m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

7 December 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 7 December 2015 commencing at 6.30pm. 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 Deborah Hutchens. 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 7 December 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO COUNTRY

 

NOTICE OF WEBCASTING OF MEETING

 

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

 

Confidential Items

 

1.      Little Lane Commercial Terms and Fitout Costs

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.

 

2.      Rosenthal Avenue Development - Tennant Commercial Terms

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret; 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. 

public forum

 

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

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

3.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 16 NOVEMBER 2015

 

Petitions

 

4.      Petition Requesting Council to Authorise Funds for the Purchase of Land for the Proposed Pinaroo Park

 

Orders Of The Day

 

Notices of Motion

 

5.      Private Members Bill - Preservation of Local Democracy

 

Officer Reports for Determination

 

6.      Planning Proposal 22 (1-13A Marshall Ave) post-exhibition

 

7.      Proposed Review of Ward Boundaries

 

8.      Draft Sustainability Action Plan

 

9.      LEP Review 2015 - Further Report

 

10.    DCP Review 2015: Child Care and Parking

 

11.    Amendment to the Lane Cove Country Club Constitution

 

12.    Delegation of Authority During the Christmas Recess

 

13.    Council Meeting Schedule - 2016

 

14.    November 2015 Traffic Committee

 

Officer Reports for Information

 

15.    Successful Festival by the River

 

16.    Remembrance Day Poppy Project

 

17.    Community Wellbeing Index  

 

 

 

 

           


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Petition Requesting Council to Authorise Funds for the Purchase of Land for the Proposed Pinaroo Park

 

 

Subject:          Petition Requesting Council to Authorise Funds for the Purchase of Land for the Proposed Pinaroo Park    

Record No:     SU6135 - 73899/15

Division:         Open Space and Urban Services Division

Author(s):       Peter Patterson 

 

 

 

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a petition received on 2 December 2015 with 41 signatures formally requesting “Lane Cove Council to urgently authorise the funds required to purchase the land needed for the proposed PINAROO PARK in the western area of Mowbray precinct.

 

Background

 

Mowbray Precinct was rezoned from R3 medium density zoning to R4 high density in January 2013. Council objected to the rezoning but it was pushed through by the Department of Planning. Council lobbied the DG of the Department of Planning for a joint planning and  traffic study to assist in reviewing the LEP and the need for any amendments. The study outcomes lead to a revised rezoning of the Mowbray Precinct - new zonings of 1.6:1 & 14.5m (4 Storeys) for eastern area and 1.8:1 & 17.5m (5 Storeys) for western area. The Land and Housing Corporation owned 113 properties in the western area with the higher zoning.

 

10-20 Pinaroo Place is affected by bush fire and Riparian zones, and as such could not be developed as high density residential. As these properties adjoin Council’s existing park at 18 Mindarie Street, houses 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 20 were identified for a proposed land swap with 1 Giraween Avenue in order to build a large central park to provide for the population increase. The houses proposed for the swap are owned by the Land and Housing Corporation. To date the Land and Housing Corporation has been prepared to swap the land with Council although negotiations and representations to State Ministers are ongoing.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

1.   Council receive and note the petition;

2.   Council indicate it is still committed to acquire the land at Pinaroo for the purpose of a park, and 

3.   The head petitioner be informed of Council’s decision.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Patterson

Executive Manager - Open Space and Urban Services

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Private Members Bill – Preservation of Local Democracy

 

 

Subject:          Private Members Bill – Preservation of Local Democracy    

Record No:     SU5558 - 73827/15

Division:         Lane Cove Council

Author(s):       Councillor Scott Bennison 

 

 

 

Councillors would be aware of the Report of the NSW Legislative Council Inquiry into Local Government in New South Wales and the resulting 17 recommendations including the support for the Joint Regional Authority (JRA) model developed by this Council in conjunction with Hunters Hill and Ryde.

 

This Legislative Council’s inquiry has vindicated local Councils in NSW that have stood against amalgamations.

 

We all know that State Government predetermined the criteria so that Local Government would fail any assessment and has been disingenuous throughout this whole process.

 

For those councils who have resisted and elected to stand alone we congratulate you for standing up for local democracy.

 

On the 18 November 2015 over 600 people attended a rally at Martin Place Sydney in protest against forced amalgamations.

 

I would like thank Greg Cumming, the Mayor of Holroyd, other Councils/Councillors and residents for their assistance in organising and attending the rally. We should also offer a special thanks to representatives from our regional councils Blaney and Cabonne who travelled long distances to attend the rally.

 

I would like to especially thank our guest speakers, Greg Cumming (Mayor of Holroyd), Keith Rhodes (President of LGNSW) Toni Zeltzer (Mayor of Woollahra), Alan Jones, the  Mayors of Cabonne and Blaney, Legislative Members, Peter Primrose (Labor), David Shoebridge (The Greens), Fred Nile (Christian Democrats) and Robert Borsak (Shooters & Fishers Party).

 

We appreciate that the members of the Legislative Council once again provided assurances that no legislation would pass through the NSW Upper House that forced Council’s to amalgamate. It was unfortunate that no members of the Government attended to substantiate their views on forced amalgamations.

 

Councillors will recall the contempt that the Premier and the Minister for Local Government displayed towards Councillors at the recent Local Government Conference and more recently in a letter which essentially stated that unless we adopt their agenda for forced amalgamations then we will not be part of the future of Local government.

 

I propose we go one step further and call upon the Legislative Council members who support local democracy to move a Private Members Bill to implement the recommendations from the Legislative Council, Local Government Inquiry into Local Government. Included as AT-1 is example drafting of the changes required.

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to the recommendations contained in the report of the NSW Legislative Council General Purpose Standing Committee No. 6 that:-

 

1.     Council write to MP’s Fred Nile and Paul Green, and request that a joint Private Members Bill, the “Preservation of Local Democracy Bill”, be presented to the NSW Parliament at the first sitting of Parliament in 2016. The Bill would make changes to the Local Government Act 1993 which reflect the findings of the Legislative Council Inquiry into Local Government, in particular that no merger of councils can be proposed by the Minister unless there is demonstrable evidence that the councils are severely financially unsustainable to the point of insolvency or are otherwise unable to maintain an acceptable level of service provision to their respective local communities.

 

2.     Request that the MP’s make a public statement in respect of 1, as soon as possible; and

 

3.     Write to our Local Member the Hon. Anthony Roberts, MP’s David Shoebridge, Robert Borsak, and Peter Primrose and LGNSW to seek their support for 1.

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Scott Bennison

Councillor

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Suggested Provisions to Give Effect to Certain Recommendations Contained in the Report of the NSW Legislative Council General Purpose Standing Committee No. 6

4 Pages

 

 

   


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Planning Proposal 22 (1-13A Marshall Ave) post-exhibition

 

 

Subject:          Planning Proposal 22 (1-13A Marshall Ave) post-exhibition    

Record No:     SU5763 - 72304/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):       Stephanie Bashford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Planning Proposal 22 relating to 1-13A Marshall Avenue, St Leonards was recently exhibited to amend the site’s height from 65 metres to 94 metres under Local Environmental Plan 2009 in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act.

 

The proposed height increase would permit the redistribution of the existing FSR across the site. The purpose is to permit a building form producing faster-moving shadows over the properties to the south, massing the majority of the building form at the eastern end of the site closest to the rail line.

 

It is important to note that:-

·    No increase is proposed to the Floor Space Ratio, residential density, vehicle numbers or infrastructure requirements i.e. the FSR remains the same as under the LEP since 2010.

·    State agencies have endorsed Council’s strategy that would result from the planning proposal.

 

The LEP height would be amended to facilitate a reduced overall shadow impact and  align with the associated public benefits scheme under the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) as endorsed in 2014, contributing directly to the provision of the new St Leonards Rail Plaza.

 

The planning proposal is consistent with the State Government’s strategic policies, in that the St Leonards Specialized Centre is changing in character with increases in heights across its three local government areas in proximity to the rail station.

 

The proposal aims to support the revitalization of the St Leonards Specialized Centre in line with the Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney by supporting growth and public amenity in proximity to the St Leonards rail station.

