m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

1 March 2010

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 Council Chambers on Monday 1st March 2010 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 Win Gaffney. 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 www.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 1 March 2010

 

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.       Corporate Services Division Report No. 8

SUBJECT: Acquisition of Property - Lane Cove West Business Park

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 the report contains valuation information as to the potential purchase prices for the property. 

 

 

public forum

 

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

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

2.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 15 FEBRUARY 2010

 

 

REFERRED REPORTS

           

OPEN SPACE AND URBAN SERVICES REPORT NO. 3

SUBJECT: PROPOSED GAS PRIMARY REGULATING STATION

           

Jemena Asset Manament Pty Ltd has requested this matter be deferred until the meeting of 15 March 2010 so that they can be in attendance to address the meeting.

 

Orders Of The Day

 

3.       Order Of The Day No. 2

SUBJECT: Citizenship Ceremony - 17th March 2010

 

4.       Order Of The Day No. 3

SUBJECT: Council and Committee Meeting Schedule - March and April 2010

 

Notices of Motion

 

5.       Notice of Motion No. 2

SUBJECT: Lane Cove Occasional Care Centre

 

6.       Notice of Motion No. 3

SUBJECT: Kingsford Smith Oval, Longueville

 

7.       Notice of Motion No. 4

SUBJECT: Consultation Strategy for Lane Cove Plaza

 

General Managers Reports

 

8.       General Managers Report No. 4

SUBJECT: Lane Cove Market Square Carpark - Further Report on Paid Parking

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

9.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 5

SUBJECT: 16 Kingslangley Road Greenwich  

 

 

 

 

               


Ordinary Council Meeting 1 March 2010

 

Order Of The Day No. 2

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 2

Subject:          Citizenship Ceremony - 17th March 2010    

Record No:    SU28 - 6012/10

Author(s):       Millie  Stephen 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

A Citizenship ceremony will be conducted by the Mayor in the Council Chambers on Wednesday 17th March 2010 commencing at 7:00pm. A Councillor is required to attend the ceremony and speak to the new citizens about local government.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That a Councillor be nominated to attend the Citizenship ceremony on 17th March 2010 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 1 March 2010

 

Order Of The Day No. 3

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 3

Subject:          Council and Committee Meeting Schedule - March and April 2010    

Record No:    SU1915 - 6571/10

Author(s):       Kirsty Fleming 

 

 

 

The Council and Committee Meeting Schedule for the remainder of March 2010 and April 2010 is proposed as follows:-

 

 

March              15                    Ordinary Council

                                                Planning and Building Committee

                                                Services and Resources Committee

 

April                 3                      Inspection Committee

 

April                 6  (Tuesday)    Ordinary Council                                            

                                                Planning and Building Committee

                                                Services and Resources Committee

 

April                 19                    Ordinary Council

                                                Planning and Building Committee

                                                Services and Resources Committee

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council and Committee Meeting Schedule for the remainder of March 2010 and April 2010 be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 1 March 2010

 

Notice of Motion No. 2

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Notice of Motion No. 2

Subject:          Lane Cove Occasional Care Centre    

Record No:    SU1997 - 6827/10

Author(s):       Councillor David Brooks-Horn 

 

 

 

The Lane Cove Occasional Care was successful in obtaining a grant of $60,000 for their renovations under the State Government's Community Building Partnerships scheme. The Centre, however, will still be short of the funds required to complete the proposed works. Having regard to the fact that this facility services the whole Council area, I move:-

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council contribute matching funds of up to $45,000 for renovations to the Lane Cove Occasional Care Centre and the General Manager identify a suitable source of funding in the next Budget Review.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor David Brooks-Horn

Councillor

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 1 March 2010

 

Notice of Motion No. 3

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Notice of Motion No. 3

Subject:          Kingsford Smith Oval, Longueville    

Record No:    SU320 - 6822/10

Author(s):       Councillor Shauna Forrest 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council considers that the primary purpose of all the playing fields of Lane Cove, including Kingsford Smith Oval, is sport. Signs around the Kingsford Smith Oval state that the playing field is only available as an off leash dog area when it is not being used for organised training or games. This is consistent with the recommendations of the Harlock Jackson Report on Leash Free Areas Review adopted by Council in June 2007.

