatement. It must also include certification from the certified consultant that the remediation works are appropriate.

The draft SEPP will also introduce standardised operational requirements for Category 2 remediation works which will regulate site establishment practices, site and works management during remediation and validation procedures.

Development Applications Generally

The draft SEPP will still require consent authorities to consider contamination when determining applications more generally. The same tests and requirements in clause 7 of SEPP 55 will be replicated in the new SEPP. This includes the provision that states that consent authorities must not give consent to carry out any development on the land unless they have considered whether the land is contaminated. As part of this test, consent authorities must consider:

· Potentially land-contaminating past uses and activities on the land; and

· The extent to which land is proposed to be used for sensitive land uses such as residential, educational, recreational, child-care purposes or hospital purposes.

However, a key change in the draft SEPP is that it will give a new discretion to the consent authority to waive this requirement, if the consent authority has knowledge that allows them 'to be certain of the suitability of the land for the proposed use'. This is generally supported in scenarios where the proposed change of use does not disturb the soil structure, but will be dependent upon the assessment determination of the consent authority.

Local Council Policies

In the three Inner West Development Control Plans, there are separate policies on the treatment of contaminated land. Currently, remediation works that would otherwise be classified as Category 2, but do not meet the standard provisions outlined in the Inner West DCPs, are automatically classified as Category 1 works by virtue of section 9(f) of SEPP 55. This can encapsulate relatively minor remediation works that are then required to meet high regulatory standards required for the granting of development consent.

The proposed changes will have the effect of streamlining all works as either Category 1 or Category 2 works. The draft Remediation of Land SEPP alone will determine the categorisation of remediation works and provide a consistent framework statewide.

Strategic Planning

SEPP 55 requires planning authorities to consider matters relevant to contaminated land when preparing an environmental planning instrument to zone or rezone land (known as Planning Proposals or Rezoning Applications). The new SEPP proposes to remove this and provide the requirement in a specific Section 117 Ministerial Direction (known as Section 9.1 under the amended EP&A Act).

Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines

The new SEPP and guidelines place emphasis on the role of certified contaminated land consultants. It seems likely that the new SEPP will adopt the Environmental Protection Authority's (EPA) list of recognised certification schemes.

Key proposed changes to the Guideline include:

· Outlining the preliminary and detailed site investigation processes;

· Outlining the role of the principal certifying authority when dealing with contaminated land and site audits; and

· Providing guidelines on how to address possible contamination of near-by sites.

This Council and the three former Councils have tended to rely on site audits to validate remediation works. This is because Council usually does not have the in-house technical expertise to properly assess the information received from developers having carried out remediation works. The guidelines encourage councils to generally rely on the documentation provided by the certified contaminated land consultant. It further clarifies circumstances in which further review, including a possible site audit, may be requested.

REPORT

POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

Generally, the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP and Guidelines are supported as they update State policy that has been in place for over 20 years. Notwithstanding this, Council should be aware of the following policy implications including the potential need for additional staff resourcing to address a potential increase in data recording and related requirements.

INNER WEST DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS (DCPS)

The proposed removal of section 9(f) of SEPP 55 and the introduction of standardised operational requirements for Category 2 works, whilst generally consistent with the Inner West DCPs, will require the revision of the following sections of the Inner West DCPs as Category 2 remediation works (defined by the new SEPP) will no longer be applicable:

· Section 2.24.11 Development Controls for Remediation Works of Marrickville DCP 2011; and

· Section C1.8.16 Development Controls for Remediation Works of Leichhardt DCP 2013.

The Draft SEPP and Guidelines also provide new guidance for councils on what best practice provisions should be included for Category 1 remediation works. The introduction of the new SEPP and Guidelines will require the amendment of the details found in these contamination sections of the Inner West DCPs:

· Section A14 Contaminated Land in Ashfield DCP 2013;

· Section 1.8 Contamination in Leichhardt DCP 2013; and

· Section 2.24 Contaminated Land in Marrickville DCP 2011.

It is recommended that Council review the contamination sections of the Inner West DCPs in accordance with the new SEPP and Guidelines once they are finalised to adjust them to be consistent with the new SEPP and Guidelines. The changes are likely to be administrative in nature however this is subject to final review and analysis.