 

Submissions received discussed wide-ranging issues, most of which referred to the effects of population density that are unrelated to the proposed height increase, as floor space would remain unchanged.

 

Submissions relevant to the height increase are discussed below.

 

It is concluded that the proposed height increase from around 21 storeys to 29 storeys is consistent with the strategic planning context, and the effects on other properties in the precinct are not grounds to alter the proposal as the urban design benefits to the St Leonards centre’s public domain and infrastructure are in the broader public interest.

 

The NSW agencies Roads & Maritime Services, Transport for NSW and Sydney Trains submissions advised that they have no objection the proposal.

 

It is recommended, having regard to the above factors, that Council approve Planning Proposal 22 for 1-13A Marshall Avenue, St Leonards (AT 1 – available electronically) for submission to the Department for finalization.

 

Background

 

·    On 20 April, Council approved the preparation of a planning proposal for the above height increase, subject to a Voluntary Planning Agreement for the site as endorsed by Council on 17 November 2014.

·    The Department’s LEP Gateway approval to exhibit was issued on 14 August 2015.

·    The Gateway requirements for exhibition and compliance with them are described in the responding letter to the Department from Council dated 25 September 2015.

·    The responses from Transport for NSW – Roads & Maritime Services (23 September 2015) and Sydney Trains (25 September 2015), both stating that they had no objection to the proposal, noting that the Floor Space Ratio is not increasing.  A traffic report by Transport Modellers Alliance is attached (AT 2)

·    Public exhibition was held from 16 October 2015 for six weeks. In total, 88 submissions were received, including 37 online surveys, and additionally 1 petition with 48 signatories from residents of the Northmark/ Shoremark complex on the east side of the rail line. The submissions have been circulated electronically to the Councillors, and the issues are summarized below.

·    The Planning Proposal was updated to reference the transport agencies’ submissions and Voluntary Planning Agreement.

 

Discussion

 

This section lists issues referred to in the Gateway response and public submissions. It then provides comments on the issues. Willoughby Council did not object to the planning proposal. A submission was received from North Sydney Council commenting noting that that, as the site is not immediately proximate to the North Sydney, there are not many major amenity-related issues for that LGA, subject to comments below.

 

Issues Relating to the Proposed Height Increase

 

The Gateway requirements relating to the proposal for height increase are discussed below.

 

1.                “Prior to exhibition, the proposal is to be revised to:-

a.    Include detailed urban design consideration of height transition, overshadowing, privacy and view impacts;

b.    Respond to the St Leonards South Master Plan, including consideration of the built form relationship between the proposal site and the Master Plan area;

c.    Cumulative impact of overshadowing in the locality, including that from 75−79 Lithgow Street and 84−90 Christie Street:”

 

The public submissions relevant to the height increase are as follows (in italics), followed by staff comments.

 

Height, Scale and Character

·    Height is Excessive, and is on the highest ridgeline: The St Leonards Strategic Centre is located on a ridgeline as the road and rail networks historically followed the most suitable topography.

·    Overdevelopment for its location: The Strategic Centre is proposed to provide higher towers to meet the density objectives of the Metropolitan Strategy around rail stations - 29 storeys is appropriate within that future character under State policies and would be 7 storeys lower than The Forum (and see below).

·    Views will be lost for properties to the north: The Marshall Ave proposal should be considered cumulatively with those for 472-500 Pacific Hwy, Winten and others: It is the case that tower developments are intended for St Leonards by all three councils in response to the State’s Metropolitan Strategy policy for the Strategic Centre’s densification This will inevitably impact on the views available to other properties in the area; however significant public benefits in terms of public domain, open space and transport access are to be provided to balance the area’s amenity. Further comments are below.

·    North Sydney Council comments that an increase in height may have an impact on the views experienced from the surrounding area, including North Sydney LGA.. However, North Sydney advises that its recent St Leonards/ Crows Nest Planning Study (Precincts 2 & 3) identifies 655-657 Pacific Hwy, 100 Christie St and 619-621 Pacific Hwy “as sites which are in close proximity to 1-13A Marshall Avenue and have been earmarked as locations for ‘Tall Buildings’ - defined as buildings which are more than 18 storeys.” See above comments.

·    Impact on the character/ amenity of the area: The character of much of the area is currently characterized by under-developed, ageing properties and a viable redevelopment aims to contribute to the revitalization of the centre. The floor space ratio is unchanged by the proposal and so will have no impact on traffic or other infrastructure needs.

·    The proposal sets a precedent for St Leonards: The Forum (35 storeys) set the precedent over a decade ago for buildings taller than this one. A mixed use building of comparable scale with this one is already under construction at 6-16 Atchison.

·    The village character will be lost. The Metropolitan Strategy 2014: A Plan for Growing Sydney identifies St Leonards, located on a rail-bus network close to the Sydney CBD and containing the Royal North Shore Hospital, as a Strategic Centre, not a village:-

 

 “Action 1.7.1: Invest In Strategic Centres Across Sydney To Grow Jobs And Housing And Create Vibrant Hubs Of Activity:-

 

Investment in strategic centres will focus on removing the barriers to investment and economic activity. Unlocking developable land by consolidating fragmented sites for redevelopment and improving planning policies and regulations will encourage flexibility, higher density and a more diverse range of activities.”

 

·    The height of cities such as Paris and Rome should a model. Those major metropolises contain towers, despite also protecting their heritage centres which have no comparison with St Leonards.

·    The principles applied to Pavilions on the Park (Duntroon Ave) relating to garden areas and other matters should apply: That development is located three times as far from St Leonards station as the subject site, which is immediately adjacent to a major park within a lower density precinct. The St Leonareds South Master Plan proposes a comparable scale of eight storeys close to Duntroon Avenue, transitioning uphill towards the Strategic Centre (see below).

·    Overshadowing will be excessive and will affect existing residents. Shadow analysis has shown that the shadow standards under the NSW SEPP 65 standards will be satisfied (see below).

·    A coordinated plan is needed for St Leonards to enable assessment of the cumulative effect of the numerous tower developments. This plan was on exhibition for over four months in the St Leonards South Master Plan, and is reproduced again below.

·    Developments should be phased to give respite from construction impacts: The range of proposals will not be developed simultaneously.

 

Planning Agreement

·    The $8 million planning agreement would result in little community benefit. The proposed funding would contribute directly to the provision of a park of almost 5,000m2 and improved traffic movement and access around the bus-rail interchange at St Leonards. This is considered to be a major public benefit in coordination with the revitalization of an under-developed centre.

·    State approval has to be obtained to build over the rail line.

·    The VPA should require rezoning of the entire area.

 

Comments on the Above Issues

 

(i)    Height, Scale and Character

 

Visual Impact:

 

A height of 65m is currently permissible under LEP 2009, and a resulting building would, of course, be visible within the Specialised Centre’s tower precinct as a whole. The impact of an increase from around 21 to 29 storeys is not out of character in this context of the surrounding building heights and the emerging and desired future character of St Leonards Specialised Centre.

 

·    On 15 May 2015, the Department gazetted the rezoning of 472-504 Pacific Hwy for mixed use with significant height increases for towers of 27-43 storeys and an associated VPA to contribute to the Rail Plaza construction and other public benefits. This has provided a model for the planning proposal and VPA mechanism now being put forward for 1-13A Marshall Avenue.

·    Willoughby Council has endorsed a proposal for towers up to around 50 storeys to be submitted to the Department. The Forum has existed for many years at a height of around 35 storeys.

·    North Sydney Council finalised the St Leonards/ Crows Nest Planning Precincts 2 & 3 Study in May 2015, permitting four key sites with unspecified heights to await planning proposals, and other sites already under construction include 6-16 Atchison St at a comparable height to the 29 storeys proposed for 1-13A Marshall Avenue.

 

In short, the height increase is in character with the integrated vision for St Leonards’ revitalisation.  The built form and range of proposals above, with increased scale interrelated with public domain improvements, demonstrate similar approaches across the three councils in St Leonards as a whole.

