Agenda of Local Transport Forum - Monday, 20 October 2025

Local Transport Forum Meeting

20 October 2025

Minutes of Meeting held on 15 September 2025

Meeting commenced at 11:02 AM

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY BY CHAIRPERSON

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

FORUM REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT

Victor Macri	Councillor –Midjuburi - Marrickville Ward (Chair)
Liz Atkins	Councillor – Damun - Stanmore Ward
Vinoth Srinivasan	Transport for NSW (TfNSW)
Graeme McKay	Representative for Jo Haylen MP, Member for Summer Hill
Bill Holliday	Representative for Kobi Shetty MP, Member for Balmain
Colin Jones	Representative for Inner West Bicycle Coalition (IWBC)
Manod Wickramasinghe	IWC’s Traffic and Transport Planning Manager
Sunny Jo	IWC’s Coordinator Traffic Engineering Services (North)
George Tsaprounis	IWC’s Coordinator Traffic Engineering Services (South)
Jason Scoufis	IWC’s Coordinator Traffic Investigations & Road Safety
Christy Li	IWC’s Business Administration Officer

VISITORS

Alana Wulff	Public Speaker- Item 7
Brendan Arrow	Public Speaker- Item 7
Lise Chagnard	Public Speaker- Item 8
Mikayla Odelli	Public Speaker- Item 9
Gino Odelli	Public Speaker- Item 9

APOLOGIES:

Miriama Tamata	Representative for Jenny Leong MP, Member for Newtown
Julius Villanueva	Representative for Transit Systems

DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS:

Nil.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

That the Minutes of the Local Transport Forum held on Monday, 18 August 2025 and Extraordinary Local Transport Forum held on Monday, 1 September 2025 be confirmed.

MATTERS ARISING FROM COUNCIL’S RESOLUTION OF MINUTES

Nil.

LTF0925(2) Item 1 Murray Street at Smidmore Street, Marrickville – Proposed raised pedestrian crossing and Refuge islands - Design Plan 10344-A (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West PAC)

SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety for pedestrians and motorists in Murray Street and Smidmore Street, Marrickville by converting the existing at-grade pedestrian crossing in Murray Street to a raised pedestrian crossing and reinstate various refuge islands and new kerb blisters in Murray Street and Smidmore Street. The proposal aims to improve pedestrian and motorist safety by better defining safe pedestrian crossing points, improve sight lines, reduce traffic speeds and conflicts with traffic movements at this location.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

That the detailed design plan for the proposed raised pedestrian crossing and refuge islands in Murray Street at Smidmore Street, Marrickville and associated signs and line markings (as per Design Plan No.10344-A) be APPROVED.

DISCUSSION:

No advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the detailed design plan for the proposed raised pedestrian crossing and refuge islands in Murray Street at Smidmore Street, Marrickville and associated signs and line markings (as per Design Plan No.10344-A) be APPROVED.

LTF0925(2) Item 2 Gannon Street, Tempe – Pedestrian Crossing Review (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward /Summer Hill Electorate /Inner West LAC)

SUMMARY

At the Council Meeting held 20 May 2025 a Notice of Motion (NoM) regarding the Gannon Street Pedestrian Crossing was considered. It noted that the raised pedestrian crossing on Gannon Street at Edwin Street, Tempe continues to pose a significant risk to pedestrians and requested that a review of safety at the crossing be conducted and that further ways to improve pedestrian and road user safety at the crossing be considered. This report provides the outcome of the review and recommends various regulatory signage changes and works in addition to possible pruning works.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the installation of small kerb blisters either side of the Gannon Street, Tempe pedestrian crossing be supported in principle and included in Council’s Traffic Facilities Forward Works Program.

2. That statutory 10 metre ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed on both sides of Edwin Street east of Gannon Street, Tempe

3. That the existing 10 metre length of BB-lines in Edwin Street east of Gannon Street, Tempe be removed.

4. That the existing ‘No Stopping’ sign on the northern side of Gannon Street just east of the existing raised pedestrian crossing be relocated 6 metres southward so as to be compliant with the 10 metre ‘No Stopping’ zone after the crossing (departure side) in accordance with relevant Australian Standards, Austroads Guides and TfNSW Standard Supplements and Technical Directions to maintain clear visibility for pedestrians and motorists.

5. That Council’s Public Trees team be requested to investigate whether the tree outside No.40 Gannon Street, Tempe requires pruning to improve sightlines for both motorists and pedestrians at the existing raised pedestrian crossing.

DISCUSSION:

Council Officers tabled comments regarding concerns for the lack of parking in the streets near Tempe Station, noting that the City of Canterbury Bankstown has proposed to implement 4P restricted parking in Bayview Avenue, Tempe which would further exacerbate the current parking concerns.

Council Officers tabled comments from a resident who supported the recommendation and suggested that further speed reduction treatments be investigated for Gannon Street, as there are often occasions of vehicles speeding down the street. The resident questioned whether the kerb blisters were designed to narrow the street and act as a treatment to slow down traffic. The resident also suggested that Council’s Parking Rangers patrol Edwin Street and enforce cars that are not parked perpendicular or parallel to the driveway verge.

Council Officers advised that the installation of the kerb blisters are proposed to narrow the crossing distance to provide additional safety for pedestrians. Council Officers noted that the kerb blisters also provide an opportunity for Council to move the Pedestrian crossing signs to within the blister islands to provide better visibility for the signage.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

2. That statutory 10 metre ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed on both sides of Edwin Street east of Gannon Street, Tempe

3. That the existing 10 metre length of BB-lines in Edwin Street east of Gannon Street, Tempe be removed.

LTF0925(2) Item 3 Saywell Street, Marrickville – Temporary full road closure for Heaps Gay Street Festival 2025 – Saturday 29 November 2025 (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West PAC)

SUMMARY

Council has received an application under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 to use Saywell Street, Marrickville to hold a street party style event for the community, known as ‘Heaps Gay Street Festival', on Saturday 29 November 2025 between the hours of 2pm and 11pm. The erection of the stage, stalls and associated works will include the temporary full-road closures of Saywell Street, Marrickville between Cadogan Street and Shirlow Street from 7:00pm Friday 28 November 2025 to 7pm Sunday 30 November 2025. The closure includes partial closure of adjoining streets also including Cadogan Lane, Sloane Street and Sloane Lane and a Drop off loop via Fitzroy Street.

It is recommended that Council endorse the temporary full road closure of Saywell Street, Marrickville between Cadogan Street and Shirlow Street from 7:00pm Friday 28 November 2025 to 7pm Sunday 30 November 2025 subject to the applicant complying with the conditions within this report; and advice of the proposed event being forwarded to the appropriate stakeholders and authorities including emergency services.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

That the proposed temporary full road closure (permitting local access where possible) of Saywell Street between Cadogan Street and Shirlow Street, Marrickville from 7.00pm Friday 28 November to 7pm Sunday 30 November 2025 be APPROVED, subject to the approval of the S68 Application and the applicant complying with, but not limited to, the following conditions:

a) All affected residents and businesses, including NSW Police Local Area Commander, Transit Systems, Fire and Rescue NSW and NSW Ambulance Services, shall be notified in writing by the applicant of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days prior to the event, with the applicant making reasonable provision for residents and businesses;

b) A minimum four (4) metres unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed sections;

c) The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed; and

d) The applicant be advised in terms of this report and that all costs for the event and implementation of the road closure are to be borne by the applicant.