STRATEGIC PLANNING ASSESSMENT

The purpose of section 6 of SEPP 55 is to specify contamination and remediation issues that are to be considered as part of a rezoning proposal. It states that in preparing an environmental planning instrument (EPI) a planning authority is not to permit a change of use of the land unless:

a) The planning authority has considered whether the land is contaminated;

b) If the land is contaminated, the planning authority is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be made suitable, after remediation); and

c) If the land requires remediation to be made suitable for any purpose for which land in that zone is permitted to be used, the planning authority is satisfied that the land will be so remediated before the land is used for that purpose.

The proposed removal of section 6 of SEPP 55 and its replacement with a new Section 117 Ministerial Direction appears to be a result of the recent Land and Environmental Court (LEC) decision of Moorebank Recyclers Pty Ltd v Tanlane Pty Ltd (No.2) [2017] NSWLEC 186 which highlighted an issue with the existing SEPP 55 framework and the relevant rezoning provisions under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

The LEC had to determine whether certain council resolutions and a Gateway Determination for a planning proposal were invalid on the basis that there was a purported failure to comply with section 6 of SEPP 55. However, the Court found that there was no intersection between the legal requirements of section 6 of SEPP 55, and sections 55 and 56 of the EP&A Act. The Court found that the scope of Clause 6 is confined to the preparation of an EPI. The Court held that, as neither of the procedures described in Section 55 (making of planning proposal) or Section 56 (make of a Gateway Determination) could properly be described as the preparation of an EPI as they fell outside of Clause 6 of SEPP 55.

The implication of this determination largely underscores the difficulty of successfully challenging the making of an amendment to an EPI. It highlighted that the procedures related to the making of a planning proposal and Gateway Determinations are relatively imprecise and allow considerable flexibility. The proposed Section 117 Direction aims to address this issue and will directly link the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP to s55 and 56 of the EP&A Act (now known as sections 3.33 and 3.34 respectively).

The proposed Section 117 Direction is generally supported as it will provide clarity and probity to decision-making made under sections 55 & 56 of the EP&A Act. However, Council's support is subject to the provision that no statement is included that provides for approval pathways if a proposal is inconsistent with the Direction. Additionally, it is recommended that a reiteration of section 6 of SEPP 55 be further included in the draft SEPP to strengthen the linkages between the proposed Section 117 Direction, Draft SEPP and Guidelines, and sections 55 and 56 under the EP&A Act to remove any ambiguity.

COMPLIANCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT

Generally, no objections are raised in relation to the proposed 16 new types of Category 1 Remediation Works. However, Council should note that policy changes will increase the costs of these works, which now must include the cost of having a certified contaminated land consultant prepare, certify and validate a remediation plan. Improvements to site practices and management may also be required to conform to the new operational requirements.

As development applications will be required to disclose more detailed information about their works they can expect a higher level of oversight from consent authorities (such as Council). The use of a certified consultant is strongly supported as it is likely to improve the quality of information and provide legitimacy that enable consent authorities to rely on and accept the information provided. However, some proposed new types of development will require consent authorities to maintain long-term oversight when it is made a condition of consent, such as:

· Remediation where a long-term environmental management plan is or will be required;

· Remediation where confirmation of successful completion is dependent upon post-remediation monitoring; and

· Remediation that will result in on-site containment of contaminated soil or contaminated groundwater, or both.

The State Government states that it is desirable that consent authorities have oversight of the long-term management of these sites. There are record and data management issues that arise from a variety of persons being involved in the contamination and remediation process over long periods of time. Such processes would typically involve members from the following sections of Council: Development Assessment, Property, Strategic Planning, Building and Compliance, GIS and Environmental Health. Given the Inner West's industrial past, Council should expect that it will receive an increase in the amount of information required from, and provided by, accredited certifiers as part of the draft SEPP's new pre- and post-certification processes.

The change could impose additional resourcing burdens on Council and require the creation of a specialist role to have sole responsibility for contaminated land GIS data entry, development assessment initial evaluation/referrals and enforcement action/monitoring in relation to contaminated lands and associated land remediation works in the Inner West LGA.