Lane Cove Cricket Club book the field for cricket training and pay fees to Council in order to have exclusive use of the field at these times. Dogs off leash on the field during these training sessions is a safety issue for the club, however Kingsford Smith Oval is the only off leash option in walking distance in Longueville for dog owners.


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.   A report on the use of Kingsford Smith Oval be brought to Council, including the hours of hire and use by sporting clubs (and others) and numbers and nature of complaints received by Council in relation to the use of Kingsford Smith Oval; and

 

2.   Council liaise with sporting clubs to discuss the hours of use (bookings).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Shauna Forrest

Councillor

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 1 March 2010

 

Notice of Motion No. 4

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Notice of Motion No. 4

Subject:          Consultation Strategy for Lane Cove Plaza    

Record No:    SU3821 - 6830/10

Author(s):       Councillor Shauna Forrest 

 

 

 

Council's resolution to exhibit options for 'The Lane Cove Plaza Concepts' included the adjacent grassed area and shade structures.  The Supran and Buchannan option was deliberately drawn to include the Grass area, and as it is different to the others to be exhibited, so should be included in this category as well.

 

Therefore I move:-

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         The ‘Supran and Buchannan Plaza Concept' be included as part of the 'Lane Cove Plaza Concepts' in the Lloyd Rees Bandstand Public Consultation Strategy; and

 

2.         The Dickson Rothschild Heritage Report also go out on exhibition with the Plaza and Bandstand concepts as background information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Shauna Forrest

Councillor

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Dickson Rothschild Heritage Report for Lloyd Rees Bandstand May 2009

5 Pages

 

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 1 March 2010

 

General Managers Report No. 4

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    General Managers Report No. 4

Subject:          Lane Cove Market Square Carpark - Further Report on Paid Parking    

Record No:    su1460 - 7057/10

Author(s):       John Lee 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report relates to parking within Lane Cove Market Square (LCMS) and the surrounding areas.  It gives consideration to the usage information available for the LCMS Carpark, the public submissions and the survey undertaken by the Chamber of Commerce.  The report recommends that paid parking be implemented as generally outlined in General Managers Report No. 23 to the Ordinary Meeting of Council of 6 October 2009 with minor amendments.

 

Background

 

When the development deed was signed between Woolworths, Fabcot P/L and Council, the commercial arrangements were predicated on a minimum of 2 hours free parking within LCMS.  The Development approval also required a minimum of 2 hours free parking. 

 

General Manager’s Report No. 23 to the Ordinary Meeting of Council of 6 October 2009 provided a detailed background on the parking strategy proposed for this carpark.  Having considered the report, Council resolved to:-

 

1.   Adopt the strategy outlined in the report to implement paid parking within the Lane Cove Market Square development;

2.   Endorse for the purpose of public exhibition the following paid parking fee structure:-

0-2 hours                                                                                    Free;

2-3 hours                                                                                    $ 4.50;

3-4 hours                                                                                    $ 6.00;

4-5 hours                                                                                    $15.00;

5 up to a maximum of 6 hours continuous stay per day             $20.00

Over 6 hours with multiple entries per day                                $40.00; and

3.   Subject to no objection being received Council adopt the fees and charges, should objection be received a further report be submitted to Council.

 

Council also resolved as a matter arising that a further report on the matter be submitted to the 1st Council meeting in February 2010.  This report was delayed one month to include operating data outside of school and the December / January holiday period.

 

Automatic number (licence) plate recognition (ANPR) technology, similar to that used on tollways and for traffic infringements such as red light cameras has already been installed.

 

In conjunction with exit boom gates, the cameras allow a fast throughput of vehicles whilst ensuring vehicles do not simply shift place within the carpark or leave temporarily to overstay or avoid fees.

 

The proposed technology does not require the issue of a ticket on entry and will be programmed to automatically raise the boom on exit for each vehicle whose accumulated stay is 2 hours or less, with a predefined grace period to allow for delays in exiting the carpark. 

 

Those vehicles requiring a payment will be able to pay at a pay station.  Regular users who stay more than 2 hours will also have the opportunity to pre-register their vehicle registration and credit card details.

The proposed changes to Council’s advertised fees and charges were placed on public exhibition until Monday 23 November 2009.  This report responds to each the issues raised.

