|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Live Streaming of Council Meeting
In the spirit of open, accessible and transparent government, this meeting of the Inner West Council is being streamed live on Council’s website. By speaking at a Council meeting, members of the public agree to being recorded and must ensure their speech to the Council is respectful and use appropriate language. A person who uses defamatory, discriminatory or offensive language may be exposed to liability for which Council takes no responsibility. Any part of this meeting that is held in closed session will not be recorded
Pre-Registration to Speak at Council Meetings
Members of the public must register by 2pm of the day of the Meeting to speak at Council Meetings. If you wish to register to speak please fill in a Register to Speak Form, available from the Inner West Council website, including:
Are there any rules for speaking at a Council Meeting?
The following rules apply when addressing a Council meeting:
What happens after I submit the form?
Your request will then be added to a list that is shown to the Chairperson on the night of the meeting.
Where Items are deferred, Council reserves the right to defer speakers until that Item is heard on the next occasion.
Accessibility
Inner West Council is committed to ensuring people with a disability have equal opportunity to take part in Council and Committee Meetings. At the Ashfield Council Chambers there is a hearing loop service available to assist persons with a hearing impairment. If you have any other access or disability related participation needs and wish to know more, call 9392 5657.
Persons in the public gallery are advised that under the Local Government Act 1993, a person may NOT tape record a Council meeting without the permission of Council.
Any persons found recording without authority will be expelled from the meeting.
“Record” includes the use of any form of audio, video and still camera equipment or mobile phone capable of recording speech.
An audio recording of this meeting will be taken for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the minutes.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
PRECIS |
1 Acknowledgement of Country
2 Apologies
3 Notice of Webcasting
4 Disclosures
of Interest (Section 451 of the Local Government Act
and Council’s Code of Conduct)
5 Moment of Quiet Contemplation
6 Confirmation of Minutes Page
Minutes of 30 November 2018 Council Meeting 5
Minutes of 13 November 2018 Council Meeting 36
7 Mayoral Minutes
Nil at the time of printing.
8 Condolence Motions
Nil at the time of printing.
9 Staff Reports
ITEM Page
C1118(2) Item 1 Future of White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal Bus Service 50
C1118(2) Item 2 Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 53
C1118(2) Item 3 Council Meeting Schedule for 2019 55
C1118(2) Item 4 Quarterly update on Tenders awarded 57
C1118(2) Item 5 Draft Tree DCP - Endorsement for Exhibition 58
C1118(2) Item 6 Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy 91
C1118(2) Item 7 Events in Parks Policy 133
C1118(2) Item 8 Results - Community Satisfaction Research 2018 204
C1118(2) Item 9 Local democracy update 324
C1118(2) Item 10 Audited Financial Reports as at 30 June 2018 329
C1118(2) Item 11 Inner West Council Annual Report 2017/18 423
C1118(2) Item 12 Classification of Crown Lands and Prioritisation of Park Plans of Management 507
C1118(2) Item 13 Heritage Pub Protections Update 519
C1118(2) Item 14 Proposed Expansion of Longitude Building, 36 James Craig Road, Rozelle 526
C1118(2) Item 15 Proposed Compliance & Enforcement Levy 533
C1118(2) Item 16 Abandoned Shopping Trolley Policy and Protocol 537
C1118(2) Item 17 Draft Inner West Council Asbestos Policy 555
C1118(2) Item 18 2018/19 First Quarter Budget Review. 744
C1118(2) Item 19 Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 6 November 2018 764
C1118(2) Item 20 Inner West Local Planning Panel Update 814
C1118(2) Item 21 Compliants Handling Policy 828
C1118(2) Item 22 Status of Legal Proceedings 847
C1118(2) Item 23 Investment Report as at 31 October 2018 858
10 Notices of Motion
ITEM Page
C1118(2) Item 24 Notice of Motion: Save Globe Preschool - EOI and Contingency Fund 893
C1118(2) Item 25 Notice of Motion: Bring Council Meetings Back to the Community 895
11 Reports with Confidential Information
Reports appearing in this section of the Business Paper are confidential in their entirety or contain confidential information in attachments.
The confidential information has been circulated separately.
ITEM Page
C1118(2) Item 26 Greenway Delivery Project Management and Engagement Plan 897
C1118(2) Item 27 Request for Reimbursement of Legal Expenses 916
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 30 October 2018
Meeting commenced at 6.35pm
Present: |
|
Darcy Byrne Victor Macri Marghanita Da Cruz Mark Drury Lucille McKenna OAM Colin Hesse Sam Iskandar Tom Kiat Pauline Lockie Julie Passas Rochelle Porteous Vittoria Raciti John Stamolis Louise Steer Elizabeth Richardson |
Mayor Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor (6.40pm) Councillor Councillor Councillor General Manager Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment |
Michael Tzimoulas |
Deputy General Manager Chief Financial and Administration Officer |
John Warburton |
Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement |
Nellette Kettle
Harjeet Atwal
Cathy Edwards-Davis David Birds Erla Ronan Kendall Banfield Ian Naylor Darcie Huisman |
Group Manager Civic and Executive Support, Integration, Customer Service and Business Excellence Group Manager Development Assessment and Regulatory Services Group Manager Trees, Parks and Sportsfields Group Manager Strategic Planning Group Manager Community Services and Culture Manager WestConnex Unit Manager Civic and Executive Support Business Paper Support Officer |
APOLOGIES: (Byrne/Steer)
THAT Apologies from Councillor York be accepted and a leave of absence be granted.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:
Clr Lockie and Clr Steer declared non-significant, non-pecuniary interests in Item 9 as their works is featured in an exhibition that is proposed to receive a grant from Council.
Motion: (Hesse/Stamolis)
THAT the declaration of interests be noted.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
THAT the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on Tuesday, 9 October 2018 be confirmed as a correct record, subject to the following change:
On page 8 of the Minutes, amend the Declaration of Interest for Clrs Iskandar and Macri to refer to Item 5.
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil |
Clr Porteous entered the meeting at 6.40pm
THAT:
1. Council write to the shareholders of Wests Tigers, including Wests Ashfield, seeking discussions about how a Tigers Leagues Club could be delivered and operated within any approved development of the former Balmain Leagues Club site, as is required under Council’s planning controls and the most recent NSW Land and Environment Court determination;
2. Write to the Administrator of the Balmain Leagues Club seeking clarification about the state of the Club’s assets, the likelihood of the Board being reformed and the potential for Wests Tigers’ shareholders to take up the ownership or management of a Tigers Leagues Club within any approved development;
3. Note the previous resolution of Leichhardt Council to offer assistance in the establishment of a charitable trust to fund the Balmain Tigers Rugby League Football Club;
4. Write to Wests Tigers, the Australian Rugby League Commission and the New South Wales Rugby League stating our preference for arrangements to be made for the ongoing funding of the Balmain Tigers Rugby League Football Club through a charitable foundation, or other means, to ensure the Football Club’s ongoing existence;
5. Write to the NSW Government restating our opposition to the compulsory acquisition of the former Leagues Club site for use as a dive site for the proposed Western Harbour Tunnel, noting the enormous environmental, health and amenity impacts the project would have on the local community and Rozelle Public School; and
6. Seek confirmation from Council Officers about when the Development Control Plan for the site will be reported to Council.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti and Stamolis Against Motion: Crs Hesse and Steer |
THAT:
1. Council proceed with the event focusing on the prevention of violence against women planned to be held on 21 November at the Addison Road Community Centre; 2. Council’s publicity material for the above event should focus on the 16 Days of Activism to prevent violence, as aligns with Council’s current practices and initiatives, and encourage our community partners to take a similar stance; 3. Council writes urgently to the CEO of White Ribbon Day: a. Seeking private and public clarification from White Ribbon about their policy position and intentions with regards to women’s reproductive rights; b. Requiring a response to this enquiry by 2 November to allow Council to further determine in which way Council will be involved with the White Ribbon Day event planned for 21 November 2018 at the Addison Road Community Centre; and 4. Confirming that we will remove Council association with White Ribbon if the organisation changes its policy position regarding reproductive rights.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Cr Passas |
Suspension of Standing Orders
Motion: (Byrne/McKenna OAM)
THAT Council hear from all of the registered speakers and that the speaker registered for Item 28 be heard first.
Motion Tied
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Iskandar, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas and Raciti
Against Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer
The Chairperson used his Casting Vote for the MOTION and the MOTION was carried.
Foreshadowed Motion: (Porteous/Stamolis)
THAT Council bring forward the items that the speakers have registered to speak to and that the speaker registered to Item 28 be heard first.
The Foreshadowed Motion lapsed.
ADJOURNMENT
8.47pm - The Mayor, Clr Byrne adjourned the meeting for a short recess.
9.11pm– The Mayor, Clr Byrne resumed the meeting.
Clr Iskandar retired from the meeting at 8.47pm.
Resumption of Standing Orders
Motion: (Byrne/McKenna OAM)
THAT Standing orders be resumed.
Motion Lost
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas and Raciti
Against Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer
Absent: Cr Iskandar
Foreshadowed Motion: (Porteous/Hesse)
THAT Council bring forward the items that the speakers have registered to speak to.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas and Raciti
Absent: Cr Iskandar
Suspension of Standing Orders
Motion: (Byrne/Porteous)
THAT Item 1 be brought forward.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Cr Iskandar
Clr Passas left the meeting at 9.31pm
THAT Council:
1. Receives and notes the report; and
2. Endorses the Financial Statements to be placed on public exhibition, ensuring that the document is exhibited in an Accessible and readable form, with a view of tabling the final report at the November 2018 Council meeting.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Crs Iskandar and Passas
|
Clr Passas returned to the meeting at 9.37pm
THAT:
1. 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;
2. The position be be temporarily appointed for a trial period of two years initially. The effectiveness and success of the Office of Sport shall be evaluated at the end of the two year period;
3. The 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, seniors and people with disabilities as informed by the Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West, and engage also with residents participating in individual and non-club based recreational activity; and
4. Council receive a report back after one year on a review of the position of Office of Sport Coordinator.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Iskandar |
Clr Passas left the meeting at 10.04pm
Clr Passas returned to the meeting at 10.13pm
Motion: (Stamolis/Passas)
THAT items 10, 13, 16, 17, 22, 23 and 25 be brought forward and moved en bloc and the recommendations contained in the reports be adopted by Council.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Cr Iskandar
THAT Council:
1. Write to the City of Sydney Council requesting it supports the preparation of a joint letter to the RMS WestConnex Delivery Unit seeking their funding and delivery of the City West Cycle Link as a component of the M4-M5 Link Project; and 2. Write to the Minister for Roads and Minister for Transport, highlighting the unique opportunity, presented by construction of the Rozelle Railyards Linear Park, to permit the creation of the City West Cycle Link and requesting their support in pursuing its synchronised construction with the park and Council’s active transport network and its funding and delivery by RMS.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Iskandar |
THAT the report be received and noted.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Iskandar |
THAT the following legacy policies rescinded as they are deemed obsolete:
a) Audio Recording of Council Meetings Policy;
b) Council Committee Structure and Terms of Reference;
c) Councillor Expenses and Facilities Policy;
d) Provision of Information to Councillors Policy;
e) Councillor Policy For Payment Of Expenses & Provision Of Facilities;
f) Meetings Between Councillors & Members Of Parliament and/or Government Departments;
g) Precinct Committee System Policy;
h) Precinct Committee System Policy;
i) Social Media Policy;
j) Media Relations Policy;
k) Community Engagement Policy; and
l) Social Media Strategy.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Iskandar |
THAT the report be received and noted.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Iskandar |
Confidential Session
Motion: (Byrne/McKenna OAM)
THAT Council move into Confidential session to consider Items of business containing Confidential Information.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Cr Iskandar
Members of the public were asked to leave the Chamber.
Motion: (Byrne/Passas)
THAT Council return to open session to read out the recommendations from the
Closed Session.
The Mayor read out to the Meeting the recommendation from the Closed Session of
Council.
Reports with Confidential Information
THAT Council note the report.
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous and Raciti Against Motion: Crs Hesse, Stamolis and Steer Absent: Cr Iskandar |
That the meeting be adjourned until 6.30pm, Tuesday 6 November 2018.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Iskandar |
Meeting Adjourned at 11.03pm
Meeting resumed at 6.36pm on Tuesday 6 November 2018
Present: |
|
Darcy Byrne Victor Macri Marghanita Da Cruz Mark Drury Lucille McKenna OAM Colin Hesse Tom Kiat Pauline Lockie Julie Passas Rochelle Porteous Vittoria Raciti John Stamolis Louise Steer Elizabeth Richardson |
Mayor Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor General Manager Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment |
Michael Tzimoulas |
Deputy General Manager Chief Financial and Administration Officer |
John Warburton |
Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement |
Nellette Kettle
Harjeet Atwal
David Birds Erla Ronan Kendall Banfield Jan Orton Wal Petchler Ian Naylor Katherine Paixao |
Group Manager Civic and Executive Support, Integration, Customer Service and Business Excellence Group Manager Development Assessment and Regulatory Services Group Manager Strategic Planning Group Manager Community Services and Culture Manager WestConnex Unit Group Manager Environment and Sustainability Group Manager Roads & Stormwater Manager Civic and Executive Support Business Paper Coordinator |
APOLOGIES: (Drury/McKenna OAM)
THAT Apologies from Councillor Iskandar be accepted.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Councillor Macri left the Meeting at 7:13 pm.
Councillor Macri returned to the Meeting at 7:19 pm.
THAT Council:
1. Includes in its next quarterly newsletter information on WestConnex impacts and areas of assistance offered by Council, with reference to the issues listed in the Council report. This information is to be supported by complementary information on Council’s website and within the existing WestConnex Weekly Update Reports. Actions to be investigated and implemented for increasing the readership of the Weekly Update Reports;
2. a) That Council writes to the NSW Premier with copies to relevant ministers and local State members to:
· Request details of the outcome of any Roads & Maritime Services (RMS) review carried out of the location and installation of RMS street ‘furniture’ (cabinets, signs and poles) at Haberfield-Ashfield and similarly obstructive signs and infrastructure in St Peters, such as the electrical box recently installed outside 10 Brown St, St Peters; · Direct relevant Ministers, RMS and the M4 East contractor to review and relocate street furniture (wherever possible) in consultation with Council and the local community, to ensure that this infrastructure should be located well away from footpaths within the verge as close as possible to the kerb, not blocking footpaths or creating a hazard for pedestrians, other footpath users and to drivers exiting streets; · Direct the redesign and widening of the footway on the southern or Ashfield side of Parramatta Road between Orpington & Bland Streets including the intersection with Chandos Street to its original pre-WestConnex width of approximately four metres; · Point out that the newly-installed WestConnex-related road signs at the front of Ashfield Park are in breach of M4 East Condition of Approval B26, which is intended to prevent visual impacts on Ashfield Park; · Request a review of the safety and accessibility of signalised pedestrian crossings around the M4 East Haberfield interchange, i.e. Parramatta Road crossing at Bland Street, Parramatta Road crossing at Wattle Street, Wattle Street crossing at Ramsay Street and Dobroyd Parade crossing at Waratah Street; · Request RMS and project contractors to take immediate action to reduce kerbside parking demands in Haberfield-Ashfield, particularly around the Haberfield Public School, noting work on the Parramatta Road construction sites is about to commence; · Request the RMS and project contractors work with Council to install traffic calming and 40kph speed limits around all Haberfield-Ashfield construction sites; · Request RMS to supply to Council and DP&E information from ‘consistency assessments’, to be examined by Council and DP&E for consistency with conditions of approval; · Request a meeting with DP&E staff prior to approval of WestConnex Stage 3 Modification 1 regarding the following further construction impact mitigation measures: vehicular access to both Parramatta Road construction sites to/from Parramatta Road; reduced vehicle speed limit around all construction sites; no out-of-hours works on civil sites; no shuttle bus or construction vehicle layover to service out-of-area construction sites; all spoil haulage trucks to use M4 East tunnels; increased level of mitigation for noise, vibration, dust and property damage; extension of the project impact area for property assessment purposes from 50 to 100 metres; temporary pedestrian access bridge between Parramatta Road construction sites to be open to the public; additional crossing guards around Haberfield Public School, funded by RMS, SMC and/or project contractors; and an expanded area for offer of alternative accommodation or voluntary acquisition for severely affected residents around construction sites.
b) Staff: · Work with the local traffic committee and disability groups in their advocacy work toward relocation of the RMS street furniture, widening of the Parramatta Road footway and assessment of signalised pedestrian crossings; and · Support the Haberfield Public School efforts to approach to RMS to secure crossing guards at Bland St and Denman Avenue;
3. Writes to the NSW Premier and relevant Ministers seeking a dialogue with the WestConnex Stage 3A (mainline tunnel) contractor to inform the community of details of what facilities and activities are planned for the Ashfield-Haberfield Muirs sites;
4. a) Writes to the Premier and relevant Ministers seeking a meeting with relevant Minister(s) and staff from RMS and Sydney Motorway Corporation (SMC): · to express concern about inadequate consultation on the M4 East Urban Design & Landscape Plan (UDLP) to date; · to seek further input by Council and the community in this plan prior to its finalisation; and · to ensure there is adequate consultation on the Haberfield Gardens legacy plan prior to its finalisation. b) Writes to the Premier requesting that Treasury authorises RMS to return all residual lands in Haberfield and Ashfield to open space or other appropriate community uses, in recognition of the considerable impacts suffered by the Haberfield-Ashfield community from WestConnex construction and the limited amount of open space available in this densely-developed part of Ashfield; c) Discusses with the owner of the former Buddhist temple site the possibility of working with RMS to create more publicly-accessible open space around the realigned Parramatta Road between Orpington and Chandos Streets at Ashfield; and d) Requests information from RMS on all residual lands (including acquired properties that are surplus) and lands that are proposed to be acquired;
5. a) Requests a review by Council legal staff of the proposed occupation of a portion of Reg Coady Reserve at Haberfield that is part of the creation of the G-loop for WestConnex Stage 3. Legal staff to investigate seeking appropriate compensation for use of this land. b) In collaboration with Canada Bay Council, writes to Sydney Water to clarify details and timelines for the proposed naturalisation of Iron Cove Creek. Council to propose that part of the cost of this naturalisation work be borne by RMS, SMC and/or Stage 3 contractor as a contribution to revitalising areas that have been negatively affected by WestConnex;
6. a) Establishes a register and map of properties that have been reported to have suffered damage from WestConnex construction. Council to inform residents of this register and encourage them to inform Council of WestConnex-related property damage regardless of distance from WestConnex tunnels and construction sites. The register to be kept up-to-date and be available to the public via Council’s website. Advice from Council’s legal and risk management staff on legal or other risks to be sought before proceeding with this action; and b) Writes to RMS, SMC and WestConnex Stage 3 contractors to advocate increasing the qualification zone for pre-condition reports from 50m to 100m.
7. Reimburses Rozelle Against WestConnex (RAW) $890 (including GST) for flyer printing for the 14 April 2018 anti-WestConnex rally in King George Park and $113.85 (including GST) for materials needed to erect 150 of Council’s anti-WestConnex corflute signs on poles in the Rozelle area (total RAW expenses = $1,003.85). Reimbursement is subject to provision to Council of invoices, receipts or other proof of expenses.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Macri and Passas
|
Amendment (Porteous/Hesse) THAT Council reimburses Rozelle Against WestConnex (RAW) $890 (including GST) for flyer printing for the 14 April 2018 anti-WestConnex rally in King George Park and $113.85 (including GST) for materials needed to erect 150 of Council’s anti-WestConnex corflute signs on poles in the Rozelle area (total RAW expenses = $1,003.85). Reimbursement is subject to provision to Council of invoices, receipts or other proof of expenses.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas and Raciti
As the Amendment was carried it was incorporated into the Primary Motion. |
THAT Council:
1. Upgrade the fencing, gate and playground equipment at the pocket park located at Elizabeth Street, Ashfield between Alt Street and Frederick Street, Ashfield with the funds from the Ashfield SRV Parks renewal fund; and
2. Repair the fencing, gate and playground equipment at the pocket park located at Elizabeth Street, Ashfield between Alt Street and Frederick Street, Ashfield.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil
|
Amendment (Hesse/Da Cruz)
THAT Council repair the fencing, gate and playground equipment at the pocket park located at Elizabeth Street, Ashfield between Alt Street and Frederick Street, Ashfield.
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Lockie, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Macri, Passas and Raciti Absent: Cr Kiat
As the Amendment was carried it was incorporated into the Primary Motion.
Clr Kiat re-entered to the meeting at 7.50pm |
Councillor Passas left the Meeting at 7:54 pm.
Councillor Passas returned to the Meeting at 7:58 pm.
Councillor Raciti left the Meeting at 8:35 pm.
Councillor Raciti returned to the Meeting at 8:48 pm.
THAT Council:
1. Approve the funding recommendations for the Inner West Council Grant Program 2018-19 contained in Attachments 1-5;
2. Receive a report which provides information to councillors on providing a significant increase to the grants program funding in the order of 15%-25%; and
3. Look at providing the full grant requested for successful grants.
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Macri, Passas and Raciti |
ADJOURNMENT
9.08pm - The Mayor, Clr Byrne adjourned the meeting for a short recess.
9.22pm– The Mayor, Clr Byrne resumed the meeting.
Councillor Passas re-entered to the Meeting at 9:34 pm.
C1018(2) Item 18 Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 2 October 2018 |
Motion: (Lockie/Stamolis)
THAT the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 2 October 2018 be received and the recommendations be adopted, with the following amendments:
a) Council to provide a donation to the Newtown Neighbourhood Centre for the equivalent sum of any application fees required to authorise the road closures required for the operation of the Newtown Festival (LTC1018 Item 22).
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Raciti |
Councillor Raciti re-entered to the Meeting at 9:36 pm.
THAT this report be received and noted.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil |
Councillor Kiat left the Meeting at 9:46 pm.
That Council adopt the Asset Management Policy.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Kiat |
Councillor Kiat returned to the Meeting at 9:49 pm.
C1018(2) Item 24 Adoption of Public Access to Information held by Council Policy
|
Motion: (Drury/McKenna OAM)
THAT Council:
1. Adopts the revised Public Access to Information held by Council Policy (Attachment 1); and
2. Rescinds the following policies: a) Inner West Council “Public Access to Information Policy” reviewed 14 October 2016 (Attachment 2); b) former Ashfield Council “Access to Council Information Policy” dated September 2010 (Attachment 3); c) former Ashfield Council “Access to Council Information Policy” dated September 2010, reviewed May 2012 (Attachment 4); and d) former Marrickville Council “Public Access to Information Policy” reviewed October 2010 (Attachment 5).
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil |
Councillor Raciti and Passas retired from the Meeting at 10:09 pm.
ADJOURNMENT
10.28pm - The Mayor, Clr Byrne adjourned the meeting for a short recess.
10.30pm– The Mayor, Clr Byrne resumed the meeting.
Councillor Lockie retired from the Meeting at 10.30 pm.
THAT a report be brought back on introducing tiered waste charges across the Inner West LGA including associated promotion to ratepayers and tenants about council and community services to divert resources and minimise waste going to landfill.
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Macri and McKenna OAM Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti |
Meeting closed at 10.32pm.
Public Speakers:
Item #
|
Speaker |
Suburb |
Item 36: |
A/Prof Melanie Bishop |
Macquarie University |
Item 3: |
Ian Holmes Fiona Ledden |
Ashfield Croydon |
Item 4: |
Paul Power Carole Allen |
Rozelle Leichhardt |
Item 5: |
Jo Blackman |
Dulwich Hill |
Item 6: |
Paul Power Paul Dawson John Thomson Paul Avery Terence Kelly |
Rozelle Annandale Lilyfield Balmain Rozelle |
Item 11: |
Allison Heller |
Sydney |
Item 12: |
Paul Apostoles Janet Dandy-Ward Carolyn Day Karen Torrisi Christopher White |
St Peters St Peters St Peters St Peters St Peters |
Item 14: |
Sharon Laura Eddie Tezel Janet Dandy-Ward Malachy Ward Anne Picot Rachel Davies |
Haberfield Ashfield St Peters Haberfield St Peters Ashfield |
Item 16: |
Neil Tonkin |
Lilyfield |
Item 28: |
Stephanie Koch |
Ashfield |
Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 13 November 2018
Meeting commenced at 6.33 pm
Present: |
|
Darcy Byrne Victor Macri Marghanita Da Cruz Mark Drury Lucille McKenna OAM Colin Hesse Sam Iskandar Tom Kiat Pauline Lockie Julie Passas Rochelle Porteous Vittoria Raciti John Stamolis Louise Steer Elizabeth Richardson |
Mayor Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor General Manager Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment |
Michael Tzimoulas David Birds Erla Ronan Wal Petschler Melodie Whiting Harjeet Atwal
Laura Stevens |
Deputy General Manager Chief Financial and Administration Officer Group Manager Strategic Planning Group Manager Community Services and Culture Group Manager Roads and Stormwater Group Manager Human Resources Group Manager Development Assessment and Regulatory Services Group Manager Communications, Engagement and Events |
Ian Naylor |
Manager Civic and Executive Support |
Katherine Paixao |
Business Paper Coordinator |
APOLOGIES:
Motion: (Byrne/McKenna OAM)
THAT Apologies from Councillor York be accepted and a leave of absence be granted
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:
Clr Drury declared a significant, pecuniary interest in Item 5 Proposed Amendments to the NSW Planning System - Short Term Rental Accommodation as his wife uses home away (a short term rental accommodation service) to rent their holiday flat and he will leave the chamber during discussion and voting.
Motion: (McKenna OAM/Hesse)
THAT the declaration of interest be noted.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Centenary of Armistice Day
The Mayor advised the meeting that on remembrance day the Deputy Mayor and himself attended an exhibition at Petersham RSL Club celebrating the 100 year anniversary of the Armistice that ended World War I.
As part of this exhibition there was a mayoral minute adopted by Petersham Council in 1918 and the Mayor read this mayoral minute out to the meeting as it is a timely reminder of the reason for celebrating the anniversary of the Armistice.
Suspension of Standing Orders
Motion: (McKenna OAM/Hesse)
THAT Council Suspend Standing Orders to bring forward the speakers registered for Item 14.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Confidential Session
Motion: (Byrne/McKenna OAM)
THAT Council move into Confidential Session to consider Items 14 and 16 which contains Confidential Information.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Councillors left the chamber and convened the confidential session in the Committee Room due to the large number of public in attendance.
Motion: (Byrne/McKenna OAM)
THAT Council return to open session to read out the recommendations from the
Closed Session.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
The Mayor read out to the Meeting the recommendations from the Closed Session of
Council.
Reports with Confidential Information
Items 14 and 16 were dealt with in conjunction.
C1118(1) Item 14 Ashfield Aquatic Centre Construction Tender Recommendation |
Councillor Passas left the Meeting at 7:58 pm.
ADJOURNMENT
7.59pm - The Mayor, Clr Byrne adjourned the meeting for a short recess.
8.10pm– The Mayor, Clr Byrne resumed the meeting.
Suspension of Standing Orders
Motion: (Byrne/McKenna)
THAT Council further Suspend Standing Orders to hear from all registered speakers.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Crs Iskandar, Passas and Porteous
Councillor Porteous re-entered the Meeting at 8:11 pm.
Councillor Iskandar re-entered the Meeting at 8:12 pm.
Councillor Passas re-entered the Meeting at 8:13 pm.
Councillor Passas left the Meeting at 8:19 pm.
Councillor Raciti left the Meeting at 8:19 pm.
Suspension of Standing Orders
Motion: (Byrne/Hesse)
THAT Council further Suspend Standing Orders to bring forward Items 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 and 12.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti
Councillors Passas and Raciti returned to the Meeting at 8:36 pm.
THAT Council:
1. Endorse the Multicultural Policy;
2. Reallocate $113,000 in 2018/19 and subsequent financial years within the Community Services and Culture Group to deliver the Multicultural program priorities: a. Employing a part time Multicultural Policy Project Officer ($84,000 per annum); b. Developing and delivering a multicultural small grants program enabling community-lead celebrations of culture $29,000; c. Initiating the Multicultural Advisory Committee commencing 29 November 2018; d. Initiating the Inter-Faith Reference Group commencing first quarter 2019 e. Continuing translation of key Council documents into community languages as required; f. Developing the framework and protocols supporting community to community relationships; and g. Identifying a prospective Chinese city with which to form a community to community relationship.
3. Note that the following Multicultural program priorities are not recommended to proceed in 2018/19 and are unfunded: a. Additional investment in expanding Lunar New Year celebrations b. Investment in an anti-racism film competition and festival.
4. A report be brought back at the December 2018 Ordinary Council meeting on funding the multicultural project officer as a full time position; and
5. A report be brought back in 12 months on a review of the achievements of the Multicultural Project Officer.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Passas and Raciti |
Councillor Passas retired from the Meeting at 9:06 pm.
THAT Council:
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Passas |
Councillor Drury left the Meeting at 9:23 pm as he had declared a pecuniary, significant conflict of interest in item 5. He did not participate in discussion or vote on this matter.
Councillor Raciti retired from the Meeting at 9:25 pm.
Councillor Drury returned to the Meeting at 9:35 pm.
Councillor Macri left the Meeting at 9.55 pm.
Resumption of Standing Orders
Motion: (Byrne/Porteous)
THAT Standing Orders be resumed.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Crs Macri, Passas and Raciti
Councillor Macri returned to the Meeting at 10.01 pm.
THAT Council:
1. Send a letter of condolence to the family of Richard Gill, expressing our sadness at their loss and our appreciation of the enormous contribution Richard made to the inner west and the cultural community of Australia; 2. Commemorate Richard Gill by naming the new musical instrument lending library, which is under development, in his honour; and 3. Convene a meeting of interested cultural organisations to assist with their goal of establishing a music festival to commemorate Richard Gill. |
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti |
THAT Council:
1. Economic Development Officers contact all eligible restaurants and cafes in the former Leichardt LGA and notify them of the gazettal of changes to the Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan that means they can use a Complying Development pathway to convert from an existing property with consent to operate as a restaurant or café, to a Small Bar; and 2. Officers review the implementation of the amendments with a view to incorporating the provision into the new Inner West Council LEP.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Cr Hesse Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti |
THAT Council:
1. Adopt the Banners, Flags and Temporary Signage Policy subject to
$166,000 being funded at the next quarterly budget review;
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Iskandar, Macri and McKenna OAM Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti
|
Amendment (Kiat/Porteous)
THAT:
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti
As the Amendment was carried it was incorporated into the Primary Motion. |
The Mayor ruled this motion out of order as the motion did not identify a source of funds to undertake the work as required by Clause 5.1(1) of the Code of Meeting Practice.
|
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Iskandar, Macri and McKenna OAM Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti
As the Amendment was carried it was incorporated into the Primary Motion. |
Foreshadowed Motion (Byrne)
THAT there be no extra budget allocation to the policy in this financial year.
This Foreshadowed Motion lapsed. |
Suspension of Standing Orders
Motion: (Drury/Byrne)
THAT Council Suspend Standing Orders to move into Confidential Session to consider Items 13 and 15 as they contain Confidential Information.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti
Members of the public were asked to leave the Chamber.
Motion: (Byrne/Iskandar)
THAT Council return to open session to read out the recommendations from the
Closed Session.
The Mayor read out to the Meeting the recommendation from the Closed Session of
Council.
Reports with Confidential Information
C1118(1) Item 15 Compulsory Acquisition for Construction Lease - Part Burrows Ave Sydenham |
THAT the General Manager (or Delegate) sign a Deed of Compensation & Acquisition and Construction Lease once lease terms are finalised for lease over a Council road being Part Burrows Avenue Sydenham (known as Lot 5 in PPN 1245223), for the Sydney Metro project.
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Nil Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti |
THAT Council:
1. Adopt the Sponsorship policy; and
2. Rescind the below legacy policies of the former Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville councils as this new Inner West Council policy replaces them: - Sponsorship and small donations policy (Ashfield); - Sponsorship policy (Leichhardt); and - Sponsorship policy (Marrickville).
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Cr Hesse Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti
|
Amendment (Steer/Da Cruz)
THAT the Policy be amended to remove the following words from the fifth dot point under part four restrictions ‘unless the business is based in Council’s local government area and can demonstrate considerable contributions to the community’.
Motion Tied For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Porteous, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Drury, Iskandar, Lockie, Macri and McKenna OAM Absent: Crs Passas and Raciti
The Chairperson used his Casting Vote against the MOTION and the MOTION was lost. |
Meeting closed at 11.03 pm.
The following items will be considered at the next Ordinary Council Meeting on 27 November 2018; Items 7, 8, 9 and 10.
Public Speakers:
Item #
|
Speaker |
Suburb |
Item 3: |
Judy Singer Sebastian Berrans |
Balmain Rozelle |
Item 4: |
Bill Holliday Neil Tonkin (NSW Bicycle Coalition) |
Lilyfield Lilyfield |
Item 5: |
Jim Robertson |
Birchgrove |
Item 6: |
Les Johnston |
Balmain |
Item 11: |
Neil Tonkin (NSW Bicycle Coalition) |
Lilyfield |
Item 12: |
Gem Romuld (ICAN) |
Woonona |
Item 14: |
Rachel Brittliff David Collins-White Rene Holmes Phil de Gail (President UNSW Wests Water Polo) Alfie Jellett |
Ashfield Croydon Ashfield Artarmon
Croydon |
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Future of White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal Bus Service
Council at its meeting on 13 November 2018 resolved that the matter be deferred to the meeting to be held on 27 November 2018.
Prepared By: Bernadette Selfe - Business Relations Coordinator
Authorised By: David Birds - Group Manager Strategic Planning
SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to respond to Council Resolution C1018(1) Item 10 Notice of Motion - Future of White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal Bus dated 9 October 2018 which required staff to: 1. Provide an update on the status and effectiveness of the minibus service to the White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal 2. Detail the costs to Council of the minibus service since it commenced 3. Widely consult with the Chamber and businesses in Balmain and Rozelle about any future use of the funds used for the bus.
In 2016, Council entered into a two year funding agreement with the Port Authority NSW that aimed to capture the economic potential of the White Bay Cruise Terminal as a tourism asset for Balmain Peninsula by providing a free bus service for passengers from the cruise terminal to Balmain and Rozelle villages. This agreement ended in March 2018. The program evaluation showed that the project was tracking very short of the anticipated $1.4m per year return and showed no sign of achieving that return. Based on the evaluation Council declined an offer to extend the new agreement with the Port Authority. The total cost to Council to deliver the program over two years was $75,000. Council provided one off funding for this initiative which ceased in the 2017-18 financial year.
Representatives from the Balmain Rozelle Chamber were consulted about the project and where made aware that the funds associated with the bus service were only for a two year period. As a result there are no funds available in the 2018-19 budget for related initiatives. However staff from the Economic Development Unit are in discussions with the Balmain Rozelle Chamber to examine other possible promotional initiatives for the area. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council notes the information outlined in this report. |
BACKGROUND
In 2015, the former Leichhardt Council and the Port Authority NSW entered into a two year agreement to develop, promote and capture the economic potential of the White Bay Cruise Terminal as a tourism asset for Balmain and Rozelle villages. This project provided a free bus service for passengers from the cruise terminal to Balmain and Rozelle. This agreement ended in March 2018.
MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION RAISED IN THE NOTICE OF MOTION
1. Provide an update on the status and effectiveness of the minibus service to the White Bay Cruise Ship Terminal
Council undertook an evaluation that showed the initiative did not justify Council’s continued financial investment in this project. It was estimated by a consultant when the project was developed that the initiative would generate around a $1.4m per year return into the local economy over a four year period. This figure was based on an average passenger spend of $120 for a self-guided tour and $45 for crew arriving at the White Bay Terminal.
Based on the figures for 2016/17 and in Table 1 below, it is estimated that in the two years that the program operated the Balmain and Rozelle economy received the following passenger spend:
· 2016/17 (21 ships) - $70,560 (5.04% of the anticipated target $1.4m return)
· 2017/18 (34 ships) - $117,600 (8.4% of the anticipated target $1.4m return).
Table 1. Number of passengers using the bus service 2017/18
Date |
30 Nov |
5 Dec |
20 Dec |
21 Dec |
23 Dec |
3 Jan |
17 Jan |
20 Jan |
23 Jan |
No. |
0 |
10 |
31 |
146 |
49 |
6 |
35 |
75 |
7 |
|
|||||||||
Date |
25 Jan |
5 Feb |
6 Feb |
8 Feb |
10 Feb |
11 Feb |
12 Feb |
13 Feb |
14 Feb |
No. |
41 |
32 |
23 |
0 |
16 |
27 |
14 |
20 |
3 |
|
|||||||||
Date |
15 Feb |
16 Feb |
17 Feb |
18 Feb |
19 Feb |
20 Feb |
21 Feb |
22 Feb |
23 Feb |
No. |
3 |
5 |
16 |
4 |
2 |
10 |
130 |
26 |
74 |
|
|||||||||
Date |
24 Feb |
27 Feb |
4 March |
6 March |
11 March |
17 March |
28 March |
|
|
No. |
8 |
0 |
11 |
17 |
13 |
16 |
5 |
|
|
The estimated amount of income received by the local businesses that can be attributed to cruise ship visitors (figures obtained from talking to the businesses in Balmain/Rozelle) represents in 2016/17 only 5.04% of the anticipated final $1.4m return and in 2017/18 around 8.4% of the anticipated final $1.4m return.
These figures are much lower than the staged growth targets for those years of $650,940 for 2016/17 (only 10.8% achieved) and $928,500 for 2017/18 (only 12.6% achieved). Furthermore the increase from 2016/17 to 2017/18 does not relate to a greater take up by the passengers on each ship but rather an increase in the number of ships from 21 to 34. The evidence appears to indicate that iconic attractions such as the Opera House, Harbor Bridge, Darling Harbour, Kings Wharf and the retail shopping opportunities in Sydney City appear to be more attractive to passengers.
Feedback from businesses has been mixed. In 2016/17 businesses reported good sales from cruise ship customers and noticed an increase in foot traffic. In 2017/18 businesses reported that they were very busy but not sure why, and had not noticed an increase in sales from cruise passengers. Some businesses were not aware of the service, despite Council staff hand delivering information about the program. Shops where business owners are present were aware of the service while shops managed by staff were less likely to be aware of the service.
Representatives from the Balmain and Rozelle Chamber have advised that they believe numbers were down on the previous year. They attribute this to passengers bypassing the villages to go to Balmain East Wharf to get to Circular Quay. The Port Authority NSW disputes this, as the Captain Cook Ferry service is located next to the terminal and is a quicker option for passengers to get into Sydney city.
Council staff have reviewed the shuttle service and confirm that approximately 50% of the morning passengers were using the service to go the wharf to make their way into Sydney. However, in the afternoon passengers and crew were using the service to go shopping in Balmain - Rozelle. This was a concern as the aim of the shuttle is to transfer passengers from the terminal to the Darling Street precincts of Rozelle and Balmain and not as an alternative means of transport into Sydney City.
2. Detail the costs to Council of the minibus service since it commenced
Council provided one off funding for this initiative for two years ending in 2017-18. The cost to deliver the program was $75,000 a year which was shared equally between the Port Authority NSW and Council at $37,500 each per year. Funds were used to run two shuttle buses from 8.30am to 5.30pm from White Bay to Balmain/Rozelle. There was also the cost to Council of one staff member attending quarterly meetings, and around 4 hours a week during cruise season (approximately $3,100).
3. Widely consult with the Chamber and businesses in Balmain and Rozelle about any future use of the funds used for the bus
As noted earlier in this report, Council provided one off funding for this initiative which has now ceased. There are no funds allocated for this project in 2018-19 and therefore no funds available to use on related initiatives in the area. Representatives from the Balmain Rozelle Chamber were consulted about this project and were made aware that the funds associated with the bus service were only for a two year period. However staff from the Economic Development Unit are in discussions with the Balmain Rozelle Chamber to examine other possible promotional initiatives for the area for consideration.
Council’s Economic Development Unit continues to promote and market the local economy to drive awareness, visitation and local spend to businesses, including in Balmain and Rozelle. The Economic Development Unit, as part of its strategic planning, is developing an Economic Development Strategy which will help to optimise the economic potential of the key sectors and locations across the Inner West LGA and is also liaising with the local chamber on the Strategy.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Staff contacted the local business chamber for their feedback on the project to help inform this report.
CONCLUSION
The program evaluation showed that the project was tracking very short of the anticipated $1.4m per year return. The two year funding agreement between Council and the Port Authority NSW ended in March 2018. Based on the evaluation Council declined to enter into a new agreement with the Port Authority and there are no remaining funds that were allocated to the project that are available for use on other projects.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Enterprise Bargaining Agreement
Council at its meeting on 13 November 2018 resolved that the matter be deferred to the meeting to be held on 27 November 2018.
Prepared By: Melodie Whiting - Group Manager Human Resources
Authorised By: Rik Hart - Interim General Manager
SUMMARY To respond to the Council Resolution of 25 September 2018, requesting a report on the status of the current Enterprise Bargaining Agreement and any recent action in this area. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive and note this report. |
BACKGROUND
At the 25 September 2018 Council Meeting Council resolved:
THAT:
4. A report be brought to Councillors about current Councils Enterprise Bargaining Agreement and any recent action in this area.
Council has given a commitment to staff, Unions and the Consultative Committee to harmonise conditions of employment for all staff.
One of the impediments to achieving this is the former Council Agreements which are specific to small groups of staff from the former Councils and do not apply to all of our current staff in like jobs. The conditions contained therein are in many cases irrelevant, have been superseded by the Award provisions or Council Policy or Protocols.
There is also some disparity and discord between the conditions of these old agreements and they are preventing harmonisation. Although Council is making good progress we need to take further action to advance the harmonisation process and to provide staff with one set of conditions for all staff or like groups. The Eba’s include:
• Marrickville Industrial Agreement No. 7340 from 1984
• Marrickville Industrial Agreement No. 8627 from 1991
• Marrickville Industrial Agreement IRC 7340 from 1992,
• Leichhardt Council Waste Collection Enterprise Agreement 2006-2009 (IRC6/581)
• Leichhardt Municipal Council Enterprise Agreement 2006-2008 (IRC6/580)
• Leichhardt Council Parks and Streetscapes Team Enterprise Agreement 2004-2006 (IRC4/5240)
Also following the co-location, consultation and negotiations with unions and staff representatives on the Council a number of improvements have also been identified they include:
· harmonisation of service standards,
· better “fit for purpose” plant and equipment
· team configurations,
· tasks undertaken
· conditions of employment and
· the review and in some cases replacement of the old Council agreements
The Unions, staff representatives and Council are now preparing to commence meetings. The outcomes will be the subject of consultation with the Unions, Staff and the Joint Consultative Committee.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
It is hoped that there will be some financial savings but they are subject to the consultation and negotiations with Staff and unions.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The Joint Consultative Committee has received and noted a report on this and looks forward to the consultation to begin.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Nil.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Council Meeting Schedule for 2019
Council at its meeting on 13 November 2018 resolved that the matter be deferred to the meeting to be held on 27 November 2018.
Prepared By: Ian Naylor - Manager Civic and Executive Support
Authorised By: Nellette Kettle - Group Manager Integration Customer Service & Business Excellence
SUMMARY To adopt the Council Meeting Schedule for 2019. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Adopt the Council Meeting Schedule for 2019 as detailed in the report; and
2. Publicise the Schedule on Council’s website, at Council’s Service Centres and on the Inner West Council page in the Inner West Courier. |
BACKGROUND
Council has previously adopted a Meeting schedule of 2nd and 4th Tuesdays from February through to November and on 2nd Tuesday of December. Council also resolved in 26 June 2018 to schedule a 2 week meeting and briefing recess in July each year. The below schedule takes into account these previous Council resolutions and provides the meeting dates for 2019 for Council’s endorsement. It is anticipated that Councillor Briefings will commence on 5 February.
2019 Council Meeting Schedule
Tuesday 12 February |
Tuesday 26 February |
Tuesday 12 March |
Tuesday 26 March |
Tuesday 9 April |
Tuesday 23 April |
Tuesday 14 May |
Tuesday 28 May |
Tuesday 11 June |
Tuesday 25 June |
Tuesday 23 July |
Tuesday 13 August |
Tuesday 27 August |
Tuesday 10 September (Mayor and Deputy Mayor Election) |
Tuesday 24 September |
Tuesday 8 October |
Tuesday 22 October |
Tuesday 12 November |
Tuesday 26 November |
Tuesday 10 December |
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Nil.
CONCLUSION
Nil.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Quarterly update on Tenders awarded
Council at its meeting on 13 November 2018 resolved that the matter be deferred to the meeting to be held on 27 November 2018.
Prepared By: Joe Cavagnino - A/Group Manager Procurement and Fleet
Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
SUMMARY Following resolution by Council at its meeting on 3rd July 2018, a list of tenders awarded under delegation by the General Manager is reported to Council for its information. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT information on tenders awarded by the General Manager be received and noted. |
BACKGROUND
On 3rd July 2018, Council resolved that the General Manager be given the delegated authority to enter into Council contracts up to the value of $1,500,000.
Council further resolved:
2. Information on tenders issued and awarded under delegation by the General Manager be reported to Council for information only at the next possible council meeting.
Accordingly, this report provides advice to Council on tender contracts awarded by the General Manager that are below the $1,500,000 delegated amount.
For the quarter 1 July 2018 to 30 September 2018, the following tender and subsequent contracts were awarded:
Tender No
|
Description of Goods & or Services |
Awarded Tenderer |
Amount Inc GST |
T08-16
|
Replacement of the Chester Street Footbridge across Johnston Street Annandale |
Fleetwood Urban Pty Ltd |
$495,002.00 |
T11-17 |
Replacement of AKAC Fitness Equipment
|
Technogym |
$189,971.10 |
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Nil.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Draft Tree DCP - Endorsement for Exhibition
Prepared By: Gwilym Griffiths - Urban Forest Manger
Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
SUMMARY This report is seeking Council’s endorsement of the draft Tree Management Development Control Plan (DCP) to be placed on public exhibition for 28 days, in accordance with ‘Notice of Motion: Tree DCP Mail Out’ resolved at the 11th September 2018 Council meeting. The results will be presented to Council along with a final Tree Management DCP for adoption. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. Council resolve to publicly exhibit the draft Tree Management Development Control Plan for the Inner West, as detailed in ATTACHMENT 2 of this report, for a period of 28 days, to replace the existing tree management controls contained in: i. the Comprehensive Inner West Development Control Plan 2016 for Ashbury, Ashfield, Croydon, Croydon Park, Haberfield, Hurlstone Park and Summer Hill; ii. Leichhardt Development Control Plan 2013; and iii. Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011.
2. The results of the public exhibition and community engagement process are presented to Council along with a final Tree DCP for adoption.
|
BACKGROUND
At the 13 February 2018 Council Meeting (C0218 Item 11), it was resolved that Council:
Urgently review the DCP controls on trees relating to issues arising around damage to residents and properties and the financial burden to residents of tree retention ie. The requirement to obtain engineers and arborist reports and bring forward and expedite the harmonisation of Council DCP relating to tree preservation and replacement.
The following process has been followed:
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff resources have been allocated to the preparation and administration of this DCP amendment as part of their annual action plan.
Funding options for the grant scheme are currently being developed and will be presented to Council with the final Tree DCP for adoption.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The following teams have had input into the development of the draft Tree DCP: Strategic Planning; Legal Services; Development Assessment & Regulatory Services; and Environment & Sustainability.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Community consultation was undertaken as part of the discussion paper engagement process, comments received have been considered during the development of the Draft Tree DCP.
It is intended to undertake this exhibition process concurrently with the exhibition of the aligned DCP provisions currently being prepared by Strategic Planning. These are proposed to be reported to Council early in the new year with exhibition commencing shortly thereafter. This will result in all revisions to the 3 current DCP’s to align certain provisions being exhibited together.
Engagement will be carried out in accordance with ‘Notice of Motion: Tree DCP Mail Out’ at the 11th September 2018 Council meeting, where it was resolved that;
An LGA wide mail out calling on submissions on the new Tree DCP with information on what is happening in 5 ethnic languages, after the adoption of draft changes to the DCP.
CONCLUSION
The Draft Tree DCP has been developed to address the Council resolution 13 February 2018 Council Meeting and meet the requirements of Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 and other planning policy. It aims to strike a balance between ensuring adequate protection of people and property while also enabling an increase in urban canopy to achieve broader canopy targets.
1.⇩ |
Previous Council Report 25 September 2018 |
2.⇩ |
Draft Tree Management DCP |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy
Prepared By: Cathy Edwards-Davis - Group Manager Trees, Parks and Sports Fields
Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
SUMMARY The draft Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy was placed on public exhibition from 15 October 2018 to 12 November 2018. This report provides a summary of the outcomes of the public exhibition and community engagement process and presents the final Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy for adoption.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. Council adopt the Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy;
2. The 46 Clubs currently utilising sporting grounds in the Inner West be advised by email that the Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy has been adopted; and
3. Council rescind the Sports Ground Allocation Policy of the former Marrickville Council.
|
BACKGROUND
At the Council meeting on the 9 October 2018, the following was resolved:
THAT:
1. The draft Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days;
2. The 46 Clubs currently utilising sporting grounds in the Inner West be advised by email that the draft Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy is on public exhibition; and
3. The results of the public exhibition and community engagement process are presented to Council along with a final Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy for adoption.
The purpose of the Sporting Grounds Allocations Policy is to contribute to a Healthier Inner West by encouraging active sports participation. The Policy will also establish eligibility and the selection criteria for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds. The Policy has been developed based on the principles to be transparent, equitable and consistent.
The objectives of this Policy are as follows:
· To provide a transparent, equitable and consistent methodology for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds and facilities to sports clubs, sports associations, schools and tertiary education providers within the Inner West Council area.
· To provide a diverse range of opportunities for participation in sport, recreation and physical activity for Inner West residents.
· To provide access to sporting grounds and facilities which contribute to a Healthy Inner West and promote participation in active sport, physical activity and social connectivity.
· To ensure the opportunity for participation of a broad mix of groups, including participation of girls; women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities; seniors; and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
· To ensure that Council managed sporting grounds and facilities are occupied by inclusive, viable and sustainable sporting clubs and sporting associations.
· To ensure that access to sporting grounds by all users has regard to the sustainability and maintenance requirements associated with good sporting ground management.
The Policy proposes a hierarchy of use when allocating the sporting grounds.
Where only one applicant is requesting access to a sporting ground, in general this will be made available to them. Council staff will attempt to resolve conflicting requests through mutual agreement between users.
Where Council cannot resolve the conflicting request through mutual agreement, when required, competing requests will be assessed against weighted criteria with the allocation given to the applicant with the highest weighted score. These criteria include:
· Historical use of facilities
· Community based
· Membership numbers
· Tenancy record
· Access and equity
· Support for access and equity
· Leadership diversity
· Diversity of sports
· Traditional seasonal allocations
· History of Financial responsibility
· Club development
· Traffic and Parking Impacts
Allocation Process and Determination
The winter season Clubs have requested that the allocations process occur earlier. Previously the winter season allocation application forms were distributed in January. It is proposed that this will be brought forward to November. Further, it may be possible to bring this forward in the future pending the introduction of an online booking system which is currently being investigated.
As per the Council resolution on the 21 August 2018, the allocation determination will be made by staff. A review committee will be established to resolve club objections to decisions.
PUBLIC EXHIBITION: COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND OFFICER RESPONSE
The draft Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy was placed on public exhibition on Your Say Inner West from 15 October 2018 to 12 November 2018. The 46 Clubs currently utilising sporting grounds in the Inner West were advised by email that the draft Policy was on public exhibition. The project was promoted via social media channels and on Council pages in Inner West Courier as YSIW feature project on 6 November.
There were 133 aware participants who visited the Your Say project page with the Draft Policy, with 58 people downloading documents. 17 submissions were made on the Draft Policy through Your Say Inner West and three sporting clubs emailed Council staff directly. Two submissions indicated that they supported the draft Policy, 17 submissions indicated that they supported the draft Policy, with changes and one submission did not support the draft Policy.
Following the public exhibition period, the policy has been further updated to reflect community feedback prior to being considered and adopted by Council.
Community comments |
Council officer response |
This has been done without any community consultation , this affects Residents In surrounding area, This will have major implications for noise, amenity of residents, shared use of the park, parking and pedestrian and traffic safety.
|
The draft Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy was placed on public engagement through the Your Say Inner West website. The project was promoted via social media channels and on Council pages in Inner West Courier as YSIW feature project on 6 November. All members of the community were invited to comment on the draft Policy.
Parks Plans of Management (POM) outline the hours of use that sporting grounds may be utilised. The Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy does not seek to extend the hours of use of the sporting grounds, with the associated impacts such as noise and parking. The Policy aims to manage the activities within the already allocated hours of use as defined by the relevant POM. If an individual POM is reviewed in the future, this will be required to be placed on public exhibition, allowing for further community engagement.
|
I would support community organisations being prioritised higher and particularly above private schools. Eg football United does soccer programs for refugees.
|
Agreed. This is supported by the Weighted Criteria Score as outlined in the proposed Policy. |
Firstly, it would be good to have explicit mention of the similar policy for council owned swimming pools.
With respect to the Hierarchy of Use list: 1. I think that it makes more sense for the actual "Community based sporting club games" to be given a higher priority than "Community based sporting club training"
2. There is mention of "Major Council events endorsed by Council". I presume that minor events endorsed by council falls under "Community based organisations". If that is the case can it be changed to "Community based organisations including minor council endorsed events" or adding a separate item at a similar level. 3.
For public schools there is a location requirement of Inner West public schools but there is not a similar restriction for private schools, tertiary education providers or community based organisations.
Some alignment of points would be good.
|
Noted. This comment has been referred to the Aquatic Facilities Manager.
In practice training is largely on weekday afternoons and evenings and games on weekends. Generally, these two activities will not conflict. Training has lesser impact on the sporting grounds. These two priorities are both at the top of the eight different prioritised groups.
Agreed, this is unclear. This has been updated to say “Council events and events endorsed by Council.”
Agreed, this has been updated in the Policy. |
Council should never refuse the use of a sporting ground if there is no one using the sporting ground.
The hire fees are also too high. Sport has to be encouraged.
|
Agreed. The purpose of the Policy is to encourage active sports participation. Council will endeavour to accommodate seasonal and casual allocations, within the number of sporting grounds available and taking into consideration the long term whole-of-life cost of the assets including depreciation and maintenance. In general, Council will approve the use of a sporting ground if it is available. From time-to-time this may not be appropriate if for example, renovation works are underway or the activity proposed would have a detrimental impact on the turf (eg. driving food trucks onto a sporting ground).
Fees and charges are not considered as part of this Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy. The review of the fees and charges will be considered separately.
|
Exclusive use of Lambert Park by one club should not be the case. it's a highly sought after artificial surface that should be shared amongst the other major football clubs in our LGA.
|
As outlined in the Policy, Lambert Park is currently “out of scope” for this Policy as it is the subject of an existing lease.
The lease is due to expire in March 2020 and the ongoing use of Lambert Park can be reviewed at this time.
|
I think it is important to ensure availability for casual non-club group users - especially if you want to meet this objective: "To ensure the opportunity for participation of a broad mix of groups, including participation of girls; women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds." Piease see article attached. https://theconversation.com/pushing-casualsport-to-the-margins-threatens-cities-social-cohesion-92352
|
Sporting clubs have exclusive access where they have made a booking through Council. Outside of these times, casual use of the sporting grounds is supported and encouraged. Eg. people going for a jog or a small group of friends informally kicking a football.
Council is responsible for the management of all activities within parks and sporting grounds. There is an ongoing high demand for open space resources within the Inner West, particularly with increasing densities. Council must actively manage access to the parks.
|
[Club Name] welcomes Council’s decision to adopt a Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy incorporating a clear and consistent policy.
It is understood council may apply some elements of the draft policy to winter 2019 applications, which will shortly open. [Club Name] requests that careful consideration is given to the staged implementation of the policy where new requirements are introduced to ensure clubs are not disadvantaged by short lead times.
The policy would introduce significant new demands on clubs in collating information and administering compliance. Noting most small to medium sized sporting clubs are run largely or entirely by volunteers.
To a degree [Club Name] has reached a threshold in size as dictated by the availability of fields for training and games. Some clubs may not exercise such self regulation and this could disadvantage those who do.
The general presumption that where one only one application for a field is received by it will be granted is supported. It is suggested team numbers should be added to the later, in that this, rather than raw numbers, is basis for field occupation and use.
It may be that a district association wishes to hire on behalf of all or a subset of its clubs in the LGA. There would need to be some consideration of the detail of how this might operate (such as clubs agreeing to the application and then to the outcome, transparency on how an association sub-allocates to clubs).
Further, the selection criteria are worded as if clubs will be the only applicants, in that “club” is predominantly used. To accommodate other bodies it is suggested “club or other hirer” be used as appropriate.
[Club Name] has lower fees than many other soccer clubs because of the high level of volunteer effort. Fees are minimised as part of the club’s efforts for inclusive participation. It is requested council carefully consider the financial ramifications of its policy for any perverse effects on participation.
The policy at various points requires the supply of information. It would be useful to define acceptable documentation and how facts are to demonstrated. It is suggested the point at which information on the selection criteria will be requested be specified.
There is a public interest in maintaining a range of clubs in each sport. It would be undesirable for choice, diversity and heathy competition to have large clubs increase in size at the expense of smaller ones, or new ones. The presumption against substantial increases in allocation is noted and welcomed.
As a sporting club [Club Name] supports the principal of use of public transport, walking and cycling. However, there are practical limits to utilisation.
The club has storage in shipping containers at [location]. These have been used for many years. The club relies on this storage during the winter season and over summer. Were these longstanding arrangements to change the club would be disadvantaged both financially in having to make alternative arrangements and in the extra effort of transporting bulky equipment to and from fields.
Where a sporting club has use of facilities not owned or managed by council, such as a school or government agency, this should be taken into account by council in allocating its fields to avoid effective over-allocation.
It is not entirely clear from the draft if increased tenure would only be available where capital contributions are made, or if it may otherwise be requested by a club. This should be clarified in the final policy.
There are equity issues in managing increased tenure in exchange for increased fees. It may favour clubs with greater resources and those based in higher socioeconomic areas.
Hosting Neutral Games and Finals The current usage agreement is not clear of the permissibility of this.
State Sporting Association is defined but is not used in the policy. The policy refers variously to “governing sporting Association”, “all relevant sporting associations”, “parent associations” and “sports associations” which could give rise to some confusion. It is suggested a single defined term be used throughout for regional/district associations.
|
Should Council adopt the Policy on the 27 November 2018, it is proposed that the Policy will apply to the Winter 2019 allocations.
It is noted and understood that all/ most Clubs will be unable to demonstrate targeted programs and this will be an ongoing target and objective.
Section 6.5 of the Policy outlines that Hirers may request additional allocations. However, Council will not generally approve an individual Hirer substantially increasing their allocation. The purpose of this is to help ensure diversity of sporting code access.
Agreed. Team numbers have been added.
Agreed. If the Association is the hirer, the expectation is that they would also need to meet the objectives of the Policy.
Agreed. The use of association, applicant or hirer has been reviewed and utilised only where appropriate.
Fees and charges are not considered as part of this Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy. The review of the fees and charges will be considered separately.
Agreed. Further information on when selection criteria information is needed has been added to the Policy.
Agreed. Section 6.5 of the Policy outlines that Hirers may request additional allocations. However, Council will not generally approve an individual Hirer substantially increasing their allocation. The purpose of this is to help ensure diversity of sporting code access.
Noted. This is only one of the weighted selection criteria. There are a number of other factors which will also be considered in the allocation process.
The Policy outlines that hirers are not entitled to storage space. At this stage there are no plans to make changes to historical storage arrangements. Should changes be proposed in the future, this would be discussed with the relevant club.
Noted. This can be considered. It may be difficult for Council staff to do this, as this information is not always available.
Agreed. This has been clarified in the Policy.
Agreed. The Policy has been updated such that where a Club makes a capital contribution for extended tenure, the applicant must contribute an equivalent amount to Council to be used by Council to upgrade or renew priority sporting ground assets as identified in the Parks and Sportsfields Asset Management Plan. This would help address one of the adopted principles of equity.
Agreed. The Hiring Conditions have been modified to say that Games played on home grounds must be in accordance with the scheduled, home and away fixtures as determined by state sporting associations and any scheduled game must involve a home team, except where the club is hosting finals as scheduled by the state sporting association.
Agreed. The terminology has corrected in the Policy.
|
AFL NSW/ ACT and the Newtown Jets made the following comments:
The only item we would like reviewed is item 3.2 Out of Scope.
AFL NSW/ACT [and the Jets] has an agreement for the non-exclusive use of Henson Park till 30 September 2024. Should Henson Park be therefore added to the list of grounds which are out of the new policy?
|
As the Clubs have identified, there is a non-exclusive agreement between Council and AFL NSW/ ACT and the Newtown Jets.
Within the scope of the agreement, AFL and the Newtown Jets have prioritised access to the grounds. However, Council may also licence these grounds for use by other Clubs when not in use by AFL and Newtown Jets.
The Policy has been updated to reflect this.
|
In 6.2 of policy, could have public, tertiary and private schools at same level, and then preferences will first go to school's space (as a ratio to number of students) and then those who don't have enough space to run events.
|
The priority has been clearly set such that public schools have highest priority, followed by tertiary education providers and finally private schools. It is not recommended that these priorities be changed. |
In broad terms, our club is very supportive of the Draft Policy.
That the Winter Season be defined as starting on the 2nd Monday in March and ending on the 2nd Monday in September. Reason: It better reflects the actual usage required by Winter and Summer sports.
The definition of the pre-season allocation is too vague in its implementation to allow either winter or summer sporting clubs to plan the start of their seasons, knowing that preseason training is an integral part of all sports. Fields start to free up at the end of both seasons due to finals involving fewer teams. This decreased usage could allow maintenance to begin earlier on some fields. This approach would support the intention of 6.7. Out of Season Use; sporting clubs would have a greater incentive to notify council to identify those opportunities, knowing the benefit is delivered back to their members via earlier access pre-season.
6.6. Allocation Process & Determination - Item 8 Remove the sentence "Council will not deduct for wet weather". Reason: This statement is related to hire fees and should not be included in the Allocation Policy as it is not relevant to the operation of the Policy.
6.11. New/ Upgraded Sporting Grounds Remove the sentence in paragraph 2: "This historical usage does not extend to the new additional hours of use". Reason: The Weighted Criteria Score table is a comprehensive means of determining the selection criteria and is the centrepiece of the Grounds Allocation Policy. It would be contrary to the stated objective of the policy - to provide a "consistent methodology for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds and facilities" - if any other methodology were used to determine allocations for fields currently being used by local sporting clubs, regardless of whether they have been upgraded or not. Reason: Sporting clubs and their members are essential to gaining local support and funding for the upgrade of fields and facilities. A club's historical usage of a ground should continue to be recognised where they have been integral to the upgrade taking place. If club's cannot be certain of benefiting from the upgrade for which they and their members have lobbied, volunteered and raised funds then there will be no incentive for clubs to assist in the process. Reason: One of the most important outcomes of the Allocation Policy is to provide certainty for community based sporting clubs. It would be inequitable and unreasonable to expect a local club to compete for access to upgraded local grounds at which the club has proven historic usage, purely on the basis that the ground is now in better condition or offers better facilities.
6.11. New/ Upgraded Sporting Grounds Remove the part of the sentence in paragraph 3 that states: "or upgraded" so that the revised line reads "Should Council obtain new sporting grounds, access to these new facilities will be via a public, open, advertised Expression of Interest". Reason: On meeting the criteria as established in the Weighted Criteria Score table, sporting clubs with proven historic usage of a ground should retain/increase their allocation on that field if it is upgraded.
Games Add the following words at the end of the current sentence: "except where the club is hosting finals as scheduled by the parent association". Reason: Finals games are often played on neutral grounds.
Soccer Goals Amend the following line so that it reads: "The only approved method of affixing nets to goals is as per the goal manufacturer's instructions or by the use of velcro". Reason: some goal posts come with a nylon track system that allows nets to be affixed without velcro or any other type of strap.
|
Agreed. This definition can be changed. This can apply from Winter 2020. It is noted that the Winter 2019 allocation EOIs have already been distributed (which do not reflect this change). However, for Winter 2019, this request will be taken into consideration on a case-by-case basis.
Noted. Deductions are related to the fees and charges. However, they also represent a potential significant administration burden for staff in the allocations process and in the issuing of invoices (and/ or refunds). The need to avoid this administration burden needs to be highlighted in the Policy as well.
If a ground has historically been used for 30 hours per week by a club, as per the Policy, generally that club would continue to enjoy the use of those grounds for those 30 hours.
An upgrade may include a new synthetic turf field. In this instance, it would be anticipated that a significant number of additional hours could be utilised from these grounds. An additional 30 hours per week may be realised. It is intended that these 30 additional hours could be allocated to other potential applicants, including new and emerging sports. This reflects the objectives of the Policy to provide a diverse range of opportunities for participation in sports and to ensure the opportunity for participation of broad mix of groups, including participation of girls; women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities; seniors and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
Notwithstanding this, if a historical user has made a capital contribution to the upgrade, it is agreed that they should be the be predominant/ sole beneficiary of the additional hours. This would be discussed at the time of the contribution. As outlined in 6.10 Tenure & Capital Contributions, any proposal to accept a capital contribution from a Hirer and offer increased tenure and/ or decreased hire fees will be reported to Council, who will make the final determination as to whether to accept the capital contribution.
The sentence has been changed to read, “Should Council obtain new or upgraded sporting grounds (where the hours of use is substantially increased), access to these new facilities will be via a public, open, advertised Expression of Interest.”
The reason for this is as per the comment above.
Agreed. This has been changed in the Policy.
Agreed. This has been changed in the Policy.
|
Seven submissions were received from the community requesting exclusive off-leash areas within the Inner West, at specified times, for greyhound dogs.
|
The Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy was not developed to address this particular issue.
Some of Council’s sporting grounds are off-leash when not in use for sporting games or training. There is no capacity at the present time or in the foreseeable future for any team sports to be removed from sporting grounds to allow additional access for off-leash dogs (greyhounds or otherwise).
If Council were to develop exclusive off-leash area for greyhounds, this is likely to create a regional attractor. There is already an ongoing high demand for open space resources within the Inner West, particularly with increasing densities. In this respect, there are other larger areas within the greater Sydney metropolitan area which may be suitable for such use. I note that the NSW State Government supports the greyhound racing industry as well as regulating and monitoring the welfare of greyhounds. In this respect, sites controlled by the NSW Government may be better options for the Greyhound Group to investigate.
|
FURTHER AMENDMENTS
In response to feedback from various individual Councillors, the following amendments have also been incorporated into the proposed final Policy:
· “Hockey” has been added as a traditional winter sport in the definitions.
· In the Conditions of Seasonal Hire – Car Parking, “and visitors” has been added to the sentence, “Hirers are responsible for the conduct of their members in this regard.”
· Clarification has been made that the Policy does include Richard Murden netball courts.
· In the capital contribution section, an additional requirement has been added that where a Club makes a capital contribution for extended tenure, the applicant must contribute an equivalent amount to Council to be used by Council to upgrade or renew priority sporting ground assets as identified in the Parks and Sportsfields Asset Management Plan. This would help address one of the adopted principles of equity.
FORMER LEGACY COUNCIL/S’ POLICIES TO BE RESCINDED
In developing this new Policy, the Sports Ground Allocation Policy (former Marrickville Council) was considered. It is appropriate that on adoption of the new Policy, the former Sports Ground Allocation Policy be rescinded by Council. This former Policy is attached.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Staff resources have been allocated to the administration of this Policy as part of their annual action plan.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The Policy was considered by the Leadership Team. Their comments have been incorporated.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
The Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy Discussion Paper was emailed to all sporting clubs currently utilising sporting grounds in the Inner West on the 14 May 2018. The clubs were requested to provide feedback on the Discussion Paper by the 25 June 2018.
A workshop was held with the clubs on the 18 June 2018. 19 sporting club representatives attended the workshop. In addition, six written submissions were received from the clubs. The results from this engagement were presented to Council on the 21 August 2018. This report is attached.
The draft Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy was emailed to all sporting clubs currently utilising sporting grounds in the Inner West on the 17 October 2018. The clubs were requested to provide feedback on the draft Policy by the 12 November 2018.
The following diagram illustrates the process to develop the Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy.
Feedback from the Clubs and community representatives is discussed above in the report.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of this Policy is to contribute to a Healthier Inner West by encouraging active sports participation. The Policy will also establish eligibility and the selection criteria for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds.
1.⇩ |
Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy |
2.⇩ |
Former Marrickville Sports Ground Allocation Policy |
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Sporting Grounds Allocations Policy
Sporting Grounds Allocations Policy
DOCUMENT PROFILE
Title |
Sporting Grounds Allocations Policy |
Summary |
This Policy will contribute to a Healthier Inner West by encouraging active sports participation. The Policy establishes eligibility and the selection criteria for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds. |
Background |
The Policy provides a transparent, equitable and consistent methodology for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds and facilities |
Policy Type |
Council Policy |
Relevant Strategic Plan Objective |
Strategic direction 4: Caring, happy, healthy communities Outcome 4.3 The community is healthy and people have a sense of wellbeing: 1. Provide the facilities, spaces and programs that support wellbeing and healthy communities 2. Provide opportunities for people to participate in recreational activities they enjoy |
Relevant Council References |
Events in Parks Policy Park Access Application Park Plans of Management |
Main Legislative Or Regulatory Reference |
Local Government Act |
Applicable Delegation Of Authority |
As per Delegations Register |
Attachments |
See Appendixes |
Record Notes |
External available document |
Version Control |
See last page |
Document: |
Council Policy |
Uncontrolled Copy When Printed |
|
Custodian: |
Parks Planning & Engagement Manager |
Version # |
1 |
Approved By: |
Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields |
TRIM Ref # |
|
Adopted By: |
Council |
Publish Location |
Internet |
Adopted Date and Minute #: |
Xx / xx / xx |
Next Review Date |
XX / XX / xX |
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Policy is to contribute to a Healthier Inner West by encouraging active sports participation. The Policy will also establish eligibility and the selection criteria for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds.
2. OBJECTIVE
The objectives of this Policy are as follows:
· To provide a transparent, equitable and consistent methodology for the seasonal allocation of sporting grounds and facilities to sports clubs, sports associations, schools and tertiary education providers within the Inner West Council area.
· To provide a diverse range of opportunities for participation in sport, recreation and physical activity for Inner West residents.
· To provide access to sporting grounds and facilities which contribute to a Healthy Inner West and promote participation in active sport, physical activity and social connectedness.
· To ensure the opportunity for participation of a broad mix of groups, including participation of girls; women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities; seniors and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
· To ensure that Council managed sporting grounds and facilities are occupied by inclusive, viable and sustainable sporting clubs and state sporting associations.
· To ensure that access to sporting grounds by all users has regard to the sustainability and maintenance requirements associated with good sporting ground management.
3. SCOPE
3.1. In scope
This policy applies to the following sporting grounds within the Inner West:
Algie Park, Arlington Recreation Reserve, Ashfield Park, Balmain Road (Callan Park), Birchgrove Oval, Blackmore Oval, Camdenville Oval , Camperdown Oval, Centenary Park, Cohen Park, Easton Park, Glover Street (Callan Park), Hammond Park, Henson Park (outside of the non-exclusive Deed of Agreement), HJ Mahoney Memorial Reserve, King George Park, Leichhardt Oval # 2, Leichhardt Oval # 3, Mackey Park, Marrickville Park, Petersham Oval, Pratten Park, Richard Murden Netball Courts, SSC Leichhardt Campus, Steel Park, Tempe Recreation Reserve and Waterfront Drive (Callan Park).
This policy will apply to any new sporting grounds within the Inner West. See 6.9 New/ Upgraded sporting grounds for further information.
This policy applies to all sporting clubs, state sporting associations, schools, tertiary education providers and other organisations seeking an allocation to utilise Council sporting grounds and facilities.
3.2. Out of scope
This policy does not apply to those sporting grounds which are the subject of an existing long term (greater than one season) lease or licence, until such time as these existing leases/ licences expire. These grounds include:
Sporting Ground |
Organisation with Lease/ Licence |
Expiry of Lease/ Licence |
Centenary Park |
Super 6 Soccer Pty Ltd (Summer) |
March 2020 |
Lambert Park |
APIA Leichhardt Tigers Football Club |
March 2020 |
Pratten Park |
Western Suburbs District Cricket Club (Summer) |
August 2032 |
Canterbury District Soccer Football Association (Winter) |
March 2021 |
|
Tempe Reserve Netball Courts (part of Robyn Webster Sports Centre) |
Sydney University Sport and Fitness |
|
This policy does not apply to those sporting grounds which are the subject of a Deed of Agreement, within the terms of the non-exclusive Deed of Agreement and until such time as the Agreement expires. These grounds include:
Sporting Ground |
Deed of Agreement (Non-Exclusive) |
Expiry of Agreement |
Henson Park |
AFL NSW/ ACT (Winter) and Newtown Jets (Winter) |
September 2024 |
The above sporting grounds will be subject to the Policy (in scope) should the lease, licence or Deed of Agreement expire and it is not renewed.
New Leases, Licences and Deeds of Agreements
Should Council enter into a new lease, licence or Deed of Agreement with a club or state sporting association, the Policy would no longer apply to the relevant sporting ground.
Leichhardt Oval
This policy does not apply to allocations at Leichhardt Oval. The Application to hire Leichhardt Oval may be found on the Council website.
Events in Parks Policy and Guidelines
This policy does not apply to special events and one-off events. These activities are managed under the Events in Parks Policy and Guidelines.
4. DEFINITIONS
Allocation
An allocation is an agreement between Council and a hirer to utilise a Council sporting ground and/or facility. It is a short term licence (less than a year). An allocation allows a hirer non-exclusive use of a sports ground and/or facility at specific agreed times. Allocations can be annual, seasonal or casual in nature.
Applicant
An applicant includes any sporting club, state sporting association, community group, school, tertiary organisation or any other group or organisation that make an application for a seasonal hire allocation.
Casual Allocation
An allocation to a club, association, community group, school or commercial sporting provider to utilise a sporting ground or facility on a single occasion for a pre- determined fee. Seasonal allocation requirements are prioritised over casual allocations and are also subject to ground availability and condition.
Facilities
The buildings adjacent to sporting grounds, including
toilets, canteens, storerooms and change rooms.
Hirer
A hirer includes any sporting club, state sporting association, community group, school, tertiary organisation or any other group or organisation that hires a sporting ground.
In Season Allocation
During the summer or Winter Season as defined.
Lease
A Lease grants a tenant exclusive possession of a Council property and gives the tenant a proprietary interest in the Council Property which is binding on third parties. Leases will not generally be used for the tenure of sporting grounds.
Licence
Licences confer non-exclusive use of a licenced area for a specified period subject to payment of a licence fee. Multiple licences may be issued to multiple users of the same licenced area for different times. Licences can be for a one off use (permit or hire agreement) or regular ongoing use throughout a season (seasonal hire).
Pre-Season Allocation
A restricted allocation (subject to availability) to a hirer to utilise a Council sporting ground and/or facility at agreed times prior to the commencement of the competitive scheduled winter sporting season for the purpose of sports training and physical preparation for the winter season.
Seasonal Allocation
An allocation to a hirer to utilise a Council sporting ground and/or facility at agreed times throughout the summer or winter season.
School Allocation
An allocation to a school to utilise a Council sporting ground and/or facility during the day (between 9am – 3pm during school terms) at agreed times throughout the summer or winter season.
Sporting Grounds and Facilities
Council owned sporting infrastructure available for sporting use for training and game days.
State Sporting Association
A pre-eminent governing body for a sport in NSW
Substantial Increase
A substantial increase in allocations is greater than ten hours or greater than 10% of the hirer’s current allocation in one year (whichever is the lesser) AND/ OR greater than 20 hours or greater than 20% of the hirer’s current allocation over five years (whichever is the lesser).
Summer Season Allocation
An allocation to a hirer to utilise a Council sporting ground and/or facility at agreed times between the period of second Saturday in September and second Sunday in March (subject to maintenance needs).
Summer Sports (Traditional)
The following are traditional summer sports: athletics, baseball, cricket, oz tag, touch football, ultimate frisbee and six aside soccer,
Winter Season Allocation
An allocation to a hirer to utilise a Council sporting ground and/or facility at agreed times between the period of the second Monday in March and the second Friday in September (pre-season allocations may start earlier).
Winter Sports (Traditional)
The following are traditional winter sports: football (soccer), netball, rugby league, rugby union, hockey and Australian Rules football.
5. POLICY STATEMENT
The Inner West Council recognises that access to open space for sporting and recreational use is of strategic importance to residents who live, work and play in the Inner West. Access to sporting grounds, which provide for a diverse range of recreational opportunities, is important in contributing to a healthy Inner West.
The Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy establishes the eligibility and selection criteria to be applied when allocating use of Council’s sports grounds and facilities to sporting clubs, state sporting associations, schools, tertiary education providers and commercial operators within the Inner West Council Local Government Area.
Council allocates sporting grounds on a seasonal and casual basis. Council will endeavor to accommodate seasonal and casual allocations, within the number of sporting grounds available and taking into consideration the long term whole-of-life cost of the assets including depreciation and maintenance.
6. POLICY
6.1. Policy Principles
This Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy has been developed in accordance with the following principles:
· Transparent
· Equitable
· Consistent
These principles were discussed with the Inner West sporting clubs and associations in the development of this Policy.
Council staff will utilise the following hierarchy to prioritise the allocation of sporting grounds:
1. Community based sporting club training
2. Community based sporting club games
3. Council events and events formally endorsed by Council
4. Inner West public schools competitive sporting programs and physical education classes
5. Tertiary education providers
6. Inner West private schools competitive sporting programs and physical education classes
7. Community based organisations
8. Commercial organisations
6.3. Allocation Types
Council offers the following types of allocations for the use of sporting grounds and their associated facilities:
· Winter Season Allocation
· Summer Season Allocation
· Preseason Allocation (subject to availability)
· Casual Allocation (subject to availability)
· School Allocation
6.4. Applicant Eligibility Criteria
To be eligible to submit an application for a sporting ground and associated facilities, applicants must satisfy the following criteria:
· Submit to Council a completed and accurate Allocation Application Form/s by the advertised closing date; and
· Provide documented evidence that the majority of their membership resides within the Inner West Council local government area; and
· Have no outstanding debt with Council; and
· Provide a Certificate of Currency for public liability insurance of a minimum of $20 million. The policy must indicate that Inner West Council is noted as an Interested Party (Principal Indemnity Endorsement), and that the Business Activity shown on the Certificate of Currency must be appropriate and include functions such as organising and running a sporting event or sporting club or state sporting association; and
· Provide a copy of the applicant’s annual report, including the financial report; and
· Provide a copy of the applicant’s documented plan to increase participation of girls and women, culturally and linguistically diverse and socially disadvantaged people.
The applicant must satisfy the Eligibility Criteria outlined in 6.3 Applicant Eligibility Criteria. Once this is satisfied, Council will review allocation requests for sporting grounds sequentially as follows:
1. The hierarchy in 6.2 Hierarchy of Use will be utilised.
2. Where only one applicant is requesting access to a suitable sporting ground, in general this will be made available to them.
3. Council accepts that hirers require reasonable assurance that they will continue to be allocated seasonal use of sporting grounds to plan and manage their strategic plans effectively. Where a hirer continues to demonstrate membership numbers, Council will not unreasonably refuse to provide an allocation, consistent with the previous season’s allocations.
4. Hirers may request additional allocations. From year-to-year, Council will not generally approve an individual hirer substantially increasing their allocation. The purpose of this condition is to help ensure diversity of sporting code access.
5. Council encourages applicants to collaborate with each other. Should two or more applicants put forward a proposed sharing arrangement of a sporting ground, Council will give this favourable consideration.
6. Council staff will attempt to resolve conflicting requests through mutual agreement between applicants.
7. Where Council cannot resolve the conflicting request through mutual agreement, when required, competing requests will be assessed against the weighted criteria outlined below, with the allocation given to the applicant with the highest weighted criteria score. At this stage, applicants will be requested to submit information which demonstrates their capacity to address the weighted criteria.
Weighted Criteria Score
|
Criteria |
Principles |
Scoring |
Assessment Guide |
A |
Historical Use of Facilities |
Council will recognise applicants with a strong history at particular facilities. Council recognises that active sporting grounds are in high demand and priority access will be given to Inner West residents. Priority will be given to clubs which have the majority of members based in the Inner West. |
10 |
Historical home ground of Inner West sporting club (i.e. No other club has been based there) |
5 |
Inner West home based sporting club for more than ten years |
|||
3 |
Inner West home based sporting club for less than ten years |
|||
0 |
Applicant with no previous home within the Inner West |
|||
B |
Community Based |
Sporting grounds are a limited resource and must be utilised to provide maximum overall benefit to the community. Council recognises that sporting clubs provide community building benefits. |
5 |
Not-for-profit sporting clubs with demonstrated strong ties to the local community (e.g. community groups, schools) |
3 |
Not-for-profit sporting clubs with no demonstrated links to the local community |
|||
0 |
Commercial operators |
|||
0 |
No information provided |
|||
C |
Membership/ Team Numbers |
Sporting clubs and associations are instrumental in increasing positive social, cultural and economic benefits and developing community leaders. Participation levels are therefore a factor in the level of benefit to the community. If an applicant has declining membership/ teams, their hours of access may be decreased, they be relocated to an alternative venue more suited to the applicant’s level of usage or a secondary allocation may be given to another applicant to maximise use; |
5 |
Applicant membership numbers/ teams are steady or increasing |
3 |
Applicant membership numbers/ teams have declined in the last year |
|||
0 |
Applicant membership numbers/ teams have declined over the last three years |
|||
0 |
No information provided |
|||
D |
Tenancy Record |
Council recognises the social and cultural important of an applicant having a good relationship with Council, other park users and the local community. A history of compliance with all terms and conditions of hire is essential. Consideration will be given to factors such as only utilising the grounds during allocated hours, maintaining allocated sporting grounds and facilities in a clean and tidy manner, and no substantiated complaints from nearby residents. |
5 |
Good records of stewardship of sporting grounds. No impact on neighboring residents. No breaches in the previous five years. |
3 |
Fair record of stewardship. No impact on neighboring residents within the previous two years. No breaches in the previous two years. |
|||
0 |
Breach within the previous two years |
|||
E |
Access & Equity |
Ensuring the opportunity for participation of a broad mix of groups. Council will allocate ground to support sporting applicants which have programs to increase participation of girls; women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities; seniors and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. |
5 |
Three or more programs or support for people from a targeted group. |
3 |
Two programs or support for people from a targeted group. |
|||
1 |
One program or support for people from a targeted group. |
|||
0 |
Zero programs or support for people from a targeted group. |
|||
0 |
No information provided |
|||
F |
Support for Access & Equity |
Demonstrated long term support by applicants for increased participation of girls; women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities; seniors and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. |
5 |
Demonstrated increase in applicant membership numbers from a targeted group. |
1 |
Steady applicant membership numbers from a targeted group. |
|||
0 |
Declining applicant membership numbers from a targeted group. |
|||
0 |
No information provided |
|||
G |
Leadership Diversity |
Council will support sporting applicants which demonstrate increasing numbers of women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities; seniors and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds in positions coaching, leading, instructing, decision makers, officials and administrators at all levels. |
5 |
Demonstrated increase in applicant leadership diversity. |
1 |
Steady applicant leadership diversity. |
|||
0 |
Declining applicant leadership diversity. |
|||
0 |
No information provided |
|||
H |
Diversity of Sports |
Council will allocate grounds to encourage a diversity of sporting codes. Where a new and emerging sport can demonstrate that they have a plan for the ongoing success of the applicant for a number of years, Council will endeavor to accommodate their needs. For emerging applicants, the allocation of sporting grounds will not be based solely on applicant membership numbers. |
5 |
New or emerging sport, where the applicant can demonstrate a plan for ongoing success |
1 |
New or emerging sport, where the applicant cannot demonstrate a plan for ongoing success |
|||
I |
Traditional Seasonal Allocations |
Sporting grounds are a limited resource. Preference will be given to the traditional seasonal allocations. |
5 |
Request for a summer season allocation by a summer sport OR request for a winter season allocation by a winter sport. |
0 |
Request for a summer season allocation by a winter sport OR request for a winter season allocation by a summer sport. |
|||
J |
History of Financial Responsibility |
Sporting grounds are a limited resource and the costs are subsidised by Council. Priority will be given to fiscally responsible applicants. |
5 |
No outstanding debt with Council in the previous five years. |
3 |
Outstanding debt with Council in the previous five years, which has now been repaid. |
|||
No Allocation |
Current outstanding debt with Council. |
|||
K
|
Applicant Development |
Ensuring applicants have good policies and practices in place including risk management, child protection and anti-bullying to ensure a safe environment for all participants. Facility management, succession planning and organisation management structure documentation is also well regarded. |
5 |
Applicants with documented policies and initiatives to support volunteers. |
3 |
Applicants with policies in development |
|||
0 |
No documented policies or plains in place. |
|||
0 |
No information provided |
|||
L |
Traffic and Parking Impacts |
Traffic and parking impacts must be minimised for the amenity of the surrounding community. |
5 |
Applicants with documented policies to incorporate public and active transport in their organisation of activities. |
3 |
Applicants with policies in development. |
|||
0 |
No documented policies or plains in place. |
|||
0 |
No information provided |
School and Tertiary Organisation Selection Criteria
Council will review allocation requests for sporting grounds from school and tertiary organisations as follows:
· Priority will be given to schools and tertiary organisations as outlined in 6.2 Hierarchy of Use; and
· Priority will then be given to schools and tertiary organisations in accordance with the following hierarchy (in order):
1. No available grounds within the school/ tertiary organisation
2. Limited available grounds within the school/ tertiary organisation
3. Substantial available grounds within the school/ tertiary organisation
6.6. Allocation Process & Determination
The allocation process is undertaken as follows:
1. Staff will advertise for Expressions of Interest and distribute the Allocation Application Forms for the summer season by June and for the winter season by November (it may be possible to bring this forward in the future pending the introduction of an online booking system). Notwithstanding this, in all cases, it is the responsibility of the hirer to ensure that application forms are requested and received.