SECTION 149 PLANNING CERTIFICATES (10.7 UNDER THE AMENDED EP&A ACT)

Under section 149 of the EP&A Act, a person may request a council to issue a planning certificate. The certificate must contain advice on matters about land that are prescribed by Schedule 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. A section 149(2) Planning Certificate must include information that states whether the land is affected by section 59 of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997. Generally speaking, this section states whether it is known if the land is 'significantly contaminated' or not.

However, section 149(5) provides councils with the opportunity to record additional property information about the land. Councils do not incur liability for advice provided in good faith under section 149(5) in relation to contaminated lands. The draft Guidelines encourage councils to provide information relating to contamination and remediation of that land if aware of that information in section 149(5) Planning Certificates. The new SEPP will create an opportunity to improve Council's record and GIS management of contamination information on section 149(5) Planning Certificates.

Currently, there are three separate Council templates for section 149 Planning Certificates as a legacy of the former councils. The former Ashfield and Marrickville approach did not state any contamination information under section 149(5). Conversely, the former Leichhardt approach did include information on contamination and remediation works where it was lodged on the GIS data base. Only the former Leichhardt approach aligns with the draft Guidelines recommendations.

Acknowledging that all three former areas have vastly different approaches to their 149 Planning Certificate templates, there is an urgent need to review Council's Section 149 Planning Certificate policy and templates.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil at this stage, but additional resourcing burdens as a result of the implementation of the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP may require the future creation of a Contaminated Lands Management Officer role to have responsibility for contaminated land GIS data entry, development assessment initial evaluation/referrals and enforcement action/monitoring in relation to contaminated lands and associated land remediation works.

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Environmental Health Officer:

· Comment – Generally, no objections to 16 new types of Category 1 Remediation Works.

Concern – Type (m), (n) and (o) remediation works require consent authority to maintain long term oversight when a condition of consent. Consent authority’s capacity to maintain long term data integrity of a contaminated sites database, and ability to adequately follow up with monitoring and enforcement action is questionable.

Reason – Variety and number of persons involved in the process, such as Planning, Property and Environmental Health Officers, who are likely to be responsible for contributing to database, will inevitably lead to corruption of database.

Suggestion – A Contaminated Lands Management Officer role be created within consent authority (Council), to have sole responsibility for contaminated lands GIS data entry, development assessment initial evaluation/referrals and enforcement action/monitoring in relation to contaminated lands.

· Comment – Generally, no objections relating to ‘Operational Requirements for Category 2 remediation’.

· Comment – Generally, no objections relating to the proposed new Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Not applicable.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council endorse the attached submission that requests DPE make minor changes to the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP and Guidelines prior to finalising the plans.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩	Draft Inner West Council Submission to Proposed Remediation of Land SEPP & Guidelines
2.⇩	State Government's Proposed Explanation of Intended Effect for Remediation of Land SEPP Policy
3.⇩	State Government's Draft Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines to be associated with the proposed Remediation of Land SEPP

Council Meeting

27 March 2018

Item No: C0318 Item 10

Subject: Inner West Council Position on the Cruise Ship Terminal

Prepared By: Ryan Cole - A/ Group Manager Development Assessment and Regulatory Services

Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson – A/ Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment

SUMMARY

This report aims to respond to points 1 of Council resolution C0218 Item 10 adopted 27 February 2018, and outlines the current position of the Inner West Council in regard to the White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal and the work being done Council in relation to this matter.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council:

1. Note that since the White Bay Cruise Terminal commenced operations in 2013, Council has been advocating to NSW Government Ministers and state agencies to reduce, mitigate and monitor impacts on residents living and those working within the vicinity of the White Bay Cruise Terminal in terms of odour, noise and air quality associated with cruise ship exhaust fumes;

2. Note that there have been some initiatives implemented including:

a) regular meetings with state agency officers with community members and Council representatives to discuss agency actions and resident concerns

b) provision for ongoing noise and air quality monitoring

c) mandating low sulphur fuel use (for limited times when ships are in port); and

d) the implementation of a noise abatement strategy; and

3. Note that notwithstanding the measures implemented the number of cruise ships using the facility annually continues to rise and the concerns of residents living and those working within the vicinity of the White Bay Cruise Terminal in terms of odour, noise and air quality associated with cruise ship exhaust fumes remain.

