|
AGENDA R |
Council Meeting
TUESDAY 24 SEPTEMBER 2019
6.30pm
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
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 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 24 September 2019 |
|
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 from 16 July 2019 Extraordinary Council Meeting 5
Minutes from 27 August 2019 Council Meeting 8
Minutes of 10 September 2019 Council Meeting 22
7 Public Forum – Hearing from All Registered Speakers
8 Condolence Motions
Nil at the time of printing.
9 Mayoral Minutes
ITEM Page
C0919(2) Item 1 Mayoral Minute: Acknowledgement of Retiring Long Serving Staff Members 24
10 Reports with Strategic Implications
ITEM Page
C0919(2) Item 2 Lobbying Policy and Register 25
C0919(2) Item 3 Long Term Accommodation Strategy EOI 30
11 Reports for Council Decision
ITEM Page
C0919(2) Item 4 2019 Annual Grants Program 61
C0919(2) Item 5 Planning Proposal for 36 Lonsdale Street and 64-70 Brenan Street, Lilyfield 101
C0919(2) Item 6 3 Cahill Street Annandale - Compulsory Acquisition 103
C0919(2) Item 7 Sporting Grounds - Fees & Charges 105
C0919(2) Item 8 Exhibition of Additional Fees and Charges for 2019/20 108
C0919(2) Item 9 Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 2 September 2019 123
12 Reports for Noting
ITEM Page
C0919(2) Item 10 Tree DCP Amendment 146
C0919(2) Item 11 Investment Report as at 31 August 2019 160
C0919(2) Item 12 Budget Saving Tracking Summary 186
13 Rescission Motions
ITEM Page
C0919(2) Item 13 Notice of Motion to Rescind: C0819(2) Item 1 Tree Management DCP 27 August 2019 188
14 Notices of Motion
ITEM Page
C0919(2) Item 14 Notice of Motion: Bunnings Tempe 210
C0919(2) Item 15 Notice of Motion: Mental Health data 211
C0919(2) Item 16 Notice of Motion: A plan to increase tree canopy in Marrickville Ward 213
C0919(2) Item 17 Notice of Motion: Increasing Tree Canopy 214
C0919(2) Item 18 Notice of Motion: Long Term Accommodation Strategy: Full Community Consultation 216
C0919(2) Item 19 Notice of Motion: Organisation Restructure and Staff Redundancies 218
C0919(2) Item 20 Notice of Motion: Inner West Train Station Accessibility Upgrades 219
15 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
C0919(2) Item 21 Land and Property Strategy Initiative - Hay Street Carpark Affordable Housing Redevelopment 220
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Minutes of Extraordinary Council Meeting held on 16 July 2019
Meeting commenced at 6:30pm
|
Present: |
|
|
Darcy Byrne Victor Macri Marghanita Da Cruz Mark Drury Lucille McKenna OAM Colin Hesse Sam Iskandar Tom Kiat Pauline Lockie Rochelle Porteous Vittoria Raciti John Stamolis Louise Steer Anna York |
Mayor Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Group Manager Human Resources |
|
Marcia Doheny |
General Counsel |
APOLOGIES:
THAT Apologies from Councillor Passas be accepted.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York
Against Motion: Nil
DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:
Councillor Raciti declared a non-significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 1 – Notice of Motion: Matters Concerning the General Manager as a relative is employed by the law firm who provided legal advice.
Motion: (Byrne/Lockie)
THAT the Disclosure of Interest be received and noted.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York
Against Motion: Nil
Confidential Session
Motion: (Byrne/Da Cruz)
THAT Council enter into confidential session to consider the recently published SA Ombudsman reports regarding the CEO as well as advice (including independent legal advice) Council has received regarding same.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York
Against Motion: Nil
That in accordance with Section 10A(2) d(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, the following matters be considered in Closed Session of Council for the reasons provided:
C0719(1) Item 1 Notice of Motion: Matters Concerning the General Manager (Section 10A(2)(a) personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors) of the Local Government Act 1993).
ADJOURNMENT
6.33pm – The Mayor, Clr Bryne adjourned the meeting to allow time to read the summary legal advice.
6:40pm – The Mayor, Clr Bryne resumed the meeting.
Reports with Confidential Information
The Extraordinary Meeting was adjourned at 8.15pm until Tuesday 23 July 2019 at the conclusion of the Ordinary Council meeting.
The meeting was resumed on 23 July 2019 at 8.18pm
|
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 Anna York |
Mayor Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Group Manager Human Resources |
|
Marcia Doheny |
General Counsel |
APOLOGIES: Nil
Reports with Confidential Information
|
C0719(1) Item 1 Notice of Motion: Matters Concerning the General Manager |
|
Motion: (Byrne/Hesse)
THAT Council note the advice and that the matter is closed.
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York Against Motion: Nil |
Meeting closed at 8:33pm
Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting held on 27 August 2019 at Ashfield Service Centre
Meeting commenced at 6.31pm
|
Present: |
|
|
Darcy Byrne Victor Macri Marghanita Da Cruz Lucille McKenna OAM Colin Hesse Sam Iskandar Tom Kiat Pauline Lockie Julie Passas Vittoria Raciti John Stamolis Louise Steer Anna York Elizabeth Richardson |
Mayor Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Chief Executive Officer Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment |
|
John Warburton |
Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement |
|
Cathy Edwards-Davis Gwilym Griffiths Wal Petschler |
Group Manager Trees, Parks and Streetscapes Urban Forest Manager Group Manager Footpaths, Roads and Stormwater |
|
Ian Naylor Katherine Paixao |
Manager Civic Governance Governance Coordinator |
APOLOGIES:
Motion: (Stamolis/Hesse)
THAT Apologies from Councillors Drury and Porteous be accepted.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York
Against Motion: Nil
DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:
Clr Kiat declared a significant, non-pecuniary interest in Item 2 - Sydney Eastern City Planning Panel Report: DA10.2018.220: 74 – 75 Carlton Crescent Summer Hill as his employer has a long standing and ongoing campaign in relation to Ambulance stations in Sydney and he will leave the chamber during discussion and voting.
Motion: (Byrne/Lockie)
That Council note the disclosures of interest.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York
Against Motion: Nil
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
|
THAT the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on Tuesday, 13 August 2019 be confirmed as a correct record. Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York Against Motion: Nil |
Motion: (Byrne/Passas)
THAT Council hear from all registered speakers for Item 1.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York
Against Motion: Nil
PUBLIC FORUM
The registered speakers were asked to address the meeting. The list of speakers is available on the last page of these minutes.
ADJOURNMENT
7.42pm - The Mayor, Clr Byrne adjourned the meeting for a short recess.
7.50pm– The Mayor, Clr Byrne resumed the meeting.
Councillor Passas re-entered the Meeting at 7:52 pm.
|
That Council amend the Tree DCP policy to include the following:
1. The following new objectives: a. To maintain and enhance the amenity of the Inner West Local Government Area through the perseveration or appropriate trees and vegetation;
b. To ensure the cost burden of meeting tree canopy targets does not
fall unreasonably on property owners and lower income residents in
particular; and c. Encourage private property owners to plant new trees and replace inappropriate trees in order to meet Council’s tree canopy targets.
2. Amend objective 3 to read “to ensure the safety of the community, private property and public infrastructure assets.”;
3. Amend prescribed trees (2.20.3) to be 6 meters rather than 5 meters in height;
4. A schedule of tree species which are exemptions for the need of a tree permit as detailed in the tabled document;
5. Exempt work definition to be amended to: a. Allow for canopy lifting to 2.5 meters above ground without limitation on branch diameter; and
b. Selective pruning to a 3 meter clearance above the roof or from the face of all structures that are being impacted.
6. Where replacement of trees is approved, Council prefers that trees that are removed are replaced on the site with a suitable replacement canopy tree and in a suitable location onsite. However, there may be circumstances when there is no suitable location on site (for example, in the case of small backyards); a financial contribution will be required to be paid to support public tree planting. Offset fees are to established within Council’s fees and charges schedule;
7. Council approval is not required to prune or remove trees within 3m of an existing dwelling or ancillary structure, which has been approved through a Development Application or Complying Development Certificate, within the same lot as the tree. The distance is to be measured from the face of the tree trunk closest to the dwelling or structure to the external wall or roof line of the dwelling or structure, the definition of which may include a garage, carport, studio, shed, workshop, swimming pool, spa or retaining walls with a height greater than 600mm;
8. Development consent is to be required for works or removal of trees only in the following circumstances (all other applications will be categorised as tree works permit applications or minor works requests):
a. Removal of trees identified on the Inner West Council heritage trees list;
b. The tree forms part of an Aboriginal object or that is located within an Aboriginal place of heritage; and
9. The following criteria for the assessment of applications will form the guidelines for tree applications with the assessment criteria in the DCP to be amended to match these: Danger Danger is assessed based on a number of factors including; · The potential/likelihood of a tree or tree part to fail; · A history of previous branch failure; · The size of the defective part of the tree; · The use and occupancy of the area that may be struck by a defective part; and · The tree exceeds 15m in height and is within the strike zone of a habitable dwelling.
Meeting the danger criteria gives significant determinative weight to the application to approve the removal and/or pruning of a tree.
Property Damage The likelihood of the tree having an adverse effect on property including trees renowned for having extensive root systems, which cause damage to footings of houses or, trees that cause blockages to domestic sewer and drainage lines.