 

The Planning Proposal provides details on visual impacts in Attachment 1 at page 21.

 

View Lines:

 

The Planning Proposal undertook view analysis of these locations:-

 

·    The residential dwellings on the southern side of the Forum East and Forum West high rise buildings:

o There is a separation distance of approximately 150m between the Forum and the site. The west-facing apartments located in the south western corner of the two high rise buildings are the ones more oriented towards a building on the site.

o The Forum East building is less affected due to the point of reference being further to the east. This ensures that their iconic views are not affected.

o For both Forum buildings, the photomontages illustrate that below level 20, the additional height affects only the sky.

o In relation to the upper levels of Forum East (south west corner) the impacts are confined to areas west of the city skyline generally over the Wollstonecraft peninsula across the rivers to Balmain. The wide panorama remains unaffected.

o In relation to the upper levels of the 35-storey Forum West (south west corner) there will be impacts slightly more towards the east affecting the western part of the city skyline and Darling Harbour area. However, iconic buildings and features are unaffected.

 

The following graphics show the effect from a lower level of the nearest residential building, Forum West (the currently permissible levels shown in grey, and the additional storeys shown in red against the sky):-

 

Forum West Unit 1801

 

and from an upper Forum West level:-

 

Forum West Unit 2401

 

·   The residential apartments in the Abode building on the corner of Albany Street and Pacific Highway:

o The Abode building (18 storeys) is located 300 metres from the site.

o A high rise building on the site would be visible from the upper levels of the Abode building; however, the extent of visual impact is minor. A high rise building on this site would not affect views that might be enjoyed to the south west across the Greenwich Peninsula, Lane Cove River and Hunters Hill Peninsula.

 

·    Suites within the commercial development located on the northern side of the Pacific Highway:

The commercial development on the northern side of the Pacific Highway has heights varying from 4 to 13 storeys. Their view lines across the site would not be altered by the amended height.

 

·    Commercial offices on the southern side of Pacific Highway (on the opposite side of Marshall Lane):

The Pacific Highway properties have a maximum building height of 36m. Existing and future buildings are too close to be affected by any increase in building height from 65m to 94m.

The majority of the Site has low rise buildings and this provides for view lines form the upper storeys of future developments on the Highway.

 

The Planning Proposal provides details on view lines on Attachment 1 at page 23.

 

            Shadowing

 

·    The cumulative shadow analysis indicates that the additional height maintains three hours sunlight in the residential area south of the site. 

·    It is noted that the cumulative shadows fall across the St Leonards South Strategy area which currently comprises 1- and 2-storey houses. The St Leonards South Strategy proposes to change the housing form to multi-level buildings. The taller building forms will allow elevated dwellings in a multi-level building to achieve reasonable solar access.

·    The cumulative shadow diagrams confirm that Newlands Park is not affected by shadows from a tower building on the site including the additional height proposed above 65metres.

 

The Planning Proposal provides details on shadowing on Attachment 1 at page 29.

 

Privacy

 

·    Privacy impacts to the future built form envisaged under the St Leonards South Master Plan) finalised in July 2015) would be managed by the building separation requirements of the Apartment Design Guide under SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

 

The Planning Proposal provides details on privacy on Attachment 1 at page 31.

 

In regard to the development proposed to result from the site’s planning controls, Council’s urban design consultant Tim Williams, architect AIA, advised in his SEPP 65 Report of 29 October 2014 as follows:-

 

“In my opinion, the applicant has endeavoured to minimise the impact of the proposal with respect to overshadowing, and will be providing a valuable addition to a future public square over the railway line” (AT-3, page 10).

 

The impacts of the proposal are positive balanced against the objectives of focussing residential development at major transport and employment hubs and an acceptable outcome. It is noted that the properties to the north of the site are of similar or greater height and have enjoyed the advantage of having significant under-development opposite them for over a decade since their construction and it is not considered reasonable to prevent their redevelopment consistent with the future character of the St Leonards Strategic Centre.

 

St Leonards South Master Plan Scale

 

The submission that the VPA should require rezoning of the entire area is consistent with the increasing residential densities planned in the St Leonards South Master Plan. The Master Plan proposes building transitioning in height from 19 storeys at the corner of Marshall Ave and Canberra Ave to 15, 12 and 8 storeys along Marshall Ave and towards River Rd.

 

 

(ii)   Planning Agreement

 

The planning proposal is accompanied by a Voluntary Planning Agreement under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 for monetary contributions to Council to contribute to the construction of the St Leonards Rail Plaza, on substantially the same terms as negotiated, exhibited and endorsed by Council in late 2014.

 

The Planning Agreement was exhibited with the planning proposal and is provided electronically as AT-4 to this report.

 

The planning agreement would result directly in significant community benefit with the creation of a public park of almost 5,000m2 on the south side of the highway, as well as improvements to traffic movements associated with a refurbished bus-rail interchange.

 

In relation to the status of the proposed St Leonards Rail Plaza, Council has issued tenders and engaged an authorized engineering organization to undertake preliminary design stage in liaison with the State rail agencies. TfNSW has been working collaboratively with Council to participate in transport stakeholder workshops with Council to provide it with access to information to inform Council's design.

 

It is noted that the properties affected are located approximately six kilometres from the Sydney CBD and it is foreseeable that developments in the areas between would be redeveloped. As commented in relation to the planning proposal for either side of Friedlander Place, now gazetted, it is acknowledged that, for some owners on the north side, there would be an impact on the current panoramic views.

 

For the centre’s users generally though, including the majority of existing residents, the improvement to the amenity, functioning and economic stimulus of St Leonards resulting from Council’s strategy for St Leonards, to which this site would contribute, will be expected to be positive. The new plaza relating to the VPA would provide significant, centrally-located areas to socialise and relax in urban open space which is otherwise very limited for the existing unit-dwellers in St Leonards.

 

Other Submissions

 

A number of submissions discussed wide-ranging issues, most of which referred to the impacts of population density that are unrelated to the proposed height increase, as floor space is unchanged:-

 

Traffic

·    Ensure adequate car spaces - the socio-economic group buying these apartments will own at least one car each, including in studios.

·    Commercial parking, storage and loading needs to be feasible.

·    Canberra Ave should be opened for left turn access in and out at Pacific Highway.

·    Traffic congestion, medical rooms' parking needs and safety issues.

·    North Sydney Council: Require fewer parking spaces, given its proximity to public transport and access to other centres: Staff: A DA would be assessed under future DCP controls and Council is reviewing its parking rates currently.

 

Infrastructure

·    Open space, child care and schools will be needed.

·    Sewerage is already overburdened.

 

Employment

·    North Sydney Council: Strengthen St Leonards’ role as a strategic centre by increasing the amount of space designated for employment use: Staff: Marshall Ave has never been part of the commercial centre. Its recent zoning in 2010 to B4 Mixed Use, from R2 Low Density Residential, introduced the potential for commercial floor space as proposed by the developer.

 

The above are among a number of development control issues which would be addressed having regard to individual proposals and impacts.

 

Council and the Department have supported increased height on this site over some years. This site’s planning proposal was first approved by the Department for exhibition in 2012 at 78 metres, without nominated public benefits, and in the interim developments of over 30-50 storeys on the northern (North Sydney and Willoughby Councils) side of Pacific Highway have been submitted to the Department.

 

A development application for 1-13A Marshall Avenue was lodged by Loftex in September 2014 for a twenty-nine storey tower (94 metres), with a voluntary planning proposal that earmarked funds for the public domain works for the proposed Rail Plaza. This application was, however, refused by the Joint Regional Planning Panel on 19 March this year due to their view that the mechanism of seeking a variation above the existing LEP height standard through a DA under clause 4.6 to vary the height from 65 metres was not appropriate and should be articulated in the LEP.

 

This process issue would not apply provided that the LEP height standard is amended via a Planning Proposal to accord with the scale of 94 metres relating to the VPA exhibited and endorsed by Council in late-2014.