BACKGROUND

Council resolution C0218 Item 10 adopted 27 February 2018 stated:

“1. A report to be prepared for the March 2018 Ordinary Council Meeting detailing:

a) The current position of the Inner West Council in regard to the White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal; and

b) The work being done by the Inner West Council to try to resolve the impact of the cruise ships on its community.”

2. Council write to the Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Michael

McCormack MP, NSW Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight Melinda Pavey

MP, NSW Minister for the Environment Gabrielle Upton MP, Port Authority of

NSW and the NSW Environmental Protection Authority seeking the implementation of regulations mandating:

a) Cruise ships switch to low-sulphur fuel at least one hour prior to entering Sydney Harbour; and

b) All cruise ships that enter Sydney Harbour install scrubbers in exhaust stacks to reduce the impacts of fumes on the community; and

3. Write to the Port Authority of NSW and the NSW Department of Planning &

Environment seeking clarification about the implementation of the Noise Mitigation Strategy, including details on how many residents have been offered noise abatement measures and how many residents have accepted those measures.

This report addresses Point No.1 of the above resolution.

History

On 2 February 2011 the Minister for Planning granted approval under the former Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to MP10_0069 for the construction and operation of a Cruise Passenger Terminal at White Bay.

In April 2013 the Cruise Passenger Terminal was completed and started operating. As there are no conditions on the consent for the number of ships permitted to berth, the number has been increasing annually.

Since the commencement of the Cruise Passenger Terminal, Council has played an active role advocating to NSW Government Ministers and agencies to reduce, mitigate and monitor impacts on residents living and those working within the vicinity of the White Bay Cruise Terminal in terms of odour, noise and air quality associated with cruise ship exhaust fumes.

Some of the key areas Council has been advocating include:

· Writing objections to the application that subsequently approved the construction and operation White Bay Cruise Terminal

· Writing to relevant State Ministers and Departments (EPA, Planning, Health, Ports) outlining ongoing community concerns

· Appearing before a Parliamentary Inquiry into the performance of the EPA which made specific reference to actions considered not to be taken by the department to address concerns over community concerns when ships are in port

· Making submissions on the NSW Protection of the Environment Operations (Clean Air) Regulation 2010 and the Noise Mitigation Strategy for the White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal

· Advocating for ongoing air quality and noise monitoring

· Advocating for the installation of shore to ship power

· Attending community meetings

· Council Officers attending regular agency meetings with local residents to discuss actions and concerns with the NSW EPA, Department of Planning & Environment, NSW Health and NSW Ports

· Council has established a dedicated webpage to outline actions and update for the community

It should be noted that there have been some initiatives implemented attempting to mitigate impacts, these include:

· the creation of a noise abatement strategy

· provision for ongoing noise and air quality monitoring; and

· mandating low sulphur fuel use (for limited times when ships are in port)

The key details of each of the above detailed initiative are outlined as follows:

Creation of a noise abatement strategy

The Port Authority's noise mitigation strategy has been developed in an attempt to address the ongoing issue of noise from ships when berthed at the terminal (i.e. engine noise, vibrations and passenger announcement / music).

The NSW Port Authority documentation outlines the elements of the program as follows:

1. Noise Attenuation Program: noise attenuation comprising of physical treatments to homes to a defined area of residences where noise modelling indicates that average noise levels reach or exceed 55 decibels at night (‘attenuation eligibility threshold’).

2. Noise Restriction Policy: a new policy restricting on-deck music and public announcements not related to safety and restrictions for ships which cause further exceedances of the attenuation eligibility threshold. Non-compliant ships will be given an initial warning to make improvements; a second non-compliance will result in a loss of priority booking status plus overnight relocation of the ship; and a third non-compliance will result in future bookings not being allowed

3. Noise Logging: continuous real-time logging to monitor noise levels and guide ongoing noise management.

Port Authority received approval from the Department of Planning and Environment in late 2017 for the strategy and is currently working to commence delivery of the three elements.

When notified of the proposed strategy Council engaged an expert acoustic consultant to review the proposal and make recommendations. Council further held a public meeting at the Balmain Town Hall to discuss the matter.

Details of the Noise Mitigation Strategy can be found in Attachment A.

