m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

16 February 2015

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, 48 Longueville Road Lane Cove on Monday 16 February 2015 commencing at 7:00pm. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

 

Council Meeting Procedures

 

The Council meeting is chaired by the Mayor, Councillor David Brooks-Horn. 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 on 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 on 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 the Government Information (Public Access)  Act 2009, 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 16 February 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO COUNTRY

 

NOTICE OF WEBCASTING OF MEETING

 

public forum

 

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

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 8 DECEMBER 2014 AND EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING – 21 JANUARY 2015

 

Orders Of The Day

 

Officer Reports for Determination

 

2.       Petition requesting a Cultural Centre for Lane Cove

 

3.       Proposed Lease and Licence Arrangements - Longueville Sporting Club and Linley Point Reserve

 

4.       Alcohol Free Zones in Local Parks & Reserves

 

5.       Lane Cove Traffic Committee -  16 December 2014

 

6.       Proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement for 96 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

 

7.       2016 Local Government Elections

 

8.       Tender for Blackman Park Creek

 

9.       2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-2015 Budget

 

Officer Reports for Information

 

10.     Neighbour Day 2015

 

11.     Lane Cove West Road Safety Status

 

12.     2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-15 Delivery Program and Operational Plan

 

13.     Council Snapshot  

 

 

 

 

                     


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Petition requesting a Cultural Centre for Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          Petition requesting a Cultural Centre for Lane Cove    

Record No:    SU4965 - 8535/15

Division:         General Managers Unit

Author(s):      Geoff Douglas 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council is in receipt of a petition with 1,076 signatures calling “For a dedicated performing arts space in Lane Cove to be used by all Lane Cove Performing Arts Groups.” The petition is accompanied by a formal proposal for a Cultural Centre. This report outlines Council’s previous consideration of the provision of a Cultural Centre and recommends Council consider requesting the petitioners to prepare a detailed business case on the proposed method of operation of a facility and Council explore the option of incorporating performance facilities in the new multi-purpose recreation building at the Lane Cove Golf Course.

 

Background

 

During the consultation on the proposed Rosenthal Ave Carpark redevelopment several direct submissions were received for a new theatre facility submitted by Lane Cove Theatre Company which included a petition.  A supporting letter was also received from the Lane Cove School Council, which endorsed the Lane Cove Theatre Company’s formal proposal and petition, as well as setting out a number of specific additional items that were seen as being of benefit to the school.

 

On 16 December 2014 a “formal proposal” was received from the Lane Cove Theatre Company calling for “...a permanent performance space to be built as part of the Rosenthal Ave development...”.  The covering letter was signed by Trent Gardiner of the Lane Cove Theatre Company and states that it is submitted “on behalf of and in collaboration with The Lane Cove Youth Orchestra, Lane Cove Public School, Roseville and Lane Cove Dance Academy, Scene and Heard Acting School”.  The letter includes a petition with 1,076 signatures. It is noted that Council’s normal protocols for a petition require the addresses of the signatories, these are not included in the petition, therefore the origins of the persons are unknown.

 

The proposal outlines a history of the theatre company’s desire to have a purpose built performance space, and mentions some of the various premises where they have staged their performances.  The proposal enumerates specific requirements including a 200 – 300 seat auditorium, certain specific functional areas and spatial allowances including back of house, 6m stage height, lighting grid, control room / bio, dressing rooms and toilets for 20 male & 20 female performers and crew (Lane Cove School Council in their submission request dressing rooms for 80 children), foyer space with bar kitchenette, office and ticketing areas, rehearsal rooms and on site storage.

 

It acknowledges that in 2008 Council resolved not to build a purpose built performance space in Lane Cove, and it’s author states that he “...does fully understand and accept the financial reasons for this decision.”  and that they do not want a multimillion dollar performing arts facility but “...simply a space that the performing arts groups of Lane Cove can call home”.

 

Council’s decision followed the 2008 Hassell report which assessed both a 350 seat and a 500 seat auditorium for a possible purpose built performance space.  The Lane Cove Theatre Company proposal to hand scales this back somewhat to a 200 to 300 seat auditorium.  Additionally the previous Hassell assessment included facilities which the present Lane Cove Theatre Company proposal does not, such as restaurant, childcare, studios, and such like. The present Lane Cove Theatre Company proposal will nonetheless result in a multimillion dollar performing arts project, and the issues of the previous scheme remain. 

 

Hassell’s “Lane Cove Cultural Centre Study – Final Report February 2008” assessed three sites:-

 

·  Rosenthal Avenue Carpark;

·  266 Longueville Road; and

·  164-180 Longueville Road.

 

The main objectives of the Hassell study were to:-

·    Develop an appropriate development model;

·    Determine which of the three Council land holdings is most suited to the development model;

·    Investigate the provision of other ancillary carparking, commercial, retail and/or residential uses; and

·    Recommend appropriate urban design and planning controls.

 

As part of the Hassell Report, preliminary costs were prepared for the development of the Cultural centre.

 

Three (3) financial project cost models and operating costs models for the Lane Cove Cultural Centre were considered in the financial analysis, prepared by MacroPlan, outlined in Section 9 of the report:-

·    Scenario 1 (Minimum Scheme) model included all uses identified by the community and a theatre space of 350 seats;

·    Scenario 2 (Maximum Scheme) model considered all uses identified by the community and a theatre space of 500 seats; and

·    Scenario 3 (Modified Scheme) model considered a modified number of uses identified by the community and a theatre space of 350 seats.

 

All models can be applied to any site under consideration and included project costings (in 2008 dollars) for demolition and car parking required by the Cultural Centre only.

 

Description

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

WT Estimate

$20,036,000

$23,160,000

$13,820,000

Demolition (1,500 sqm at $51.70/sqm

$       77,550

$       77,550

$       77,550

Car Parking (148 bays at $27,500 per space)

$  4,070,000

$  4,070,000

$  4,070,000

INDICATIVE PROJECT COST

$24,183.550

$27,307.550

$17,967.550

 

The Study examined other similar facilities operated by councils and the following operational costs were estimated for the proposed facilities (2008 cost base)

 

Scenario

Cost

1

$565,321

2

$462,774

3

$304,041

 

In addition to the above, the Hassell report noted that existing users of the 164 Longueville Road site would need to be relocated during redevelopment of that site, which at the time was estimated to cost a further $1.8m (in 2008).

 

Council in early 2008 considered the recommendations of the Hasselll Report, which in summary considered that a total bill potentially approaching $20million was not feasible.  Regardless of the best location, it was felt that Council did not have the necessary funding, particularly the ongoing net subsidy required for the facility. Ongoing operational and maintenance costs were considered problematic.

 

The Mayor at the time, Councillor Ian Longbottom attended the 28 May 2008 meeting of the Cultural Advisory Committee, and explained the above thinking regarding the Cultural centre.

 

Council at its meeting held on 16 June 2008, unanimously resolved not to proceed with the planning for a single site Cultural Centre – but investigate a range of possibilities for supplying or enhancing cultural facilities within current upgraded premises or in new premises as part of the Major Projects Plan. 

 

Council later at its meeting of 6 April 2010 was advised that Council had engaged Pegasus Performing Arts Consulting Pty Ltd to assess and report on “what is realistically needed in the form of capital assistance and building renovations assistance by cultural groups”.

 

One of the requirements for Pegasus was to assess the options for building upgrades or relocations (of cultural groups) within the Municipality.  Since completion of that report the following initiatives to improve cultural facilities have been undertaken:-

·    Renovation of the Living and Learning Centre;

·    Provision of storage facilities for the Lane Cove Theatre Group and Historical Society;

·    Gallery Lane Cove established at 164 Longueville Road;

·    The incorporation of a 140 seat meeting area and low scale performance space into the Little Lane development;

·    Planning for the relocation of Centrehouse to the Lane Cove community Centre, which will follow Lane Cove and Northside Community Services relocation to new premises in the Little Lane development;

·    Planning for the relocation of the Lane Cove Music & Cultural Centre to be relocated into new premises in the Little Lane development;

·    Planning and construction of a new facility at 314 Burns Bay Rd to provide practice facilities (with outdoor performance opportunities) for the Lane Cove Concert Band and community hall;

·    Converted the garage at Carisbrook House into a meeting and storage area; and

·    Constructed the new Meeting House Community Space.