 

Conclusion

 

This Planning Proposal would confirm the LEP planning controls required to enable this site to contribute to Council’s long-standing strategy for the revitalization of the St Leonards Specialised Centre. The proposed height would be consistent with the evolving character of the St Leonards Specialized Centre and facilitate a development that maintained the original FSR restrictions while being able to contribute to the adjacent St Leonards Rail Plaza. A voluntary planning proposal would accompany a subsequent development application in the terms approved already by Council in 2014 to contribute to the significant public domain improvements currently in train.

 

It is emphasized once again that the floor space ratio (FSR) will remain unchanged by this proposal relating to height only (changing from 21 to 29 storeys).  The proposal does not increase potential dwelling numbers or, therefore, traffic or other infrastructure requirements. The proposal with a planning agreement would, however, enable the provision of new urban open space and upgrade of the existing rail-bus access infrastructure.

 

The submissions of the NSW agencies Roads & Maritime Services, Transport for NSW and Sydney Trains advised that they have no objection the proposal.

 

Council is recommended to submit Planning Proposal 22 to the Department for finalization as being consistent with the State Government and Council strategic policies for the St Leonards Centre.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That LEP Planning Proposal 22 for 1-13A Marshall Ave, St Leonards be adopted and submitted to the NSW Department of Planning & Environment for finalisation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Planning Proposal 22: 1-13A Marshall Ave, St Leonards

165 Pages

Circulated Separately

AT‑2 View

Transport Modellers Alliance traffic report, edited as at 11 September 2015

9 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

SEPP 65 Report, 29 October 2014

2 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Planning Agreement as exhibited

27 Pages

Circulated Separately

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Proposed Review of Ward Boundaries

 

 

Subject:          Proposed Review of Ward Boundaries    

Record No:     SU821 - 73242/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):       Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council at its meeting of 21 September 2015 considered a report on the review of ward boundaries and resolved to place on exhibition two proposals for new ward boundaries, i.e. a three (3) ward and a nine (9) ward option. This report outlines the results of community consultation and will recommend a revised three (3) ward option be adopted as Council’s new ward boundaries for the 2016 Local Government Elections.

 

Discussion

 

In preparation for the 2016 Local Government elections scheduled for Saturday 10 September 2016, the NSWEC reminded Council to consider the need to review ward boundaries and/or change ward boundary names.

 

Under Section 211 of the Local Government Act 1993 (“The Act”), councils are required to review their wards and alter them if “the number of electors in one ward in its area differs by more than 10% from the number of electors in any other ward in its area.” Council last considered this matter in March 2006 and altered its ward boundaries to ensure the variation in wards was less than 10%.

 

Information supplied by the NSWEC as at 27 August 2015 showed that enrolments in respect of the Lane Cove Council wards have gradually increased as a result of the significant development activity in the area, with the number of electors in West Ward as at 27 August 2015 exceeding the number of electors in Central Ward by 10.53% as illustrated in the following table:

 

Ward

Number of Electors

Variation

West

8,225

Highest

Central

7,359

10.53%

East

7,717

6.18%

Total

23,301

 


As a result of this variation Council at its meeting of 21 September, 2015 in considering a report on the review of ward boundaries resolved:

“1.  The information be noted;

2.   Council place on public exhibition the options for new ward boundaries proposed in the report in accordance with the consultation strategy outlined in the report; and

3.   Following the consultation period, the outcomes be reported back to Council for determination of new ward boundaries.”

 

The two (2) options for ward boundary changes placed on public exhibition as required by the Act included a three (3) ward option, refer (AT-1) and a nine (9) ward option as at (AT-2).

In reviewing the ward boundaries, consideration was also given to anticipated growth in population/number of electors between August 2015 and the closing of rolls, forty (40) days prior to the Elections. It being noted that 1200 units are due for completion between August 2015 and the end of July 2016, resulting in the variation increasing even further from that as of 27 August 2015 given the majority of development activity is located in West Ward i.e. 150 Epping Road 367 units, 316-322 Burns Bay Road 268 units and the recently completed 214 units at 7-15 Centennial Avenue and 92-96 Gordon Crescent.

 

In accordance with the Act and Council’s community consultation plan, the ward boundary options were placed on public exhibition for 28 days and allowing 42 days for public submissions. The proposal was advertised by e-newsletter, public notice in the North Shore Times, on Council’s website, in the Public Foyer of the Civic Centre and Libraries as well as via targeted letters to residents associations. Additionally, as required by the Act the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and NSWEC were consulted. Results of the community consultation are as follows.

 

Council received 19 submissions in total:-

·  3 from community groups/residents associations;

·  1 from the ABS; and

·  15 from individuals.

 

14 submissions expressed support for retaining the 3 ward boundaries option whilst 2 submissions expressed support for the 9 ward boundary option. The other 3 submissions did not expressly support either option but provided other comments on the proposal.

 

PREFERENCE SUMMARY

Preference

Count

3 Wards

14

9 Wards

2

TOTAL

16

 

Clearly, the majority of respondents supported retaining a 3 ward scenario with respondents indicating they are familiar with that number and identified the potential administrative complexity of a 9 ward option as well as confusion surrounding candidates, boundaries and polling place locations. Also, given the small number of electors in a 9 ward scenario ie approximately 2600 electors, one new unit development could result in a greater that 10% variance in elector numbers between wards which will necessitate more regular ward boundary reviews and add to voter confusion.

 

The ABS has advised that they have no issues with the 2 options presented. Their interest being that ward boundaries align as much as possible with Statistical Areas on which population and census data is based on.

 

However, the NSWEC have advised that they only consider changes to ward boundaries against current enrolment numbers, not the projected enrolments as at July 2016 when the rolls close. Consequently, further consultation has occurred with the NSWEC on the amended ward boundary plans at (AT-3) - 3 wards and (AT-4) – 9 wards, which contain enrolment variances between wards of less than 10% based on updated enrolment numbers as at 21 October 2015. The amended 3 ward option provides minimal variations to those on exhibition, with notably the existing boundary between Central Ward and East Ward along Longueville Road being retained rather than the whole Village being contained in Central Ward. The amended 9 ward option presents a number of changes to the exhibited version due to the difficulty in maintaining variances under 10% when there are a relatively small number of electors in each ward. As a result, if the amended 9 ward option is adopted, the NSWEC have advised that further community consultation would be required due to the significant change proposed.

 

Conclusion

 

Following consideration of changes to ward boundaries, including consultation with the community, ABS and NSWEC it will be recommended that Council adopt the amended three (3) ward option as presented at (AT-3) as the new ward boundaries from the Local Government elections currently scheduled for 10 September 2016. In recommending the three (3) ward option, it is clear the majority of respondents to the community consultation prefer this option due to potential confusion over boundaries, polling places and candidates, as well as the additional administrative complexity and cost for conducting the Election. Additionally, given the small variance in the number of electors between wards in the nine (9) ward scenario, it can take one new development in an area to increase the number of electors in one ward over another by 10% thus the need to continually monitor and review ward boundaries adding to voter confusion.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:-

1.     The report be received and noted;

2.     Council adopt as its new ward boundaries from the September 2016 Local Government Elections, the three (3) ward option at AT-3 to this report;

3.     The new ward boundaries be published and promoted on Council’s website, in corporate publications such as the community newsletter, notices enclosed with rate notices and via e-newsletters and other appropriate opportunities particularly closer to the Election date; and

4.     The New South Wales Electoral Commission and Australian Bureau of Statistics be notified of Council’s decision.

.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Ward Boundaries - Option 1 - 3 Wards - Public Exhibition

1 Page

 

AT‑2 View

Ward Boundaries - Option 2 - 9 Wards - Public Exhibition

1 Page

 

AT‑3 View

Ward Boundaries - Option 1 - 3 Wards -  Revised

1 Page

 

AT‑4 View

Ward Boundaries - Option 2 - 9 Wards - Revised

1 Page

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Draft Sustainability Action Plan

 

 

Subject:          Draft Sustainability Action Plan     

Record No:     SU5806 - 71130/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):       Katy Christian 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

On 6 October 2015 Council resolved that the Draft Sustainability Action Plan 2016 to 2021 be placed on public exhibition for five (5) weeks and that a further report be prepared for Council summarising the results of the community consultation. The five (5) week exhibition period commenced on Wednesday 7 October 2015 and ended on Tuesday 24 November 2015. Council received a total of nine (9) written submissions.