Provision for ongoing noise monitoring

Under the approval there is a condition (D1) which outlines noise criteria. Between 2013 and 2017 the Port Authority have at times engaged acoustic consultants to undertake noise assessment for specific ships with higher volumes of complaints were received. These reports are available online. Some reports outline issues on ships associated with fans, engine noise which requires form of insulation etc.

As detailed above, the Port Authority seeks to implement a noise abatement strategy. In particular the Port Authority proposes to undertake continuous real-time logging noise logging to monitor noise levels and guide ongoing noise management.

Information on the Port Authority website is limited and the real time noise monitoring data is not available. As such, as per the Council resolution adopted 27 February 2018, Council will be seeking further details on the implementation of the strategy.

Provision for ongoing air quality monitoring

The NSW Port Authority has installed an air quality monitoring station at the corner of Grafton and Adolphus streets, Balmain to monitor the ambient air quality in the immediate vicinity of the White Bay Cruise Terminal. The station monitors Sulphur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter less than 2.5 microns diameter (PM2.5) and meteorological parameters including wind speed and direction. The information from the air quality monitoring station is available in close to real time on the Port Authority website.

Over the years, it has been argued that the station is incorrectly located, being situated adjacent to the terminal facility and significantly below the exhaust stacks of the ship when berthed. A secondary station is an alternate location has previously been requested. One was temporarily installed near Clontarf Cottage for approximately 3 weeks a number of years ago.

Mandating low Sulphur fuel use

On 1 October 2015 NSW Protection of the Environment Operations (Clean Air) Regulation 2010 was amended to put in place an environmental regulatory regime when cruise ships entered Sydney Harbour. The regulation was set up in two stages.

Stage 1 provided that from 1 October 2015 cruise ships to use low sulphur fuel (0.1% or less) when berthed. Essentially allowing a transition for cruise ships to start using fuel which provides exhaust with reduced toxins. The bunker fuel however was still permitted to be used for approximately 1 hour after berthing and 1 hours prior to departure whilst the fuel transition was occurring.

Stage 2 was set to commence from 1 July 2016 when the cruise ships were to use low sulphur fuel (0.1% or less) at all times when operating in Sydney Harbour. The second stage essentially required bunker fuel to be switched to low sulphur outside the harbour entrance.

Unfortunately, the Regulation was only in effect for a short period and the second stage of the regulation was never implemented. The cessation of the regulation was due to a conflict between NSW and Federal legislation. As a result, the state regulation was invalidated.

Upon the cessation of the NSW regulation and the Federal law being applicable, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) became the appropriate authority on fuel use. The Federal Government amended legislation to enable AMSA to issue directions under the Navigation Act 2012.

Currently Orders are in place which stipulate:

“From December 2016, cruise vessels capable of accommodating more than 100 passengers and at berth in Sydney Harbour will be issued with a Direction by AMSA. The Direction will require the vessel to limit sulphur emissions by using low sulphur fuel or an alternative measure that achieves an equivalent outcome, specifically:

A. using fuel with a sulphur content not exceeding 0.1% mass per cent concentration (0.1% m/m); or

B. using an exhaust gas cleaning system, certified and approved in accordance with the International Maritime Organization Guidelines for Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems 2015; or

C. using a power source external to the vessel; or

D. using a combination of any of the above measures.”

The above order is similar to Stage 1 of the NSW Regulation however it does provide the Stage to component which would remove the additional hour (approximately 2 hours at berth and 1-2 hours manoeuvring up and down the harbour) of burning bunker fuel. Furthermore the order does provide additional options such ‘scrubbers’ in the exhaust systems or ‘shore to ship power’.

Details of AMSA Direction can be found in Attachment B.

Rejection of Shore Power by NSW Government

For a number of years Council has been advocating to the NSW Government for shore to ship power installation. The installation of would result in a reduction of toxic exhaust fumes being dispersed in close proximity to residential properties. The Parliamentary Inquiry into the performance of the NSW EPA listed this as a necessary consideration. It is also a permitted option for the reduction in air pollution in the Directions issued by the Federal Regulator AMSA for ships using Sydney Harbour.

Notwithstanding the above, the NSW Port Authority undertook a feasibility analysis into the installation of ‘shore to ship power’ for cruise vessels when berthed at the White Bay Cruise terminal.