DISCUSSION:

Council Officers tabled comments from the Representative for Transit Systems, noting that this proposal will not have any effects on Transit System services.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the proposed temporary full road closure (permitting local access where possible) of Saywell Street between Cadogan Street and Shirlow Street, Marrickville from 7.00pm Friday 28 November to 7pm Sunday 30 November 2025 be APPROVED, subject to the approval of the S68 Application and the applicant complying with, but not limited to, the following conditions:

b) A minimum four (4) metres unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed sections;

c) The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed; and

d) The applicant be advised in terms of this report and that all costs for the event and implementation of the road closure are to be borne by the applicant.

LTF0925(2) Item 4 Wellington Street and Terry Street, Rozelle - Proposed New Raised Pedestrian Crossing (Baludarri-Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety in Wellington Street and Terry Street, Rozelle by constructing new raised pedestrian crossings and bicycle facilities near the existing roundabout. The proposal aims to improve pedestrian, cyclist and motorist safety by better defining safe pedestrian crossing points and addresses pedestrian safety and driver behaviour at this location.

This proposal will not have an impact on existing parking arrangements in the street.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

That the attached detailed design plan (Design Plan 10349) for the raised pedestrian crossings and bicycle lane at the intersection of Wellington and Terry Street, Rozelle be approved.

DISCUSSION:

Council Officers tabled the amended detailed design plan (Design Plan 10349) for the raised pedestrian crossings and bicycle lane at the intersection of Wellington and Terry Street, Rozelle.

**Please see Appendix One for the amended plans tabled in the meeting**

Council Officers noted that the amended design has incorporated kerb blisters on the east side of Wellington Street at the proposed pedestrian crossing to shorten the crossing distance.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the attached amended detailed design plan (Design Plan 10349) for the raised pedestrian crossings and bicycle lane at the intersection of Wellington and Terry Street, Rozelle be approved.

LTF0925(2) Item 5 Traffic Management Plan for the 2025 Balmain New Year's Eve Event (Baludarri-Balmain Ward/ Balmain Electorate/ Leichhardt PAC)

SUMMARY

This report outlines the traffic management plan for the 2025 New Year’s Eve event.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the Traffic Management Plan (Attachment 1) detailing the traffic arrangements for the 2025 Balmain New Year’s Eve be supported.

2. That the Traffic Management Plan (Attachment 1) be forwarded to Council’s Parks and Streetscapes Coordinator, Transport Management Centre and the Major Events & Incidents Group (NSW Police).

3. That a temporary ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Montague Street between Darling Street and Beattie Street, Balmain.

4. That the following temporary modifications to bus stops be approved:

a) On the northern side of Darling Street:

i. Install temporary ‘Bus Zones’ between Mort Street and Ford Street.

ii. Extend the ‘Bus Zone’ between Ford Street and McDonald Street.

iii. Extend the ‘Bus Zone’ between McDonald Street and Curtis Road, outside Nos.217-223 Darling Street.

b) On the southern side of Darling Street:

i. Install a temporary ‘Bus Zone’ between Booth Street and Beattie Street, outside No. 244-270 Darling Street.

c) On the eastern side of Grove Street:

i. Install a temporary ‘Bus Zone’ between Wharf Road and Bay Street, Birchgrove.

d) on Eaton Street

i. Install a temporary 27m and 41m length ‘Bus Zone’ between Darling Street and Gladstone Street on the east and west side respectively;

ii. Install a temporary 65m and 54m length ‘Bus Zone’ between Gladstone Street and Darvall Street on the east and west side respectively;

5. That it be noted that taxi / hire car access to the Peninsula will be restricted from 7:00pm.

6. That the NSW Taxi Council be advised of the Committee’s recommendation.

DISCUSSION:

Council Officers tabled comments from the Representative for Transit Systems, noting that Transit Systems will be attending the Balmain NYE Operational planning meeting with Council.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the Traffic Management Plan (Attachment 1) detailing the traffic arrangements for the 2025 Balmain New Year’s Eve be supported.

2. That the Traffic Management Plan (Attachment 1) be forwarded to Council’s Parks and Streetscapes Coordinator, Transport Management Centre and the Major Events & Incidents Group (NSW Police).

3. That a temporary ‘No Stopping’ zone be installed on the eastern side of Montague Street between Darling Street and Beattie Street, Balmain.

4. That the following temporary modifications to bus stops be approved:

a) On the northern side of Darling Street:

i. Install temporary ‘Bus Zones’ between Mort Street and Ford Street.

ii. Extend the ‘Bus Zone’ between Ford Street and McDonald Street.

iii. Extend the ‘Bus Zone’ between McDonald Street and Curtis Road, outside Nos.217-223 Darling Street.

b) On the southern side of Darling Street:

i. Install a temporary ‘Bus Zone’ between Booth Street and Beattie Street, outside No. 244-270 Darling Street.

c) On the eastern side of Grove Street:

i. Install a temporary ‘Bus Zone’ between Wharf Road and Bay Street, Birchgrove.

d) on Eaton Street

i. Install a temporary 27m and 41m length ‘Bus Zone’ between Darling Street and Gladstone Street on the east and west side respectively;

ii. Install a temporary 65m and 54m length ‘Bus Zone’ between Gladstone Street and Darvall Street on the east and west side respectively;

5. That it be noted that taxi / hire car access to the Peninsula will be restricted from 7:00pm.

6. That the NSW Taxi Council be advised of the Committee’s recommendation.

LTF0925(2) Item 6 Shaw Street at Belgrave Street, Petersham - Proposed 'STOP' control and kerb extensions/blisters (Damun-Stanmore Ward/Newtown Electorate/Inner West PAC)

SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety on Shaw Street, Petersham at Belgrave Street by converting the existing ‘GIVE WAY’ control to ‘STOP’ control and constructing kerb extensions and blisters to reduce vehicle speeds due to a history of crashes at this intersection. There are also new kerb ramps proposed within the kerb extensions to provide a pedestrian facility to cross Shaw Street. This proposal has received construction funding from Transport for NSW under the 2025/2026 Australian Blackspot Program.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

That the detailed design plan for the proposed ‘STOP’ control, kerb extensions, kerb blisters, kerb ramps, associated signs and line markings on Belgrave and Shaw Streets, Petersham (as per Design Plan No.10345) be approved.

DISCUSSION:

The Representative for the Inner West Bicycle Coalition noted that the design plans did not show changes in parking spaces as stipulated on the legend.

The Representative for the Inner West Bicycle Coalition also noted that there were signs missing along Belgrave Street and Shaw Street and requested Council to review the signage in the area.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

LTF0925(2) Item 7 Newtown Enmore Parking Review Study

SUMMARY

Council has undertaken a Parking Review Study to improve parking in Newtown and Enmore. The study has detailed a number of recommendations to improve conditions in laneways and intersections and extension of existing M8 resident parking scheme into the additional roads of Juliett Street, Francis Street and Lynch Avenue.

There are also a number of recommendations that increase parking capacity by introducing 90 degree angle parking in select local roads of Pemell Street, Gilpin Street and Dickson Street. Other recommendations include the introduction of ‘No Stopping’ at intersections and ‘No Parking’ in laneways. The Parking Review Study report including recommendations is provided in Attachment 1 with appendix detailed in Attachment 2.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the Newtown Enmore Parking Review Study be received and noted.