Condition of the tree The structural integrity of the tree is assessed for any visible signs of decay or deterioration, this is usually indicated by a lack of foliage, dead branches evident in the canopy, presence of fungal fruiting bodies, excessive sap being exuded from the trunk and/or evidence of insect attack, particularly borer damage. Further, the likelihood the species displays toward branch failure and subsequent limb fall
Health of the tree The species susceptibility to environmental changes, which may affect the longevity of the species survival in its current location. This would include, changes in soil level, excessive root damage caused during construction works, changes in water availability, competition for other vegetation (particularly climbing vines), and compaction of soil (particularly in high usage areas such as car parking areas).
Complying Development The need for tree removal in order to allow for development that could otherwise be carried out under a Complying Development Certificate. A statement from the certifier confirming that tree removal is the only impediment to the issuance of a CDC must be submitted to support the application. These applications will be assessed based on the same criteria as a Development Application.
Significance to Streetscape An assessment of the visual environment and the significance the specimen plays within the streetscape. Other criteria would include if the tree is an endangered or rare species, is of historical significance or, the link the tree provides between bushland and reserves (the connectivity of habitat). Termites Each case of termite infestation will be investigated on its merit. Potential Future Damage The potential for the tree to cause damage in the future is also considered in an assessment for removal. Extenuating
Circumstances Circumstances, such as the owner’s capacity to undertake required maintenance of a tree and surrounds, whether the land owner planted the tree, or solar access for renewable energy systems and other like considerations.
10. The “criteria not considered” provisions are to be deleted;
11. Dangerous tree assessments are to be based on the safety risk in all weather conditions, not “normal” conditions;
12.
A plain English Language
explanation of tree pruning provisions is to be made
13.
Council is to prepare a list of
trees that are supported as replacement trees
14.
A report be prepared identifying
measures, outside of DCP provisions, which
15.
A review of the Tree DCP is to be
conducted after 12 months and reported to
16. After the determination of an application, applicants have the opportunity to seek a review of determination under Section 8.2 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. If an application is refused or if the application if approved with conditions the applicant has the opportunity to request a review of determination that will be determined by the CEO. A review of determination must be completed within 6 months of the determination of the original application under Section 8.3(2) of the Act. Applicants need to ensure that they submit their application for review within 2 months of the determination in order to allow Council to conduct the review in most circumstances. Applicants must be informed at the time of the determination of their application of the review process available to them;
17. There be no height requirement for the removal of exempt weeds;
18. Council increase the tree canopy in business zone to 25%;
19. To assist residents to plant trees in places that will ensure the health and vigour of the tree and to reduce risk, Council will provide information and advice on its website; and
20. To reflect the importance of trees in our community, a range of summary statistics to be reported by Council on a quarterly basis. This includes: applications by type, number of tree removals and tree plantings, and if possible, costs associated with this. Statistics should also be provided for the public domain: tree removals, tree plantings, total stock of trees and tree canopy. |
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Iskandar, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis and York Against Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat, Lockie and Steer
|
|
Foreshadowed Motion: (Lockie/Hesse)
THAT Council adopt the amended draft Tree Management DCP shown as Attachment 1 and replace the existing controls as set out in: a. Part 2.20 Tree Management of the Marrickville Development control 2011; b. Part 4 Tree Preservation and Management and Tree Replacement and New Tree Planting contained within Chapter C, Sustainability of the Inner West Comprehensive Development Control Plan (DCP) 2016 for Ashbury, Ashfield, Croydon, Croydon Park, Haberfield, Hurlstone Park and Summer Hill; and c. C1.14 Tree Management contained with part C – Place of the Leichhardt DCP 2013. This Foreshadowed Motion lapsed. |
Councillor Kiat left the Meeting at 8:16 pm as he declared a significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in Item 2.
Councillor Passas left the Meeting at 8:16 pm.
Councillor Kiat returned to the Meeting at 8:28 pm.
Councillor Passas returned to the Meeting at 8:31 pm.
Councillor Raciti left the Meeting at 8:49 pm.
ADJOURNMENT
8.49pm - The Mayor, Clr Byrne adjourned the meeting for a short recess.
8.53pm– The Mayor, Clr Byrne resumed the meeting.
Councillor Iskandar re-entered the Meeting at 8:55 pm.
Councillor Raciti returned to the Meeting at 8:58 pm.
En Bloc
Motion: (Stamolis/Byrne)
THAT Council move Items 7 and 9 en bloc and adopt the recommendations contained within.
Motion Carried
For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, , Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York
Against Motion: Nil
Absent: Cr Passas
|
THAT the report be received and noted.
|
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, , Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York Against Motion: Nil Absent: Cr Passas |
|
THAT:
1. The report be received and noted; and
2. Council receive a full report on proposed savings identified in this report at the next Ordinary Council meeting. |
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York Against Motion: Nil Absent: Crs Passas |
Councillor Passas returned to the Meeting at 9:08 pm.
Councillor Hesse left the Meeting at 9:21 pm.
Councillor Hesse returned to the Meeting at 9:25 pm.
|
THAT this Council takes the following steps to ensure all residents have a permanent parking place outside their home at all times:
1. Contact President Trump for his wall building contractor (US/Mexico) to construct a wall around the Inner West;
2. Any cars or people passing through the Inner West to pay a mobility tax to the Inner West Council, no parking allowed;
3. Passports required for non-Inner West citizens; and
4. Businesses unable to find parking for their staff from outside the area to go broke in their own time, without community or Council support.
This motion lapsed for want of seconder. |
|
THAT Council immediately set-up a taskforce to seek partners to develop Marrickville Town Hall as an art gallery and performance space.
|
|
Motion Lost For Motion: Crs Da Cruz, Hesse, Kiat and Steer Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Iskandar, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis and York
|
|
Amendment (Stamolis/Passas)
That Council prioritise community, arts and culture.
|
|
Motion Lost For Motion: Crs Hesse, Kiat, Lockie, Passas, Stamolis and Steer Against Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Iskandar, Macri, McKenna OAM, Raciti and York
|
|
Foreshadowed Motion (Byrne/Iskandar)
THAT Council note the advice from officers that the EOI process for Marrickville Town Hall has been concluded with outcomes being reported to Council in September.
|
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Iskandar, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis and York Against Motion: Crs Hesse, Kiat and Steer |
|
THAT:
1. Council review previous traffic counts in Chandos Street and neighbouring streets and request comparable data from RMS, obtained following the opening of Westconnex Stage 1, with a view to closing Chandos Street at the intersection of Parramatta Road;
2. The matter be referred to Council for consideration; and
3. Staff investigate the option for allowing left turn only out of Chandos Street onto Parramatta Road, if Chandos Street is not closed. |
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York Against Motion: Nil |
|
THAT Council:
1. Commend staff for their work in bringing together such a high-quality forum; 2. Write to the Minister for Environment the Hon Matt Kean and the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces the Hon Rob Stokes to let them know of the success of the Inner West War on Food Waste forum, and to thank the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Planning and Environment for their involvement; 3. Collaborate with Randwick Council to coordinate a further meeting, to be hosted at Randwick, with the objective of beginning discussions with interested Councils regarding a group approach to planning and locating a food waste recovery plant and transfer stations for the use of metropolitan Councils; and 4. Write to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to thank them for their presentation at the War on Food Waste forum and ask for their guidance in ongoing collaboration between metropolitan Sydney councils and the development of a proposal for a food waste processing plant.
|
|
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, McKenna OAM, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York Against Motion: Crs Macri and Passas |
Meeting closed at 9.48pm.
Public Speakers:
|
Item #
|
Speaker |
Suburb |
|
Item 1: |
Rene Holmes Geoff Crossley Robert Mayer Toula Chrisafis Brigita Molnar Nancy Wahlquist |
Ashfield Tempe Stanmore Summer Hill Ashfield Balmain |
|
Item 4: |
Yvette Beaumont Jason Bruer Alex Dilworth Bailan Devereaux |
Marrickville Marrickville Marrickville Marrickville |
|
Item 14: |
Gerard Turrisi Adrian Walton |
Leichhardt Haberfield |
Minutes of the Extraordinary Council Meeting held on 10 September 2019
at Ashfield Service Centre
Meeting commenced at 6.30pm
|
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 Anna York Deborah Lennis |
Mayor Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Councillor Chief Executive Officer Aboriginal Programs Supervisor |
|
Ian Naylor Katherine Paixao |
Manager Civic Governance Governance Coordinator |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
Council’s Aboriginal Programs Supervisor gave a Welcome to Country.
APOLOGIES: Nil
DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS: Nil
The Chief Executive Officer acted in the role of Chairperson until the election of the Mayor.
|
C0919(1) Item 1 Election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor |
|
The Chief Executive Officer advised that the election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act and Regulations.
The Chief Executive Officer advised that he has received two (2) nominations for the position of Mayor and two (2) nominations for the Position of Deputy Mayor.
Motion: (Byrne/Passas)
THAT in the view of openness and transparency the election for Mayor and Deputy Mayor be conducted by a show of hands.
Motion Carried For Motion: Crs Byrne, Da Cruz, Drury, Hesse, Iskandar, Kiat, Lockie, Macri, McKenna OAM, Passas, Porteous, Raciti, Stamolis, Steer and York Against Motion: Nil
The Chief Executive Officer advised that he has received nominations for the position of Mayor for Councillor Porteous and Councillor Byrne.