 

Discussion

 

The carpark has now been operational since the development opened on 26 November 2009.  Fitness First commenced operations late January 2010 and the Library will open late February 2010.

 

Essential elements of the proposed LCMS parking Strategy are:-

·   Automatic Number Plate recognition cameras to record time and date of entry and exit of vehicles;

·   Non ticket boom gate on entry activated by a surface loop to both manage vehicle speed past the lobby as well as control exit without payment;

·   Boom gate on exit which will open for all matched License Plate registrations where the accumulated period of stay is less than 2 hours;

·   Time will accumulate where the difference between exit and re-entry per day is less than 1 hour;

·   Those leaving the carpark where the accumulated time exceeds 2 hours will be directed by an LED screen to an auto pay machine.  The auto pay machine will accept credit cards, notes and coins and will update the exit boom gate controls to open when the vehicle re approaches the boom gate on leaving; and

·   The LED screen could be available for in house advertising.

 

Public Consultation

 

In response to the public notification of the proposed changes to Council’s fees and charges, Council received 6 formal submissions opposing the changes and 1 in support.  Only 2 responses were received from local businesses. Council also received a survey undertaken by the Chamber of Commerce who summarised the 1,100 responses they received.

 

Responses to comments raised by the 7 respondents

 

Comment

 

Most respondents suggested that at least 3 hours or more was required to undertake family shopping or other shopping / professional visits.

 

Response

·   The current proposal for paid parking after 2 hours free parking allows anyone needing more than 2 hours to undertake the family shopping as well as undertake other shopping or professional visits, albeit at a modest charge;

·   All other Council carparks in the Village have a mix up to 3 hours free with 10 hours available in Birdwood Ave carpark;

·   2 hours free with a sliding scale of fees thereafter provides an appropriate mix between turnover and capacity; and

·   With one level of 3 hour parking within LCMS carpark, the results in Attachment 1 – Figures 1 and 2 shows that well in excess of 90% of patrons leave within 2 hours with 65% or more leaving within 1 hour.

 

Comment

 

Business should be encouraged locally noting that other major shopping centres have 3 hour free.

 

Response

·   It is not appropriate to compare this carpark with those associated with major regional retail centres which provide car parking for a much wider range of retail shopping and other commercial and professional uses;

·   North Sydney charge at the rate of $3.50 / half hour for parking after 2 hours free with time accumulated for 3 of their carparks, linked via number plate recognition cameras;

·   Cremorne Shopping Centre (Secure Parking) is a comparable shopping centre which provides 2 hours free parking with a shopping receipt and then $8 for 2-3 hours with receipt.  Casual parking ranges from $5 for the first hour to $12 for 2-3 hours.  The maximum daily charge is $35 (see http://www.secureparking.com.au/displaycarpark.aspx?carparkid=41);

·   The LCMS carparks' capacity is largely a function related to the uses within the development with some additional spare parking for other demand in the village, including seating in the Plaza;

·   The average arrival and departure, in excess of 3.2 vehicles per minute as set out in Attachment 5, achieves a near full carpark; 

·   A recent review of all carparks indicates that the additional spaces in LCMS carpark are at or near full with Rosenthal, Little Lane and Sera St/Coles also at or near capacity.  This indicates that the current mix of regulated parking has provided local business with regular turnover of shoppers up to 3 hours; and

·   Apart from on street parking outside of the Village CBD, LCMS carpark provides the only opportunity for longer stays without risk of infringement.

 

Comment

 

Some shoppers will prefer shopping in Chatswood or Macquarie Centre.

 

Response

·   Some shopping experiences for Lane Cove residents will still occur at the regional centres; 

·   The indirect cost, however, of a trip undertaken to deliberately avoid $4.50 for 2-3 hours parking far exceeds the proposed charge;

·   The near full capacity in the carpark is evidence that this development is attractive to users; and

·   A combined 174 x 3 hour free but regulated parking spaces are available in other council carparks.

 


Comment

 

Longer stay parking should be more expensive.

 

Response

 

This carpark is not designed to operate as a commuter or commercial carpark.  There is little, but some evidence to date of use by long term day/commuter parking.  Although it is intended to monitor and review the fee structure, it is considered that the $40 fee for 6 hours is an appropriate deterrent for long stay parking and compares reasonably with other similar carparks.

 

Comment

 

There should be some express / short term parking with a 1 hour limit.