 

Discussion

Whilst the current proposal envisages a smaller scale facility, it will still be a multi-million dollar project, even if car parking is excluded. Council has already taken the decision to integrate a park into the Rosenthal Development, rather than residential schemes or the like which would provide significant revenue to pay for the project. The current Rosenthal Scheme cannot also fund the construction of a performance space.  The provision of a dedicated facility is currently not funded in any other Council Plans, and the ongoing operational costs are important to consider, as they will be significant. Council has already funded one study on these costs and therefore it is proposed that the groups proposing the facility be requested to prepare a detailed Business Case on how the facility would operate to ensure it is financially sustainable.  Council’s current planning does include a new multi-purpose recreation building at the Lane Cove Golf Course.  As planning proceeds for this facility, it is recommended Council explore incorporating facilities that would also make it adaptable for use as a performance space.

 

Conclusion

 

Lane Cove Theatre Company has expressed a desire to have a dedicated theatre facility included in the Rosenthal Ave development in Lane Cove.  They submitted a formal proposal which is supported by Lane Cove School Council and by a public petition.

 

In 2008 Council resolved not to further consider providing a dedicated Cultural Centre due to the considerable capital and running costs involved.  An alternative approach of supplying or enhancing cultural facilities within current upgraded premises or in new premises was adopted.  Several cultural facilities have already been provided using this alternative approach.

As the ongoing costs of these facilities are significant, it is recommended that the proponents be requested to prepare a detailed business case on the proposed method of operation of a facility and Council explore the option of incorporating facilities in the new multi-purpose recreation building at the Lane Cove Golf Course, that would also make it adaptable for use as a performance space.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:-

1.       Receive and note this report;

2.       Notify the head petitioner that Council explore the option of incorporating facilities in the new multi-purpose recreation building at the Lane Cove Golf Course, that would also make it adaptable for use as a performance space; and

3.       Request the head petitioner to prepare a detailed business case on the proposed method of operation of a performance facility to ensure it is financially sustainable.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Proposed Lease and Licence Arrangements - Longueville Sporting Club and Linley Point Reserve

 

 

Subject:          Proposed Lease and Licence Arrangements - Longueville Sporting Club and Linley Point Reserve    

Record No:    SU1429 - 7043/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Kirsty Fleming 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

In accordance with the Local Government Act, Council recently advertised its intention to grant a lease and a licence for the following two sites which are classified as Community land:-

·    Longueville Sporting Club – Corner Kenneth Street and River Road West – to the Longueville Sporting Club for the purpose of operating a bowling club; and

·    Part of Linely Point Reserve – to Sydney University for the purpose of ensuring access and parking for the proposed adjoining new rowing facility which is to be constructed on Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) land. 

 

Three (3) submissions were received in relation to the proposed Longueville Sporting Club lease, with the major concerns raised relating to the operating hours of the facility and the impact of patrons on neighbouring residents.  Two (2) submissions were received in relation to the proposed Linley Point Reserve licence.  The major concerns raised related to the development of the neighbouring RMS land as opposed to the provisions of the licence agreement. However, both submissions also opposed any restriction of public access to the Reserve and activity that could compromise the quiet passive enjoyment of Linley Park by the wider community.

 

It is recommended that Council endorse the Agreements for a 10 year term. 

 

Background

 

Council has recently held discussions with both the Longueville Sport Club and University of Sydney in relation to implementing new lease and licence agreements, respectively.  As these agreements are in respect of Community land, in accordance with the Local Government Act, Council was required to advertise its intention to grant a lease or licence and consider any submissions received during the consultation period. 

 

An advertisement was published in the North Shore Times on 7 January 2015 (shown attached as AT-1).  Additionally, notices were affixed to the club house and placed at main access routes through Linley Point Reserve and letters were sent to adjoining residents and property owners.  The closing date for submissions was Monday, 2 February 2015.  

 

Discussion

 

Longueville Sporting Club

 

Council currently has a lease agreement in place with the Longueville Sporting Club.  It is proposed to surrender the existing agreement, which is due to expire in November 2015 and implement a new lease for a further ten (10) year term

 

Council received three (3) submissions and one (1) request for additional information during the notification period in relation to the proposed Longueville Sporting Club lease.  The primary concerns raised within the submissions relate to the operating hours of the facility and the impact of patrons on neighbouring residents, specifically noise and anti-social behaviour resulting from alcohol consumption at the premises and in the neighbouring Central Park.  Some of the specific concerns raised include:-

·    Noise from patrons leaving the facility late into the night / early hours of the morning;

·    Noise levels from fitness classes commencing prior to 7am at Fitness Revelation (the fitness club located at the premises); and

·    Littering and anti-social behaviour in the neighbouring Central Park.

 

The submissions highlight the need for appropriate conditions within the lease agreement which will allow better management of these negative impacts.  It is noted that although the lease allows the Club to “use the Premises seven (7) days a week, twenty-four (24) hours a day, in accordance with any development consent and as specified in the Liquor License held by the Club under the Liquor Act 1982 (NSW) and in accordance with the Registered Clubs Act 1976 (NSW)”, it also includes a range of provisions in relation to noise, nuisance and disorderly conduct. These include:

 

“4.8      Noise

 

The Club will comply with all relevantly applicable legislation with respect to noise and will otherwise have regard to the amenity of the surrounding residential properties in regulating noise emanating from the Club (including but not limited to noise caused by patrons entering or leaving the Premises) and the Parties expressly acknowledge that the Lessor may, in its absolute discretion, impose whatever requirements or restrictions it considers are reasonably necessary to preserve the amenity of the surrounding residential properties.

 

4.9       Nuisances

 

(a)        The Club must not carry on upon the Premises any illegal, noxious, noisome or offensive art, trade, business, occupation, or calling and must not do, or omit to do, anything on the Premises, if such act or omission causes, or is likely to cause, annoyance nuisance, grievance, damage, or disturbance to members of the public, or the occupiers, or owners of any neighbouring premises.

 

(b)        The Club will immediately comply with any notice relating to the abatement of any nuisance on the Premises that may be received by the Lessor, or the Club, or be served upon the Club by the Lessor, or by any Public Authority.

 

4.10     Gambling Liquor and Disorderly Conduct

 

(a)  The Club may allow any gambling and games of chance to take place or be conducted upon the Premises, subject to obtaining and retaining current all necessary consents, leases, permits and approvals required by law for the use to which the Club proposes to put the Premises.

 

(b)  The Club may allow the consumption of licensed liquor on the Premises, subject to obtaining and retaining current all necessary consents, leases, permits and approvals required by law for that use and providing that the Club ensures that persons using the Premises conduct themselves in a proper and orderly manner.

 

(c)  Should any person on the Premises not conduct himself or herself in a proper and orderly manner, or use offensive or profane language, or be guilty of disorderly or indecent conduct, the Club must forthwith expel or have expelled such person from the Premises.

Whilst the concerns raised in submissions are considered serious and it is appreciated that the patrons of the club may contribute to some extent to anti-social behaviour in neighbouring Central Park, it is difficult to verify that this is the sole cause.  As such, and in response to previous representations made to Council by concerned residents, a separate report has been prepared which provides further options for Council to consider relating to the establishment of Alcohol Free Zones in parks including Central Park, as a measure to curb anti-social behaviour and the negative impacts being experienced.  Additionally, Council has already reinstated the gate and lock at the Club to help ensure patrons do not leave the Club premises and consume alcohol in the adjacent Park and will reinforce with the club the need to manage issues surrounding noise and disorderly conduct that impacts on surrounding residents. The club has given a commitment to increase its vigilance to comply with the lease provisions and minimize the impacts identified.

 

University of Sydney (USYD)

 

The proposed licence agreement for the University of Sydney (USYD) relates to the future development of a new rowing shed at Burns Bay, off Linley Point Reserve. The intent of the agreement is solely to facilitate access across the public land to the proposed boatshed facility that has been approved for development on the adjoining RMS land. 

 

The development of the facility itself has already been through the DA process (DA77/2013) and will be constructed entirely on RMS land.  However, there will be a section of walkway from the roadway (Linely Lane) to the mean high water mark which Council proposes to licence to USYD for a ten (10) year term so that they can be assured a right of access to their facility.  The licence also proposes to allocate up to 7 of the 20 proposed car spaces to USYD.  At this stage it is envisaged that these parking spaces will be signposted for ‘permit holders only’.  The proposed licence area is highlighted in pink on the plan attached as AT-2.

 

Council received two (2) submissions and one (1) request for additional information during the notification period in relation to the proposed Linley Point Reserve licence.  The primary concerns raised within the submissions relate to the DA and development of the facility as opposed to the licence arrangements.  However, both submissions also opposed any restriction of public access to the Reserve and activity that could compromise the quiet passive enjoyment of Linley Park by the wider community. 

 

It is important to note that the Licence between Council and USYD provides a non exclusive right of access only and will not restrict public access to the Reserve. In fact, as part of the development USYD will be contributing to improvements within the Reserve that will offer greater public benefit including an extension of the roadway to allow one way through traffic (an RMS condition of the development), park upgrades such as walkways, lighting and landscaping works, additional parking spaces and the construction of a public jetty, alongside their facility, which will be leased by Council from RMS for public use (outlined in blue on AT-2).  Whilst the boatshed itself will be leased privately between RMS and USYD a condition has been included to allow it to be open up to 6 days per year for public use (open days / special events etc).

 

Potential parking issues resulting from additional demand generated by new developments in the area was also highlighted as an area of concern in both submissions.  It is noted that in light of large multi-unit developments in the surrounding area, all the proposed parking at this site will need to be monitored and restrictions may need to be imposed on public spaces in the future to ensure adequate parking availability for members of the public visiting the Reserve.

 

 




Conclusion

 

Whilst it is considered that the issues raised in the submissions from residents are relevant concerns, it is anticipated that the strategies proposed in this report and the report to Council on extending the number of reserves including Central Park as Alcohol Free Zones, will address the key matters.  In regard to Linley Point Reserve, it is considered that the proposed development by USYD will enhance the facilities and access to the Reserve for the benefit of the wider community. 

 

As such, it will be recommended that Council enter into a lease for a further ten (10) year term for the Longueville Sporting Club.  Also, that Council enter into a licence for a ten (10) year term with the University of Sydney for part Linley Point Reserve which will ensure access to their proposed facility to be constructed on adjoining RMS land.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:-

1.    Receive and note the report;

2.    Enter into a lease arrangement with the Longueville Sporting Club Limited for a ten (10) year term in respect of Community and Crown Land located at the intersection of River Road West and Kenneth Street, Longueville;

3.    Enter into a licence arrangement with the University of Sydney for a ten (10) year term in respect of Community Land located at Linley Point Reserve, Lane Cove; and

3.    Authorise the General Manager to finalise and execute the agreements on Council’s behalf.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

North Shore Times Advertisement for Lease of Longueville Sporting Club and Licence of Linley Point Reserve

1 Page

AT‑2 View

Plans of Licence Area - Linley Point Reserve - Sydney University

4 Pages

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Alcohol Free Zones in Local Parks & Reserves

 

 

Subject:          Alcohol Free Zones in Local Parks & Reserves    

Record No:    SU3530 - 4192/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      David Wilson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council resolved at its Ordinary Meeting of the 8 December 2014 to:-

1.         Review and update Alcohol Free Zones throughout Lane Cove parks and reserves, with the inclusion of Central Park, Longueville, to discourage disruptions to neighbours, and deter anti social behavior;

2.         Notify police of alleged anti social behaviour associated with the removal of alcohol from the Longueville Sporting Club and its consumption in the park; and

3.         Reinstate the gate with padlock at the Longueville Sporting Club to restrict direct movement into the park.

In reviewing this matter, Council’s Parks Section and Waste Contractors have advised that evidence of drinking and anti-social behaviour occurs in a small number of our parks in the Lane Cove LGA and presents as occasional vandalism and discarded alcohol bottles and littering.

 

Council held discussions with the Police, and they advised that previously, Pottery Green was frequently being used by underage persons that were drinking in the park after dark and that with improvements in the lighting and regular patrols of this location, these incidents have reduced significantly.

 

Whilst the incidence of drinking and anti-social behaviour is not a regular occurrence in all parks, anti social behaviour is generally undertaken after dark in areas that are poorly lit and in locations in close proximity of licensed premises or where alcohol can be purchased. Council has recorded alcohol related incidents at Central Park, Kingsford Smith Oval and Birrahlee Reserve.

 

To address this issue, it is recommended to place on public exhibition a proposal to declare Central Park, Kingsford Smith Oval and Birrahlee Reserve as Alcohol Free Zones (AFZ’s), other than for approved Council endorsed events.

 

Background

 

Currently  AFZ’s only apply for New Years Eve and Special Events as declared by the NSW State Government – such as the Naval Review, Lane Cove does not have any other AFZ’s  declared for its parks, reserves and open space.

 

In 2012, in response to anti-social behaviour at Manns Point Park on New Year’s Eve (NYE), Council declared all foreshore parks and Kingsford Smith Oval as Alcohol Free Zones (AFZ), with these restrictions being in place for the period of 6pm on 31 December to 9.00am on 1 January, from 31 December 2012 to 1 January 2016.

 

The AFZ on NYE has resulted in no anti-social behaviour being reported to the Council or Police for this particular event.

 

Discussion

 

A letter addressing the specific complaint concerning the Longueville Sporting Club and drinking in Central Park has been forwarded to Chatswood Police and the reinstatement of the gate and lock at the Club has been completed to ensure patrons do not leave the Club premises and consume alcohol in the adjacent Park.

 

Council does not have detailed data regarding specific instances of anti-social behaviour in local parks, as these matters are generally referred directly to the Police, although the recent community submission relating to antisocial behaviour in Central Park was submitted to Council following an alleged disturbance at this location in November 2014.

 

Council has held discussions with Chatswood Police about the incidents and reports about alcohol consumption, anti-social behaviour and underage drinking in the LGA. The Police have advised that approximately 12 months ago, Pottery Green was frequently being used by underage persons that were drinking in the park after dark. The Police have advised that with improvements in the lighting and regular patrols of this location, these incidents have reduced significantly from a policing perspective, and the area is no longer regarded as a location that requires regular Police patrols.

 

Council’s Parks Section and Waste Contractors (URM) have advised that evidence of drinking and anti-social behaviour is present in a few of our parks in the Lane Cove LGA and is observed in the form of occasional vandalism and the presence of alcohol bottles and littering.

 

The declaration of an area as an AFZ can have a negative impact on the use of public spaces and areas where the community socializes, and where alcohol may be consumed in a responsible manner, such as at a BBQ or picnic at one of the many harbourside locations, and consideration of such needs to be made before declaring an area as an AFZ.

 

Lane Cove’s parks and reserves are well patronized and attract members of the local community as well as many visitors and there may be a need to manage the use of these areas that are in close proximity of licensed premises or where alcohol can be purchased.

 

It is also appropriate to consider given the use of some of these locations and the community facilities, to enable Council to waive the restriction for special events that may occur on an infrequent basis, where alcohol may wish to be served in a responsible manner by the organizers of the event.

 

Council’s and the Police’s current regulatory powers are limited in relation to moving people on that are drinking in parks after dark, as none are declared as AFZ’s, other than on NYE. Accordingly a number of options are presented for consideration.

 

Option 1.   Place on exhibition a proposal to declare the following parks as AFZ/APA (24 Hour) that are in close proximity of licensed premises or locations where alcohol can be purchased from and within walking distance of these outlets (other than for approved Council endorsed events):-

·    Birrahlee Reserve;

·    Central Park; and

·    Kingsford Smith Oval.

 

Option 2.   Place on exhibition a proposal to declare all parks and reserves in the LGA between the hours of 8pm and 8am as AFZ’s and work with the local Police to have more regular patrols of hot spot areas (other than for approved Council endorsed events).

 

Legislation

 

Council is able to establish Alcohol Free Zones (AFZ’s) for roads, footpaths and car parks in accordance with Section 644 (4) of the Local Government Act, 1993 (the Act) that states:-

 

(4)The proposed alcohol-free zone may comprise either or both of the following:-

(a) a public road or part of a public road,

(b) a public place that is a car park or part of a car park.

 

The primary purpose of this Section is to prohibit the drinking of alcohol on public streets.

 

In addition to regulate the consumption of alcohol in public parks and reserves, Council is able to establish Alcohol Prohibited Areas (APA) in accordance with Section 632A (4) that states;

 

(4) A council may declare any public place (or any part of a public place) in the council’s area to be an "alcohol prohibited area" for the purposes of this section. However, an alcohol prohibited area cannot be established in relation to a public place that is a public road (or part of a public road) or car park.

 

The primary purpose of this Section is for police to have the power to seize, confiscate and dispose of alcohol where persons are found to be consuming alcohol in a public park.

 

In regard to both Sections of the Act, public consultation is required and approval from the Local Area Command prior to adoption by Council.

 

Community Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to inform local residents of Council’s intention to establish Alcohol Free Zones in the Lane Cove Local Government Area. Any comments received would be reviewed and evaluated prior to any determination whether or not to proceed with the establishment of Alcohol Free Zones in the Lane Cove Local Government Area.

 

Method

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Inform

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Open

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community and community groups

Residents of affected areas. Owners of licensed premises, Local Police.

Lane Cove Community

Proposed Medium

Advertisements,

E-newsletter, Posters on Public Notice in Library and Plaza

Notification Letters

 

Public and

Website Exhibitions

 

Indicative Timing

February to April

February to April

February to April

 

Budget

 

In declaring an AFZ’s, the NSW Government Guidelines on Alcohol Free Zones require widespread public consultation with the community and if adopted by Council, specific and clear signage installed defining the AFZ.

 

Council has over 50 parks in the LGA and as such if all were to be declared as AFZ’s, up to 10 signs per park would be required to adequately sign post these areas at a cost of approximately $50 to $100 per sign (manufacturing costs + installation costs) or a total cost of up to $50,000 to undertake these works. A budget allocation for would need to be allocated in the 2015/16 budget, should this option proceed.

 

Conclusion

 

Addressing anti-social behaviour linked to the consumption of alcohol can be challenging for both the Council and the Police where it impacts the community.

 

Feedback from the Police, Parks staff and Council’s Waste Contractor suggest that where it occurs in Lane Cove ,the problem is localized and has been dealt with by the Police in ‘moving people on’ and can be managed more formally by implementing AFZ’s in locations that are in close proximity to premises where alcohol can be purchased.

 

The advice from the community and the Police is that the locations where a few isolated incidents have occurred have generally been in locations close to premises that are licensed and or sell alcohol.

 

As such three locations are proposed for consideration as AFZ’s:-

·    Birrahlee Reserve;

·    Central Park; and

·    Kingsford Smith Oval.

 

It is therefore proposed that Option 1 be considered and these parks be exhibited as possible 24 hour AFZ’s and be implemented for a 4 year period, other than for approved Council endorsed events where Council may approve the consumption of alcohol.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:-

1.    Pursuant to Section 632A and Section 644 of the Local Government Act, 1993 the proposal to declare the following Central Park, Kingsford Smith Oval, and Birrahlee Reserve, as  Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas be placed on public exhibition for 6 weeks and community consultation take place in accordance with the consultation strategy outlined in the report; and

2.    A further report be submitted to Council following the exhibition period to consider the results of the community consultation.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Lane Cove Traffic Committee -  16 December 2014

 

 

Subject:          Lane Cove Traffic Committee -  16 December 2014    

Record No:    SU1326 - 7810/15

Division:         Open Space and Urban Services Division

Author(s):      Sashika Young 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Lane Cove Traffic Committee Meeting was held on Tuesday, 16 December 2014.  The Agenda is included as AT-1.  The Traffic Committee recommendations are shown in the Minutes of the Meeting, included as AT-2.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopt the recommendations of the Lane Cove Traffic Committee Meeting held on Tuesday, 16 December 2014.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

AGENDA - Traffic Committee - 16 December 2014

19 Pages

AT‑2 View

MINUTES - Traffic Committee - December 2014

10 Pages

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement for 96 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          Proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement for 96 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA13/19-01 - 7782/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report outlines a proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) relating to the strata subdivision of the subject site and a proposed contribution to Council for affordable housing initiatives, should it decide to enter into a VPA with the owner of 96 Burns Bay Road, Tobinvest Pty Ltd.

 

The State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 i.e. ‘the SEPP’ applies to the proposed strata subdivision of this 16 dwelling residential flat building into 16 lots, as the building meets the definition of a low-rental residential building. As a result, a contribution is payable to the State Government or alternatively the applicant can enter into negotiations for a VPA with Council for payment of a contribution for affordable housing in the Lane Cove LGA. This option is preferred by the applicant with a proposed contribution amounting to $127,000 being offered to Council. A Section 96 application has been lodged to vary a condition of Development Consent in DA19/13 in respect of the affordable housing contribution to facilitate the VPA.

 

The report will recommend that the proposed VPA be endorsed and placed on public exhibition for 28 days in conjunction with advertising the Section 96 Application.

 

Background

 

The objective of the Voluntary Planning Agreement system is to extend the means by which planning authorities such as Council may obtain development contributions to provide public amenities, services and other public purposes.

 

To assist Council in determining an appropriate contribution for the proposed VPA, HillPDA consultants were engaged to undertake an assessment as to the appropriate dollar value of the proposed VPA and community benefits.

 

The subject site is a two storey residential building located on the southern side of Burns Bay Road between Bridge Street and Grace Street, Lane Cove. Built in circa 1968 the building presently provides 8 x 2 bedroom and 8 x 1 bedroom units, some of which (between 4 and 14) were provided for rent at or below the median level for that type of unit in Lane Cove LGA at the time the application for strata subdivision was submitted.

 

As the building meets the definition of a low-rental residential building, the proposed strata subdivision triggers State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. The Affordable Rental Housing SEPP 2009 Guidelines (the Guidelines) prepared by Planning and Infrastructure (P&I) unequivocally state that “in cases where an affordable housing contribution is considered appropriate, the contribution must be determined and paid in accordance with the scheme set out in the SEPP. The scheme includes a standard formula for calculating the contribution amount. This formula is based on 5% of the notional cost of providing replacement affordable housing in the area”.

On this basis it has been assessed the value of the contribution is $159,000. This represents 5% of the full replacement cost ($530,000) of a unit on the basis of the loss of 6 low rental bedrooms.

i.e. $530,000 average unit value x 6 bedrooms x 5% of unit replacement cost = $159,000 contribution.


The NSW Centre for Affordable Housing confirmed with Hill PDA that the online tool provided by P&I continues to be the most appropriate method to calculate the contribution. It is noted that the contribution is normally paid to Department of Housing for affordable housing initiatives across the state.

 

Voluntary Planning Agreements and Public Purpose

 

Subdivision 2, Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 sets out the system of planning agreements in NSW. Section 93F(1) provides that “a planning agreement is a voluntary agreement or other arrangement between one or more planning authorities and a developer under which the developer agrees to make development contributions towards a public purpose”.

 

A public purpose is defined by Section 93F(2) of the EP&A Act 1979 to include: the provision of, or the recoupment of the cost of providing public amenities and public services (as defined in s93c), affordable housing, transport or other infrastructure. It also includes the funding of recurrent expenditure relating to such things as the monitoring of the planning impacts of development and the conservation and enhancement of the natural environment.

 

In keeping with the definition of public purpose, various VPA’s have secured the transfer of land to Council as a public benefit. Examples include the VPA in respect of 7-15 Centennial Avenue and 92-96 Gordon Crescent which provides for the transfer to Council of 15 Centennial Avenue to form part of Stringybark Creek Reserve and the VPA with Meriton for 150 Epping Road, provides in part for the transfer of 13,430sqm of land for a bushland reserve and contributions to infrastructure in the Lane Cove LGA. In this case, the VPA proposes a contribution for affordable housing initiatives in the Lane Cove LGA on the basis of the loss of 6 low rental bedrooms. The contribution would be in lieu of general condition 4 of the Development Consent for DA13/19 which requires payment of a contribution in accordance with Section 94F of the Environmental Planning Act and the SEPP. A Section 96 Application has been lodged for amendment to the consent to facilitate entering into the proposed VPA with Council.