The report concluded that: “Based on investigations and potential air emissions benefits, Port Authority of NSW does not recommend the installation of shore power at White Bay Cruise Terminal as a cost-effective solution.”

The key reasons provided was that the installation of the facility to enable ship to ‘plug in’ is expensive, the number of ships capable of connecting to the facility is relatively low and there are other technologies available to achieve the same outcome. As such, at this point the option for shore to ship power is not proceeding.

A copy of the NSW Port Authority reasons for Shore Power rejection is details in Attachment C

Consideration of Council’s Position

Council resolution C0218 Item 10 adopted 27 February 2018 required consideration of “The current position of the Inner West Council in regard to the White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal”

Essentially this requires Council to determine whether to:

a) Continue to advocate to NSW and Federal Governments to reduce, mitigate and monitor impacts on residents living and those working within the vicinity of the White Bay Cruise Terminal in terms of odour, noise and air quality from cruise ship exhaust fumes noting staff resources will be diverted from budgeted, planned and scheduled operations; or

b) Cease advocacy role in relation to the White Bay Cruise Terminal

In consideration of the above, since the White Bay Cruise Terminal commenced operations in 2013, Council has been advocating to NSW Government Ministers and agencies to reduce mitigate and monitor impacts on residents living and those working within the vicinity of the White Bay Cruise Terminal in terms of odour, noise and air quality associated with cruise ship exhaust fumes.

Some initiatives have been implemented, however resident concerns are still present. Shore to ship power is still a matter that can be advocated for, however additional mitigation measures can also be sought which could include:

· Mandating cruise ships switch to low-sulphur fuel at least one hour prior to entering Sydney Harbour

· Requiring all cruise ships that enter Sydney Harbour install scrubbers in exhaust stacks to reduce the impacts of fumes on the community

· Immediately implementing a ban on any ship that fails noise restriction criteria

· Advocating to the NSW Government to formulate better noise mitigation and abatement strategies and information on when the Abatement Strategy will be fully implemented

· Seeking a restriction on the number of ships permitted to use the facility annually in addition to limiting berthing at the facility to a single ship at any one time

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

A resolution for continued advocacy would require resources being diverted from budgeted, planned and scheduled operations. The level at this point is unquantifiable and will be dependent on the level and type of advocacy required.

OTHER STAFF COMMENTS

Nil.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Nil.

CONCLUSION

Council has been seeking to address community concerns resulting from the operation of the terminal since 2013.

Consideration of continued advocacy is a matter for Council to determine with consideration given to the fact that despite the measures implemented, the number of cruise ships using the facility annually continues to rise and the concerns of residents living and those working within the vicinity of the White Bay Cruise Terminal in terms of odour, noise and air quality associated with cruise ship exhaust fumes remain.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩	A - WBCT Noise Abatement Strategy Fact Sheet
2.⇩	B - AMSA Direction
3.⇩	C - NSW Port Authority reasons for Shore Power outcomes

Council Meeting

27 March 2018

Minutes of Local Traffic Committee Meeting

Held at Chamber Room, Petersham Service Centre on 6 March 2018

Meeting commenced at 10.11am

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY BY CHAIRPERSON

I acknowledge the Gadigal and Wangal people of the Eora nation on whose country we are meeting today, and their elders past and present.

COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT

Clr Marghanita Da Cruz	Leichhardt Ward (Chair)
Mr Bill Holliday	Representative for Jamie Parker MP, Member for Balmain
Mr Chris Woods	Representative for Ron Hoenig MP, Member for Heffron
Ms Sarina Foulstone	Representative for Jo Haylen MP, Member for Summer Hill
Mr Ryan Horne	Roads and Maritime Services
SC Anthony Kenny	NSW Police – Inner West Area Command

OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE

Mr Peter Whitney	State Transit Authority
Mr Tony Michalis	State Transit Authority
Mr Colin Jones	Inner West Bicycle Coalition
Mr Wal Petschler	IWC’s Group Manager, Roads, Traffic and Stormwater
Mr John Stephens	IWC’s Traffic and Transport Services Manager
Mr George Tsaprounis	IWC’s Coordinator Traffic and Parking Services (South)
Mr Manod Wickramasinghe	IWC’s Coordinator Traffic and Parking Services (North)
Ms Mary Bailey	IWC’s Parking Planner
Mr David Yu	IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services
Mr Boris Muha	IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services
Mr Emilio Andari	IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services