 

Response

 

With 65% or more leaving within 1 hour, lift access to all carpark levels and with the consent constraint in regard to 2 hours free parking, there is no need for 1 hour express parking.  This can, however, be reviewed at a future time based on longer term usage trends.

 

Comment

 

Fear of Parking Fines.

 

Response

·   The proposed paid parking approach is much more equitable than enforcement where a single infringement is of a twentyfold order compared to the LCMS carpark fee for 2-3 hours; and

·   In context, parking at the rate of $1.50 per hour on top of 2 hours shopping, dining or an appointment with the dentist etc is not an excessive impost to park in a premier undercover carpark.  The proposed fee compares more than favourably with neighbouring municipal car parks.

 

Comment

 

While supporting the fees and charges, there should be a review of the parking regime in 6 months to optimise turnover in peak periods based on actual data.

 

Response

 

The cameras will provide accurate and ongoing detailed data on usage profiles, capacity, repeat usage profiles, and length of stay by time of day etc.  This will allow periodic reviews of pricing, costs, usage and capacity based on actual data.

 

Responses to Chamber of Commerce Survey

 

The Chamber of Commerce undertook a 3 week survey distributed to businesses in the Village.  The following responds to their findings from 1100 respondents as advised by the Chamber.

 

Survey Question 1

How many hours should be free before a charge is levied

                    1Hour     2Hours      3hours      4hours       More than four

 

The responses were as follows;

0 Hours      1Hour      2Hours      3hours      4hours       More than four

% 0.09%     0.27%      2.82%       78.27%    14.09%      4.45%

 

Response

 

The response with 96% wanting free parking for 3 or more hours needs to be taken in the context of actual usage where in excess of 98% stayed in the LCMS carpark for less than 3 hours.

 

 

It is also noted that when the Chamber undertook a survey of businesses in the Village in March 2009, 56% considered that their customers needed less than 2 hours parking.

 

Survey Question 2

Would you shop elsewhere if there was only 2 hours free parking at the Market Square?

The responses were as follows;

Yes                  No                 Maybe

76.26%            8.37%           15.37%

 

Response

 

The LCMS carpark has operated as a regulated carpark with 2 levels at 2 hours and 1 level at 3 hours.  The survey results taken before Market Square opened need to be considered against actual usage, noting that the carpark is operating at near capacity for much of each day.

 


Survey Question 3

Should the time limits in the other car parks be changed?

No Change            Decreased           Increased

69.52%                  1.00%                 29.48%

 

The Chamber also added that they would support a number of spaces at the lower section of Rosenthal being changed to 4 hours paid parking with a meter installed in the area from which tickets can be purchased.

 

Response

 

The rationale for introducing parking meters with longer times into other carparks or on street parking should be subject to a separate investigation after paid parking has been implemented in Market Square carpark.

 

Currently there are 85 x 3 hour parking spaces and 76 x 1 hour parking in addition to 5 x disabled and 4 x seniors parking.  2 hour parking is also available on street in Rosenthal Ave.

 

Notwithstanding the additional car parking spaces provided in the LCMS carpark, Rosenthal Ave is still operating at or near maximum capacity for much of the day.  The 3 hour spaces in the Sera Street extension usually have spare capacity.  The number of arrivals is approximately equal to the number of departures from the carpark.

 

Without additional cameras it is not feasible to manage, on a daily basis, the current practice of changing location in Rosenthal Ave to avoid detection and extending stay beyond 3 hours.

 

In reality, having 4 hour metered parking in Rosenthal Ave is no different to having 4 hour paid parking in LCMS, and at $1.50 per hour, the charge would be the same.

 

Parking Fees

 

The Chamber undertook a review of parking fees in the area and concluded that the proposed fee structure for Market Square was comparable but generally lower than Macquarie Centre, Westfield Chatswood, Rhodes for vehicles staying in excess of 3 hours and Top Ryde for vehicles staying in excess of 4 hours.

 

Response

 

While these major shopping complexes are not directly comparable with Market Square, the proposed fee structure compares favourably when assessed against these centres and other comparable centres some of which are listed in Attachment 4.

 

Communication

 

The Chamber recommended providing warnings being issued before fines were issued.

 

Response

 

Data is available on those who regularly use the carpark in excess of the regulated time and warning letters could be issued advising of the time restrictions which apply.