2. Summer applications are due back to Council in July and winter applications are due back in December. The due date will be stated on the application. Late applications will not be considered.
3. Council staff will assess the applications in accordance with 6.2 Hierarchy of Use, 6.3 Applicant Eligibility Criteria and 6.4 Selection Criteria. This process takes approximately one month.
4. The allocation determination will be made by Council staff as resolved by Council on the 21 August 2018.
5. Council staff will distribute the Draft allocations to the hirers for comment for a period of ten days.
6. Council staff will distribute the Final allocations. Council staff will advise hirers of any shut down or maintenance periods during the seasonal allocation (e.g. Easter) at the start of the season.
7. Any further requested changes to the allocation (e.g. as a result of increased / decreased registrations) will be accommodated subject to availability and consistency with the principles contained in this Policy.
8. Council will issue invoices for seasonal allocations one month after the commencement of the respective sporting season. Council will not deduct for wet weather.
9. At the start of each season, the seasonal allocations, including the relevant hirer, will be published on Council’s website (this will not include casual hirers).
6.7. Out of Season Use
Applicants are allocated grounds for the fixed summer or winter season only.
All applicants are required to notify Council’s Parks Planning and Engagement team two weeks prior to the season completion advising if sporting grounds are not required for finals. Subject to maintenance requirements, Council may permit the hirer in the following season to start training earlier.
Council may allow hirers to utilise the sporting grounds for out of season use if there are grounds available.
All commercial operators or associations running competitions must make sure that their competitions run within the winter and summer allocation periods. There is no provision for these competitions to overlap seasons or be moved to alternative sporting ground in the interim.
6.8. Sporting Ground Rest Periods
Sporting grounds will be managed to maximise long term usage and minimise over-use. Council will restrict sporting ground use in order to maintain safe playing surface conditions and minimise maintenance.
All of the sporting grounds will be rested (not utilised) for a minimum of one week between the seasons. Generally this will be in the last week of March and the first week of September. This may change annually if longer rest periods are required.
Council will advise the hirers at the start of the season, the week(s) that the sporting grounds will be not utilised.
All sporting grounds will be rested on Mondays, with the exception of those grounds listed in the table below.
Sporting Ground |
Exemption to use on Monday (Reason) |
Arlington Reserve |
Arlington Reserve is a synthetic turf sporting ground and as such it does not need to be rested. Arlington Reserve has a Management Plan in place. |
Hard surface courts (eg. basketball, netball, tennis, multi-purpose) |
Hard surface courts do not need to be rested. |
Henson Park |
Henson Park currently has training Monday to Friday evenings. The sporting grounds are rested during the daytime as there is no school usage |
King George Park |
Athletic events only, with minimal impact on the grounds. |
Synthetic Turf Sporting Grounds |
Should any new synthetic turf sporting grounds be installed by Council, these will not need to be rested. |
Tempe Reserve |
St George Oztag has been playing at Tempe Reserve on Monday nights (only) for many years. They have indicated that they would like this to continue. The exemption to use Tempe Reserve by St George Oztag on Mondays will be granted for a fixed period until 2021, to allow the Club time to make other arrangements. The Club will be given notice. |
6.9. Fees and Charges
The seasonal allocation of sporting grounds to hirers is subject to the payment of the relevant fees and charges. These fees and charges are updated annually and are advertised on Council’s website.
6.10. Tenure & Capital Contributions
Council is committed to the provision and maintenance of a range of well-maintained and safe sporting grounds and facilities to encourage informal and organised recreation activities consistent with community needs.
Council has an adopted Parks and Sportsfields Asset Management Plan which provides a comprehensive plan to ensure the delivery of services from parks and sportsfields infrastructure is provided in a financially sustainable manner. The asset management plan details information about infrastructure assets including actions required to provide an agreed level of service in the most cost effective manner while outlining associated risks. The plan defines the services to be provided, how the services are provided and what funds are required to provide the services over a 20-year planning period.
Long Term Leases/ Licences
Most parks are classified as community land. S46A(3) of the Local Government Act requires leases of community land greater than five years to be via public, open tender.
If applicants are seeking a lease/ licence of greater than five years, in the first instance, applicants should contact the Trees, Parks & Sportsfields service unit to discuss this process.
Short Term Licences
Council has no expectation that sporting clubs or associations will make a capital contribution to the development of a facility. In general, allocations will continue to be managed on a seasonal basis as outlined in this policy.
Notwithstanding this, Council aims to recognise and encourage organisations who do contribute to the development and/or upgrade of a Council facility. In recognition of a capital contribution, Council may (at its absolute discretion) provide the following:
· Increased tenure (up to a maximum of five years)
· Decreased hire fees
The following will be given consideration when determining whether to accept a capital contribution:
· The applicant seeking longer tenure must meet the following minimum criteria:
o The majority of their membership must reside within the Inner West Council local government area
o Not-for-profit sporting clubs with demonstrated strong ties to the local community (e.g. community groups, schools)
o Applicant membership numbers are steady or increasing
o Good records of stewardship of sporting grounds. No breaches in the previous five years.
o Demonstrated programs to support increased participation of girls; women; people from lower socio economic backgrounds; people with disabilities; seniors and/ or people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
o No outstanding debt with Council in the previous five years;
· Any improvements must be consistent with the Recreation Needs Study: A Healthier Inner West and the relevant park Plan of Management.
· Any improvements must have the appropriate planning approvals.
· The capital improvements must coincide with and not adversely impact on the needs of the other sporting ground users and the wider community.
· In addition to the amount contributed to apply for extended tenure, the applicant must contribute an equivalent amount to Council to be used by Council to upgrade or renew priority sporting ground assets as identified in the Parks and Sportsfields Asset Management Plan.
· Council must be willing and financially able to take on the increased maintenance and depreciation associated with the capital upgrade.
· No assumption should be made that Council will make a co-contribution to the capital improvements. Council may (at its absolute discretion) choose to partner with an applicant if the proposed works are already identified and funded in the Long Term Financial Plan and Parks and Sportsfields Asset Management Plan.
· Throughout the period of tenure, the licence agreement will require ongoing participation levels to justify the allocation of the facility and the ongoing financial viability of the organisation.
· Any substantial increase in hours (e.g. lights or synthetic surface) will require a public, open EOI process as outlined in 6.10 New/ Upgraded Sporting Grounds.
Organisations contributing toward the capital upgrade of Council facilities do so on the understanding that the facility remains in Council ownership and that Council will specify and project manage all capital construction works.
Increased Tenure
Increased tenure will be calculated as follows:
Length of Tenure |
Anticipated Capital Contribution |
1 season |
Advertised fees and charges for 1 year x 1 |
2 seasons |
Advertised fees and charges for 2 years (Inc. CPI) x 1.25 |
3 seasons |
Advertised fees and charges for 3 years (Inc. CPI) x 1.5 |
4 seasons |
Advertised fees and charges for 4 years (Inc. CPI) x 1.75 |
5 seasons |
Advertised fees and charges for 5 years (Inc. CPI) x 2 |
For example, if an applicant in year 2018 pays $1,000 and they are seeking a five year tenure, their capital contribution will be:
($1,000 + 1,030 + $1,061 + $1,091 + $1,126) x 2 = $10,618
A similar calculation will be utilised for decreased hire fees.
The capital contribution made by the applicant will be utilised as follows:
· 50% for the capital improvements nominated by the applicant
· 50% for capital improvements nominated by Council to upgrade or renew priority sporting ground assets as identified in the Parks and Sportsfields Asset Management Plan. These improvements may be located in another sporting ground.
Grant Funding Submissions
If requested by the Clubs, Council can be the lead applicants in grant funding submissions to State and Federal Governments and peak state sporting associations for infrastructure upgrades to Council grounds. Council staff will prepare the grant submission. Sporting Clubs will be required to assist in the provision of information to satisfy the grant funding application requirements.
Council Approval
Any proposal to accept a capital contribution from a hirer and offer increased tenure and/ or decreased hire fees will be reported to Council, who will make the final determination as to whether to accept the capital contribution.
6.11. New/ Upgraded Sporting Grounds
Council may take possession of new sporting grounds. Council may also upgrade sporting grounds such that the hours of use for those grounds is substantially increased (e.g. through new floodlighting or a synthetic surface).
As outlined above, the allocation of sporting grounds will recognise the historical usage of the grounds. This historical usage does not extend to the new additional hours of use.
Should Council obtain new or upgraded sporting grounds (where the hours of use is substantially increased), access to these new facilities will be via a public, open, advertised Expression of Interest. The Expression of Interest will be advertised in the local newspaper. The criteria for allocation of the new or upgraded sporting grounds will be outlined in the advertisement.
Any hirer using a sporting ground or facility which is in breach of the Conditions of Hire outlined in Annexure 1 – Conditions of Seasonal Hire as attached may be subject to the following:
· Exclusion from future allocations
· Monetary penalty
Warnings
Where it is alleged that a hirer has breached the Allocation conditions, the following will be undertaken:
· On the first alleged breach, Council staff will investigate the breach and make an assessment. The hirer will be notified in writing of the breach assessment.
· On the second alleged breach, Council staff will investigate the breach and make an assessment. If upheld, the hirer will be provided with the breach assessment and a first written warning.
· On the third alleged breach, Council staff will investigate the breach and make an assessment. If upheld, the hirer will be provided with the breach assessment and a second written warning.
· On the fourth alleged breach, Council staff will investigate the breach and make an assessment. If upheld, the hirer will be provided with the breach assessment and a final written warning. At this point, at its absolute discretion, Council may cancel the hirer’s allocations for the season.
Future Allocations
Council will excluded an applicant from future allocations for the following:
· If the applicant has an outstanding debt with Council; OR
· If the applicant has been issued with a final written warning in the preceding season.
Council may consider excluding an applicant from future allocations for the following:
· If the applicant has been issued with one or more written warnings in the preceding season; OR
· If the damage caused by the applicant impacts on the start of the season for the subsequent sporting ground hirer.
Monetary Penalties
All damage to Council property, either deliberate or accidental should be reported to Council as soon as possible, outlining full details of the incident.
After the season, excepting usual seasonal wear and tear, the sporting ground and facilities are to be returned to the same condition as they were prior to the season. In the event that the hirer does not hand back the site in the same condition, Council will clean and repair the sporting ground and facilities to the standard required by Council at the hirer’s cost.
During the season, Council will on-charge any additional costs incurred by Council to the hirer including:
· The cost of monitoring activities for compliance with conditions of consent; and
· The cost to clean up waste from a park, sporting grounds or change/ amenity building; and
· The cost to repair unreasonable damage after use; and
· Use of canteens and kiosks.
An after-hours callout fee applies where council is required to attend the park to assist the hirer with matters such as access. Fees will be on a cost recovery basis. A minimum of 4 hours of staff overtime will be payable.
7. APPEAL PROCESS
Applicants may only make an appeal if they have no outstanding debt with Council. Appeals may only be made by not-for-profit volunteer based sporting clubs.
Should an individual Club be unsatisfied with the allocations made available to them, the following appeal process will be followed:
· The Club is to lodge a written appeal, outlining their reasons for appealing. The appeal must be received within two weeks from the date when final allocations are issued by Council. The written appeal is to be signed by the state sporting association (where there is one). The Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields (or equivalent) will review the appeal and advise the Club of:
o The outcome of the appeal and any action taken;
o The reason/s for the decision;
o The proposed remedy or resolution/s that will be put in place (if needed); and
o Any options for review
· Should the Club still be unhappy with the allocation, they may lodge a second written appeal, further outlining their reasons for appealing. The second appeal, along with the results of the first appeal will be referred to the Allocations Review Committee. The Allocations Review Committee will respond to the Club with the following:
o The outcome of the appeal and any action taken;
o The reason/s for the decision; and
o The proposed remedy or resolution/s that will be put in place (if needed).
The elected Councillors will play no part in the allocation appeal process.
Allocations Review Committee
Terms of Reference will be prepared for the Allocations Review Committee in accordance with the following:
· Summer and winter season Allocations Review Committees will be established.
· Membership of the Allocations Review Committee is to be made up of Council officers and members of all relevant state sporting associations.
· The relevant state sporting associations must have sporting clubs which are locally based with the Inner West area.
Council
The elected Councillors may only overturn a staff allocation determination or an Allocations Review Committee determination through a resolution of Council via a Notice of Motion to Council.
8. RESPONSIBILITIES
Parks Planning & Engagement Staff, within the Trees, Parks & Sportsfields service unit are responsible for administering, assessing and determining the allocations in accordance with the above methodology.
The Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields (or equivalent) is responsible for reviewing first appeals in accordance with the above methodology. The Allocations Review Committee is responsible for reviewing second appeals in accordance with the above methodology.
The Finance service unit are responsible for issuing invoices to the hirers, on advice from the Trees, Parks & Sportsfields service unit.
Trees, Parks & Sportsfields service unit are responsible for maintenance of the sporting grounds.
The Properties, Major Building Projects and Facilities team are responsible for maintenance and cleaning of the facilities.
9. ASSOCIATED PROCEDURES
The following are related legislation, policies and procedures:
· Inner West Events in Parks Policy and Guidelines
· Park Plans of Management
· Inner West Council Park Use & Access Guidelines
· Inner West Council Fees & Charges
· Inner West Mobile Food Vending Policy
· Local Government Filming Protocol
· Inner West Council Events Policy
· Local Government Act 1993 (NSW)
· Crown Lands Act
· Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)
· Local Environment Plans
· Development Control Plans
· Food Act 2003 (NSW)
· Food Regulation 2015 (NSW)
· Food Standards Code
· Liquor Act 2007 (NSW)
· Smoke-Free Environment Act 2000 (NSW)
· Smoke-Free Environment Regulation 2016 (NSW)
· Callan Park (Special Provisions) Act 2002 (NSW)
Version Control - POLICY HISTORY:
The history of modifications and approval to the Policy must be detailed in the table below post adoption
Governance Use only:
Version |
Amended By |
Changes Made |
Date |
TRIM # |
1 |
Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields |
New IWC Policy |
October 2018 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
Annexure 1 – Conditions of Seasonal Hire
By submitting a Sporting Grounds Allocation Application, applicants and hirers are agreeing to the Conditions of Season Hire outlined below.
Written Approval
Hirers may only utilise the sporting grounds when they have an agreed allocated booking. Council will provide written approval of allocations. This is to help ensure that the sporting grounds have adequate rest periods and to maintain the sporting grounds in the long term.
Where a hirer is found to be playing on a sporting ground outside their allocated booking, they will be subject to the penalties outlined in 6.11 Damages and Breaches.
Subletting
Hirers may not sublet or reallocate grounds and/ or facilities to other users on a casual or seasonal basis. All grounds allocations must be approved by Council. This is primarily to manage risk and ensure public safety.
Hours of Operation
The standard hours of operation for sporting grounds within the Inner West are as follows:
· Mondays - all sporting grounds are closed for rest and maintenance (with the only exceptions noted in 6.8 Sporting Ground Rest Periods)
· Tuesdays to Fridays 7.00 am – 9.00 pm
· Saturday 8.00 am – 6pm.
· Sunday 8.00 am – 5pm
Any exception to the standard hours of operation must be approved by Council in writing.
Games
Games played on home grounds must be in accordance with the scheduled, home and away fixtures as determined by state sporting associations and any scheduled game must involve a home team, except where the club is hosting finals as scheduled by the state sporting association.
Availability of Grounds Outside Allocations
Sporting grounds and facilities are not available for use outside the approved times unless prior arrangements have been confirmed with the Parks Planning and Engagement team. Where such use is permitted, the casual hire charges will apply.
Should any hirer find it necessary to alter the times of ground usage during the season, arrangements should be made with the Parks Planning and Engagement team prior to any changes being made.
Ground Closures
Council reserves the right to close any sporting ground and/ or facility due to inclement weather, to protect the playing surface and other assets, due to safety concerns, to reduce risk to players and the public or to allow the completion of capital and maintenance works. This decision is not negotiable.
Council staff inspect the sporting grounds regularly, as part of ongoing maintenance. Hirers are also required to conduct pre-match ground assessments and address any hazards.
In the event of inclement weather conditions, Council will inspect each ground and determine its suitability for use.
Council will close grounds during inclement weather on weekdays to prevent playing surface deterioration, in preference to match play on weekends.
Council will assess and notify users of sporting ground closures through the following means:
· Council website (https://www.innerwest.nsw.gov.au/explore/parks-sport-and-recreation/sporting-ground-status)
· Wet weather line on 9367 9190
· Twitter: @IWCsportgrounds
· Open and Closed signs at the sporting grounds (where available).
Council staff will update the ground closure notifications by 10am for the Schools and 3pm for the evening hirers.
If during the season, the condition of the sporting ground deteriorates, Council may, at its absolute discretion reduce the hours or cancel the right of a hirer to use a sporting ground for health and safety and/ or maintenance reasons.
Council will not be held responsible for relocating or finding alternative sporting grounds for the hirers. Council will not be held responsible for any costs incurred by a hirer relocating to an alternative venue due to ground closures.
No refunds will be provided for closures associated with inclement weather. It is noted that Council heavily subsides the management and maintenance of access to sporting grounds for community access.
Other Users
Outside of the agreed allocation hours to hirers, Council retains the right to make the sporting grounds and facilities available to casual hirers.
Member Behaviour
The hirer is responsible for the satisfactory conduct of all members and persons attending their training/ games/ utilising the sporting ground. The hirer shall ensure that the amenity of property owners adjoining parks is not disturbed by excessive noise, offensive language, poor behaviour or any other activity likely to cause unreasonable disturbance.
Emergency Access
Council will issue keys to seasonal sporting ground hirers. Access to the venue must be maintained for emergency vehicles. Hirers, if onsite, are responsible for allowing access in the case of an emergency.
Storage Allocation and Containers
Hirers are not entitled to storage space. If storage is available at the sporting ground, Council may at its absolute discretion provide hirers with access to this space. Council will at its absolute discretion determine the design, placement and size of storage space made available to hirers.
Any storage will be approved on a seasonal basis. Council staff may direct hirers to remove any items stored at the end of the season.
No new shipping containers, utilised for storage, will be permitted within the Inner West.
Sporting Ground Damage
When undertaking training, hirers are encouraged to rotate their training/ drill areas within the sporting grounds to reduce wear and tear, e.g. By moving goal mouths. This minimises damage to the grounds and potential risk of injury to players. Council staff can work with the hirers on potential options to facilitate this.
Seasonal Changeover
All hirers are required to notify Council’s Parks Planning and Engagement team two weeks prior to the season completion advising if sporting grounds are not required for finals.
Sporting Forum
A seasonal sporting forum will be held twice yearly (generally March and September). Every hirer is generally expected to send a representative to attend this forum. A maximum of two representative committee members per hirer may attend.
Car Parking
Car Parking is restricted to designated car parks only. At no times are cars allowed on parks or sporting grounds without the approval of Council. Hirers are responsible for the conduct of their members and visitors in this regard. It is the hirer’s responsibility to monitor and control car parking.
Soccer Goals
Soccer Nets are not to be secured to soccer goals using electrical tape (or any other tape) which is permanently affixed and/ or leaves a residue. The only approved method of affixing nets to goals is as per the goal manufacturer's instructions or by the use of Velcro.
Floodlighting
Council is responsible for the maintenance of all floodlighting on sporting grounds. Hirers will be provided with access to floodlighting at the commencement of the season once seasonal allocations are finalised. Training on sporting grounds must cease by 9pm with the floodlights automatically going off at 9:15pm (if not turned off earlier by the hirer). This does not apply to Arlington Reserve (9:30pm) and Tempe Reserve (10pm). Any faults associated with floodlight use are to be reported to Council.
Marking of Grounds
Council is responsible for the marking of all sporting grounds. The hirers may not linemark the grounds.
Maintenance of Baseball Diamonds
Council is responsible for the maintenance of baseball diamonds. The hirers may not undertake these works. Nominated hirer representatives may provide advice to Council on the formation of the baseball diamond at the commencement of the baseball season.
Cricket Covers
Council is responsible for the maintenance and preparation of the wicket block and outfield. The ownership and management of cricket wicket covers lies with the respective cricket clubs or association. The home team is responsible for the covering, removal and storage of cricket covers where inclement weather is forecast. Cricket covers are to be stored appropriately and not left on turf areas where they may damage the turf surface.
Waste
Council provides bins at each sporting ground. All hirers are responsible for waste generated from their respective sporting activities. Hirers are responsible for ensuring that the sporting grounds are left in a clean state. At no time are hirers permitted to store or stack waste next to bins. Hirers found to have stored waste next to bins will be charged for the removal and disposal of such waste by Council.
Advertising and Sponsorship
No permanent advertising may be displayed at the sporting grounds. Seasonal hirers may display advertising signage during their allocated sporting ground hours only. With the exception of fences, advertising may not be affixed to the facilities. Advertising is limited to temporary banner signage only. Advertising must not include alcohol, soft drink, fast food, firearms, pornography or tobacco sponsorship.
Smoking
Smoking is prohibited on all Council sporting grounds. All hirers are responsible for informing their members and educating sporting ground visitors that sporting grounds are smoke free.
In addition, smoking is not permitted in the following areas:
· Within any structures;
· Within 10 metres of children’s play equipment in outdoor public places;
· Spectator areas at sports grounds or other recreational areas used for organised sporting events;
· Within 10 metres of a food fair stall/ kiosk/ canteen.
Selling of Goods
Hirers may only sell food, drinks (non-alcoholic) and raffle tickets.
Public Address System
No public address (PA) system or electronically operated sound equipment shall be used unless approved by Council. Sound levels must not exceed LAeq 15 minute ≤ 65 dB(A) when measured at the nearest affected receiver (resident or business).
Good Sports
Council expects all hirers to demonstrate respect towards each other and towards Council staff.
All Inner West sporting clubs must be accredited with Good Sports. The Good Sports program is a preventive health initiative. It’s implemented voluntarily through community sporting clubs; helping clubs to promote healthier, safer and family-friendly environments and behaviors.
Alterations and Building Works
The hirer may not make alterations, additions or deletions to the facilities or any Council assets without first obtaining permission in writing from Council as the owner of the land and buildings. If works are approved, they shall be carried out under the supervision of Council.
Buildings, improvements, additions and extensions, if approved, once built become the absolute property of Council without the hirer being entitled to any payment or compensation in request thereof.
Dogs
Some of the sporting grounds are off-leash for dogs when there is no organised, approved hiring of the sporting grounds. Signage will be in place onsite to indicate if the sporting grounds are off-leash for dogs.
The following sporting grounds are off-leash for dogs when there are no approved bookings
· Balmain Road Sporting Ground
· Blackmore Oval
· Cohen Park
· Easton Park
Glover Street Sporting Ground
· HJ Mahoney Reserve
· King George Park
· Leichhardt #2
· Leichhardt #3
· Waterfront Drive Sporting Ground
If there are any issues with dogs off leash during booking times, hirers are asked to contact Council Rangers on 02 9392 5000.
Coaching Clinics
All school holiday coaching clinics for sport within the Inner West LGA must be run through a registered Inner West sporting club with clinics and training dates approved by Council.
School Allocations
Schools must submit an application form for all usage of the sporting grounds (even if Council does not charge for this usage).
Activities Requiring Approval
The following activities require an approval from Council in writing:
· Filming (commercial);
· Selling or consuming alcohol;
· Installing any structure, screen, awning, sign, enclosure, equipment, stalls or amusement devices;
· Exhibiting or distributing advertisements or handbills;
· Any use that brings in a third party supplier, including amusement devices, formal catering, etc.
Prohibited Activities
The following activities are not permitted within any park or sporting ground:
· Tree pruning
· Trench digging
· Attaching signs or structures to trees or Council signage
· Archery; golf; go karting (or using other motorised equipment); paintball; laser tag; riding horses; driving of model cars; sale or use of glass receptacles; camping or lodging overnight; possession or utilisation of any firearms; coal BBQs; lighting candles; lighting fires (this excludes utilising the Council provided BBQs).
Council discourages the use of balloons, plastic straws, glitter, party poppers and confetti in parks and discourage Colour Run events.
Management Plans
Council may require the hirer to prepare and implement management plans. The size and nature of the activities being held on the sporting ground will determine if the hirer must prepare the following, for approval by Council:
· Prepare and implement a Traffic Management Plan
· Prepare and implement a Risk Assessment and Management Plan
· Prepare and implement an Emergency Management Plan
· Provide security staff
· Undertake community notification of the activities
· Install temporary fencing around the perimeter of the activities
· Install Variable Message Signs in advance of the activities
· Prepare a First Aid Plan and provide first aid staff
· Provide toilet facilities (in addition to existing park public toilets)
· Prepare and implement a Waste and Litter Management Plan
· Install “No Smoking” signs throughout the venue
Additional Conditions
In consideration of the hirer’s proposed activities, Council at its sole discretion may apply additional conditions of approval, as deemed necessary.
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Events in Parks Policy
Prepared By: Cathy Edwards-Davis - Group Manager Trees, Parks and Sports Fields
Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
SUMMARY The draft Events in Parks Policy was placed on public exhibition from 20 September 2018 to 14 November 2018. This report provides a summary of the outcomes of the public exhibition and community engagement process and presents the final Events in Parks Policy for adoption.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. Council adopt the Events in Parks Policy;
2. The known Event Organisers who currently manage events in Inner West parks be advised that the Policy commences on 1 January 2019;
3. Council rescind the Event Management Manual of the Leichhardt Council; and
4. Council staff negotiate with Athletics Australia and enter into an Agreement on the basis of the responsibilities outlined in the report below.
|
BACKGROUND
Council is responsible for the management of all activities within parks, reserves, sporting grounds and public open space. There is an ongoing high demand for open space resources within the Inner West, particularly with increasing densities. Council must actively manage access to the parks.
Events are fun and entertaining, and provide opportunities for large and small communities to connect and safely share enjoyable and inspiring experiences. Events can be informative, build community knowledge, and raise awareness to develop a shared understanding of social, economic or environmental issues. Events can build capability within a community, develop a sense of community spirit, identity and belonging.
Council encourages the use of parks for events as they help contribute to the health, wellbeing and liveability of the Inner West. It is Council’s objective to ensure that park events are suitable and managed in a manner which is safe and which is appropriate to the local environment and surrounding community.
At the Council meeting on the 11 September 2018 a draft Events in Parks Policy and Events in Parks Guidelines were considered. Council resolved:
THAT:
1. The draft Events in Parks Policy be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days;
2. The results of the public exhibition and community engagement process are presented to Council along with a final Events in Parks Policy for adoption;
3. The Events in Parks Guidelines be noted; and
4. The words ‘discourages the use of’ be inserted at the beginning of condition 44 of the Park Event Conditions included in the Policy.
PUBLIC EXHIBITION: COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND OFFICER RESPONSE
The draft Events in Parks Policy was placed on public exhibition on the Your Say Inner West from 20 September 2018 to 14 November 2018. Known Event Organisers who currently manage events in Inner West parks were advised by email that the draft Policy was on public exhibition.
102 people visited the Your Say website with the Draft Policy, with 57 people downloading documents. Eight people were engaged and made a submission on the Draft Policy. Three people indicated that they supported the draft Policy, two people indicated they supported the draft Policy with changes. Three people did not support the draft Policy.
Following the public exhibition period, the policy has been further updated to reflect community feedback prior to being considered and adopted by Council.
Community comments |
Council officer response |
Any planned event which has any commercial content whatever should be totally banned in public parks, or other public places. Public parks are there for when members of the public may need them. Their availability for public use must not be dictated to by the commercial whims and preferences of commercial entities. For example, a stressed citizen, seeking solitude, must have the space available when required, not at a time dictated by commercial interests. Too many times i have entered into public parks, to find portion of the park fenced off for a private function, usually with the attendant loud music, or car parking etc. Any form of leasing arrangement for commercialised functions would not result in fainess, because Council is incabable of properly and fully administering the operation of such functions. Nor would residents or the public generally, have any idea whether a given function was authorised by Council, or not.
IF Council decides to allow commercialised functions in parks, no function or any group of functions should be allowed to occupy any more than 10% of the public park at any one time. The entity holding the function must fund the necessary security and traffic control arrangements, including pedestrian traffic.
|
Council encourages the use of parks for events. Some commercially run events may still contribute to the health, wellbeing and liveability of the Inner West.
Some events may be not-for-profit in general but have a part commercial component to them (eg. food trucks at events).
When assessing the suitability of any commercially run event, staff give consideration to factors such as broad community appeal and accessibility. Council staff have in the past refused events which proposed to fence off the majority of a park, charge a substantial entry fee and therefore exclude many community members from attending the event.
It is noted that any commercial event must pay full fees and charges, including waste fees and any costs associated with traffic management controls. |
This is far too bureaucratic. Fees, Schedules and 4 weeks notice kills all spontaneity and drains organisers of the will to live. We should be able to just turn up with a sound system and play some tunes till a reasonable hour (determined by proximity to residences). At the very most it should just be a 2 minute phone call to council to let them know to put more bins out.
We could trial it in a section of one park for a bit. Reclaim The Streets would be happy to curate it.
|
Council is responsible for the management of all activities within parks, reserves, sporting grounds and public open space. There is an ongoing high demand for open space resources within the Inner West, particularly with increasing densities. Council must actively manage access to the parks.
Council encourages the use of parks for events as they help contribute to the health, wellbeing and liveability of the Inner West. It is Council’s objective to ensure that park events are suitable and managed in a manner which is safe and which is appropriate to the local environment and surrounding community.
It is noted that for a Park Casual Event of less than 30 people, no approval is needed from Council (subject to the conditions as outlined in the Policy).
The Parks Planning & Engagement team will act as the contact point for Event Organisers who are proposing to hold an event in a park. The Parks Planning & Engagement team will liaise with the relevant internal Council teams such as the planners and traffic engineers, on behalf of the Event Organiser. The Event Organiser will not need to negotiate multiple approval processes through Council. This is an improved service to the community, by offering them a “one-stop-shop” solution for the approval of an event in a park.
|
Park facilities are well managed by the community including fitness, other non-commercial & not for profit events. Applications for use of park facilities should continue to not be required for non-commercial & not for profit events of any size. |
Council is responsible for the management of all activities within parks, reserves, sporting grounds and public open space. There is an ongoing high demand for open space resources within the Inner West, particularly with increasing densities. Council must actively manage access to the parks.
Council encourages the use of parks for events as they help contribute to the health, wellbeing and liveability of the Inner West. It is Council’s objective to ensure that park events are suitable and managed in a manner which is safe and which is appropriate to the local environment and surrounding community.
It is noted that for a Park Casual Event of less than 30 people, no approval is needed from Council (subject to the conditions as outlined in the Policy).
|
It would be good if the list of events could be expanded
to encompass council events as well.
|
Agreed. The Events in Parks Policy also applies to Council run events. This has been added to the Policy, for clarity.
It is Council’s objective to ensure that park events are suitable and managed in a manner which is safe and which is appropriate to the local environment and surrounding community. Events will be assessed within the parameters of this objective. If it is suitable to have a non-Council event on the same weekend as a Council event then this will be permitted. If the impact would be too great, then only one of the events may be permissible. Council staff would work with Event Organisers to find another suitable venue and/ or date for the event.
|
1. The policy needs to be coordinated with policy for
events run by the Council, which does not have much transparency in its application.
For instance, since the council merger, the Council has started banning dogs
from the offleash area in Enmore Park for some events (and days leading up to
the events), with the event manager claiming it was published and advertised
policy. Despite having my contact details she has yet to provide the proof
requested. I have not been able to locate anything on the Marrickville or
Inner West council sites.
|
Agreed. The Events in Parks Policy also applies to Council run events. This has been added to the Policy, for clarity.
The Inner West Council does not currently have a Companion Animal Management Policy. However, staff are in the process of preparing this.
Agreed. Waste management is an important component of event management. The Policies outlines, after the event, the site is to be returned to the same condition as it was in prior to the event. Clean-up must be within two hours to prevent litter spread or within a practicable timeframe dependent on the size of the event (whichever is the lesser). In the event that the Event Organiser does not hand back the site in the same condition, Council will clean and repair the venue to the standard required by Council at the Event Organiser’s cost.”
The Events in Parks Guidelines, which complement the Policy, states, “Event Organisers are responsible for developing a Waste and Litter Management Plan, which must be submitted to Council for approval, and must include:…A list of actions required before, during and after the event to ensure waste and litter is managed and to ensure the safety of event staff and participants;…The Event Organiser must ensure that the venue and the surrounding area is maintained in a clean and tidy condition throughout the event, including the bump-in and bump-out phases. All waste and general rubbish are to be cleared on a regular basis. All waste is to be contained inside bins and serviced through the event to ensure bins do not overflow.” |
Athletics Australia Partnership
At the Council meeting on the 27 February 2018, a Notice of Motion was considered with regards to a partnership with Athletics Australia. Council resolved:
THAT Council:
1. Endorse a partnership between Inner West Council and Athletics Australia for the purpose of developing a template that can make it easier for organisations to establish and manage fun runs and other athletics events;
2. Officers ensure that the Policy meets the needs of Inner West Council; and
3. Officers provide a report to Council on the final Policy, with recommendations on how it can be implemented in the inner west local government area.
Proposal from Athletics Australia
Athletics Australia has the following objectives:
· Grow Recreational Running/Walking connections by 2020.
· Position Athletics Australia as the leading Authority for Recreational Running/Walking in Australia.
· Continue to build innovative, market driven programs and services that deliver positive outcomes for Australian Runners/ Walkers;
· To improve the health of Australians with a particular focus on inactive groups, women and socially disadvantaged.
Athletics Australia have identified that Event Organisers may experience difficultly in preparing for and supporting an athletics event. Athletics Australia has approached Council with a proposal to partner with them to guide the instigation and organisation of athletics events in the LGA and across Australia. Athletics Australia have developed a company called iRun 2.0, a dedicated business focused on the growth of recreation running and walking.
In summary, the proposal from iRun 2.0 and Athletics Australia is as follows:
· iRun would develop their website to include a sanctioning/ licencing portal that athletics Event Organisers could log into and it would provide a “one stop” shop providing what they need to operate and manage an athletics event.
· Athletics Australia, through iRun 2.0 would become the regulatory arm of government, removing layers of bureaucracy involved in the approving events.
· iRun 2.0 would connect sanctioned events to walking and running enthusiasts.
· A best practice framework and risk management protocol would be developed with Council and used by Athletics Australia for running and walking events.
iRun 2.0 intend to charge athletics Event Organisers for use of their services and they have developed a pricing structure based on the event type, distance and size.
Proposed Responsibilities
It is noted that Council has a duty of care to the broader community regarding the use of public spaces and it cannot devolve itself of its statutory obligations. Athletics Australia cannot become the regulatory arm of government. Therefore it is recommended that the following responsibilities be outlined in any Agreement between Council and Athletics Australia.
Athletics Australia and iRun 2.0 would be responsible for:
· Providing a “one stop” shop and advice to athletics Event Organisers on planning events, insurance, traffic management, etc.
· Providing a contact point between the athletics Event Organiser and Council.
Council would be responsible for:
· Nominating a single point of contact for Athletics Australia and iRun 2.0 when organising and managing athletics events within the Inner West.
· Retain all statutory obligations (including Section 68 Approvals, Development Application Approvals, Traffic Committee approvals, etc.).
· Approving the use of a park or public space for an athletics event in order to ensure:
o That a single space is not booked by multiple users at the same time;
o The safety of event participants (eg. suitability of the location for the size of the event, ensuring appropriate rest periods for turf); and
o Impacts on adjacent residents are considered and managed.
The Events in Parks Policy and associated Guidelines provide templates and assistance to all Event Organisers, including those who wish to manage an athletics event. Further, with the existing structure, Council has allocated two staff within the Parks Planning & Engagement team whose role is to assist Event Organisers in preparing their event. A partnership with Athletics Australia is complementary to the proposals contained within the Events in Parks Policy.
It is therefore recommended that Council staff negotiate with Athletics Australia and enter into an Agreement on the basis of the responsibilities above and the Events in Parks Policy.
Policy Introduction
It is proposed that the new Policy be introduced from 1
January 2019. The planning for some future scheduled events in parks is
likely already well progressed. It is not intended that these events
would have to make any adjustments at this stage; albeit that any changes would
likely be only minor in nature.
FORMER LEGACY COUNCIL/S’ POLICIES TO BE RESCINDED (copies also attached)
In developing this new Policy, the Event Management Manual (former Leichhardt Council) was considered. It is noted that this former Manual provided practical advice on running an event. A separate Inner West document, Events in Parks Guidelines provides practical guidance on the management of major events in parks. A copy of the Guidelines is available on Council’s website.It is appropriate that on adoption of the new Policy, the former Event Management Manual be rescinded by Council.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The existing Council structure has been developed to ensure there are staff resources to assist Event Organisers with the approval process for an event in a park.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The following teams have had input into the development of the draft Policy & Guidelines: Communications, Engagement & Events; Community Services & Culture; Customer Service; Footpaths, Roads, Traffic & Stormwater; Development Assessment & Regulatory Services; and Environment & Sustainability.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
The public engagement process is outlined above in the report.
CONCLUSION
The objective of the Events in Parks Policy is to assist community Event Organisers by guiding them through the approval process for events that take place in parks in the Inner West Council.
Council has allocated staff resources to assist Event Organisers in preparing their event.
1.⇩ |
Events in Parks Policy |
2.⇩ |
Former Leichhardt Event Management Manual |
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Events in Parks
Policy
Events in Parks Policy
Title |
Events in Parks Policy |
Summary |
The purpose of this policy is to assist community Event Organisers by guiding them through the approval process for events that take place in parks in the Inner West Council.
|
Background |
Council encourages the use of parks for events as they help contribute to the health, wellbeing and liveability of the Inner West. It is Council’s objective to ensure that park events are suitable and managed in a manner which is safe and which is appropriate to the local environment and surrounding community.
|
Policy Type |
Council Policy |
Relevant Strategic Plan Objective |
Strategic direction 4: Caring, happy, healthy communities Outcome 4.1 Everyone feels welcome and connected to the community 1. Foster inclusive communities where everyone can participate in community life Outcome 4.3 The community is healthy and people have a sense of wellbeing: 1. Provide the facilities, spaces and programs that support wellbeing and healthy communities
|
Relevant Council References |
Events in Parks Guidelines Sporting Grounds Allocations Policy Park Access Application Park Plans of Management Event Invitation and Speaking Policy LAP Waste Management in Public Places Policy
|
Main Legislative Or Regulatory Reference |
Local Government Act |
Applicable Delegation Of Authority |
As per Delegations Register |
Attachments |
See Annexures |
Record Notes |
External available document |
Document: |
Council Policy |
Uncontrolled Copy When Printed |
|
Custodian: |
Parks Planning & Engagement Manager |
Version # |
1 |
Approved By: |
Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields |
TRIM Ref # |
|
Adopted By: |
Council |
Publish Location |
Internet |
Adopted Date and Minute #: |
Xx / xx / xx |
Next Review Date |
XX / XX / xX |
Table of Contents
1. Purpose
2. Objective
3. Scope
3.1. In scope
3.2. Out of scope
Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy. 5
Commercial Fitness Trainers Policy. 5
Park Access for Works
Filming in Parks
Busking
4. Policy Statement
5. Policy
5.1. Selecting a Park Venue
5.2. Event Size
Park Casual Event (less than 30 people)
Park Minor Events (up to 500 people) 6
Park Major Events (greater than 500 people)
6. Park Major Event Approval Process
6.1. Park Event Booking and Approval by Council’s Parks Planning & Engagement team
6.2. Planning Approval by Council’s Development Assessment & Regulatory Services team (where needed)
7. Park Event Fees
8. Fee Waiver
9. Damage Bonds
10. Related Legislation, Policies and Procedures
11. Appeal Process
Council
12. Responsibilities
Annexure 1 - Park Event Conditions. 14
Annexure 2 – Parks & Facilities Which May be Booked
The purpose of this policy is to assist community Event Organisers by guiding them through the approval process for events that take place in parks in the Inner West Council.