VISITORS

Mr Steven Burns	Item 10
Mr Mike Samms	Item 10
Ms Ann-Therese King	Item 18
Mr Denis Doyle	Item 18
Ms Natalie Lovett	Item 18
Mr Joseph Atallah	Item 18
Ms Elizabeth Avent	Item 18
Mr Neil Tonkin	Item 18
Mr Bob Moore	Item 18
Ms Leonie Derwent	Item 18
Ms Roslyn Burge	Item 18
Mr Peter Haramis	Item 18
Resident of Hornsey Street, Lilyfield	Item 18

APOLOGIES:

Ms Jo Haylen MP	Member for Summer Hill
Mr Jamie Parker MP	Member for Balmain
Sgt John Micallef	NSW Police – Burwood & Campsie (emailed support)
Sgt Dan Chilvers	NSW Police – Leichhardt (emailed support)
Clr Julie Passas	Deputy Mayor – Ashfield Ward

DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:

Nil.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

The Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on Tuesday, 6 February 2018 were confirmed.

MATTERS ARISING FROM COUNCIL’S RESOLUTION OF MINUTES

The Local Traffic Committee recommendations of its meeting held on 7 December 2017 and 6 February 2018 were adopted at Council’s meeting held on 27 February 2018.

Council at its meeting held on 27 February 2018 also resolved that:

Council as soon as possible organise a public meeting on the Lilyfield Road Cycleway proposal at which staff provide a full overview of the proposal and allow the community to ask questions in order to better understand what is being proposed. (Item 17 LTC0218)

LTC0318 Item 1 Croydon Road, Croydon - Proposed statutory ‘NO STOPPING’ Restrictions at Intersection With Anthony Street
(ASHFIELD WARD/STRATHFIELD ELECTORATE/ASHFIELD LAC)

SUMMARY

This report provides an update in response to Council's resolution dealing with Notice of Motion C1017 Item 14 – Pedestrian safety on Croydon Road, Croydon of its 12 October 2017 Council Meeting. An on-site meeting was conducted on 7 December 2017.

This report specifically looks at the installation of statutory ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at the intersection of Croydon Road and Anthony Street, Croydon as part of the local traffic calming measures identified to improve the safety of school children and pedestrians on Croydon Road, Croydon. A further report will be submitted following the completion of pedestrian surveys and traffic counts.

It is recommended that the statutory 'No Stopping' restrictions, in the form of unbroken yellow lines, be installed on both sides of all approaches to the intersection of Croydon Road and Anthony Street, Croydon for the distances as indicated in order to deter illegal parking, improve visibility and access and increase safety for all road users.

Officer’s Recommendation

THAT:

1. This report be received and noted;

2. Unbroken yellow lines (statutory ‘No Stopping’ lines) be approved for installation at the distances indicated on both sides of all approaches to the intersection of Croydon Road and Anthony Street, Croydon as follows in order to deter illegal parking, improve visibility and access and increase safety for all road users;

a) Install solid yellow line marking on Croydon Road (western side) for a distance of 10m north of Anthony Street;

b) Install solid yellow line marking on Croydon Road (eastern side) for a distance of 20m north of Anthony Street;

c) Install solid yellow line marking on Croydon Road (western side) for a distance of 20m south of Anthony Street;

d) Install solid yellow line marking on Croydon Road (eastern side) for a distance of 15m north of Anthony Street;

e) Install solid yellow line marking on Anthony Street (northern side) for a distance of 20m west of Croydon Road;

f) Install solid yellow line marking on Anthony Street (southern side) for a distance of 20m west of Croydon Road;

g) Install solid yellow line marking on Anthony Street (northern side) for a distance of 10m east of Croydon Road; and

h) Install solid yellow line marking on Anthony Street (southern side) for a distance of 10m east of Croydon Road.

3. Council Rangers be advised of the decision and requested to include this location in their patrols, once the ‘No Stopping lines have been installed and affected residents notified.

DISCUSSION

The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION