m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

15 December 2008

The meeting commences at 6.30pm. If members of the public are

not interested in any business recommended to be considered in

Closed Session or there is no such business, Council will ordinarily

  commence consideration of all other business at 7pm.

 


 

Notice of Meeting

 

Dear Councillors

 

Notice is given of the Ordinary Council Meeting, to be held in the Council Chambers, Lower Ground Floor, 48 Longueville Road, Lane Cove on Monday 15 December 2008 commencing at 6:30PM. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Yours faithfully



Peter Brown

General Manager

 

Council Meeting Procedures

 

The Council meeting is chaired by the Mayor, Councillor Ian Longbottom. Councillors are entitled to one vote on a matter. If votes are equal, the Chairperson has a second or casting vote. When a majority of Councillors vote in favour of a Motion it becomes a decision of the Council. Minutes of Council and Committee meetings are published on Council’s website wwww.lanecove.nsw.gov.au by 5pm of the Thursday following the meeting.

 

The Meeting is conducted in accordance with Council's Code of Meeting Practice. The order of business is listed in the Agenda on the next page. That order will be followed unless Council resolves to modify the order at the meeting. This may occur for example where the members of the public in attendance are interested in specific items of the agenda.

 

Members of the public may address the Council Meeting on any issue for a maximum of 3 minutes during the public forum which is held at the beginning of the meeting. All persons addressing the Meeting must speak to the Chair. Speakers and Councillors will not enter into general debate or ask questions.

 

If you do not understand any part of the information given above; require assistance to participate in the meeting due to a disability; or wish to obtain information in relation to Council, please contact Council’s Manager Governance on 99113525.

 

Please note meetings held in the Council Chambers are recorded on tape for the purposes of verifying the accuracy of minutes and the tapes are not disclosed to any third party under section 12(6) of the Local Government Act, except as allowed under section 18(1) or section 19(1) of the PPIP Act, or where Council is compelled to do so by court order, warrant or subpoena or by any other legislation.

 

 

 


Ordinary Council 15 December 2008

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO COUNTRY

 

MATTERS RECOMMENDED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER TO BE CONSIDERED IN CLOSED COMMITTEE

 

Confidential Items

 

1.       Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 39

SUBJECT: NSROC Tender for Supply; Supply & Delivery and Supply, Delivery & Laying of Asphaltic Concrete

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (c) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; it further being considered that discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to public interest by reason of the foregoing and Tender details, should they be revealed, may result in commercial disadvantage to parties involved in the tender process.

Some information provided to council by tenderers is provided on the basis that council will treat it as commercial in confidence.  It is not in the public interest to reveal all details of these tenders or the assessment process. Tenderers have provided sensitive information about their operations in the confidence that their details will not be made public by council. The practice of publication of sensitive information provided by tenderers could result in the withholding of such information by tenderers and reduction in the provision of information relevant to council’s decision..

 

2.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 74

SUBJECT: Access to Private Roadways for Council's Waste Contactors (URM)

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (g) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice as comprises a discussion of this matter, that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege; it further being considered that discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to public interest by reason of the foregoing and and in this instance the report contains advice concerning possible litigation.

 

3.       Human Services Division Report No. 18

SUBJECT: Tender for Cleaning Contract

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (c) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; it further being considered that discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to public interest by reason of the foregoing and Tender details, should they be revealed, may result in commercial disadvantage to parties involved in the tender process.



Some information provided to council by tenderers is provided on the basis that council will treat it as commercial in confidence.  It is not in the public interest to reveal all details of these tenders or the assessment process. Tenderers have provided sensitive information about their operations in the confidence that their details will not be made public by council. The practice of publication of sensitive information provided by tenderers could result in the withholding of such information by tenderers and reduction in the provision of information relevant to council’s decision.

  

public forum

 

Members of the public may address the Council Meeting on any issue for 3 minutes.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

4.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 1 DECEMBER 2008

 

Petitions

 

5.       Petition No. 1

SUBJECT: Parking - Lane Cove Village Shopping Centre

 

Orders Of The Day

 

6.       Order Of The Day No. 30

SUBJECT: Tabling of Pecuniary Interest Returns by Councillors

 

7.       Order Of The Day No. 31

SUBJECT: Citizenship Ceremony - Australia Day 2008

 

General Managers Reports

 

8.       General Managers Report No. 34

SUBJECT: Little Lane Carpark Redevelopment

 

9.       General Managers Report No. 37

SUBJECT: Woolworths Lane Cove Market Square - Status Report

 

Open Space and Urban Services Division Reports

 

10.     Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 40

SUBJECT: Recreation Action Plan and Playground Strategy

 

11.     Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 42

SUBJECT: Bicycle Plan

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

12.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 514

SUBJECT: 1-16 Duntroon Avenue, St Leonards

 

13.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 71

SUBJECT: Lane Cove Village Structure Plan

 

14.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 73

SUBJECT: Container Deposit Legislation

 

15.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 75

SUBJECT: Delegated Authority Report - November 2008

 

16.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 76

SUBJECT: Draft Little Lane Development Control Plan

 

17.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 77

SUBJECT: Telstra Payphones

 

Human Services Division Reports

 

18.     Human Services Division Report No. 17

SUBJECT: Federal Funding - Federal Government Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program

 

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

 

 

   


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Petition No. 1

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Petition No. 1

Subject:          Parking - Lane Cove Village Shopping Centre    

Record No:    SU2708 - 44595/08

Author(s):       Craig Wrightson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council is in receipt of a petition from 45 people requesting Council re-examine the recent changes made to parking in the Rosenthal Ave Carpark, it is recommended a Report be submitted on the matter.

 

Discussion

 

Council is in receipt of a petition from 45 people stating: -

 

“We the undersigned shopkeepers and business owners of Lane Cove Village Shopping Centre hereby petition Lane Cove Council, Lane Cove Chamber of Commerce and Lane Cove Alive to re-examine the changes made to parking in Lane Cove Rosenthal Street Carpark.  Since the allowable parking time has been reduced to 60 and 90 minutes out businesses have experienced less customers and sales reductions.  The time limits imposed do not give people the time necessary to do their business, without worrying about being booked.  Business owners and Professional Service suppliers are receiving complaints from their customers/ clients who are now abandoning Lane Cove as a destination for shopping”.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That a Report be submitted to Council in relation to the parking arrangements in the Rosenthal Avenue Carpark.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

      


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Order Of The Day No. 30

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 30

Subject:          Tabling of Pecuniary Interest Returns by Councillors    

Record No:    SU2095 - 44391/08

Author(s):       Ian Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to table the Pecuniary Interest Returns of councillors who have not submitted a return for the period to 30 September 2008, as they were only elected in September this year.  Councillors who were elected in September (i.e excluding those persons who were   councillors during the previous term) are required to lodge a return within the three-month period after becoming a councillor.

 

Discussion

 

Section 449(3) of the Local Government Act 1993 (“LG Act”) requires councillors (i.e. excluding returning councillors) to lodge a “Disclosures by Councillors and Designated Persons Return” within the three-month period after becoming a councillor.  The general manager must keep a register of lodged returns and table lodged returns at a meeting of Council in accordance with Section 450A of the LG Act.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note the tabling of Pecuniary Interest Returns of newly elected councillors.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Order Of The Day No. 31

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 31

Subject:          Citizenship Ceremony - Australia Day 2008    

Record No:    SU28 - 44560/08

Author(s):       Anita Holesgrove 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

An Australia Day Citizenship Ceremony will be held in the Council Chamber on Monday 26 January 2009 commencing at 9:00am.

 

A Councillor is required to attend the ceremony and speak to the new citizens about local government.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

 

That a Councillor nominate to attend the Ceremony on 26 January 2008 and speak to the new citizens about local government

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

   


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

General Managers Report No. 34

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    General Managers Report No. 34

Subject:          Little Lane Carpark Redevelopment    

Record No:    SU3164 - 41460/08

Author(s):       John Lee 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report re-presents to Council concepts for the redevelopment of Little Lane Carpark following the decision of the previous Council to defer consideration of the matter, and recommend to the incoming Council that they:-

 

a)         advise Davis Langdon (Aust) P/L that it has endorsed Scenario 3 as set out in their “Feasibility Study and  Options Analysis Report” dated 30 July 2008 as its preferred outcome for the site, subject to further refinement during the next phase; and

 

b)         authorise the General Manager to engage Davis Langdon  (Aust) P/L to proceed with Stage 2 including the preparation of the documentation for a development application, when the Section 69 certificate in respect of LEP 2008 has been submitted to the Minister.

 

Davis Langdon (Aust) P/L was appointed as the lead consultant to progress the redevelopment of the Little Lane Carpark.  Davis Langdon have teamed up with architects Turner + Associates P/L forming the main consultancy team (DL_TA) for the redevelopment of the Little Lane Carpark. 

Their report entitled “Feasibility Study and Options Analysis Report” dated 30 July 2008 circulated to all Councillors (and publicly available on the web) completes the first stage of their commission by presenting their concepts with a recommendation of a preferred scenario.

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 7 April 2008, Council also requested the General Manager, when reporting back at the end of Stage 1, to advise on progress to incorporate an at grade link between the public carpark within this project and Longueville Road.Councillors were updated on this project by David Hartigan of Davis Langdon and Nic Perrin for Nicholas + Turner & Associates at a workshop on 10 November 2008 examining changes in the economic outlook.

 

Background

 

Redevelopment of the Little Lane Carpark was identified in the Major Projects Strategic Plan 2007-2016.  Subsequently, a report prepared by Scape Scott Carver P/L set out a number of draft development controls and a preferred building envelope to guide redevelopment of this site.  A major feature of the building envelope achieved good solar access into the existing residential units to the south of the carpark site.

 

During the period of the previous Council, Councillors workshopped a number of Scenarios during a presentation by David Hartigan of Davis Langdon and Nic Perrin for Nicholas + Turner & Associates (DL_TA).  Councillor responses to that presentation were provided to DL_TA for consideration.  A further scenario has been developed addressing Councillor responses.

 

Discussion

 

The primary reason for undertaking the proposed redevelopment of the Little Lane carpark is to increase the amount of public carparking on that site as part of an overall strategy to meet a shortfall of public carparking within the Lane Cove Village Centre in a financially responsible manner.

 

The appointment of DL_TA is in 2 stages.  Stage 1 investigated a number of concepts concluding with a preferred scenario which best meets the objectives set out by Council in December 2007.  Following Council endorsement of a preferred scenario, DL_TA would be recommissioned to complete Stage 2 to prepare a DA.  The development application would not be lodged for assessment until the LEP 2008 has been gazetted, as the proposal would be inconsistent with the current zoning of special uses carpark.

 

DL_TA Executive Summary Extract

 

The following extract form the DL_TA report is from their Executive Summary:-

 

Lane Cove Council has recently engaged Davis Langdon and Turner + Associates to prepare documentation for Phase 1 – Concept Design for the Little Lane Car Park Redevelopment.

A number of land use options have been investigated:-

 

·     “Aged Care Living”

·     “Senior Living” Apartments

·     Tourism – Boutique Hotel / Serviced Apartments

·     Commercial Office

·     Retail

·     Community

·     Residential Apartments

 

Each of the options has some merit, with the residential use however being demonstrably better.

In order to satisfy Council’s stated objectives, a ‘mixed use’ element is required to be introduced. Various combinations of community space, retail / cafe facilities and commercial / professional suites have been assessed.

 

A number of Scenarios based on the residential model have been assessed in detail:-

 

·          Scenario 1: An eight storey building with six residential floors, one floor mixed retail and community, and one floor commercial. (34 Units).

·          Scenario 2:   An eight storey building with seven residential floors and one mixed retail and community.  (42 Units).

·          Scenario 3:  An eight storey building with seven residential floors and one mixed retail and community which shows increased FSR awarded in exchange for the provided Community space and / or public car parking. (42 Units).

·          Scenario 4: The low rise, perimeter block form as suggested in the draft Village Structure Plan for Precinct 6 has been investigated.  Whilst a multi-building option is meritorious in principle, once more detailed building layouts were examined it became clear that a low rise, perimeter block format was not suitable within the specific site constraints.

 

The car parking solution proposed for the project provides for a total of 262 car parks over five levels.  This solution allows for a continuous helical design whereby the car park floor slab is built to a continual 1:28 fall, (similar in principle to the New Sydney Opera House Car Park).

 

All the options developed for the Little Lane Carpark Development are based on the following design principles:-

 

·          Considerate urban response

·          Sound environmental social and economical design principles

·          Functional excellence

·          Expressional delight

 

Colliers International Consultancy and Valuation was engaged to undertake an appraisal of the property and its potential land uses. Having established that a residential development with some mixed use would offer the best and highest use, they were instructed to offer an opinion as to the Gross Realisation for a number of the Scenarios to be developed. Turner + Associates Architects provided concept sketches for a number of these Scenarios. Davis Langdon’s Quantity Surveyors subsequently undertook an indicative cost estimate for the scope of works outlined for each of the Scenarios. Finally, Davis Langdon undertook a basic feasibility analysis of each of the Scenarios, deducting from the Gross Realisation identified by Colliers the construction, sales, leasing and finance costs, to arrive at a Net Revenue position for each Scenario.

 

The following issues can be fine tuned in Phase 2:-

 

·          Active ESD technologies

·          Details of the street frontages / activation

·          Car parking

·          Use and size of the areas within the Community Centre

·          Development Strategy

 

Should DL_TAA be re-engaged to deliver Phase 2 – Design Development of the project, we would develop, and ultimately recommend to Council a suitable Development Strategy. This strategy would sit below Council’s own Probity Plan for the project, and would form a central plank of the overall Project Risk Plan.  In accordance with our brief, Council will need to endorse a preferred concept prior to engaging Davis Langdon and Turner + Associates to undertake Phase 2 and develop the DA documentation.  This endorsement would provide direction on the general building envelope and FSR but would allow flexibility to fine tune the relative mix and sizes of the use elements.

 

It is our recommendation that Council endorse Scenario 3 as the preferred option. This then allows detailed design work to proceed as part of Phase 2 – Design Development and preparation of Development Application documentation.

 

Carparking

 

The report identified two options for carparking, one being 5 levels within the site and the other extending approx 5.5m under Little Lane with 4 levels.  The latter adds an additional $1.4m to the project, however it better caters for the residential component on the upper level rather than being split over two levels.  The merits of both options will be considered in more detail during Stage 2.  DL_TA cost estimates are based on 5 levels of carparking within the site.

 

DL_TA Recommendations

 

The following recommendations from the DL_TA report are considered appropriate:

 

Davis Langdon and Turner + Associates Architects, in conjunction with Colliers International Consultancy and Valuation, have investigated a broad range of land use options and concluded that a development of predominantly residential apartments, with some element of community / performance space and retail / café, would be the best use of the site at Little Lane car park.

A number of Scenarios have been developed showing possible combinations of these uses. Cost reports, revenue projections and development feasibilities for these various scenarios have been appended to this report.

 


Scenario 3 as presented demonstrates how the floor space might be maximised, producing the optimum number and mix of units. An eight storey building with seven residential floors and one mixed retail and community space is proposed. It shows a nominal FSR adjustment awarded in exchange for the provided Community space and additional public car parking.

By adopting the best and highest land use option – predominately High Density Residential - Council can be assured of achieving one of its key objectives, the maximisation of the Commercial returns from the site, while still meeting its car parking, ESD and community commitments.

In accordance with our brief, Council will need to endorse a preferred concept prior to engaging Davis Langdon and Turner + Associates to undertake Phase 2 and develop the DA documentation.  This endorsement would provide direction on the general building envelope and FSR but would allow flexibility to fine tune the relative mix and sizes of the use elements.

 

It is our recommendation that Council endorse Scenario 3 as the preferred option. This then allows detailed design work to proceed as part of Phase 2 – Design Development and preparation of Development Application documentation.

 

By electing to proceed to the next Phase, Council will maintain control of the project during the fine tuning process, which can be determined during further stakeholder workshops.

By maintaining control over the process through Phase 2, Council will:-

 

·          be afforded the best opportunity to determine the optimum mix and relative size of the various residential, community, retail and car parking spaces

·          ensure the optimum Sustainability outcome for the project, balancing commercial returns with Council’s ESD commitments and be best placed to control the final design (materials, colours, bulk, context, finishes, active and passive ESD initiatives, etc)

·          ensure it maintains control over issues important to the Community, such as the activation of street frontages (Little Lane and Little St.); links to other facilities such as the Aquatic Centre and Pottery Green; and the activation of the landscaped roof on the car park to ensure high quality public open spaces.

·          de-risk the design development phase of the project, thus ensuring the maximum possible commercial returns to Council

·          allow Council to make the decision to sell the site or to develop the site post Approval of the DA

·          allow Council to call for tenders from either Developers or Builders, armed with very robust documentation, thus facilitating competitive pricing

·          be assured it is beyond any reproach from a probity perspective

·          allow Council to determine at any later stage whether it will sell the retail space or maintain ownership  and lease the space for on-going income receipts

 

Draft Development Control Plan

 

DL_TA have confirmed that the concepts presented to Council are not inconsistent with the site specific Little Lane draft development control plan (LLDCP) placed on public exhibition.  The changes proposed to the draft LLDCP do not appear to require a redesign of the concepts.  The Statement of Environmental Effects to accompany the DA will address how the aims and objectives of the LLDCP have been addressed.

 

DLEP 2008

 

While final certainty on the planning controls is subject to gazettal of the LEP 2008, it is now proposed that Stage 2 proceed to allow lodgement and assessment once the Section 69 certificate in respect of DLEP 2008 has been submitted to the Minister.  This allows the design in Stage 2 to proceed concurrent with the gazettal process.

 

At Grade Link between the Public Carpark and Longueville Road

 

Access from the public carpark will be achieved to all levels of the carpark from the main foyer of the building.  The foyer has direct and quite visible access from the public domain on Little Lane.  In discussion with DL_TA and Colliers International, they are of the opinion that it is preferable to encourage activation of the public domain of the development by having the public enter /exit the building and from / to Little Lane rather than a direct link from the carpark to the western side of Little Lane.

 

There are two existing links through to Longueville Road from Little Lane adjacent to the development.  The location of the main foyer presents well for a direct link with lift as part of a future redevelopment of one or more Longueville Road properties.  Initial discussions with one owner have been positive, although there is no timetable for redevelopment at this stage.  A link through one of the arcades at the northern part of Longueville Road maximizes the retail concept of “wallets past windows” identified in the Tactix 4 study.  The pedestrian arcade within the recently redeveloped 104 Longueville Road includes a lift to all levels from its Little Lane foyer.  Access from the proposed Little Lane carpark and foyer to that arcade will still present a good pedestrian desire line through to Longueville Road with an at grade crossing of Little Lane and either the lift or internal stairs.

 

Previous Community Consultation

 

Consultation with the community in regard to the redevelopment of the Little Lane Carpark is summarised as:-

 

a)         IRIS Research

As part of consultation on the Major Projects Strategic Management Plan, the Little Lane site was considered.  82% supported redevelopment of this site.  IRIS Research presented respondents with the following base data:

(i)         Underground / structural public car parking with access from Little Street for around 150 spaces, serving the Aquatic Centre, CBD long term parking and commuter parking;

(ii)        Commercial units at street level possibly including outdoor dining;

(iii)       Residential and / or commercial units above;

(iv)       Private car parking for residential uses;

(v)        Potential (possibly in association with a private sector development) for a footbridge between the project over Little Lane to one of the arcades through to Longueville Road, with lift access from the public car park;  and 

(vi)       Community meeting rooms.

 

With structural car parking costing in the order of $30,000 to 40,000 per car space, the project would need to include around $6m of saleable real estate to achieve additional car parking on the site at no cost to Council.  Using the proposed development controls in the draft Comprehensive LEP 2007, as a guide only, net revenue from the project toward other community projects is estimated to be in the order of $3 million. This car park has 86 spaces A footbridge over Little Lane to access Longueville Road is being considered.  At this early stage, the location of the footbridge is not important.

IRIS reported that retention of most of the trees along Little Street has been identified as an important issue in maintaining the streetscape;

b)         Public exhibition of the Major Projects Plan included 2 days manned display in the Plaza;

c)         Council’s questionnaire distributed to residents adjacent to developments in the Major Projects Plan, on the web, available at Council and in the Library and handed out in the Plaza.  With 79% of respondents supporting or could live with redevelopment of the site, the results were of the same order as the independent IRIS Research;

d)         Presentation to Greenwich progress Association 15 August 2007;

e)         Presentation to Community Leaders Group 16 August 2007;

f)          Presentation to Lane Cove West Residents Association 16 October 2007;

g)         Scott Carver held 2 workshops with the Little Lane Carpark community including the Village.  The first workshop on the 4 September 2007 identified issues and the second on 20 November 2007 explained how the preferred building envelope addressed those issues;

h)         17 December 2007, Council endorsed the building envelope and draft planning controls for the site set out in the Scott Carver Report;

i)          The Scott Carver Report was placed on public exhibition as a supporting document to the DLEP 2007; and

j)          The Little Lane carpark DCP has been placed on public exhibition and is the subject of a contemporaneous report to this Ordinary Meeting of Council.

 

Workshop 10 November 2008

 

David Hartigan and Nicolas Perrin presented Councillors with a review of the project, a discussion on the social inclusions and on changes in the economic outlook from their August 2008 report.  Councillors were also provided with copies of previous relevant reports including the Scott Carver draft planning controls and Davis Langdon Concepts report dated August 2008.

In summary, Council should ensure that they are in a position to benefit from lower interest rates, lower labour costs (associated with higher unemployment), falling prices for key building products and increased competition associated with a downturn in building construction over the coming months.  It is understood that Council’s key objectives for the site has not changed.

An application for funding under the Green Precinct will also be made.  If successful, this could lead to a grant up to $1.5m.

A question was raised in regard to the bicycle paths through the site.  Any cyclist along Little Street having an origin / destination in or beyond Phoenix Street or south of Central Ave will use Little Street or Central Ave.  The difference in levels between Little Street and the podium over the carpark is not suitable to creating a bicycle path through the site.  In any event, cyclists would still need to traverse either Little Street or central Ave to reach Longueville Road.

In response to a question raised in regard to sustainable initiatives in linking this development with sustainable measures being examined for cogeneration (heating / powering) for the Aquatic Centre, any benefits identified such as spare electricity or spare heating will be examined during the DA stage and during the detailed construction design stage.  The DA will also include an examination of the energy efficiencies of the proposal when compared to the energy usage of a “standard building” of similar usage.

 

Ongoing Consultation

 

Given the level of community consultation to date on this project, it would be appropriate to engage in further consultation in regard to the building form if the consultants proposed a different built form.  Consultation with key stakeholders will be undertaken during the DA stage to refine the community use(s).  Further workshops with Councillors are expected during the detailed design phase to discuss critical elements.  The draft final design will also be workshopped with Council prior to lodgement of the Development Application.

 

Relationship to the Village Structure Plan

 

The Little Lane precinct is identified in the draft Village Structure Plan.  There are two separate matters from the Structure Plan that need discussion at this time.

 


Built Form

 

While supporting the LEP 2008 FSR controls for the site, the draft Village Structure Plan suggest that a lower level perimeter block built form is a more suitable design option in achieving a similar density.  Earlier versions of the Structure plan referenced the Mondrian as a suitable example and the draft retains reference to The Point at Pyrmont.  Both of these examples are useful in comparing the spatial aspects of this site to built forms from awarded designs. 

 

Attachment 1 overlays the Mondrain on the Little Lane site with similar solar access orientation.  This overlay is useful in determining that a perimeter block form is not suitable. Attachment 2 shows the comparative site relationship of The Point, Pyrmont, noting a similar building separation to the rear of Longueville Road / Little Lane frontage to The Point.  Interestingly, the Point is developed on a site of similar size to the Little Lane Carpark plus the adjacent residential flats to the south. Attachment 3 adds dimensioned relationships of the block form proposed in the draft

 

Village Structure Plan for Precinct 6.  Key points include:-

 

a)         Very shallow unit depth of 9.5 – 10.5m for the Little Lane carpark site;

b)         Separation for the Little Lane carpark site between adjacent buildings of 6.6m and 7.4m being less than the 12m separation for a 4 storey dwelling required under SEPP 65 and the Residential Flat Design Code;

c)         Vegetation along Little Street likely to be affected

d)         The additional floor space in each of the narrow cross links may not translate into additional units as the shallow depth is a function of “T” type unit topologies; and

e)         Front setback to Little Street is 3.6m not 5m and 3.9m to Little Lane, not 2m.

 

Davis Langdon concluded that “Whilst a multi-building option is meritorious in principle, once more detailed building layouts were examined it became clear that a low rise, perimeter block format was not suitable within the specific site constraints”

 

Future Road Hierarchy

 

The draft Village Structure Plan suggests that Little Street would be suitable as an alternate route for through traffic if Longueville Road is closed to through traffic.

 

Such a proposal will require careful examination.  Little Street is primarily residential in nature with active sport adjacent in the Aquatic Centre and Pottery Green incorporating pedestrian links from Phoenix St and Kimberley Ave through to the village.  If the road hierarchy of Little Street changes from a local road to a Collector Road it would be feasible to construct an overhead footbridge from the podium over Little Street.  The increase in traffic generated by the development is unlikely to influence future road hierarchy decisions for Little Street.

 

It would also be feasible, albeit more expensive to excavate under Little Street to provide an aisle off one of the levels of carparking with perpendicular parking on either side and have a pedestrian ramp up to Little Street footpath.  High Voltage cables are located along the eastern side of Little Street.  To achieve this, most of the vegetation we have attempted to keep along Little Street would be affected. 

The building setback to Little Lane also allows future consideration of Little Lane as the alternate route to Longueville Road.  In any event it should be noted that activation of Little Lane is a key element to the success of this project.

 


Conclusion

 

The scenario preferred by Davis Langdon and Turner + Associates best meets the objectives set out by Council in December 2007 in delivering around 200 public carparking spaces on this site and is generally consistent with the aims and objectives set out in the draft development control plan.

 

Refinement of the exact mix of community/ retail space will be undertaken having regard to key stakeholder needs with a separate report to go to Council on community space options prior to the finalisation of a Development Application.

 

Having Davis Langdon proceed with Stage 2 was contemplated in the contract documents, once a preferred scenario is resolved by Council.  There is still some lead time in preparing the Development Application, and being in a position to lodge it.  Following assessment, there is still significant lead time in preparing the construction drawings and obtaining a construction certificate.  It is now recommended that Council authorise the General Manager to engage Davis Langdon (Aust) P/L to proceed with Stage 2 including the preparation of the documentation for a development application to be lodged for assessment after the Section 69 certificate in respect of LEP 2008 has been submitted to the Minister.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council :-

 

1.   Advise Davis Langdon (Aust) P/L that it has endorsed Scenario 3 as set out in their “Feasibility Study and  Options Analysis Report” dated 30 July 2008 as its preferred outcome for the site, subject to further refinement during the next phase;

 

2.   Authorise the General Manager to engage Davis Langdon (Aust) P/L to proceed with Stage 2 including the preparation of the documentation for a development application, to be lodged for assessment after the Section 69 certificate in respect of LEP 2008 has been submitted to the Minister.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

At 1 overlays the Mondrain on the Little Lane site

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

At 2 shows the comparative relationship of The Point at Pymont

3 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

At 3 shows dimensioned relationships of the block form from the draft Village Structure Plan

1 Page

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

General Managers Report No. 37

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    General Managers Report No. 37

Subject:          Woolworths Lane Cove Market Square - Status Report    

Record No:    SU1460 - 43830/08

Author(s):       John Lee 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This status report for the Woolworths Lane Cove Market Square updates Council on progress and responds to the request for information on financial outlays.

 

Progress

 

At the date of this report progress is summarised as:-

 

a)         Upper Drop Off zone completed;

b)         Lower drop off zone completed;

c)         Fabcot P/l properties demolished

d)         Rear part of Library demolished;

e)         Link Road completed – except for landscaping and footpath once the sheds are removed;

f)          Stormwater and retention tanks under the Link Road constructed;

g)         Piling completed;

h)         Top Down Slab and access to North East service yard (rear of Library Place) completed;

i)          Design completed and Construction Certificates issued by Dix Gardner (private certifier)

j)          most of the excavation has been completed except for trenches below the lower carpark level 1, construction access ramp and ancillary works;

k)         part of the lower ground floor slab concreted;

l)          Crane erected;

m)        Stormwater drain through to existing drain in 15 Austin Street completed;

n)         Sera Street retaining wall completed; and

o)         Footings and construction of columns for Level 2 carpark in progress;

 

Photomontage

 

The following montage captures the state of construction during the first week in December 2008.

 


Construction Timetable

 

The following timetable has been provided by Mainbrace Constructions, the building contractor.  As this does not include any delays, the likely completion date is likely to be the revised contract date +8 weeks:

 

 

Original Contract Dates

Revised Contract Date

Actual Date

Commence site construction

14 April 2008

14 April 2008

10 April 2008

SP1-Link Rd Completion

7 July 2008

8 August 2008

26 August 2008

SP2-Carpark 2 Access

-

-

 

SP3-Supermarket shell H/over

1 June 2008

18 July 2009

 

SP4-Mall/Specialty shell H/over

15 June 2009

29 July 2009

 

SP5–Library shell H/over

15 June 2009

29 July 2009

 

SP6-Gymnasium shell H/over

18 May 2009

4 July 2009

 

Practical Completion

10 Aug 2009

23 Sep 2009

 

 

 

Financial Timetable

 

The following summarises the financial expenditure / income for the project

 

     Carparking Contribution  - Net $1.7m

    70% in progress payments commencing after excavation completed

    30% after carpark certified as fit for purpose

     Library Shell Contribution - $650,000

    Once Library is ready for handover

     Property Contribution - $68,400

    On commencement of lease

     Library Fitout

    Consultants

    Long lead time requiring some pre orders for items such as the Library lift and HVAC

    Fitout to be tendered, and reported to Council

Appointment of Independent Certifier

 

Council has appointed Mr Doug McMillan as the Independent Certifier for this project.  His role is to ensure Council’s interests are protected in regard to quality and progress payments through to handover of the Library Shell, carparks and practical completion.  Although he is engaged by Council his costs are met by Woolworths, under the Development Deed.

 


Dust and Noise

 

Dust and noise from the development resulted in a number of complaints, some of which were investigated by WorkCover without any adverse findings.  Noise monitoring was implemented, after hard rock was encountered requiring rock to be broken out with rock picks.  As most of the excavation is now complete, both dust and noise complaints are not expected to continue to be of concern.

 

Future Reporting

 

Council is asked to reconsider the basis for reporting back to Council on the status of this development to be on an as needs basis either by exception or in relation to events that require Council approval such as the Library fitout contract.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.   Receive and note this report;

 

2.   Request the General Manager to report on the progress of this development on an as needs basis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 40

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 40

Subject:          Recreation Action Plan and Playground Strategy    

Record No:    SU1270-02 - 44235/08

Author(s):       Susan Butler 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Draft Recreation Action Plan and Draft Playground Strategy have been on public exhibition for 60 days and a number of submissions have been received. Some minor amendments have been made to these documents following the consultation period and now the final Recreation Action Plan and Playground Strategy have been prepared for adoption by Council.

 

Background

 

In October 2007 Council engaged Parkland Environmental Planners to undertake a Recreational Needs Study and prepare a Draft Recreation Plan. The Draft Recreation Action Plan was developed from the Recreation Plan prepared by these consultants.

 

The Draft Recreation Action Plan was presented to Council at its meeting on 1 September 2008 prior to be placed on public display for 60 days. The public exhibition period was done at the same time as that for the Draft Playground Strategy, which had been presented to Council earlier on 16 June 2008.

 

Discussion

 

Community consultation included:

 

·     E-newsletter sent out 28 August 2008 about a recreation survey for Gen x, alerting recipients to the Recreation Plan about to go on exhibition

·     Email sent to representatives of sporting clubs and associations on sports committee 9 September 2008

·     Advertisement in North Shore Times on Friday 10 October 2008

·     Article in Council’s Community Newsletter distributed in October

·     Article in October’s edition of The Village Observer

·     Copies on display at Libraries, Council offices from 14 October 2008

·     On line exhibition of the draft Plan and draft Strategy from 17 October 2008

·     On line survey on the draft Playground Strategy

·     Signs in playgrounds at Gore Creek and Stringybark Reserve in place by 17 October 2008

·     Letter to all residents associations sent out on 3 November 2008

·     E-newsletter sent out in early November extending the consultation period until the end of November

 

Submissions were received from a number of groups and individuals. Five comments were received on the Recreation Action Plan itself, there were 26 responses to the Gen X recreation survey and 22 submissions were received on the draft Playground Strategy. Comments were received from the Lane Cove North Residents Association (LCNRA), Stringy Bark Creek Residents Association (SBCRA) and the Bushland Management Advisory Committee (BMAC).

 


A summary of the matter raised in the submission is detailed below

 

Issue

Submission

Response

Recreation Plan

Too much is being planned for Blackman Park – needs a overall plan

LCNRA; SBCRA; BMAC

Master plan currently being prepared as part of Plan of Management for public consultation in the new year

Bike path and walking track at Tambourine Park may be a source of conflict

SBCRA; BMAC

Suggestion for children’s bike track, subject to further investigations

BMX track at Blackman Park may be a source of conflict

SBCRA; BMAC

Suggestion only, subject to further investigations

Turrumburra Park is not suitable for skate park

SBCRA; BMAC

Suggestion only, subject to further consultation

Provision of netball courts should be given higher priority

LCNRA

A complex of at least 4 courts is needed, but there is a lack of available locations

Public access to leased tennis courts needs to be increased

LCNRA

Noted

Importance of educating dog owners in good manners towards those using open space

LCNRA

Sustainability Levy project underway this year

Concerns about construction of new clubhouse at Tantallon Oval

SBCRA

Noted

Access Committee should specifically consulted when planning this strategy; refers to accessibility audit for Blackman Park etc

Individual

Noted

Playground Strategy

Suggestions for change in hierarchy - one district playground needed in Lane Cove North and upgrade at Blackman Park urgently

Individual

3 neighbourhood level playgrounds identified for Lane Cove North rather than 1 district playground; Blackman Park upgrade scheduled for 2011/12

Playground needed in shopping mall

Individual

No plans at this stage

Place for feedback from residents to affect playground design

Individual

Consultation on possible options for district and neighbourhood playgrounds included in strategy (Action 3.5)

Concerns about Gore Creek Reserve, Tambourine Park and Burns Bay Reserve are out of the way parks that many people wouldn’t know about; can be clashes with sporting events at Bob Campbell Oval within Gore Creek Reserve

Individual

Noted

Toilets and fences are very important and needed at neighbourhood playgrounds; Completely fence a couple more playgrounds; Fence all play equipment, not just dog areas

Individuals

Strategy is to fence playgrounds on busy roads as a priority; with fencing at other playgrounds considered on a case by case basis; issue of fencing between playground and dogs off leash areas to be considered further

 

Preference for rubber softfall not bark

Individuals

Higher cost to install rubber softfall, will continue to use a mixture of softfall materials, with rubber used around new toddler equipment

Shade cover needed as some equipment gets very hot

Individuals

Higher costs involved, to be considered at some playgrounds

Playgrounds near other facilities eg coffee

Individual

 

More benches for carers at some playgrounds

Individuals

Furniture provision included in all playground upgrades; additional seating installed when required

Design for the full range of children’s ages

Individual

Recent upgrades have been done with a broader range of ages in mind

Bike riding tracks for children in playground settings

Individuals

Noted

Gen X Survey

New/better play equipment

Individual

Playground strategy

More picnic shelters, more seating, more bins

Individuals

Noted

Upgraded walking tracks

Individual

Noted

Improved public toilets

Individual

Noted

Better maintenance of bushland edges

Individual

Noted

Specific Comments about Stringybark Reserve Playground

Stringybark needs upgrade – more swings, more diverse equipment, separation of playground and dogs

Individual

Playground upgrade currently being planned

Old equipment at Stringybark needs replacement with at least 4 swings

Individual

Noted

Interesting natural ground levels; stimulate the minds of 5 +

Individual

Noted

Toilet facilities needed at Stringybark

Individual

No plans to install more toilets in parks

Cycletrack for young children off the road

Individual

Noted

Specific Comments about Gore Creek Reserve Playground

Need for picnic tables near the play equipment at Gore Creek

Individuals

Furniture will be installed as part of the playground upgrade currently being planned

Location away from the picnic area is a problem, isolated from car park and toilet

Individuals

Noted

Suggestions for a bike track at Gore Creek, for children learning to ride and rollerblading, maybe near the foreshore, Blackman Park is too far away

Individual

Noted

New parks in other areas have natural themes, not brightly coloured plastic

Individual

Noted

Pedestrian access to Gore Creek reserve is difficult – long, shaded walk with no footpath, steep

Individual

Noted

Specific Comments about other Playgrounds

Fence needed on Penrose St side of Best St Reserve

Individual

To be done when funds are available

 

Marjorie York Playground needs upgrading urgently also needs toilets

Individual

Playground upgrade planned for 2009/10

Blackman Park is very desolate and needs more equipment, more barbecues and picnic tables

Individual

Playground upgrade planned for 2011/12

Don’t close the playgrounds at Finlayson St and Blackman Park tennis courts

LCNRA

Reference to closure of Finlayson Playground deleted from Recreation Action Plan; note comments about Blackman Park tennis courts

Leemon Reserve is ideal park for a playground and social interaction

Individual

Noted

Leemon Reserve and Henningham Playground are good playgrounds for young children

Individual

Noted

Playgrounds upgraded recently eg Cullen St and Henley St are quite satisfactory

Individual

Noted

 

The exhibition period coincided with the Council elections and the subsequent reforming of the community based committees.