2. That further consultation be undertaken into installing ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at the intersections detailed below with a risk assessment to determine the length of ‘No Stopping’:

a) St Marys Street/Gilpin Street/Oxford Street

b) Albermarle Street/Australia Street

c) Albermarle Street/Denison Street

d) Albermarle Street/Probert Street

e) Albermarle Street/Chelmsford Street

f) Albermarle Street/Oxford Street

g) Albermarle Street/Bedford Street

h) Phillip Street/Gladstone Street

i) Phillip Street/Charles Street

j) Phillip Street/Belmore Lane

k) Phillip Street/Thurnby Lane

l) Trade Street/Albert Street

m) Trade Street/Pierce Street

n) Trade Street/Kingston Lane

o) James Street/Simmons Street

p) Denison Street/Fitzroy Lane

q) Baltic Street/Bedford Street

r) Lynch Avenue/Francis Street

s) Cambridge Street/Cambridge Lane

t) Lynch Avenue/Juliett Street

u) Albert Street/Bedford Street

3. That ‘90 degree angle parking vehicles under 6 metres only’ signposting with associated kerb extensions be supported at the following locations and they be listed for consideration in Council’s Traffic Facilities Program subject to consultation:

a) on the southern side of Pemell Street between Reiby Street and Simmons Street

b) on the southern side of Gilpin Street between Kingston Road and Kingston Lane

c) on the southern side of Dickson Street between Pearl Lane and King Lane

4. That ‘No Parking’ and associated ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at intersections be installed at the following locations subject to consultation:

a) the southern side of Cambridge Lane between Cambridge Street and London Street

b) both sides of Hoffman Lane between Chelmsford Street and London Street

5. That ‘2P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M8’ signposting restrictions be installed in the following streets subject to consultation:

a) western side of Francis Street between Enmore Road and Lynch Avenue

b) eastern side of Juliett Street between Enmore Road and Lynch Avenue

c) northern side of Lynch Avenue between Juliett Street and Francis Street

DISCUSSION:

Public Speaker Alana Wulff entered the meeting at 11.04am.

Ms Wulff advised that she lives on Francis Street and supported the recommendation to introduce ‘2P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M8’ parking restrictions on her street and would like Council to consider more restrictive parking measures on Francis Street to address the existing parking issues in the street. It was noted that Francis Street is one of the streets west of Enmore Road, which does not have restricted parking, which makes the street appealing for commuters and other long-term parkers further adding to the existing issues in the area. Ms Wulff noted that the parking study was undertaken in 2023 and that it does not accurately reflect the current parking conditions in 2025. Ms Wulff noted in Appendix A of the report that Francis Street has >85% parking occupancy on Wednesdays and 70-80% parking occupancy on Saturday nights, which would mean the proposed restrictions would not fully address the issues in the street, and suggested that the proposed ‘2P’ parking restrictions be amended to ‘2P 8am-10pm.’ Ms Wulff noted that she has witnessed a high volume of people parking their vehicles (regular motor vehicles as well as camper vans and trailers) on the street and not moving them for long periods of time, severely impacting her ability to park near her property. Ms Wulff notes that she has a young family, and having to park streets away from her house has been difficult and stressful. Ms Wulff also noted she supported the proposed ‘No Stopping’ restrictions in Francis Street and would like to be consulted by Council on the proposed location of the signage on the street.

Public Speaker Alana Wulff left the meeting at 11.19am.

Public Speaker Brendan Arrow entered the meeting at 11.19am.

Mr Arrow advised that he supported the recommendation to introduce ‘2P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M8’ parking restrictions on Francis Street and suggested that Council consider amending this to ‘1P’ parking restrictions. Mr Arrow noted that he often has trouble parking near his residence and often must park many streets away from his property. Mr Arrow stated that he often sees cars circling Francis Street and the nearby streets looking to find parking. Mr Arrow noted that due to the lack of parking, people often park over driveways and footpaths, which makes it hard for people on mobility scooters to access the footpaths. Mr Arrow noted that he also supported the proposed ‘No Stopping’ signs to be implemented on Francis Street. Mr Arrow noted that there is a new townhouse development on Francis Street which will add to the parking needs of the street. Mr Arrow noted that the TAFE carpark is available to use by people here to see a show at Enmore Theatre at a cost; however, the carpark is not fully utilised at times, as people often prefer to find free parking.

Public Speaker Brendan Arrow left the meeting at 11.27am.

Council Officers tabled comments from a resident requesting more uniform parking restrictions, as they often have difficulty finding parking even with a parking permit. It was noted that the resident resides on Edgeware Road and that their side of the road does not have restricted parking, making it difficult to find parking, especially when shows are playing at the Enmore Theatre. It was noted that the resident also has small children, which makes it hard when they cannot park close to their property, especially if they must cross Edgeware Road on foot to get back home. The resident noted that having ‘2P’ parking on their side of the road would allow for more frequent movements of parked cars and would allow more opportunities for them to park near their home.

Council Officers advised that they had proposed for ‘2P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M8’ in Francis Street, Lynch Avenue and Juliett Street as a way to slowly introduce RPS restrictions in the area. It was noted that the proposal for ‘2P 6pm-10pm’ restrictions would likely get more support than if Council were to propose more aggressive RPS treatments. It was noted that should the RPS restrictions have been supported during consultation and implemented, it would be easier to propose extending the restrictions to suit the needs of the area.

The Chairperson noted the residents' comments regarding the TAFE carpark and questioned if it would be possible for the carpark to be opened to the diners and the public for use. Councillor Atkins noted that this could be raised with the Newtown Enmore business community.

The Representative for the Inner West Bicycle Coalition questioned if Council would review the installation of bike loops in the Newtown Enmore area.

The Chairperson advised that this has been raised as a Notice of Motion by the Councillors and that the original program to review and install bike loops will be revisited.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the Newtown Enmore Parking Review Study be received and noted.

2. That further consultation be undertaken into installing ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at the intersections detailed below with a risk assessment to determine the length of ‘No Stopping’:

a) St Marys Street/Gilpin Street/Oxford Street

b) Albermarle Street/Australia Street

c) Albermarle Street/Denison Street

d) Albermarle Street/Probert Street

e) Albermarle Street/Chelmsford Street

f) Albermarle Street/Oxford Street

g) Albermarle Street/Bedford Street

h) Phillip Street/Gladstone Street

i) Phillip Street/Charles Street

j) Phillip Street/Belmore Lane

k) Phillip Street/Thurnby Lane

l) Trade Street/Albert Street

m) Trade Street/Pierce Street

n) Trade Street/Kingston Lane

o) James Street/Simmons Street

p) Denison Street/Fitzroy Lane

q) Baltic Street/Bedford Street

r) Lynch Avenue/Francis Street

s) Cambridge Street/Cambridge Lane

t) Lynch Avenue/Juliett Street

u) Albert Street/Bedford Street

a) on the southern side of Pemell Street between Reiby Street and Simmons Street

b) on the southern side of Gilpin Street between Kingston Road and Kingston Lane

c) on the southern side of Dickson Street between Pearl Lane and King Lane

4. That ‘No Parking’ and associated ‘No Stopping’ restrictions at intersections be installed at the following locations subject to consultation:

a) the southern side of Cambridge Lane between Cambridge Street and London Street

b) both sides of Hoffman Lane between Chelmsford Street and London Street

5. That ‘2P 6pm-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M8’ signposting restrictions be installed in the following streets subject to consultation:

a) western side of Francis Street between Enmore Road and Lynch Avenue

b) eastern side of Juliett Street between Enmore Road and Lynch Avenue

c) northern side of Lynch Avenue between Juliett Street and Francis Street

LTF0925(2) Item 8 Holbeach Avenue, Tempe - Proposed timed parking restrictions (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward/Heffron Electorate/Inner West PAC)

SUMMARY

This report outlines existing parking issues on Holbeach Avenue immediately adjacent to Tempe Reserve and proposes timed parking restrictions (6P 8am-6pm Mon-Fri, vehicles under 6 metres only) to reduce long-term parking usage whilst balancing parking needs for field users, nearby businesses and residents.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the proposed ‘6P 8am-6pm Mon-Fri, vehicles under 6 metres only’ on the eastern side of Holbeach Avenue adjacent to Tempe Reserve be approved.

2. That timed angle or unrestricted parking spaces at the existing ‘Bus Zone’ on Holbeach Avenue opposite Tempe Reserve be investigated.