 

The submissions received during the public exhibition show strong support to most elements of the plan, with submissions suggesting minor adjustments to introductory concepts to improve clarity and comments on wording for some actions. The final Draft Sustainability Action Plan, incorporating these adjustments and dated 25 November 2015 is attached as AT-1 and is recommended to be adopted by Council. 

 

Background

 

Council’s original Sustainability Action Plan (SAP) Think Global, Act Local was introduced in 2005. The Draft SAP builds on the achievements made in the first ten years of the plan and aims to:-

 

·    Maximise the integration of sustainability across Council’s operations and improve sustainability performance;

·    Identify aspirational directions for sustainability initiatives across Council, business and community practice; and

·    Guide the direction of sustainability levy funding to promote best practice sustainability outcomes.

 

Initial Consultation Strategy

 

Council and the appointed consultant, Ramboll Environ, undertook considerable community consultation in the review and design phase of the Draft SAP. Council formed two 92) consultation groups to provide guidance on the development of goals and actions:-

 

·    A Community Expert Panel, made up of representatives of all relevant Council Advisory Committees; and

·    A Staff Working Group made up of 22 staff across all divisions of Council.

 

These two (2) groups participated in a series of facilitated workshops to identify key sustainability issues for Lane Cove and developed targeted actions, assessing impact, importance and effectiveness. A community wide survey was also conducted to identify the community’s sustainability values and to obtain insights on key issues, gaps, challenges, needs and opportunities regarding sustainability and the environment in Lane Cove. 166 survey responses were received.

 

This consultation and engagement process generated a large number of themes, ideas and actions. The evaluation of results used a statistical analysis which compared individual themes against one another and then weighted individual actions according to their level of impact and importance. This process allowed themes and priorities to be discussed at a public forum with a community audience and provided greater understanding of what the community saw as important, and where Council had the ability to directly implement change and actions.

 

Draft SAP Summary

 

Research and community consultation was used to develop the Draft SAP. The Draft SAP has three (3) key themes; Environment, Community and Liveability, which reinforce the role of Council as a leading sustainability performer, guiding future strategies and actions across Council’s operations. The themes reflects Council’s quadruple bottom line approach ensuring all decisions consider a balance of economic, environmental, cultural and social elements to enhance the quality of life in Lane Cove.

 

Each theme has four (4) goals which clarify the sustainability direction of the theme and a list of actions which focus on areas of high importance and operations of high impact and where Council has the ability to educate and engage the community for sustainability.

 

Final Consultation Strategy

 

Council resolved on 6 October 2015 that the draft Sustainability Action Plan 2016 to 2021, be placed on public exhibition for five (5) weeks and that a further report be prepared to summarise the results of the community consultation.

 

Council staff prepared the following consultation material in accordance with the consultation plan proposed in the report to Council in October 2015:-

 

·    North Shore Times advertisement;

·    eNewsletter;

·    Public exhibition material for the Civic Centre, Lane Cove Library, Greenwich Library; and

·    Council’s Website.

 

Discussion

 

Council received nine (9) written submissions, six (6) from individuals, two (2) from community organisations and one (1) from a Council Advisory Committee, with all submissions supporting the general contents of the Draft Plan.

 

Specific submission content is summarised below with key points noted. 

 

·    Three (3) submissions provided general support without feedback for content changes, emphasising the importance of some actions with specific examples relevant to Lane Cove.

·    Five (5) provided comment on Council’s Strategic Vision, confusing it for the Draft Plan’s Strategic Vision and sought further information on the integration of the SAP with other Council’s Plans.

·    Three (3) focussed suggestions around Goal 1, emphasising the difference between bushland and other open spaces and providing suggestions for wording changes to improve clarity for some actions around water management and bushland.

·    One (1) added comments around formatting and suggested realignment of some actions with more relevant themes.

·    One (1) provided a suggestion for further indicators improving measurability of the plan.

·    One (1) emphasised the need for resourcing footpaths, pedestrian access and traffic management for larger developments and did not support Car Share resourcing as a priority, due to parking concerns in Lane Cove.

 

All submissions have been reviewed by relevant staff, and changes reviewed in the context of organisational priorities and alignment with the intention of the Plan. A number of changes to the Draft Plan are now proposed arising from issues outlined in the received submissions. The detail of the changes is explained in AT-2.

 

The key changes to the Draft Plan as raised in the submissions relate to:-

 

·    Clarification of Council’s integrated planning framework and connection of the SAP to other related Council Plans;

·    Review of some terminology in actions specifically related to open space, clarifying where actions relate to bushland or parks and sport fields; 

·    Rewording of some actions to improve clarity of meaning;

·    Recatagorizing some actions under more relevant themes;

·    Review of importance of some actions; and

·    Formatting and review of headings.

 

Conclusion

 

Allthough the number of responses to the public consultation has not been significant nine (9) responses in total, there was considerable public participation in the development process with 50 participants attending a public forum and 166 community survey responses and all submissions received have shown support for Council’s Draft Sustainability Action Plan. It is therefore assumed there is broad support for the final draft of the SAP.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.   Adopt the Revised Draft Sustainability Action Plan 2016 to 2021, dated 25 November 2015 (shown attached as AT-1);

 

2.   Conduct the next review of the Sustainability Action Plan in 2021 and report on progress annually through Council’s Annual Report; and

 

3.   Thank the Community Expert Panel and Staff Working Group for their Contribution to the development of the Draft Sustainability Action Plan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Revised Draft Sustainability Action Plan 2016 to 2021 - Dated 25 November 2015

35 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Draft Sustainability Action Plan Proposed Changes

2 Pages

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

LEP Review 2015 - Further Report

 

 

Subject:          LEP Review 2015 - Further Report    

Record No:     SU5918 - 66990/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):       Stephanie Bashford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

A report was presented to Council in July relating to a planning proposal to amend Local Environmental Plan 2009 in regard to a range of planning and development issues (a copy is attached at AT-1). A Councillor Workshop was subsequently held in September to discuss key issues.

 

The process is part of a regular review of the LEP conducted periodically since its introduction in February 2010. This second report summarises the issues discussed at the workshop, and recommends items for endorsement to proceed to a planning proposal in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. It recommends that:-

 

·    The matters referred to in the Schedule at AT-2 be submitted to the NSW Gateway seeking approval for exhibition, adding also the new matters below arising since July;

 

·    Dual occupancies: The LEP is to be clarified to confirm, on the basis of legal advice, Council’s long-standing policy that subdivision is not permissible; and

 

·    7 Dettmann Avenue: The owner has requested that the Environmental Conservation E2 Zone applying to the western quarter of this property be removed, having regard to an Ecology Report and Survey submitted in November.

 

·    Battle-axe blocks: Access handles are not to be included in FSR calculations.

 

·    Animal training and boarding establishments to be permissible in the IN2 Light Industrial Zone to permit dog day care.

 

Background

 

On 20 July 2015, a report was presented to Council proposing to make amendments to LEP 2009 on such matters as zone boundaries, dual occupancies, road reservations, heritage listings, editing of text and mapping historical anomalies, alignment of floor space and height controls and other matters.  At that meeting, Council resolved that:-

 

 “Consideration of the LEP Review 2015 be deferred to a future Councillor Workshop before  

   being further considered by Council” and, as a Matter Arising:-

 

 “As part of the Councillor Workshop, information regarding the history and advantages and  disadvantages of dual-occupancies be prepared”.

 

The Councillor Workshop was held on 14 September 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion

 

(A)       Councillor Workshop

 

At the Workshop, Councillors considered a range of issues, and the discussions led to the following staff recommendations.

 

Table A - ISSUES 1 to 9 FOR COUNCIL DECISION: As in July Workshop

 

LEP Issue

Aim

Recommendation

1

Height Objective:

Currently this is: “To minimize any overshadowing” etc.

It has been interpreted literally by the JRPP re 1-13A Marshall Av, creating an almost impossible situation for new development in an area of transition and growth. It thus inhibits the use of cl.4.6 applications even in DAs supported by Council.