 

Conclusion

 

The community has had the opportunity to comment on the draft Recreation Action Plan and draft Playground Strategy. Submissions have been reviewed and a number of changes as noted above have been made to the Action Plan and Strategy. The Recreation Action Plan and Playground Strategy are now ready for adoption by Council.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Recreation Action Plan and Playground Strategy dated 8 December 2008 be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Recreation Action Plan December 2008

 

 

AT‑2 View

Playground Strategy December 2008

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 42

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 42

Subject:          Bicycle Plan    

Record No:    SU3341 - 44505/08

Author(s):       Wayne Rylands 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the Council meeting of 17 November 2008, Council resolved to defer progressing the Bicycle Plan and to hold a workshop on 8 December 2008, to discuss the possible impacts of some proposed bicycle facilities on bushland.  The Draft Bicycle Plan, prepared by Jamieson Foley & Associates, in conjunction with Sustainable Transport Consultants and GTA Consultants on behalf of Council, has been amended to account for discussions at the workshop.

 

The Plan provides strategic direction for bicycles, whilst considering Council’s other policies and plans. The Bicycle Plan sets out strategies and actions for further developing the bicycle network in Lane Cove.

 

Background

 

The Draft Bicycle Plan was tabled at the Ordinary Council meeting of 17 November 2008. Several members of the community addressed the Council, concerned about the possible impacts of proposed bicycle facilities on bushland. As a result of the concerns raised, Council deferred public exhibition of the Draft Bicycle Plan and resolved:

 

1.         Councillors be supplied with a copy of the Lane Cove Plan of Management for Bushland.

 

2.         A workshop be held on 8 December 2008 to discuss the Bicycle Plan; and

 

3.         The Bicycle Plan be submitted to the Council meeting on 15 December 2008.

 

Councillors have subsequently been supplied with a copy of the Lane Cove Plan of Management for Bushland.  The Councillor Workshop scheduled for 8 December 2008 has been held, and the proposed bicycle facilities that impact on bushland were discussed and amendments have been made to the Draft Bicycle Plan.  The Draft Bicycle Plan is now resubmitted for Council’s consideration and determination.  As Councillors have been previously provided with a copy of the plan it is attached electronically only to this Report

 

Discussion

 

At the Councillor Workshop held on 8 December 2008, discussions centred on the parts of the Draft Bicycle Plan that impacted on bushland/park reserves. Specifically, the following areas were debated in detail:

 

(i)         The proposed local bicycle trail from Epping Road through Stringybark Creek, along Ventemann’s Reach, and then through Blackman Park: It was considered appropriate to remove this proposed trail from the Draft Bicycle Plan due to the possible impacts on the environmentally sensitive salt marsh areas at Ventemann’s Reach. It was also identified that the area adjacent to Stringybark Creek is privately owned.

(ii)        The proposed community trail along the rear of Lane Cove West Public School, linking Sam Johnson Way and Mars Road: Due to the possible benefits, it was considered appropriate to retain this trail to assess the community’s views on its’ possible benefits/negative impacts. This area is not classified as bushland in Council’s LEP.

(iii)       The proposed local bicycle trail through Burns Bay Reserve and Linley Point Reserve, linking Riverview Street with Burns Bay Road: Due to the possible benefits, it was considered appropriate to retain this local bicycle track in the Draft Plan to allow the community to consider and comment on the benefits/negative impacts. There is a small segment of this route that runs through bushland, but it was considered that if constructed sensibly, a bicycle path would not have any adverse impacts on the bushland (if retained to the current wide path way).

(iv)       The community trail, previously identified as The Big Walk, was a community initiative that proposes a pathway along the eastern side of the Lane Cove Golf Course, to terminate at River Road, using the proposed Regional Route along River Road instead of continuing through the bushland to Gore Creek Reserve: Although Council has not supported this previously, and it was acknowledged that it would be costly to construct and likely have some impacts on the golf course, it was decided to allow the community to provide their comments on this proposal. Previous Council investigations on this trail identified costs to be in the vicinity of two to four million dollars. This cost was calculated based on the need to make the path accessible for all user groups, including the less able bodied and mothers with prams.

 

Community Consultation

 

The Bicycle Plan was drafted after discussions were held with stakeholder groups, including Lane Cove Bicycle Committee, Bicycle NSW, RTA, liaising with Council’s Traffic, Planning, Community Services and discussions with other interest groups. Further to this preliminary consultation Community Consultation is proposed in accordance with Council’s Communication Strategy.

 

The consultation is designed to communicate the process and outcomes of the Bicycle Plan, including the identified strategies and actions for future bicycle provision in Lane Cove.  Any comments received will be reviewed and evaluated to determine whether or not to proceed with or amend any of the draft strategies and actions.

 

Draft Bicycle Plan

Level of Participation

Inform

 

Involve

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Open

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community

 

Key message givers e.g.; committees of local bicycle groups and associations; local resident & interest associations

Lane Cove Community; Local Bicycle Groups and Associations

Proposed Medium

Community newsletter; Public exhibition; E-newsletter

Briefing sessions; email notification

Online survey;

Indicative Timing

On line exhibition from 1 December 2008 until 13 February 2009

Starting

1 December 2008

Starting

1 December 2008

 

 


Method

 

The Bicycle Plan aims to provide Council with a direction for improving bicycle opportunities in Lane Cove over the next 10-20 years. The community now has the opportunity to comment on this draft Plan.

 

 

Conclusion

 

The amendments detailed in the Discussion above have been made to the Draft Bicycle Plan that is tabled for Council’s consideration and determination.

 

As stated at the Council meeting of 17 November 2008. Council aims to improve and expand the bicycle facilities in the area. The proposed Bicycle Plan Strategy includes an element on planning for the next 10-20 years and identifies ways to balance the cost of new facilities and renew existing ones. The proposed State Regional and Local Bicycle Routes are the result of workshops between Council staff, research by Traffic and Transport Consultants and workshops with key interest groups.

 

It is proposed that Council adopt the Draft Bicycle Plan for the purpose of Public Exhibition. Following the exhibition period, it is recommended, that a further report be submitted to Council for the adoption of the plan after taking into account the submissions and comments received during the exhibition period.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-  

 

1. Council adopts the Draft Bicycle Plan, dated 8 August 2008, and as amended for the                purposes of public exhibition.

 

            2. The Draft Bicycle Plan is placed on public exhibition for 60 days and community consultation take place in accordance with the Consultation Strategy outlined in the report.

 

            3. A further report is submitted to Council following the exhibition period to consider the final Bicycle Plan for adoption.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Draft Bicycle Plan, dated 8 August 2008

97 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 514

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 514

Subject:          1-16 Duntroon Avenue, St Leonards    

Record No:    DA06/55-01 - 42039/08

Author(s):       Rajiv Shankar 

 

 

Property:                     1-16 Duntroon Avenue, St. Leonards

 

DA No:                         DA06/55 – Second- Section 96 Modification.

 

Date Lodged:              17 October 2008

 

Cost of Work:              NA

 

Owner             :                       Australand

 

Author:                         Rajiv Shankar

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Section 96 modification to DA06/55 for the demolition of 14 dwelling houses and 2 semi-detached dwellings and the erection of a residential flat building development comprising 4 buildings of between 5 – 7 storeys, containing 186 dwellings, basement parking for 214 vehicles, landscaping and site works.  Stratum lot and strata subdivision.  Civil works in Duntroon Avenue.  Construction in 2 stages.

ZONE

Residential 2(a1)

 

Subject to site specific provisions contained in Clause 19I of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987 (pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 53 – Metropolitan Residential Development – Amendment No. 6)

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

No

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                 2,1/2 ,2/2, 3/2, 4/2, 5/2, 6/2, 3, 5, 7, 9,  11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25,27, 27A, 29, 31, 33, 35, Canberra Av, 566 Pacific Hwy, 12, 14 Holdsworth Ave, 68/50 Oxley St, 1/47, 4/47, 7/47, 81/47, 4/13-15, 17  Lithgow St, 8/104 Shirley St, Marshall Ave, 25/11-17 Selwyn St, 12A/18 Boronia St, 14 Park Rd,

Ward Councillors       Clr I Longbottom, Clr K Mcllroy, Clr W Gaffney, Clr A Smith, Clr S Forrest, Clr R Tudge, Clr S Bennison, Clr D Brooks-Horn, Clr P Palmer,

Progress Association:            St Leonards – Wollstonecraft Progress Association.

Other Interest Groups:  North Sydney Council.

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

 

The application has been called to the Planning and Building Committee by Councillor Tudge due to concerns raised by the neighbours.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

·     The application is a section 96 modification seeking to amend DA06/55. 

 

·     The original development was approved by Council at its meeting of 19 June 2006 and was amended on 15 September 2008.

 

·     The proposal primarily includes amendments to the proposal which are as follows:

 

o  An increase in the height of the 5 lift overruns by 200mm. 

 

o  Conversion of a two bedroom unit into a Building Management Committee (BMC) meeting room for the use by residents to satisfy SEPP 65 amenity concerns and which was a requirement of condition 8 of the consent.

 

o  Addition of one extra bedroom to an existing 2 bedroom unit as a result of the conversion of the above two bedroom unit into the Building Management Committee meeting room.

 

o  Reduction of the building clearance over a drainage easement from 8.0m to 6.0m.

 

o  Internal alteration to the approved building resulting from Council’s original conditions of consent.

 

o  The proposal originally also included modifications to the public domain plans.

 

·     The proposed modification to the public domain plans have been separated from this Section 96 modification application and have been referred to Council’s Manager Assets, as the approval on public land would to be granted under the Roads Act. The assessment of these plans is being carried out and would be determined separately and communicated directly to the applicant by Manager Assets.  The objections submitted in relation to this matter have been forwarded to the Engineers for consideration as part of their review.

 

·     A total of four objections have been received which relate to the increase in the height of the lift overruns and the public domain plans.

 

·     The application is supported and recommended for approval.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

The site was the subject of a site specific rezoning called in by the Minister for Planning and effected through an amendment (Amendment No. 6) to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 53 – Metropolitan Residential Development in 2002.  Amendment No. 6 inserted site specific controls into the Lane Cove LEP 1987 (Clause 19I).

A previous development application for the site was considered by Council in 2003.  That application proposed the demolition of the existing dwelling houses on the site and the erection of a residential flat building development comprising 4 buildings (Buildings A – D) of between 5 and 7 storeys in height containing 238 units and a floor space ratio of 2.33:1, with basement parking for 280 cars and associated landscaping and site works. 

 

That proposal was refused by Council in September 2003. 

 

An appeal to the Land and Environment Court (LEC) was subsequently dismissed.  The appeal was dismissed principally for the reason that the proposal was determined to be ‘not of good design’ and did not satisfactorily address the design quality principles of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

An alternate proposal was submitted. The proposal included the following:

 

·     Demolition of existing dwelling houses and removal of all existing vegetation;

·     Construction of a residential flat development comprising 4 buildings (Buildings A- D) that are 5 - 7 storeys in height with a floor space ratio of 1.73:1;

·     A total of 186 dwellings (including 19 adaptable units) and basement parking for 214 vehicles (195 resident spaces and 19 visitor spaces);

·     Associated landscaping and site works;

·     Stratum lot and strata subdivision;

·     Civil works including new footpath, kerb, guttering on the frontage of the development site and new driveways to the subject site, 3 new pram ramps, disabled parking and set down zone and garbage pick-up zones and parking bay, landscaping and modification of the Duntroon Avenue and River Road intersection and the Duntroon Avenue and Canberra Avenue intersection.

 

The applicant undertook extensive consultation with the community, with Council and other relevant authorities during the preparation of the subject application.  Two community information days were held and an information line and web site were established.  A public meeting was held at the Council Chambers following the lodgement of this development proposal during the exhibition period. Twenty eight submissions were received and considered by Council in the determination of the proposal.

 

The application was approved by Council at its meeting of 19 June 2006.  On 10 July 2008 a section 96 modification was lodged to amend the consent to permit advertising signs and a sales office. The application was approved on 15 September 2008.