DISCUSSION:

Public Speaker Lise Chagnard entered the meeting at 11.28am.

Ms Chagnard supported the recommendation; however, she expressed concerns that the implementation of the ‘6P 8am-6pm Mon-Fri, vehicles under 6 metres only’ may move vehicles currently parking on the eastern side of Holbeach Avenue down to park near the water tower. Ms Chagnard noted that currently, when there is sport at the Tempe Reserve, cars sometimes park illegally, causing visibility issues for cars wanting to turn in or out of the street. Ms Chagnard is concerned that if the proposed restrictions shift the trailers, campervans, and other vehicles down to park adjacent to the water tower, it will impede the sightlines of motorists, causing potential safety issues.

Public Speaker Lise Chagnard left the meeting at 11.34am.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the proposed ‘6P 8am-6pm Mon-Fri, vehicles under 6 metres only’ on the eastern side of Holbeach Avenue adjacent to Tempe Reserve be approved.

2. That timed angle or unrestricted parking spaces at the existing ‘Bus Zone’ on Holbeach Avenue opposite Tempe Reserve be investigated.

LTF0925(2) Item 9 Unnamed laneway (rear of Church Street and Warren Road), Marrickville (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward/Summer Hill Electorate/Inner West PAC)

SUMMARY

This report outlines existing parking challenges within a laneway at the rear of Church Street and Warren Road, Marrickville. It proposes an adjustment to the existing ‘No Parking’ restriction which seeks to balance access and parking needs for affected residents.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

That the relocation of the ‘No Parking’ restriction a further 2-metres north in the laneway at the rear of Church Street and Warren Road, Marrickville be approved.

DISCUSSION:

Public Speakers Mikayla Odelli and Gino Odelli entered the meeting at 11.35am

Ms Odelli and Mr Odelli opposed the recommendation, noting that this will compromise their ability to park in the laneway and consequently decrease their property value and increase their car insurance premium. Ms Odelli stated that her family regularly use this laneway to access their work vehicles to load and unload equipment. Ms Odelli also stated that the proposed recommendation will reduce parking availability and noted her concerns regarding the amount of car accidents and cars being damaged on Warren Road, and why this issue of the Church Street garage placement and access was not properly considered when the building plans went to Council for review. Ms Odelli noted that the initial request for the ‘No Parking’ restrictions to be amended was so the neighbouring resident could access their off-street parking space from either side. Ms Odelli acknowledged it can be inconvenient to manoeuvre any vehicle in the laneway but noted that the residents of the Church Street address were still able to access their garage from one direction.

Public Speakers Mikayla Odelli and Gino Odelli left the meeting at 11.40am

Council Officers tabled comments from a resident opposing the recommendation. The resident noted that the proposed recommendation does not resolve their concerns with regards to accessing their property, as the proposed position of the ‘No Parking’ sign does not allow an adequate turning space to access their garage. It was noted that Council have been inconsistent with booking residents for parking across their driveways and requested that the parking rules be consistently applied so they would have access to their garage. The resident suggested that the arrows on the ‘No Parking’ restriction be changed to a bi-directional arrow and that an additional ‘No Parking’ sign be placed on the north side of the double garages at #43. The resident also notes that having access to her garage is important to they are the primary caregivers to their elderly parents.

Council Officers noted that it is often difficult to maintain access from both directions in laneways due to the narrow nature of the lanes.

The Chairperson suggested that no changes be made to the existing 'No Parking’ in the laneway at the rear of Church Street and Warren Road, Marrickville

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

That no changes be made to the existing 'No Parking’ in the laneway at the rear of Church Street and Warren Road, Marrickville

LTF0925(2) Item 10 Sydenham Station Parking Study

SUMMARY

This report outlines the investigation completed in the residential and industrial streets surrounding Sydenham Station to assess parking impacts due to the opening of the Metro at Sydenham Station and closure of the T3 Bankstown Line. It provides an assessment of parking occupancy rates, and proposes adjustments to existing timed permit parking restrictions, and new timed (both permit and non-permit) parking restrictions to better support residents and businesses on streets north and south of Sydenham Station.

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the existing ‘2P 8.30am-6pm Mon-Fri Permit Holders Excepted Area M4’ signposting restrictions be replaced with ‘2P 8am-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M4’, subject to consultation being undertaken in the following streets:

· Northern side of Bridge Street, west of Unwin’s Bridge Road

· Eastern side of Leslie Street, south of Bridge Street

· Northern side of Terry Street, between Unwin’s Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Both sides of Park Road, between Rowe Lane and Henry Street

· Western side of Henry Street, between Park Road and Park Lane

· Southern side of Park Road between Henry Street and Stewart Lane

· Southern side of Rowe Lane between Railway Road and Reilly Lane

· Northern side of George Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Lee Lane

· Northern side of Yelverton street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

· Northern side of Frederick Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

· Southern side of Frederick Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Northern side of Sutherland Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

· Southern side of Sutherland Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Eastern side of Henry Street between Sutherland Street and Grove Street

· Southern side of Grove Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

2. That consultation be undertaken into installing new ‘2P 8am-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M4’s restrictions in the following streets:

· Southern side of Sutherland Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Southern side of Terry Street between Henry Street and Princes Highway

· Southern side of George Street between Henry Street and Princes Highway

3. That consultation be undertaken into installing new ‘1P 8.30am-5pm Mon-Fri; 8.30am-12.30pm Sat’ restrictions on both sides of Park Road between Unwins Bridge Road and Rowe Lane

4. That consultation be undertaken into installing, 2P 8am-6pm Mon-Fri’ restrictions on the northern side of Sydenham Road between Fitzroy Street and Cadogan Street, and on the southern side of Sydenham Road between Railway Parade and Buckley Lane, and ‘No Parking’ restrictions on the northern side of Sydenham Road, east of Shirlow Street subject to Transport for NSW approval.

DISCUSSION:

The Chairperson requested that Gerald Street also be included for consultation for ‘2P’ Parking restrictions.

Council Officers advised that they undertake a review of Gerald Street and consult the residents and businesses on an appropriate parking scheme for the street.

The Representative for the Member of Summer Hill questioned whether the proposed restrictions would change once the Metro is fully opened and replacement buses are no longer required.

Council Officers advised that the proposal would remain even after the Metro has completed its upgrade works on the T3 line, as it is predicted that the parking demand in the area after the completion of the Metro works will not be reduced.

No further advice provided by LTF members.

RECOMMENDATION:

· Northern side of Bridge Street, west of Unwins Bridge Road

· Eastern side of Leslie Street, south of Bridge Street

· Northern side of Terry Street, between Unwins Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Both sides of Park Road, between Rowe Lane and Henry Street

· Western side of Henry Street, between Park Road and Park Lane

· Southern side of Park Road between Henry Street and Stewart Lane

· Southern side of Rowe Lane between Railway Road and Reilly Lane

· Northern side of George Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Lee Lane

· Northern side of Yelverton street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

· Northern side of Frederick Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

· Southern side of Frederick Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Northern side of Sutherland Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

· Southern side of Sutherland Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Eastern side of Henry Street between Sutherland Street and Grove Street

· Southern side of Grove Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Princes Highway

2. That consultation be undertaken into installing new ‘2P 8am-10pm Permit Holders Excepted Area M4’s restrictions in the following streets:

· Southern side of Sutherland Street between Unwins Bridge Road and Henry Street

· Southern side of Terry Street between Henry Street and Princes Highway

· Southern side of George Street between Henry Street and Princes Highway

3. That consultation be undertaken into installing new ‘1P 8.30am-5pm Mon-Fri; 8.30am-12.30pm Sat’ restrictions on both sides of Park Road between Unwins Bridge Road and Rowe Lane

5. That a parking scheme for Gerald Street which provides some short-term parking and supports the businesses be developed and engagement be undertaken with the businesses and residents in Gerald Street

General Business:

Item 11: Request for Parking Restrictions in Burrows Road South, St Peters

The Chairperson noted he had received a request from a constituent requesting that Council review Burrows Road South, St Peters, for potential parking restrictions to deter people from parking on the street long-term, whilst meeting the business needs in the area. Council Officers advised that they investigate the matter and provide a response to the relevant parties.

Item 12: Update on Carrington Road, Marrickville South Resident Parking Scheme

The Chairperson requested an update on the Carrington Road Resident Parking Scheme proposal. Council Officers advised that a plan is being developed and has progressed to the final draft stage. Council Officers noted that they would be consulting the residents in 2 different stages in smaller areas to try to increase the response rate from the residents. Council Officers noted that the first stage letter should be ready to go out to the residents for consultation after the upcoming school holidays.

Item 12: Update on Charlotte Street, Marrickville Resident Parking Scheme Survey

The Chairperson requested an update on the Charlotte Street, Marrickville Resident Parking Scheme Survey. It was noted that previously, the Resident Parking Scheme proposal did not proceed as the parking occupancy rate failed to meet Council’s threshold. Council Officers advised they have reached out to Transport for NSW to determine when they anticipate their planned works on the street to be completed. It was noted that once they get a timeframe on when Transport for NSW’s works will be completed, Council will organise to have another parking survey undertaken in the area.

Item 13: Abandoned shopping trolleys on Ashfield rooftop carpark

The Representative for the Inner West Bicycle Coalition raised concerns regarding abandoned shopping trolleys in the Ashfield carpark taking up parking spaces. Council Officers noted that Centre Management looks after the collection of trolleys and advised that they will contact Centre Management to advise them of the issue.

Meeting closed at 12.31pm.

CHAIRPERSON

Clr Victor Macri

Appendix One

Local Transport Forum Meeting

20 October 2025

Item No: LTF1025(1) Item 5

Subject: Sydney Street, Marrickville – Temporary full road closure for Summer Fair 2025 Event – Saturday 13 December 2025 (Midjuburi-Marrickville Ward / Summer Hill Electorate / Inner West PAC)

Prepared By: Jennifer Adams - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Manod Wickramasinghe - Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

That the proposed temporary full road closure of Sydney Street between Sydenham Road and Marrickville Road, Marrickville from 4.00am to mid-night on Saturday 13 December 2025 be APPROVED in order to hold the Sydney Street Summer Fair Event, subject to the applicant complying with, but not limited to, the following conditions:

a) A Road Occupancy License application be obtained by the applicant from the Transport Management Centre;

b) All affected residents and businesses, including NSW Police Local Area Commander, Transit Systems, Fire and Rescue NSW and NSW Ambulance Services, shall be notified in writing by the applicant of the proposed temporary road closure at least 7 days prior to the event, with the applicant making reasonable provision for residents and businesses;

c) A minimum four (4) metre unencumbered passage be available for emergency vehicles through the closed section;

d) The occupation of the road carriageway must not occur until the road has been physically closed; and

e) The applicant be advised in terms of this report and that all costs for the event notification and implementation of the road closure are to be borne by the applicant.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council has received an application (ENRC20250061) from Mothership Studios to use Sydney Street to hold a community event – The ‘Sydney Street Summer Fair’ on Saturday 13 December 2025 between the hours of 10am and 9pm. The assembly of stalls and associated works will include the temporary full-road closures of Sydney Street, Marrickville between Sydenham Road and Marrickville Road from 4.00am to mid-night.

It is recommended that Council endorse the temporary full road closure of Sydney Street, Marrickville between Sydenham Road and Marrickville Road from 4am to mid-night on Saturday 13 December 2025 subject to the applicant complying with the conditions within this report; applying to TfNSW to obtain a Road Occupancy License from the Transport Management Centre and advice of the proposed event being forwarded to the appropriate stakeholders and authorities including emergency services.

BACKGROUND

The Sydney Street Summer Fair Event will be a community-run, free full-day event taking place on Saturday, 13th December 2025, along Sydney Street, Marrickville. The event will be organised by the local businesses of Sydney Street and will feature market stalls, food, music, and family activities. The event site is limited to Sydney Street with a full road closure in place for the duration of the event. Pedestrian access will be maintained throughout, with controlled entry points for suppliers and emergency services as required.

Officer Comments

Site location & road network

Sydney Street is local street and is approximately 12.8 metres in width and characterised by a mixture of business properties. Unrestricted parking is permitted on both sides of the street.

A map of a city

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

The Applicant has advised that Sydney Street will be closed to traffic thoroughfare (permitting local access where possible at the Marrickville Road end of the street) so the event can successfully occur and has supplied a TMP. (attached at the end of this report). The TMP is to be submitted to TfNSW for consideration and approval

Event Details

• Event Name: Sydney St Summer Fair Event – Marrickville

• Event Date: Saturday, 13 December 2025

• Event Start Time: 10:00 am

• Event Finish Time: 9:00 pm

• Event Set-Up Time: 4:00 am – 8:00 am (site bump-in)

• Stall-Holder and Production Bump-In: 8:00 am – 10:00 am

• Event Pack Down / Stall-Holder Bump-Out: 9:00 pm – 10:00 pm

• Final Site Bump-Out Complete: 12:00 am

Site layout will be as shown in the diagram reproduced below:

A map of a city

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

The applicant will liaise closely with the businesses on Sydney Street to ensure they will not require access over the proposed weekend. Access will be preserved at the eastern end of Sydney Street to enable egress from Frank’s Automotive (corner Sydney Street and Marrickville Road) and customer parking at The Hop and Grain Brew Store (50 Sydney Street). No other part of Sydney Street will be accessible by vehicle. Pedestrian access will be maintained at all times. There are no formal cycleways affected by the event footprint. Cyclists approaching or passing through the precinct will be asked to dismount and walk their bicycles within the event area to maintain the safety of all attendees.

Primary Traffic Control

The following traffic control measures are diagrammatically shown and detailed in the Traffic

Guidance Scheme (TGS) and Detour Plan.

A map of a city

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

A 4-metre wide emergency vehicle access must be maintained through the closed road areas during the course of the event. Special Event advance notice signs will be strategically installed at least two (2) weeks prior to the event to alert motorists of the proposed closures.

Impacts on traffic

Sydney Street carries a low volume of traffic and therefore the diverted traffic will have no major impacts on surrounding road network. The event will be held on the weekend when lower than weekday traffic volumes are expected.

Detour routes will remain in effect for the duration of the Sydney Street closure. Local traffic will be redirected via surrounding streets, with clear signage and traffic controllers in place to assist drivers in navigating around the site.

Public Transport

The nearest public transport access to the event is Sydenham train and metro Station, located a short walk from Sydney Street. At the time of writing, there are no scheduled interruptions to train services that would affect access to the event.

No bus routes operate along Sydney Street itself. All existing services in the Marrickville area run on surrounding roads, including Enmore Road, Marrickville Road, and Illawarra Road. As a result, no public bus services will be affected by the Sydney Street closure for the Sydney St Summer Fair Event, and scheduled services will continue to operate as normal.

Pedestrians and Cyclists

Pedestrian movement will not be significantly affected by the event. Existing footpaths along and surrounding Sydney Street will remain accessible and usable throughout the day. Attendees are encouraged to follow instructions from traffic controllers to ensure safe movement around the site.

There are no formal cycleways affected by the event footprint. Cyclists approaching or passing through the precinct will be asked to dismount and walk their bicycles within the event area to maintain the safety of all attendees.

Special Event Clearways

Contrary to what is written in the TMP (page 12) no Special Event Clearways are anticipated for the event. The Event is a commercial venture, and Council is not involved in any planning for this event. The applicant is responsible for all aspects of this temporary full road closure and needs to submit the TMP to TfNSW for their endorsement and comply with all TfNSW guidelines and procedures.

Public Consultation

The applicant is to notify all affected residents and businesses in writing at least 7 days prior to the commencement of works. A draft copy of the notification letter is attached at the end of this report.

The proposed road closure has been advertised on Council’s website in accordance with the Roads Act 1993.

As the road closure abuts a State Road a ROL will be required. The TMP and associated TGSs are to be submitted to the TfNSW for consideration and approval.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

All works and costs of the road closure implementation and notification will be borne by the applicant.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩

Sydney Street Summer Fair - Marrickville 2025 - TMP TGS

Local Transport Forum Meeting

20 October 2025

Item No: LTF1025(1) Item 6

Subject: Brighton Street, between Wentworth Street and The Avenue, Petersham – Proposed raised pedestrian crossing replacing existing raised threshold - Design Plan 10355 (Damun-Stanmore Ward / Newtown Electorate / Inner West PAC)

Prepared By: Jennifer Adams - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Manod Wickramasinghe - Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

That the detailed design plan for the proposed raised pedestrian crossing in Brighton Street, between Wentworth Street and The Avenue, Petersham and associated signs and line markings (as per Design Plan No.10355) be APPROVED.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety for pedestrians and motorists in Brighton Street, Petersham (in front of No.101 and No.99 Brighton Street) by constructing a new concrete raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing with landscaped kerb blister islands to replace the existing concrete raised threshold. The proposal aims to improve pedestrian safety by better defining and prioritising pedestrian movements across Brighton Street whilst also reducing traffic speeds. The proposal will address concerns regarding pedestrian and driver behaviour at this location.

BACKGROUND

A report went to Council’s Local Traffic Committee on 17 June 2024 detailing proposed treatments recommended after the Petersham North Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Scheme Review. One recommendation included:

a) ‘That the raised threshold in Brighton Street between Wentworth Street and The Avenue be upgraded to a raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing.’

Council at its meeting held on 3 September 2024 considered a Notice of Motion (Item 37) regarding Pedestrian Safety on Brighton Steet, Petersham, and resolved in part:

2. That as part of the Petersham North LATM Plan endorsed by the Traffic Committee, Council investigate and expedite measures to prevent speeding and improve pedestrian safety on Brighton Street, including but not limited to:

b) installation of raised pedestrian crossings on Brighton Street at the Petersham Park gate, Palace Street and Railway Street intersections;

This report details the design plan for the pedestrian improvement works and its related consultation results. The works are expected to be undertaken during the 2025/2026 financial year, subject to final approvals, and budget allocations. No firm construction date is yet available, and residents will be notified prior to any work starts in the street.

Other Staff Comments

The following works are proposed and are illustrated on the attached Consultation Plan (Plan No. 10355). The proposed works aim to improve pedestrian and motorist safety by better defining safe pedestrian crossing points, improving sight distances, reducing traffic speeds and conflicts with traffic movements at this location.

Specifically, the proposed scope of work includes the following:

· Construct a new raised concrete pedestrian crossing (in place of the existing concrete raised threshold), with “gutter bridges” comprising heel safe grating to provide safe access over existing kerb and guttering to the new raised pedestrian crossing. Tactile indicators will also be provided either side of the new raised pedestrian crossing;

· Construct landscaped kerb blister islands on both sides of the road adjacent to the new raised pedestrian crossing. Landscaping to be suitable species of native grasses (subject to final design);

· Reconstruct some sections of damaged concrete footpath with new concrete footpath (as shown on the Plans);

· Reconstruct sections of kerb and gutter with new concrete kerb and gutter (only where needed to facilitate the works);

· Install new ‘No Stopping’ signage and zones adjacent to the new pedestrian crossing to provide statutory compliance for minimum sight distance requirements (refer to Plans);

· Install signage and line marking associated with the works as required and were shown on Plans;

· Provide new lighting comprising new timber poles and flood lights to ensure the raised pedestrian crossing complies with the current lighting standards.

Parking Changes

The proposal will result in the loss of four (4) on-street parking spaces, - three (3) on the Park side of Brighton Street and one (1) on the residential side of Brighton Street. This is required to ensure minimum sight distances according to relevant standards are provided on either side of the new raised pedestrian crossing. Please refer to a copy of the plan below.

A blueprint of a building

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Streetlighting

The new raised pedestrian crossing will require new flood lighting to be provided in order for it to comply with current standards. This will involve the provision of up to two (2) new timber power poles and two (2) new floodlights. The lighting design will be undertaken by a Lighting Consultant commencing in the near future.

The consultation plan along with the turning path analysis are provided in the attachments.

Consultation

Consultation was conducted between 22 August 2025 and 10 September 2025. A letter along with a copy of the design plan was sent to residents / businesses in the immediate locality and also separately to Inner West Council Bike Group. A total of 12 letters were distributed.

A map of a neighborhood

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

There were two (2) responses, both opposing the proposal.

Summary of main issues

Council response

Concerns raised by Resident No.1.

1. Loss of 4 on-street car parking spaces (which are used by resident)

2. What is the justification for the new pedestrian crossing – why is the pedestrian crossing required

In general, Council attempts to reduce the loss of parking when considering the installation of traffic facilities. It accepts that sometimes parking will be lost and balances this loss against the gains in safety and amenity as a result of installing the device. In this case kerb blisters have been incorporated into the crossing design to minimize the loss of car parking.

A number of safety measures have been suggested by local residents and identified through the Petersham North LATM Plan. The community engagement feedback for the Petersham North LATM study indicated that there were insufficient opportunities to safely cross Brighton Street in and around Petersham Park. Collected data indicated that a sufficient number of pedestrians cross at this location hence it was proposed to upgrade the existing raised threshold to a raised zebra crossing. During community engagement it was also raised as a safety issue through Council’s Access and Inclusion team.

The location meets the warrants as required in Council’s Pedestrian Crossing Warrant Policy.

Concerns raised by Resident No.2.

1. Location of proposed crossing – sightlines and lighting affected by two large eucalyptus trees - suggests alternative location for pedestrian crossing in front of Preschool and Bowling Club

2. Requests speed reduced to 40km/h

3. Loss of on-street parking in an area that is highly competitive for parking (resident does not have off street parking)

4. Potential light spillage from the additional proposed floodlights

Feedback to the Petersham North LATM community engagement indicated that there were insufficient opportunities to safely cross Brighton Street in and around Petersham Park and the subject location was indicated as a preferred crossing point. Traffic data has been collected for the site. Warrants have been met for the proposed pedestrian crossing at the proposed location.

Sight lines to the pedestrian crossing signs will be adequate as the signs will be located on the kerb extensions. The data indicates that more pedestrians cross in front of the Park – 33 in am. 26 in pm. as opposed to in front of the Bowling Club – 7 in am. 10 in pm.

Council in cooperation with Transport for NSW (TfNSW) has commenced a process of implementing ‘InnerWest@40’ which will reduce speed limits on local roads to 40km/h.

The proposal will result in the loss of four (4) on-street parking spaces - three (3) on the Park side of Brighton Street and one (1) on the residential side of Brighton Street. This is required to ensure minimum sight distances according to relevant standards are provided on either side of the new raised pedestrian crossing. Council officers have attempted to minimize parking loss through the inclusion of kerb blisters.

The proposed new raised pedestrian crossing requires to be illuminated with the standard level of lighting in compliance with Australian standard AS/NZS 1158.4:2024 Lighting for roads and public spaces, Part 4: Lighting of pedestrian crossings. The lighting will be directed specifically onto the pedestrian crossing, with measures taken to limit any light spill to surrounding residential properties.

Conclusion

It is recommended that the detailed design plan (10355) for the proposed new raised pedestrian crossing in Brighton Street, Petersham (as shown in the Attachments) be approved.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The project is listed on Council’s 2025/2026 Traffic Capital Program for construction and estimated cost is $120,000. Project number is 303634.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩	Brighton Street, Petersham at Petersham Park - Raised Pedestrian Crossing Design - 303634-10355-Consultation-Plans
2.⇩	Swept Path Diagrams - 303634-10355-Plans-TCs

Local Transport Forum Meeting

20 October 2025

Item No: LTF1025(1) Item 7

Subject: Brighton Street at Railway Street, Petersham- Proposed Raised Pedestrain crossing.
(Damun-Stanmore Ward/Newtown Electorate/Inner West PAC)

Prepared By: Boris Muha - Traffic Engineer

Authorised By: Manod Wickramasinghe - Traffic and Transport Planning Manager

RECOMMENDATION

That the detailed design plan for the proposed raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing in Brighton Street at Railway Street, Petersham and associated signs and line markings (as per Design Plan No.10357 shown in Attachment 1) be APPROVED.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

This report supports the following strategic directions contained within Council’s Community Strategic Plan:

2: Liveable, connected neighbourhoods and transport

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council is planning to improve safety for pedestrians in Brighton Street at Railway Street, Petersham by constructing a new raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing. The proposal aims to improve pedestrian and motorist safety by better defining safe pedestrian crossing points, improving sight distances, reducing traffic speeds and conflicts with traffic movements at this location.

BACKGROUND

A report was submitted to Council’s Local Traffic Committee on 17 June 2024 detailing proposed treatments recommended after the Petersham North Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Scheme Review. One of the included recommendations is provided below:

“Part 1 (n) That a raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing be installed at Brighton Street (eastern leg) at Brighton Street/Railway Street intersection”.

Furthermore, Council at its meeting held on 3 September 2024 considered a Notice of Motion (Item 37) regarding Pedestrian Safety on Brighton Steet, Petersham, and resolved in part:

b) installation of raised pedestrian crossings on Brighton Street at the Petersham Park gate, Palace Street and Railway Street intersections;

DISCUSSION

The following is provided in discussion.

A map of a city

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Figure 1- Locality Map

Street Name	Brighton Street
Carriageway width (m) kerb to kerb	Approx.10.2m
Carraigeway type	Two-way, one travel lane each direction.
Classification	Local
Speed Limit km/h	50
85^th percentile speed km/h	-
Vehicles per day (vpd)	Approx. 2000-3000
TfNSW available reported crash history (last 5 years)	NIL in the last 5 years.
Parking arrngements	Unrestricted parking both sides.
Side intersecting street	Railway Street

Table 1. Road Network detail.

The Plan

The following works are proposed and are illustrated on the plan in Attachment 1.

Brighton Street at Railway Street, Petersham (Plan No. 10357):

· Remove the existing concrete splitter island on approach to the roundabout and construct a new raised concrete pedestrian crossing, with cross over paths to provide safe access over the existing kerb and guttering to the new raised pedestrian crossing. Tactile indicators will also be provided either side of the new raised pedestrian crossing;

· Construct two (2) landscaped kerb blister islands on both sides of the road adjacent to the new raised pedestrian crossing as shown on plan. Landscaping to be of suitable species of native grasses (subject to final design);

· Construct concrete kerb & gutter with heel safe gutter bridge channel;

· Extend the stormwater drainage system into Brighton Street (comprising new pit and pipe) to improve inlet capacity;

· Reconstruct some sections of concrete footpath with new concrete footpath;

· Provide compliant lighting for the new raised pedestrian crossing – comprising a new flood light on existing power pole;

· Install new ‘No Stopping’ signs and zones in Brighton Street to comply with the required minimum clearances required for safety;

· Provide signage and line markings associated with the works, repaint some existing line markings (where shown on plans).

Parking Changes

It is proposed to slightly adjust the existing ‘No Stopping’ signage by approximately 5m on the north side and 7m on south side of Brighton Street. This will result in the loss of 2 on-street parking spaces in Brighton Street to meet the minimum sight line requirements for pedestrian crossings. The remainder of the works will generally be within the existing No Stopping zones of Brighton Street as shown on plan.

Streetlighting

There is an existing streetlight on an existing power pole at the north side of the proposed raised pedestrian crossing however this streetlight will not be adequate for the proposed pedestrian crossing. Compliant lighting in the form of a new flood light is to be provided on the existing power pole. Please note this is subject to final design by a Lighting Consultant and the scope of works may vary to that described above.

Additional information

Relevant vehicles 6.4m SRV and 8.8m MRV (garbage truck) turning paths movements for this case are provided under existing and proposed conditions in Attachment 1.

Consultation

A letter outlining the proposal was mailed to (18) properties (23 letters) in Railway Street and Brighton Street, Petersham. (See also map of consultation area Figure 2).

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The project is listed in Council’s Traffic Facilities Capital Works program to be carried out in 2025/2026, subject to funding and programing. The work is estimated to be around $108,000.

A map of a neighborhood

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Figure 2. Consultation Area Map

Submissions were closed on Friday 26 September 2025.

(2) resident submissions were received raising objections or concerns. These are tabled below with the officer’s response provided.

Residents Comments

Officers Response

Objection/concerns raised by Resident No.1.

· The plan is a waste of time. Can not see the project warranted.

This work will limit/loss of street parking.

· The location has been identified under the Petersham North LATM [refer to Background above] to require and warrant a crossing to improve pedestrian safety at this location.

· The loss of parking is essential to accommodate the crossing and is minimised by constructing the crossing near to the corners of the intersection to occupy the existing ‘No Stopping’ zones.

Objections/concerns raised by Resident No.2.

· The proposed crossing doesn't serve the needs of this area's pedestrian traffic at the identified location. Majority of train commuters crossing Brighton Street from Petersham Train Station are the approximately 1,000 students of Fort Street High School; these students don't follow Railway Street to/from school, but rather Palace Street, which is one block West (the students turn West along Terminus Street as soon as they've left the train station). By placing the proposed raised crossing along Railway Street, we are ignoring the safest route already identified by majority of consistent users.

· The foot-traffic identified above also helps two local businesses - Brighton the Corner and Brothers Ben Cafe - stay open. If we attempt to place a 'safe crossing' so far East, this can divert 'foot traffic,' and result in a loss of income for both businesses. The locals of Northern Petersham don't want these businesses to shut.

· There are already two at-grade pedestrian routes across Brighton Street - along Railway Street used by the Fort Street students. Council could convert one of these into an at-grade zebra-striped crossing, which (presuming zebra-stripe crossings are safer) would be better for the students, and wouldn't reduce the foot traffic for the local businesses.

· The proposed placement of the crossing - which gives pedestrians assured right-of-way over vehicle traffic - is only 1 block West of the intersection with Crystal Street. The intersection at Crystal Street is part of a short but complex stretch of road hosting two T-intersections featuring stoplights and a right-turn lane from the Northbound onto an Eastbound feeder road towards the City - which leaves only a single Northbound lane for traffic moving towards Parramatta Road and East Leichhardt. And that particular lane is the one that branches onto Brighton Street. When the mass of Fort Street students and commuters stream across the proposed crossing in the numbers we've witnessed on a typical school day they will halt Westbound drivers on Brighton Street, allowing the traffic to back-up all the way onto Crystal Street and causing more congestion at peak hour. (It will also prevent the Crystal Street's Southbound right-turn lane from crossing onto Brighton Street in the scant time permitted by the lights.)

· In terms of the proposed structures, Plan 10357 offers a 4m-wide raised crossing, along with concrete bibs and landscaped kerb blisters in the approach to the crossing/intersection. The kerbing blisters require the removal of 2 car spaces from local street parking. Why sacrifice these spaces for the blisters? I understand it may be because narrowing the road will promote the slower and more-cautious driving of those nearing the crossing/roundabout. But we already have narrowed road segments one block West - at the roundabout intersection of Brighton and Palace Streets. The road is narrowed in the approaches to that intersection by the median/islands which guard the at-grade crossings there; while these crossing aren't currently zebra-striped, they are 3m wide and come with staple-bollards to protect pedestrians on the island.

· I believe that adding a new raised crossing with landscaped kerbing blisters on Brighton Street to be unnecessary, especially when it costs the locals parking spaces; it appears unnecessary in the face of the fact that we could upgrade the existing crossing(s) at Palace Street to serve the existing traffic needs without adversely affecting the local residents and businesses. No need for bibs or raising but mark it zebra at-grade; if regulations mandate, the existing cut-outs on the median blisters can be expanded to 4m width, although the current 3 m width seems to work well. If raising and bibs are mandated, I would suggest working Westward from the Western at-grade crossing to build-out the required crossing structure along Palace Street.

Response to resident comments point 1 and 2

· Pedestrian movement counts were completed on various days at different times which indicate a pedestrian crossing at this location is warranted and would meet the conditions of approval as required by Transport for NSW and council pedestrian crossing warrant guidelines. It is acknowledged that the main pedestrian desire line is to cross Brighton Street at Palace Street and, in this respect, Council is also proposing to install a raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing at this location which will serve the movements to and from the local shops and school.

Response to resident comments point 3.

· The said pedestrian routes are presumed right at the intersection. The proposed crossing is slightly set back to minimise conflict with turning traffic at the roundabout. It is raised to assist in traffic calming. It is properly aligned and allows improved safety and access for pedestrians (particularly elderly and disability) in crossing over from the footpath.

Response to resident comments point 4.

· The observation is noted. It is acknowledged that when school finishes, there are large numbers of students from High Schools which make their way to nearby rail stations and bus stops. This causes temporary inconvenience for motorists, however this is short lived and temporary. The raised pedestrian crossing will help the students cross safely and possibly more efficiently over the current arrangement.

Response to resident comments point 5

· The kerb blisters-built outs provide a protected shorter distance for pedestrian to cross over the road. They also assist to reduce the ‘No Stopping sight distant clearance under Transport for NSW guidelines. Pedestrian crossings without kerb island blisters require further ‘No stopping’ clearance hence further loss of parking.

The crossings of question in Palace Street are ‘Pedestrian Refuges’ which can have openings constructed under current Transport for NSW guidelines to about 3 metres. New pedestrian(zebra) crossings have zebra markings needing to be minimum 3.6m long under Transport for NSW guidelines. The raised crossing platform is constructed 4metres in width to house in the length of the zebra markings.

Response to resident comment point 6.

· The proposed location has been identified under the Petersham North LATM [refer to Background above] to require and warrant a crossing for improved pedestrian safety at this location.

The Petersham North LATM also recommended raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing(s) at Palace Street and Brighton Street. This will be further investigated under detail design and reported to a future LTF meeting.

Conclusion

It is recommended that the detailed design plan for the proposed raised pedestrian (zebra) crossing in Brighton Street at Railway Street, Petersham and associated signs and line markings (as per Design Plan No.10357 shown in Attachment 1) be APPROVED.

ATTACHMENTS

1.⇩

Proposed raised Pedestrian (zebra) crossing in Brighton Street at Railway Street, Petersham and associated turning paths

1.⇩	Approved detail design plan of kerb extension/road widening in Hurlstone Avenue at Prospect Road
2.⇩	Extract of Traffic Committee meeting 17 March 2025 relating to the Item 8
3.⇩	Traffic Management Plan (TMP)

1.⇩	Elizabeth Street at Edwin Street (North), Croydon - raised pedestrian crossing - Design plan
2.⇩	Garbage truck swept path movement- left from Elizabeth St. into Edwin Street North
3.⇩	Garbage truck swept path movement- right from Edwin Street North into Elizabeth St

Resident feedback	Council response
Your proposal is good. But it needs proper monitoring. There's already a ‘No Stopping’ section between Sunnyside Avenue and Fred Street, and people still park there anyway.	Noted. Council’s Compliance will be advised of this matter.
Parking in Fred Street, Lilyfield is also needed to be improved as 10m ‘No Stopping’ zone is not enforced. Vehicles are parked in an angular way without a formal signage. Getting in and out is difficult for trucks due to illegal parking close to the intersection of Cecily Street and Fred Street. Max 8-hour parking to be introduced to discourage long-term parking.	The parking issues in Fred Street and will investigate this as a separate matter.
I do not support ‘No Stopping’ zone or ‘No Parking’ zone in Cecily Street. It is already hard to park in the street. I have lived and been using this street for more than 30 years and we have not needed it. People need tolerance and patience in our streets.	Comment on parking availability is noted, however the proposal has prioritised road safety and driver visibility. Statutory 10m ‘No Stopping’ zones are signposted to further enforce intersection safety, and additional ‘No Parking’ is intended to improve visibility at the road bend, where approaching sight distance is currently limited by parked vehicles.
Extend the ‘No Parking’ zone opposite No.48 and 52 Cecily Street to improve the driveway access	The width of Cecily Street at the subject location is 6.7m which is adequate for movements in and out of driveways. In this situation extending the ‘No parking’ zone is not considered required at this time.
An addition of 'No Parking' zone to Cecily St, outside 56 Cecily St. Vehicles frequently park on both corners of Cecily Street and Brockley Street, significantly obstructing drivers' visibility when turning from Brockley Street into Cecily Street. This creates a dangerous situation and has led to accidents in the past.	Noted. The width of Cecily Street south of Brockley Street is 7.8m which is wider than the other sections. Council’s Compliance will be advised of this matter.
It would greatly assist to have car spaces marked out on Cecily St so that there are no cars parked right up to the corners which make it difficult for pedestrians to use footpath and impedes visibility.	‘No Stopping’ signs are installed at intersection to outline where vehicles should not park.
The ‘No Stopping’ and ‘No Parking’ near Brockley Street are completely unnecessary as hardly anyone goes in and out of this street. Traffic is not particularly fast here. The ‘No Stopping’ zones on either side of the unnamed lane are also unnecessary. Parking is always in short supply on Cecily Street, and we need as much as possible consistent with safety.	The proposal has prioritised safety and driver visibility. It must be noted that the statutory 10 m ‘No Stopping’ zones are signposted as part of this plan. The proposed ‘No Parking’ zone aims to improve visibility at the bend, where sight distance can be limited by parked vehicles.

1.⇩	Parking inventory and survey results
2.⇩	Consultation parking plan
3.⇩	Final parking plan

1.⇩	Traffic Guidance System (TGS) plan and detour plan
2.⇩	Traffic Management Plan (TMP)- 'Summer Hill Social' event 2026

Street Name	Elizabeth Street
Carriageway width (m) kerb to kerb	10m
Carraigeway type	Two-way, one travel lane each direction.
Classification	Local-collector
Speed Limit km/h	50
85^th percentile speed km/h	-
Vehicles per day (vpd)	Approx. 8000
TfNSW available reported crash history (last 5 years)	1 in 2023, Rum 21- right through at the intersection, Moderate injury. 1 in 2024, Rum 44- Edwin Street, south of Elizabeth Street o/s 99-199 with parked vehicles manourvering. Towaway-non injury.
Parking arrngements	Unrestricted parking both sides.

Side intersecting street	Edwin Street (North)