A separate document, Events in Parks Guidelines provides practical guidance on the management of major events in parks. A copy of the Guidelines is available on Council’s website.
Council is responsible for the management of all activities within parks, reserves, sporting grounds and public open space. There is an ongoing high demand for open space resources within the Inner West, particularly with increasing densities. Council must actively manage access to the parks.
Events are fun and entertaining, and provide opportunities for large and small communities to connect and safely share enjoyable and inspiring experiences. Events can be informative, build community knowledge, and raise awareness to develop a shared understanding of social, economic or environmental issues. Events can build capability within a community, develop a sense of community spirit, identity and belonging.
Council encourages the use of parks for events as they help contribute to the health, wellbeing and liveability of the Inner West. It is Council’s objective to ensure that park events are suitable and managed in a manner which is safe and which is appropriate to the local environment and surrounding community.
Many events in the Inner West take place with little involvement from Council. Apart from granting permits to hold the activity in public spaces, Council contributes to events in the following ways:
· Provide strategic direction for events
· Deliver events
· Facilitate event planning through Council processes
· Manage the impact of events on local communities and the environment (e.g. noise, traffic, waste)
· Process consents, permits and licences required to hold events
· Promote the health and safety of all who attend an event and the community near an event
· Monitor compliance with regulatory and licensing requirements
· Provide venues for staging events
· Market and promote events in which we have invested
This policy applies to proposed events occurring in parks, reserves and sporting grounds, either owned by Council or under its control and management (e.g. Crown Land). These events are usually single one-off events, such as parties, celebrations, corporate events, charity events, fun runs and community festivals.
This policy applies to all events in parks, including Council run events.
Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy
This Policy does not apply to seasonal bookings for sports training and games on sporting grounds, usually hired by sporting clubs, tertiary organisations and schools.
Commercial Fitness Trainers Policy
This policy does not apply to commercial fitness trainers and commercial running groups who use Council sporting grounds and parks for training.
This Policy does not apply to applications for park access for non-recreation purposes such as works within the park or access through a park to adjacent properties for works or deliveries. Applications for park access are available on Council’s website.
This Policy does not apply to applications for filming in parks. Applications for filming are available on Council’s website.
This Policy does not apply to applications for busking. Applications for busking are available on Council’s website.
NSW Government Events
This Policy does not apply to State Government events such as the New Year’s Eve celebration. For large state events, Council is not the Event Organiser. Council’s responsibility is to collaborate with the NSW Police and other stakeholders to ensure public safety at key gathering points.
Parks Managed by the State Government
This Policy does not apply to parks owned and managed by the State Government, including Callan Park and Ballast Point Park.
Council encourages the use of parks for events as they help contribute to the health, wellbeing and liveability of the Inner West. It is Council’s objective to ensure that park events are suitable and managed in a manner which is safe and which is appropriate to the local environment and surrounding community.
This policy is to assist community Event Organisers by guiding them through the approval process for events that take place in parks in the Inner West Council.
A separate document, Events in Parks Guidelines provides practical guidance on the management of major events in parks. A copy of the Guidelines is available on Council’s website.
Council’s Parks Planning & Engagement team manage all activities within the parks. It is their responsibility to ensure that different activity requests are managed for both active and passive recreation, to ensure that there is access for multiple park users and to ensure that a single space is not booked by multiple users at the same time.
For any proposed event, the first step is to contact Council’s Parks Planning & Engagement team (parks@innerwest.nsw.gov.au or 02 9392 5311) to ensure that the preferred park venue is suitable and that the proposed date for the event is available.
When selecting a park venue for an event, consideration should be given to the following:
· Suitability of the event in the preferred location. It is suggested to all hirers that a site inspection is conducted before booking the venue (without Council Staff);
· Expected number of attendees;
· How participants will travel to the venue (are there public transport options, is there enough parking);
· Surrounding facilities (e.g. toilets);
· Waste management;
· Impact on surrounding residents;
· Fees and charges for event hire (i.e. budget).
When booking the event venue, allow time for set up and pack down time.
Park Casual Event (less than 30 people)
Casual use of parks is permitted, for up to 30 people, without approval from Council subject to the conditions outlined in Annexure 1 - Park Event Conditions.
If hirers want to use a space in a Council park exclusively (e.g. Elkington Park Rotunda), it is recommended that a booking is made. If a location is booked by another group, they will have priority of use.
Park Minor Events (up to 500 people)
Minor events in parks are permitted, for up to 500 people, subject to the submission of an Casual Park and Sporting Ground Hire Form (available on Council’s website) and conditions outlined in Annexure 1 - Park Event Conditions. For minor events in parks, the Casual Park and Sporting Ground Hire Form must be submitted to Council at least four weeks in advance.
Park Major Events (greater than 500 people)
Any event in a park with greater than 500 people is considered a major event. This document will guide Event Organisers on the approval process and provide advice on the management of major events in parks in the Inner West.
A separate document, Events in Parks Guidelines provides practical guidance on the management of major events in parks. A copy of the Guidelines is available on Council’s website.
6. Park Major Event Approval Process
There is a two-step approval process for Park Major Events:
1. Park Event booking and approval by Council’s Parks Planning & Engagement team; and
2. Planning Approval by Council’s Development Assessment & Regulatory Services team (where needed, see below).
6.1. Park Event Booking and Approval by Council’s Parks Planning & Engagement team
For any proposed event, the first step is to contact Council’s Parks Planning & Engagement team (parks@innerwest.nsw.gov.au or 02 9392 5000) to ensure that the preferred park venue is suitable and that the proposed date for the event is available.
Correct site selection is a critical success factor for an event. The site you select should match your expectations of size, location and available facilities. Crowd and infrastructure capacities vary depending on the chosen site with only some being easily accessible and in close proximity to transport.
When selecting a park venue, consideration should be given to the expected number of attendees, and how participants will travel to the venue. When booking the event venue, allow time for set up and pack down time.
Various sports clubs, schools and other park users hire the parks and sporting grounds on a seasonal or casual basis. Where a proposed park event coincides with seasonal sporting club usage or another regular park booking, priority will be given to the prior or regular booking. Council may approve alternative dates or venues, subject to bookings, ground conditions and proposed use.
The Park Event booking and approval of all events within parks is at the sole discretion of Council as the land owner/ manager. Park Event booking and approval will not be provided if the park venue is not suitable and/ or the proposed date is not available. If Park Event booking and approval has been granted and if required, the Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields will sign Owner’s Consent for any Section 68 Application or Development Application.
Major events are subject to the submission of an Casual Park and Sporting Ground Hire Form (available on Council’s website) and conditions outlined in Annexure 1 - Park Event Conditions.
6.2. Planning Approval by Council’s Development Assessment & Regulatory Services team (where needed)
Depending on the type and size of the proposed event, it may require a planning approval, through a Section 68 Application or a Development Application (DA).
It is the responsibility of the Event Organiser to submit all relevant documentation to Council for a Section 68 Application or a Development Application. The DA process is a separate process to the Park Event Approval and the application is received and assessed by the Development Assessment team in Council. Where a DA is required, development consent, if granted, will be issued by the Council’s Development Assessment & Regulatory Services Service team, in addition to the Park Event Approval.
If a Section 68 Application or Development Application is required, the application must be submitted to Council at least six months in advance. The Event Organiser must book the Park before either of these applications are submitted.
The following table provides a guide to which approval is needed for events. The table is indicative only as requirements will depend on the type and scale of event.
Park Minor and Major Event Types |
Park Event Booking and Approval |
Section 68 |
Development Application |
Wedding with: · Maximum 120 people · No sound amplifiers |
x |
|
|
Event with: · Up to 500 people · Catering · No sound amplifiers · Minimal impact to park users or residents |
x |
|
|
Event with: · Over 500 people · Stalls · Sound amplifiers · Impact to park users or residents |
x |
x |
|
Sporting activities (other than a fun run/ walk) with under 1,000 people |
x |
|
|
Sporting activities (other than a fun run/ walk) with over 1,000 people |
x |
x |
|
Fun run/ walk with under 5,000 people on site at any one time. With exempt development under the SEPP. Sound amplification permitted with approval from Building Certification Building Certification Manager (or equivalent senior role). |
x |
|
|
Fun run/ walk with over 5,000 people on site at any one time |
x |
x |
|
Events which are: · For trade or business, including the sale of goods · Subject to an admission fee · For commercial activities (where permissible)
See also Council’s Mobile Food Vending Policy |
x |
x |
|
Events at sites listed on the State Heritage Register |
x |
x |
|
Stand alone stalls/ food trucks
See also Council’s Mobile Food Vending Policy |
x |
x |
|
Large scale community events and park festivals including repeat annual events |
x |
x |
|
Council run community events and park festivals including repeat annual events |
x |
x |
|
Corporate promotion with minimal impact |
x |
|
|
Outdoor movies for less than 1,000 people |
x |
x |
|
Some activities associated with events may be exempt from a Planning Approval through the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008. A Park Event Booking and Approval will still be required.
Park event fees will apply. Further information is available on Council’s website in the Inner West Fees & Charges document.
If the event requires Planning Approval by Council’s Development Assessment & Regulatory Services team there is a further fee to lodge the application.
The Event Organisers are responsible for all operational costs associated with conducting their event.
Council may issue a fee waiver for certain events to eligible applicants. An application, available on Council’s website, will need to be submitted.
Council will accept proposals for projects, programs, events, and activities that provide a benefit to the local community. Proposals must meet the selection criteria below. Council will give priority to projects where it can be shown that the project:
· Meets community needs or aspirations
· Is a priority for the local community
· Is aligned with Council’s strategic plans.
In addition the applicant must:
· Be capable of carrying out the proposed project or activity
· Need Council’s support for the project to go ahead.
Who can apply?
To be eligible to apply applicants must be:
· A not-for-profit organisation that is based in and/or which services the local area OR
· A community group that is based in the local area OR
· A peer support group, for example Alcoholics Anonymous, that has a majority of local participants
In addition all applicants must:
· Be proposing a project or activity principally for the benefit of residents of the Inner West Council
· Have completed a Causal Park and Sporting Ground Hire form
· Have completed a Reduced Fees and Fee Waiver Application Form and provided support material as requested
· Have no outstanding debts to Inner West Council.
Who cannot apply?
The following groups and types of activities are not eligible to apply for reduced fees or fee waivers and must pay 100 per cent of the applicable fee.
· Commercial organisations/sole traders
· Fundraising events are generally not eligible. However, they may be supported if they are considered a high priority for the local community. This will be determined on a case-by-case basis and will take into account other eligibility requirements, the nature of the event, and the benefits to the local community of supporting the event
· Political parties, or activities that are overtly political in nature
· Regular, organised sporting activities/ events carried out by sporting clubs, sporting groups or associations.
· Religious services or activities that are overtly religious in nature
· Schools, tertiary institutions, school Parents and Friends Associations and school Parents and Citizens Associations
· State or federal government agencies /departments.
Notwithstanding that Council may grant a fee waivers, the following fees will apply to all events:
· Damage bonds
· Key deposits
· Supply of waste and recycling receptacles and removal of waste
· Electricity use
All applications are assessed against the eligibility and selection criteria, and Council’s Strategic Plans by staff with relevant expertise. Recommendations are then presented for approval to:
· Council (for fee waivers over $4,000 in value)
· The General Manager’s delegate (for fee waivers less than $4,000)
Payment of a damage bond will be required, prior to the event.
All damage to Council property, either deliberate or accidental should be reported to Council as soon as possible, outlining full details of the incident.
The Event Organiser must meet with Council’s Parks Engagement Officer on the closest working day before the event for a site handover and the next working day after the event for a formal site back.
After the event, the site is to be returned to the same condition as it was in prior to the event. Clean-up must be within two hours to prevent litter spread or within a practicable timeframe dependent on the size of the event (whichever is the lesser). In the event that the Event Organiser does not hand back the site in the same condition, Council will clean and repair the venue to the standard required by Council at the Event Organiser’s cost.
The damage bond may also be utilised to cover any costs incurred by Council during the event, including the cost of monitoring the event for compliance with conditions of consent and/or legislative requirements as a consequence of carrying out the event.
10. Related Legislation, Policies and Procedures
The following are related legislation, policies and procedures:
· Inner West Council Events in Parks Guidelines
· Inner West Council Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy
· Inner West Council Park Use & Access Guidelines
· Inner West Council Fees & Charges
· Inner West Mobile Food Vending Policy
· Inner West Council Inclusion Access Plan
· Local Government Filming Protocol
· Inner West Council Events Policy
· Local Government Act 1993 (NSW)
· Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)
· State Environmental Planning Policies
· Local Environment Plans
· Development Control Plans
· Food Act 2003 (NSW)
· Food Regulation 2015 (NSW)
· Food Standards Code
· Liquor Act 2007 (NSW)
· Building Code of Australia
· Smoke-Free Environment Act 2000 (NSW)
· Smoke-Free Environment Regulation 2016 (NSW)
· Callan Park (Special Provisions) Act 2002 (NSW)
· Roads Act 1993 (NSW)
Should an Event Organiser be dissatisfied with the outcome of their application for a Park Event, the following appeal process will be followed:
The Event Organiser is to lodge a written appeal, outlining their reasons for appealing. The Parks Planning & Engagement staff will review the appeal and advise the Event Organiser of:
· The outcome of the appeal and any action taken;
· The reason/s for the decision;
· The proposed remedy or resolution/s that will be put in place (if needed); and
· Any options for review
Should the Event Organiser still be unhappy with the outcome of the application, they may lodge a second written appeal, further outlining their reasons for appealing. The second appeal, along with the results of the first appeal will go to the Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields to review. The Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields will make a recommendation to the Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment regarding the allocation.
The Deputy General Manager will respond to the Event Organiser with the following:
· The outcome of the appeal and any action taken;
· The reason/s for the decision; and
· The proposed remedy or resolution/s that will be put in place (if needed).
The elected Councillors will play no part in the event application appeal process.
The elected Councillors may only overturn a staff event application determination through a resolution of Council via a Notice of Motion to Council.
Trees, Parks & Sportsfields staff are responsible for the following:
· Reviewing and approving events in parks in accordance with Events in Parks Policy
· Providing advice and assistance to Event Organisers
· Reviewing and approving fee waiver requests, if appropriate
· Reviewing appeals, as needed
· Reviewing and revising this Events in Parks Policy when required. Substantive changes must go to Council for approval (this does not include minor administrative updates)
· Being the nominated Council point of contact for Event Organisers and liaising with other responsible sections of Council as required and as listed below.
Development Assessment and Regulatory Services staff are responsible for the following:
· Assessing Section 68 and Development Applications in accordance with the relevant legislation
· Undertaking regulatory inspections, including food inspections, if needed
Footpaths, Roads, Traffic and Stormwater staff are responsible for the following:
· Assessing Traffic & Pedestrian Management Plans
· Referring proposed traffic changes to the Traffic Committee, if needed
Environment and Sustainability staff are responsible for the following:
· Assessment of the waste management plan
· Providing waste and recycling services, when paid for by the Event Organiser.
Customer Service staff are responsible for processing park event fees and damage bonds.
Approval for any event in a park which is not in accordance with the Events in Parks Policy will require approval through a Council resolution.
Version |
Amended By |
Changes Made |
Date |
TRIM # |
1 |
Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields |
New IWC Policy |
July 2018 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
Annexure 1 - Park Event Conditions
|
|
Condition Applies to |
||
Number |
Condition Description |
Park Casual Events (<30 people) |
Park Minor Events (<500 people) |
Park Major Events (>500 people) |
1 |
Park events may not occur where another group has a park booking (seasonal or casual).
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
2 |
Groups who have made a park booking through Council take priority over those who have not made a booking.
|
ü |
|
|
3 |
The hirer shall only use the parks during their allocated park booking times. The following hours of use guidelines apply to park bookings: Parks can be booked for non-sporting activities from 8am to 6pm and 8am to 8pm during daylight savings hours (unless given special permission).
|
|
ü |
ü |
4 |
Casual sporting events may not occur on any of Council’s sporting grounds including: Algie Park, Arlington Recreation Reserve, Ashfield Park, Balmain Road (Callan Park), Birchgrove Oval, Blackmore Oval, Camdenville Oval , Camperdown Oval, Centenary Park, Cohen Park, Easton Park, Glover Street (Callan Park), Hammond Park, Henson Park, HJ Mahoney Memorial Reserve, King George Park, Leichhardt Oval # 2, Leichhardt Oval # 3, Mackey Park, Marrickville Park, Petersham Oval, Pratten Park, SSC Leichhardt Campus, Steel Park and Tempe Recreation Reserve, Waterfront Drive (Callan Park).
|
ü |
|
|
5 |
The following activities require an approval from Council and may not be undertaken as a park casual event: · The use of sports grounds by sporting organisations; · Engaging in any trade or business, commercial and/ or profit based activities; · Collecting any monies; · Filming; · Wedding ceremonies; · Selling alcohol; · Consuming alcohol in prohibited areas; · Installing any structure, screen, awning, sign or enclosure; · Exhibiting or distributing advertisements or handbills; · Fly drones or model aircraft; · Driving vehicles off marked vehicle areas or parking areas; · Play any musical instrument, sing, direct or procure any musical performances for a fee or reward; · The use of any public address (PA) system or electronically operated sound equipment; · Any use that brings in a third party supplier, including amusement devices, formal catering, etc.
|
ü |
|
|
6 |
Written approval must be obtained from Council. An application must be made to Council at least four weeks in advance.
|
|
ü |
|
7 |
The hire of sporting grounds to be considered only after seasonal sporting club and school use has been determined. Council may approve alternative dates or venues, subject to bookings, ground conditions and proposed use.
|
|
ü |
ü |
8 |
Fees and charges apply (see Council’s website).
|
|
ü |
ü |
9 |
All bookings are to be paid in full in advance of the event/ use of facilities.
|
|
ü |
ü |
10 |
Bonds may be withheld if terms and conditions of park hire are not adhered to.
|
|
ü |
ü |
11 |
Bonds may be utilised to cover any costs incurred by Council during the event, including the cost of monitoring the event for compliance with conditions of consent and/or legislative requirements as a consequence of carrying out the event.
|
|
ü |
ü |
12 |
The amount listed in the fees and charges is a minimum bond only. The Group Manager Trees, Parks & Sportsfields may increase the bond amount if the use is deemed to be a higher risk activity.
|
|
ü |
ü |
13 |
Costs will apply where Council incurs additional costs to: · provide a requested service; or · is required to clean up rubbish or pick up litter from a park, sporting grounds or change/ amenity building; or · empty full public park bins as a result of the event; or · repair unreasonable damage after use.
|
|
ü |
ü |
14 |
The Event Manager shall ensure that all damage to Council property, either deliberate or accidental is reported to Council as soon as possible, outlining full details of the incident.
|
|
ü |
ü |
15 |
An after-hours callout fee applies where council is required to attend the park to assist the hirer with matters such as access. Fees will be on a cost recovery basis. A minimum of 4 hours of staff overtime will be payable.
|
|
ü |
ü |
16 |
After the event, the site is to be returned to the same condition as it was in prior to the event. In the event that the Event Organiser does not make good the venue, Council will clean and repair the venue to the standard required by Council at the Event Organiser’s cost.
|
|
ü |
ü |
17 |
Booking cancellations will incur an administration fee plus any additional costs incurred by the Council as result of the hire.
|
|
ü |
ü |
18 |
Council will not refund any fees and charges for booking cancellations less than 7 days prior to the event.
|
|
ü |
|
19 |
The park is hired in the condition as is. There may be works occurring in the park at the time. The Event Organiser is responsible for inspecting the site. Council takes no responsibility for the condition of the park and will not refund any fees and charges.
|
|
ü |
ü |
20 |
The Event Organisers are responsible for all operational costs associated with conducting their event.
|
|
ü |
ü |
21 |
A Certificate of Currency for public liability insurance of a minimum of $20 million must be submitted to Inner West Council. The policy must indicate that Inner West Council is noted as an Interested Party (Principal Indemnity Endorsement), and that the Business Activity shown on the Certificate of Currency must be appropriate for the organiser’s function, such as organising and running a community festival.
|
|
ü |
ü |
22 |
No public address (PA) system or electronically operated sound equipment shall be used unless approved by Council. Sound levels must not exceed LAeq 15 minute ≤ 65 dB(A) when measured at the nearest affected receiver (resident or business).
|
|
ü |
ü |
23 |
No temporary structures, amusement devices (e.g. jumping castles, temporary rides), equipment or stalls shall be placed within a park, unless approved by Council in writing.
|
|
ü |
ü |
24 |
No alcohol is permitted for sale at events in parks without a valid liquor licence and written Council approval.
|
|
ü |
ü |
25 |
The collection of monies and/or selling of goods, including an entry/ admission fee shall not be allowed within the confines of the park unless approved by Council in writing.
|
|
ü |
ü |
26 |
The Event Organiser must ensure that the venue and the surrounding area is maintained in a clean and tidy condition throughout the event, including the bump-in and bump-out phases.
|
|
ü |
ü |
28 |
Waste and recycling receptacles must have clear bin signs consistent with the NSW Environment Protection Authorities (EPA) standard away from home signage.
|
|
ü |
ü |
29 |
Smoking is not permitted in the following areas: Within any structures; · Within 10 metres of children’s play equipment in outdoor public places; · Spectator areas at sports grounds or other recreational areas used for organised sporting events; · Within 10 metres of a food fair stall.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
30 |
Access to the venue must be maintained for emergency vehicles and/or owners/tenants of properties requiring access.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
31 |
A minimum of 2.5 metres width must be maintained for pedestrian access at all times.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
32 |
A Tree Protection Plan is to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the event.
|
|
|
ü |
33 |
All temporary structures (including stalls, toilets, refrigeration units, generators etc.) are to be placed outside the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of any tree.
|
|
ü |
ü |
34 |
Tree protection measures shall be implemented and complied with for the duration of the event including site preparation and pack up.
|
|
ü |
ü |
35 |
Tree pruning is not permitted in any park/open space.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
36 |
Trench digging is not permitted in any park/open space.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
37 |
No signs or other structures are to be attached to trees or Council signage.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
38 |
Vehicles are not permitted to enter parks without prior written approval from Council.
|
|
ü |
ü |
39 |
Authorised vehicles driving in the park must not exceed walking pace and must have hazard lights on.
|
|
ü |
ü |
40 |
Authorised Vehicles are not permitted to drive on grassed areas within the venue unless turf protection measures such as temporary protective boards or flooring or similar measures are used.
|
|
ü |
ü |
41 |
No vehicle shall be parked within the confines of the venue during the event unless approved by Council in writing.
|
|
ü |
ü |
42 |
Vehicles are not permitted to drive or park beneath the dripline of any tree within the venue under any circumstances.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
43 |
The following activities are not permitted within parks at any time: archery; golf; go karting (or using other motorised equipment); paintball; laser tag; riding horses; driving of model cars; sale or use of glass receptacles; camping or lodging overnight; possession or utilisation of any firearms; coal BBQs; lighting candles; lighting fires (this excludes utilising the Council provided BBQs).
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
44 |
Council discourages the use of balloons, plastic straws, glitter, party poppers and confetti in parks and discourages Colour Run events.
|
ü |
ü |
ü |
45 |
Plans/incentives should be developed to minimise single use packaging including coffee cups, plates and cutlery. |
|
ü |
ü |
46 |
Council does not take park bookings for New Year’s Eve.
|
|
ü |
ü |
47 |
Council only permits weddings ceremonies in Parks (not wedding receptions).
|
|
ü |
ü |
48 |
An Event Approval must be obtained from Council. As much notice as possible must be given as other planning approvals (Section 68 or Development Application) may apply.
|
|
|
ü |
49 |
If a Section 68 or Development Application is required, an application must be made to Council six months in advance.
|
|
ü |
ü |
50 |
Generally, Council will only approve one major event per quarter per park (this does not include leases, licences and seasonal sports grounds bookings).
|
|
|
ü |
51 |
Council will not refund any fees and charges for booking cancellations less than 14 days prior to the event.
|
|
|
ü |
52 |
Grass must be protected through the use of temporary protective boards or flooring to protect all high traffic areas including stalls, food, beverage and merchandise sale areas.
|
|
ü |
ü |
53 |
All structures must be weighted and not pegged.
|
|
ü |
ü |
54 |
When using water-weighted structures, water weights must be pre-filled and cannot be emptied onto the grass.
|
|
ü |
ü |
55 |
The Event Organiser is responsible for compiling any event plans required by Council. The size and nature of the event will determine if the Event Organiser must undertake the following, for approval by Council: · Prepare and implement a Traffic Management Plan · Prepare and implement a Risk Assessment and Management Plan · Prepare and implement an Emergency Management Plan · Provide security staff · Undertake community notification of the event · Install temporary fencing around the perimeter of the event · Prepare and implement an Alcohol Plan · Provide a drinking fountain or drinking tap · Install Variable Message Signs in advance of the event · Prepare and implement a First Aid Plan and provide first aid staff · Provide toilet facilities (in addition to existing park public toilets) · Prepare and implement a Waste and Litter Management Plan · Install “No Smoking” signs throughout the venue
|
|
ü |
ü |
56 |
The Event Manager is responsible for the satisfactory conduct of all persons attending their event. The Event Manager shall ensure that the amenity of property owners adjoining parks is not disturbed by excessive noise, offensive language, poor behaviour or any other activity likely to cause unreasonable disturbance.
|
|
ü |
ü |
57 |
In consideration of the event details, Council at its sole discretion may apply additional conditions of approval, as deemed necessary. |
|
ü |
ü |
The Events in Parks Guidelines provides further guidance around some of these conditions.
Annexure 2 – Parks & Facilities Which May be Booked
The following is a list of parks and facilities which may be booked:
|
36th Battalion Park |
Leichhardt |
* |
Algie Park |
Croydon |
|
Allman Park |
Ashfield |
* |
Arlington Recreation Reserve |
Dulwich Hill |
* |
Ashfield Park |
Ashfield |
|
Badu Park |
Annandale |
* |
Balmain Road Sporting Ground (Callan Park) |
Lilyfield |
|
Bill Peters Reserve |
Ashfield |
* |
Birchgrove Park |
Birchgrove |
|
Birrung Park |
Balmain |
* |
Blackmore Park |
Leichhardt |
|
Bridgewater Park (including picnic area) |
Rozelle |
* |
Camdenville Park |
St Peters |
|
Camperdown Memorial Rest Park |
Newtown |
* |
Camperdown Park |
Camperdown |
* |
Centenary Sportsground |
Croydon |
* |
Cohen Park |
Annandale |
|
College Street Playground |
Balmain |
|
Cooks River Foreshore |
Marrickville |
|
Darrell Jackson Gardens |
Summer Hill |
* |
Easton Park |
Rozelle |
|
Elkington Park |
Balmain |
|
Enmore Park |
Marrickville |
|
Evan Jones Playground |
Leichhardt |
|
Ewenton Park |
Balmain |
|
Gladstone Park |
Balmain |
* |
Glover Street Sporting Ground (Callan Park) |
Lilyfield |
|
Goodsir Street Reserve |
Rozelle |
* |
HJ Mahoney Memorial Reserve |
Marrickville |
* |
Hammond Park |
Ashfield |
|
Hawthorne Canal Reserve |
Leichhardt |
* |
Henson Park |
Marrickville |
|
Hinsby Park |
Annandale |
|
Hoskins Park |
Dulwich Hill |
|
Illoura Reserve |
Balmain East |
|
J.F. Laxton Reserve |
Dulwich Hill |
|
Jack Shanahan Reserve |
Dulwich Hill |
|
Jarvie Park |
Marrickville |
|
Johnson Park |
Dulwich Hill |
|
Kendrick Park |
Tempe |
* |
King George Park |
Rozelle |
|
|
|
* |
Leichhardt #2 |
Lilyfield |
* |
Leichhardt #3 |
Lilyfield |
|
Leichhardt Park - (Giovinazzo Grove) |
Lilyfield |
|
Leichhardt Park - (Peace Grove) |
Lilyfield |
|
Lewis Herman Reserve |
Ashfield |
|
Lookes Avenue Reserve |
Balmain East |
* |
Mackey Park |
Marrickville |
|
Marr Reserve |
Leichhardt |
* |
Marrickville Park |
Marrickville |
|
McNeilly Park |
Marrickville |
|
Montague Gardens |
Stanmore |
|
Mort Bay Park |
Birchgrove |
|
Morton Park |
Dulwich Hill |
|
O'Connor Reserve |
Rozelle |
|
O'Dea Reserve |
Camperdown |
|
Origlass Park |
Balmain East |
|
Paringa Reserve |
Balmain |
|
Peacock Point |
Balmain East |
* |
Petersham Park |
Petersham |
|
Pioneers Memorial Park |
Leichhardt |
* |
Pratten Park |
Ashfield |
|
Propeller Park |
Balmain East |
|
Punch Park |
Balmain |
|
Richard Murden Reserve |
Haberfield |
|
Robson Park |
Haberfield |
|
Shields Playground |
Leichhardt |
|
Simmons Point Reserve |
Balmain East |
|
Simpson Park |
St Peters |
|
Smith Hogan Spindlers Park |
Annandale |
* |
Steel Park |
Marrickville |
|
Sydenham Green |
Sydenham |
|
Tempe Lands – Village Green |
Tempe |
* |
Tempe Reserve |
Tempe |
|
Thornton Park |
Balmain East |
|
Tillman Park |
Sydenham |
|
Wangal Nura Park |
Leichhardt |
|
War Memorial Park |
Leichhardt |
* |
Waterfront Drive Sporting Ground (Callan Park) |
Lilyfield |
|
Weekley Park |
Stanmore |
|
Whites Creek Valley Park |
Lilyfield |
|
Wicks Park |
Marrickville |
|
Yeo Park |
Ashfield |
|
Yurulbin Park |
Birchgrove |
* Note: for sporting grounds located within a Park – priority will be given to sporting club bookings
The following skate parks may be booked:
· Darrell Jackson Gardens
· Dulwich Hill Skate Park
· Sydenham Green
· Whites Creek Valley Park
The following rotundas may be booked:
· Elkington Park
· Camperdown Park
· Petersham Park
All other Council picnic areas (included shelters) cannot be booked and may be utilised on a first come first use basis
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Results - Community Satisfaction Research 2018
Prepared By: Prue Foreman - Engagement Manager
Authorised By: Laura Stevens - Group Manager Communications, Engagement and Events
SUMMARY Council commissioned independent social research company Micromex to survey a representative sample of 1,003 residents across all areas of the LGA in September/October 2018. The results are positive for Inner West Council. Community satisfaction with Council’s overall performance increased by a statistically significant amount compared to 2017. The research and full results are detailed in the report. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receive and note the report.
|
BACKGROUND
Council undertook statistically valid, demographically representative research in 2016, 2017 and 2018 enabling comparison of change over time. The recent research, conducted in September/October 2018 was scheduled to align with the one year anniversary of the election of the Inner West’s first Council.
The research aims to:
· Assess and establish the community’s priorities and satisfaction in relation to Council activities, services and facilities
· Identify the community’s overall level of satisfaction with Council’s performance
· Identify the community’s level of agreement with prompted statements surrounding wellbeing/connectedness
· Identify methods of communication and engagement with Council
· Identify priority areas for Council to focus on
· Assess community strategic plan measures
KEY FINDINGS
Council’s overall performance
91% of respondents were at least ‘somewhat satisfied’ with the performance of Council, with significantly more selecting the top box ‘very satisfied’ in 2018.
The mean satisfaction rating was 3.58,
significantly higher than 3.49 in 2017. This rating is on par with the Micromex
benchmark for Sydney metropolitan councils. Over the past 12 months, perception
of Council’s value for money and financial management has also
significantly improved. WestConnex remains contentious and housing
affordability remains problematic.
Community engagement
Resident perceptions of Council’s community engagement have steadily improved over the three survey periods since Inner West Council was established. In 2018, 61% rate Council’s community engagement as good to excellent.
Integrity and decision making rated ‘moderate’ with 79% of residents stating they were at least ‘somewhat satisfied’, a significant increase from 2016.
‘The Inner West is a good place to live’ (95% agree).
The Community Strategic Plan’s guiding principle ‘to work together in a way that is creative, caring and just’ was measured for the first time. Residents believe that Council is ‘at least somewhat’ caring (88%), creative (83%) and just (87%).
The top challenges facing the area in the next 10 years were managing and planning for development/overdevelopment (40%), traffic management/congestion (27%), availability of/access to/improving public transport (24%) and environmental protection/managing pollution/maintaining green open spaces (22%).
Information from Council
‘Brochures/flyers’ (78%) remains the primary method but has significantly decreased since 2017. Council’s quarterly newsletter Inner West Council News is the second highest source.
Information about Council sourced through the ‘web/internet’, ‘libraries’, ‘email’ and ‘Council community centres’ all significantly increased in 2018.
Younger residents (aged 18-34) were significantly more likely to seek information through ‘Facebook or Twitter’, 35-49 years were significantly more likely to utilise the ‘web/Internet’ and ‘email’, whilst those aged 50+ were significantly more likely to state they receive information through traditional print media such as ‘brochures/flyers’, ‘Council’s quarterly newsletter’ and the ‘local paper’.
WestConnex
had high awareness (97%), but mean support was ‘relatively low’
(2.55) although support is significantly higher than 2016. WestConnex remains
contentious, with 50% of residents not very to not at all supportive, while the
other 50% are at least somewhat supportive.
Analysis of 41 services and facilities determined stated importance,
rated satisfaction and to what extent the services and facilities contribute to
residents’ overall satisfaction with Council. Residents are at least
‘moderately’ satisfied with 36 of the 41 services and facilities.
‘Managing development in the area’ has the least relative
satisfaction.
The top/bottom five services with the highest/lowest importance rating were:
The top/bottom five services with the highest/lowest satisfaction rating were:
Importance trends
Compared to the previous research conducted in 2017, there were significant increases in residents’ levels of importance for eight of the comparable 41 services and facilities provided by Council.
These were:
There were also significant decreases in importance for two of the comparable services/facilities:
Satisfaction trends
There was an increase in residents’ levels of satisfaction across six of the comparable 41 services and facilities provided by Council and no decreases in satisfaction compared to 2017.
The greatest performance gaps are: managing development in the area; community's ability to influence Council's decision making; long term planning for Council area; maintaining footpaths; traffic management and road safety; maintaining local roads excluding major routes; management of parking; access to public transport; provision of Council information to the community; and support for people with a disability.
The key drivers of overall satisfaction (as determined by regression analysis) revolve around planning, engagement and physical connectivity.
These top 12 indicators contribute 60% of Council’s overall satisfaction rating:
The full report is attached and provides further details of the results and analysis.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
The Community Satisfaction Survey is an engagement technique guided by Council’s Community Engagement Framework. It informs service delivery and measurement of achievement of the Community Strategic Plan – Our Inner West 2036.
CONCLUSION
The 2018 community survey results indicate that Inner West Council is on a healthy trajectory.
In order to build and consolidate on these results, Micromex recommends that Council:
· Continue to engage/communicate Council’s planning, leadership and advocacy regarding the long term management/mitigation of development
· Further engage/explore opportunities and innovation in the area of public and active transport
· Maintain core operational services such as maintenance of local infrastructure and public spaces to ensure a high standard of presentation and functionality
1.⇩ |
Report - Inner West Community Satisfaction Research 2018 - Micromex |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Local democracy update
Prepared By: Prue Foreman - Engagement Manager
Authorised By: Laura Stevens - Group Manager Communications, Engagement and Events
SUMMARY Applications for membership of Council’s new local democracy advisory committees and working groups were open during September/October 2018. The report updates Council on the process and outcomes of membership, as well as recent community engagement at Inner West. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Receive and note the report;
2. Replace the previously adopted Safety working group with the twice-yearly Local Safety Forums adopted by Council (C0718 item 1);
3. Merge the previously adopted Cooks River and Parramatta River working groups to form the River Catchments working group; and
4. Note the inaugural combined meeting of the new Local Democracy Groups scheduled for Thursday, 29 November 2018 at Ashfield Town Hall.
|
BACKGROUND
Council adopted a new structure of Local Democracy advisory committees and working groups at its meeting on Tuesday, 11 September 2018 (C0818(3) Item 4). Following the meeting, membership applications opened from 17 September to 21 October 2018 for eight advisory committees and six new working groups.
Advisory committees |
Working groups |
· Access · Arts and Culture · Environment · Housing and Affordability · Multicultural · Planning and Heritage · Social Strategy · Transport
|
· Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander · Cooks River · Parramatta River · Safety · Seniors · Young Leaders
|
Promotion
Promotion of the Local Democracy advisory committees and working groups included:
· Media release
· Facebook, Twitter and Instagram
· Council column 20 Sep, 18 Oct
· Inner West Courier ad 20 Sep (quarter page), 16 Oct (half page) – both editions
· Inner West What’s On e-news 20 Sep
· Your Say Inner West e-news October edition
· Mayoral video
· Inner West Youth Alliance and local high schools – direct email
· Previous SRG members – direct email
· Databases and networks – direct email
· People who responded to public exhibition – direct email
· Newsroom – staff announcement
· School holidays program – targeting young people, e.g. at skate parks and youth centres
· Green Living Centre e-news
· Community Gardens, Community Leaders networks
Inner West Courier
Council e-news Facebook post
Membership applications
Applicants could submit via:
· Your Say Inner West
· Paper form by email, mail, Customer Service Centres or direct to staff
More than 140 people applied, some of whom applied for membership of more than one group. There were sufficient applications for all advisory committees and all but two working groups.
Numbers for the Safety working group and Parramatta River working group however, were low. Council has already endorsed the establishment of twice-yearly Local Safety Forums, described in the report as ‘the forums will provide a key mechanism for consultations on our Strategic plans and policies, as well to plan initiatives’. Therefore it is recommended that the Safety working group be replaced with the Local Safety Forums adopted by Council (C0718 item 1). It is also recommended that the Cooks River and Parramatta River working groups merge to form a single River Catchments working group. There will be significant crossover of topics and capacity for knowledge sharing across projects focused on the two rivers in the Inner West local government area.
Applications were assessed by a panel of Group Managers (Community Services and Culture, Environment and Sustainability, and Strategic Planning) against eligibility criteria. Letters of offer have been sent to successful applicants for the following advisory committees and working groups:
Local Democracy Group |
Letters of offer |
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander working group |
10 |
Access advisory committee |
15 |
Arts and Culture advisory committee |
15 |
Environment advisory committee |
15 |
Housing and Affordability advisory committee |
9 |
Multicultural advisory committee |
15 |
Planning and Heritage advisory committee |
12 |
River Catchments working group (proposed) |
8 |
Seniors working group |
13 |
Social Strategy advisory committee |
11 |
Transport advisory committee |
14 |
Young Leaders working group |
8 |
The inaugural combined meeting to welcome the new local democracy groups will be held on Thursday, 29 November 2018, at 6pm at Ashfield Town Hall.
International Women’s Day working group:
Council also resolved to establish an International Women’s Day (IWD) working group (C0818(3) Item 4). A separate expression of interest process to recruit membership of the IWD working group has commenced in collaboration with the Leichhardt Women’s Health Centre, with whom Council jointly plans the IWD celebrations.
Resident Associations Small Grants Program
Council resolved to establish a small grants program for independent resident associations (C0518 Item 7). The small grants programs was initially proposed for incorporated associations, however Council received feedback indicating that incorporation was a barrier to resident groups. Consequently the guidelines have been amended to include unincorporated not‐for‐profit residents’ associations who represent local residents on neighbourhood issues and provide opportunities for the local community to come together to discuss what's important to them.
The grants will open in late January 2019, with applications reported to Council in March for decision. Funding will be awarded in April 2019. Councillors will be advised when the grants open.
Community Groups Register
Council resolved to establish a community groups register to support local groups and provide a register for engagement projects (C0518 Item 7). The register has been established on Council’s website under Contribute > Community participation > Community group register. There are 13 categories of groups. More than 50 local groups have registered to date.
Community engagement update
Since 1 September 2018, more than 23,000 visits were logged on Council’s Your Say Inner West engagement site. The projects attracting the highest engagement were:
· Our Library Your Say (library strategy)
· Improving Safety at Camperdown Memorial Rest Park
· Fitness Equipment in Parks
· Improving Dawn Fraser Baths
Your Say Inner West engagement outreach stalls were held at:
· Dulwich Hill Village Fair
· Summer Hill Neighbourhood Feast
· Marrickville Festival
· Norton Street Festa
Engagement pop-ups or forums have been held to engage the community in:
· GreenWay concept designs
· Improving Safety at Camperdown Memorial Rest Park
· Draft Multicultural Policy and Action Plan 2018-20
· Streetscape improvement Master Plan – Annandale, Camperdown, Leichhardt and Petersham areas
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
All of Council’s Local Democracy Groups – including advisory committees, working groups and other forums – are part of Council’s Community Engagement Framework, helping to strengthen local participatory democracy. The Community Engagement Framework guides how Council will engage so that a broad range of perspectives are sought and the community has a strong voice in Council’s decision-making.
CONCLUSION
This report updates Council on initiatives that strengthen local democracy at Inner West through a new advisory committee and working group structure, additional engagement mechanisms and regular reporting to Council. Council will receive Local Democracy reports in March, May, July, September and November of each year.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Audited Financial Reports as at 30 June 2018
Prepared By: Carl Conrad - Financial Reporting Manager
Authorised By: Michael Tzimoulas - Deputy General Manager Chief Financial and Administration Officer
SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to inform Council that the 2018 audited financial reports for the Inner West Council have been placed on public exhibition in accordance with legislative requirement. Council is required to receive and note the financial reports after being placed on public exhibition. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. Receives and notes the report; and
2. Receives the final audited reports for the Inner West Council for the reporting period ending 30 June 2017 (ATTACHMENT 1).
|
BACKGROUND
At the 30 October 2018 Council meeting, the financial reports for the Inner West Council were presented for signature. The reports were subsequently placed on public exhibition once the auditor’s reports were received.