 

With 6-7% of users of the LCMS carpark likely to exceed 2 hours, it is proposed that an LED screen will provide advice to those users for at least 1 week before activating the requirement to make payment.

Data Collected from the License Plate Recognition Cameras

 

The number plate recognition cameras have provided invaluable data.  In the analysis of data, it is noted that data recorded since the end of the January school holidays including Fitness First gymnasium (opened late January 2010) is representative of but not dissimilar to usage profiles since the early December 2009.

The following data is provided as attachments with the following explanations.

 

Attachment 1 shows the daily profile of length of stay.  Figure 1 is representative for the period since early December through to the end of the school holidays and Figure 2 is the period since then until present.  This data is compared to similar carparks where typically more than 92% of visits are 2 hours or less.

 

Attachment 2 drills down to the time of entry (grouped into hour timeslots) vs. length of stay.  This graph is read by reading the total arrivals of the period for any given hour from the blue dashed line then comparing the number leaving within that hour on the orange line and then following the hour – hour lines across to the purple line for 1-2 hours and to the aqua line for 2-3 hour. 

 

The aqua line graphically represents the proportion of the arrivals which stayed for more than 3 hours.

 

The following examples are for vehicles arriving in the 9-10 and 12 noon-1pm periods:-

 

3/12/2009-20/2/2010

9-10 am

12- 13 (1pm)

Arrivals

2904

 

3452

 

Stay less than 1 hour

1431

49.3%

2221

64.3%

Leave within 1-2 hours

997

34.3%

928

26.9%

Leave within 2-3 hours

311

10.7%

226

6.5%

 

From 27/1/2009

9-10 am

12- 13 (1pm)

Arrivals

1546

 

1532

 

Stay less than 1 hour

692

44.8%

960

62.7%

Leave within 1-2 hours

556

36%

414

27%

Leave within 2-3 hours

191

12.4%

119

7.8%

           

Whilst it is appropriate to suggest that longer stays in excess of 2 hours free should be encouraged to assist other businesses, when the capacity profile in Attachment 3 is examined, it is clear that 2 hours free for shopping from this carpark is the right balance to have the carpark operate at or near full capacity for significant periods of each day.  Increasing the free period would trade off full capacity against legitimate and effective turnover. 

 

Note:  Attachment 3 understates the capacity profile for the following reasons:-

a)   the level 2 pan handle has not been included in the counts;

b)   until boom gates are installed, some traffic leaves without going past the exit cameras; and

c)   fine tuning the cameras is still in progress.

 

Attachment 5 shows a typical profile of the number of vehicles arriving and leaving per hour. As explained in the report, the actual number is higher as the pan handle on level 2 hasn’t been monitored and the system is still being fine tuned.  This graph shows that for most of the day, the turnover exceeds 3.2 vehicles per minute or 200 vehicles per hour (in a 320 space carpark).

 


3 Hour Parking in the Village

 

As noted earlier, there are 174 x 3 hour free but regulated parking available in the following locations which are available to any one wishing to spend 3 hours free in the village:-

 

Rosenthal Ave                                              85 Spaces; 

Little Lane Carpark                                       65 Spaces; and  

Sera Street excluding Coles carpark           24 Spaces. 

 

Should additional 3 hour parking spaces be required, consideration could be given through the Traffic Committee to changing the 11 x 2 hour parking in the recently reconstructed parking area in Sera St extension just south of the link road to 3 hours or change 9 of the 3 hour to 4 hour in lower down in Sera Street extension. 

 

Whilst every day is different, the data suggests that vehicles entering after 6pm do not, at this stage, impact on the capacity of the Market Square carpark.  Further after this time, other car parks also tend to have some space capacity.  It is recommended that where a vehicle has not accumulated time earlier in the day, that vehicle entries made between 6 pm and 11pm are not charged on exit.  This would need to be periodically reviewed against capacity.

 

In addressing a view that users of the carpark were of the impression that the carpark was only 2 hours free, the following table demonstrates that 87% of users left within 1 ¾ hours with a further 5.7 % leaving within 1 ¾ hours and 2 ¼ hours . 