 

Impacts to the Community

 

Council’s assessment of the original Development Application and a review of the Statement of Environmental Effects accompanying the application identified a notable number of impacts to the community as a result of the loss of affordable rental housing. These impacts would include, but not be limited to, the following:-

·    Reduced housing choice for existing and potential tenants;

·    Impacts to socio-economic diversity;

·    Increased impacts by way of possible social isolation and displacement for relocated tenants; and

·    Increased competition for affordable housing and housing stress as well as greater demand on publically funded housing and rent assistance.

 

In addition, the Guidelines state “Where the vacancy rate for Sydney is less than 3%, it must be concluded that there is not sufficient comparable accommodation in the locality to satisfy the demand for such accommodation. In those circumstances, a development proposing a loss of such accommodation is likely to cause adverse social and economic effects on the general community.” Given that existing vacancy rates are below 3% for Sydney and the subject site has a number of long term tenants within older age groups, Council’s assessment reiterates concerns regarding adverse impacts to the community as a result of the proposed subdivision.

 


Benefit to the Proponent

 

The Guidelines explain that the standard formula for calculating a contribution to mitigate the loss of affordable rental housing (referenced above) was developed to “provide consistency, fairness and predictability in the amount of contribution levied”. The Guidelines go on to state “Therefore no scope is provided for variation of the contribution amount. If the consent authority considers that the combined contributions payable for affordable housing and under section 94 are excessive, consideration should be given to reducing the amount payable under section 94.”

 

On this basis Hill PDA have tested whether the contribution, in addition to any additional contributions by way of s94 would create an unreasonable financial burden in light of the value gained by the approval of 16 strata title units.

 

The applicant has submitted that only four (4) units are presently rented at submarket rates and should therefore be applicable for an affordable housing contribution. Therefore, an exercise was undertaken by Hill PDA on the value uplift in these 4 units post subdivision. After allowing for subdivision costs and building works of $32,000 per unit to meet BCA standards on subdivision, it was determined that the value uplift for the 4 units would be in the order of $237,000 which therefore exceeds the assessed contribution of $159,000. It is anticipated that the overall uplift in value post subdivision for the 16 units would be approximately $900,000.

 

The applicant has proposed that the contribution required under the Act and the SEPP be paid to Council in the form of a VPA rather than the State Government. As the Contribution under the VPA would be for affordable housing initiatives in the Lane Cove LGA, rather than the State Government applying the contribution anywhere in NSW, the applicant requests a 20% discount on the contribution therefore the contribution would be in the amount of $127,000. It is considered that the request is not unreasonable given that the contribution would benefit the Lane Cove LGA, only which is most impacted by the strata subdivision.

 

Community Interest Test

 

It is considered that having the contribution paid to Council would allow for Council to give consideration to allocating the monies to developing strategies and studies addressing affordable housing needs in the area, the management of affordable/key worker housing which is being dedicated to Council with various developments such as 150 Epping Road (providing 13 units to Council) and or assisting with expenses associated with the relocation if need be of residents of 96 Burns Bay Road to appropriate aged care facilities in the area such as Pottery Gardens.

 

Community Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to permit public submissions on the proposed VPA for an affordable housing contribution.  Any comments received will be reviewed and evaluated as part of any determination as to whether or not to proceed with the VPA.

 


Method

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Inform

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Open

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community and residents of 96 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

Lane Cove Community and impacted residents

Lane Cove Community and impacted residents

Proposed Medium

Advertisement and

eNewsletter.

 

Notification Letters

Public Advertisement and

Website Exhibition

Indicative Timing

February/March 2015

February/March 2015

February/March 2015

 

Conclusion

 

The Development Consent and proposed VPA whilst benefiting the applicant through having the capacity to sell off 16 individual residential apartments at 96 Burns Bay Road, provides benefits to the community by providing funding to Council for affordable housing strategies and initiatives in the LGA. Otherwise, the contribution would be paid to the State Government and applied anywhere in New South Wales.

 

It is therefore recommended that Council exhibit the proposed VPA for public comment in conjunction with the notification of the Section 96 application in respect the determination of DA 13/19 for a period of 28 days as required by the legislation. Council is the consent authority for the Section 96 Application. However, prior to consideration of the application, Council will need to determine whether or not to accept the VPA following the consultation.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.   Council receive and note the report;

 

2.   Council give notice of its intention to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement  as outlined in the report with the owner of the subject site in accordance with the consultation strategy outlined in the report; and

 

3.   Following the community consultation, a further report be submitted to Council for determination.

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

96 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove - Locality Map

1 Page

AT‑2 View

Explanatory Note for Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement
96 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

3 Pages


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

2016 Local Government Elections

 

 

Subject:          2016 Local Government Elections    

Record No:    SU5619 - 1001/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Kirsty Fleming 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The next Ordinary Election of Council is scheduled for Saturday, 10 September 2016.  Pursuant to s. 296 (2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) (“the Act”) all NSW councils are required to determine arrangements for the conduct of the 2016 Local Government Elections by March 2015.  Councils must resolve whether to administer their own elections or appoint the NSW Electoral Commissioner (NSWEC) to conduct the election.

 

Background

 

Following the Local Government Amendments Bill 2011 which enabled councils in NSW to conduct their own elections, 14 councils, including Lane Cove Council, successfully conducted their own 2012 elections. The majority of these councils engaged the services of a private contractor, the Australian Election Company (the AEC).  However, Council resolved that the General Manager conduct the 2012 Local Government Elections for the Lane Cove Local Government Area and, as a result, achieved a 27% cost saving based on the estimated costs of the NSWEC. The total cost of Council’s 2012 election was approximately $103,000.

 

The Office of Local Government’s report on the review of the elections stated that the 14 Councils that administered their 2012 elections did so successfully and there were no disputes lodged about the declaration of the results.

 

Discussion

 

There are three (3) options available to Council in regard to the administration of the 2016 Local Government Elections:-

·    NSW Electoral Commission (NSWEC);

·    Australian Election Company (AEC); or

·    Council.

 

NSW Electoral Commission

 

This option provides the lowest risk to Council. Council is also exempted under the Act from having to call tenders even if the cost exceeds $150,000, if the NSWEC is chosen. The cost estimate received from the Commission for the conduct of the 2016 Election is $198,626.  This estimate is based on a similar sized council serviced by the NSWEC in 2012 with the Returning Officer office costs similar to that of the comparable council.  CPI growth since 2012 for non-staff expenses of 11% and wage growth since 2012 of 10.4% for staff expenses have been applied accordingly in calculating the estimate. 

 

Australian Election Company

 

A private company, headed up by Richard Kidd who has had significant experience working with the Australian Electoral Commission. They are based in Queensland, and have conducted council elections in both QLD and NSW. The risk in terms of their capability is considered minimal. 


An indicative quotation has been obtained which is commercial in confidence, and has been circulated separately to Councillors on a confidential basis. They are not the cheapest option.  If Council chooses this option, Council is not exempted under the Act from having to call tenders, however, s55(3)(i) allows Council to resolve to not call tenders, because of ‘...the unavailability of competitive or reliable tenderers’. At this time there are no other firms who can conduct the election and the NSWEC has indicated it will not respond to tenders. If this option is chosen the contractor must appoint a ‘natural person’ as the Returning Officer, not simply name the particular company.