 

SITE:

 

The site is located on the eastern side of Duntroon Avenue and northern side of River Road.  The site is bounded to the east by the North Shore Railway line.  The site is long and relatively narrow.  It has an overall length of 250m and a width which varies between 35-50m.   It has an area of 10,179 m2.  The site is fenced with temporary security mesh fencing. The development is currently under construction.  A single storey site sales office exists towards the southern corner of the site.  Site Location Plan attached (AT1).

 

PROPOSAL:

 

The proposal primarily includes amendments to the proposal which are as follows:

 

·     An increase in the height of the 5 lift overruns by 200mm. 

 

·     Conversion of a two bedroom unit into a Building Management Committee (BMC) meeting room for the use by residents to satisfy SEPP 65 amenity concerns and which was a requirement of condition 8 of the consent.

 

·     Addition of one extra bedroom to an existing 2 bedroom unit as a result of the conversion of the above two bedroom unit into the Building Management Committee meeting room.

 

·     Reduction of the building clearance over a drainage easement from 8.0m to 6.0m.

 

·     Internal alteration to the approved building resulting from Council’s original conditions of consent.

 

·     The proposal originally also included modifications to the public domain plans.

 

To facilitate the above, the applicant is seeking to amend a number of the conditions of the existing development consent.

 

Generally the modifications are considered to be minor and benign in terms of impact on the amenity of the surrounding area.  A high proportion of the modifications are internal and would not be viewed from Duntroon Avenue.

 

A detailed summary and assessment of each modification proposed is contained in the Attachments  to this report.  Please refer to the attachments.

 

Proposed Changes to the Public Domain.

 

The proposed modification to the public domain plans: Drawing numbers C10 Rev 8 & C11 Rev 9 (dated 20 Oct 2006) and prepared by Robert Bird Group have been separated from this Section 96 modification application and have been referred to Council’s Manager Assets, because the approval on public land would to be granted under the Roads Act. The assessment of these plans is being carried out and would be determined separately and communicated directly to the applicant by Manager Assets.  Copies of resident objections relevant to this matter have been provided to the Manager Assets.

 

Proposed Changes to Conditions:

 

The following, reflect the changes to the conditions of the original consent sought by the applicant to allow the proposed changes to the plans.  The struck through wording reflects deletions from the condition sought by the applicant.  Each condition following articulates the condition as amended.

 

Condition 1

 

The amendments to this condition reflect the amended architectural plans.

 

That the development be strictly in accordance with the plans drawn by Allen Jack & Colliers and numbered: DA0001-09, DA1001-05, DA1002-09, DA1003-10, DA1004-04, DA1005-11, DA2003-25, DA2004-25, DA2101-27, DA2102-26, DA2103-16, DA2104-18, DA2105-14, DA2106-14, DA2107-14, DA2108-15, DA2109-14, DA2110-15, DA2111-14, DA2112-16, DA2113-13, DA2114-13, DA2601-05, DA2602-05, DA2603-05, DA2901-11, DA2902-10, DA3102-13, DA3103-13, DA3104-15, DA3105-14, DA3201-11, DA3202-13, DA3203-10, DA3204-07, DA3205-02, DA5502-03, and  the Statement of environmental Effects prepared by JBA as amended by the Section 96(2) application approved on 15 September 2008 and all other supporting documentation and strata plans.


Officer’s Comment:    This is satisfactory as it reflects the amended plan numbers that are subject to the section 96 modification.

 

Condition 8.

 

A large meeting room is required to satisfy SEPP 65 amenity concerns.  A single level, 1 bedroom apartment with courtyard shall be converted into the Building Management Committee (BMC) meeting room for use by residents.  Sufficient area shall be converted for use as the Building Management Committee (BMC) meeting room for use by residents. A courtyard area is to be dedicated for use in conjunction with the BMC meeting room. Details of the meeting room location and facilities contained therein shall be submitted PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

Officer’s Comment:    This is satisfactory and meets the condition requirement.

 

Condition 53

 

Visitor’s Spaces.  The 19 visitor parking spaces are located under blocks A and B resulting in uneven distribution of the visitor parking arrangement. The development is to provide an appropriate level of distribution of visitor spaces. Details of compliance are to be shown on the plans PRIOR TO THE IS  ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

The applicant seeks to deleted condition 53.

 

Officer’s Comment:    No objection is raised to deletion of Condition 53 as an appropriate distribution of visitor spaces is now shown on the plans. This is satisfactory as the distribution meets the objective of the condition by providing the spaces throughout the development.

 

Condition 54

 

Northern C Lobbies.  The northern C lobbies on both levels and the Southern C lobby (level CP1) do not provide required circulation due to restricted clearance of bollards and the proximity of parking spaces.  Details of compliance are to be shown on the plans PRIOR TO THE IS ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

The applicant seeks deletion of condition 54.

 

Officer’s Comment:    This is satisfactory as appropriate lobby clearances have now been provided in the amended plans.  Council’s Engineers have examined this aspect of the proposal.

 

Condition 69

 

Bulky Waste/Recyclables.  A storage space of a minimum 6m2  Storage space shall be incorporated into the proposed garbage rooms for each building A, B, C, D, for the storage of bulky waste/recyclables details as provided on Plans No. DA-2003-25; DA-2004-25 to be provided PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.


Officer’s Comment:    The amendment suggested by the applicant is satisfactory as the amended plan provides the required amount of bulky waste/ recycling storage.

 


Condition 125

 

Drainage Easement Longitudinal Section. A longitudinal section of the Council 2.5m wide drainage easement with respect to the location of Building ‘’D’’ shall be submitted. The plans are to detail the location and depth of the existing Ø900mm drainage pipe in the 2.5m wide drainage easement.  The plan is to be endorsed by a Registered Surveyor attesting to the accuracy of such information. The plans are to show that the depths of any footings which are located within the zone of influence of the existing drainage pipe in the drainage easement are shown as being to the invert level of the pipe and/or competent bedrock. There is to be no encroachment over the drainage easement that results in adverse impacts to stormwater drainage on the site, provided that all structures are elevated at a height of 6m above the ground level. Minor structures may encroach drainage easements provided that Council is satisfied they do not result in adverse impacts to the function of the easement. provided that all structures are elevated at a height of 8m above the ground level.

 

Engineer’s Comment: This was considered by Council’s Engineers who have advised that the proposal is satisfactory subject to the words “minor structures” being substituted with the words “retaining structures”.

 

Condition 126

 

Construction near Easements, Pipelines, Culverts, or Watercourses.  Buildings and other structures are to be kept clear of natural watercourses, drainage easements, pipelines and culverts in which Council has an interest. Retaining walls may encroach drainage easements provided that Council is satisfied they do not result in adverse impacts to the function of the easement. The proposed building shall not encroach onto any existing Council stormwater line or drainage easement. Where necessary any existing Council stormwater line located on the property is to be relocated or adjusted to be clear of the proposed building to the satisfaction of Council’s Urban Services Division.

 

Engineer’s Comment: This was considered by Council’s Engineers who have raised no objection to this amendment.

 

Condition 130

 

Filling in Overland Flow path. No permanent structures or fill is permitted within the flow-path. Planting is to be located clear of overland flow path. Minor structures may be constructed within overland flow paths provided Council is satisfied they do not impede overland flow, so as to result in adverse impacts.  Liaison with Councils Landscape Architect will be required PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

Engineer’s Comment: Council’s Engineers have advised that this is satisfactory subject to the words “minor structures” being substituted with the words “retaining structures”.

 

Condition 140

 

Structure Clear of Easement – Surveyor. The proposed structure/s to be located clear of the existing Council easement.  A certificate from a Registered Surveyor is to be submitted to Council verifying the location of the structure/s after footings have been poured and before the construction of any walls. Retaining walls may be constructed within overland flow-paths provided Council is satisfied they do not impede overland flow.

 

Engineer’s Comment: This was considered by Council’s Engineers who have raised no objection to this amendment.

 


Condition 162

 

All loading and unloading in relation to the use of the premises being other than the collection of garbage and recyclable waste and the delivery and collection of furniture and household goods by removalists, is to be carried out within the property.  Loading areas are to be used for the loading and unloading of goods, materials etc and no other purpose.

 

The applicant is of the view that the revised wording improves the practicability of the condition by allowing for the use of Duntroon Avenue by vehicles collecting garbage and recyclable waste from the site and for the delivery and collection of furniture and household goods by removalists.

 

Council’s Manager Traffic’s Comment: This aspect was referred to Council’s Traffic Manager who has raised no objection to this amendment, subject to the addition of the following words:  “which can be carried out on the on-street loading zone”.

 

Condition 172

 

Provision is to be made for pedestrians (pram ramps and refuges) at the intersection of Duntroon Avenue/River Road and Canberra Avenue and Duntroon Avenue.

 

Removal of the provision of the pedestrian and pram ramps and crossing at the junction of Duntroon Avenue and River Road so that the pedestrians are not encouraged to cross there and therefore address safety issues raised by Council.

 

Engineer’s comment: The engineers do not support this amendment, and require the condition to remain as existing.

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY:

 

DA06/55- Demolition of 14 dwelling houses and 2 semi-detached dwellings and the erection of a residential flat building development comprising 4 buildings of between 5 – 7 storeys, containing 186 dwellings, basement parking for 214 vehicles, landscaping and site works.  Stratum lot and strata subdivision.  Civil works in Duntroon Avenue.  Construction in 2 stages.

 

REFERRALS:

 

Comments from the various referrals have been incorporated by way of “officer comment” in the preceding section to assist with the assessment and consideration of the section 96 proposal.

 

Manager Assets

 

Modified public domain plans, drawings C10 Rev 8 & C11 Rev 9, have been separated from this Section 96 modification application and have been referred to Manager Assets, because the approval on public land would to be granted under the Roads Act.

 

The proposed amendments have been discussed with Council’s engineer and relevant comments have been included in this report.

 

The Engineer’s comments with regard to the proposed amendments to various conditions are reproduced separately and are as follows:

 


Condition 125

 

·     The words “minor structures” to be substituted by “retaining structures”.

·     Structures elevated at a height of 6m above the ground level is acceptable.

 

Condition 126 – Acceptable.

 

Condition 140

·     The words “minor structures” to be substituted by “retaining structures”.

 

Condition 162

·     The following line to be included in the condition – (which can be carried out on the on-street loading zone)

 

Condition 172

·     The engineers do not support this amendment, and require the condition to remain as existing.  Any changes / modification to the proposed traffic islands require direct approval from (RTA) Roads and Traffic Authority.

 

96(2)(a)  The development to which the consent relates to is substantially the same development.

 

The proposed changes are relatively minor in nature and as such, the proposed development is substantially the same as to that which was originally approved by Council.

 

96(2) (b) Consultation with relevant Minister, public authority or approval bodies.

 

Not applicable.

 

96(2)(c)  Any submissions made

 

The proposal was advertised in accordance with Council’s policy.  Four submissions were received. The issues raised in the submissions have been considered and are addressed in this report.

 

79(C)(a)(i)  The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instrument

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987

 

The subject site is zoned Residential 2(a1) and is subject to site specific provisions contained in Clause 19I of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987 (pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 53 – Metropolitan Residential Development – Amendment No. 6).

 

The proposed amendments will not alter compliance of the proposal.

 

79(C)(a)(ii)  The provisions of any Draft Environmental Planning Instrument

 

There are no additional provisions that need to be considered with respect to the draft LEP.

 

79(C)(b)  The likely impacts of the development

 

It is considered that given the nature and scale of the proposed amendments, no additional significant impacts on the amenity of the adjoining and adjacent developments would occur.  The proposed internal amendments would improve functionality and amenity for future occupants.

 

79(C)(c)  The suitability of the site for development

 

An approval for the DA has already been granted and it is considered that the proposed alterations will not affect the suitability of the site for this development.

 

79(C)(d)  Any submissions made

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council’s policy. Four submissions were received. The issues raised in the submissions have been addressed as follows:

Submission from the resident of 15 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards and 14 Holdsworth Avenue Wollstonecraft.

 

Objects to the amendment to condition 162, which would now require that the all loading and unloading, other that the collection of garbage and recyclable waste and delivery and collection of furniture and household goods by removalists, to be carried out within the property.  The objector requests that all loading and unloading take place on site.

 

Comment

 

Council’s Manager Assets has stated that furniture and household goods collection can be carried out in the on-street loading and unloading zone.

 

Increase in height of the lift overruns.

 

Comment

 

The increase in height of the lift overruns is by 200mm which is considered not significant with regard to the extent of the overall development and any impact on nearby properties. The increase in the height is required to satisfy the design specifications for the lifts.