The Chief Executive Officer asked all Councillors who support Councillor Porteous being the first nomination received, for the position of Mayor to raise their hands.
Councillor Porteous received 6 votes.
The Chief Executive Officer asked all Councillors who support Councillor Byrne being the second nomination received for the position of Mayor, to raise their hands.
Councillor Byrne received 8 votes.
Councillor Stamolis abstained from voting.
The Chief Executive Officer declared that Councillor Byrne to be elected Mayor.
The Chief Executive Officer advised that he has received nominations for the position of Deputy Mayor for Councillor Raciti and Councillor Steer.
The Chief Executive Officer asked all Councillors who support Councillor Raciti being the first nomination received, for the position of Deputy Mayor to raise their hands.
Councillor Raciti received 8 votes.
The Chief Executive Officer asked all Councillors who support Councillor Steer being the second nomination received, for the position of Deputy Mayor to raise their hands.
Councillor Steer received 6 votes.
Councillor Stamolis abstained from voting.
The Chief Executive Officer declared that Councillor Raciti to be elected Deputy Mayor.
The Mayor, Councillor Byrne assumed the chair. |
Meeting closed at 6.34 pm.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Mayoral Minute: Acknowledgement of Retiring Long Serving Staff Members
From: The Mayor, Councillor Darcy Byrne
|
THAT Council acknowledge and thank retiring long serving officers, Allan Willding, Donald Lawler, Peter Clement, Karen Mohan, and John Grant who have given many years of service to the former Leichhardt Council and Inner West Council and thank them for their dedication. |
Background
I would like to formally acknowledge the dedication of a number of recently retired long-serving staff members: Allan Willding, Donald Lawler, Peter Clement, Karen Mohan, and John Grant.
Allan, Donald, Peter, Karen and John have served at the former Leichhardt and Inner West councils for a combined 155 years, in the areas of Resource Recovery, Property and Finance.
Allan Willding
Allan has served the former Leichhardt and Inner West councils for the past 38 years. Allan began at Leichhardt Council on 25 November 1980 as Team Leader in the Design Program team. He has held management positions in both councils, notably as the Manager Works and Waste for Leichhardt Council for 16 years and for the last two years as the Resource Recovery Services Manager for Inner West Council.
Donald Lawler
Donald has served the former Leichhardt and Inner West Councils for the past 42 years. Beginning on 20 December 1976 Donald has held the position of a Driver for Domestic Waste ever since.
Peter Clement
Peter has served the former Leichhardt and Inner West councils for the past 39 years. Peter began working with Leichhardt Council on 15 August 1980 as a Laborer for Domestic Waste. In July 2013 he was appointed as Waste Services Coordinator, a position which he has held for the past six years.
Karen Mohan
Karen has served the former Leichhardt and Inner West councils for the past 20 years. Karen commenced employment on 18 October 1999, as a Financial Accounting Officer and worked in Finance and Property during her service to Council.
John Grant
John has served the former Leichhardt and Inner West councils for the past 16 years. He has held the position of Revenue Coordinator since he joined Council on 28 July 2003.
Their committed service has been of great value to the community and Council wishes them enjoyable retirement.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Lobbying Policy and Register
Prepared By: Ian Naylor - Manager Civic Governance
Authorised By: Nellette Kettle - Group Manager Customer Service & Civic Governance
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Adopt the Policy shown as Attachment 1, subject to no adverse submissions being received during the public exhibition process;
2. Place the policy on public exhibition for a period of 28 days; and
3. Be provided with the results of the public exhibition process by Councillor Briefing note. |
DISCUSSION
Council staff have developed a Draft Lobbying Policy, shown as Attachment 1, to set out a fair and transparent process for the lobbying of Council Officials. The policy outlines appropriate conduct for lobbyists and Council Officials and establishes a lobbyist register which will be published on Council’s website.
In developing this policy, Council staff have reviewed ICAC publications, other council policies and the Lobbying of Government Officials Act 2011. As this policy relates to the conduct of Council Officials and lobbyists, is based on ICAC recommendations and will have minimal impact on individual residents, it is proposed that Council adopt this policy and Councillors be advised of any submissions and minor amendments to the policy by Councillor Briefing Note.
|
1.⇩ |
Draft Lobbying Policy |
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Long Term Accommodation Strategy EOI
Prepared By: Brooke Martin - Group Manager Properties, Major Building Projects and Facilities
Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Proceeds to undertake an Expressions of Interest (EOI) for Council’s long-term accommodation needs as provided in Attachment 1; and
2. Report back to Council the outcomes of the EOI and proposed next steps.
|
DISCUSSION
The Expressions of Interest (EOI) seeks proposals from experienced property developers and land owners to provide a strategy to address Council’s future accommodation needs. Council currently operates out of three administration offices and four depots, a legacy of the former Ashfield, Marrickville and Leichhardt councils. Consolidating council locations will be more efficient and economical and can enhance Council services.
The EOI will be open for 6 weeks and marketed through Council’s website and social media, local papers and commercial property sites. A report on the outcomes of the EOI will be provided to Council for a decision on the next steps.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The Asset Management Plan forecasts $9 million capital renewal is required in the next 4 years to maintain the administration offices and depots including significant air conditioning upgrades and structural rehabilitation.
Consolidation of administration offices and depots will provide significant savings currently estimated at $58 million over the life of the 10-year long-term financial plan.
|
1.⇩ |
Draft EOI Long Term Accommodation Strategy |
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: 2019 Annual Grants Program
Prepared By: Tess Newton-Palmer - Community Resourcing and Research Supervisor,
Authorised By: Erla Ronan - Group Manager Community Services and Culture
|
THAT Council approve the funding recommendations as detailed in Attachments 1 to 6. |
DISCUSSION
The 2019 Annual Grants Program was advertised in June for prospective applicants. To support applicants, Council held two information sessions which included a presentation on the grants program, streams, and tips on preparing an application, followed by a series of one-on-one discussions with grant officers. Applicants were also encouraged to book a one-on-one session with the grant officer. Over 150 one-on-one sessions were held, giving individuals and groups the opportunity to clarify their ideas and develop their applications in line with the Grant Guidelines. More information on Council’s Annual Grant Program is available via the Grant Program Guidelines 2019.
In 2019, Council received 203 applications across the five streams for a total funding request of $1,001,379. Applications were assessed against the eligibility criteria detailed in the Grant Program Guidelines and taking in account Council’s Budget of $328,050. A summary of the applications received is contained in Attachment 7.
|
1.⇩ |
Arts and Culture - Category 1: Individual Artists Grants |
|
2.⇩ |
Arts and Culture - Category 2: Living Arts Grants |
|
3.⇩ |
Community History and Heritage Grants |
|
4.⇩ |
Community Wellbeing Grants |
|
5.⇩ |
Environment Grants |
|
6.⇩ |
Recreation Grants |
|
7.⇩ |
Inner West Council Annual Grants Summary |
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Planning Proposal for 36 Lonsdale Street and 64-70 Brenan Street, Lilyfield
Prepared By: Aleksandar Kresovic - Strategic Planner
Authorised By: David Birds - Group Manager Strategic Planning
|
THAT Council:
1. Does not support the proponent’s Planning Proposal for the reasons recommended to the Inner West Local Planning Panel (IWLPP) identified in Attachment 1;
2. Supports the amended Planning Proposal prepared by Council officers and recommended by the IWLPP for forwarding to the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces for a Gateway Determination in accordance with Attachments 2 and 3;
3. Requests the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces to delegate the plan making functions for the amended Planning Proposal prepared by Council officers to Council;
4. Following receipt of a favourable Gateway Determination for the amended Planning Proposal prepared by Council officers and compliance with any conditions, places the Planning Proposal on public exhibition and consults with public authorities; and
5. Be provided with a report on submissions received during the public exhibition period and from consultations with public authorities. |
DISCUSSION
In 2018 Council received an application (Attachment 5 and 6) for the following amendments to the Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013 (LLEP 2013) as it applies to 36 Lonsdale Street and 64-70 Brenan Street, Lilyfield:
· Increasing the maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) from 0.6:1 to 2.15:1; and
· Introducing a maximum building height control of 19 metres (6 storeys).
Assessment of the proponent’s Planning Proposal concluded that the proposed FSR and height controls would result in excessive bulk and scale in relation to the surrounding residential area.
As the site can sustain an increase in density, Council Officers prepared an amended Planning Proposal (Attachment 2) and presented it to the IWLPP for advice (Attachment 1). The IWLPP supports this amended Planning Proposal (Attachment 3), which provides for:
· A maximum FSR – 1.5:1;
· A maximum height of buildings – RL 33.2 (5 storeys); and
· Addition of the site as a key site with a site-specific clause for minimum setbacks, a maximum number of storeys, site objectives and non-residential uses at street level facing City West link.
The IWLPP recommended the proponent’s proposal not be supported for the reasons recommended by Council staff in Attachment 1.
Attachments 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 have been published separately in the Attachments Document on Council’s Website https://www.innerwest.nsw.gov.au/about/the-council/council-meetings/current-council-meetings
|
1.⇨ |
Report to the Inner West Council Local Planning Panel - (published separately on Council’s website) |
|
2.⇨ |
Council Officer's Planning Proposal - (published separately on Council’s website) |
|
3.⇨ |
Minutes of the Inner West Council Local Planning Panel 23 July 2019 - (published separately on Council’s website) |
|
4.⇨ |
Council Officer’s Planning Proposal Assessment Checklist - (published separately on Council’s website) |
|
5.⇨ |
Proponent's Original Planning Proposal - (published separately on Council’s website) |
|
6.⇨ |
Proponent's Architectural Concept Plans - (published separately on Council’s website) |
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: 3 Cahill Street Annandale - Compulsory Acquisition
Prepared By: Caroline Tunney - Property Officer
Authorised By: Brooke Martin - Group Manager Properties, Major Building Projects and Facilities
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Council:
1. Proceeds to acquire No.3 Cahill Street, Annandale NSW 2038 either by agreement or compulsorily acquisition process in accordance with the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (Act), subject to approval from the Minister of Local Government;
2. Authorises the CEO or delegate to: · do all things necessary to facilitate obtaining the Minister for Local Government’s approval; · write to the property owners advising them of Council’s resolution; · to enter into a negotiation process to try to reach an agreement for the acquisition of the property with the property owners and / or their legal representatives; § if the negotiation process fails, to proceed with compulsory acquisition in accordance with the Act; and § sign all documents to give effect to the acquisition.
3. Provides budget for the acquisition and open space improvements from the S94 Leichhardt Open Space Plan; and
4. Provides ongoing funding for the annual maintenance from working funds.
|
DISCUSSION
The property located at No.3 Cahill Street, Annandale is identified for the purposes of ‘Local Open Space RE1’ in Land Reservation Acquisition Map LRA_009 under the Leichhardt LEP 2013 and subject to clause 5.1 of the Leichhardt LEP 2013.
It has been flagged since 2005 as a property for acquisition in the former Leichhardt Council’s Developer Contribution Plan No.1 – Open Space and Recreation.
This property is also identified by the Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Strategy for the purposes of RE1 Public Recreation (see page 269) and is supported by a Section 9.1 Ministerial Direction under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. This scheme will be implemented as part of the upcoming comprehensive review of the Inner West Local Environmental Plan.
Both the 2005 Recreation and Needs Study and the 2018 Recreation Study “A Healthier Inner West” highlight the significant deficiencies in open space provision which currently exist in the Annandale Ward area. Annandale is below the LGA minimum benchmark standard for open space (13.3m² per person) at 10.8m². Population projections for this ward are increasing with urbanisation and there will be a significant future need residential access to quality open space in the near future.
The acquisition would embellish the existing Cahill Street Reserve (No’s 5- 7 Cahill Street). No.1 Cahill Street has also been designated for acquisition. The reserve has accessibility issues and existing equipment is around 20 years old. The park is currently utilised as a rest spot for key industrial workers from the existing factories which surround the site.
While the existing open space needs to be upgraded in the future, it is recommended that embellishment should not be undertaken until a precinct plan is completed for the area as a whole, including that of the residential precinct development component in conjunction with the public domain planning. Planning and embellishment of No.1 Cahill Street should also be part of this work.
Further details on the acquisition, valuation and required budgets are provided in the confidential attachments.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The funds for the acquisition would be drawn from the Leichhardt Section 94 Open Space & Recreation reserve. However, all existing and projected funds in the reserve have been allocated to projects, and a re-phasing of some projects will be required.
Ongoing annual maintenance is estimated at $5,000.
|
Valuation report - 3 Cahill Street, Annandale - Chaloner Valuations - Confidential |
|
|
Acquisition and budget for 3 Cahill Street Annandale - Confidential |
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Sporting Grounds - Fees & Charges
Prepared By: Cathy Edwards-Davis - Group Manager Trees, Parks and Streetscapes
Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. Council proceed with the sporting ground fees and charges as advertised with the 2019/2020 budget; and
2. To ensure fairness for individual clubs who may face increased fees, that these be phased over four years.
|
DISCUSSION
At the Council meeting on the 25 June 2019, the budget for 2019/2020 including fees and charges was considered. It was resolved (in part):
Defer the new fees and charges for sporting grounds pending consultation with the relevant peak sporting associations and that those associations be requested to formally submit a position to officers on how fees can best be harmonised, with the matter to be reported back to an August Council meeting. The existing fees system with standard CPI increase remain in place in the interim;
Draft Proposal
The fees and charges for sporting grounds at the former Councils were substantially different. The draft proposals for 2019/2020, advertised with the budget, sought to harmonise the fees and charges across the Inner West to help ensure equity. It was proposed that there be no net change in overall income to Council (other than a CPI increase). In summary, it was proposed that an hourly rate is utilised. The total income was divided by the total number of hours utilised by the clubs, to determine the hourly rate.
To ensure fairness for individual clubs who may face increased fees, it was proposed to phase the changes in fees and charges over four years. The proposed fees and charges were presented to all sporting clubs at the Sports Forum on the 12 November 2018.
Association & Sporting Clubs Further Engagement
As per the Council resolution, staff met with the Associations on the 11 July 2019. A letter was sent to them on 12 July 2019 outlining the proposed harmonised fees and charges and requesting feedback by the 16 August 2019.
In summary the feedback was:
· Rugby League are opposed to substantial increases at Birchgrove Oval, King Georges Park and Blackmore Oval.
· A soccer club is concerned that they are paying three times the price to utilise grounds in the former Ashfield compared with former Leichhardt.
· Ultimate Frisbee have indicated that they would like the fees to broadly remain unchanged.
· Cricket NSW are opposed to the proposed changes in fees and charges. They have requested that the fees and charges be based on “Intensity of Use” to be fair and equitable as it relates to maintenance and remediation costs. They have also suggested that the fees and charges should be considered in the light of “Membership Base”.
· Three cricket clubs are concerned that they will be paying increased fees under the proposals and they are concerned that it has an unfair impact on cricket. One club suggested an “Intensity of Use” fee.
Sporting Ground Fees & Charges Options
|
|
Option (All options to include CPI increases) |
Impact (rates per hour per field) |
Positive Outcomes |
Negative Outcomes |
|
1 |
Retain fees of former Councils |
· The rate varies between clubs of $9.91 per hour to $42.61. · Some clubs pay $0 for training hours. |
· Cost neutral to Council. · Clubs continue to pay the fees and charges they are used to paying |
· There is inequity in charges between the three former Council areas. |
|
2 |
Retain fees of former Councils AND remove cap at former Leichhardt Council |
· The rate varies between clubs of $19.56 per hour to $42.61. · Some clubs pay $0 for training hours. |
· Greater equity in charges between the three former Council areas. · Additional incentive for clubs in the former Leichhardt area to book only the hours required. |
· Additional charges for clubs in the former Leichhardt area. |
|
3 |
Fees as drafted and advertised with the budget for 2019/2020 |
· Training without lights $24.20. With lights $32.20. · Games without lights - $30.20. With lights $38.20. |
· Cost neutral to Council. · Equity in charges. · Incentives for clubs to book only the hours required. |
· Additional charges for some clubs (proposed to be phased over four years). |
|
4 |
Fees based on “Intensity of Use” |
· Lower intensity sports would pay (say) $14.20 to $28.20. · Higher intensity sports would pay (say) $28.40 to $42.40. |
· Cost neutral to Council. · The fees charged for lower intensity sport such as cricket would be lower. |
· Potentially complicated to administer given the number of sports played in the Inner West. · The fees charged for football codes would be higher. |
|
5 |
Fees based on “Membership Base” (per participant charge) |
· Sports with a low number of participants per field per hour (28) would pay (say) $6.40. · Sports with a high number of participants per field per hour (288) would pay (say) $66. |
· Cost neutral to Council. |
· Potentially complicated to administer if the number of players varies for the different bookings. · The fees charged for junior sports with more children on the ground would be higher (contrary to Council objectives to encourage participation).
|
|
6 |
The higher fees remain as is and the lower fees are increased gradually to match the higher fees (over say 10 years) |
· The rate varies between clubs of $13.18 (in year one) per hour to $42.61. · Clubs who currently pay $0 for training would pay $13.18. |
· The clubs who currently pay higher fees are used to paying the higher fees. |
· This is complicated to administer. · It will take a substantial period of time for equity in charges between clubs. |
|
7 |
The Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy is modified such that Associations manage allocations and fees and charges on behalf of the individual clubs. Fees as drafted and advertised with the budget for 2019/2020. |
· Training without lights $24.20. With lights $32.20. · Games without lights - $30.20. With lights $38.20. |
· Cost neutral to Council. · Equity in charges. · Incentives for clubs to book only the hours required. |
· Additional charges for some clubs (proposed to be phased over four years). · The Associations have a greater administrative burden. |
Discussion
As anticipated, the clubs which would have lower fees and charges have generally expressed support for the proposals. The clubs which would have higher fees and charges have generally expressed opposition to the proposals.
The sporting grounds are subsidised by Council. That is, the capital, renewal and maintenance costs attributable to the sporting ground assets is higher than the fees and charges which Council charges for the grounds.
The Inner West has low rates of public open space available to the community. The sporting grounds are currently being utilised at an average of 112% of their capacity. That is, they are already being over-utilised. Arguably some sports do have a lesser impact on the turf. However, their use of the limited number of grounds creates an opportunity cost for other sports which clearly cannot utilise the grounds at the same time. A per hourly charge reflects the fairest means to charge for a scarce resource.
Option 7 in the table above would not be suitable for all sports. In the case of soccer however, it is consistent with a submission made by the CDSFA during consultation on the Sporting Grounds Allocation Policy.
Given the above it is recommended that Council proceed with the harmonisation of the sporting ground fees and charges (option 3).
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The financial implications are outlined in the table above.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Exhibition of Additional Fees and Charges for 2019/20
Prepared By: Erla Ronan - Group Manager Community Services and Culture and Simon Duck - Group Manager Aquatic Services
Authorised By: John Warburton - Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
1. Council note the Draft Community Services Fees and Charges in Attachment 1 and the Aquatic Facilities fees detailed in this report will be exhibited for a period of 28 days;
2. Council note the guidelines for eligible Aquatic Sporting Clubs;
3. Council resolves to adopt the Fees and Charges subject to no adverse submissions being received during the exhibition period; and
4. Councillors receive a memo with the results of the public exhibition process and a further report to Council if adverse submissions are received.
|
DISCUSSION
Indoor Venues, Rooms and Community Centres
During consideration of the 2019/20 Budget, Council deferred adoption of fees and charges for indoor venues, rooms and community centres, and other facilities subject to a review of eligibility criteria for subsidies and exemptions. A review of the eligibility criteria for reduced fees and fee waivers has been undertaken. The criteria is published in the Draft Grants and Fee Scales Policy which will be placed on public exhibition with these proposed fee changes.
The following amendments have been made to the fees and charges:
1. Session rates have been introduced at each room, venue, and facility at a rate lower than the hourly rate to accommodate local residents.
2. Bus fee increases have been aligned with CPI.
Lane Hire Fee at Aquatic Facilities
Councillors have received a briefing on 3 September 2019 and advice from staff on the legality of past fee waivers and the need to create new fees for the use of Aquatic Facilities by Aquatic Sporting Clubs. New fees are required to replace the past practices of providing fee waivers to these clubs. New fee categories are proposed for lane hire within the Inner West Council Aquatics Facilities for approved Aquatics Sporting Clubs to be applied form 1 November 2019. Approved Aquatics Sporting Clubs are defined as not for profit community based sporting organisations providing ongoing aquatics sporting activities that enhance community wellbeing for all age groups.
Lane Hire would be subject to availability of the amenities and lanes within the Aquatic Centres as determined by Aquatics Centre Management. Aquatics Sporting Clubs would be required to register each year and provide all appropriate documentation as requested which may include:
· Registration with swimming, water polo or other sporting bodies as appropriate.
· Completion of an annual hire agreement and acceptance of associated terms and conditions.
· Insurance provision as required and outlined in the hire agreement.
· Declarations of compliance with all appropriate governing bodies associated with their sport such as swimming or water polo NSW.
· Annual Child Safety overview by their responsible officer/s declaring how this process is managed within their organisation. This may include reference to working with children checks of officers and volunteers and adherence to standards as required by their governing bodies in relation to the supervision of children.
The proposed new lane fees for approved Aquatic Sporting Clubs in Aquatic Facilities for 2019/20 will be applied from 1 November 2019 and are as follows:-
· 50m lane hire $5 per hour, per lane; and
· Where lane is less than 50m, lane hire $2.50 per hour, per lane.
The proposed lane hire fees supersedes previous fees, waivers and practises by the Inner West Council and former Councils. Council staff have contacted the Aquatic Sporting Clubs to advise of this report and recommendations for new fees.
|
1.⇩ |
Community Services Fees and Charges |
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 2 September 2019
Prepared By: John Stephens - Traffic and Transport Services Manager
Authorised By: Wal Petschler - Group Manager Footpaths, Roads, Traffic and Stormwater
|
THAT the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 2 September 2019 be received and the recommendations be adopted. |
ITEMS BY WARD
|
Ward |
Item |
|
|
Baludarri (Balmain) |
Beattie Street and Palmer Street, Balmain - Proposed 'Motor Bike Only' and 'No Parking' Restrictions |
|
|
Wharf Road, Lilyfield - Temporary Road Closure for Balmain Fun Run 2019 |
|
|
|
Gulgadya (Leichhardt) |
Boomerang Street and Crescent Street, Haberfield - Proposed Intersection Treatment |
|
|
Ashfield Street (Lane), Ashfield - Proposed 'No Parking' restrictions |
|
|
|
Upward Street, Leichhardt - Resident Parking Scheme |
|
|
|
Carlisle Street, Leichhardt - Temporary Road Closure for Royal Hotel Inner West Beer festival |
||
|
Norton Street Italian Festa 2019 - Temporary Road Closures |
||
|
63-65 Pyrmont Bridge Road, Annandale - Additional Information for Modification of Development Consent |
||
|
Ramsay Street, Haberfield – Review of Timed Parking |
||
|
Midjuburi (Marrickville) |
Richardsons Crescent & Carrington Road, Marrickville - Request for Pedestrian Crossing Facility |
|
|
Petersham Road, Marrickville - Proposed Installation of Statutory 'No Stopping' & 'No Parking' signage between Graham Avenue and Stanley Street |
|
|
|
Renwick Street, Marrickville – Illegal Parking adjacent to Woolworths Carpark driveway |
|
|
|
Damun (Stanmore) |
Newtown Local Area Traffic Management Strategy |
|
|
Church Street, between Carillon Avenue and Rochester Street, Newtown - Temporary Full Road Closure - to dismantle a tower crane at 142 Carillon Avenue |
|
|
|
Fisher Street, Petersham between Regent Street and Audley Street – Temporary Full Road Closure to dismantle tower crane at No. 22 |
|
|
|
Australia Street, Eliza Street, Lennox Street & Mary Street, Newtown – Temporary Full Road Closures for Newtown Festival on Sunday 10 November 2019 |
|
|
|
Eltham Street, Lewisham – Temporary Full Road Closure to install new sewer main in the roadway on behalf of Sydney Water |
|
|
|
Djarrawunang (Ashfield) |
|
|
|
Terrace Road / Ness Avenue, Dulwich Hill – Temporary Full Road Closure of Rail Underpass just north of the roundabout at Ewart Street – Sydney Metro (SSJ) early enabling works on T3 Line – notice of change of dates |
|
|
|
All Wards
|
Minor Traffic Facilities |
|
DISCUSSION
Meeting of the Inner West Council Local Traffic Committee was held on 2 September 2019 at the Petersham Service Centre. The minutes of the meeting are shown at ATTACHMENT 1.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Projects proposed for implementation 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 of LTC Meeting 2 September 2019 |
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Tree DCP Amendment
Prepared By: Michael Deegan - Chief Executive Officer
Authorised By: Michael Deegan - Chief Executive Officer
|
THAT Council receive and note this report. |
DISCUSSION
With regard to the Tree DCP Amendment there are three issues before you:
1. The resolution passed by Council which officers have sought to make internally consistent – see Attachment 1.
2. The rescission motion which would return the position to that recommended by officers – see Agenda Item 12.
3. Whether Council might seek some sort of compromise advocated by some Councillors.
Some Councillors argue that the approach to protecting the tree canopy has been single mindedly focussed on the environment to the detriment of some individual ratepayers. Please note since January 2019, 75% of tree permits were approved (211) and 25% refused (71). Councillors have now agreed to a review proposal where permits refused have a right of appeal to the CEO before considering a Land and Environment Court action. The Hills Shire Council formula has been quoted as a comparison however their average population is 4.46 person per hectare compared to the Inner West 56.28 persons per hectare with much smaller lot sizes (Statistics form Council’s Community Profile https://profile.id.com.au/inner-west).
Statistics
The proportion of the tree canopy in private dwellings was stated to be about 55% rather than the figure of between 70-80% which staff have advised. The figure provided by officers was a land ownership percentage (70% private land 30% Public) not canopy percentage. The landownership percentage was provided by Council’s GIS team. Council relies on the Department of Planning SEED mapping data set for the latest and most comprehensive canopy information, see link below;
Council staff are unable to verify the figure of 55% as no source information has been provided.
Tree Canopy
In any event the proportion of tree canopy is far less than required: minimum 40%. NSW DPIE and Greater Sydney Commission. Officers are finalising an audit of public trees and will bring back to Council some proposals early next year, including an enhanced budget. In the meantime the Tree DCP is focused on private trees.
Key Issue
The key issue is the removal of any tree within three metres of any structure without permit. Officers' original advice was to allow this by permit within 500 mm of a principal structure.
Possible Compromise
A compromise would be within one metre of the principal structure by permit, with the CEO review process to be advised to all ratepayers. The officers' recommendation is based on the best advice and practices used by other Councils including Bayside, Blacktown, Burwood, Camden, Cumberland, Hunters Hill, Lane Cove, Mosman, North Sydney, City of Sydney, Waverley, Willoughby and Woollahra Councils where trees meeting the height and species requirements are subject to DA or permit. Exemptions for trees near a primary dwelling include Canterbury Bankstown, Fairfield, Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai and Northern beaches. The exemption does not generally apply to ancillary and minor structures. Some Councillors may prefer to allow trees to be removed within one metre of the principal building without permit. This is not my recommendation.
Council staff currently undertake an evidence based approach where if a tree is found to be causing damage to a property, staff will consent to the removal and most importantly are able to condition replacement. There is no evidence base to allow removal of a tree based on a distance offset alone. It is arbitrary and does not account for the fact that the tree may not be causing damage to a property. Staff originally recommended 0.5m as a compromise to reflect Councillor and community feedback on the matter.
Weeds List
Council staff recommend the removal of Kaffir Plum, Bunya Bunya pine, Norfolk Island pine and Hoop pine from the list of weeds. Celits australis should be swapped for Celtis sinesnis which is a prolific weed in the area (australis is not).
Weeds over 10 metres High.
This is a difficult issue for officers. The current Inner West canopy is dominated by such trees. The rationale for the 10m is that at this size they are valuable canopy trees and their removal should be considered in more detail. The likelihood is that these species will be approved for removal via application but at least there is a mechanisms to set replacement planting conditions to compensate the lost canopy.
Pruning of Major Trees
This requires expert advice on safety grounds.
Street Trees
Damage to footpaths and fences requires a different approach to that undertaken to date as street trees are not managed under the Tree DCP. The coordination of tree removal and footpath replacement needs a different approach and the officers have established a working party for this. Please note fences etc are insurance matters and are considered on a case by case by Council's insurers. It is proposed that arguments about street tree impacts also be considered by the CEO as part of the review process.
Replacement Trees
A list of replacement trees will be available and Council could provide one or more trees free of charge to ratepayers. In the Sutherland Shire residents, are entitled to two free trees per annum on the production of their rates notice. Costs for this are being prepared. The permit system allows this requirement for trees replacement. An exemption means this is not enforceable.
|
1.⇩ |
Tree Management DCP Amended |
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Investment Report as at 31 August 2019
Prepared By: Brendhan Barry - Manager Financial Services
Authorised By: John Warburton - Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the report be received and noted. |
REPORT
Council’s holding in various investment categories are listed in the table below. Council’s portfolio size sits at $238.3m, of which 91% are A rated or above. All Socially Responsible Investments (SRI’s) are investments that comply with the Non Fossil Fuel standards.
During August, Council drew down on a $40M loan from TCorp. These funds have been invested with Non Fossil Fuel Lending ADI’s, thereby temporarily inflating Council’s investments by this amount. These investments are timed to mature in accordance with the expected future cash outflows on the Ashfield Aquatic Centre project.
Council’s annualised return continues to exceed the bank bill index benchmark. Council’s portfolio had a One-Month Portfolio Investment Return of 2.49%, above the UBSWA Bank Bill Index Benchmark (0.99%).
The attachments to this report summarise all investments held by Council and interest returns for periods ending 31 August 2019.
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 August 2019 have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act, Local Government Regulations and the Inner West Council Investment Policy.
|
1.⇩ |
IWC Aug19 |
|
2.⇩ |
IWC Economic and Investment Portfolio Commentary Aug 19 |
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Budget Saving Tracking Summary
Prepared By: Daryl Jackson - Chief Financial Officer
Authorised By: John Warburton - Deputy General Manager Community and Engagement
|
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the Year to Date August 2019 Report be received and noted.
|
Background
Council recently adopted its 2019/20 Budget and resolved to make $10m savings to ensure Council is financially sustainable. The attached Savings Tracking Summary will be used to track each designated item of savings to ensure that Council remains on track to achieve them by 30 June 2020 as shown attached to this report.
The Year to Date August 2019 Report reflects savings of $2.7m. Council is on track with its agreed saving. It is anticipated the template will have more meaningful financial data in the period after the 1st Quarter.
|
1.⇩ |
YTD August 2019 Savings Tracking Summary |
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion to Rescind: C0819(2) Item 1 Tree Management DCP 27 August 2019
From: Councillors Louise Steer, Colin Hesse, Tom Kiat and Marghanita Da Cruz
|
Motion:
We, the abovementioned Councillors, hereby submit a Notice of Motion to rescind Council’s resolution of 27 August 2019, C0819(2) Item 1 Tree Management DCP, and propose the alternative Motion be adopted as follows:
THAT Council adopt the amended draft Tree Management DCP shown as Attachment 1 (C0819(2) Item 1) and replace the existing controls as set out in: a. Part 2.20 Tree Management of the Marrickville Development control 2011; b. Part 4 Tree Preservation and Management and Tree Replacement and New Tree Planting contained within Chapter C, Sustainability of the Inner West Comprehensive Development Control Plan (DCP) 2016 for Ashbury, Ashfield, Croydon, Croydon Park, Haberfield, Hurlstone Park and Summer Hill; and c. C1.14 Tree Management contained with part C – Place of the Leichardt DCP 2013.
|
Background
Reasons for rescission:
A. Neither Councillors nor
Officers were not provided with a copy of the
20 amendments prior to them being presented at
the council meeting nor
were they fully presented at the meeting. This
is what was provided to
councillors after the meeting. See Webcast
at https://youtu.be/IFMTJ6wXdyw
B. The motion passed on 27 August 2019 is in breach of s 38 of the Local Government Act which provides that a public plan of management must be put on display for 28 days, with a period of at least 42 days for the public to make submissions. This requirement is mandatory. The changes made in the motion to the draft Tree Management DCP are so extensive that the original draft is unrecognisable and therefore constitutes an entirely new Tree Management DCP which should have been put on public exhibition for the public to make submissions.
C. The motion passed on 27 August 2019 is in breach of s 40 of the Local Government Act which provides that at an amended plan of management be adopted without public exhibition only if the amendments are insubstantial, which is not the case here, where the amendments are material, significant and extensively change the intent and content of the Tree Management DCP which had been exhibited.
D. The Tree DCP amendments have had a long history as follows:
On 13 February 2018. Council resolved:
|
C0218 Item 11 Notice of Motion: Trees Policy |
|
|
Motion: (Passas/ Macri)
THAT Council:
1. 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; and
2. Consider funding this work as part of the next quarterly budget review in 2017/18 or as part of the budget considerations for 2018/19. |
|
|
|
|
|
On 31 July 2018, Councillors were briefed with a discussion paper.
E. On 10 August 2018, Council prepared a discussion paper on engagement.
F. On 11 September Council resolved unanimously that:
|
C0918(2) Item 2 Tree DCP Harmonisation - Discussion Paper |
|
Motion: (Passas/Hesse)
THAT:
1. The Development Control Plan amendments on tree management be developed having regard to the principles of:
• Public safety • Protection of property • Equity/ financial burden • Increased urban canopy
2. Council prepare the draft Tree DCP taking into consideration the options within the Discussion Paper, and the feedback received from the community consultation;
3. The draft Tree DCP be reported to Council prior to being placed on public exhibition;
4. Council liaise with the Architectural School and Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology about any advice or assistance or partnership they can offer to assist Council in expanding and measuring tree canopy and green infrastructure;
5. A report be prepared about ways the Tree Management Grant System could be funded;
6. The Establishment of a Significant Tree Register be considered in the 2019/20 Budget Development Process; and
7. The level of Tree Canopy for the LGA against the Greater Sydney Commission's target of 40% be reported on the Website. |
|
|
G. On 25 September 2018, staff reported to Council with community comments and received endorsement to prepare draft DCP.
H. On 24 October, the draft DCP was distributed to internal key stakeholders.
I. On 8 November 2018, the draft DCP was distributed to the Leadership Team.
J. On 27 November 2018, the draft DCP was presented to Council, who resolved that:
|
C1118(2) Item 5 Draft Tree DCP - Endorsement for Exhibition |
|
Motion: (Macri/Passas)
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;
3. When the policy comes back off public exhibition, a summary of which options identified in the discussion paper have been included and excluded in the draft DCP policy be provided; and
4. A plain english language explanation of the policy be provided in the post exhibition report. |
|
|
K. In February 2019, the draft DCP was put on public exhibition, which was extended to 21 May 2019.
L. The following teams had input into the draft DCP: Urban Forest Team, Strategic Planning, Legal Services, Development Assessment and Regulatory Services, Environment and Sustainability.
M. 448 residents made submissions, with 81% in favour of the draft Tree Management DCP.
The following text is the motion to be rescinded:
Motion: (Macri/Passas)
That Council amend the Tree DCP policy to include the following:
1. The following new objectives:
a. To maintain and enhance the amenity of the Inner West Local Government Area through the perseveration or appropriate trees and vegetation.
b. To ensure the cost burden of meeting tree canopy targets does not fall unreasonably on property owners and lower income residents in particular.
c. Encourage private property owners to plant new trees and replace inappropriate trees in order to meet Council’s tree canopy targets.
2. Amend objective 3 to read “to ensure the safety of the community, private property and public infrastructure assets.”;
3. Amend prescribed trees (2.20.3) to be 6 meters rather than 5 meters in height;
4. A schedule of tree species which are exemptions for the need of a tree permit as detailed in the tabled document;
5. Exempt work definition to be amended to:
a. Allow for canopy lifting to 2.5 meters above ground without limitation on branch diameter; and
b. Selective pruning to a 3 meter clearance above the roof or from the face of all structures that are being impacted.