 

Council

 

The final option would be for Council to again administer its own election. The General Manager can conduct the election by appointing a suitably qualified Returning Officer and Substitute Returning Officer. The DLG Guidelines state the Returning Officer is responsible for:-

·    “managing the Returning Officer’s office;

·    appointing and training staff including Polling Place Managers on how to conduct a count and how to determine formality of ballot papers;

·    developing procedures to be followed by electoral officials issuing pre-poll, declared institution, postal and election day votes;

·    preparing all necessary printed election materials such as forms, declaration envelopes, signs etc;

·    obtaining all necessary election material for use in pre-poll and election day venues such as voting screens, ballot boxes, pencils etc;

·    determining the quantity of ballot papers required and arranging for their printing, delivery and secure storage;

·    making Braille ballot papers available, if requested;

·    dealing with political parties, candidates and the public;

·    processing candidates’ nominations including acceptance of the deposit and conducting the draw for position of candidates on the ballot paper;

·    registering how to vote material;

·    putting in place all necessary arrangements to enable pre-poll, declared institution, postal and election day voting;

·    ensuring delivery and collection of election materials to and from pre-poll and election day polling venues;

·    conducting the ‘check count’ of the votes and the distribution of preferences;

·    declaring the election; and

·    arranging storage (and ultimate destruction) of ballot papers and voting-related materials for the statutory period of 6 months.”

 

Whilst this option poses the highest risk to Council and would require Council staff being re-allocated to the task, it is achievable as demonstrated in 2012. 

 

In terms of costs, it is estimated that the cost of conducting the 2016 Election in house would be approximately $115,000.  This is based on an 11% increase in non-staff costs and 10% increase in staffing costs between September 2012 and September 2016.  The key to running a successful election is the appointment of an experienced Returning Officer, support of Council officers and the effective internalisation of associated costs.  Mr Tony Bounader was appointed Returning Officer for the 2012 election and from all accounts did an excellent job, with the elections being conducted without incident.  Unfortunately Mr Bounader has advised he would not be available to conduct elections for Council in 2016. Should Council support this option, it is proposed that the General Manager appoint a Returning Officer early in 2016 to commence preparation for the Election.

 

On the issue of costs, the DLG Guidelines outline the requirement for each Council to “prepare a report for the Minister for Local Government on the conduct of each election that must disclose, among other things, full and transparent costings for that election….

 

It needs to be acknowledged that although council staff may be used to undertake administrative tasks related to the conduct of elections, this comes at a cost. Notably any time spent on election-related work is time not spent on other council duties. Similarly use of council office space or office equipment or resources for election-related work is at the expense of other day to day council activities.

 

The internalisation of costs is exactly that, i.e. it does not have a direct impact on Council’s budget. The size of the tasks undertaken by staff are not significant enough to warrant concern on the impact of Council operations.  At the last election, Council IT staff proved more than capable of effectively supporting the Returning Officer and the cost of using existing recently retired computer equipment has no cost impact. Similarly using council’s Training Room for office accomodtation and processing a pay run to pay the casual staff will require additional effort, and may even incur overtime, but will be minimal compared to the amount proposed by the NSWEC and AEC.

 

Conclusion

 

Council has proven that it can conduct an election in a professional, efficient and cost effective manner.  Therefore, based on the cost estimates received and the cost previously incurred as a result of administering Council’s own 2012 elections, it is recommended that Council conduct the 2016 Ordinary Election. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:-

1.    Council conduct  in house the 2016 Ordinary Election of Council; and

2.    The New South Wales Electoral Commission be advised of Council’s decision.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Tender for Blackman Park Creek

 

 

Subject:          Tender for Blackman Park Creek    

Record No:    SU5698 - 7515/15

Division:         Open Space and Urban Services Division

Author(s):      Martin Terescenko 

 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Blackman Park was previously the location of a landfill site that closed in the late 1970’s. The landfill area was subsequently converted to a recreational park and has a two tiered layout with sporting fields on both tiers. The top tier was recently upgraded with a synthetic surface, providing for two full size soccer/rugby fields and one AFL/cricket field.  Within the landfill area there are a series of stormwater drains. The drains below the top tier are non-functioning and require replacing. Due to the continuing settlement of the landfill, the subsequent difficulty to construct a new stormwater line in this area, and to assist in mitigating flood issues caused by the non-functioning stormwater drain, a creek will be constructed along the southern edge of Blackman Park.

 

The project has been divided into three separate packages of work, due to the specialty involved in each area:-

1.   Main Civil Works;

2.   Landscaping; and

3.   Boardwalks.

Council called for tenders in accordance with Council’s Tender and Quotation Procedure for the construction of the Blackman Park Creek.  This report provides details on the tender process conducted and recommends that the following tenders be accepted:-

1.   Main Civil Works - Package 1: Hargraves Urban Pty Ltd;

2.   Landscaping – Package 2: Assessed as a quote under Council’s Tender and Quotation Procedure (as the price was well below $150,000); and

3.   Boardwalks – Package 3: Fleetwood Urban Pty Ltd.

Discussion

 

When Blackman Park was used as landfill a series of stormwater drains were constructed at close to the original ground levels. These drains are now some 15m below the current ground level. Over the years the stormwater drains under the top tier of Blackman Park have completely deteriorated to such an extent that they are now completely unserviceable.

 

Prior to the construction of the synthetic fields the ovals at Blackman Park were regularly flooded because the non-functional stormwater drains were unable to drain the water from the Lane Cove West catchment to the Lane Cove River. During the design phase of the synthetic fields it was determined that the most appropriate course of action to resolve the stormwater problems was to construct a new creek along the southern edge of Blackman Park between the synthetic sports field and the bushland. It was also identified early on that this would provide numerous environmental benefits as detailed below. 

 

The project has a number of key objectives including:-

·    Upgrade and improve the drainage on the site to address impacts on flooding of the synthetic playing fields and the lower grass playing fields;

·    Improve the quality of stormwater discharging from the site into Lane Cove River;

·    Enhance visual amenity of the park;

·    Enhance recreational amenity of the park;

·    Provide ecological habitat opportunity;

·    Minimise water leaching into the landfill and on to the Lane Cove River;

·    Ensure public safety in the vicinity of new creek and wetland; and

·    Provide park user interaction opportunities with creek and wetland environments.

 

The project was split initially into four separate parts as outlined in the table below. The Early Works Package was completed by the synthetic sports field contractor, and was undertaken at this stage to ensure the new fields were not flooded whilst being constructed.

 

Package

Components

Early Works (completed)

Excavation of creekline and wetland to bulk excavation design levels

1. Main

All remaining earthworks, civil, hydraulic and landscaping works to the creekline and wetland excluding works in Package 2 and 3

2. Landscaping

Planting out and establishment of all planted areas

3. Boardwalks

All bridges and boardwalks including piers, decking and balustrading

 

Separate tenders were called for the three remaining packages and it is proposed to consider them all in this report.

 

Tender Specification

 

A tender specification was prepared detailing the schedule of work, hours of work, safety requirements and reporting requirements for the works in all three packages.  The specification outlined that the tender submissions would be assessed based on the following weighted criteria:-

 

Price 20%:- Based on the Tender Price and schedule of rates provided in the mandatory schedules.

 

The bids were scored based on a pro rata difference in prices submitted, with the lowest price receiving 50 points. 

 

Capability and Capacity 40%:- Capability, Capacity & Timing. Assessment refers to the experience of the tenderer and its personnel, including management and supervision, the experience of any sub-contractors to be used, the capability of the tenderer to work within relevant policy frameworks and applicable legislation, and any initiatives for change and improvement. 

 

Timeliness refers to the tailoring of the sequence of activities to ensure the desired project outcomes and the company’s timeliness in being able to complete the project in the specified time.

 

To achieve the maximum score the tenderer is to have relevant experience, capability to provide the goods and perform the services required, positive reference checks, provide full details of personnel and equipment to carry out the work, management structure of the company and contingency plans to cover downtime and other unforseen circumstances. 

 

Experience 30%:- This criteria refers the relevant experience of the Tenderer, key personnel and the extent of skills/qualifications of the people who will be engaged to carry out the contractor's obligations under the Contract.

 

To achieve the maximum score the tenderer is to have provided details of key personnel, previous projects and had to have experience undertaking works for local government.

 

Work, Health & Safety 5%:- Work, Health and Safety refers to the tenderer’s commitment to and compliance with the Work, Health & Safety Act 2000 and Work, Health & Safety Regulation 2001.

 

To achieve the maximum score the tenderer is to provide details in their submission that they have an WHS Management Plan and work method statements.