DISCUSSION
Section 418 provides that as soon as practicable after Council receives a copy of the auditor's reports:
a) It must fix a date for the meeting at which it proposes to present its audited financial reports, together with the auditor's reports, to the public; and
b) it must give public notice of the date so fixed.
Section 418 also provides that the date fixed for the meeting must be at least 7 days after the date on which the notice is given but not more than five weeks after the auditor's reports are given to Council.
An advertisement was placed in the Inner West Courier’s City and West Editions on 13 November 2018 advising that the audited financial reports will be tabled to Council on 27 November 2018 offering members of the public to make comment on the financial reports. The electronic copies of the financial reports were available to members of the public on Council’s website from 31 October 2018 while printed copies of the financial reports were exhibited publicly at the Inner West Council Service Centres at Ashfield, Leichhardt and Petersham from 31 October 2018.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Members of the public have had the opportunity to comment on the financial reports of each respective branch during the public exhibition period. To date, no responses have been received.
1.⇩ |
IWC 17-18 Financial Statements |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Inner West Council Annual Report 2017/18
Prepared By: Dayne Glinkowski - Team Leader Corporate Strategy
Authorised By: David Birds - Group Manager Strategic Planning
SUMMARY Section 428(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 requires Council to prepare and publish an Annual Report within five months from the end of each financial year. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council receives and notes the Annual Report 2017/18. |
BACKGROUND
The Annual Report 2017/18 (Attachment 1) presents Council’s key achievements and progress in implementing its strategic priorities throughout the 2017/18 Financial Year. It also provides a summary of Council’s financial performance against the adopted Operational Plan and Budget 2017/18.
The Annual Report has been developed in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, as well as the Office of Local Government’s Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines, satisfying all statutory reporting requirements.
ANNUAL REPORT STRUCTURE
The Annual Report is divided into three sections:
Section 1: Our achievements
Highlights Council’s achievements against priorities and initiatives in the Operational Plan and Budget 2017/18. It also provides a summary of Council’s financial performance across capital works programs and key services throughout the financial year.
Section 2: Statutory reporting
Includes all reporting requirements prescribed by the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.
Section 3: Audited financial statements
Contains general purpose financial statements for the 2017/18 Financial Year. This includes an Income Statement, Statement of Financial Position, Statement of Changes in Equity, and Statement of Cash Flows.
(Note: Attachment 1 does not include the Audited Financial Statements because they are addressed as a separate item in this Council meeting and agenda. After endorsement by Council, the Audited Financial Statements will be added to the Annual Report as ‘Section 3’.)
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
This report is the last of Council’s Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) activity conducted against plans developed in the administration period.
In the 2018/19 Financial Year, reporting has commenced against Council’s full suite of new and fully integrated IP&R documents:
· Our Inner West 2036 – Community Strategic Plan;
· Four year Delivery Program 2018-22;
· Annual Operational Plan and Budget 2018/19.
The first Biannual Progress Review reporting against these documents will be prepared for Council in early 2019.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
After receipt by Council, the attached Annual Report and associated documents will be made available for the community to view and download on Council’s website.
1.⇩ |
Inner West Council Annual Report 2017/18 |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Classification of Crown Lands and Prioritisation of Park Plans of Management
Prepared By: Aaron Callaghan - Parks Planning and Engagement Manager
Authorised By: Cathy Edwards-Davis - Group Manager Trees, Parks and Sports Fields
SUMMARY This report highlights the legislative requirements under the Crown Land Management Act 2016 that Council must undertake with regards to the management of Crown Lands under its care and management.
This report provides Council with the list of parks and open space under its care and management and highlights those areas which are Crown Land and those areas which are community land owned by Council.
The report recommends the prioritisation for the preparation of park Plans of Management for community and Crown Land and highlights key recommendations pertaining to the prioritisation, development and delivery of these plans.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Endorse the prioritised list of Park Plans of Management (Attachment 1) which are to be prepared for open space under its care, control and management;
2. Note the list of Crown Lands which are to be managed by Council and endorse the initial categorisations of community land which are to be sent to the NSW Government for approval (Attachment 2);
3. Write to the NSW Minister of Primary Industries and seek additional funding of $100,000 to support the preparation of park Plans of Management for Crown Land under its care and management; and
4. Write to the NSW Minister of Primary Industries requesting that the NSW Government amend the timeframe for Plans of Management delivery, as they apply to Crown Lands, from three years to six years.
|
BACKGROUND
On the 1 July 2018, the Crown Lands Management Act 2016 (CLM Act) was enacted by the NSW Government. The Crown Lands Management Act recognises the important role that Council’s play in managing Crown Land for community use, access and recreation and stipulates that Council will manage Crown Land as if it were public land under the Local Government Act 1993.
One of the key changes in this legislation is the Act authorises local councils that are appointed to manage dedicated or reserved Crown Land to manage that land as if it were public land under the Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act).
It is important to note that with the transfer of Crown Land to Council, all existing assets, liabilities, tenures and contracts of reserve trusts which were in place prior to the new Act coming into force automatically transition to Council as the Crown Land manager.
REPORT
Plans of Management are a useful and powerful tool for Council and the community. Under the LG Act, a Plan of Management (POM) must be adopted for all community land. Once prepared and adopted, these plans provide the governance arrangements on how a park or open space is to be utilised. Park POMs include the following:
· Identify the key features of the land which is to be managed;
· Reflect community needs with regards to access, use and development;
· Set priorities for improvement works;
· Provide guidance on how the land may be used, including the provision of leases and licences.
A key legislative requirement of the LG Act is that Council must engage the community in the preparation of POMs. This includes public exhibition of POMs and opportunities for the community to comment and have direct input into the planning process.
Crown Lands Classifications
Under the CLM Act, Council as a Crown Land manager must ensure a compliant POM for all Crown Land managed as community land. Council has a total of 31 Crown Land areas for which POMs are required. The legislation requires that these POMs are developed by 30 June 2021.
Prior to commencement of the POMs, Crown Land classified as community land must be given an initial categorisation using the categories in s36(4) of the LG Act, as close as possible to the purpose for which the land is dedicated or reserved. The Minister must be notified of the proposed initial categorisation. The categorisations can be accepted or changed by Government. Council officers have prepared a list of all Crown Land which is now managed by Council as community land and will shortly seek NSW Government approval of the initial categorisation (refer to Attachment 2). Once the categorisations are approved by Government, then Council can commence the preparation of park POMs for Crown Land.
This timeline to investigate, prepare and consult with the community on these Crown Lands POMs is unrealistic given the amount of Crown Land Council is required to manage. Each POM can take up to a year to investigate, develop and importantly to consult with the community. In this respect it is recommended that Council write to the Minister of Primary Industries and request that Government amend the time frame for the delivery of POMs, as they apply to Crown Lands, from three years to six years.
Prioritisation of Parks Plans of Management
Council has 269 parks, ranging from regional parks which attract visitors from across Sydney through to small neighbourhood and pocket parks. POMs must be prepared for all of these parks. Given this substantial volume of work, it is appropriate that that the development of these POMs be prioritised.
The draft Land and Property Strategy includes an action to develop a program for new and renewal of POMs for community and crown lands.
Staff have developed a weighted prioritised ranking system based on the following criteria:
· Crown Land status (25%)
· Whether a current POM is in Place and/ or the age of the POM (20%)
· Use of the park – eg. a sporting ground with high usage (15%)
· Community priority – the significance of community use and access (15%)
· Safety (15%)
· Heritage value (10%)
Attachment 1 includes a list of Council’s parks and open space and the proposed prioritisation of POMs based on the weighted ranking.
The delivery of all the Council POMs will take a number of years to deliver given both the legislative requirements and the need for community engagement.
POMs may be developed for individual parks or generic POMs may be developed, which cover a number of parks. Individual POMs are appropriate for the large regional parks and parks with sporting grounds. Generic POMs are appropriate to address all neighbourhood and pocket parks. The parks listed in Attachment 1 identify the neighbourhood and pocket parks which are suitable for inclusion within a generic POM.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Council has been allocated $30,000 funding from the Government for the development of POMs for Crown Lands. This funding is likely to only cover the preparation of one POM. Given that there are 39 areas of Crown Land under Council’s care and management, the costs in preparing plans of management are likely to vastly exceed this. In this respect, it is recommended that Council write to the NSW Department of Industry seeking additional funding support for the preparation of draft POMs for Crown Lands. It is noted that there is a funding cap of $100,000 from Government to support POMs and it is recommended Council should seek the maximum funding level.
Council has a budget of $200,000 in 2018/19 set aside for the preparation of park POMs. It is intended that this funding will be utilised to engage a consultant, through a competitive tendering process, to prepare the prioritised POMs.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Council’s Legal Services Section has been assisting Council’s Parks Planning and Engagement team with the administrative requirements of the CLM Act.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Legislatively there are significant requirements for community engagement in the preparation and development of each Park POM, which will be adhered to at the appropriate time in the development of the POMs.
CONCLUSION
The report seeks endorsement from Council for the categorisations of Crown Lands and the prioritisation of parks POMs.
1.⇩ |
Prioritisation of Parks POMs |
2.⇩ |
Categorisation of Crown Lands |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Heritage Pub Protections Update
Prepared By: Steve Roseland - Senior Strategic Planner
Authorised By: David Birds - Group Manager Strategic Planning
SUMMARY In July 2018 Council resolved (C0718) to provide information on the heritage protections currently covering local pubs in the Inner West Council local government area (LGA) and to examine ways in which these protections could be extended. Council also determined to liaise with architectural schools and departments to investigate whether they can assist Council in undertaking relevant heritage assessments. This report updates on these actions. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the report be noted.
|
BACKGROUND
Extraordinary Council Meeting – 3 July 2018
A Notice of Motion was considered relating to the conversion of pubs within the Inner West Council area to other uses and the potential impacts that such proposals can have on the heritage of the area.
The potential for the loss of more pubs which contribute to the famous pub culture of the area was noted as an important concern and that there is a need to investigate which local pubs might require heritage protections, by virtue of their age, community significance and concern, and architectural features.
Council resolved (C0718) the following:
THAT Council:
1. Provide information on which pubs in the Inner West Council local government area have heritage protection and which do not;
2. Identify a program for an investigation into which pubs in the area have the highest architectural, historical and social heritage and are most in need of further heritage protection; and
3. Liaise with architectural schools and departments to enquire whether they would be interested in carrying out pro bono heritage assessments as a study of this niche area of Sydney history.
UPDATE
Inner West Council Pubs Current Heritage Protections
Council staff have reviewed the heritage mapping and Schedule 5 (Environmental Heritage) in the Ashfield Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2013, Leichhardt LEP 2013 and Marrickville LEP 2011, to determine which pubs in the Inner West Council LGA currently have heritage protection and which do not. These are listed in Attachment 1.
There are currently 66 pubs in the Inner West LGA. 11 (17%) have no heritage protection, 24 (36%) are protected by their location in a heritage conservation area and 31 (47%) are individually heritage listed.
As it currently stands 83% of pubs within Inner West Council have some form of heritage protection through the former Council’s LEPs, either by site specific heritage listing or by being located within a conservation area, and therefore require Council consent for any major works.
A heritage conservation area is shown within a Council’s LEP as an area with identified historical, aesthetic and/or social significance. This is to ensure that any development within that area not only retains elements of significance but may preserve, restore or adapt to improve and support ongoing heritage significance and its protection.
A heritage item identifies a specific building/structure for inclusion within Schedule 5 (Environmental Heritage) of a Council’s LEP to preserve and protect, including facades, architectural features, historical spaces and internal design fixtures.
Proposed works in a heritage conservation area or on a heritage item require a development application (DA) to be submitted which is then determined on merit.
If Council is made aware of potential works to a building not afforded heritage protections Council can consider seeking an Interim Heritage Order (IHO) to protect the building, if the building/structure has potential heritage significance, to allow an assessment for a heritage listing to take place.
Inner West Council Pubs Current Zoning Controls
A preliminary assessment carried out of the zoning of the pubs identified at Attachment 1 indicates that generally the LEP zoning of a pub is based on the character of the surrounding development such that, for example, pubs located in residential areas tend to have residential zonings.
As a result permissible uses for existing pubs under the current LEPs will reflect those zonings, resulting in residential use generally being permissible for pubs in Residential zones and business related uses being permissible in the Business zones. Shop-top housing is also permissible in the B4 Business zone.
This means that any pub could be in danger of the pub use changing to another alternative permissible use under current planning controls subject to the securing of a suitable development consent. Typically, pubs zoned R1 (General Residential) are vulnerable to potential residential conversion which would comply with current zoning, which has happened in a number of other areas of inner Sydney. Those zoned B2 (Local Centre) may be subject to adaptive reuse, also complying with current zoning, such as the recent changes to the Town Hall Hotel in Balmain.
Program for Investigation of Pubs Needing Heritage Protection
Council has now commenced the preparation of the Inner West Local Environmental Plan which will establish new and consistent planning controls across the whole Inner West LGA. This is an opportunity for the consideration of a new approach to the zoning of important heritage items, in which consideration can be given to zoning aims and objectives to reflect the desired land use (i.e. pub/hospitality/entertainment venue) and planning controls to reduce or remove development pressures and protect buildings/structures including heritage, floor space ratio (FSR), heights and local clauses. These can seek to support the pub culture of the Inner West as it adapts to changing business circumstances and can also include the consideration of the introduction of potential new heritage items. This new LEP work is already underway however it must be noted that the development of new zonings and associated controls is integrated into the program for the preparation of the new Inner West Local Environmental Plan which will take at least two years to complete.
If Council wishes to consider introducing heritage listing of specific local pubs earlier these buildings will need to be the subject of LEP amendments to the relevant former Council LEPs. Consideration could be given to the identification of potential pubs for early listing in association with supporting work that could be carried out with local universities. Some potential opportunities for this work to be carried out on a pro bono basis are currently being explored by Council staff as is outlined later in this report.
If early proposals for new heritage listings are to be developed supporting expert advice will need to be secured from experienced heritage specialists. However, as noted above, it appears that there may be scope for initial exploratory supporting work to be carried out on the justification for early heritage proposals with local universities on a pro bono basis. This is being examined with some local universities and staff will update Council on these discussions as they proceed. Potential sources of any additional expert advice required, and how that could be resourced, would then be the subject of a further report to Council identifying the outcomes of ongoing discussions and potential actions arising from them. If pro bono supporting specialist work cannot be identified this will require a new budget allocation as there is no current allocation for this work to be progressed in the current financial year outside of the longer term LEP project. The cost of specialist expert heritage from private consultants to support a heritage listing application may be $15,000 - $20,000 or more per pub depending on the size and characteristics of the pub involved.
Liaison with Local Universities
Council officers have held initial discussions with several Sydney universities to enquire whether they would be interested, and have the capacity, to carry out pro bono heritage assessment of pubs within the Inner West LGA. It appears that some opportunities may exist for joint working with some universities on this issue and staff are continuing to explore these opportunities. An outline of the current position follows.
1 Sydney University
Council officers have held initial discussions with the Sydney School of Architecture, Design and Planning on how it might be able to assist. The School has indicated an interest in exploring opportunities which have the potential to blend their heritage and planning expertise in supporting work. Discussions will be held with the School’s heritage expert soon to examine how his expertise can be combined with the School’s planning expertise on the planning policy issue of safeguarding important community infrastructure that serves a social planning purpose. It appears that there could be scope for the involvement of students in this work as part of structured coursework.
2 University of Technology Sydney
Council officers have held discussions with University of Technology Sydney (UTS) which has indicated an interest in assisting Council, however it appears that it may not be able to offer significant pro bono expert heritage advice but is more able to assist in exploring the policy issues involved and how to support the continuing functioning of existing pubs. Matters raised through the discussions included:
· Considering the relationship between the heritage protections and potential benefits and restrictions for the economic use of the premises.
· Focusing on the role the pubs play in local communities, their intrinsic value as a social hub and meeting place for residents/special occasions.
· Acknowledging the value the local pub has as an operating hospitality venue over a purely land speculation/mixed-use development opportunity and using that as a way to combat campaigns run on an anti-alcohol/anti-social behaviour platform, as many of these venues transform into family friendly establishments more orientated towards food provision.
· Acknowledgment of the difficulty in requiring businesses to stay open in identified locations as the market changes.
· Need for an approach that focuses on how best to adaptively re-use these locations, or part of the locations, to ensure they are not demolished and potentially re-developed.
· Potential to working with owners to make them aware of the opportunities including involvement of Council’s Economic Development Unit.
· Community feedback is essential to determine what they would like to see happen to these venues and help identify the value assigned by local residents.
· Potential for encouraging and facilitating where necessary the movement of micro/craft breweries into former pubs, helping to preserve similar land uses while promoting local business and employment opportunities, including helping to relieve pressure on industrial land loss.
· Using online/mobile applications to better and more widely show history of buildings/structure and make residents and patrons more aware of the historical, aesthetic and social significance.
The UTS School of Built Environment (Design Architecture & Building) has offered potential postgraduate students to undertake an assessment of existing pubs, looking at adaptive re-use options to work with owners to explore how to ensure that development pressures do not see further closures. It is intended to examine how this offer can be developed to assist Council. It is understood that this work could be carried out in the first semester in 2019.
It is also proposed to involve Council’s Economic Development Unit in this work to seek to identify means to encourage successful business models at existing pubs and to consider how to encourage adaptive reuse of buildings that maintain a pub style operation.
3 University of NSW
Council officers are holding continuing discussions with UNSW through its Faculty of Built Environment and City Planning Program about how it can be of assistance in assessing the heritage significance of pubs within the Inner West. The University staff have expressed an interest in examining how it can work with Council and Council staff are aiming to hold detailed discussions with architectural and heritage specialists on possible options in the near future.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None at present. If Council wishes to consider introducing heritage listing of specific local pubs earlier than within the new Inner West LEP program, and ongoing discussions with universities determine that additional work will be required to support these listings beyond pro bono work offered, this will require a new budget allocation as there is no allocation for this work in the current financial year outside of the longer term LEP project.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Nil.
CONCLUSION
The current heritage protections for existing pubs in the Inner West LGA have been identified. The opportunity to introduce new planning controls and heritage protections for existing pubs to protect has been identified in the new Inner West LEP program, but this is unlikely to be concluded until at least two years. If Council wishes to consider the earlier introduction of heritage protections for certain pubs this could draw on opportunities being explored with several local universities for potential pro bono supporting work. If the universities are unable to offer sufficient expert advice to support any proposed earlier protections a budget allocation will need to be made for this work.
1.⇩ |
Inner West Pubs Heritage Status |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Proposed Expansion of Longitude Building, 36 James Craig Road, Rozelle
Prepared By: Gibran Khouri - Strategic Planner
Authorised By: David Birds - Group Manager Strategic Planning
SUMMARY The Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) has received a proposal from Ozton Pty Limited, relating to the existing Longitude office building at 36 James Craig Road, Rozelle. Early design concepts indicate that the proposal will add five to eight storeys to the existing building (or approximately 19 metres in height), 4,800sqm of additional gross floor area, capacity for an additional 409 employees and no additional parking.
The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the planning process associated with this development, identify key issues that need to be addressed as part of the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) and to note the considerable impacts that would result from the construction of a building of the height indicated.
This is the first stage of a State Significant Development (SSD) process. Before a proponent can prepare an application, DPE is required to prepare and issue SEARs. This details requirements for what needs to be included in the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Council has received correspondence from DPE requesting feedback on key issues and on the drafting of SEARs.
Given the proposed height is of great concern, it is considered appropriate for Council to actively raise these concerns with key stakeholders early in the process before an application is prepared. This would be in addition to the response on the SEARs. Following the SEARs being released, if a SSD application is prepared by the proponent, a further report would be brought to Council for the purpose of endorsing a detailed submission responding to the application. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Writes to the local State and Federal Members of Parliament, Minister for Planning and Minister for Heritage to state its strong opposition to any proposal to increase the height of the building due to the unacceptable heritage, visual and other impacts; and
2. Forwards this report to the Department of Planning and Environment, to identify key issues and to inform the preparation of the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements.
|
BACKGROUND
The existing four to five storey commercial office building at 36 James Craig Road was approved in 2006 and was built within the height limit (RL23m) as specified in the Rozelle and Blackwattle Bays Maritime Precincts Master Plan (RBBMPMP). At the time, the former Leichhardt Council raised a number of concerns in relation to the proposal such as parking provision and visual impacts.
A modification application in February 2015 proposed the erection of a rectangular 3m high light box above the existing stairwell of the building. This was approved and has since been constructed.
A number of proposals currently exist in the vicinity of Glebe Island:
· Multi-User Facility - this would involve the construction and operation of a multi-user facility for the import, storage and distribution of dry bulk materials (e.g. sand and aggregates). It would operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week.
· Relocation of Hanson Construction concrete batching plants to Glebe Island.
· Stage 3 Westconnex - use of White Bay as a construction staging site for WestConnex and the Western Harbour Tunnel.
Council has forwarded a number of submissions this year in relation to these proposals including to the Port Authority on 28 February and 27 March and DPE on 15 May. The proponent for the proposed aggregate handling and concrete batching facility is currently reviewing submissions prior to assessment by DPE. Council may be given the opportunity to provide further comments prior to final assessment. In relation to the multi-user facility, no further updates have been received from the Port Authority since the Review of Environmental Factors was exhibited earlier in the year.
CURRENT PROPOSAL
Council has received correspondence from DPE requesting feedback on key issues and assessment requirements for the proposed extension to the existing Longitude building by 23 November 2018. Council officers have requested an extension of the deadline to 29 November 2018 so that Council can consider the preliminary proposal at its meeting on 27 November 2018. This extension has been granted by DPE.
Inner West Council would not be the consent authority for the proposed development and would be notified as a relevant stakeholder to provide comments to the DPE with the NSW Planning Minister recommending approval or refusal.
Key elements of the proposal as shown on the DPE website include:
· Additional five to eight storeys to the existing Longitude office building which would add an additional 19 metres in height to the building
· 4,800sqm of additional commercial floor space with capacity for an additional 409 employees
· No additional parking.
A concept drawing of the proposal accompanying the request for SEARs follows.
Source: Scott Carver, Drawing AD-SK106, view from Anzac Bridge
Assessment
Currently, given a SSD application is yet to be prepared, correspondence to DPE is primarily for the purpose of providing feedback on the SEARs. Detailed concerns about the nature of the proposal would need to be addressed through a submission to a future SSD application and/or through other means. Notwithstanding this, fundamental concerns can be raised now as a part of the response to the SEARs, and with other key stakeholders.
Given the significant impacts resulting from the proposed height of the building, it would be prudent to raise concerns from an early stage in this process through other means. If an application is prepared by the proponent, following the release of the SEARs, Council would be invited to provide comment, and a detailed submission would be prepared at that stage.
Height
The proposed height is of great concern, particularly due to the sensitive position of the building in between a number of heritage items and within important view corridors. A number of these are identified in the Rozelle and Blackwattle Bays Maritime Precincts Master Plan (RBBMPMP).
The existing height of the building, including the recently built light box is RL25.3 which is slightly higher than the RL23m limit set out in the RBBMPMP. The existing height allows for the retention of important view corridors identified in the RBBMPMP.
The proposed height is RL41.5m, exceeding the RL23m limit. The proponent’s request for SEARs letter refers to this being approximately the same height as the proposed concrete batching plant located north of this building but these proposals, while located near to each other are within entirely different contexts. The position of the Longitude building, close to a number of visual landmarks means that there is greater sensitivity associated with the impacts of increased heights. The significant breach in height proposed would result in considerable visual impacts and impacts on heritage items as discussed in the next section.
Heritage
The proposal is sited within the visual catchment of a number of heritage items listed in the Port Authority of New South Wales Section 170 Heritage Register including the World War II Monument and Glebe Island Silos. Currently, the height of the existing building is lower than the deck of the Anzac Bridge, which effectively removes it from the visual catchment of these items.
View of World War II Monument and Glebe Island Silos
Source: Google Street View
The World War II Monument is positioned to face the traffic approaching the Anzac Bridge, and its position amongst the CBD and sky backdrop is of great importance. Any visual obstruction within this visual catchment, particularly from structures in close proximity is of great concern.
Notably, it is likely that the monument will be overshadowed, particularly in the morning.
Views
In principle, the application is not compatible with the DCP for SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 in relation to the following clauses:
· Section 5.3 states that “buildings should not obstruct views and vistas from public places to the waterway; buildings should not obstruct views of landmarks and features identified on the maps accompanying this DCP.”
· Section 3.2 states that “all development should aim to: minimize any significant impact on views and vistas from and to: public places, landmarks identified on the maps accompanying the DCP and heritage items.”
· Section 5.4 refers to having “a built form which is sympathetic to their surroundings.”
The original assessment of the existing building in December 2006 carefully considered the potential impacts to the ‘three bridges view’ and Anzac Bridge. The Department acknowledged that there was a partial view loss of the three bridges, however, the extent of view loss was considered reasonable with views of the three bridges (Glebe Island, Anzac Bridge, Harbour Bridge) being generally retained. This was in the context of the maximum height being less than the RL23m limit set out in the RBBMPMP. The proposed height of RL41.5m exceeds this limit by 18.5m.
An example of a vantage point, where the view of the Sydney Harbour Bridge could be impacted by the proposal follows.
Existing view of Sydney Harbour Bridge, Glebe Island Silos and Anzac Bridge from Bayview Crescent, Annandale
Source: Google Street View
Traffic, Transport and Parking
The Bays Precinct Transformation Plan outlines development potential with a focus on active and public transport. However the area has limited accessibility other than by car and the provision of mass transport serving this site cannot be assumed. There is limited street parking and the applicant appears to have given little consideration to how the additional 409 employees would access the site. The motorway/interchange proposed nearby (as part of an integrated and far-reaching motorway network) will potentially act as an incentive to drive and the applicant should demonstrate how new employees would be helped to access the site with sustainable transport choices.
Future Use of Bays Precinct
Over the last 10 years Council has received and been invited to comment on numerous development proposals, development applications and modifications to existing approvals for the Bays Precinct Area and was a member of the Bays Precinct Taskforce participating in the development of the ‘Bays Precinct Strategic Framework Report to the NSW Government’ to guide long-term decision making within the Precinct.
Council’s long standing position in relation to the Bays Precinct, including White Bay / Glebe Island, is that cumulative impact of all developments in the area such as the Cruise Passenger Terminal, Rozelle Superyacht Facility, Baileys Marine Refuelling Facility and the Concrete Batching Plant need to be assessed and taken into consideration.
The Bays State Significant Precinct (SSP) preparation managed by UrbanGrowthNSW is currently on-hold following the cessation of negotiations with potential tenants for the core of the technology and innovation hub.
Glebe Island is identified in the “Transformation Plan: The Bays Precinct” (October 2015) as a longer term priority precinct, with Glebe Island currently an integral part of Sydney’s logistics capability for essential construction materials and working harbour services. Glebe Island and White Bay are the only deep-water wharves west of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. The transformation of the Bays Precinct could provide an opportunity to support “blue” economic activities of port and maritime industries, combined with a new mixed use innovation district (White Power Station site).
Even so the possible construction of elements of the SSP over the short to medium term that may incorporate mixed use development, public domain connections and adaptive reuse of the State-listed heritage White Bay Power Station should also be addressed in the EIS to minimise and mitigate any adverse impacts upon local residents.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Not Applicable.
CONCLUSION
Given the proposed height and other impacts of the building are of great concern, it is considered appropriate for Council to raise an in-principle fundamental objection to the proposal and actively raise these concerns with key stakeholders early in the process before an application is prepared. This is in addition to the Council’s response on the SEARs.
In relation to the specific response to consultation on the SEARS, it is recommended that DPE incorporate the following to form part of the SEARs:
· The RBBMPMP is currently not part of the list of “Environmental Planning Instruments, Policies, Plans and Guidelines” within the draft SEARs. This must form part of this list given its detailed provisions regarding height, views and vistas. The detailed provisions align with the intent of key clauses contained in DCP for SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005.
· The view analysis should be comprehensive and cover key locations along the entire foreshore from Rozelle Bay to Blackwattle Bay as well as locations such as Annandale (e.g. Bayview Crescent) in addition to Pyrmont and the Anzac Bridge itself. In particular the potential for the proposal to impact on views to key landmarks such as the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
· The Glebe Island Silos and World War II Monument act as prominent features within this vicinity and the visual relationship of the proposal in the context of these heritage items needs careful consideration through the visual assessment. Part of the assessment should take into consideration overshadowing impacts. This analysis should feed into the Heritage Impact Statement.
· An analysis of the height of the proposed development (in RL) should be undertaken comparing it with the deck of the Anzac Bridge, Glebe Island Silos, World War II Monument as well as proposed concrete batching plant and multi-user facility.
· A parking assessment needs to be prepared to consider the impact on capacity of parking on surrounding areas, given the large number of potential new occupants.
· Details on bicycle parking and end of trip facilities.
· A travel plan should be required with the following components:
o Objectives clearly prioritising site access by public transport, walking and cycling (including combinations of) and discouraging access by single occupant cars
o Specific actions to address how the above objectives will be satisfied
o Nominate the party responsible for coordinating and implementing the travel plan.
· Loading needs should be outlined including the frequency and quantity of visits by delivery/servicing vehicles as well as vehicle sizes likely to be needed.
· Cumulative impact of all developments in the area such as the Cruise Passenger Terminal, Rozelle Superyacht Facility, Baileys Marine Refuelling Facility, Concrete Batching Plant and Western Harbour Tunnel need to be assessed and taken into consideration.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Proposed Compliance & Enforcement Levy
Prepared By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
Authorised By: Rik Hart - Interim General Manager
SUMMARY Council is responsible for unlawful activity compliance and enforcement under a variety of legislation. A number of NSW councils offset the costs of performing their compliance and enforcement functions through a specific levy on development applications. The introduction of levy is recommended for Inner West Council.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. A proposed Compliance & Enforcement Levy of 0.15% per cent of the estimated cost of works of a development application over $100,000, being capped at maximum change of $10,000.00, be placed on public exhibition for a period of not less than 28 days; and
2. A report be provided to Council at the completion of the exhibition period.
|
BACKGROUND
Council is responsible for unlawful activity compliance and enforcement under various pieces legislation. With the current development pressures in the Inner West area, there are greater demands on Council to ensure compliance with legislation. There is also an expectation in the community that Council officers are available to take effective action.
Council’s development compliance, environmental health and fire safety functions are currently subsidised by $2.5 million per annum through the budget for the Environmental Health and Building Regulation team.
Since the advent of private building certification in NSW, the financial burden to councils of performing its development compliance activities has significantly increased. At present Inner West Council only performs between 15 – 30% of the building certification work in the LGA, meaning that Council does not receive the income for the remaining 70 – 85% of the certification work undertaken by private certifiers.
A number of NSW councils offset the costs of performing their compliance and enforcement functions through a specific levy on development applications.
Typically:
· The Levy is payable at the time of lodgement of a Development Application
· The Levy is not payable on s4.55 modification applications
· The Levy is applied pursuant to Section 608 of the Local Government Act
· The Levy will be refunded in full if the Development Application is refused, withdrawn or not acted upon within the timeframe stated in the approval.
The most recent amendments to the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 flagged that these fees will soon be regulated (i.e fee capped) by Department of Planning in “late 2019”. No indication has been provided as to the fee structure.
Table 1: Comparison of Compliance Levies at other NSW councils
Cost of Works |
Penrith |
Tweed |
Woollahra |
Central Coast |
Ryde |
Liverpool |
Canterbury Bankstown |
Up to $50,000 |
$0.00 |
0.10% |
0.1% (min $75) |
0.2200% |
A set 0.174% fee (minimum fee of $99.00); paid at CC stage |
0.25% (minimum $75.00) |
Nil |
$50,000 - $100,000 |
$60.00 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.1925% |
0.174% |
0.25% |
Nil |
$100,000 - $250,000 |
$60.00 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.1650% |
0.174% |
0.25% |
0.25% |
$250,000 - $500,000 |
$60.00 plus $0.50 per $1000 in excess of $250,000 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.1375% |
0.174% |
0.25% |
0.25% |
$500,000 - $1,000,000 |
$206.00 plus $0.25 per $1000 in excess of $500,000 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.1100% |
0.174% |
0.25% |
0.25% |
$1,000,000 - $5,000,000 |
$386.00 plus $0.10 per $1000 in excess of $1,000,000 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.0825% |
0.174% |
0.25% |
0.25% |
Over $5,000,000 |
$386.00 plus $0.10 per $1000 in excess of $1,000,000 |
0.1% (max.$2000) |
0.1% (max $5000) |
$4,515.00 |
0.174% |
0.25% |
0.25% |
In setting a proposed fee, Council must have regard to Section 610D of the Local Government Act 1993 which states:
610D How does a council determine the amount of a fee for a service?
(1) A council, if it determines the amount of a fee for a service, must take into consideration the following factors:
(a) the cost to the council of providing the service,
(b) the price suggested for that service by any relevant industry body or in any schedule of charges published, from time to time, by the Department,
(c) the importance of the service to the community,
(d) any factors specified in the regulations.
Noting the current costs of Council’s Environmental Health & Building Regulation functions, a fee of up to 0.2% of the cost of works of a development application would be considered appropriate.
The table below provides options for various fee structures, between 0.1% – 0.15%, and the estimated revenue from that fee structure.
Table 2: Fee Structure Options
Cost of Works |
Option A |
Option B |
Option C |
Option D |
Option E |
Up to $50,000 |
0.1% (min $75) |
Nil |
Nil |
Nil |
Nil |
$50,000 - $100,000 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
Nil |
Nil |
Nil |
$100,000 - $250,000 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.15% |
$250,000 - $500,000 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.15% |
$500,000 - $1,000,000 |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.10% |
0.15% |
$1,000,000 - $5,000,000 |
0.10% |
0.15% |
0.10% |
0.15% |
0.15% |
Over $5,000,000 |
0.1% (max $5000) |
0.15% (max $10,000) |
0.1% (max $5000) |
0.15% (max $10,000) |
0.15% (max $10,000) |
Estimated Income |
$700,000 |
$900,000 |
$600,000 |
$880,000 |
$1,000,000 |
Option E is considered the preferred option, having regard to Council’s $2.5M operating budget in this area, and noting that it does not raise a levy on small applications under $100,000.
The implications of the preferred Option E in terms of application fees for customers is set out below:
Table 3: Total Fees for Development Applications, with Levy
Current DA fees |
||||
Cost of works |
$200,000.00 |
$400,000.00 |
$1,000,000.00 |
$10,000,000.00 |
DA Fee |
$898.00 |
$1,511.00 |
$2,565.00 |
$15,575.00 |
Notification |
$720.00 |
$720.00 |
$877.50 |
$1,105.00 |
Document Management |
$87.65 |
$133.25 |
$438.20 |
$604.75 |
Current Total Fees |
$1,705.65 |
$2,364.25 |
$3,880.70 |
$17,284.75 |
Compliance Levy (0.15%) |
$300.00 |
$600.00 |
$1,500.00 |
$7,500.00 |
New Total fees |
$2,005.65 |
$2,964.25 |
$5,380.70 |
$24,784.75 |
Percentage Increase |
17.59% |
25.38% |
38.65% |
43.39% |
The proposed levy will increase Council’s ability to monitor and respond to compliance and enforcement activities, improve community education, and deliver continuous improvement and stronger governance.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The proposed levy provides increased revenue to Council. The recommended “Option E” is estimated to be approximately $1,000,000 per annum.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
It is recommended that the proposed levy be publicly exhibited for a period of 28 days, with public comment invited.
It is intended that this exhibition would align with the public exhibition of the draft Inner West Compliance and Enforcement Policy.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Abandoned Shopping Trolley Policy and Protocol
Prepared By: Graeme Palmer - Parking and Ranger Services Manager
Authorised By: Harjeet Atwal - Group Manager Development Assessment and Regulatory Services
SUMMARY This report outlines what containment and collection systems the major shopping retailers within the Inner West Local Government area have in place to deal with the abandonment and careless placement of shopping trolleys and provides information regarding the option for regulation and enforcement. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The draft Impounding Policy (Shopping Trolleys) be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days;
2. The results of the public exhibition are presented to Council along with a final Impounding Policy (Shopping Trolleys) for adoption; and
3. The Impounding (Shopping Trolleys) Protocol be received and noted.
|
BACKGROUND
At the Council meeting of the 21 August 2018 the following Notice of Motion was carried:
“1. Council undertake a review of existing major shopping retailers (e.g. Woolworths, Coles, Aldi, IGA) within the LGA to identify what (if any) “containment” systems (i.e. coin exchange, auto locking etc.) are in place to reduce the ongoing abandonment of trolleys in public places;
2. Council undertake a review of existing major shopping retailers (e.g. Woolworths, Coles, Aldi, IGA) within the LGA to identify what collection systems are in place to track (e.g. GPS or community reporting) and collect trolleys abandoned in public places;
3. Using the information obtained in points 1 & 2 above, initiate a review of the former Ashfield Council - Abandoned Shopping Trolleys Policy (2012) and SSROC recommendations against relevant legislative provisions with the aim of application for the Inner West Council Local Government Area; and
4. A report outlining, findings, options and a draft policy is to be reported to Council.”
This report responds to the above Notice of Motion and contains a review of the major retailers existing containment and collection systems, an enforcement option and a draft Policy (Attachment 1) and Protocol (Attachment 2).
REVIEW OF EXISTING CONTAINMENT AND COLLECTION SYSTEMS
In order to determine what major retailers are currently doing to address this problem 21 individual major retail stores were contacted across the LGA comprising of 5 Woolworths, 2 Coles, 3 Aldi, 1 Supabarn and 10 IGA stores. The information sought was:
1. What (if any) containment systems (e.g coin, auto locking etc) are in place to reduce the ongoing abandonment of trolleys in public places and
2. What (if any) collection systems are in place to track (e.g GPS, Community Reporting) and collect trolleys abandoned in public places. The results are as follows:
STORE |
LOCATION |
CONTAINMENT SYSTEM |
COLLECTION PROCESS |
Woolworths |
Leichhardt Market Place |
Perimeter lock system |
1 street run per day 7 days per week within a 2km radius of store. Reliant upon public reports for trolleys outside of 2km radius. |
Woolworths |
Illawarra Road, Marrickville |
Nil |
A staff member sweeps streets within a 2km radius until 9pm 7 days. Reliant upon public reports for trolleys outside of 2km radius. |
Woolworths |
Marrickville Metro |
Perimeter lock system |
2 street runs per day 7 days per week within a 2km radius of store. Reliant upon public reports for trolleys outside of 2km radius. |
Woolworths |
Darling Street, Balmain |
Nil |
2 street runs per day 7 days per week within a 2km radius of store. Reliant upon public reports for trolleys outside of 2km radius. |
Woolworths |
Liverpool Road, Ashfield |
Perimeter lock system |
2 street runs per day 7 days per week within a 2km radius of store. Reliant upon public reports for trolleys outside of 2km radius. |
Coles |
Norton Plaza |
Nil |
Drive around collection service 7 days per week |
Coles |
Liverpool Road, Ashfield |
Perimeter lock system |
Drive around collection service 7 days per week |
Aldi |
Leichhardt Market Place |
Coin |
Street sweep within 3km radius 7 days per week |
Aldi |
Marrickville Metro |
Coin |
Street sweep within 3km radius 7 days per week |
Aldi |
Liverpool Road, Ashfield |
Coin |
Street sweep within 3km radius 3 days per week |
Supabarn |
Booth Street Annandale |
Nil-Only 10 Trolleys |
3-4 Street sweeps per day. |
IGA |
Booth Street, Annandale |
No trolleys |
No trolleys |
IGA |
Catherine Street, Lilyfield |
Nil |
Nil |
IGA |
Holt Street, Stanmore |
Nil-Only small volume of trolleys |
Nil |
IGA |
Hardie Street, Summer Hill |
Coin |
Staff sweep of carpark and twice per week street sweep up to 2km radius |
IGA |
Ramsey Road, Haberfield |
Coin |
43 Trolleys in store counted everyday – if any missing, store owner drives around to collect |
IGA |
Darling Street, Rozelle |
No trolleys |
No trolleys |
IGA |
King Street, Newtown |
Coin |
Staff sweep ‘local area’ |
IGA |
Enmore Road, Enmore |
No trolleys |
No trolleys |
IGA |
Norton Street, Leichhardt |
No trolleys |
No trolleys |
IGA |
Canterbury Road, Dulwich Hill |
Nil |
No trolleys permitted off site, staff take trolleys to the rear of store and unload directly to customer |
The review of existing containment and collection systems from the major retailers in the Inner West LGA has revealed the following:
· 30% of stores either do not have any trolleys or have a very small number,
· 50% of stores do not have any form of containment system for their trolleys,
· 70% of stores have a regular ‘street sweep’ within 2-3kms of the store location.
It is clear from the above information that the lack of containment systems is the major contributing factor in shopping trolleys being left abandoned and unattended in the streets of our LGA. Many stores carry out regular ‘street sweeps’ as they are well aware of the problem, however whilst this assists in removing the trolleys from the streets, it does nothing to reduce the daily reoccurrence of this issue.
REVIEW OF FORMER ASHFIELD COUNCIL ABANDONED SHOPPING TROLLEY POLICY
In preparing this report and the draft Policy and Protocol, the former Ashfield Council Abandoned Shopping Trolley Policy (Attachment 3) was reviewed with the aim of application for the Inner West Council. Please note, although SSROC discussions occurred, no formal recommendations were made therefore no consideration has been given to this effect.
The majority of this policy appears aspirational at best but unfortunately is largely unenforceable for reasons outlined below.
There was value in the policy in relation to educational information. This information could be used to provide retailers with advice on how they may implement better containment practices.