 

 

Length of Stay

% Vehicles Leave

Cumulative %

0-½  hour

34.6%

34.6%

½ - 1 hour

29.7%

64.3%

1-1½ hour

17.4%

81.7%

1½-1 ¾  hour

5.3%

87%

1 ¾ - 2 ¼  hour

5.7%

92.7%

 

 

Level 2 Pan Handle

 

The data on usage indicates that a number of patrons regularly park for periods in excess of 3 hours with a number of regular users parking all day.  It is likely that some are shop owners either within or external the development.

 

The site constraints with private access from within the main entry require a different management of the Level 2 Pan Handle.

 

It is proposed to offer those spaces on Level 2 to shop owners within the development, regular users and any other interested persons for a monthly or annual fee and to manage that area as authorised parking only.

 

Rationale for Paid Parking

 

In a metropolitan area, without regulation of parking, all day parking occurs from:-

a)         Commuters accessing public transport;

b)         Shop owners and their staff; and

c)         Nearby residents and their visitors.

 

Existing carparks, whilst imposing daily time limits, is hard to enforce as all day parking swap spaces at least once per day to avoid detection.

 

Surface parking is significantly cheaper to construct, however opportunity for land purchase for additional parking is limited and expensive.  Additional parking to meet capacity is likely to be a multi level structural carpark, much of which is likely to be below ground.  Current estimated cost for structural parking is $32,000 per space.

 

Whist the proposal for paid parking is not aimed as a revenue source for other works, it is a necessary component in meeting a significant part of the expected costs of operating the Market Square carpark.  The data shows that only 1% of vehicles stay in the carpark beyond 3 hours.   Once paid parking is introduced, it is expected that a number of this group would find alternate parking further reducing the catchment of patrons who would be required to pay. 

 

The benefit to cost of installing and managing the automated carpark management system with number plate recognition for less than 1% of vehicles per day is marginal at best.

 

In general, additional expense associated with operating multi level structural carparks often include:-

a)         Lighting;

b)         Ventilation;

c)         Cleaning;

d)         Maintenance and repair of equipment and structure;

e)         Parking management;

f)          Receipt management;

g)         Inspections;

h)         Asset depreciation;

i)          Insurance;

j)          Fire Safety;

k)         Vertical Transportation; and

l)          Security including electronic surveillance, open and closing, patrols etc

 

Paid parking is an appropriate means for Council to recover these additional costs.  

 

There is a balance between the free parking period and the period of the day a carpark operates at or near capacity.  A longer free period results in lower turnover of spaces. A commuter carpark for instance remains full during the day with little turnover. 

 

The scale of fees is equivalent to $1.50 per hour up to 4 hours.  This is the equivalent fee already applying to metered parking.  Beyond 4 hours the fee escalates to discourage longer term parking.

 

Conclusion

 

The Lane Cove Market Square carpark has a vehicle usage / turnover consistent with similar car parks with more than 90% of patrons exiting within 2 hours.  At this point in time there is a good balance in the relationship between arrivals and exits against capacity, having regard to the future demand from the Library.

 

The fees and charges as advertised also strikes an appropriate balance between short and longer term parking to discourage commuter or all day parking.

 

The license plate recognition cameras provide a reliable tool to capture vehicle details, calculate accumulated time and control the exit boom gate, allowing more than 90% of patrons to leave without having to stop at the exit boom.  This technology is used in a number of carparks in the region including Manly, North Sydney and Willoughby LGA’s for operators to manage long term parking by counting accumulated time spent in one or more carparks under their control.

 

Whilst the proposed ticketless system has not been installed in a major carpark to date, the site constraints are such that it is not possible to install a ticket based system.  The benefits of the completely automated operation include reduced cost from tickets, good exit flow for most patrons including preregistered patrons, and effective management of frequent users accumulating time spent for multiple entries or those who swap spaces.

 

Flexibility in the system will allow for free parking where an entry is made after 6pm each day provided that the patron has not accumulated time during the day.

 

It is proposed to accept an offer of assistance from the Chamber of Commerce in developing an advertising and education strategy to coincide with the implementation of paid parking.

 

Should Council approve the implementation of paid parking, it is expected that the system will be installed and operational by 1 June 2010.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.      Adopt the advertised changes to the fees and charges for paid parking within the Lane Cove Market Square as set out in the report;

2.      Authorise the General Manager to implement paid parking with the first 2 hours free as outlined in the report, noting that provided a vehicle has not accumulated time earlier in the day, entries made between 6 pm and 11pm will not be charged on exit.