 

It is not considered that the increase in height of the overruns would result in any view losses or overshadowing.  The overruns would be viewed as part of the overall structure and the variation would not result in any undue bulk or scale issue.

 

Changes to the public Domain plans indicated in drawings C10 revision 8 and C11 revision 9.

 

Comment

 

The assessment of these plans is being carried out and would be determined separately and communicated directly to the applicant by Manager Assets.  Copies of objections have been provided to the Manager Assets.

 

Submission from the resident of 31 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards

 

The ramped access point to Newlands Park at the junction of Duntroon Avenue and the north entrance to Newlands Park does not exist any more after the earthwork, which now does not provide disabled access to the park.

 

Comment

 

The access ramp has been re-instated.

 

Limited access mobility is available to cross the footpath on Duntroon Avenue to Newlands Park with high curb to cross for an extended distance.

 


Comment

 

The crossings referred to are the old vehicular access points to the dwelling houses that have been demolished.  The redundant crossings are required to be removed as normal Council practice.  New crossings are being provided at locations to serve the development under construction.

 

Fourth Submission

 

The same as submission from the resident of 31 Canberra Avenue, St Leonards.

 

Comment

 

See above comments.

 

Generation of garbage in the park

 

Comment

 

This concern is not considered directly related to the subject application.

 

79(C)(e)  The public interest

 

The proposed development does not create any additional environmental impacts or in any way adversely affect the adjoining properties.  As such, it is considered that the development is in the public interest.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The Section 96 modification application has been assessed having regard to the relevant Planning Instruments and Council controls, as well as public good and suitability of the site. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory subject to the following conditions. The matters under Section 96 and Section 79C of the EP&A Act have been considered and are in the view of the assessing planner reasonable and satisfactory.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Pursuant to the provisions of section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the development consent D06/55 for the demolition of 14 dwelling houses and 2 semi detached dwellings and the erection of a residential flat building development comprising 4 buildings of between 5 – 7 storeys, containing 186 dwellings, basement parking for 214 vehicles, landscaping and site works, stratum and strata subdivision and civil works in Duntroon Avenue,  construction in 2 stages on 1-16 Duntroon Avenue, St. Leonards is amended in the following manner:

 

A          Amend condition 1 as follows:

 

 

1.         That the development be strictly in accordance with the plans drawn by Allen Jack & Colliers and numbered: DA0001-09, DA1001-05, DA1002-09, DA1003-10, DA1004-04, DA1005-11, DA2003-25, DA2004-25, DA2101-27, DA2102-26, DA2103-16, DA2104-18, DA2105-14, DA2106-14, DA2107-14, DA2108-15, DA2109-14, DA2110-15, DA2111-14, DA2112-16, DA2113-13, DA2114-13, DA2601-05, DA2602-05, DA2603-05, DA2901-11, DA2902-10, DA3102-13, DA3103-13, DA3104-15, DA3105-14, DA3201-11, DA3202-13, DA3203-10, DA3204-07, DA3205-02, DA5502-03, and  the Statement of environmental Effects prepared by JBA as amended by the Section 96(2) application approved on 15 September 2008 and all other supporting documentation and strata plans and as amended by the following conditions:

 

B         Amend condition 8 as follows:

 

8.         A large meeting room is required to satisfy SEPP 65 amenity concerns.  Sufficient area shall be converted for use as the Building Management Committee (BMC) meeting room for use by residents. A courtyard area is to be dedicated for use in conjunction with the BMC meeting room.

 

C         Conditions 53 & 54 are deleted.

 

D         Amend condition 69 as follows:

 

69        Bulky Waste/Recyclables.  Storage space shall be incorporated into the proposed garbage rooms for each building A, B, C, D, for the storage of bulky waste/recyclables details as provided on Plans No. DA-2003-25; DA-2004-25.

 

E          Amend condition 25 as follows:

 

125      Drainage Easement Longitudinal Section. A longitudinal section of the Council 2.5m wide drainage easement with respect to the location of Building ‘’D’’ shall be submitted. The plans are to detail the location and depth of the existing Ø900mm drainage pipe in the 2.5m wide drainage easement.  The plan is to be endorsed by a Registered Surveyor attesting to the accuracy of such information. The plans are to show that the depths of any footings which are located within the zone of influence of the existing drainage pipe in the drainage easement are shown as being to the invert level of the pipe and/or competent bedrock. There is to be no encroachment over the drainage easement that results in adverse impacts to stormwater drainage on the site, provided that all structures are elevated at a height of 6m above the ground level. Retaining structures may encroach drainage easements provided that Council is satisfied they do not result in adverse impacts to the function of the easement.

 

F          Amend condition 126 as follows:

 

126      Construction near Easements, Pipelines, Culverts, or Watercourses.  Buildings and other structures are to be kept clear of natural watercourses, drainage easements, pipelines and culverts in which Council has an interest. Retaining walls may encroach drainage easements provided that Council is satisfied they do not result in adverse impacts to the function of the easement. The proposed building shall not encroach onto any existing Council stormwater line or drainage easement. Where necessary any existing Council stormwater line located on the property is to be relocated or adjusted to be clear of the proposed building to the satisfaction of Council’s Urban Services Division.

 

G         Amend condition 130 as follows:

 

130      Filling in Overland Flow path. No permanent structures or fill is permitted within the flow-path. Planting is to be located clear of overland flow path. Retaining structures may be constructed within overland flow paths provided Council is satisfied they do not impede overland flow, so as to result in adverse impacts. Liaison with Councils Landscape Architect will be required PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

H         Amend condition 140 as follows:

 

 

 

140      Structure Clear of Easement – Surveyor. The proposed structure/s to be located clear of the existing Council easement.  A certificate from a Registered Surveyor is to be submitted to Council verifying the location of the structure/s after footings have been poured and before the construction of any walls. Retaining walls may be constructed within overland flow-paths provided Council is satisfied they do not impede overland flow.

 

I           Amend condition162 as follows:

 

162      All loading and unloading other than the collection of garbage and recyclable waste and the delivery and collection of furniture and household goods by removalists, (which can be carried out on the on-street loading zone) is to be carried out within the property.  Loading areas are to be used for the loading and unloading of goods, materials etc and no other purpose.

 

J          Condition number 172 to remain unchanged.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Location Plans - S96

4 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Table of Section 96 modifications

8 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 71

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 71

Subject:          Lane Cove Village Structure Plan    

Record No:    SU3076 - 43478/08

Author(s):       Brendan Metcalfe 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council is requested to adopt the Lane Cove ALIVE initiated Lane Cove Village Structure Plan (LCVSP) attached electronically at AT1 as amended following public exhibition (Councillors have been provided with a copy of the plan separately).   The Structure Plan was exhibited for eleven weeks over August to October 2008 with a public information session held on 13 October 2008. 

 

The Structure Plan, initiated by Lane Cove ALIVE, seeks to provide a coherent framework for the Lane Cove Village, which Council would use to guide future development and assist Lane Cove Village to be an environmentally sustainable, commercially successful, active and social centre.

 

The plan was developed by a consultancy, City Plan Services (CPS), for Council, with guidance from a Steering Committee and input from the community between November 2007 and June 2008.

 

Following a review of submissions and discussion with the Structure Plan Steering Committee, which included five Council Management staff members and two Lane Cove ALIVE representatives, minor editing of the plan is recommended.  

 

The amended Lane Cove Village Structure Plan seeks to provide Council and the community of Lane Cove with an urban design road map for consideration in the future development of our village.  The structure plan is recommended for adoption as a reference point for consideration in the development of future plans.

 

Background

 

The Process

 

City Plan Services (CPS) was engaged by Council in November 2007 to develop the Structure Plan.  The Objective of the Structure Plan was to provide a suite of recommendations for the coordination of actions to be undertaken in subsequent detailed plans for the Lane Cove Village. The structure plan seeks to:-

 

(i)         propose options for the Village Centre’s optimum physical layout, combining accessible urban form with opportunities for the community’s desired range of activities, to ensure a sustainable, economically viable and vibrant centre, and

(ii)      provide an integrating planning framework to guide the process within which subsequent design solutions will be prepared in the short, medium- and long-term.

 

The key milestones in the project have been:-

 

·      formation of the Steering Committee on 5 November 2007, and subsequent meetings held on 13 December 2007, 30 January, 4 April 2008 and 27 November 2008, to ensure that project objectives and timeframes were met

·      three Councillor workshops were held on 19 November 2007, 9 February 2008 and 23 June 2008, to brief Council on the status of the Structure Plan and provide opportunity for questions and input

·      a community workshop was held on 26 February 2008 with community leaders and residents.  The workshop focused on the purpose of a Structure Plan, a history and urban design context of the Village Centre and gaining feedback on ideas that CPS had developed to that date,

·      a report to Council for public exhibition, held from 9 August 2008 to 24 October 2008 and

·      an information session held on 13 October 2008 with members of the public, Councillors, City Plan Services and Council staff to inform the public prior to making submissions on the Draft Plan.

 

CPS conducted a review of Council’s existing plans and policies and their relationship to current legislation and State plans.  An urban design analysis of the Village Centre was also carried out.  3D models were developed to illustrate possible physical relationships, which were featured in workshops and are contained in the draft plan. The relationship of urban form and social activity also formed an integral part of research, for example: walking routes, land uses and the amount of open space encouraging interaction among users of The Plaza or use as a meeting place for mothers and their children.  Conversely the topography and building form limit access to the Village Centre from the east.

 

Discussion

 

The Role and Structure Plan Content

 

The role of the structure plan is to act as a reference document for use by Council when preparing plans and considering future land use strategies and options in the village. 

 

To facilitate this, the structure plan includes an Urban Design Vision in section 2. e.g. a Town Square at the Southern end of Rosenthal Avenue Car Park.  The Background research discussed in this report above forms section 3.  Recommendations of the plan are contained in the Structure Plan Framework, section 4 and are to:-

 

1. Expand pedestrian domain by:

a.    creating a Village Square on part of the land between Rosenthal Avenue and Birdwood Lane;

b.    footpath widening of Longueville Rd to allow more cafe/dining seating;

c.    public space upgrades along Birdwood Lane and Little Lane;

d.    reclaiming public space for pedestrians at the intersection of Longueville Rd with Epping Road - the main gateway / forecourt to the town centre;

e.    activating the public space in front of the Library and the Community Centre on both sides of Longueville Rd / south of Central Avenue.

 

2. Reinforce fine grain mix of uses by:

f.     providing incentives for shop top housing;

g.    supporting mix of uses (retail, office, cultural and residential) on all large development sites, including the Gateway precinct, Rosenthal Avenue and Little Lane car park sites.

 

3. Provide active street edges and improve design quality of the built form by:

h.    more sophisticated design guidelines (DCP) for commercial development;

i.     setting up a design review panel to provide advice on major development;

j.     mandating architecture competition for the key gateway sites at Longueville Rd/Epping Rd.

 

4. Improve access by:

k.    encouraging efficient, healthy and cost effective transport modes such as walking and cycling by improving the pedestrian domain (see point 1);

l.     encouraging public transport usage by relocating bus routes from Little Street to Longueville Road;

m.   reduce pass-through car traffic by creating alternative routes such as Cox’s Lane and direct connection between Rosenthal Avenue and Epping Rd;

n.    prepare a Sustainable Transport Strategy.

 

Precinct Objectives and Guidelines give more detailed character statements for the 7 precincts identified by the plan in section 5, with tools for strategy implementation outlined in section 6 such as a Public Domain Master Plan (consultants appointed), Development Control Plan review (currently being undertaken as part of the Compressive Development Control Plan),  Design Review Panel, Design Competitions, a Sustainable Transport Plan and monitoring and review of the Structure Plan itself.

 

The structure plan contains concepts and options that emerged during its development.  The Steering Committee is aware that Council may or may not wish to pursue every element of the study, however, the recommendation is that the document be adopted with minor amendments from exhibition and that the options within it be investigated as Council sees fit over time.

 

Relationship to Other Plans

 

The Structure Plan has no legal status and would be selectively referenced by Council when preparing site specific plans or implementing the Draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan.  The Structure Plan (LCVSP) acts as a road map for Council and the community to reference when preparing detailed plans or strategies, the first of which would be the Public Domain Master Plan which is currently underway and discussed below.  The road map or LCVSP guides the reader through sign posted physical options, principles or visions for particular precincts of the Village Centre for consideration.