In reviewing the Policy the following items were identified that have not been included in the Inner West Council draft Impounding Policy (Shopping Trolleys):
· “Generally, Council officers will notify the trolley owner or nominated trolley collection agent of the location of abandoned trolleys which pose a risk or nuisance and require collection of the trolley within 1 hour of notification. Abandoned trolleys which do not, in the Council officers opinion, pose a risk or nuisance will be required to be collected within 24 hours from the time of notification.”
This method is impractical as it required multiple attendances to the same trolley to determine compliance, either after 1 hour or 24 hours dependent upon whether the trolley posed a risk. This is not considered to be an effective or efficient use of Council’s staffing resources.
· “Impounded trolleys belonging to retailers who have installed wheel locks, coin return mechanisms or similar systems or who have provided ongoing trolley, containment management procedures were able to collect their trolleys without charge within 28 days from the date of being impounded”.
This ‘free’ release of impounded trolleys does not encourage any change in behaviour by the retailers. As such impounding fees are to be applied.
· “Council accepted that some customers may utilise shopping trolleys to convey goods for some distance beyond the retail premises to where they live. It acknowledged that some shopping trolleys will be abandoned notwithstanding the type of management system in place. The policy did not intend to prohibit the use of shopping trolleys but aimed to provide procedures for both Council and retailers to deal with abandoned trolleys and to promote the use of alternate means for customers to convey their purchases such as using their own shopping carts.”
The manner in which this is worded gives the reader the impression that it is okay or is generally accepted that trolleys will be utilised in this fashion.
· Retailers and Shopping Centre Management Responsibilities – The Policy imposed a significant set of ‘aspirational’ conditions upon retailers and managers of shopping centres (listed below), all of which are unenforceable as there are no provisions under any legislation that permits Council to enforce any such requirements.
FORMER LEGACY COUNCIL POLICIES
In developing this new Policy, the former Ashfield Council Abandoned Shopping Trolley Policy was considered. It is appropriate that on adoption of the new Policy, the former Ashfield Council Abandoned Shopping Trolley Policy be rescinded by Council. This will be recommended when the final Policy is brought back to Council under report for adoption.
The former Marrickville and Leichhardt Councils did not have a Policy relating to Abandoned Shopping Trolleys, rather internal working protocols using provisions under the Act.
ENFORCEMENT
Councils Regulatory Services staff will utilise the relevant provisions under the Impounding Act 1993 (“the Act) to assist in the regulation of this matter. The Impounding Protocol (Shopping Trolleys) has been developed to guide Council Officers in the considerations that are to be taken into account when investigating reports of abandoned and/or unattended shopping trolleys.
Under Councils current 2018/19 Fees and Charges, if Council proceed to impound a single shopping trolley, the below fees and charges are applicable for its return should it be claimed within 28 days
· Impounding Contractors Collection and Transport Fee $165.00
· Administration Fee for Serving Notice of Impounded Article $80.00
· Storage Fee Per Day $16.00
Should the shopping trolley not be claimed within 28 days, in accordance with the Act, it will be sold or otherwise disposed of.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
External contractors would be required to facilitate the physical collection of the trolleys. This has been quoted at $150.00 + GST per individual trolley collected, if large volumes and/or complexities are involved in the collection, then this will be discussed with the contractor and each required impounding will be quoted individually. This would require a budget increase to cover the costs of the impounding contractor; however any expenditure may be recuperated via impounding fees and charges.
Any impounding program generated as a result of this Policy can be sustained within our current structure.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Not applicable
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
It is recommended that the draft Policy be placed on public exhibition for 28 days.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of the draft Impounding Policy (Shopping Trolleys) and Protocol are to guide Council Officers responsible for dealing with abandoned or unattended shopping trolleys in public places in a manner that is accountable and transparent, consistent, proportional and timely and to assist the community in understanding its role and the role of Council in relation to this activity.
This report is seeking Council’s endorsement of the draft Impounding Policy (Shopping Trolleys) to be placed on public exhibition for 28 days, with the results presented to Council along with a final Policy for adoption.
1.⇩ |
Draft Impounding Policy (Shopping Trolleys) |
2.⇩ |
Draft Impounding Protocol (Shopping Trolleys) |
3.⇩ |
Former Ashfield Council Abandoned Shopping Trolleys Policy |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Draft Inner West Council Asbestos Policy
Prepared By: Simon Grierson - Environmental Health & Building Regulation Section
Authorised By: Harjeet Atwal - Group Manager Development Assessment and Regulatory Services
SUMMARY Council resolved at the 14 August 2018 Council Meeting with a Notice of Motion that a report on how Council can adopt the office of Local Government Model Asbestos Policy for NSW.
A draft Asbestos Policy in accordance with the resolution. The draft policy provides guidance and information on how to manage asbestos for Council workers, the local community and wider public.
This report is seeking Council’s endorsement of the draft Asbestos Policy to be placed on public exhibition for 28 days, with the results presented to Council along with a final Policy for adoption.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The draft Inner West Council Asbestos Policy be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days; and
2. The results of the public exhibition are presented to Council along with a final Inner West Council Asbestos Policy for adoption
|
BACKGROUND
Council resolved at the 14 August 2018 Council Meeting with a Notice of Motion that a report on how Council can adopt the office of Local Government Model Asbestos Policy for NSW.
A draft Asbestos Policy in accordance with the resolution. The draft policy provides guidance and information on how to manage asbestos for Council workers, the local community and wider public.
POLICY DISCUSSION
Inner West Council acknowledges the serious health hazard of exposure to asbestos.
Council has an important dual role in minimising exposure to asbestos, as far as is reasonably practicable, for both:
§ residents and the public within the Local Government Area (LGA)
§ workers (employees and other persons) in Council workplaces.
The draft Asbestos Policy (Attachment 1) has been prepared taking into consideration the Model Asbestos Policy for NSW Councils in accordance with Section 23A of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government NSW Developing Your Council’s Asbestos Policy.
The draft Policy objective is to outline:
§ the role of Council and other organisations in managing asbestos;
§ Council's relevant regulatory powers;
§ Council's approach to dealing with naturally occurring asbestos, sites contaminated by asbestos and emergencies or incidents;
§ general advice for residents on renovating homes that may contain asbestos;
§ Council's development approval process for developments that may involve asbestos and conditions of consent;
§ waste management and regulation procedures for asbestos waste in the LGA;
§ Council's approach to managing asbestos containing materials in Council workplaces;
§ sources of further information.
Part 1 in Section 6 of the draft Policy includes the sections that are likely to be of most interest to the local community and wider public.
Part 2 in Section 6 of the draft Policy is information that applies to workers associated with Council including employees, contractors, consultants, and volunteers (as defined by the NSW Work Health and Safety Regulation 2017).
Definitions for key terms used in the draft Policy are provided in Appendix C and acronyms are listed in Appendix D.
The draft Policy applies to friable and non-friable (bonded) asbestos within the LGA. The draft Policy outlines Council's commitment and responsibilities in relation to safely managing asbestos and contains general advice. For specific advice, individuals are encouraged to contact Council or the appropriate organisation (contact details are listed in Appendix E of the draft Policy).
The draft Policy does not provide detail on specific procedures. Practical guidance on how to manage risks associated with asbestos and asbestos containing material can be found in the:
§ Code of practice on how to manage and control asbestos in the workplace (catalogue no. WC03560) published by SafeWork NSW (Attachment 2);
§ Code of practice on how to safely remove asbestos (catalogue no. WC03561) published by SafeWork NSW (Attachment 3);
§ Additional guidance material listed in Appendix B of the draft Policy.
FORMER LEGACY COUNCIL POLICIES
In developing this new Policy, the Asbestos Policy (former Leichhardt Council) was considered. It is appropriate that on adoption of the new Policy, the former Leichhardt Council Asbestos Policy (Attachment 4) be rescinded by Council. This will be recommended when the final Policy is brought back to Council under report for adoption.
The former Ashfield and Marrickville Council’s did not have an adopted Asbestos Policy hence no rescission is required.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications arising from the Policy.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Feedback from the following stakeholders have been received, reviewed and incorporated where appropriate in the draft Asbestos Policy: Council’s Trees, Parks and Sportsfields Group, Council’s Footpaths, Roads, Traffic and Stormwater Group, Council’s Environment and Sustainability Group, Council’s Integration, Customer Service and Business Excellence Group, Council’s Legal Services Group, Development Assessment and Regulatory Services Group, Council’s Human Resources Group, Council’s Strategic Planning Group, Council’s Properties, Major Projects and Facilities Group, and the NSW Internal Ombudsman.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
It is recommended that the draft Inner West Council Asbestos Policy be placed on public exhibition for 28 days.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of draft Asbestos policy is to provide guidance and information on how to manage asbestos for Council workers, the local community and wider public.
This report is seeking Council’s endorsement of the draft Asbestos Policy to be placed on public exhibition for 28 days, with the results presented to Council along with a final Policy for adoption.
1.⇩ |
Draft Inner West Council Asbestos Policy |
2.⇩ |
Code of practice on how to manage control asbestos workplace-by SafeWork NSW |
3.⇩ |
Code of practice on how to safely remove asbestos - by SafeWork NSW |
4.⇩ |
Former Leichhardt Council Asbestos Policy |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: 2018/19 First Quarter Budget Review.
Prepared By: Daryl Jackson - Financial Partnering and Analytics Manager
Authorised By: Michael Tzimoulas - Deputy General Manager Chief Financial and Administration Officer
SUMMARY Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 requires that a quarterly budget review be considered by Council, which shows revised estimates for income and expenditure for the financial year indicating whether Council’s financial position is satisfactory and makes recommendations for remedial action where needed.
The Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS) are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting. This report provides a comprehensive high level overview of Council’s financial position as at 30 September 2018 in accordance with the Code, together with supplementary information. Any forecast results are projections as at 30 June 2019.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The report be received and noted; and 2. Council approves the budget adjustments required.
|
Discussion
This report provides an overview of Council’s quarterly financial position as at 30 September 2018. The QBRS report is prepared in accordance with the Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting. It includes information on Council’s Operating, Capital and Net Budget Position as at 30 September 2018.
During the quarter, a detailed review of both the operating and capital budgets were undertaken to reconfirm the budget projections for the current financial year. A number of adjustments have been made (detailed below) which include adjustments for the change in grant and contribution revenues, the correction for unidentified revenue brought forward from the former Councils, the reclassification of capital funding between restricted and working fund and the rephrasing of revenue and expenditure in the current financial year as well as into future years.
Council has updated its projected budget result to $5.9 million including capital revenue against that reported in the 2018/19 Adopted Budget of $23.0 million, this is a reduction of $17.1m. Excluding capital revenue, a deficit of $13.7 million has been projected against the 2018/19 Adopted Budget Deficit of $3.1 million.
It is important to note that the change in budgeted result is predominantly due to 2 adjustments made in the Q1 QBRS:
1. Adding unfinished 2017/18 Capital projects that are still work in progress and will be completed in 2018/19 - $8.4m. These projects are funded from prior year budget allocations;
2. Adjusting depreciation to the correct levels as identified in the 2017/18 General Purpose Financial Statements after the ongoing review of the asset register and useful lives of assets - $5.5m. In particular, Building assets have had a thorough valuation and review of their components performed by independent valuer.
At this point, surplus funds (other than the below VPA or Marrickville Hospital funds) have not eventuated.
The Capital Budget will be reviewed throughout the financial year on an ongoing basis with the capital works managers. Changes to the Capital Works will be brought to Council through future QBRS.
Cash Flow forecasts of major projects will be monitored ensuring the expenditure remains in line with the budget. September 2018 year to date capital expenditure totals approximately $5.4 million.
Currently unfunded Council Resolutions.
The following Council resolutions were resolved to be considered at the next Quarterly Budget Review. The proposed budget adjustments do not include these projects and they are proposed to be considered at the next QBRS in Quarter 2:
· WestConnex Air Quality & Noise Monitoring - $250k
· C0618 Item 5 Branding Competition Prizes - $30k
· C0518 Item 7 Economic Impact Assessment (Micro-Brewing) - $40k
· C0918 Item 19 – Allocation of budget to Strategic Planning for ongoing notification about infrastructure projects, rezoning proposals and public meetings - $200k per annum ($2m over 10 year LTFP)
Council has resolved C1018(2) item 2 Dawn Fraser Upgrade to determine funding post grant outcome and C0818(3) Item 5 to be considered in the LTFP if existing funds cannot be found in QBRS. As such, they have not been considered in this QBRS.
Unallocated VPA Funds
Council has received 2 Voluntary Planning Agreements that currently have not been allocated within the budget. A proposed allocation is identified below.
o $1.9m received from 429-449 New Canterbury Rd;
· $0.8m must be allocated to Public Domain works in Dulwich Hill;
· Proposed that balance funds Dulwich Hill Town Centre upgrade or other Dulwich Hill renewal works.
o $1.4m from 14 McGill St, Lewisham.
· $280k proposed to be allocated to Greenway project within the vicinity of the development
· $1.1m proposed to be allocated to renewal work in former Marrickville.
Council has also received $10m from the sale of land relating to the Marrickville Hospital Site. It is proposed that this funding be allocated:
· $1.7m fitout cost for the new Marrickville Library located at the site;
· $1.0m Alex Trevillion Plaza public domain upgrade as per Council resolution;
· $0.6m Henson Park surface upgrade (as per Council resolution);
· $3.5m unfunded and unbudgeted Town Hall renewal and accessibility works for Petersham, Marrickville and Newtown;
· $3.5m to be allocated to synthetic turf review and installation (Council resolution) and/or infrastructure backlog renewal in Marrickville area.
Summary of Budget Movements.
The following are key movements with a brief explanation and impact on Council’s budget:
- Decrease in Capital Expenditure of ($1.5m) predominantly funded by capital grants and contributions
· Trees, Parks and Sportsfields Capital Projects – ($8.3m) - refer to Item 3 below.
· Property Capital Projects – ($3.0m) - refer to Item 4 below.
· Unfinished Projects from 2017/18 – $8.4m - refer to Item 1 & Capital Schedule – Unfinished Projects from 2017/18.
· Footpaths, Roads, Traffic and Stormwater – $0.9m - refer to Item 2 below.
· ICT Capital Projects – $0.1m - refer to Item 12 below.
· Environment and Sustainability Capital Projects – $0.2m - refer to Item 5 below.
· Recreation and Aquatics Capital Projects – $0.2m - refer to Item 10 below.
- Forecast decrease in revenue relating to Capital & Operational Grants & Contributions
· Footpaths, Roads, Traffic & Stormwater - $2.2m (Lilyfield Cycleway $1.2m deferred to future years and a reclassification of $1.0m to working funds from Grant Funds).
· Trees, Parks and Sportfields - $7.8m (2017/18 Greenway Project delayed, included in the 2018/19 1st Quarter QBRS due to a delay from Sydney Trains for their approval to proceed with the project.
- Forecast decrease in revenue relating to User Charges & Fees -
· Environment and Sustainability - $1.2m (reclassification to Domestic Waste Charge – budget alignment to actuals).
· Children and Family Services for the change in the opening of Leichhardt Park Childcare Centre to the 3rd quarter of 2018/19 financial year - $0.6m.
· Community Services & Culture - $0.3m
§ $95k venue hire charges carried forward from amalgamation. This was an overly optimistic calculation based on the usage rates.
§ There is no charge for internal hall hire if used for IWC work related activities. The budget from pre-amalgamation included $50k which has now been removed.
§ $87k revenue carried forward from Leichhardt Council that has no identified source.
§ Meals on Wheels usage is trending lower, fees for this service have been reduced by $60k in line with this trend.
§ $43k impact of council’s fee scales resolution to discount venue hire for not-for-profit groups.
- Forecast increase in revenue relating to Domestic Waste Charges –
· Environment and Sustainability - $1.2m (reclassification from User Fees and Charges – budget alignment to actuals).
- Forecast increase in Employee Costs –
· Strategic Planning $0.7m – due to an increase in headcount to complete the LEP within 2 years as required by the State Government utilising the LEP contribution.
- Forecast increase in Materials and Contracts –
· Strategic Planning $0.8m – for the Community Needs Assessment Study, Developer Contribution Plan and Traffic & Parking Needs Assessments resolutions by Council, the Victoria Roads Precinct Contributions Plan and the Trees DCP mail out – a Council resolution (see Item 7 for the breakdown).
- Depreciation, a change to the useful life of buildings –
· The useful life of Council buildings have been reassessed by an independent assessor resulting in an increase in the annual depreciation charge leading to a change in the depreciation policy reducing the useful life of these assets. This change has impacted the P&L by $5.5m.
Further details can be found in the September 2018 QBRS Movements section of this report.
Report by the Responsible Accounting Officer of Council
Section 203(2) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires a report by Council’s responsible accounting officer regarding the Council’s financial position at the end of each quarter.
The responsible accounting officer is of the opinion that the Quarterly Budget Review Statement for the Inner West Council for the quarter ended 30 September 2018 indicates that Council’s projected financial position at 30 June 2019 will be satisfactory
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The proposed budget adjustments include $8.4m of unfinished capital projects that will be completed in 2018/19. Council’s budget is funded with the deficit reflecting expenses incurred in the current year for ongoing projects, however, funding received in prior years.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
All relevant staff have been consulted during the budget adjustment process.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Nil
1) Primary Financial Statement
2) September 2018 QBRS Movements
ITEM 1 - Unfinished Capital Projects from FY17/18 - See Capital Schedule for details
Increase Capital Expenditure $8,377k
Funded by Externally Restricted Funds $6,323k
Funded by Transfer from Working Funds $2,054k
ITEM 2 - Footpaths, Roads, Traffic & Stormwater
Increase User Charges & Fees $677k
Decrease Other Income $42k
§ Restoration fees of $635k are anticipated to complete restorations for Westconnex Haberfield Stage 1 in 18/19.
Decrease Capital Grants & Contributions $3,137k
Increase Operating Grants & Contributions $938k
§ $1.2m funding for Lilyfield Cycleway construction has moved to 2019/20 as the design is being reviewed in 2018/19.
§ Additional $1.0m of Capital Grant funding relating to construction of Lilyfield Cycleway in the original budget has been moved into future year to achieve the target renewal ratios.
Increase Capital Expenditure $913k
§ $1.0m for Ashfield Town Centre Upgrade Contractual extension of time due to latent conditions. Practical completion expected in 2018/19.
§ $635k Restoration works for Westconnex Haberfield Stage 1 in 2018/19.
§ $350k Whytes Creek Trunk Drainage Design Contribution to Sydney Water who are experiencing delays. William St Pipeline encountered unknown Sydney Rail high voltage cables requiring revised construction methodology.
§ $100k Chester Street Footbridge construction commencement delayed pending resolution of work method in proximity to high pressure gas main and utility approval.
§ $90k Riverside crescent drainage design revision necessary due to service conflicts.
§ $49k Roadside Furniture Design & consultation delayed due to project management resourcing.
§ $72k Booth Street Bridge - Investigation Design and Replacement - Initial tender process for design unsuccessful, delaying completion of design work. Construction planned in 2018/19.
§ $35k Dover Street Road Reconstruction and Queen / Armstrong / Hardy Roundabout Construction balance of funds from design work to contribute to 2018/19 budget.
§ $1.2m decrease of Lilyfield Cycleway construction has moved to 2019/20 as the design is being reviewed in 2018/19.
§ $300k decrease in Town Centres for reallocation of funding to Balmain Telstra Building and Public Square project.
The above changes have been funded from the following sources -
Transfer from Externally Restricted Funds $72k
Transfer from Internally Restricted Funds $180k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $2,265k
ITEM 3 - Trees, Parks & Sportsfields
Increase Operating Grants & Contributions $30k
Increase Employee Costs $62k
Increase Materials & Contracts $580k
§ $580k Reclassification of capital projects to operational and anticipated OLG grant to partially fund Crown Lands Plans of Management.
Decrease Capital Grants & Contributions $7,750k
Decrease Capital Expenditure $8,300k
§ $8.3m of the 2018/19 Greenway Projects have been transferred to 2019/20 due to delays in approvals from Sydney Trains.
Decrease Externally Restricted Funds $1,332k
Increase Internally Restricted Funds $1,308k
§ Funding source has been changed from external to internal funding as Asset Renewal cannot be funded from external source.
ITEM 4 - Property Services
Increase Other Income $25k
Increase Capital Grants & Contributions $3,397k
Decrease Capital Expenditure $3,120k
Decrease in Capital Expenditure of –
§ Ashfield Aquatic Centre upgrade works $2.95m has been moved to 2019/20 to align with the latest project plan.
§ Dawn Fraser Pool upgrade works of $1.35m moved to 2019/20 to align with the latest project plan. The DA has been submitted and detailed design underway. Project expected to commence in April 2019.
Offset with an increase in-
§ $805k Work in progress from 2017/18. Confirming starting date with Telstra for the part demolition of the building to start the Plaza project. Leichhardt Town hall façade works 65% progressed.
§ $300k Steel Park Childcare Work in progress from 2017/18. DA submitted and detailed design underway. Project expected to commence in March 2019.
Decrease External Restricted Funds $8,463k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $1,920k
§ $3.4m Transferred to VPA –
o $1.9m received from 888 New Canterbury Trust
o $1.4m from 14, McGill St, Lewisham.
§ Reallocation of project funding from incorrectly allocated restricted funds to working funds.
ITEM 5 - Environment & Sustainability
Decrease User Fees & Charges $1,211k
Increase Domestic Waste Charge $1,192k
§ Reclassification of budget to align to actual entries in the ledger.
Decrease Other Revenue $31k
Decrease Operating Grants & Contributions $4k
Increase Employee Costs $130k
Increase Materials & Contracts $21k
Increase Other Expenses $96k
Increase Capital Expenditure $192k
Increase Externally Restricted Funds $274k
§ $250k of Unutilised Better Waste & Recycling Fund grant recognised to fund a project officer and projects.
§ $192k for the Construction of Marrickville Community Recycling Centre funded by grant received in a prior financial year.
ITEM 6 - Community Services & Culture
Decrease User Fees & Charges $335k
§ $95k venue hire charges carried forward from amalgamation. This was an overly optimistic calculation based on the usage rates.
§ There is no charge for internal hall hire if used for IWC work related activities. The budget from pre-amalgamation included $50k which has now been removed.
§ $87k revenue carried forward from Leichhardt Council that has no identified source.
§ Meals on Wheels usage is trending lower, fees for this service have been reduced by $60k in line with this trend.
§ $43k impact of council’s fee scales resolution to discount venue hire for not-for-profit groups.
Decrease Operating Grants & Contributions $23k
§ Original Budget had a higher estimate of Grant funding, Q1 has reduced this to be in line with the expected actual Grant funding, linked operating costs have been reduced in line with expected actual Grant to be received.
Increase Employee Costs $119k
Decrease Materials & Contracts $110k
§ Multicultural Officer Position approved by a Council resolution, which has been funded by an internal budget reallocation from within Materials & Contracts.
Increase Other Operating Expenses $30k
§ Leichhardt Municipal Band cost missed in the original (adopted) budget.
Increase Capital Expenditure $24k
§ Bayrun Mural was unfinished in 2017/18, to be completed in 2018/19. Funded by 2017/18 working funds.
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $421k
§ The above budget changes have been funded through working funds.
ITEM 7 - Strategic Planning
Increase User Charges & Fees $169k
Increase Capital Grants & Contributions $750k
Increase Employee Costs $713k
Increase Materials & Contracts $793k
Increase Externally Restricted Funds $533k
§ Increase in the Rezoning Charges for 2018/19 is driving a $169k of additional revenue.
§ State Government requires LEP to be completed within 2 years has provided a contribution of $750k in 2018/19.
§ Increase in Employee costs is utilising the LEP contribution with an additional 9 positions included.
§ Community needs assessment study of $200k.
§ Developer Contribution Plan of $200k.
§ Traffic & Parking needs assessment $250k have been added as per Council resolution.
§ Victoria Road Precinct Contributions Plan $157k.
§ $200k Trees DCP mail out Council resolution.
ITEM 8 - Library & History
Decrease Operating Grants & Contributions $286k
Increase Materials & Contracts $440k
Increase Other Expenses $30k
Increase Transfer from Restricted Grants $756k
§ Operating Grants & Contributions has reduced by $286k which was a placeholder in the original budget for unutilised Grant funding from prior years. This has been changed to be Restricted Grants.
§ Additional $440k in Materials & Contracts
§ $30k of Other Expenses (Advertising Costs) have been funded with unutilised Grant funding from 2017/18, this will be allocated to the New Marrickville Library.
ITEM 9 - Children & Family Services
Decrease Enrolment Fees $609k
Decrease Employee Costs $431k
Decrease Materials & Contracts $31k
Decrease Other Expenses $7k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $140k
§ Change to the opening of Leichhardt Park Centre to Q3'19 and included opening of Steel Park Centre in Q4'19.
ITEM 10 - Recreation & Aquatics
Increase Capital Grant & Contributions $440k
Increase Materials & Contracts $673k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $233k
§ $440k grant received for Urbane Amenity Improvement Program.
§ $233k of new gym equipment for AKAC.
ITEM 11 - Communications, Engagement & Events
Increase Employee Costs $146k
Increase Materials & Contracts $11k
Decrease Other Expenses $6k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $162k
§ Salaries and Wages increase of $66k reflects the adoption of JCC structure.
§ $50k relates to reallocation of events project costs to better reflect usage, offset with Materials.
§ $26k has been included in Events for waste services costs, offset with general revenue. This had previously been booked in Environment & Sustainability funded from General Waste.
§ Budget of $23k for a new guillotine has been included due to the existing guillotine being dangerously unsafe for use, funding from general revenues.
ITEM 12 - ICT
Increased Capital Expenditure $130k
Increase Transfer from Internal Funds $130k
§ Additional Carryover for TechOne costs from FY17/18.
ITEM 13 - Integration, Customer Service & Business Excellence
Increase Employee Costs $15k
Decrease Other Expenses $29k
Decrease Transfer from Working Funds $14k
§ Employee Costs driven by $15.2k due to an increase from 0.8 FTE to a Full Time for a CSO position to meet the current operational demand.
§ Decrease in Other Expenses due to realignment of SCCG budget.
ITEM 14 - DGM CFO & Administration
Increase Materials & Contracts $19k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $19k
§ Council Resolution C0418 Item 9 - Recruit and appoint an additional independent member to the ARIC.
ITEM 15 - DGM Assets & Environment
Increase Capital Expenditure $80k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $80k
§ For JRA Asset Implementation.
ITEM 16 - Corporate Support Services
Decrease Operating Grants & Contributions $2,653k
Increase Transfer from Working Funds $2,653k
§ FAG grant income received as advanced payment for 2018/19, transferred to working funds.
ITEM 17 - Depreciation Adjustment
Increase Depreciation $5,518k
Increase Depreciation Contra $5,518k
A thorough review of Assets performed as part of the 17/18 Financial Statements has resulted in a decrease in useful life of substructure and superstructure of buildings (assessed by an independent assessor) resulting in an increase in the annual depreciation booking.
3) Summary Profit & Loss Statement
4) Service Unit P&L Summary
5) Capital Expenditure Statement
Capital projects are reviewed on a monthly basis with a view to aligning cash flow budgets with deliverables.
6) Capital Schedule – Unfinished Projects from 2017/18
7) Cash & Investments – Restricted Held
Council’s cash position sees an unrestricted balance of $61.7 million as at 30 September 2018. The unrestricted balance will continue to diminish as Council expends it on operational expenses and capital projects during the financial year. The funds have been invested in accordance with Council’s investment portfolio which saw Council’s non fossil fuel investment at approximately $160.8m or 78% of its total portfolio as at the end of September 2018.
8) Contract Listing
Above is a listing of contracts Council entered into during the period 1 July to 30 September 2018.
9) Consultancy & Legal Expenses
A consultant is a person or organisation engaged under contract on a temporary basis to provide recommendations or high level specialist or professional advice to assist decision making by management. Generally it is the advisory nature of the work that differentiates a consultant from other contractors.
Where any expenses for Consultancy or Legal Fees (including Code of Conduct expenses) have not been budgeted for, an explanation is to be given. Report on external expenses only (not internal expenses).
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 6 November 2018
Prepared By: John Stephens - Traffic and Transport Services Manager
Authorised By: Wal Petschler - Group Manager Footpaths, Roads, Traffic and Stormwater
SUMMARY The minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 6 November 2018 are presented for Council consideration. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 6 November 2018 be received and the recommendations be adopted.
|
ITEMS BY WARD
Ward |
Item |
Page Number |
Leichhardt |
LTC1118 Item 5 Lyall Street, Leichhardt - Christmas Street Party - Road Occupancy (Leichhardt Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 6 |
Leichhardt |
LTC1118 Item 17 Flood Street and Allen Street, Leichhardt - Bus Stop Modifications (Leichhardt Ward / Balmain Electorate / Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 21 |
Leichhardt |
LTC1118 Item 27 63-65 Pyrmont Bridge Road, Annandale - Modification of Development Consent (Leichhardt Ward/ Balmain Electorate/Leichhardt LAC)s |
Page 32 |
Leichhardt |
LTC1118 Item 29 Croydon Road, Croydon - Proposed Pedestrian and Traffic Calming Treatments (Leichhardt Ward / Strathfield Electorate / Burwood PAC) |
Page 34 |
Ashfield |
LTC1118 Item 14 Armstrong Street / Queen Street / Hardy Street intersection, Ashbury – Revised intersection Design Plan – RC552 D - C17 (Ashfield Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Inner West LAC) |
Page 15 |
Ashfield |
LTC1118 Item 22 'No Stopping' Restrictions - The Summer Hill Flour Mill Development and Surrounding Streets (Ashfield Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Burwood PAC) |
Page 27 |
Ashfield |
LTC1118 Item 23 Edwin Street North, Croydon- Request for 'Mail Zone' |
Page 30 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 1 Short Street, Birchgrove Christmas Street Party - Road Occupancy (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 2 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 2 Unnamed Laneway (between May Street and The Boulevarde), Lilyfield Christmas Street Party - Road Occupancy (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 3 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 3 Temporary Road Closure to Carryout Sewer Works on 5-7 White Street, Lilyfield (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 4 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 4 Red Lion Street, Rozelle, Annual Road Occupancy (Street Party) (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 5 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 19 Little Darling Street, Balmain - Proposed Extension of 'No Stopping' zone (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 24 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 20 The Boulevarde at Balmain Road, Lilyfield - Proposed 'No Stopping' zones and '15 Minute' parking restrictions (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 25 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 21 Brenan Street, Lilyfield - Proposal for Car Share Parking Space (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 26 |
Balmain |
LTC1118 Item 28 2019 St Jerome's Laneway Festival - Traffic Management Plan (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
Page 33 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 6 Liberty Street and Bedford Street, Stanmore – Temporary Full Road Closure for Rail Overbridge Refurbishment Works (STANMORE WARD /NEWTOWN ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
Page 7 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 7 Fisher Street, Petersham between Regent Street and Audley Street – Temporary Full Road Closure to carry out crane lift works at No. 22 (Stanmore Ward/Newtown Electorate/Inner West LAC)
|
Page 8 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 8 Phillip Street, PETERSHAM - Installation of 12 metre Length of ‘Loading Zone’ Restrictions (STANMORE WARD / NEWTOWN ELECTORATE / INNER WEST LAC) |
Page 9 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 9 Bridge Road, STANMORE – Proposed 10 Minute Parking Restrictions 1-7 Albany Road (Stanmore Ward / Newtown Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
Page 10 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 10 Keith Street, Dulwich Hill - Proposed Improvements to Streetscape – Amended Design Plans 6190_update 11-10-18 (STANMORE WARD /SUMMER HILL ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
Page 11 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 11 Percival Road and Albany Road roundabout, STANMORE - Proposed speed cushions and kerb blisters – Design Plan 10049 (STANMORE WARD /NEWTOWN ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
Page 12 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 15 Summer Hill Street at Victoria Street, Lewisham – Proposed Kerb Extensions Design Plan – No.10043 (Stanmore Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
Page 17 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 24 OLD CANTERBURY ROAD, LEWISHAM - Temporary Full Road Closure for Rail Overbridge Refurbishment Works (Stanmore Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
Page 30 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 25 New Canterbury Road, Petersham – Proposed Signage Outside No.31-33 (Stanmore Ward / Newtown Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
Page 31 |
Stanmore |
LTC1118 Item 30 Gordon Lane, Petersham between Sadlier Crescent and Balanaming Lane – Temporary Full Road Closure (Stanmore Ward/Newtown Electorate/Inner West LAC) |
Page 37 |
Marrickville
|
LTC1118 Item 12 Garden Street, Marrickville - Temporary Long Term Full Road Closure (MARRICKVILLE WARD /SUMMER HILL ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
Page 13 |
Marrickville
|
LTC1118 Item 13 Railway Parade, Marrickville - Temporary long term full road closure for construction works related to Sydenham Metro Upgrade – SSJ Group (MARRICKVILLE WARD /SUMMER HILL ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
Page 14 |
Marrickville
|
LTC1118 Item 18 Lilydale Street, Marrickville - Proposed Permit Parking (Marrickville Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Inner West LAC) |
Page 23 |
Marrickville
|
LTC1118 Item 31 Works Zone 7.00am-5.00pm Mon-Fri; 7.00am-1.00pm Sat -Applebee Street, St Peters (Marrickville Ward / Heffron Electorate / Inner West PAC) |
Page 38 |
Marrickville
|
LTC1118 Item 32 Addison Road and Victoria Road, Marrickville - Adult cyclists on footpath |
Page 39 |
All Wards
|
LTC1118 Item 16 Minor Traffic Facilities (All Wards/ All Electorates/ All LACs) |
Page 18 |
All Wards
|
LTC1118 Item 26 Local Traffic Committee Schedule for 2019 |
Page 32 |
BACKGROUND
Meeting of the Inner West Council Local Traffic Committee was held on 6 November 2018 at Petersham. The minutes of the November meeting are shown at ATTACHMENT 1.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Projects proposed for implementation in 2017/18 are funded within existing budget allocations.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Specific projects have undergone public consultation as indicated in the respective reports to
the Traffic Committee. Members of the public attended the meeting to address the Committee
on specific items.
1.⇩ |
Minutes to the Local Traffic Committee meeting on 6 November 2018 |
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Minutes of Meeting
Held at Petersham Service Centre on 6 November 2018
Meeting commenced at 10.05am
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 Victor Macri |
Chair – Deputy Mayor – Marrickville Ward |
Bill Holliday |
Representative for Jamie Parker MP, Member for Balmain |
Sarina Foulstone |
Representative for Jo Haylen MP, Member for Summer Hill |
Sgt Paul Vlachos |
NSW Police – Inner West Police Area Command |
SC Sam Tohme |
NSW Police – Burwood Police Area Command |
Marina Nestoriadis |
NSW Police – Leichhardt Police Area Command |
Ryan Horne |
Roads and Maritime Services |
|
|
OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE |
|
|
|
Peter Whitney |
Transit Systems – Inner West Bus Services |
Asith Nagodavithane |
Transit Systems – Inner West Bus Services |
Colin Jones |
Inner West Bicycle Coalition |
Clr Marghanita da Cruz |
Councillor – Leichhardt Ward |
Wal Petschler |
IWC’s Group Manager, Roads, Traffic and Stormwater |
John Stephens |
IWC’s Traffic and Transport Services Manager |
Manod Wickramasinghe |
IWC’s Coordinator Traffic and Parking Services (North) |
Jenny Adams |
IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services |
Vinoth Srinivasan |
IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services |
Felicia Lau |
IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services |
Scipio Tam |
IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services |
Boris Muha |
IWC’s Engineer – Traffic and Parking Services |
Davide Torresan |
IWC’s Civil Engineer |
Christina Ip |
IWC’s Business Administration Officer |
|
|
VISITORS |
|
|
|
Andrew Akratos |
Item 14 |
Tony Franken |
Item 15 |
Belinda Mason |
Item 17 |
Nicole Sun |
Item 17 |
Marion Rae |
Item 17 |
John Hart |
Item 17 |
Steven Carpenter |
Item 20 |
Phillipa Goodrick |
Item 29 |
Sara Arthur |
Item 29 |
Matina Mottee |
Item 29 |
Rene Holmes |
Item 29 |
Calum Hutcheson |
Item 31 |
Tony Metledge |
Item 31 |
|
|
APOLOGIES: |
|
|
|
George Tsaprounis |
IWC’s Coordinator Traffic and Parking Services (South) |
DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:
Nil.
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
The Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on Tuesday, 2 October 2018 were confirmed. |
MATTERS ARISING FROM COUNCIL’S RESOLUTION OF MINUTES
The Local Traffic Committee recommendations of its meeting held on 2 October 2018 were adopted at Council’s meeting held on 30 October 2018.
LTC1118 Item 1 Short Street, Birchgrove Christmas Street Party - Road Occupancy (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received an application for approval of a Christmas Street Party in Short Street, Birchgrove between Curtis Road and Spring Street to be held on Saturday, 15 December 2018 between 6:00pm and 11:30pm.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The temporary road closure of Short Street, Birchgrove between Curtis Road and Spring Street on Saturday, 15 December 2018 between 6:00pm and 11:30pm be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Balmain) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Short Street, Birchgrove; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The temporary road closure of Short Street, Birchgrove between Curtis Road and Spring Street on Saturday, 15 December 2018 between 6:00pm and 11:30pm be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Balmain) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Short Street, Birchgrove; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 2 Unnamed Laneway (between May Street and The Boulevarde), Lilyfield Christmas Street Party - Road Occupancy (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received an application for approval of an annual Christmas Street Party in the Unnamed Laneway between May Street and The Boulevarde, Lilyfield to be held on Saturday, 22 December 2018 between 4:00pm and 10:00pm.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The temporary road closure of the Unnamed Laneway, Lilyfield between May Street and The Boulevarde (section at the rear of Nos. 355-367 Balmain Road) on Saturday, 22 December 2018 between 4:00pm and 10:00pm be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Leichhardt) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum three (3) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Unnamed Laneway Lilyfield; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The temporary road closure of the Unnamed Laneway, Lilyfield between May Street and The Boulevarde (section at the rear of Nos. 355-367 Balmain Road) on Saturday, 22 December 2018 between 4:00pm and 10:00pm be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Leichhardt) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum three (3) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Unnamed Laneway Lilyfield; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 3 Temporary Road Closure to Carryout Sewer Works on 5-7 White Street, Lilyfield (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
An application has been received from Gledhill Constructions for the temporary full road closure of White Street, Lilyfield between Moore Street and Moore Lane (frontage of house No.5-7 White Street section) between Wednesday, 28 November 2018 and Wednesday, 12 December 2018, with a further 2 weeks contingency thereafter to carryout sewer works on White Street, Lilyfield. It is recommended that the proposed temporary road closure be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The proposed temporary full road closure of White Street, between Moore Street and Moore Lane (frontage of house No.5-7), Lilyfield from 7am to 5pm, Wednesday 28 November 2018 to Wednesday, 12 December 2018, with a further 2 weeks contingency thereafter, in order to carryout sewer works in White Street, Lilyfield as per the submitted TCP;
2. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre;
3. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The proposed temporary full road closure of White Street, between Moore Street and Moore Lane (frontage of house No.5-7), Lilyfield from 7am to 5pm, Wednesday 28 November 2018 to Wednesday, 12 December 2018, with a further 2 weeks contingency thereafter, in order to carryout sewer works in White Street, Lilyfield as per the submitted TCP;
2. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre;
3. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 4 Red Lion Street, Rozelle, Annual Road Occupancy (Street Party) (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
This report seeks approval for the temporary road closure of Red Lion Street, Rozelle to facilitate the annual ‘Christmas Street Party’ event that has been successfully conducted since 2009.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The temporary road closure of Red Lion Street between Darling Street and Evans Street, Rozelle on Saturday, 15 December 2018 between 5:00pm – 12:00midnight be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Balmain/Leichhardt) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Red Lion Street, Rozelle; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The temporary road closure of Red Lion Street between Darling Street and Evans Street, Rozelle on Saturday, 15 December 2018 between 5:00pm – 12:00midnight be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Balmain/Leichhardt) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Red Lion Street, Rozelle; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 5 Lyall Street, Leichhardt - Christmas Street Party - Road Occupancy (Leichhardt Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received an application from a resident of Lyall Street, Leichhardt to conduct a Christmas Street Party in Lyall Street, west of Flood Street between 2.00pm and 6.00pm on Saturday, 15 December 2018. This event was successfully conducted in 2017.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The temporary full road closure of Lyall Street, west of Flood Street, Leichhardt on Saturday, 15 December 2018 between 2:00pm and 6:00pm be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Leichhardt) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Lyall Street; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The temporary full road closure of Lyall Street, west of Flood Street, Leichhardt on Saturday, 15 December 2018 between 2:00pm and 6:00pm be supported as per the submitted TCP;
2. All residents and businesses in and around the affected area, including NSW Fire & Rescue (Leichhardt) to be notified by the applicant in advance (7 days prior to the event) of the temporary road closure;
3. A minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section of Lyall Street; and
4. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 6 Liberty Street and Bedford Street, Stanmore – Temporary Full Road Closure for Rail Overbridge Refurbishment Works (STANMORE WARD /NEWTOWN ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
SUMMARY
An application has been received from Sydney Trains TfNSW for the temporary full road closure of Liberty Road (between Railway Avenue and Trafalgar Street) and Bedford Street (between Liberty Street and Pierce Street), Stanmore on 3 separate occurrences being 8 to 11 March 2019, 5 to 8 April 2019 and 1 to 4 November 2019 in order to carry out refurbishment works on the Liberty Street Stanmore rail over bridge. The streets will be temporarily closed to all vehicular traffic, including emergency vehicles and local residents. It is recommended that the proposed temporary full road closures be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the proposed temporary full road closure of Liberty Road (between Railway Avenue and Trafalgar Street) and Bedford Street (between Liberty Street and Pierce Street), Stanmore on 3 separate occurrences being 8 to 11 March 2019, 5 to 8 April 2019 and 1 to 4 November 2019 be approved, in order to carry out refurbishment works on the Liberty Street Stanmore rail over bridge subject to the following conditions:
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre. 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders. 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
Council Officers advised that noise impacts may be an issue for residents in the area. Council Officers recommended that the notification letters, to be mailed out by Sydney Trains, include advice on the impact of night time closures and include a contact number so residents can contact Sydney Trains directly if any issues arise.