 

Environment and Sustainability 5%:- Environment and Sustainability Assessment refers to the manner in which environmental issues are to be appropriately addressed, including commitment to due diligence and the principles of ecologically sustainable development (ESD) in regard to environmental legislation and documentation outlining past performance in regard to environment protection and enhancement initiatives.

 

To achieve the maximum score the tenderer was to provide details of an environmental policy and answer yes to all applicable questions in the Environmental Survey included in the tender specification. 

 

Advertisement

 

Council advertised the tender in the Sydney Morning Herald on 13, 16 and 17 December 2014, North Shore Times on 17 December and the Tender Link Website.  Tenders closed at 2:00pm on 3 February 2015 and Council received 8 conforming submissions for the Civil Works; 9 conforming tenders for the Landscaping; and 4 conforming tenders for the Boardwalks. 

 

The tender evaluation panel consisted of Council’s Manager Assets, Design Engineer and Landscape Architect.

 

Evaluation

 

Civil Work – Package 1

Each tender was assessed based on the above weighted criteria and ranked accordingly:-

 

Company

Price (20%)

Capability, Capacity & Timing (40%)

Experience (30%)

Work, Health & Safety (5%)

Environment (5%)

Australian Prestressing Services Pty Ltd

 

 

 

 

 

Celtic Civil Pty Ltd

Equally Preferred

 

 

Equally Preferred

 

Civil Constructions Pty Ltd

 

 

Preferred

Equally Preferred

Equally Preferred

Civil Edge Contracting Pty Ltd

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

 

Hargraves Urban Pty Ltd

Equally Preferred

Preferred

 

Equally Preferred

Equally Preferred

Quality Management & Constructions Pty Ltd

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

 

Simmons Civil Contracting Pty Ltd

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

 

Think Pink Tippers Pty Ltd

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

Equally Preferred

 

One tender from Scape Constructions Pty Ltd was received via email. This tender was not considered as it was not submitted into Council’s Tender Box as per the tender requirements.

 

Landscaping – Package 2

The prices for the Landscaping came in well under $150,000 and will be assessed as a quote under Council’s Tender and Quotation Procedure.

 

Boardwalks – Package 3

Each tender was assessed based on the above weighted criteria and ranked accordingly:-

 

Company

Price (20%)

Capability, Capacity & Timing (40%)

Experience (30%)

Work, Health & Safety (5%)

Environment (5%)

Australian Prestressing Services Pty Ltd

 

 

 

 

 

Fleetwood Urban Pty Ltd

Preferred

Preferred

Preferred

Equally Preferred

Equally Preferred

Quality Management & Constructions Pty Ltd

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

Equally Preferred

Total Earth Care Pty Ltd

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

Equally Preferred

 

Budget

 

The creek works are a major capital upgrade of Council’s stormwater system in Blackman Park and will form part of Council’s drainage infrastructure. The creek design replaces the non functioning stormwater lines under the landfill and will be paid for out of Council’s Infrastructure Levy.

 

The Landscaping and Boardwalk components will be paid for out of Council’s Capex program for 2014/15.

 

Conclusion

 

A confidential memorandum has been circulated separately to Councillors detailing the prices submitted by each tenderer, how each of the weighted criteria was assessed and details of the reference checks undertaken of the recommended tenderer.

 

Having recorded the highest score across the weighted criteria and positive reference checks were received about the quality and reliability of their work, the Tender Panel recommends that:-

1.   The tender from Hargraves Urban Pty Ltd be accepted for Main Civil Works - Package 1 and they be awarded the contract; and

2.   The tender from Fleetwood Urban Pty Ltd be accepted for Boardwalks - Package 3 and they be awarded the contract.

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:-

1.         Accept the tender from Hargraves Urban Pty Ltd for the Blackman Park Creek Main Civil Works – Package 1 for an amount of $622,890.54;

2.         Accept the tender from Fleetwood Urban Pty Ltd for the Blackman Park Creek Boardwalks – Package 3 for an amount of $240,202.00; 

3.         Note that Blackman Park Creek – Package 2 will be assessed as a quote under Council’s Tender and Quotation Procedure; and

4.         The General Manager be authorised to enter into contracts with Hargraves Urban Pty Ltd and Fleetwood Urban Pty Ltd

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-2015 Budget

 

 

Subject:          2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-2015 Budget    

Record No:    SU757 - 4551/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

The Second Quarter 2014 - 2015 Budget Review involves a variety of variations in both income and expenditure. It is recommended that the Budget be varied in terms of the report.

 

Background

 

Council is required to prepare a Budget Review Statement each quarter, in accordance with Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. This report is prepared in accordance with the clause for the period ending 31st December 2014. The Division of Local Government has issued a prescribed format for reviews which is included as an attachment to this report. The purpose of these reviews is to ensure that the impact of financial variations are reflected in the forecast of Council’s global budgetary position to 30 June 2015, and the adopted Budget adjusted accordingly.

 

Discussion

The following is a summary of Council’s adopted Budget for 2014 - 2015 and the revised Budget following the adjustments included in this report:-

 

All Numbers(000’s)

Original Budget

30.09.2014
Quarter 1 Revised Budget

31.12.2014 Quarter 2 Adjustments

31.12.2014 Quarter 2 Revised Budget

Expenditure

$37,391

$717

$210

$927

Income

$42,548

$1,015

$4,931

$5,946

Surplus/ (Deficit)

$5,157

$298

$4,721

$5,019

Surplus/(Deficit) before

Capital Grants/Contributions

-

$298

$15

$313

 

Operating Expenditure

Two adjustments are recommended for review for Operating Expenditure. Legal expenses continue to exceed original estimates due to appeals in the Land and Environment Court. Legal Expenses exceeded $400,000 at the end of December with further invoices to be paid. In addition an adjustment was required for Public Liability Insurance for Market Square 

Capital Expenditure

The major adjustment in Capital Expenditure was raising funds for the completion of Blackman Park which is funded by Section 94. An upgrade of the Assetic Asset Management software was also included. This will allow for a renewed Asset Management Plan and calculation of the cost to bring the Assets of the Council to a satisfactory condition.

Operating Income

There were a number of changes necessary to Operating Income at the end of the second financial quarter. Interest on Investments continued to exceed estimates as the portfolio remains larger than anticipated even though interest rates remain low. Section 94 Development Application Fees have exceeded the original estimate with the continued high level of development activity which has also increased the fees from archiving the Development Applications. Adjustments are necessary to both the Plaza and the Aquatic Centre leases due to delays in construction and deferrals of rentals.


Capital Income

 

The major adjustment in Capital Income is due to the continued high level of Section 94 Fees received. These fees are earmarked for projects outlined in the Section 94 Plan and held as reserves for these purposes. To that extent a transfer from reserve is required as carry over funds into the 2014/2015 financial year for the project at Blackman Park.

 

Conclusion

The following statement is made in accordance with Clause 203(2) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

It is my opinion that the quarterly Budget Review Statement for Lane Cove Council for the quarter ended 31 December 2014 indicates that Council's projected financial position will be satisfactory at year end 30 June 2015, having regard to the projected estimates of income and expenditure and the original budgeted income and expenditure.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the 2014 – 2015 Budget be varied as follows:-

 

 

Original Budget

30.09.2014
Quarter 1 Revised Budget

31.12.2014

Quarter 2 Adjustments

31.12.2014 Quarter 2 Revised Budget

Expenditure

$37,391

$717

$210

$927

Income

$42,548

$1,015

$4,931

$5,946

Surplus/ (Deficit)

$5,157

$298

$4,721

$5,019

Surplus/(Deficit) before

Capital Grants/Contributions

-

$298

$15

$313

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Budget Review for Quarter Ended 31st December 2014

6 Pages

 

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Neighbour Day 2015

 

 

Subject:          Neighbour Day 2015    

Record No:    SU4985 - 7918/15

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):      Corinne Dickinson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council’s operational plan highlights the need to encourage interaction between neighbours which to date has included initiatives such as Love Where You Live, Meet the Neighbours and A Guide to Street Parties.

 

The National Neighbour Day campaign is held on the last Sunday in March each year. In addition to promoting the March campaign to the local community, Council intends to foster the sentiment of Neighbour Day all year round.