 

The Lane Cove Draft Local Environmental Plan 2008 (DLEP 2008) sets out the land use zoning (or the types of development permissible) and development standards of maximum height and floor space ratio (FSR - the ratio of land size to building size) for the Village Centre.  The DLEP was adopted by Council on 4 August 2008.  Areas that would be amended by the DLEP when gazetted include Rosenthal Avenue Car Park and 7-13 Birdwood Avenue as mixed use with an increase in FSR to match the rest of the commercial area of 2:1, or 2.5:1 with residential, the Little Street Car Park to Mixed Use with 2.7:1 FSR and height of 30 metres and the Civic Centre site to B2 Local Centre, 2:1 FSR and height of 21m.

 

The Comprehensive Development Control Plan (CDCP) is being prepared and will take into account the DLEP’s rezonings and other documents in proposing draft controls for the Centre.

 

The Little Street Development Control Plan is being finalised to supplement the DLEP’s height and FSR controls above. A development application for the site would take into account the Village Structure Plan as well as the DCP.

 

The Lane Cove Village Public Domain Master Plan (PDMP) is being prepared as Stage 2 of the process commenced with the Village Structure Plan. It will provide detailed plans for landscaping, seating, pedestrian links, cultural activity areas etc based on from the Village Structure Plan’s principles and framework.

 

Community Consultation

 

The Structure Plan’s community consultation has been conducted in line with Council’s Community Consultation Methods Guide. Additionally, an extra workshop was held and the Draft Plan was exhibited over an extended period to allow the maximum opportunity for community input and public comment. 

 

Public and targeted forms of consultation included:

 

·     Advertising in local newspaper

·     Public exhibition at the Civic Centre, Lane Cove ALIVE office, Lane Cove Library and online exhibition on Council’s website

·     Email notification of community leaders and groups connected to the Village Centre

·     Strategic bulletin to Progress / Resident Associations and

·     Hard copy notification letters to business owners connected to the Village

·     Hard copies available for viewing and electronic documents available for download

·     Public information session 13 October 2008 with substantial time available for questions and feedback.

 

Submissions

 

A total of 22 submissions were received, with 7 from community groups, 1 from Councils’ Major Projects Director and 14 from members of the community.  The comments and issues raised in submissions have been responded to individually in AT2 to this report.

 

The submissions (circulated to Councillors separately) generally praised Council for its foresight in preparing a coordinated plan for the Lane Cove Village Centre.  Other elements of the Plan that received support were:-

 

·     Proceeding with Public Domain Master Plan for the Village Centre

·     Maintaining the Village character

·     Encouraging more sustainable transport

·     Extending the hours for which the Plaza is actively used

·     Upper floor terrace dining along the Plaza

·     Retaining the heritage qualities of the Village Centre

·     A Town Square at the southern end of Rosenthal Avenue Car Park

·     An upgrade of the Plaza

·     Cultural Facilities linked to the Town Square

·     Alternative traffic routes though the Centre

·     Dedicated bus lanes in Longueville Road

·     Improving access and removing barriers to the Plaza

·     Better access to Longueville Road from the east and west

·     Improving /  increasing parking on Rosenthal Avenue

·     Seeking alternatives to a cultural centre

·     The plan providing a starting point for further consultation and master plans to follow.

 

Issues raised during exhibition included:-

 

·     Large buildings at the Gateway Precinct

·     Increasing retailing without demand

·     The at-grade crossing from southeast to northeast at intersection of Longueville/Epping Rd

·     A road exiting to the northern end of Rosenthal Avenue onto Epping Rd

·     The widening of Coxs Lane

·     That the comparisons of Lane Cove to other centres are not relevant

·     The proposed link between 12-16 The Plaza

·     Removing parking on Longueville Rd

·     Paid parking

·     Development other than increased car parking on Rosenthal Avenue

·     Pedestrian Link through Rosenthal Avenue Car Park

·     Larger volumes of traffic in Little Street

·     That consultation for the project was lacking, and further community suggestions should have been included in the Plan

·     That a design review panel would not achieve local objectives.

 

No significant amendments are recommended for the Plan as a result of the community feedback, as indicated in the Summary of Submissions and Responses at AT2. Recommended actions to ensure that the issues highlighted by the community are resolved are to prepare a Traffic / Transport Master Plan including feasibility of Coxs Lane widening and complete the CDCP review.

 

The proposed minor amendments to the plan are attached at AT3 to this report.  The recommended amendments are technical in nature (errors, omissions and clarification) and do not seek to alter the structure plan focus or content.

 

Conclusion

 

The Lane Cove Village Structure Plan has regard to previous and current planning documents, local history, current community wants, needs and desires for the future in the development of its urban vision options for Lane Cove.  The draft plan was publicly exhibited and enthusiastically debated in the community.  The Structure Plan has generally been well received by the public with strong support for the principles and broad concepts proposed.  The principles of improving the Village Centre and continued community consultation, during preparation of the Public Domain Master Plan or other documents such as the Comprehensive Development Control Plan, provide a sound platform for the development of the Village Centre to 2030.

 

Council is requested to adopt the Lane Cove Village Structure Plan with the amendments proposed in AT3 of this report. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopt the Lane Cove Village Structure Plan dated 25 July 2008 as amended as a fundamental reference document in the land use planning of Lane Cove Village.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Lane Cove Village Structure Plan - Electronic Attachment Only

134 Pages

Circulated Separately

AT‑2 View

Lane Cove Village Structure Plan Submissions - Summary of Comments and Responses

13 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Recommended Amendments to the Plan

1 Page

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 75

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 73

Subject:          Container Deposit Legislation    

Record No:    su2011 - 43936/08

Author(s):       Steve Fedorow 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

A Notice of Motion regarding Container Deposit Legislation was considered by Council at its meeting of 17 November 2008 and it was resolved that the General Manager report to a Council Meeting in December with updated figures on costs to Council before writing to the Premier, Minister for Environment & Climate Change supporting the Container Deposit Scheme.

 

This report provides updated information relating to a Container Deposit Scheme for Council’s consideration and recommends that Council:

 

·     Acknowledge the economic and environmental benefits to ratepayers in adopting a Container Deposit System in NSW.

·     Write to the NSW Minister for Environment & Climate Change and the NSW Premier calling for the Government to introduce a Container Deposit System in NSW.

 

Background

 

Following consideration of a Notice of Motion at its meeting of 17 November 2008 (AT-1), Council requested that it be provided with updated figures on the costs to Council should it choose to write to the Premier and the Minister for Environment & Climate Change in support of a CDS scheme.

 

Discussion

 

The National Packaging Covenant (NPC) was established in 1999 as a voluntary partnership between government and industry and is designed to “minimise the environmental impacts arising from the disposal of used packaging, conserve resources through better design and production processes and facilitate the re-use and recycling of used packaging materials”.  The NPC has also set a recycling target of 65% for packaging with no further increases in packaging waste disposed to landfill by the end of 2010  (National Packaging Covenant 2007).

 

In October 2008 the NPC released its Mid-Term performance report, which can be accessed at the following website:-  http://www.packagingcovenant.org.au/page.php?name=midtermreview.  As this report is over 400 pages it has been provided in electronic form on Council’s Website as an attachment to this report.  This report found that the overall recycling rate for post-consumer recycling increased from 40% in 2003 to 56% in 2007 and projects that the 65% target is by 2010 is likely to be met.

 

A Total Environment Centre review (AT-2 & AT-3) of the NPC Mid-Term performance report identified that the report failed to take account of an estimated 125,000 tonnes of plastic and cardboard delivery packaging, along with 96,000 tonnes of imported glass packaging and 32,000 tonnes of imported plastic packaging.  Additionally rising consumption meant that 200,000 tonnes of extra glass, plastic and steel packaging were also excluded from NPC figures bringing the recycling rate below 50%.

 


The NPC performance report found that improvements in kerbside recycling services (via an increased number of Council’s providing a kerbside recycling service and increased range of materials being collected) have had a strong influence on the improvement in the post-consumer recycling rate from 2003 to 2007.  It is important to note that nationwide Local Government contributes $374 million p.a. to run kerbside recycling services.

 

The NPC performance report also identified that whilst 25% of glass and aluminium, and 45% of PET beverage packaging by weight is consumed away from the home, that recycling rates for these materials are significantly lower than for those consumed at home.

 

Recycling Breakdown Rates for Home and Away

 

Container type

Residential recycling rate

Away from home recycling rate

Glass Beverage

66%

17%

Aluminium Beverage

83%

32%

PET Beverage

69%

18%

Source – NPC Mid-Term Performance Report

 

In April 2008 the Boomerang Alliance (members include the Local Government & Shires Association of NSW & the Total Environment Centre amongst others) released a background briefing paper regarding Container Deposits (AT-4).  The paper found that a National Container Deposit System could work alongside and reduce the costs of kerbside recycling by at least $59 million per annum whilst significantly improving away from home recycling rates.  The paper also found that South Australia (who operate a Container Deposit Scheme) has the highest overall recycling rate per capita and a kerbside recycling cost to the household half that of NSW.

 

Conclusion

 

The introduction of a container deposit system has the potential to reduce Council’s costs in delivering kerbside recycling services through the value of unredeemed deposits and a reduction in the volume of the kerbside recycling stream and landfill streams, whilst providing an overall environmental benefit through increased overall recycling rates.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.   Acknowledge the economic and environmental benefits to ratepayers in adopting a Container Deposit System in NSW.

 

2.   Write to the NSW Minister for Environment & Climate Change and the NSW Premier calling for the Government to introduce a Container Deposit System in NSW.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Notice of Motion - Container Deposit Legislation

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Recycling audit omits waste

2 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

'Rubbery' recycling figures trashed

1 Page

 

AT‑4 View

Container Deposits: The common sense approach towards a zero waste society

18 Pages

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 75

Subject:          Delegated Authority Report - November 2008    

Record No:    SU1863 - 44240/08

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

 

During the month of November 2008 a total of 51 Development Applications were determined under delegation by staff.  In addition 5 Construction Certificates and 7 Privately Certificated Construction Certificates were issued.  There were 2 Privately Certified Complying Developments. Council.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Applications determined for November 2008

7 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 77

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 76

Subject:          Draft Little Lane Development Control Plan    

Record No:    SU3334 - 44261/08

Author(s):       Stephanie Bashford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

It is recommended that Council adopt the Draft Little Lane Car Park Development Control Plan (DCP) as amended attached at AT1 to this Report. The plan will provide development controls for a mixed use development with underground parking which the Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan proposes to permit.

 

This project is a key step in the phased upgrading of Council’s car park on the perimeter of the Village. The DCP’s adoption would provide appropriate controls and guidance for the preparation of a development application (DA) on Council’s behalf, and that DA’s subsequent assessment by an independent consultant.

 

Background

 

(i)         Purpose of the Development Controls

 

The purpose of the DCP is to provide development controls to guide Council’s plans for the redevelopment of the car park site to a mixed use development that is also referenced in the following documents.

 

1.         The Major Projects Strategic Management Plan 2007 – 2016, which was adopted by Council on 15 October 2007 identifies the Little Lane site as having the potential to increase the amount of public car parking near the Village and Aquatic Centre.

 

2.         The Draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan (DLEP), finalized by Council on 4 August. This plan rezones the site Mixed Use B4 for a range of uses including residential, commercial, retail and/or community facilities.  The additional public car parking and facilities have regard to the NSW Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy’s requirement for Lane Cove to provide an additional 2,700 dwellings by 2021. In accordance with a further State policy, the NSW Standard LEP, the DLEP (not the DCP) has already set the height (30m) and floor space ratio (2.7:1) controls for the site.

 

The DCP’s role, while supporting the DLEP’s new viable building scale for the site, aims to interrelate it with surrounding developments to ensure that any future structure has regard to best practice and good planning outcomes.

 

(ii)        Exhibition

 

On 4 August 2008 Council endorsed the Draft Little Lane Car Park DCP, prepared by Scape Pty Ltd, for public exhibition, as shown at AT2. This was held from 20 August to 7 October. Ten submissions were received, 4 from associations and 6 from residents.

 


Discussion

 

(i)         Submissions

 

The submissions made during exhibition have been circulated to Councillors. These cover a range of design and other issues, in particular the DCP’s relationship with the Village Structure Plan, which is also being finalised.  It should be noted that the Structure Plan would be taken into account in the preparation of any DA, as would all other relevant Council documents. It is not expected that these documents necessarily all restate identical recommendations, given that the consultancies responsible for each document have their own specific focus.  What is important is that they do not contradict each other and they are mutually inclusive.

 

The submissions are summarised and responses to them set out in AT 3. Amendments to the DCP since exhibition are as in the version proposed in AT 1.

 

(ii)        DA Process

 

Although the development assessment of any future development proposal would usually be done by Council staff, in this case where Council is the property owner it would be undertaken by an independent planning consultant. The State Government has foreshadowed the requirement from 1 July 2009 for council developments to be assessed by a Joint Regional Planning Panel, but the DA is expected to be lodged before that date, in which case the JRPP may not be involved.