 

To enable (i) satisfaction of formal SEPP 65 and DCP controls and (ii) satisfactory design solutions on merit.

Amend the Height Objective to the Ashfield model“to maintain satisfactory solar access to existing buildings and public areas”.

 

2

Car repairs/ panel beating in the Lane Cove West Industrial Area.

To ensure services in the area meet the needs of the workforce of around 7,000 employees.

Allow the related uses “vehicle repair station” and “vehicle body repair workshop” in the IN2 Light Industrial Zone.

 

3

Zone boundaries – the standard LEP allows a distance to be specified into an adjacent zone to facilitate appropriate development.

To allow zone overlap, so that a predominant use may include an additional site with adjacent zoning on a merit basis, to facilitate orderly development.

Specify in the LEP a distance of up to15 metres between zones where zone uses may overlap.

4

Dual occupancies:–:

 

Clarify that subdivision is not permissible, in accordance with Council’s long-standing policy since the amendment to LEP 1987 (LEP Amendment 26 of 24 May1996).

 

The Department advised during drafting of the LEP that the “dual occupancy” definition prevented subdivision, but DA applicants frequently query this as a basis for refusals.

 

Add 2 clauses to clarify that dual occupancies may not be subdivided:-

 

(i)"Despite any other provision of this Plan, development consent must not be granted to a development application for the subdivision of land on which development for the purpose of dual occupancy is erected or is proposed to be erected if the subdivision would result in each of the dwellings that comprise the dual occupancy being located on separate lots.”

(ii) Subdivision of dual occupancies is to be excluded from the use of cl.4.6.

 

 

5

Bushland on 14 Gay St - private property: (graphic below):-

 

OSUS & BMAC have identified the site as an integral part of Upper Stringybark Reserve, valuable ecologically and aesthetically.

 

The EP layer is applied to private properties (whereas an E2 Environmental Conservation zone generally applies to land intended to become public).

 

It would be an interim measure allowing acquisition in future if negotiated with the owner (under the Just Terms Act).

 

• Development could result in irreparable damage to the viability of the reserve’s flora and fauna and destruction of the wildlife corridor currently running through the southern half of the property.

• This includes an Endangered Ecological Community – Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest.

• Stringybark Creek Reserve is highly valued by the community and has been rehabilitated over many years through regular work by Bushcare Groups.   

• The site is 2,790m2 in total.     A developable area of around 1,500m2 would remain.

 

Apply an Environmental Protection (EP) layer (see graphic) south of the blue line) so that Council must consider the land’s “vegetation, topography and distinctive features”.

 

 

6

Heritage – 9 Robert St  (graphic below)

The owner has requested this to be listed.

Obtain a report by Council’s heritage consultant and amend heritage listing as per recommendation.

7

Heritage - 1 & 3 Austin St inter-War bungalows – second storey has been permitted.

Substantially altered.

Obtain a report by Council’s heritage consultant and amend heritage listing as per recommendation.

8

Heritage - Brett Whitely early self-portrait on inside of the garage wall at 18 Lucretia Avenue (graphic below):

Wendy Whitely has confirmed authenticity.

Include in heritage listing subject to owner’s agreement.

 

Graphics

Bushland on 14 Gay St (Item 5)

 

 

Heritage – 9 Robert St, Greenwich (Item 6)

 

 

Brett Whiteley self-portrait (item 8)

 

 

(B)       New/ matters since the Workshop

 

(i)         7 Dettmann Avenue

 

The owner has requested that the E2 Environmental Conservation Zone applying to the western quarter of this property should be removed. The same zoning also applies to the rear of 41 Stuart St and of 3A and 5A Dettmann Ave, which are the remaining four private sites of twelve properties intended to become public land for some decades, which was reflected in the 1987 LEP. The following maps shows the remaining properties( further graphics and background material is included as  AT-5).

 

 

 

The western end of these sites have been identified in plans since the 1950s for environmental protection within a line of vegetation extending between Cowper St and Stuart St and adjoining Council’s reserve, including mangroves near the high water line.

 

The current LEP 2009 zoning equivalent to the earlier plans is the E2 Environmental Conservation Zone (typically for future public lands). An EP Environmental Protection layer also applies (typical for private property).

 

In a letter dated 29 October 2015, in support of the owner’s request, the owner has submitted an ecological report by SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd AT 4 expressing the opinion that:-

 

·    The regional-scale mapping does not reflect the vegetation on the site and there are no flora or fauna that are endemic to Lane Cove, of restricted distribution or of ecological significance;

·    The tree canopy is patchy with no shrub layer or ground layer of significance; and

·    There are no threatened species or habitat for such and minimal food by such species.

 

Council’s Open Space Section has considered the issues raised in the above Ecology Report and a Survey received on 10 November, 2015. The Open Space Section advises that:-

 

·    Studies undertaken prior to February 2012 indicated the presence of Saltmarsh vegetation (EEC) and Estuarine Swamp Oak Forest (EEC) on the site. There are endangered species on the subject land.

·    The strip of E2 land is part of a continuum of vegetation and habitat corridor that has been identified in plans since the 1950s.

·    Vegetation has been illegally removed from the site and a prosecution has been made.

·    Although the site is currently degraded, due to its location adjacent to Warraroon Reserve there is potential for the re-establishment of native vegetation.   There is the opportunity for re-seeding from adjacent bushland, with improvement to animal habitat close to Warraroon Reserve.

 

 

 

 

 

The following aerials show the vegetation, in 1947, 2010 and 2015.

 

 

As stated previously the area was previously identified in LEP 1987 for acquisition by the Department of Planning, however, the Department of Planning advised during the drafting of the Draft LEP in 2008,  that it no longer intended to acquire the lands to the west of Dettmann Avenue. 

 

The issue is what the appropriate controls are, having regard to the site’s history:-

 

·    E2 Environmental Conservation: The E2 zone is appropriate for future public land if Council intends to acquire it.

otherwise

·    EP: If it is to remain private land, retain only the Environmental Protection overlay. The Environmental Protection layer requires consideration in any DA of the environmental values on the land; but does not have the legal strength of the E2 Environmental Conservation zone, which prohibits all development there.

 

Note both zonings would permit subdivision based on Council’s other controls.

 

Option 1:

·      Retain E2 Environmental Conservation (protects vegetation on future public land)

·      Requires LEP Acquisition

·      Retain EP Environmental Protection (protects vegetation on private land)

 

Aim

Proviso

The access link would offer the opportunity for access to Tambourine Bay from Warraroon Reserve and through up to Stuart St as part of the foreshore access network (see photos below).

 

Access to the park from Stuart St should be improved as well.

The E2 land would be added to the LEP Reservation list (416m2 approx on 7 Dettmann Ave). There is no timeframe for acquisition, unless “economic hardship” is proven. Purchase would be at independently assessed fair market value.

 

The other three rear properties would need to be added to the reservation list (approx. 1,600m2 in total with No.7).

The EP layer prevents construction in the interim on that rear land portion, but the FSR can be used on housing uphill. The land could be re-vegetated as a condition of consent to a DA.

 

 

However, if Council is to expand its acquisition list, this site may not be a priority for purchase compared with the rear of other private properties along the foreshore.

Public access along the foreshore has been a Council principle over decades and this would extend the network.

There is no clear cliff-line below which the public could walk safely and be screened from view of the residents, unlike on some other foreshore sites purchased by Council.

 

The photographs below (November 2015) show the potential public access linking to the land formerly intended for purchase by the Department.

 

   Department land at rear of No.1                          Rear of No.5A – potential public access to south

    

 

   Rear of 5A and 3A                                                 Rear of 7 Dettmann Ave

    

 

Option 2:

·      Delete E2 Environmental Conservation over the four properties (no acquisition)

·      Retain EP Environmental Protection.

 

Aim

Proviso

The EP Environmental Protection layer prevents construction on that rear land, but the FSR may be used on house development uphill.

 

Public access would be available at low water only, and requires protection of endangered species of plants at the side of the route.