 

In demonstrating how the Love Where You Live project fosters neighbourhood interaction, Council has become the first Council in Australia to receive the status of ‘Very Neighbourly Organisation’.

 

Background

 

Council’s operational plan identifies the need to establish a neighbourhood program that encourages interaction between neighbours.

 

The Love Where You Live project has provided activities and resources such as the Meet the Neighbours event series and A Guide to Street Parties.

 

The National Neighbour Day campaign complements Council’s neighbourhood activities and as a result Council approached National Neighbour Day organisers, Relationships Australia to get involved in the 2015 campaign on Sunday 29 March.

 

Discussion

 

Council will promote the National Neighbour Day campaign to the local community, encouraging local residents and businesses to support the event.

 

Council is also producing a local Discover Your Neighbourhood pack in time for National Neighbour Day providing an opportunity for existing and new residents to explore and connect with their local community. The pack will be produced through the Love Where You Live campaign and can, in conjunction with other resources, continue the neighbourhood focus beyond the single day on 29 March.

 

The ongoing commitment of Council has been recognized by Relationships Australia who have confirmed Council as a Very Neighbourly Organisation (VNO).

 

A VNO is a community organisation, business group, or government organisation which:-

·    Has significant networks of community minded members who are actively involved in local activities;

·    Believes in the importance of social connection and resilient communities;

·    Is able to support the Neighbour Day message and campaign activities; and

·    Can help grow the Neighbour Day ethos beyond a single day, to being kind and caring                         about your local community every day of the year.

 


A VNO must demonstrate the following five principles which represent the founding principles of Neighbour Day:-

1.  Strengthen communities and build better relationships with the people who live around us;

2.  Create safer, healthier and more vibrant suburbs and towns;

3.  Promote tolerance, respect and understanding;

4.  Break down community barriers; and

5.  Protect the elderly, the vulnerable and the disadvantaged.

 

This status is reflected on the Neighbour Day website which features Council’s Love Where You Live logo and a reciprocal link to Council’s website:-

http://www.neighbourday.org/national-support-partners/very-neighbourly-organisations/

 

Conclusion

 

Council is pleased that through a number of initiatives as part of the Love Where You Live campaign it has become the first Council in Australia to be recognised as a Very Neighbourly Organisation.

 

This status reflects Council’s ongoing commitment to initiatives which promote neighbourly behaviour within the Lane Cove community.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note this report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Lane Cove West Road Safety Status

 

 

Subject:          Lane Cove West Road Safety Status    

Record No:    SU5044 - 8162/15

Division:         Open Space and Urban Services Division

Author(s):      Wayne Rylands 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Over the past 2 years Council has undertaken a number of initiatives with the Lane Cove West Public School to improve road safety. This was initiated with a traffic study that was undertaken by staff in May 2013. The study is provided as AT-1. It is recommended that the report be received and noted.

 

Background

 

Council at its meeting of 8 December 2014 requested an update on the status of initiatives that were developed as a part of that study.

 

In late 2012, Lane Cove West Public School and the Parents & Citizens (P&C) Association approached Council to help them with improving road safety around the school as student numbers continued to increase and additional rooms were in the process of being added to the school.

 

The main road safety issues raised by the school and P&C were as follows:-

 

1.   Safety for students at the start of the school day in Cullen Street, due to traffic volumes and observed vehicle speeds;

2.   Parents/carers arrive early and overstay the parking time limits;

3.   Parents encourage students to jaywalk across Cullen Street, to/from the school; and

4.   Parents are unwilling to adhere to parking restrictions on Cullen Street during the start and end of the school day.

 

Section 4 of the study report provided a series of recommendations to address these issues. This report provides an update for Councillors on what has occurred to date, and what action is still in progress.

 

Discussion

 

Since the study report was presented to Council in mid-2013, a number of the initiatives proposed have either been implemented or Council is awaiting action from various state government departments or stakeholders to implement them.

 

Alterations have been made to the parking arrangements for the school drop off and pick up areas on Cullen Street, based on the surveys undertaken by staff and the recommendations of the study. Now after a year in place, the feedback from the school is that the new parking arrangements appear to be working well, and the incidence of illegal parking in particular has reduced significantly.

 

In late May 2014, Council wrote to the State Transit Authority (STA), requesting the reinstatement of the school bus that traverses through Lane Cove and Riverview. A significant number of students come from these areas, and currently parents have little alternative but to drive them, particularly in inclement weather. Support for the reintroduction of a school bus was provided by over 40 parents when a survey was undertaken by Council. Unfortunately, to date the STA has not agreed to the reinstatement of the bus, even though Transport for NSW has indicated its’ support. Staff will maintain pressure on the STA to reinstate the bus service.

 

Also, as part of the study undertaken in 2013, Council explored the possibility of introducing ‘Walking Buses’ to the school. Three realistic routes were identified by staff where at least 20 students would be able to form a group and walk as a collective to school. Due to the ages of the children, this would require adult supervision. As such, either parents or a suitably qualified person (with child protection checks, etc) would be required to provide that adult supervision. The school P&C has indicated that it would be difficult to get parents to commit to this over any extended period. RMS has also confirmed that there is currently no programme to fund Walking Bus schemes to schools and advised that NSW Health would be better placed to provide support. Health has also advised that no financial assistance is available in their current budgets.

 

The final initiative from the study still awaiting finalization is the Henley Street parking alterations. This matter is currently with RMS, awaiting consideration by the Regional Traffic Committee. It is anticipated that the matter will be considered in either late February or early March. Staff will keep Council informed on this matter once it has been considered and formal advice is received from the Regional Traffic Committee.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Lane Cove West Public School - Traffic Study

48 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-15 Delivery Program and Operational Plan

 

 

Subject:          2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-15 Delivery Program and Operational Plan    

Record No:    SU238 - 5320/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Kirsty Fleming 

 

 

Executive Summary

This report outlines the 2nd Quarter progress towards achieving the projects listed in the adopted 2014-2015 Delivery Program and Operational Plan.  It is recommended that the report be received and noted.

Discussion

Council’s adopted 2014-2015 Delivery Program and Operational Plan details the projects proposed to be undertaken during the financial year in order to meet the goals and objectives of Lane Cove 2025 - Community Strategic Plan. Council reports quarterly on the progress towards completing the projects and achieving the targets for the adopted performance measurements. The 2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-2015 Delivery Program and Operational Plan is shown attached as AT-1

 

The projects in the Quarterly Review are listed by the responsible Council Division and where the project has a completion date the ‘Action Status’ column graphically demonstrates the progress towards completion. The Review also includes a comment on the status of each project.

 

The Quarterly Review also provides a report on progress towards achieving the targets set for performance measurement for each Division of Council. A cumulative figure for performance measurement is shown so that performance can be tracked each quarter towards achieving the required target.

The highlights of the projects either commenced or completed for the 2nd quarter include:-

·    Synthetic playing fields completed and officially opened (November);

·    Small Steps, Positive Parenting Program Parent Forums were held (October/November);

·    Completed the upgrade of the Lane Cove Plaza (November)

·    Produced Council’s Annual Report as part of the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework (November);

·    Coffee Carnevale event was held promoting local restaurants and produce showcasing the cafe culture in Lane Cove (November);

·    Community consultations held for for Rosenthal Car Park Redevelopment Design Ideas (November – December);

·    Community consultation commenced for St Leonards Draft Master Plan (December)

·    Kindy Cove Child Care Centre refurbishment was completed and an official opening was held (December);

·    Lane Cove Aquatic Centre Gymnasium Extensions completed (December);

·    New walkway was completed at Manns Point Greenwich and an official opening was held (December).

·    Light Up Lane Cove Christmas Lights Competition held (December).

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the 2nd Quarter Review of the 2014-15 Delivery Program and Operational Plan be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

2nd Quarter Review of 2014 - 2015 Operational Plan

48 Pages

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 16 February 2015

Council Snapshot

 

 

Subject:          Council Snapshot    

Record No:    SU220 - 7822/15

Division:         General Managers Unit

Author(s):      Millie Stephen 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Attached for the information of Councillors is a review of Council’s recent activities, entitled Council Snapshot. This report provides a summary of the operations of each Division.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Council Snapshot

55 Pages