The RMS representative stated that applications for full road closures and the TMP need to be sent to RMS for approval.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation with the addition of a recommendation regarding notification letters and for the application and the TMP to be submitted to RMS.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the proposed temporary full road closure of Liberty Road (between Railway Avenue and Trafalgar Street) and Bedford Street (between Liberty Street and Pierce Street), Stanmore on 3 separate occurrences being 8 to 11 March 2019, 5 to 8 April 2019 and 1 to 4 November 2019 be approved, in order to carry out refurbishment works on the Liberty Street Stanmore rail over bridge subject to the following conditions:
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre. 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders. The notification letter should advise stakeholders of the impact of night time closures and include the applicant’s contact number. 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed. 4. The application and TMP be submitted to RMS for approval.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 7 Fisher Street, Petersham between Regent Street and Audley Street – Temporary Full Road Closure to carry out crane lift works at No. 22 (Stanmore Ward/Newtown Electorate/Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
An application has been received from Boycebuild Pty Ltd for the temporary full road closure of Fisher Street, Petersham between Regent Street and Audley Street, for a period of 8 hours on 3rd December 2018 between the hours of 7:00am and 3pm, in order to stand a mobile crane to carry out crane lift works. It is recommended that the proposed temporary full road closure be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the proposed temporary full road closure of Fisher Street, Petersham between Regent Street and Audley Street, for a period of 8 hours on 3rd December 2018 between the hours of 7:00am and 3pm, be APPROVED in order to stand a mobile crane to carry out crane lift works at No.22 Fisher Street, subject to the following conditions;
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre. 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders. 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
Council Officers advised that the applicant has requested for a change of date for the proposed full road closure to 5 December 2018 due to industrial action on 3 December 2018. The TMP with the new date has been submitted to the RMS for approval. It was agreed that as the closure date of 3rd December was apparently being advertised to meet the 28 day advertising period prior to Council approval, the applicant would need to reapply and a new closure date would require a 28 day advertising period.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the proposed temporary full road closure of Fisher Street, Petersham between Regent Street and Audley Street, for a period of 8 hours on 3rd December 2018 between the hours of 7:00am and 3pm, be APPROVED in order to stand a mobile crane to carry out crane lift works at No.22 Fisher Street, subject to the following conditions;
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre. 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders. 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 8 Phillip Street, PETERSHAM - Installation of 12 metre Length of ‘Loading Zone’ Restrictions (STANMORE WARD / NEWTOWN ELECTORATE / INNER WEST LAC) |
SUMMARY
A request has been received for a ‘Loading Zone’ in Phillip Street, Petersham to help facilitate loading and unloading for local businesses along Parramatta Road and Phillip Street, Petersham.
It is recommended that a 12 metre length (existing 2 car parking spaces with ‘1P 8.30am- 6.00pm Mon-Fri, 8.30am-12.30pm Sat’ restrictions) be replaced with “Loading Zone 8.30am – 4.30pm Monday – Friday’ restrictions on the western side of Phillip Street (adjacent to the Petersham Inn), commencing from the existing ‘No Stopping’ restrictions (closest to Parramatta Road) be approved, in order to provide loading / unloading facilities for local businesses along Parramatta Road and Phillip Street, Petersham.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT a 12 metre length (existing 2 car parking spaces with ‘1P 8.30am-6.00pm Mon-Fri, 8.30am-12.30pm Sat’ restrictions) be replaced with “Loading Zone 8.30am – 4.30pm Monday – Friday’ restrictions on the western side of Phillip Street (adjacent to the Petersham Inn), commencing from the existing ‘No Stopping’ restrictions (closest to Parramatta Road) be approved, in order to provide loading / unloading facilities for local businesses along Parramatta Road and Phillip Street, Petersham.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT a 12 metre length (existing 2 car parking spaces with ‘1P 8.30am-6.00pm Mon-Fri, 8.30am-12.30pm Sat’ restrictions) be replaced with “Loading Zone 8.30am – 4.30pm Monday – Friday’ restrictions on the western side of Phillip Street (adjacent to the Petersham Inn), commencing from the existing ‘No Stopping’ restrictions (closest to Parramatta Road) be approved, in order to provide loading / unloading facilities for local businesses along Parramatta Road and Phillip Street, Petersham.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 9 Bridge Road, STANMORE – Proposed 10 Minute Parking Restrictions 1-7 Albany Road (Stanmore Ward / Newtown Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
As part of the approved child care centre development at 1 – 7 Albany Road, Stanmore a condition of the Modified Land and Environment Court Order No. 250036 of 2016, dated 21 December 2016 was that the applicant was to apply to the Local Traffic Committee for 2 dropoff/pick-up car spaces on Bridge Road, Stanmore. The development results in two on-street spaces gained in Bridge Street due to redundant existing vehicular crossings being reconstructed as kerb and gutter. The applicant requests that new parking restrictions be considered and approved for these spaces as a drop-off/pick-up facility for the child care centre.
It is recommended that a 12 metre length (2 car parking spaces) of ‘P10 7:00am-9:30am 3:30pm-6:00pm, Monday-Friday’ restrictions be installed on the western side of Bridge Street adjacent to 1-7 Albany Road, Stanmore. Adjacent businesses/residences will be notified of the new restrictions when the signage is to be installed.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. Council approve the installation of two ‘P10 7:00am-9:30am 3:30pm-6:00pm, Monday-Friday’ parking spaces on the western side of Bridge Street (commencing from the kerb blister closest to Salisbury Lane), between Albany Road and Salisbury Lane, Stanmore in order to provide an additional on-street drop-off/pick-up facility;
2. The existing ‘No Stopping 9.00pm-5.00am Monday – Sunday’ restrictions on the western side of Bridge Street, between Albany Road and Salisbury Lane, Stanmore remain; and 3. The costs of the supply and installation of the parking signage are to be borne by the applicant.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. Council approve the installation of two ‘P10Minute 7:00am-9:30am 3:30pm-6:00pm, Monday-Friday’ parking spaces on the western side of Bridge Street (commencing from the kerb blister closest to Salisbury Lane), between Albany Road and Salisbury Lane, Stanmore in order to provide an additional on-street drop-off/pick-up facility;
2. The existing ‘No Stopping 9.00pm-5.00am Monday – Sunday’ restrictions on the western side of Bridge Street, between Albany Road and Salisbury Lane, Stanmore remain; and
3. The costs of the supply and installation of the parking signage are to be borne by the applicant.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 10 Keith Street, Dulwich Hill - Proposed Improvements to Streetscape – Amended Design Plans 6190_update 11-10-18 (STANMORE WARD /SUMMER HILL ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
SUMMARY
Detailed design plans have now been finalised for the proposed improvements to the streetscape in Keith Street, Dulwich Hill. The proposal will enhance the street with new footpath and road surfaces, as well as drainage improvements and increased landscaped areas.
Consultation was undertaken with 127 owners and occupiers of properties in the locality regarding the proposal. A summary of the consultation results are presented in this report for consideration.
It is noted that after consultation and following community objection to the loss of parking (2 on-street spaces), the original consultation plans have now been amended (6190_update 11- 10-18) by shortening the northern kerb extension to within the statutory 10 metres from the intersection. This has now resulted in the gain of one of the proposed ‘lost’ parking spaces. The southern kerb extension must remain as originally proposed due to design constraints. Essentially, there is now a net loss of 1 parking space as a result of the proposal, not the original proposed two on-street spaces.
It is recommended that the proposed amended detailed design plans be approved.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the detailed amended design plans (Design Plan No.6190_update 11-10-18 – 1,2,3) for the proposed improvements to the streetscape be APPROVED.
DISCUSSION
Clr da Cruz asked whether the proposed landscaping includes rain gardens. Council Officers advised that water sensitive design is incorporated in projects where possible.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the detailed amended design plans (Design Plan No.6190_update 11-10-18 – 1,2,3) for the proposed improvements to the streetscape be APPROVED.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 11 Percival Road and Albany Road roundabout, STANMORE - Proposed speed cushions and kerb blisters – Design Plan 10049 (STANMORE WARD /NEWTOWN ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
SUMMARY
Design plans have been prepared for proposed speed cushions and minor splitter island modifications to existing kerb blisters at Percival Road and Albany Road roundabout, Stanmore as part of Council’s Traffic Capital Works Program. The proposal for speed cushions, kerb blister modifications and associated signs and line marking will improve traffic conditions and road safety at this location. The proposal is funded from a successful application as part of the 2017/18 Federal and NSW Government’s Blackspot Programs.
Consultation was undertaken with owners and occupiers of properties in Percival Road and Albany Road regarding the proposal. A summary of the consultation results are presented in this report for consideration. It is recommended that the proposed detailed design plan be approved.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the detailed design plan for the speed cushions, kerb blisters and associated signs and line markings at the roundabout of Percival Road and Albany Road, Stanmore (as per Design Plan No.10049) be APPROVED.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the detailed design plan for the speed cushions, kerb blisters and associated signs and line markings at the roundabout of Percival Road and Albany Road, Stanmore (as per Design Plan No.10049) be APPROVED.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 12 Garden Street, Marrickville - Temporary Long Term Full Road Closure (MARRICKVILLE WARD /SUMMER HILL ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
SUMMARY
An application has been received from Sydney Metro SSJ Group – Sydenham Metro Upgrade project – for the temporary long term full road closure of Garden Street, Marrickville (between the rear of 1-11 Sydenham Road to Garden Street roads end) between 27 November 2018 and December 2021 in order to carry out construction activities for the upgrade of Sydenham Station being delivered as part of the Sydney Metro City & Southwest program of work. The subject street section will be temporarily closed to all vehicular traffic.
It is recommended that the proposed temporary full road closure be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the proposed temporary long term full road closure of Garden Street (58 metres south of Shirlow Street to Garden Street roads end) 27 November 2018 and December 2021 be APPROVED in order to carry out construction activities for the upgrade of Sydenham Station being delivered as part of the Sydney Metro City & Southwest program of work subject to the following conditions:
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre; 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders; and 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
Council Officers tabled more detailed plans indicating where barriers will be located (Attachment 1).
The representative for the Member for Summer Hill asked about impacts to parking on Garden Street and asked for clarity regarding the length of the notification period. Council Officers advised that efforts have been made to minimise impact to residents and retain pedestrian access and parking. In regards to the applicant notifying stakeholders, Council Officers advised that the applicant has a communication policy that includes notifying stakeholders at least 14 day prior to the commencement of works, which can be provided to the representative.
Clr da Cruz requested any placement of temporary traffic warning signs not obstruct footpaths. Council Officers advised that attempts are being made to maintain footpath access for as long as possible.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the proposed temporary long term full road closure of Garden Street (58 metres south of Shirlow Street to Garden Street roads end) 27 November 2018 and December 2021 be APPROVED in order to carry out construction activities for the upgrade of Sydenham Station being delivered as part of the Sydney Metro City & Southwest program of work subject to the following conditions:
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre; 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders; and 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 13 Railway Parade, Marrickville - Temporary long term full road closure for construction works related to Sydenham Metro Upgrade – SSJ Group (MARRICKVILLE WARD /SUMMER HILL ELECTORATE/ INNER WEST LAC) |
SUMMARY
An application has been received from Sydney Metro SSJ Group – Sydenham Metro Upgrade project for the temporary long term full road closure of Railway Parade, Marrickville between Sydenham Road (adjacent to 1-11 Sydenham Road) and Railway Parade from 27 November 2018 to December 2021 in order to carry out construction activities for the upgrade of Sydenham Station being delivered as part of the Sydney Metro City & Southwest program of work. The subject street section will be temporarily closed to all vehicular traffic.
It is recommended that the proposed temporary full road closure be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the proposed temporary long term full road closure of Railway Parade, Marrickville between Sydenham Road (adjacent to 1-11 Sydenham Road) and Railway Parade from 27 November 2018 to December 2021 be APPROVED in order to carry out construction activities for the upgrade of Sydenham Station being delivered as part of the Sydney Metro City & Southwest program of work subject to the following conditions:
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre. 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders. 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
Council Officers tabled more detailed plans indicating where barriers will be located (Attachment 2).
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the proposed temporary long term full road closure of Railway Parade, Marrickville between Sydenham Road (adjacent to 1-11 Sydenham Road) and Railway Parade from 27 November 2018 to December 2021 be APPROVED in order to carry out construction activities for the upgrade of Sydenham Station being delivered as part of the Sydney Metro City & Southwest program of work subject to the following conditions:
1. A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre. 2. All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders. 3. The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 14 Armstrong Street / Queen Street / Hardy Street intersection, Ashbury – Revised intersection Design Plan – RC552 D - C17 (Ashfield Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has previously approved planned improvements at the intersection of Armstrong Street, Queen Street and Hardy Street, Ashbury to improve the safety for pedestrians and vehicles, following extensive engagement with the community in December 2015 and March 2016. Some amendments have been completed to the approved design plan.
A revised design plan has now been finalised for the proposed intersection improvements at Armstrong Street / Queen Street / Hardy Street intersection, Ashbury. The revised proposal with road reconstruction, construction of new pedestrian refuges, kerb blisters and extensions, upgraded street-lighting, footpath and storm water upgrades, line marking and signs will improve the safety for pedestrians and vehicles using this intersection.
Consultation was undertaken with owners and occupiers of properties in the locality regarding the revised proposal. It is recommended that the revised detailed design plan be approved.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT;
(1) the design plan for the revised improvement works, including road reconstruction, construction of two new pedestrian refuges with kerb blisters and extensions, upgraded street-lighting, footpath and storm water upgrades, line marking and signs at the intersection of Armstrong Street, Queen Street and Hardy Street, Ashbury (as per the attached design plan No. RC552 D–C17) be APPROVED. (2) Reduce the ‘No Stopping’ distance on the western side of Queen Street (southern approach) from 23m to 20m for the refuge located in Queen Street South of Hardy Street to provide adequate space for one car parking space adjacent to the driveway.
DISCUSSION
Public speaker: Andrew Akratos attended at 10.13am
Mr Akratos, resident of a property on the corner of Queen Street and Hardy, made the following comments:
· Pedestrian safety on Queen Street South is a major concern. · Vehicles travelling into Queen Street South from Queen Street North often dangerously undertake U-turns into Hardy Street or Armstrong Street. · Queen Street South experiences high volumes of vehicles during morning and afternoon peak periods with vehicles entering from Harland Street. · More safety facilities should be placed or better positioned on Queen Street South to improve pedestrian access. · The ‘No Stopping’ distance will result in loss of street parking adjacent to his property on Hardy Street and Queen Street. Access to his property will become problematic as he has young children, his wife has mobility issues and has elderly relatives who visit.
Council Officers advised Mr Akratos that the second part of the Officer’s recommendation proposes reducing the ‘No Stopping’ distance on Queen Street to provide space for one parking space, which addresses his concerns regarding loss of parking adjacent to his property.
(Mr Akratos left at 10.17am)
Council Officers tabled a response received after the consultation period closed (Attachment 3).
The representative for the Inner West Bicycle Coalition requested for bike symbols to be installed on Hardy Street from Armstrong Street to the kerb extensions. The representative stated that previously there was no access to Hardy Street from Queen Street; however, that has since changed which has led to an increase in the number of cyclists accessing Hardy Street schools from Queen Street. Installing bike symbols would warn motorists of increased cyclist activity in that section of road.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT;
(1) the design plan for the revised improvement works, including road reconstruction, construction of two new pedestrian refuges with kerb blisters and extensions, upgraded street-lighting, footpath and storm water upgrades, line marking and signs at the intersection of Armstrong Street, Queen Street and Hardy Street, Ashbury (as per the attached design plan No. RC552 D–C17) be APPROVED. (2) Reduce the ‘No Stopping’ distance on the western side of Queen Street (southern approach) from 23m to 20m for the refuge located in Queen Street South of Hardy Street to provide adequate space for one car parking space adjacent to the driveway. (3) Bicycle logos be installed in Hardy Street from Armstrong Street to the kerb extensions proposed in Hardy Street.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 15 Summer Hill Street at Victoria Street, Lewisham – Proposed Kerb Extensions Design Plan – No.10043 (Stanmore Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
A design plan has been finalised for the proposed traffic calming improvement works in Summer Hill Street at Victoria Street, Lewisham to improve pedestrian safety and address illegal parking at the intersection. There are no changes to the existing parking restrictions in the street. The kerb extensions will be constructed within the statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ distance at the intersection and there be no loss of legal on-street parking spaces.
Consultation was undertaken with owners and occupiers of properties adjacent to the intersection of Summer Hill Street and Victoria Street, Lewisham regarding the proposal. It is recommended that the detailed design plan be approved (Design Plan – 10043).
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the design plan for the proposed kerb extensions and associated signs and line markings in Summer Hill Street and Victoria Street, Lewisham (as per the attached design plan No. 10043) be APPROVED.
DISCUSSION
Public speaker: Tony Franken attended at 10.18am
Mr Franken opposed the proposed kerb extensions and made the following comments:
· Turning vehicles often cut the corner of Victoria Street and Summer Hill Street due to the narrow roads. · Vehicles on Summer Hill Street approaching Victoria Street often do not adequately stop or slow down before entering Victoria Street. · Motorists travelling along Summer Hill Street often travel through the middle of the road. The proposed kerb extensions will narrow the road, further funnelling vehicles to the middle of the road. · In lieu of kerb extensions, centre lines could be marked on Summer Hill Street to remind motorists to stay in their lane when entering and exiting the street. Give Way linemarking and signage could also be installed on Summer Hill Street. If this option was implemented, ‘No Stopping’ signs on either sides of Victoria Street would need to be installed.
(Mr Franken left at 10.22am)
It was agreed that the centre linemarkings in Victoria Street and Summer Hill Street would improve traffic flow at the intersection.
Council Officers tabled submissions received after the consultation period closed (Attachment 4).
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation with the addition of centre linemarkings for Victoria Street and Summer Hill Street.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. the design plan for the proposed kerb extensions and associated signs and line markings in Summer Hill Street and Victoria Street, Lewisham (as per the attached design plan No. 10043) be APPROVED; and 2. centre line marking be installed on Victoria Street and Summer Hill Street for an appropriate length within the intersection.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 16 Minor Traffic Facilities (All Wards/ All Electorates/ All LACs) |
SUMMARY
This report considers minor traffic facility applications received by Inner West Council, including ‘Disabled Parking’ and ‘Work Zone’ requests.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The requested 'Disabled Parking’ zone in front of No.44 Edith Street, Leichhardt not be supported as the property as an off-street parking space;
2. A 6m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.21 Red Lion Street, Rozelle;
3. A 5.5m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.34 Rawson Street, Haberfield;
4. A 5.5m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.15 Campbell Street, Balmain;
5. A 5.5m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.14 Reuss St, Birchgrove;
6. A 9m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am – 1.00pm Sat’ be installed in front of No.25 Isabella Street, Balmain for 12 weeks, subject to written concurrence from the owner of No.25 Isabella Street, Balmain;
7. A 23m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 6.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am – 1.00pm Sat’ be installed in front of No.2-4 Murrell Street, Ashfield for 12 weeks;
8. A 14m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 7.00am -1pm Sat’ be installed in Phillip Street, Newtown along the side boundary of No.119 Enmore Road for 12 weeks;
9. A 30m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am – 1.00pm Sat’ be installed in front of No.297-289 Trafalgar Street, Petersham for 26 weeks;
10. A 30m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am-1.00pm Sat’ be installed on Regent Street along the side boundary of No.287-289 Trafalgar Street, Petersham for 26 weeks;
11. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the southern side of David Street, Marrickville, adjacent to property No.2/44 Robert Street, Marrickville; 12. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the northern side of Station Street, Tempe, in front of property No.85 Station Street, Tempe; 13. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the western side of High Street, Marrickville, in front of property No.47 High Street, Marrickville; 14. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the northern side of Hutchinson Street, in front of properties no. 67 & 69 Hutchinson Street, St Peters, subject to written concurrence being received from No.69 Hutchinson Street; 15. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Hopetoun Street, Camperdown, in front of property no. 38 Hopetoun Street, Camperdown; 16. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Bruce Street, Stanmore, in front of property no. 35 Bruce Street, Stanmore; 17. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the western side of Wemyss Street, in front of property no. 52 Wemyss Street, Marrickville; 18. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the northern side of Salisbury Road, in front of property no. 30a Salisbury Road, Stanmore; 19. A 5.5m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.23 Beach Road, Dulwich Hill; and 20. A 25m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 7.00am -1pm Sat’ be installed on Victoria Road, Marrickville in front of Wicks Park for 12 weeks.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The requested 'Disabled Parking’ zone in front of No.44 Edith Street, Leichhardt not be supported as the property as an off-street parking space;
2. A 6m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.21 Red Lion Street, Rozelle;
3. A 5.5m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.34 Rawson Street, Haberfield;
4. A 5.5m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.15 Campbell Street, Balmain;
5. A 5.5m ‘Disabled Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.14 Reuss St, Birchgrove;
6. A 9m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am – 1.00pm Sat’ be installed in front of No.25 Isabella Street, Balmain for 12 weeks, subject to written concurrence from the owner of No.25 Isabella Street, Balmain;
7. A 23m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 6.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am – 1.00pm Sat’ be installed in front of No.2-4 Murrell Street, Ashfield for 12 weeks;
8. A 14m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 7.00am -1pm Sat’ be installed in Phillip Street, Newtown along the side boundary of No.119 Enmore Road for 12 weeks;
9. A 30m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am – 1.00pm Sat’ be installed in front of No.297-289 Trafalgar Street, Petersham for 26 weeks;
10. A 30m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 8.00am-1.00pm Sat’ be installed on Regent Street along the side boundary of No.287-289 Trafalgar Street, Petersham for 26 weeks;
11. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the southern side of David Street, Marrickville, adjacent to property No.2/44 Robert Street, Marrickville; 12. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the northern side of Station Street, Tempe, in front of property No.85 Station Street, Tempe; 13. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the western side of High Street, Marrickville, in front of property No.47 High Street, Marrickville; 14. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the northern side of Hutchinson Street, in front of properties no. 67 & 69 Hutchinson Street, St Peters, subject to written concurrence being received from No.69 Hutchinson Street; 15. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Hopetoun Street, Camperdown, in front of property no. 38 Hopetoun Street, Camperdown; 16. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Bruce Street, Stanmore, in front of property no. 35 Bruce Street, Stanmore; 17. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the western side of Wemyss Street, in front of property no. 52 Wemyss Street, Marrickville; 18. A 6m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed on the northern side of Salisbury Road, in front of property no. 30a Salisbury Road, Stanmore; 19. A 5.5m ‘Disability Parking’ zone be installed in front of No.23 Beach Road, Dulwich Hill; and 20. A 25m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri and 7.00am -1pm Sat’ be installed on Victoria Road, Marrickville in front of Wicks Park for 12 weeks.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 17 Flood Street and Allen Street, Leichhardt - Bus Stop Modifications (Leichhardt Ward / Balmain Electorate / Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
Transport for NSW has approved changes to the 445 Bus Route timetable which includes changes to service times and frequencies. In order to allow the buses to safely drop-off and pick-up passengers during the new operating hours, Transit Systems have requested the existing part time ‘Bus Zone’ restrictions be modified to match the new operating hours.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The existing part time bus zones in Allen Street and Flood Street, Leichhardt be modified to full time ‘Bus Zones’ to match the bus operating hours as determined by Transport for NSW. 2. Objections received regarding the operational hours of the bus service be forwarded to Transport for NSW for review and comment.
DISCUSSION
Public speakers: Belinda Mason, Nicole Sun, Marion Rae and John Hart attended at 10.26am
Ms Mason stated the following:
· Currently the 445 bus service operates through Flood Street and Allen Street from 8.45am to 4pm on weekdays. The current 444 bus service operates a similar route to the 445 except it does not operate in Flood, Allen and Marion Streets as these are residential streets. The proposed 445 hours will send buses to Marion Street and Flood Street from 6am-12midnight and will cause noise issues for the residents for 18 hours. · Some residents were not notified of the bus changes and many do not know why the changes are being proposed. · Although she is not against extending bus services, operating in residential streets earlier than 8am or past 8pm will be harmful to the health of residents due to the noise of buses.
Ms Sun objected to the operational hours of the 445 bus service outside her residence on Flood Street. Ms Sun stated the following:
· Noise created when buses stop and start is very loud, even with windows closed, and is worse at night. This will consequently impact on sleep and will cause long term health problems. · It has been suggested that residents install double-glazed windows, however this is expensive and will not help when the windows are open for fresh air. · Electric buses can only reduce noise levels by 6 decibels compared to the normal diesel buses with over 70 decibels produced when the bus is taking off. · When a bus is idling or taking off, the windows and floors sometimes vibrates. This would keep residents awake at night. · People waiting at the bus stop outside her residence will create more noise and could lead to security issues, especially at night. · The location of the bus stop outside her property causes buses to obstruct her driveway. · People leave rubbish on the bench and brick fence which often gets blown into her front yard. · Converting the part-time bus stop in front of her property to full-time will reduce the value of her home. · The buses will remove parking spaces especially at night and in the early morning. · Longer bus operating hours will increase pollution outside her property · The 444 bus route currently operates at night and follows a similar route to the proposed 445 bus route, only including a detour via Flood Street and Allen Street. It seems pointless to have this detour and inconvenience the residents. · The existing bus stops should be moved in front of non-residential buildings.
Ms Rae stated that there is a need for more bus services and expressed her support for the extension of bus operating hours. Ms Rae stated the following:
· She relies on bus services to take her to hospital appointments and the aged care facility to take care of her elderly, sick mother. · She is unable to walk to Norton Street to take other bus services and currently has to take taxis if travelling in the morning and night.
(Ms Mason, Ms Sun, Ms Rae and Mr Hart left at 10.41am)
Some Committee members expressed concern that more information regarding the proposed new bus routes had not been provided to the community. A Transit Services representative advised that the Transport Minister has not yet publicly released the new bus services and routes.
It was noted that the Bus Zone operating hours will not affect the proposed bus service operating hours proposed by Transport for NSW. Bus service operating hours are not within jurisdiction of Council.
Council Officers suggested amending the recommendation to clarify the that the bus stop is proposed to operate from 6am until 12midnight.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation with the amendment to part 1 to reflect the bus zone operating hours.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The existing part time bus zones in Allen Street and Flood Street, Leichhardt be modified to ‘Bus Zone 6am-12Midnight’ to match the bus operating hours as determined by Transport for NSW. 2. Objections received regarding the operational hours of the bus service be forwarded to Transport for NSW for review and comment.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 18 Lilydale Street, Marrickville - Proposed Permit Parking (Marrickville Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
Following representation, Council circulated to residents for comment a proposal to extend the existing M2 permit parking area into Lilydale Street, Marrickville. Residents have expressed concern about the impact on parking during and following construction at the Old Marrickville Hospital site) 313-319 Marrickville Road. The feedback from residents meets Council resident parking guidelines for support of the proposal and the parking occupancy surveys show that there is a very high parking demand. It is recommended that the proposal for permit parking in Lilydale Street, Marrickville be approved.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. ‘2P Permit Holders Excepted 8:30am-6:00pm Monday to Friday; 8:30am-12:30pm Saturday (Area M2)’ signage be installed in Lilydale Street (eastern side) between No.1 and No. 29; and 2. Implement ‘2P Permit Holders Excepted 8:30am-6:00pm Monday to Friday 8:30am-12:30pm Saturday (Area M2)’ signage be installed in Lilydale Street (western side) between No.28 and the intersection with Stanley Street
DISCUSSION
Council Officers advised that the statutory ‘No Stopping’ signs on Lilydale Street have been vandalised on a number of occasions and advised that there is no parking on the construction site for construction workers.
Clr Macri suggested Council Officers contact the developer to request that construction workers park in the basement parking already constructed on site.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. ‘2P Permit Holders Excepted 8:30am-6:00pm Monday to Friday; 8:30am-12:30pm Saturday (Area M2)’ signage be installed in Lilydale Street (eastern side) between No.1 and No. 29; and 2. Implement ‘2P Permit Holders Excepted 8:30am-6:00pm Monday to Friday; 8:30am-12:30pm Saturday (Area M2)’ signage be installed in Lilydale Street (western side) between No.28 and the intersection with Stanley Street
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 19 Little Darling Street, Balmain - Proposed Extension of 'No Stopping' zone (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received concerns regarding obstructed driveway access in Little Darling Street, Balmain opposite the garage of No.2 Little Darling Street, Balmain
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The existing ‘No Stopping’ zone on the western side of Little Darling Street, Balmain opposite No.2 Little Darling Street be extended by 6m; and
2. The remaining 7.9m ‘2P’ parking zone be reduced to 5.5m and a 2.4m motorcycle bay be installed on the western side of Little Darling Street, Balmain.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The existing ‘No Stopping’ zone on the western side of Little Darling Street, Balmain opposite No.2 Little Darling Street be extended by 6m; and
2. The remaining 7.9m ‘2P’ parking zone be reduced to 5.5m and a 2.4m motorcycle bay be installed on the western side of Little Darling Street, Balmain.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 20 The Boulevarde at Balmain Road, Lilyfield - Proposed 'No Stopping' zones and '15 Minute' parking restrictions (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received a request to signpost the statutory ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at the intersection of Balmain Road and The Boulevarde, Lilyfield in order to prevent illegal parking and improve sight lines. Council has also received a request for a Loading Zone facility in The Boulevarde, south of Balmain Road to facilitate deliveries required for business operations.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The existing ‘No Stopping’ zone on the southern side of Balmain Road, east of The Boulevarde be extended to 11m;
2. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of The Boulevarde, south of Balmain Road;
3. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of The Boulevarde, south of Balmain Road; and
4. A 5.4m ‘P15 Minute 7:00AM-5:30PM MON-FRI’ parking restriction be installed on the western side of The Boulevarde, south of Balmain Road and 'No Stopping' Zone.
DISCUSSION
Public speaker: Steven Carpenter attended at 10.50am.
Mr Carpenter stated that he did not support the proposal for a loading zone on the western side of The Boulevarde and made the following comments:
· Drivers often do not comply with current parking signage and park on the corner of The Boulevarde or double park to access the café. · Parking availability has worsened over the years and the 2013 rezoning of the business premises on the corner of Balmain Road and The Boulevarde has changed the number of vehicles in the area. · There are not enough deliveries to the businesses to warrant the proposed loading zone. The loading zone will remove a parking space and will not address illegal parking in the vicinity. · Angle parking is the only way to address parking demand in The Boulevarde.
Council Officers advised that there was only 8% support for angle parking when the community was surveyed in 2014.
(Mr Carpenter left at 10.56am)
Council Officers advised that although angle parking in The Bouledvarde can be reinvestigated, it is unlikely that there would be a substantial change in the level of support in the four years since the community was last surveyed. The Committee also noted that the proposed facility is a 15 minute parking spot and can reduce illegal parking by providing turnover.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The existing ‘No Stopping’ zone on the southern side of Balmain Road, east of The Boulevarde be extended to 11m;
2. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of The Boulevarde, south of Balmain Road;
3. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of The Boulevarde, south of Balmain Road; and
4. A 5.4m ‘P15 Minute 7:00AM-5:30PM MON-FRI’ parking restriction be installed on the western side of The Boulevarde, south of Balmain Road and 'No Stopping' Zone.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 21 Brenan Street, Lilyfield - Proposal for Car Share Parking Space (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received a request for the installation of a ‘Car Share’ parking space in Brenan Street, Lilyfield for an existing floating car share vehicle in the precinct.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT a 2.5m wide 'No Parking, Inner West Council Authorised Car Share Vehicle Excepted' (90o angle parking) zone be installed in the closed section of Brenan Street, south of City West Link and east of Catherine Street, replacing the existing unrestricted parking space.
DISCUSSION
Clr da Cruz reported that car share users are not returning the vehicle to the designated car share parking space and requested Council Officers raise this issue with the car share operators. Council Officers agreed to pass on this feedback to the car share operators.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT a 2.5m wide 'No Parking, Inner West Council Authorised Car Share Vehicle Excepted' (90o angle parking) zone be installed in the closed section of Brenan Street, south of City West Link and east of Catherine Street, replacing the existing unrestricted parking space.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 22 'No Stopping' Restrictions - The Summer Hill Flour Mill Development and Surrounding Streets (Ashfield Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Burwood PAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received concerns regarding vehicles obstructing sight lines and manoeuvring space by parking too close to intersections within and surrounding the Flour Mill development in Summer Hill.
It has been proposed to signpost the ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at these intersections in order to improve road safety.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Nowranie Street, south of Smith Street;
2. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Smith Street, east of Nowranie Street;
3. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Fleet Street, north of Smith;
4. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the northern side of Smith Street, west of Fleet Street;
5. A 12m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Chapman Street, north of Smith Street;
6. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the northern side of Smith Street, west of Chapman Street;
7. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Spencer Street, south of Smith Street;
8. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Wellesley Street, east of Nowranie Street;
9. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Carrington Street, south of Wellesley Street;
10. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Wellesley Street, west and east of Spencer Street;
11. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Spencer Street, north and south of Wellesley Street;
12. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Spencer Street, south of Wellesley Street;
13. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Wellesley Street, west of Edward Street; and
14. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Edward Street, north and south of Mungo Scott Place;
15. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on eastern side of Edward Street, north and south of Flour Mill Way;
16. A 20m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on eastern side of Edward Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
17. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Spencer Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
18. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Spencer Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
19. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Old Canterbury Road, east of Windsor Road;
20. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Carrington Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
21. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Carrington Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
22. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Longport Street, east of Brown Street; and
23. A 20m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Longport Street, west of Old Canterbury Road.
DISCUSSION
Council Officers advised that part 5 and 6 of the Officer’s recommendation can be withdrawn as the ‘No Stopping’ zones will be resolved during the installation of the roundabout in Smith Street at Chapman Street as part of the site’s development consent.
The representative for the Inner West Bicycle Coalition stated that there is insufficient turnover of vehicles in Smith Street which is leading people to park at the corner to access the businesses in the street. There is currently 1P parking in the street and the representative stated that the time limit could be reduced to encourage parking turnover. Council Officers advised that this can be investigated as a separate issue.
Clr da Cruz asked why 20m ‘No Stopping’ zones have been proposed in part 16 and 23 of the Officer’s recommendation. Council Officers advised that 20m ‘No Stopping’ zones are required at these two locations as they will be adjacent to signalised intersections.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation with the removal of parts 5 and 6:
· A 12m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Chapman Street, north of Smith Street; and
· A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the northern side of Smith Street, west of Chapman Street.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Nowranie Street, south of Smith Street;
2. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Smith Street, east of Nowranie Street;
3. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Fleet Street, north of Smith;
4. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the northern side of Smith Street, west of Fleet Street;
5. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Spencer Street, south of Smith Street;
6. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Wellesley Street, east of Nowranie Street;
7. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Carrington Street, south of Wellesley Street;
8. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Wellesley Street, west and east of Spencer Street;
9. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Spencer Street, north and south of Wellesley Street;
10. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Spencer Street, south of Wellesley Street;
11. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Wellesley Street, west of Edward Street; and
12. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Edward Street, north and south of Mungo Scott Place;
13. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on eastern side of Edward Street, north and south of Flour Mill Way;
14. A 20m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on eastern side of Edward Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
15. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Spencer Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
16. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Spencer Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
17. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Old Canterbury Road, east of Windsor Road;
18. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Carrington Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
19. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the western side of Carrington Street, north of Old Canterbury Road;
20. A 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Longport Street, east of Brown Street; and
21. A 20m ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the southern side of Longport Street, west of Old Canterbury Road.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 23 Edwin Street North, Croydon- Request for 'Mail Zone' |
SUMMARY
A request has been made by the Croydon Licensed Post Office to have a ‘Mail Zone’ established outside/near its new ‘Australia Post’ office to be built at the property No.88 Edwin Street (North) for the pick-up and delivery of mail.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT a 7.0m length ‘Mail Zone 5.30am-7.00pm Mon-Fri; 6.00pm-7.00pm Sun’ be installed outside No.84 Edwin Street North, Croydon.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
A 7.0m length ‘Mail Zone 5.30am-7.00pm Mon-Fri; 6.00pm-7.00pm Sun’ be installed outside No.84 Edwin Street North, Croydon.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 24 OLD CANTERBURY ROAD, LEWISHAM - Temporary Full Road Closure for Rail Overbridge Refurbishment Works (Stanmore Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
An application has been received from Sydney Trains TfNSW for the temporary partial and full road closure of Old Canterbury Road, between Barker Street and Trafalgar Street/Longport Street, Lewisham on various occasions throughout 2019 in order to carry out refurbishment works on their rail over bridge.
It is noted that Old Canterbury Road is a State Road therefore the road closures will be managed by the RMS
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT this report be received and noted.
DISCUSSION
Council Officers tabled a revised detour plan noting that the detours no longer run through local streets (Attachment 5).
The representative for the Member for Summer Hill asked whether pedestrian access will be maintained throughout the road closure. Council Officers will confirm with the applicant and advise the representative on the matter accordingly.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT this report be received and noted.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 25 New Canterbury Road, Petersham – Proposed Signage Outside No.31-33 (Stanmore Ward / Newtown Electorate / Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
As part of the approved mix-used development proposal at 31-33 New Canterbury Road, Petersham a condition was imposed on the developer to provide a detailed regulatory signage and line marking plan prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate and commencement of any road works. The condition was imposed to satisfy the requirements of the RMS and the Local Traffic Committee.
The required plan has been finalised and is presented in this report for consideration. It is recommended that the signage associated with the supplied plan be supported by Council and submitted to the RMS for consideration and approval.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the submitted plan for signs and line marking outside 31-33 New Canterbury Road, Petersham (as per the attached design plan No. 01391-241/5) be supported by Council and submitted to the RMS for consideration and approval.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the submitted plan for signs and line marking outside 31-33 New Canterbury Road, Petersham (as per the attached design plan No. 01391-241/5) be supported by Council and submitted to the RMS for consideration and approval.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 26 Local Traffic Committee Schedule for 2019 |
SUMMARY
The proposed schedule of the Local Traffic Committee meetings has been prepared for the 2019 calendar year. It is recommended that the proposed meeting schedule be received and noted.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the proposed schedule of meetings of the Local Traffic Committee for the 2019 calendar year be received and noted.
DISCUSSION
Council Officers advised that agendas will continue to be released a week before the scheduled meeting.
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the proposed schedule of meetings of the Local Traffic Committee for the 2019 calendar year be received and noted.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 27 63-65 Pyrmont Bridge Road, Annandale - Modification of Development Consent (Leichhardt Ward/ Balmain Electorate/Leichhardt LAC)s |
SUMMARY
A Modification of Development Consent Application has been received to provide vehicular access to the development at No.63-65 Pyrmont Bridge Road, Annandale via Mallett Street. The development application is for an alteration to the existing building for use as a fitness centre (relocation of the Camperdown Fitness Facility at No.166-172 Parramatta Road).
Comments of the Local Traffic Committee will be referred to Council’s Development Assessment Section for consideration in determining the Modification Development Consent Application.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the report be received and noted.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the report be received and noted.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 28 2019 St Jerome's Laneway Festival - Traffic Management Plan (Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt LAC) |
SUMMARY
The proposed event, the St Jerome’s Laneway Festival 2019, is a music festival held annually at Sydney University College of Arts, Rozelle Campus, Callan Park.
Assure Event Safety Services has submitted a Development Application including a Traffic Management Plan for the upcoming “St Jerome’s Laneway Music Festival”, to be held in Callan Park on Sunday, 3 February 2019.
Comments of the Local Traffic Committee will be referred to Council's Development Assessment Section for consideration in determining the Development Application.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the report be received and noted.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the report be received and noted.
For motion: Unanimous |
LTC1118 Item 29 Croydon Road, Croydon - Proposed Pedestrian and Traffic Calming Treatments (Leichhardt Ward / Strathfield Electorate / Burwood PAC) |
SUMMARY
Council’s at its meeting on the 28 May 2018 adopted the recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee meeting of 1 May 2018 to support in principle to pursue various conceptual traffic facility proposals, for pedestrian and road safety improvements along Croydon Road from Elizabeth Street to Parramatta Road, Croydon, subject to further detail design and resident consultation. The treatments are proposed at intersections in effort to minimise the impact on parking.
This report in turn provides consultation feedback from the community on the various traffic facilities proposed along Croydon Road.
It further entails consultation feedback on two (2) alternate options, of final concept, to modify the existing STOP control to the intersection of Church Street and Croydon Road, in lieu (non-option) of a roundabout. Option 1 involves the inclusion of a right turn lane in Church Street (east), provide ‘No Stopping’ restrictions to the intersection corners and propose a speed hump in Croydon Road, north of Church Street, to improve the operation, visibility and speed control around the intersection. Option 2 involves to maintain the existing physical conditions of the intersection, provide ‘No Stopping’ restrictions to the intersection corners and propose a speed hump in Croydon Road, north of Church Street, to generally improve the visibility and speed control around the intersection. These two options were recommended for further consultation by the Local Traffic Committee at its meeting on the 7 September 2017 and was subsequently adopted by Council at its meeting on the 28 May 2018.
From approximately 2200 consultation letters sent out to the residents of the Croydon/Ashfield area bounded by Parramatta Road to the north, Frederick Street to the east, Elizabeth Street to the south and the Burwood/Inner West Council boundary, 75 submissions were received representing around a 3.5% response rate of overall area surveyed. The majority of residents supported the proposals developed by Council. Residents also indicated their support for option 1 over option 2 in relation to the Church Street and Croydon Road proposal.