 

The importance of a council development being assessed independently is being achieved in two ways. Firstly the DCP was drafted by the independent consultancy, Scape Pty Ltd. Secondly the DA, which is being prepared by Turner & Associates, will be assessed by an independent consultant or the JRPP as above.

 

(iii)       Format

 

The traditional DCP approach used by Lane Cove provides clear objectives and specific numeric development controls in a concise format relying on the expertise of architects and staff to apply them to an individual site.  A Statement of Environmental Effects would need to accompany any development application and explain the design’s appropriateness for meeting those objectives.

 

The Little Lane Car Park D.D.C.P. follows the following format AT1.

 

            Chapters 1 – Aims and objectives

                            2 – Site context

                            3 – Public domain principles

                            4 – Development controls, including

                                    FSR

                                    Height

 

The Little Lane DCP is to be progressed ahead of the lengthier Comprehensive DCP process, in view of the priority of facilitating this site’s redevelopment for increased car parking and other facilities at the earliest opportunity.

 

Any development proposal will routinely be notified to the public for consultation following its formal lodgement.

 

(iv)       Amendments to the Draft DCP

 

Minor amendments to the Draft DCP (since exhibition) are proposed in the following ways:-

 

·           edit the exhibited Draft DCP to take into account several public submissions and staff review, as shown in italics in AT 1; and

·           increasing the detailed requirements for consideration by the architects in the preparation of any development proposal which have been incorporated into a Statement of Environmental Effects guide within the amended DCP.

 

Council, in its role as the client of any architect preparing a future development proposal for the site, would remain closely involved in articulating its vision for the site, the views expressed by the community and the general principles in Council’s other plans, to ensure that this DCP’s objectives achieve a high-quality outcome, integrating and complimenting existing neighbouring   developments, for a major building on the edge of the Lane Cove Village.

 

Conclusion

 

The Little Lane Car Park Development Control Plan project has been undertaken within an independent framework which will be continued during the assessment of any future development application for the site, as is appropriate for a Council-owned property. The DCP provides clear objectives, best practice guiding principles and strong numeric development controls to guide and encourage flexible design options for the future development of this important development site.

 

The DCP has been amended since exhibition by having regard to submissions made and although minor in nature strengthen and clarify the intent of the document and it is now recommended for adoption.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:

 

1.   Council adopt the Little Lane Development Control Plan dated August 2008 including minor amendment prepared in attachment 1, in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

 

2.   The DCP take effect from the date of its advertisement in a local newspaper.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Draft Little Lane Car Park DCP as amended

13 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Draft Little Lane Car Park DCP as exhibited

11 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Submissions Summary and Responses

7 Pages

 

 


 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 77

Subject:          Telstra Payphones    

Record No:    SU1428 - 44612/08

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council has been advised that Telstra intends to remove payphones from four locations in the Lane Cove Municipality and has invited comment from Council.

 

An assessment of the payphones and likely impacts has been undertaken and it is recommended that Council object to the removal of payphones in all four locations given the likely denial of reasonable access to a payphone by the broader community which includes school children, the elderly, disabled and people without ready access to a mobile phone.

 

Discussion

 

Telstra advised Council of its intention to remove the following payphones from the municipality and invited Council to make a submission to aid the review process (AT1):-

 

 

 

Payphone ID

Location

Removal Date

0294182 x 2

Tantallon Park,

Epping Road, Lane Cove

30.12.08

0294311 x 2

Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich

30.12.08

029413 x 2

Kenneth Street, Longueville

30.12.08

02941831 x 2

Helen Street, Lane Cove North

30.12.08

 

 

In order to better understand motivation for the possible removal of the above payphones enquiries were undertaken with the Telstra nominated contact.  Advice received stated, generally payphones are considered for removal if they fail to cover costs and/or they are the subject of continued vandalism.

 

Discussion was also undertaken with Council’s Manager of Community Services who provided an understanding and snapshot of what Council’s social and demographic characteristics of Lane Cove generally and specifically in the vicinity of the payphone locations earmarked for removal.

 

Having regard to Council’s general view of promoting access and equity for everyone an internal review of the payphones earmarked for removal was undertaken.

 

The review included the physical, social and access issues likely to influence the need to retain the presence of a payphone in the current location together with an alternative public phone being in close proximity.

 

The following table highlights the findings of payphone review undertaken:-

 


 

Location

Alternative payphone in close proximity

Reason to retain payphone presence

Tantallon Park,

Epping Road

No

Adjoins sports field

Adjoins major bus shop

Busy Road

Comment

The area is used extensively by sports people including children of all ages and the broader community using public transport.  This demographic includes elderly, disabled and people who may not readily have access to a mobile phone.

Kenneth Street, Longueville

No

The payphone is located opposite a nursing home and a short distance from a sports oval. 

Comment:  The area is visited by the broader community in particular the elderly and young people who may not readily have access to a mobile phone.  The payphone is seen as a necessary communication link for people using the sports oval or visiting the nursing home.

Lower Serpentine Road, Greenwich

No

Adjoins ferry wharf and is in an isolated location.

Comment:  The ferry wharf is used by the broader community including school children, the elderly and disabled.  The area may also pose a security risk for people after dark.  The payphone is seen as a necessary communication link for people using the ferry wharf.

Helen Street

No

The payphone is located in close proximity to the nearby high density residential units. 

Comment

Local residents include the culturally diverse (non-English speaking), young families and the elderly.  The removal of a payphone would lessen the communication alternatives for many residents.

 

 

Comment

 

Notwithstanding the above review Telstra is obliged to consider all submissions made in light of its Universal Service Obligations under the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999.  A copy of the Telstra Universal Service Obligation Policy Statement attached (AT2).

 


Relevant sections of the Policy appear on page 3:

 

            “The universal service obligation incorporated into the Telecommunication Act 1999, is designed to ensure that all people in Australia, no matter where they live or conduct business, have reasonable access on an equitable basis to:

 

                        (iv)       payphones,”

 

and further page 7:

 

            “As the primary universal service provider Telstra will ensure that people in Australia, no matter where they live or conduct business, have reasonable access on an equitable basis to ………. payphones.”

 

and

 

            “Telstra’s obligation extends to the supply, installation and maintenance of Telstra operated payphones in Australia, including public consultation and resolution of any complaints about the location of pay phones.”

 

Given that the universal obligation of the primary universal service provider (Telstra) is to ensure that people in Australia, no matter where they live or conduct business, have reasonable access on an equitable basis, to pay phones it is considered that to remove the pay phones at any of the locations detailed above would be manifestly unreasonable and could not be supported.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.         Note and endorse this report.

 

2.         That a formal submission be made to the Lane Cove Telstra payphone review advising that it is this council’s strong view that the removal of the four pay phones earmarked for removal, would be manifestly unreasonable and is not supported.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Letter from Telstra

1 Page

 

AT‑2 View

Telstra's Universal Service Obligation

11 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 December 2008

 

Human Services Division Report No. 17

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Human Services Division Report No. 17

Subject:          Federal Funding - Federal Government Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program    

Record No:    SU3237 - 44372/08

Author(s):       Jane Gornall 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council at its meeting of 1 December, 2008 received and noted Corporate Services Report No. 78 – on the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program. This Report provides additional information about the program and suggests projects for submission.

 

Discussion

 

As advised in the previous Report, the Program consists of two funding programs – a Regional and Community Infrastructure Program (RCLIP) shared amongst Councils. Council’s have already been advised as to their allocations with Lane Cove receiving $188,000. The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (‘the Department) have advised that Council will be notified by letter as to the process by which Council will apply for this funding. The timetable for this project is listed later in this Report.

 

The other Program is the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program – Strategic Projects (RCLIP Strategic Projects).  This Program has an available fund of $50 million for a limited range of projects across Australia .  This fund is specifically targeted at large strategic funds seeking a minimum Commonwealth contribution of $2 million.

 

Guidelines

 

For both funding programs the guidelines make it clear that eligible projects must be additional and ‘ready-to-proceed’ (the project must be ready to commence construction within six months of signing the Funding Agreement [contract]), or be additional stages of projects that are currently underway.

 

In general the funding can be spent on:-

 

     social and cultural infrastructure (e.g. art spaces, garden);

     recreational facilities (e.g. swimming pools, sports stadiums);

     tourism infrastructure (e.g. walkways, tourism information centres);

     children, youth and seniors facilities (e.g. playgroup centres, senior citizens’ centres);

     access facilities (e.g. boat ramps, footbridges); and

     environmental initiatives (e.g. drain and sewerage  upgrades, recycling       plants).

 

The Department’s listing of examples of community infrastructure is included in the attachments to this Report.

 

Funding can be used for:-

 

       construction or fit-out;

       preparatory work such as necessary engineering and geotechnical studies;

       land surveys and site preparation; and

       project management

 

Funding is not be available for activities such as ongoing costs (e.g. operational costs and maintenance), transport infrastructure, such as roads, or related infrastructure covered by the Roads to Recovery or Black Spots programs.

 

Timetables for both of the Funding Programs is very tight and is listed below.

 

For the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program  - which includes the $188,000 allocated to Council the following timetable applies:-

 

 

     Council needs to submit project/s for funding to the Australian Government by 30th January, 2009

     Progress Report by 30th May, 2009

     Completion by 30th September, 2009           

     Final Report by 30th November, 2009

 

For the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program – Strategic Projects (RCLIP Strategic Projects) the following timetable applies:

 

     Completed application form by 4pm 23rd December, 2008

     Successful projects announced in February, 2009

     Contracts to be signed in March, 2009

     Construction must commence within six months of the contract being signed.

     Funding will be provided on commencement of the project

 

Council has a large range of projects for which additional funding would be of assistance, however the tightness of the timetables limits the range of projects that Council can guarantee can be completed within the time constraints.

 

Projects that have been considered but cannot meet the timetable include the Major Projects Plan projects currently being considered by Council; refurbishment of cultural facilities; and a range of recreational facilities.

 

Projects for Consideration

 

The following suggestions including estimated costs are presented for Council’s consideration.  They are not listed in any order of preference.

 

For the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program  - $188,000

 

Gore Creek Reserve - Gore Creek picnic area - $45,000

Includes - shelter $6500; picnic area $3485; Bubbler with dog bowl $1985; 2 bins $3350; 2 park seats $3180; entry signs $5000; fencing $5000 ; electric barbecue - $7215; feature tree $500; bush track entry upgrade $6790

 

Lane Cove Police Station – refit as temporary home for The Meeting House – funds would cover non-budgeted items including – acoustic covers, sand-pit and asbestos removal.  $30,000

 

Northwood Ferry Shelter - $100,000 for refurbishment of the current shelter.

 

Plaza Upgrade – additional funds to assist in the refurbishment of the Plaza - $13,000

 

For the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program – Strategic Projects (RCLIP Strategic Projects) – minimum grant of $2 million.

 

The recommended project for submission for this program is the work listed in the Aquatic Centre Master Plan and associated refurbishments. This project will need at least $2 million; detailed drawings will be available for the December deadline; and the Tender and DA process can meet the timetable.

 

The deadline for submission of this grant is December 23, 2008.

 

 

Conclusion

 

The tight deadlines for these funding programs has limited the range of projects that can be recommended to Council. The projects brought before Council are ones that the responsible Divisions can commit to completing within the required period.

 

Council may wish to amend or vary the recommended list.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         Council receive and note the Report.

 

2.         Council agree to the following projects being submitted to The Department of Infrastructure,             Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (‘the Department’) as Council’s             nominated projects for the Regional and Community Infrastructure Program (RCLIP) -

           

            a) Gore Creek Reserve – Gore Creek picnic area - $45,000

            b) Lane Cove Police Station – funds would cover non-budgeted items – acoustic covers,             sand-pit and asbestos removal - $30,000

            c) Northwood Ferry Shelter - $100,000 for refurbishment of the current shelter

            d) Plaza upgrade – additional funds to assist in the refurbishment of the Plaza - $13,000

 

3.         Council agree to the following project being submitted to The Department of Infrastructure,             Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (‘the Department’) as Council’s             nominated project for the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program –             Strategic Projects (RCLIP Strategic Projects) – Lane Cove Aquatic Centre Leisure             Centre Master Plan works and associated refurbishment.

 

4.         The General Manager be delegated to amend the projects listed if it becomes clear that             they will not meet the guidelines of the funding programs.

           

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Guidelines Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program 2008/09

3 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Guidelines Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program - Strategic Projects 2008/2009

6 Pages