 

As a lesser alternative to the foreshore access in Option 1, Council could at least improve the access to a small park at the western end of Stuart St with new steps and supplementary planting, without the cost of acquisition.

 

The entry to this park is constrained and would require removal/ replanting of small trees due to an existing lease over part of Council’s land for 41 Stuart Street’s driveway.

The other three sites have retained potential public access across the rear of their properties. Acquisition would enable completion of the policy already largely undertaken with the Department’s funding.

The vegetation quality of the remaining private properties is diminished compared with the public lands to the north; however, this has resulted partly from illegal tree removal at No.7.

    

Current bush track network (in orange) ending at Cowper St to the north

 

(ii)        Battle-axe blocks: It is proposed to restore the former policy under Council’s DCP prior to 2010, such that:

 

If a lot is a battle-axe lot or other lot with an access handle, the area of the access handle is not to be included in calculating the lot size (The Willoughby LEP has been successful in prevailing over the Standard LEP in this matter.). The aim is that a house is in better proportion to the lot if only the developable area is counted as FSR.

 

(iii)       Dog day care: It is proposed to add a land use for the IN2 Light Industrial Area - "animal boarding or training establishment". This responds to inquiries from members of the public wanting to operate a day care centre for dogs on a regular basis, to meet demand especially for working couples i.e. the dogs would need to be outdoors or in a warehouse, as they are there during the day time for long periods while their owners are at work. This differs from a grooming salon, permissible in the neighbourhood centres, where dogs are constrained for short periods only.

 

Table B - ISSUES 10 to 12 FOR COUNCIL DECISION: New matters since July

 

9.  It is requested that Council determine whether to retain 7 Dettmann Avenue’s E2 Environmental Conservation zoning, to have regard to updated information,

a.  retain the E2 Environmental Conservation Zone over 7, 3A, 5A and Dettmann Ave and 41 Stuart St, and add those portions of land to the LEP acquisition list for future public land, or

b.  remove the E2 Environmental Conservation zoning from the western end of the site, and from three others in Dettmann Ave, retaining only the EP Environmental Protection for private land.

 

10.  Recommendation: An access handle is not to be included in FSR calculations for a battle-axe block.

11.  Recommendation: Add "animal boarding or training establishment" as permissible in the IN2 Zone.

12.   Recommendation: Approve other miscellaneous matters as in the Schedule at AT 2.

 

Updated Schedule

 

The report in July included a Schedule of proposed amendments. This has been updated to include the recommendations resulting from the Workshop and the new matters above, as attached at AT 2.

 

DCP

 

At the Councillor Workshop, related matters arose which were proposed for amendment to the Development Control Plan 2010. These are to include such matters as:-

 

·    Scale guidelines for hospitals – consideration should extend to community infrastructure generally, such as churches and schools

·    Floor space minimum size for serviced apartments.

 

A report will be presented to Council at a future meeting once investigations re completed.

 

Community Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to seek public comment on miscellaneous issues in a planning proposal to review LEP 2009.  Any comments received will be reviewed and evaluated to determine whether or not to proceed with each issue individually. The consultation would occur upon Gateway approval being granted for exhibition of the draft LEP.

 


Method

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Inform

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Open

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community and community groups

Relevant property owners.

Lane Cove Community

Proposed Medium

Advertisement and

eNewsletter

Notification Letters

Public Exhibition,

Website Exhibition.

Indicative Timing

8 weeks

8 weeks

8 weeks

 

Conclusion

 

It is appropriate to undertake a regular review of LEP 2009 to update it in terms of issues identified by Councillors, members of the public, consultants and staff in the years since its introduction.

 

A Councillor Workshop was held in September and this report’s recommendations are made in accordance with the discussions at that workshop, as well as new matters arising recently. Two matters are highlighted:-

 

(ii)  It is to be clarified that dual occupancy developments subdivision is not permissible, in accordance with Council’s long-standing policy, and

(iii) In relation to 7 Dettmann Av, Council is requested to determine whether it wishes to retain the E2 Environmental Conservation Zone over the rear of 7 Dettmann Ave and three other properties, and add those lands to the LEP acquisition list.

 

A schedule of proposed LEP amendments is provided for Council’s approval.  Council is requested to approve the preparation of Planning Proposal 24 accordingly for submission to the Department’s LEP Gateway. The Development Control Plan 2010 would be updated as relevant for Council consideration at a future meeting.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

1.   Adopt for exhibition the following changes to the LEP 2010:-

a.   Amend the Height Objective “to maintain satisfactory solar access to existing buildings and public areas”.

b.   Allow the related uses “vehicle repair station” and “vehicle body repair workshop” in the IN2 Light Industrial Zone.

c.   Specify in the LEP a distance of 15 metres between zones to allow zone overlap.

d.   Add 2 clauses to clarify that dual occupancies may not be subdivided:-

(i)"Despite any other provision of this Plan, development consent must not be granted to a development application for the subdivision of land on which development for the purpose of dual occupancy is erected or is proposed to be erected if the subdivision would result in each of the dwellings that comprise the dual occupancy being located on separate lots.”

(ii) Subdivision of dual occupancies is to be excluded from the use of cl.4.6.

e.   14 Gay Street - Apply an Environmental Protection (EP) layer south of the blue line so that Council must consider the land’s “vegetation, topography and distinctive features”.

f.    Heritage – 9 Robert St, Obtain a report by Council’s heritage consultant and amend heritage listing as per recommendation.

g.   Heritage - 1 & 3 Austin St - Obtain a report by Council’s heritage consultant and amend heritage listing as per recommendation.

h.   Heritage - Brett Whitely early self-portrait  - Include in heritage listing subject to owner’s agreement.

i.    retain the E2 Environmental Conservation Zone over 7, 3A, 5A and Dettmann Ave and 41 Stuart St, and add those portions of land to the LEP acquisition list for future public land

or

remove the E2 Environmental Conservation zoning from the western end of the site, and from three others in Dettmann Ave, retaining only the EP Environmental Protection for private land.

j.    An access handle is not to be included in FSR calculations for a battle-axe block.

k.   "Animal boarding or training establishment"  are permissible in the IN2 Zone.

l.    Other miscellaneous matters as in the Schedule at AT-2.

2.   Approve the submission to the Department of Planning & Environment of a planning proposal in accordance with the resolutions above, seeking consent to proceed to public exhibition;

3.   Request delegation for the General Manager for the planning proposal; and

4.   Prepare draft Development Control Plan amendments as relevant to the LEP amendments, for submission to Council for consideration.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

REPORT LEP Review 2015

4 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

LEP Review 2015 Schedule for Planning Proposal 24 - 7 December 2015

4 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Background information - 7 Dettmann Ave 10 11 15

3 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Ecology Report re 7 Dettmann Av E2 Zone  received 30 Oct 2015 and Survey received 10 November 2015

12 Pages

 

AT‑5 View

Survey Report from Owner- 7 Dettmann Avenue recv'd 10 November 2015

2 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

DCP Review 2015: Child Care and Parking

 

 

Subject:          DCP Review 2015: Child Care and Parking    

Record No:     SU6120 - 72663/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):       Stephanie Bashford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

It is proposed to amend Development Control Plan 2010 to respond to issues that have arisen in relation to the assessment of development applications. These comprise:-

·    Restrictions to the size of child care centres in residential zones to a maximum of 60 places

·    Changes to car parking controls for child care centre and residential uses including to accord with SEPP 65 near transit oriented development.

 

It is intended to provide a further report to Council early in next year relating to a wider range of miscellaneous DCP issues raised by Council and the community.

 

Council is requested to approve the preparation of a draft DCP amendment for exhibition relating to these matters.

 

Discussion

 

The matters proposed for amendment are discussed below.

 

1.    Child Care Centres

 

Development applications for 5 child care centres have been assessed by Council recently. Although they are to be assessed under the current controls, they have raised concerns relevant to future applications, in particular regarding the scale of such developments in residential zones, as the population and demand continue to increase.