3.      Request the General Manger work with the Chamber of Commerce in devising an advertising strategy to advertise paid parking changes to the LCMS carpark including in the media and Council’s quarterly newsletter;

4.      Provide a 7 day moratorium on collection of fees once the system is operational, with each patron staying in excess of 2 hours being provided with an educational pamphlet;

5.      Write to those who made a submission advising them of Council’s decision; and

6.      A review of the parking arrangements for the Lane Cove Market Square carpark be undertaken in 12 months time.

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Daily Profile - Length of Stay

1 Page

 

AT‑2 View

Profile Time of Entry – Length of Stay

2 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Capacity Profile

1 Page

 

AT‑4 View

Comparable Shopping Centre Charges

1 Page

 

AT‑5 View

Typical Arrival and Departure Profiles

1 Page

 

 

   


Ordinary Council Meeting 1 March 2010

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 5

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 5

Subject:          16 Kingslangley Road Greenwich    

Record No:    DA09/241-01 - 6794/10

Author(s):       Peter Thomas 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

·     The application is for the demolition of a heritage item and a boundary adjustment to 14-16 Kingslangley Road, Greenwich.

·     The application was deferred by Council at its meeting of 15 February 2010 to allow the consideration of additional engineering details provided by the applicant.

·     Council’s engineers have not been able to endorse the vehicular access details provided and the applicant has not been able to provide the required additional information.

·     The application is recommitted to Council for determination.

 

Background and Assessment

 

Council at its meeting of 15 February 2010 considered the proposal and resolved as follows:-

 

“That the matter be deferred to the next Council meeting to allow a review of the submitted engineering report to be undertaken and a further report be submitted to Council.”

 

A copy of the original report is contained in (AT1).

 

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the submitted information provided, has raised some concerns and requested additional details to ascertain vehicular access viability (AT2).

 

The applicant’s planner has advised that given the time constraints that the requested information would not be available (AT3).   She also reiterated that in her opinion, given the circumstances of the sites, that details of vehicular access were not required to enable assessment of the application, and the proposal should be approved without reference to vehicular access.

 

Comment

 

The areas of agreement between the applicant and staff are:-

 

1.         No objection to the demolition of the heritage item.

2.         Support for the boundary adjustment subdivision to enable both lots to result in approximately equal land area and frontages.

 

The area of disagreement appears to be the provision of vehicular access to both sites. 

 

Given the site constraints, the staff report recommends that consent to the demolition of the heritage item, and the boundary adjustment be deferred until the two vehicular accesses have been constructed.  The applicant is of the view that the construction of vehicular accesses is onerous and can be addressed at a future time when a dwelling house development application is considered.

 

Note:   Conditions 32 and 33 of Part B of the original recommendation are in error with regard to part of their wording and will require amendment.  The conditions refer to the issue of a construction certificate and should refer to prior to the commencement of demolition works.  If the Council is of a mind to approve the proposal, these 2 conditions will require amendment as suggested.

The options available to Council, should it wish to support the application, would appear to be:-

 

A.         Approve the dwelling house demolition and boundary adjustment subdivision (conditions in Part B of the original report) and condition the provision of access for both lots prior to the release of the subdivision certificate.

 

B.         A deferred commencement consent requiring the construction of the driveway access to both lots, prior to the activation of the consent for demolition and the boundary adjustment subdivision.  (Note: this is the current recommendation).

 

C.        A deferred commencement consent requiring the approval of driveway access applications to both lots, prior to the activation of the consent for demolition and the boundary adjustment subdivision. 

 

Comment

 

Under Option C, construction of the driveways does not need to occur to activate the consent.

 

Conclusion

 

The above options seek to provide greater flexibility for the applicant.  The application is submitted to Council for determination.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1.   That the application be determined.

 

2.   In the event Council grants approval to the proposal that conditions in Part B of the original report be imposed.  Conditions B32 and B33 are to be amended to delete reference to the “issue of a construction certificate” and be replaced with “prior to the commencement of demolition works”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Environmental Services Division Report No. 405

11 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Email from Council's Development Engineer

1 Page

 

AT‑3 View

Email from Margaret Campbell dated 19/2/10

1 Page