6. Where replacement of trees is approved, Council prefers that trees that are removed are replaced on the site with a suitable replacement canopy tree and in a suitable location onsite. However, there may be circumstances when there is no suitable location on site (for example, in the case of small backyards); a financial contribution will be required to be paid to support public tree planting. Offset fees are to established within Council’s fees and charges schedule;
7. Council approval is not required to prune or remove trees within 3m of an existing dwelling or ancillary structure, which has been approved through a Development Application or Complying Development Certificate, within the same lot as the tree. The distance is to be measured from the face of the tree trunk closest to the dwelling or structure to the external wall or roof line of the dwelling or structure, the definition of which may include a garage, carport, studio, shed, workshop, swimming pool, spa or retaining walls with a height greater than 600mm;
8. Development consent is to be required for works or removal of trees only in the following circumstances (all other applications will be categorised as tree works permit applications or minor works requests):
a. Removal of trees identified on the Inner West Council heritage trees list;
b. The tree forms part of an Aboriginal object or that is located within an Aboriginal place of heritage; and
9. The following criteria for the assessment of applications will form the guidelines for tree applications with the assessment criteria in the DCP to be amended to match these:
Danger
Danger is assessed based on a number of factors including;
· The potential/likelihood of a tree or tree part to fail
· A history of previous branch failure and
· The size of the defective part of the tree and
· The use and occupancy of the area that may be struck by a defective part and
· The tree exceeds 15m in height and is within the strike zone of a habitable dwelling.
Meeting the danger criteria gives significant determinative weight to the application to approve the removal and/or pruning of a tree.
Property Damage
The likelihood of the tree having an adverse effect on property including trees renowned for having extensive root systems, which cause damage to footings of houses or, trees that cause blockages to domestic sewer and drainage lines.
Condition of the tree
The structural integrity of the tree is assessed for any visible signs of decay or deterioration, this is usually indicated by a lack of foliage, dead branches evident in the canopy, presence of fungal fruiting bodies, excessive sap being exuded from the trunk and/or evidence of insect attack, particularly borer damage. Further, the likelihood the species displays toward branch failure and subsequent limb fall
Health of the tree
The species susceptibility to environmental changes, which may affect the longevity of the species survival in its current location. This would include, changes in soil level, excessive root damage caused during construction works, changes in water availability, competition for other vegetation (particularly climbing vines), and compaction of soil (particularly in high usage areas such as car parking areas).
Complying Development
The need for tree removal in order to allow for development that could otherwise be carried out under a Complying Development Certificate. A statement from the certifier confirming that tree removal is the only impediment to the issuance of a CDC must be submitted to support the application. These applications will be assessed based on the same criteria as a Development Application.
Significance to Streetscape
An assessment of the visual environment and the significance the specimen plays within the streetscape. Other criteria would include if the tree is an endangered or rare species, is of historical significance or, the link the tree provides between bushland and reserves (the connectivity of habitat).
Termites
Each case of termite infestation will be investigated on its merit. Potential Future Damage The potential for the tree to cause damage in the future is also considered in an assessment for removal. Extenuating
Circumstances
Circumstances, such as the owner’s capacity to undertake required maintenance of a tree and surrounds, whether the land owner planted the tree, or solar access for renewable energy systems and other like considerations.
10. The “criteria not considered” provisions are to be deleted;
11. Dangerous tree assessments are to be based on the safety risk in all weather conditions, not “normal” conditions;
12. A plain English Language explanation of tree pruning provisions is to be made available on Council’s website;
13. Council is to prepare a list of trees that are supported as replacement trees that property owners can choose from when required to replace trees;
14. A report be prepared identifying measures, outside of DCP provisions, which have been implemented in other local government areas to actively encourage the planting of trees by property owners; and
15. A review of the Tree DCP is to be conducted after 12 months and reported to Council.
16. After the determination of an application, applicants have the opportunity to seek a review of determination under Section 8.2 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. If an application is refused or if the application if approved with conditions the applicant has the opportunity to request a review of determination that will be determined by the CEO. A review of determination must be completed within 6 months of the determination of the original application under Section 8.3(2) of the Act. Applicants need to ensure that they submit their application for review within 2 months of the determination in order to allow Council to conduct the review in most circumstances. Applicants must be informed at the time of the determination of their application of the review process available to them; and
17. There be no height requirement for the removal of exempt weeds.
18. Council increase the tree canopy in business zone to 25%;
19. To assist residents to plant trees in places that will ensure the health and vigour of the tree and to reduce risk, Council will provide information and advice on its website; and
20. To reflect the importance of trees in our community, a range of summary statistics to be reported by Council on a quarterly basis. This includes: applications by type, number of tree removals and tree plantings, and if possible, costs associated with this. Statistics should also be provided for the public domain: tree removals, tree plantings, total stock of trees and tree canopy.
The following motion to replace the rescinded otion:
THAT Council adopt the amended draft Tree Management DCP shown as Attachment 1 and replace the existing controls as set out in:
a. Part 2.20 Tree Management of the Marrickville Development control 2011;
b. Part 4 Tree Preservation and Management and Tree Replacement and New Tree Planting contained within Chapter C, Sustainability of the Inner West Comprehensive Development Control Plan (DCP) 2016 for Ashbury, Ashfield, Croydon, Croydon Park, Haberfield, Hurlstone Park and Summer Hill; and
c. C1.14 Tree Management contained with part C – Place of the Leichardt DCP 2013.
|
1.⇩ |
Draft Tree Management DCP from Council Report 27 August 2019 |
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Bunnings Tempe
From: The Mayor, Councillor Darcy Byrne
|
THAT:
1. The residential footpath along Smith Street be widened and rejuvenated to include nature strips to create distance and a screen between housing and increased traffic;
2. Council investigate options for increasing resident parking on Smith Street; and
3. Council write to Bunnings seeking confirmation of their offer to allow residents to use their car park to compensate for loss of on street parking on Smith Street. |
Background
With the approval of the Bunnings Tempe, residents of Smith street have approached Council again with concerns regarding the loss of residential parking spaces their street. Whilst Council was not the consent authority for the development, and Council made numerous submissions opposing the development on the grounds of the local traffic impacts and loss of parking. At least eight parking spots will be lost along the street as a result of the new development. Council officers have begun investigating parking on Smith Street and ways in which Council can act to help protect residents.
Officers Comments
Comment from Deputy General Manager - Assets and Environment:
Footpath widening in Smith Street and therefore narrowing of the road carriageway is not considered feasible due to the approved intersection design for the development which provides for retention of the existing traffic lanes exiting Smith street as well widening on the development side of Smith street to provide a slip lane. There are also existing industrial premises operating in Smith St relying on road width to accommodate truck access. In addition any reduction in road width could potentially necessitate removal of parking lane.
Bunnings is proposing to provide some 424 car parking spaces as a result of the development with the hours of operation for the store being 6am-9pm Monday to Friday and 6am-7pm Saturdays. A door/gate is proposed from Smith Street to allow access to these spaces for residents from Smith Street and other businesses in close proximity to the Bunnings store. It is envisaged that provision of these off-street car parking spaces will meet the needs of the store without reliance on on-street parking. Staff will however be reviewing the baseline parking demand prior to the opening of the Bunnings store and then post opening to determine the impact of the development on Smith Street.
As part of the development consent, in acknowledgement of the loss of on-street parking, 13 car parking spaces are to be specifically signposted and dedicated as public car parking spaces within Bunnings. These will be made available during operational hours of the store and via a gate/door on Smith Street. Council officers will work with Bunnings representatives to ensure these spaces are placed in close proximity to Smith Street and marked/signposted appropriately.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Mental Health data
From: Councillor John Stamolis
|
Motion:
THAT:
1. Council to note that:
a. Mental health and behavioural conditions are now the leading chronic health condition in Australia rising from 13.6% people being affected six years ago, 17.5% three years ago, to 20.1% today; and
b. Mental health and behavioural conditions affect 1.5 million people in NSW which has doubled over 10 years; with 85% of these people being of working age.
2. Council to utilise existing health survey data to advocate for and support mental health services and opportunities for these services in the Inner West.
|
Background
Almost half (47%) of Australians had one or more chronic condition as per the ABS National Health Survey 2017-18. This rose from 42% a decade ago.
The leading chronic condition is mental health and behavioural conditions. ABS data show that one in five (20%) or 4.8 million Australians had a mental or behavioural condition, increasing from 17.5% three years ago and 13.6% six years ago.
The most recent survey shows that 3.2 million people (13%) had an anxiety-related condition and 10.4% had depression or feelings of depression.
A list of main categories of chronic conditions is:
§ Mental and behavioral conditions - 4.8 million people (20.1%)
§ Back problems - 4.0 million people (16.4%)
§ Arthritis - 3.6 million people (15.0%)
§ Asthma - 2.7 million people (11.2%)
§ Diabetes - 1.2 million people (4.9%)
§ Heart, stroke and vascular disease - 1.2 million people (4.8%)
§ Osteoporosis - 924,000 people (3.8%)
NSW data
If we look at NSW, there are just on 1.5 million people who report mental health as a chronic condition. In the last 10 years, mental health has risen from the 4th highest chronic condition in NSW to the highest chronic condition.
The number of people experiencing a mental health condition in NSW doubled (increased by 101%) in the last 10 years (from 737,800 to 1,482,700).