It is recommended to proceed to detail design on the various treatments along Croydon Road, with further consultation to be undertaken with the affected residents at each location.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The report be received and noted; 2. The following proposed treatments as listed below be approved in principle subject to detailed design and further consultation with affected residents at each location:
(a) Provide a speed cushion in Croydon Road on the approach to Elizabeth Street (Figure 2-Location 1); (b) Widen the north-west corner of Anthony Street and Croydon Road, provide a refuge facility in Croydon Road south of Anthony Street, and speed cushion in Croydon Road north of Anthony Street (Figure 3-Location 2); (c) Provide kerb-blisters in Edwin Street North at the intersection to Anthony Street (Figure 4-Location 3); (d) Remove the horizontal deflection device and replace it with a pedestrian refuge island facility in Croydon Road between Kenilworth Street and Gregory Avenue, and provide speed cushions in Croydon Road on both approaches to Kenilworth Street and Gregory Avenue (Figure 5- Location 4); (e) Provide a pedestrian refuge in Croydon Road between Ranger Road and John Street, and a 10 metre length double white centreline in John Street at the approach to Croydon Road (Figure 6-Location 5); (f) Provide a pedestrian refuge opening in the splitter island in Croydon Road, north of the roundabout intersection with Church Street, and provide a speed cushion in Croydon Road on the southern end approach to Queen Street (Figure 7-Location 6); (g) Provide a right turn lane with associated ‘No Stopping’ restrictions to the intersection of Croydon Road and Church Street and speed hump/cushion in Croydon Road, north of Church Street (Figure 8A –Location7- Option 1); (h) Provide short length painted double white centre lines in Bay Street at the approach to Croydon Road, and in Croydon Road south of Bay Street (Figure 9-Location 8); (i) Provide a central median island in Dalmar Street at Croydon Road (Figure 10- Location 9); 3. That a pedestrian facility be investigated for Croydon Road near/at its intersection with Church Street separate to the proposed treatment in Item 2 (g) above; 4. The existing ‘No Stopping’ restriction on the western side of Elizabeth Street be extended by 2-3m from 10m to a distance of approx. 12-13m north of Croydon Road; 5. A ‘No Stopping’ restriction on the eastern side of Elizabeth Street be installed at a distance of approx. 12-13m north of Croydon Road; and 6. ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed in Anthony Street for a distance of 5 metres west and 7 metres east of the laneway, between Edwin Street and Croydon Road.
DISCUSSION
Public speakers: Phillipa Goodrick, Sara Arthur, Martina Mottee and Rene Holmes attended at 11am.
Ms Arthur stated that she supported the improvements to Croydon Road such as the proposed speed cushions and pedestrian refuges. Ms Arthur commented that:
· She does not support the recommendation for the narrowing of the footpath at Church Street/Croydon Road to enable the installation of a right turn bay from Church Street east into Croydon Road. Narrowing the footpath will make it difficult for people with prams or dogs walking to pass each other easily and safely. Sight lines on this footpath are poor because of the high fence at No.100 Church Street. · A pedestrian refuge should be installed on Croydon Road between Church Street and Queen Street. This will assist pedestrians crossing Croydon Road to access Centenary and Bede Spillane Parks. · She supports the recommendation to consider pram ramps at intersections along Croydon Road because the intersections are difficult to cross, especially those that are poorly designed or have no pram ramps. She suggests consideration of the pram ramps happen sooner rather than later.
Ms Holmes made the following comments:
· Council instigated installing a roundabout at the intersection of Croydon Road 16 years ago which has not materialised. · Croydon Road traffic has worsened over the years as motorists use Croydon Road to bypass Frederick Street. Traffic issues on Croydon Road has made it dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists. · Vehicles have collided with the property on the corner of Croydon Road and Church Street in the last few years. Narrowing the footpath at this location will make it more dangerous. · She has been advised that a roundabout at the intersection of Church Street and Croydon Road is not feasible. However, believes a small roundabout is feasible. · A right turn lane in Church Street will not resolve issues related to traffic coming from Frederick Street to Church Street into Croydon Road. · It has been said that there have not been many accidents reported at the Croydon Road and Church Street intersection. This is likely because accidents causing damage of less than $2,500 are often not reported.
Ms Goodrick, resident of Church Street, stated that the Croydon Road and Church Street intersection has always been dangerous and requested Council reconsider a roundabout at that intersection.
Ms Mottee, resident of Bay Street, stated that traffic in Church Street and Croydon Road is worsening and has become dangerous for pedestrians, especially pedestrians trying to catch buses. Ms Mottee requested Council give more consideration to the issue.
(Ms Goodrick, Ms Arthur, Ms Mottee and Ms Holmes left at 11.12am)
Clr da Cruz stated the following:
· She supports the speakers in relation to pedestrian safety. · Pedestrians cross Croydon Road to access bus stops between Church Street and Parramatta Road. There needs to be a pedestrian facility south of Church Street and at least one between Church Street and Parramatta Road. · Preferable to have pedestrian refuges slow traffic instead of installing speed humps as proposed. · The left turning vehicle may have sight distance obstructed due to the higher vehicle in the right lane. · Consideration should be given to prohibiting no right turns from Church Street into Croydon Road.
Council Officers advised that banning right turns from Church Street into Croydon Road would alter traffic flow and cause traffic diversions elsewhere.
Clr Macri asked if there was a way to maintain the footpath on Church Street and Croydon Road if a right turn lane on Church Street was installed. Council Officers advised that the footpaths need to be reduced to provide space for the right turning path, particularly for larger vehicles.
The representative for the Inner West Bicycle Coalition stated that the Ashfield bike map indicates that Croydon Road and Church Street are major bike routes. Council Officers will arrange for the symbols to be remarked under Council maintenance program.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the matter be deferred for reconsideration at next meeting.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 30 Gordon Lane, Petersham between Sadlier Crescent and Balanaming Lane – Temporary Full Road Closure (Stanmore Ward/Newtown Electorate/Inner West LAC) |
SUMMARY
An application has been received from Alert Traffic Control for the temporary full road closure of Gordon Lane, Petersham between Sadlier Crescent and Balanaming Lane, for a period of 10 hours on Thursday, 6 December 2018 between the hours of 7:00am and 5pm, in order to stand a mobile crane to carry out crane lift works. It is recommended that the proposed temporary full road closure be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT the proposed temporary full road closure of Gordon Lane, Petersham between Sadlier Crescent and Balanaming Lane, for a period of 10 hours on Thursday, 6 December 2018 between the hours of 7:00am and 5pm, be APPROVED in order to stand a mobile crane to carry out crane lift works at No.22 Fisher Street, subject to the following conditions:
a) A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre;
b) All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders; and
c) The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
DISCUSSION
The Committee members agreed with the Officer’s recommendation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT the proposed temporary full road closure of Gordon Lane, Petersham between Sadlier Crescent and Balanaming Lane, for a period of 10 hours on Thursday, 6 December 2018 between the hours of 7:00am and 5pm, be APPROVED in order to stand a mobile crane to carry out crane lift works at No.22 Fisher Street, subject to the following conditions:
a) A Road Occupancy License be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre;
b) All affected residents and businesses, including the NSW Police Local Area Commander, Fire & Rescue NSW and the NSW Ambulance Services be notified in writing, by the applicant, of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days in advance of the closure with the applicant making reasonable provision for stakeholders; and
c) The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed.
For motion: Unanimous
|
LTC1118 Item 31 Works Zone 7.00am-5.00pm Mon-Fri; 7.00am-1.00pm Sat - Applebee Street, St Peters (Marrickville Ward / Heffron Electorate / Inner West PAC) |
SUMMARY
Council has received an updated application for the installation of a 30m ‘Works Zone’ in Applebee Street, St Peters.
Officer’s Recommendation
THAT:
1. The installation of a 30m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri’; 7.00am - 1.00pm Sat" on the eastern side of Applebee Street adjacent to property Nos. 63-81 Princes Highway, St Peters be approved for 12 weeks; and
2. The Works Zone is not to be used for the loading of trucks with demolished or excavated materials.
DISCUSSION
Public speakers: Calum Hutcheson and Tony Metledge attended at 10.06am.
Mr Hutcheson stated that a 30m ‘Works Zone’ has been proposed to allow two vehicles to access the site and to provide sufficient space for a mobile crane whilst minimising the impact to the residential and industrial premises on Applebee Street and surrounding area.
Mr Hutcheson advised that the applicant has amended the proposed ‘Works Zone’ period and is seeking Council’s approval for a 26 week ‘Works Zone’.
(Mr Hutcheson and Mr Metledge left at 10.11am)
The Committee members agreed to the extension of the ‘Works Zone’ for 26 weeks.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. The installation of a 30m ‘Works Zone 7.00am – 5.00pm Mon-Fri’; 7.00am - 1.00pm Sat" on the eastern side of Applebee Street adjacent to property Nos. 63-81 Princes Highway, St Peters be approved for 26 weeks; and
2. The Works Zone is not to be used for the loading of trucks with demolished or excavated materials.
For motion: Unanimous
|
General Business
LTC1118 Item 32 Addison Road and Victoria Road, Marrickville - Adult cyclists on footpath
|
Council Officers advised that a resident has reported adult cyclists dangerously riding on footpaths on Addison Road and Victoria Road. Council Officers requested Police consider appropriate action.
|
Meeting closed at 12.03pm.
ATTACHMENT 1
Garden Street, Marrickville – Long term full road closures
ATTACHMENT 2
Railway Parade, Marrickville – Long term full road closures
ATTACHMENT 3
Residents’ Comments |
Officer’s Response |
A resident of Queen Street was not in support of the full design. Their concerns included the following: - the loss of parking in front of the Café and the Mechanic; - the lack of consultation with residents since 2016 on the design; - that this was the first time seeing the proposal for realigning the intersection;
They proposed to convert Hardy Street to left turn exit only onto Armstrong Street, and to upgrade the speed humps along Armstrong Street.
They also requested for the parking spots on Armstrong Street to be bay marked.
|
The ‘No Stopping’ distance and geometry of the kerb extension and intersection realignment are the same as endorsed by Council at the April 2016 Council meeting. The only change to the proposal is removing the raised threshold speed hump and providing one speed cushion, which will reduce the noise at this location.
The ‘No Stopping’ parking restrictions have been designed to the minimum requirements in accordance with RMS technical directions for pedestrian refuges, to maintain safe viewing of pedestrians at all times.
During the period of consultation in 2016 all feedback was tabled at the Local Traffic Committee for consideration. The Local Traffic Committee of the former Ashfield Council recommended to proceed with the plan to align the intersection, which was subsequently adopted by Council.
The separate proposal to upgrade the speed humps on Armstrong Street will be forwarded to Council’s Infrastructure Planning team for future investigation for Council’s 4 year Capital Works program. |
ATTACHMENT 4
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
A consultation letter was hand delivered on 9 October 2018 to 14 adjoining properties regarding the proposed works at the intersection of Summer Hill and Victoria Street, Lewisham. The consultation period closed on 26 October 2018.
A total of three (3) responses were received; two (2) responses were received against the proposal and one (1) response with additional comments was received in support of the proposal.
Residents’ Comments |
Officer’s Response |
A resident in Victoria Street was not in support of the proposal for kerb extensions at the intersection.
Instead they have recommended that a ‘Give-Way’ or ‘STOP’ sign with additional linemarking be included in Summer Hill Street at Victoria Street. They have been at the intersection for 30 years and witness cars travelling in the centre of the lane of Summer Hill Street.
|
The resident’s comments have been noted.
The proposal has been endorsed by Council as part of the Lewisham LATM plan which was widely consulted with residents, and has been included as part of Council’s 4 year Capital Works Program for Traffic Facilities. Council supports improving the streetscape through providing additional landscaping and ‘greening’ opportunities, rather than just installing parking signage.
The kerb extensions will reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians instead of having to cross the full width of the roadway, which will improve pedestrian safety.
Due to the low traffic volume and nil-accident history at the intersection, is it currently not recommended to include any additional centerline or ‘Give-Way’ linemarking at the intersection.
|
A resident of Victoria Street was in support of the proposal for additional ‘No Stopping’ signs and the upgrade to roadway and footpath at the intersection.
However they were not in support of the landscaped kerb extensions as they will not be adequately maintained.
|
The resident’s comments have been noted. This landscaped facility will be included as part of Council’s rolling maintenance program. Any maintenance can be referred to Council via email or phone calls to be investigated and taken care of.
Additionally there are a number of landscaped footpath pits around the intersection that are being maintained by the residents as part of Council’s sustainable streets program. |
A resident in Victoria Street was not in support of the proposal however requested that resident parking restrictions be implemented in Victoria Street. They are concerned about the limited parking available near their house as a result of the increased development along Old Canterbury Road. |
The resident’s comments have been noted. However, a separate process is required and cannot be implemented as part of these traffic calming improvements.
A member of the traffic team will contact the resident to discuss their application for resident parking restrictions.
|
ATTACHMENT 5
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Inner West Local Planning Panel Update
Prepared By: Rachel Josey - Manager Development Advisory Services
Authorised By: Harjeet Atwal - Group Manager Development Assessment and Regulatory Services
SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide an update to Council on the Inner West Local Planning Panel as resolved by Council at its meeting of the 3 July 2018.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the report be received and noted.
|
BACKGROUND
At the Council meeting on 3 July 2018, Council resolved the following:
“THAT:
1. Council report on the increase in appeals to the Land and Environment Court since the Council merger. The report should identify the reasons for the increase (as well as the potential for further increase), the additional costs and resources impacting on Council and it should address ways to best respond to the increase in appeals; and
2. The Inner West Planning Panel be required to report to Council every 6 months to identify any policy issues.”
This report addresses item 2 of the above resolution. Item 1 of the resolution is underway and will be reported in early 2019.
The Inner West Local Planning Panel (the Panel) was established following a resolution of Council’s Administrator on 27 September 2016. The first meeting of the Panel was held on 8 November 2016. Subsequently, amendments to the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 introduced changes that made Local Planning Panels (formerly known as Independent Hearing & Assessment Panels – IHAP) mandatory for Council’s in the Greater Sydney Region. These amendments also incorporated state-set Code of Conduct, Operational Procedures and Ministerial Directions on what matters would be referred to the Panel for determination. Therefore, the Inner West Local Planning Panel is a Local Planning Panel as required by Section 2.17 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).
The purpose of the Panel is to determine contentious and complex development applications and applications with the greatest corruption risk, while council staff continue to determine routine applications. Attachment 1 is an extract from the Ministerial Direction which lists the referral criteria for matters to be referred to the Panel.
FEEDBACK FROM PANEL MEMBERS
The current members of the Panel are:
Chairperson
Adjunct Professor David Lloyd QC
Alternative Chairs
The Hon Angus Talbot
Mr Kevin Hoffman
Expert Members
Ms Lindsey Dey
Mr David Johnson
Ms Jan Murrell
Mr John McInerney
Mr Ian Stapleton
Mrs Mary-Lynne Taylor
Ms Annelise Tuor
Community Representatives
Mr Ken Hawke
Ms Kath Roach
Ms Heather Warton
Over the last six (6) month period, the members have been asked to provide any feedback to identify any policy issues. No specific policy issues were identified in the feedback.
Other feedback from the Panel members included:
· Concern regarding the number of applications referred to the Panel for determination since the Minister for Planning’s direction. A review of the Panel meetings revealed the following:
Number of Items per Agenda |
||
2017 |
2018 |
|
Average |
5 |
8 |
Maximum |
8 |
11 |
Due to the volume of Development Applications needing to be referred to the Panel, there have been a number of months where additional meetings have been required. Further investigation and review of this matter is needed to ascertain options for increasing the effectiveness of the Panel.
The volume increase is due to the Ministerial Direction that have altered the types of applications / referral criteria for matters to be determined by the Panel. In particular, applications that exceed a particular threshold, regardless of the recommendation (approval or refusal) & any portion of demolition of a heritage item would need to be referred. Previously, applications that exceeded a particular threshold, but were recommended for refusal and applications that included partial demolition, could be determined under officer delegation. This is likely to be the subject of a future report to Council once all alternatives have been explored and a recommendation is available on how best to address this issue.
Concern was raised by some of the Panel members that generally a maximum of nine (9) matters should be set for each agenda to enable sufficient time to deal with each item appropriately. This would enable time to review the report & supporting documentation, carry out a site inspection, hear from objectors and applicants and determine the application.
· Continued Integration work with templates, content of report, conditions etc
The work integrating the systems, processes and documentation within the development assessment team continues. The development assessment team continues to operate on the I.T systems of the three legacy councils, and with three sets of varying planning controls. This has impeded the completion of the integration work.
The creation of standard report templates was completed in 2016, and are the subject of continuous refinement. However, whilst there are three Local Environmental Plans (LEP) and Development Control Plans (DCP) there will always be variation in content and some conditions. The harmonisation of ‘standard conditions’ of development consent has been carried out and is close to implementation. It is anticipated that the integration of ‘standard conditions’ will be completed early 2019.
· What applications have turned into appeals and what is the outcome of these Appeals.
Since the amendments to the EP&A Act 1979 there have not been any matters determined by the Panel, which have resulted in LEC appeals. As set out in the report to Council titled ‘Delegations to Legal Services Staff Regarding Appeals from Inner West Planning Panel’ (Item C0818(2) Item 4), the Panel will be informed of appeals as required by section 8.15(4) of the Act.
DETERMINATIONS MADE BY THE PANEL
Attachment 2 is a list of both Development Applications and Planning Proposals considered by the Inner West Planning Panel including:
- The address of the application
- A description of the proposal
- Number of submissions
- Why the application was referred to the Panel
- Determination
- How the determination differed (if at all) from the Council Officer’s recommendation
The data reveals that from February to October 2018, the panel dealt with 51 matters. Of these applications a total of 3 applications were determined contrary to the recommendation of staff. Of these 3 applications the issues behind the determination included:
1. That the Panel disagreed with the recommendation and found that the proposal was consistent with the relevant controls.
2. The Panel was not satisfied that the acoustic report was adequate and were concerned about amenity impacts on the locality; and
3. The Panel approved the application on a Deferred Commencement basis however included conditions that would amend the proposal and address the issues raised in the report.
From 2019, a 6 monthly report will be presented to Council to identify any policy issues from the panel.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The Panel currently operates with a budget of $175,624. This allows for 14 meetings per annum. In the event that current volume and workload trends continue, budget for additional meetings may need to be identified. Staff will continue to monitor this situation closely.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Not applicable
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Not applicable.
CONCLUSION
The Inner West Local Planning Panel is a requirement of Section 2.17.2 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
As depicted in the data available, the Panel has considered 51 items since February 2018. Of these applications a total of 3 applications were determined contrary to the recommendation by staff. Therefore 95% of determinations were as per the recommendation, demonstrating a consistency between the Council officers and Panel.
1.⇩ |
Referral Criteria for IWLPP |
2.⇩ |
List of matters referred to IWLPP from Feb to Oct 2018 |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Compliants Handling Policy
Prepared By: Nellette Kettle - Group Manager Integration, Customer Service, Business Excellence and Civic and Executive Support
Authorised By: John Warburton - Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement
SUMMARY To report to Council on the submissions received during the Public Exhibition period and adopt the amended policy and rescind former council policies. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Adopt the amended Complaints Handling policy shown as Attachment 1;
2. Receive an six monthly report on complaint statistics; and
3. Rescind the below legacy policies of the former Ashfield, Marrickville and Leichhardt councils: - Customer Complaints policy (Ashfield); - Service Complaints policy (Leichhardt); and - Council Complaint Management Policy (Marrickville). |
BACKGROUND
At the Council Meeting on 25 September, Council resolved:-
“1. That the draft Complaints Handling Policy be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days; and
2. That Council receive, with the draft policy’s post-exhibition report, a recommendation regarding the regular reporting of complaint statistics to Council”.
Please refer to Attachment 1: Complaints Handling policy for the updated policy.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
The policy was placed on public exhibition for a period of one month. Council received six submissions, with five in support of the draft policy. Please refer to Attachment 1: Engagement outcomes report for further information. A brief summary of the comments and suggestions made for amendments to the Draft Policy and the officer’s response are shown below:-
Support of the Policy |
Comments made in Submissions |
Officer’s Response |
Yes |
1. Standards relating to courtesy and respect, fairness etc should also be an explicit requirement of the complainant. 2. At what stage would it be assessed that a customer’s complaint is vexatious, or that based on the nature of the issue the customers proposed remedy is not feasible or will not solve the problem? 3. There should be no expectations or performance measures to achieve zero complaints especially for front line staff. |
1. Policy has been amended to reflect this.
2. This would need to be considered on a case by case basis.
3. Agree, there are no expectations or performance measures to achieve zero complaints. |
Yes |
1. A requirement along the lines of ‘Report publicly on Inner West Council’s complaints handling not less than annually’ must be added in order to give effect to the underlying public confidence purpose.
2. The Complaints Handling Policy needs to reference paragraphs 8A(1)(h) and 8A(2)(e) of the Local Government Act and a clear statement to the effect that ethical and fair treatment of residents requires honesty and candour to prevail over the interests of Council and its officers themselves. Resident must come first in all circumstances.
3. Training on the policy for customer service staff is required
|
1. Reporting will be undertaken every six months.
2. The statements in the Local Government Act are already covered in the Policy. The Policy states that purpose of Council’s complaint handling system is to handle complaints fairly, effectively and efficiently and provides statements of accountability of staff in Section 3. Complaint handling requires officers to treat a complaint on its merits. This may involve weighing the interests of the Council as well as the interest of the residents or other third parties.
3. Training for staff in the implementation of the Policy will be provided once the policy is adopted. |
Yes |
How will it be implemented by staff |
Please refer to the response above. |
No |
When people send a complaint by email the auto reply should include a complaint reference number so that complainant can follow up the complaint if required. |
This is standard practice with the implementation of the new customer request (CRM) system. |
Yes |
Council needs to review unresolved complaints already filed with them. |
Agree, this is already undertaken on a regular basis. |
Yes |
The time frame for acknowledging receipt of a complaint needs to be defined, and should be far less than the 10 days that is expected for resolution or a typical complaint. |
Customers now receive an immediate auto acknowledgment with a reference number when lodging online or over the phone with the new CRM system. |
CONCLUSION
Council has reviewed the submissions received and made amendments to the Draft Policy where appropriate.
1.⇩ |
Draft Complaints Handling Policy |
2.⇩ |
Engagement Outcomes Report - Complaints Handling Policy |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Status of Legal Proceedings
Prepared By: Joe Strati - General Counsel
Authorised By: Rik Hart - Interim General Manager
SUMMARY This report provides Council with a summary of legal proceedings in which Council is involved. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the Report be received and noted. |
BACKGROUND
This report provides Council with a summary of legal proceedings in which Council is involved.
It does not include the following types of legal proceedings:
1. Proceedings that are managed by Council’s insurers;
2. Local Court proceedings involving an appeal against a parking fine; and
3. Proceedings for the recovery of debts where those proceedings are being run by council’s external debt collection agency.
The report is current as at 1 November 2018. It does not capture changes that have occurred between that date and the date the report is considered by Council.
As the report contains no information of a confidential nature that falls within section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act 1993, it is published as an open report. Should, however, Council wish to seek legal advice on any matter addressed in the report, it would be appropriate for Council to enter into closed session for such advice to be provided and so that any legal professional privilege that may attach to such advice is not waived.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Nil.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Nil.
1.⇩ |
Summary of Legal Matters - as at 1 November 2018 |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Investment Report as at 31 October 2018
Prepared By: Brendhan Barry - Manager Financial Services
Authorised By: Pav Kuzmanovski - Group Manager Finance
SUMMARY In accordance with the requirements of clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council is provided with a listing of all investments made pursuant to section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 and reported for period ending 31 October 2018.
|
RECOMMENDATION THAT the report be received and noted.
|
BACKGROUND
Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that a report be presented to Council each month listing all investments with a certification from the Responsible Accounting Officer. Attached to this report are further reports from Council’s Investment Advisors, Prudential Investment Services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The Investment Holdings report (Attachment 1) for the period ending 30 October 2018 reflects Council’s holding in various investment categories these are listed in the table below. Council’s portfolio size sits at $202.9m, of which 83% was rated A rated or above. All Socially Responsible Investments (SRI’s) are investments that comply with the Non Fossil Fuel standards.
SCOPE FOR INCREASING SRI EXPOSURE
Council engaged its independent investment advisors, Prudential, to provide advice with respect to the scope for Council to increase its SRI exposure, which currently sits at 17% of the total portfolio. This report (Attachment 3) reviewed our current institution and credit exposures and suggests that Council increase holdings in long term higher rated SRI bonds. This is because SRI bonds are primarily issued by state governments and large, well-diversified banks (such as the four major banks in Australia) that will decrease the risk exposure of Council’s investment portfolio. These institutions usually carry the highest long term credit ratings available in Australia which usually mean a reduced rate of return. As these bonds become more readily available, Council will continue with the current approach of increasing its holdings in long term SRIs to a target range of 25-30% of the total investment portfolio.
Council’s annualised return continues to exceed the bank bill index benchmark. The period ending 31 October 2018, the portfolio for Inner West Council had a One-Month Portfolio Investment Return of 3.09%, above the UBSWA Bank Bill Index Benchmark (2.05%).
Council has a well-diversified portfolio with 83% of the portfolio spread among the top three credit rating categories (A long term / A2 short term and higher).
Council has a well-diversified portfolio invested among a range of term deposits and floating rate notes from highly rated Australian ADIs. The graph above shows Council’s individual institution exposure compared with the investment policy limits.
The graph above demonstrates the term to maturity for Council’s investments compared to Council’s approved investment policy limits.
Environmental and Socially Responsible Commitments
The graph above illustrates the gap between yields received from Socially Responsible Investments (SRI), Fossil Fuel (FF) and Non Fossil Fuel (NFF) Investments. All Socially Responsible Investments are also Non Fossil Fuel Investments.
Council’s holdings in NFF / SRI’s was $193.3m with the relative total portfolio percentage of 96%.
Council’s holdings in NFF investments were $159.3m with the relative total portfolio percentage of 79%.
Council’s holdings in SRI’s were $34.0m, with the relative total portfolio percentage of 17%.
The attachments to this report summarise all investments held by Council and interest returns for periods ending 31 October 2018.
The Current Market value is required to be accounted for. The Current Market Value is a likely outcome if Council were to consider recalling the investment prior to its due date.
All investments made for the month of October 2018 have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act, Local Government Regulations and the Inner West Council Investment Policy.
1.⇩ |
IWC Oct18 |
2.⇩ |
IWC Economic and Investment Portfolio Commentary Oct 18 |
3.⇩ |
Investment Strategy Analysis Update - Increasing SRI Portfolio Nov 2018 |
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Save Globe Preschool - EOI and Contingency Fund
From: Councillor Tom Kiat
Motion:
THAT:
1. Council reiterate its position that the State Government should allow Globe Preschool to continue operating at its existing site, and that the State Government should fund the construction of new classrooms if they are needed for Wilkins Public School rather than evicting Globe Preschool;
2. Council note that the current State Government has not accepted Council's position despite ongoing advocacy, but that the Labor opposition has indicated it would save the Preschool by not proceeding with planned eviction of Globe Preschool;
3. Council note that, after months of discussions regarding the possibility of an alternate site on Wilkins Public School for Globe Preschool, the Department of Education on 16 Nov 2018 published an EOI "for the redevelopment of part of the Wilkins Public School site for the provision and operation of a pre-school. The Department is providing the site only. It is a requirement for the successful respondent to provide the pre-school infrastructure including outdoor play areas";
4. Council urgently receive a report regarding this EOI, assessing the site being offered and the relevant conditions, and options for Council to express its interest to develop and run Globe Preschool on a new site. This should be seen as a contingency plan required only if the State Government persists in its plan to evict Globe Preschool from its current site; and
5. The report should include consideration of the creation of a contingency fund for Globe Preschool from the Marrickville Hospital site sale funds (according to the 2017-18 financial statement report this includes $10m of unallocated working funds), to prepare for the possibility that Council may need to develop a new preschool building for Globe in the near future. The allocation of the Marrickville Hospital site sale funds should be deferred until this report can be considered by council. |
Officer’s Comments:
An initial review of the EOI put out by DET suggests that the terms are highly unfavourable to Council. It is not possible to prepare a report that adequately addresses the issues raised prior to 13 December 2018 because the EOI does not specify the site and DET do not propose a site visit until 3 December 2018.
A full assessment of the site cannot be made until after this site visit and will need the services (and attendance) of an architect or draftsperson with experience and working knowledge of the requirements in design and construction of a children’s service as the EOI submission is to also include an outline of the proposed development and design concepts (development of which to be within a 10 day period, 7 working days).
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Bring Council Meetings Back to the Community
From: Councillor John Stamolis
Motion:
THAT Council prepare a report by February 2019 to address the relocation of Ordinary Council Meetings and Councillor briefings to a more central location in the Inner West Municipality; with a specific focus on using Petersham Chambers.
|
Background
Many residents and Councillors have expressed concern that Ashfield Chambers is not a central location hold Council meetings and Councillor briefings. Only last meeting, the Mayor made comments about this.
When compared with other municipalities, Ashfield Chambers is one of the least accessible to its community. Most Chambers are right in the heart of the municipality within reasonable reach from all parts of the municipality. This is not the case in the Inner West. For the Inner West, residents who live in Burwood and Canada Bay Councils live closer to Ashfield Chambers than most of our own residents.
It is clear that attendance at Ordinary Council meetings, as well as community participation at the meetings, is adversely affected by the location being at Ashfield.
For that small number of residents who are not put off by the location, once they get to Ashfield, they face an accessibility struggle as well as very poor facilities.
There is only one lift and the meeting room is on Level 6. There are no stairs which attendees can use (even so, who would walk up and down 6 flights of stairs). If residents park on the roof-top car park (i.e. equivalent to level 6) they must catch a lift to the ground floor or enter via the library and then go back up to Level 6; and do the reverse when they leave.
Councillors can also enter and exit at level 5 but only if this door is manned by a Council staff member. This is a waste of a staff resource.
Ashfield is the most inefficient and inconvenient design for Councillor and public accessibility of any of the former Chambers (i.e. Leichhardt, Petersham and Ashfield).
Once residents are in the Council Chambers, many cannot hear the proceedings due to the lack of speakers, nor can they see what is going on due to there being only one screen at the front of the room.
Temperature control is poor with Council recently outlaying funds on fans for Councillors while there is little relief for the public (there are two large but noisy fans).
The Ordinary Council meeting is held twice each month (even three times on several occasions this year). It is our most important forum. We want people to be able to have fair access to the location of Council meetings. This includes people from St Peters, Birchgrove, Balmain East, Annandale and Enmore; all of who are very remote from Ashfield.
A view is beginning to emerge that Council decides on the location that suits Council best and the 195,000 people in our community either like it or lump it.
Council needs to give strong consideration to bringing its key meetings back to its community and making the location of Council Chambers accessible. As such, Council should consider a more central location for Ordinary Council meetings as well as Councillor briefings.
Petersham Chambers immediately comes to mind. Its central location in the municipality would improve accessibility for the community. It would also be better for many Councillors.
Petersham Chambers would have enough capacity to seat attendees, apart from rare instances where attendances have been very high. It should be pointed out that even in these rare instances, Ashfield has been too small.
Ward Councillors need to ensure fair access to Ordinary Council meetings for our constituents. Residents should feel that we have considered and balanced their right of access to the highest level decision making forum in their community.
It is also time that Councillors had a say in where our meetings and briefings are held.
Officer’s Comments:
Comment from Manager Civic and Executive Support:
Councillors were briefed in November 2017 on the limitations of other venues for holding Council Meetings. The Council Chambers at both Leichhardt and Petersham Service Centre do not meet the current Building Codes for holding large public meetings. Specifically, the Petersham Service Centre has accessibility issues and does not meet contemporary fire standards as it only has one entry and exit point.
The Petersham Council Chambers also has ongoing maintenance issues with old air conditioning, plumbing and audio visual technology that would need to be upgraded to function as a venue for holding public meetings. There are no Civic and Executive Support staff based at Petersham and no caretakers located on-site, so additional labour and equipment costs would be incurred to organise setup of both the Function Room and Council Chambers to provide a similar standard to the Ashfield Service Centre and hire or purchase audio visual equipment for live minutes, microphones and webcasting. The Petersham Council Chambers is currently being used as an IT hub for Technology One staff in developing the Technology One solution for Council and additional furniture would need to be purchased to reinstate the Council Chambers.
As the Ashfield Service Centre is the current preferred location for Council Meetings, Council has recently entered into a contract to undertake an upgrade of the Ashfield Council Chambers to improve the air conditioning, upgrade the speaker and amplifier system, provide TV displays for the public gallery, provide a fixed solution for webcasting, replace the microphone system and provide monitors for each Councillor. This upgrade will be completed in January 2019. If Council were to break this contract it would cost $300,000 plus potential damages.
|
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Greenway Delivery Project Management and Engagement Plan
Prepared By: Ryan Hawken - Project Manager Greenway Delivery
Authorised By: Cathy Edwards-Davis - Group Manager Trees, Parks and Sports Fields
SUMMARY The Cooks to Cove GreenWay Master Plan was adopted by Council at its 14 August 2018 meeting with a number of amendments. Based on the Master Plan, $27m of high priority works are planned to be designed and constructed along the GreenWay by 2022.
The report provides information on project delivery planning and project assurance requested at the meeting.
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the report be noted. |
BACKGROUND
At its meeting 14 August 2018 Council resolved, in part, that:
1. The GreenWay Master Plan: Cooks to Cove GreenWay be adopted;
2. An
implementation report be brought to Council identifying the
following
components of the Greenway project:
a) A schedule and key delivery dates for capital works program;
b) Cost minimisation, risk mitigation and project management strategies;
c) Community consultation and communications plans - which must detail the approach to resident input (along the IAP2 public participation spectrum) and provide a cost / benefit analysis that recognises the value IWC places on appropriately increasing the say local residents can have about the area in which we live. The plans should also give consideration to resident requests for additional general information sessions and stakeholder / residential working groups, and other proposed consultation mechanisms;
3. An
independent project assurance advisor be appointed for the Greenway
project to provide scrutiny, oversight and
review of the project at key stage
gates for the various links, including tender release,
contract awarding, pre-
commissioning and practical completion;
4.
Resources required to operate and maintain the Greenway are identified as
part of the Operational Management Plan -
including resources required to
support Greenway biodiversity as identified in
the Masterplan documents
released for public exhibition;
This report provides a response to Item’s 2, 3 and 4 of the resolution above.
Items 5 to 13 of the resolution, which are not repeated above, have been incorporated into the Final Greenway Master Plan which has now been published on Council’s website. https://www.innerwest.nsw.gov.au/live/environment-and-sustainability/sustainability-programs/greenway
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Greenway Delivery Project Management Plan (ATTACHMENT 1) provides an implementation report which details the following framework for delivery of the project:
· Scope and objectives
· Schedule, Milestones and Approvals
· Budget and Procurement
· Monitoring and reporting requirements
· Risks
· Stakeholders and Engagement
It is noted that the Project Management Plan is a working document that will be updated at key stages throughout the life of the project.
Scope and objective
The objective is to implement funded works identified in the Cooks to Cove Greenway Master Plan. The scope of the Greenway Delivery is derived from the adopted Greenway Master Plan within the existing $27m budget. A scope overview plan is provided as an attachment.
Schedule and Milestones
The schedule for the Greenway Delivery has been developed based on the activities deemed to be required to deliver the works including planning, design, approvals and construction activities. Approvals required to complete the project are also identified.
A detailed schedule is provided as an attachment. Based on the schedule key milestones are presented. The details of the schedule will change and will be updated to reflect timeframes for planning approvals and licensing agreements and the programs of the successful construction contractors.
Budget and Procurement
The budget and procurement plan are provided based on the available funding, cost estimates and the proposed delivery program. To enable Council to achieve competitive prices in procurement, budget and procurement details are provided as a confidential attachment.
Final procurement costs are likely to change based on quotations of the successful consultants and construction contractors.
Monitoring and Reporting
The project management plan sets out the Greenway delivery monitoring and reporting requirements and their frequency. Key governance groups including the Project Control Group which is comprised of relevant Group Managers and Deputy General Managers and Project Reference Group which includes special subject matter experts from across Council disciplines.
The project progress, risks, issues, budget and status are monitored regularly by the PCG and internally through Council’s Project Management Framework project reporting portal.
Risks
Key risks including delays, cost increases, loss of funding, community concern and loss of reputation to Council are identified and controls nominated.
Stakeholders and Engagement
The engagement plan has been developed in collaboration between the Project Team and Council’s Engagement team. Internal and external stakeholders are identified along with known issues and associated level of engagement as per Council’s adopted Engagement Framework which is underpinned by IAP2 principles. The engagement plan seeks to Involve staff and key stakeholders and Consult with the wider community.
A summary of communication and engagement activities is provided for the life of the project delivery.
The communication and engagement activities have been developed in line with Council’s adopted Engagement Framework and provide a detailed analysis of stakeholders, issues, needs and project staging. The engagement plan aims to ensure early input from key stakeholders and the community to enable risks to be addressed early and ensure outcomes are aligned with community values and expectations. It also aims to make efficient use of the community’s time by enabling input at key project stages. This approach is considered to be cost effective and is funded from existing operational and project budgets.
PROJECT ASSURANCE
Council is currently in the process of scoping and procuring a suitable consultant to provide project assurance advice for the Greenway Delivery Project. It is anticipated that the project assurance advisor would commence in January 2019.
The scope for the project assurance advisor will include three main phases:
· Review of Governance
· Development of Project Assurance Plan
· Compliance review at each stage gates
Review of Governance
The project assurance advisor would review the project governance arrangements that are in place, including whether they are adequate and have been implemented consistently. The review would make recommendations to be considered by the Project Control Group.
Development of Project Assurance Plan
The project assurance advisor would review the project scope, identify key risks and, based on this, identify stages where project assurance is required, known as stage gates. These stage gates will encompass pre-tender, tender, construction and post-construction phases.
Compliance Review
Reviews would be undertaken by nominated persons or groups at each stage gate as specified in the Project Assurance Plan. The project assurance advisor would undertake a periodic review to ensure compliance with the Project Assurance Plan.
As a major grant contributor to the project, Transport for NSW is commissioning a “Health Check” for the Missing Links Project, in consultation with the GreenWay Missing Links Agencies Funding and Approvals Group and missing links state funding programs. This process will inform and compliment the Council internal project assurance process.
OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
Planning for operational and asset maintenance for new Greenway infrastructure is intended to be developed concurrent with the project design and delivery. This planning will be closely coordinated with the development of licensing agreements with Greenway landowners Sydney Trains and Sydney Water. The planning will take into consideration Greenway biodiversity resourcing and coordination with other Greenway community programs.
Asset management and operational plans will inform annual budgeting processes and will be reported to Council at a later date.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The project assurance advisor is anticipated to cost in the order of $100,000 over the life of the project based on quarterly reviews. Additional costs in the order of $100,000 are also likely to be incurred based on the likely requirements of the Project Assurance Plan, which is likely to include independent reviews by quantity surveyors, civil, geotechnical and structural engineers at various stages throughout the delivery of the project.
These costs will reduce the funding available for capital works and as result elements in the master plan will need to be deferred unless additional funding is provided.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
The Project Management Plan has been reviewed by the Greenway Delivery Project Control Group which is comprised of relevant Group Managers and Deputy General Managers.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Not applicable.
1.⇩ |
Greenway Delivery Project Management Plan |
Greenway Delivery Detailed Budgets - Confidential |
Council Meeting 27 November 2018 |
Subject: Request for Reimbursement of Legal Expenses
Prepared By: Nellette Kettle - Group Manager Integration, Customer Service, Business Excellence and Civic and Executive Support
Authorised By: John Warburton - Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement
SUMMARY A request for reimbursement of legal costs has been received from Councillor Passas. In accordance with the Councillor Expenses and Facilities Policy, Council must determine this application. |
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council determine the request for reimbursement of legal costs in accordance with the Councillor Expenses and Facilities Policy. |
BACKGROUND
A request has been received from Councillor Passas for reimbursement of legal costs associated with proceedings in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT).
Clr Passas was the respondent to a complaint brought by Mr Gary Burns, which was subsequently withdrawn. Relevant background to the matter is contained in Attachment 1 to this report.
Councillor Passas lodged an application for costs with the NCAT which was unsuccessful, with the Tribunal determining that each party should pay their own costs (refer Attachment 1).
Councillor Passas is seeking reimbursement of legal costs associated with the matter under Council’s Councillor Expenses and Facilities Policy, and is claiming reimbursement of a total of $6575.70 as per Attachment 2 and 3.
The relevant excerpt from the Councillor Expenses and Facilities Policy pertaining to legal costs is reproduced in full below:
“8. Legal assistance
8.1 Council may, if requested, indemnify or reimburse the reasonable legal expenses of:
a Councillor defending an action arising from the performance in good faith of a function under the Local Government Act
a Councillor defending an action in defamation, provided the statements complained of were made in good faith in the course of exercising a function under the Act
a Councillor for proceedings before an appropriate investigative or review body, provided the subject of the proceedings arises from the performance in good faith of a function under the Act and the matter has proceeded past any initial assessment phase to a formal investigation or review and the investigative or review body makes a finding substantially favourable to the Councillor.
8.2 In the case of a conduct complaint made against a Councillor, legal costs will only be made available where the matter has been referred by the General Manager to a conduct reviewer or conduct review panel to make formal enquiries into that matter in accordance with Council’s Code of Conduct.
8.3 Legal expenses incurred in relation to proceedings arising out of the performance by a Councillor of his or her functions under the Act are distinguished from expenses incurred in relation to proceedings arising merely from something that a Councillor has done during his or her term in office. For example, expenses arising from an investigation as to whether a Councillor acted corruptly would not be covered by this section.
8.4 Council will not meet the legal costs:
of legal proceedings initiated by a Councillor under any circumstances
of a Councillor seeking advice in respect of possible defamation, or in seeking a non-litigious remedy for possible defamation
for legal proceedings that do not involve a Councillor performing their role as a Councillor.
8.5 Reimbursement of expenses for reasonable legal expenses must have Council approval by way of a resolution at a Council meeting”.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The reimbursement of expenses can be funded through the existing budget allocation for Councillor expenses.
OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
Nil.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Nil.
CONCLUSION
Nil.
1.⇩ |
Decision of NCAT - Burns v Passas |
Tax Invoice re Passas ats Burns - Confidential |
|
Tax Invoice re Passas ats Comensoli - Confidential |