Of those 1.5 million persons in NSW with a chronic mental health condition, almost 1 in 6 (58%) are below the age of 44. In fact, 85% are below retirement age.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: A plan to increase tree canopy in Marrickville Ward
From: Councillor John Stamolis
|
Motion:
THAT Council:
1. Prepare a draft plan to prioritise tree canopy growth in Marrickville Ward (the biggest ward in the Inner West Council) which has the smallest proportion of tree canopy of all wards. Specific focus should be on three suburbs in the Marrickville Ward (Sydenham, St Peters and Tempe) which have very low tree canopy coverage (10% or less); and 2. Report the draft plan back to Council in early 2020.
|
Background
Tree canopy data, on a suburb basis, was published in the Inner West Courier on 4 September 2019 as follows (the data are also on Councils’ website):
Inner West tree cover by suburb:
0-10%: Tempe, Sydenham and St Peters
11%-15%: Marrickville, Dulwich Hill, Leichhardt, Croydon Park and Rozelle
16%-25%: Ashfield, Summer Hill, Haberfield, Lewisham, Petersham, Lilyfield, Stanmore, Annandale, Enmore, Newtown, Balmain, Balmain East and Birchgrove.
The data show that tree canopy across the Marrickville Ward is very low. Three suburbs of the Marrickville Ward, in particular: Tempe, Sydenham and St Peters have extraordinarily low tree canopy.
Marrickville Ward has an area of 964 hectares making up 27.4% of the Inner West Council. It is double the area of Stanmore Ward (the smallest ward) and it is 30% or 223 hectares bigger than the second biggest ward, the Leichhardt Ward.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Increasing Tree Canopy
From: Councillors Lucille McKenna OAM and Anna York
|
THAT Council: 1. Develop a plan to work with the community to substantially increase the Tree canopy in the Inner West LGA including specific targets for plantings and green infrastructure by suburb, to be reported in advance of the adoption of the 2020/21 Budget to allow for funding allocation; 2. Substantially increase the budget for tree planting in the 2020/21 Budget and future budgets, to be considered as part of the upcoming Budget process; 3. Create a new category of award for tree canopy expansion, to acknowledge residents who have collaborated to expand canopy in their streets. This award could be included in either annual built environment or environment awards; 4. Develop a report on a dial-a-tree program that would allow residents request a tree from Council free of charge. The report should include costings and the capacity of Council’s nurseries to provide saplings. The report should be tabled to an ordinary Council meeting within three months; 5. Review and expand the Heritage Tree List or create a Significant Tree List; 6. Develop a Tree List indicating trees suitable for planting close enough to living spaces to provide shade and cooling and which have less invasive root systems; 7. Provide a tree advice phone service to be promoted through Council communications channels, noting that this is not a substitute for inspections for applications; 8. Seek advice on how to achieve wherever underground power cables in medium and large scale developments to allow for major tree plantings; 9. Report on what compliance investigations or auditing has been conducted on large scale developments regarding their adherence to landscape plans and tree planting required as conditions of consent; 10. That a work plan for priority planting in streets with insufficient canopy be developed and reported concurrently with the current audit of trees on public land; 11. Recognising the great benefits in heat reduction, amenity and property values where tree canopy meets in the middle of streets, Council identify streets, where substantial street trees could be planted to have the canopy meet in the middle; 12. Review all underutilised parks and other public spaces to identify priority locations for the creation of urban forests to be reported with the audit of trees on public land; and 13. Develop options to increase volunteerism amongst local residents to assist with the care and maintenance of street trees and seek the support of the community to water and care for new street tree plantings.
|
Officer’s Comments:
Comment from Group Manager Trees, Parks and Streetscapes:
Council is currently in the process of undertaking an audit of all public (street and park) trees. This work should be complete in 2019. After the audit is complete, Council will prepare a Street Tree Strategy and Masterplan. This document will address the matter of tree canopy across the Inner West, as well as methodologies for community engagement and participation. This is a substantial project, which is due for completion in 2020.
The preparation of a Significant Tree Register has been budgeted for financial year 2020/21.
A ‘Trees on Private Land’ fact sheet is currently being developed that will provide guidance on how to maintain trees, where to plant and what species to use.
Controls relating to undergrounding of power lines would sit in a ‘Site facilities’ DCP (or similar) and would including generic controls around public utilities, telecommunications and services etc.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Long Term Accommodation Strategy: Full Community Consultation
From: Councillor Rochelle Porteous
|
Motion:
THAT Council: 1. Undertakes full consultation with the community on the development of its’ Long Term Accommodation Strategy; and 2. Notes that: a. The development of this strategy needs to be a public, open, accessible and transparent process; b. The strategy will plan the future use of community-owned public buildings and as such should be designed to meet the needs of the local community; and c. The priority of the strategy should also be on ensuring the buildings are costed at a rate that makes then financially accessibility to most of the community and most not for profit groups. The priority should not be on maximising income for council.
|
Background
The Long Term Accommodation Strategy should not be a strategy framed by developers but rather by the community.
The use of community-owned public buildings, agreements for the lease or management of council properties or services and the construction of new publically owned buildings are issues of great importance to the local community and therefore require extensive community consultation.
The Long Term Accommodation Strategy is a strategy which plans for the future use of community-owned public buildings.
· The development of the strategy needs to be a public, open and transparent process
· The development of the strategy needs to be consultative and accessible.
· The strategy should be designed to first and foremost identify and meet the needs of the local community.
· The priority of the strategy should be on ensuring the buildings are costed at a rate that makes then financially accessibility to most of the community and most not for profit groups.
Councillors need to be accountable to the community and ensure the community are fully consulted on decisions about the proper use and management of all council properties.
Officer’s Comments:
Comment from Group Manager Properties, Major Building Projects and Facilities:
The Public Expression of Interest process is part of the early feasibility stage. Community consultation is planned once there is an understanding of the options and draft strategies for the community to consider.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Organisation Restructure and Staff Redundancies
From: Councillor Rochelle Porteous
|
Motion:
THAT the CEO consult with Councillors and a briefing with Councillors regarding the proposed organisation restructure and any planned staff redundancies be organised as soon as possible.
|
Background
The CEO has signalled his intention to undertake a partial staff organisation restructure and it is understood that a number of Group Managers have already received notification that their position will be made redundant.
The CEO is required to consult with the Councillors on staff organisational matters.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Notice of Motion: Inner West Train Station Accessibility Upgrades
From: The Mayor, Councillor Darcy Byrne
|
Motion:
THAT Council:
1. Note that the Secretary for Transport NSW has committed to completing a station access upgrade at Petersham station by the end of 2021, and further access upgrades to Stanmore and St Peters stations by end of 2023; and 2. Write again to the Secretary for Transport urging the inclusion of Lewisham Station, currently ranked at six in the Sydney Trains Top 10 need ranking, Tempe Station, ranked 32 and Dulwich Hill Station, in future tranches of Transport for NSWs Transport Access Program.
|
Background
For some time, Council has been calling on the state government to upgrade inner west train stations to make this crucial public transport link accessible to people of all abilities.
I’m pleased to report that the State Government has listened to Council’s advocacy, and has advised us that three local stations are now to upgraded.
Of the ten railway stations in the Inner West, four have had accessibility upgrades, and a further three are within Sydney Trains’ top 10 need ranking:
2: Petersham Station
4: Stanmore Station
6: Lewisham Station
13: St Peters
32: Tempe
(unranked) Dulwich Hill
Council recently contacted the Secretary for Transport NSW, Mr Rodd Staples, requesting an update on the status of these statins and when work would be carried out to remove this barrier for residents using public transport.
The Secretary has now advised Council that the Petersham upgrade will begin in early 2020, and take about 18 months to complete.
Stanmore and St Peters stations are set to follow, with completion estimated for 2023.
In further good news, Dulwich Hill station will be upgraded as part of the Metro City and Southwest works, with the station receiving elevator access for the first time ever.
This is a great win for our community, and follows on from Council’s successful lobbying to have a temporary access ramp left in place at Tempe Railway station at the conclusion of stair refurbishment work.
|
|
Council Meeting 24 September 2019 |
Subject: Land and Property Strategy Initiative - Hay Street Carpark Affordable Housing Redevelopment
Prepared By: Brooke Martin - Group Manager Properties, Major Building Projects and Facilities
Authorised By: Elizabeth Richardson - Deputy General Manager Assets and Environment
|
THAT Council:
1. Deliver the Hay Street Carpark Redevelopment initiative including 100% affordable housing units, carpark and ground floor activation in partnership with Link housing including a profit share arrangement to commence after debt repayment;
2. Provide an investment of $900,000 into the redevelopment funded from Affordable Housing Contributions; and
3. Lodge a site-specific planning proposal for the redevelopment Option 3 as detailed in the Confidential Attachment. |
DISCUSSION
The Land and Property Strategy provides Council with initiatives to increase utilisation, condition, income and/or community benefits of the Council owned or controlled land and property portfolio. Council at its Meeting on 13 August 2019 resolved to defer the proposal for the Hay Street Carpark for one month. The Business Plan for the Hay Street Carpark is summarised below and is provided as a confidential attachment to this report.
The Hay Street Carpark Redevelopment initiative supports Council’s strategic direction to increase affordable housing. This project will deliver affordable housing, carparking and an activated ground floor in partnership with Link Housing. Link Housing will fund most of the project through a loan, cash reserves and Grants. Investment required from Council is $900,000. Council has agreed a profit share with Link to commence after repayment of the capital debt. The project relies on several key approval milestones in order to progress, including planning proposal approval, development approval and successful grant application.
The Hay Street Carpark Redevelopment project requires $900,000 from Developer Contributions in approximately 2021.
|
Hay Street Carpark Affordable Housing Initiative - Confidential |