 

These applications were generally for centres of over 100 places. By comparison, Council’s centre, Kindy Cove, has 58 places. Until recently there was a cap of 90 places under the relevant Child Care Centre regulations, however, this has been removed, which is why Council is now receiving application for such large facilities. The applications included:-

·    A centre in the R4 High Density Residential Zone in Landers Rd which  was refused on the grounds of excessive height, traffic volumes, noise from the proposed rooftop play area and other matters.

·    An application for 72 Tambourine Bay Rd (Mandalay) in the R2 Low Density Residential Zone is under consideration which has raised questions as to scale, noise and traffic volumes in a low density area.

·    A centre at 42-46 Longueville Rd in the R4 High Density Residential zone was refused on the grounds of heath, setbacks, parking an drop-off arrangements.

·    A Court case is pending following Council’s refusal of a centre at 23A Mars Rd in the industrial zone.

·    A centre is proposed for Sera Street, a narrow street with considerable through-traffic in the R3 Medium Density Residential Zone.

 

A review of the controls implemented by other councils was undertaken. Examples from a sample of other councils indicate that some have controls limiting scale:-

 

·    Hornsby Council provides generally for 30-40 place centres (residential areas) and 90-place centres (non-residential areas).

 

               

 

·    Holroyd Council provides for a maximum of 45 places in the R2 zone, with other areas to be decided on merit, including streetscape character, building envelopes and surrounding volumes.

·    Leichhardt Council permits a maximum of 90 places, provided that a minimum of 33% of places are for children under 2 years old.

 

Many councils do not stipulate a maximum number of places. However, this may reflect that previously there was a maximum 90 children cap imposed under the licensing requirements. It is recommended that Council adopt the Hornsby principle of controlling the scale of centres in residential areas, but with the variation that 60 places should be permissible regardless of heritage factors.

 

This is considered a matter of priority to allow Council to respond accordingly in future applications having regard to the recent number of DAs received. The draft DCP provisions should then be consulted with relevant agencies during public exhibition.

 

It is understood that, as the population increases, “super-centres” may be in demand, and centres with longer hours suited to shift-workers and other approaches may be sought by the public and developers. These would be best accommodated in non-residential zones. Council does not have detailed information on the relative merits of such approaches in terms of child care quality, and this report is concerned only with planning issues.

 

To allow flexibility to respond to emerging and changing social patterns, it is recommended that the statements of environmental effects be required to address such issues for staff to assess on a merit basis.

 

2.    Car Parking

 

Part R of the DCP - Traffic, Transport & Parking was reviewed in September 2014 and following utilisation of the new controls a number of minor amendments are proposed. The key changes comprise:-

·    In larger scale developments, greater than 100 residential flats, it is proposed to require a standing space onsite for removalist trucks to ensure that they do not park on-street, in particular near bus stops. A minimum of 4.5 metres clearance is proposed as per AS 2890.2.

·    Child Care Centre parking rates have been updated to refer to the Department of Education & Training’s amended child-staff ratios to be introduced in January 2016.

·    Car wash bays are to be required in the R4 residential flat buildings with greater than 20 units. At present, visitor spaces are frequently used, however it is proposed to ensure appropriate drainage facilities and that such area has greater width i.e. to 3.5 metres, to enable doors on both sides to be opened during cleaning.

·    Construction management plans are to be required to be consulted with RMS and STA subject to location. This relates to such developments on RMS roads as the Mirvac development at 472 Pacific Highway, St Leonards.

·    To avoid inconsistency it is proposed to amend Council’s rates to the mandatory parking provisions under State Environmental Planning Policy 65’s near transit oriented development, which impacts St Leonards, where major developments are proposed.

 

Table 2 – Car Parking Rates Near St Leonards Railway Station

Proposed Use

Residents/Employees

Customers/Visitors

Residential flat buildings

 

0.5 spaces per studio

0.5 spaces per 1-bedroom unit

0.9 space per 2-bedroom unit

1.40 spaces per 3 bedroom unit

2 spaces per 4+ bedroom unit

Allocation of parking spaces at developer’s discretion.

1 disabled space for each adaptable housing unit

1 space per 5 units

1 disabled space per 10 visitor spaces (minimum 1 disabled space)

 

Child Care Centres

1 space per 2 staff members

1 space per 6 children

1 accessible / disabled space per 50 spaces, minimum 1 space.

 

 

 

 

 

Community Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to provide an opportunity for the community to comment on the proposed DCP amendments for child care centres and traffic/ parking. Any submissions received will be reviewed and evaluated to determine whether or not to proceed.

 

Method

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Inform

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Open

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community and community groups

Relevant agencies

Lane Cove Community and community groups

 

Proposed Medium

Advertisement and

eNewsletter

 

Notification Letters

Public Exhibition and

Website Exhibition

 

Indicative Timing

4 weeks - Commencing Late January

4 weeks - Commencing Late January

4 weeks - Commencing Late January

 

Conclusion

 

The DCP is proposed to be amended in response to matters that have arisen in the courses of development assessment.

 

The above matters are considered to be of priority having regard to recent development applications. A broader range of DCP amendments is to be considered in a further report to Council early in the new year. Council is requested to approve the exhibition of a draft DCP amendment for these purposes.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council resolve that a draft DCP be exhibited in accordance with this report, to:-        

1.   Permit a maximum of 60 places at any one child centre in a residential zone, with variations subject to merit;

2.   Update Part R – Traffic, Transport & Parking to:-

a.   accord with SEPP 65 parking rates for transit oriented developments

b.   adjust parking rates for Child Care Centres having regard to Department of Education & Training’s amended child-staff ratios;

c.   Require onsite removalist truck spaces for developments with greater than 100 units;

d.   specify requirements for car wash bays for developments with greater than 20 units; and

e.   require consultation on Construction Management Plans with authorities where appropriate.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Amendment to the Lane Cove Country Club Constitution

 

 

Subject:          Amendment to the Lane Cove Country Club Constitution     

Record No:     SU2893 - 71906/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):       Kirsty Beram 

 

 

Background

 

At the Lane Cove Country Club’s Annual General Meeting of 26 October 2015, members unanimously voted to pass a Special Resolution to amend the Constitution to allow Social Members to attend general meetings of the Club and vote in the election of the Board.

 

Rule 104 of the Club's Constitution requires the written consent of Council to any amendment specified in such Special Resolution.  The Special Resolution, attached as AT-1, has been prepared in conjunction with and based on the advice of Club lawyers, Piggott Stinson.  The amendments set out in the Special Resolution were necessary to ensure the Club continues to comply with its Constitution, the Registered Clubs Act and Gaming Machines Act.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorse the Special Resolution to amend the Lane Cove Country Club Constitution to allow Social Members to attend general meetings of the Club and vote in the election of the Board.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Notice of Special Resolution for Annual General Meeting - Amendment to Country Club Constitution

3 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Delegation of Authority During the Christmas Recess

 

 

Subject:          Delegation of Authority During the Christmas Recess    

Record No:     SU5070 - 71914/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):       Kirsty Beram 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

In past years it has been Council’s practice to delegate authority to a Committee comprising of the Mayor and the General Manager to deal with urgent matters arising during the Christmas recess.  In such cases, Council’s policies are applied and if no such policies exist, due caution is exercised.

 

Discussion

Over the Christmas period the notification period for new Development Applications is extended until February to ensure that notifications are effective even with the vast majority of the community on holidays. It is the normal practice to grant authority to the Mayor and General Manager to determine any matters which may arise during the Christmas recess, which is consistent with s266 of the Local Government Act, “to exercise, in cases of necessity, the policy-making functions of the governing body of the council between meetings of the council.”

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:-

1.   Subject to the provisions of Section 377 of the Local Government Act, 1993, and point 2 below, Council appoint a Committee comprising of the Mayor and the General Manager, or in their absence a delegate of the Mayor and/or the person acting as General Manager, to deal with and determine, urgent matters arising during the Council recess until 15 February 2016, in such cases applying Council’s policies, or where no such policies exist, exercising due caution.

2.   No Section 96 or Section 82A reviews of development applications be undertaken under delegated authority in relation to any matter that has been determined by the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Council Meeting Schedule - 2016

 

 

Subject:          Council Meeting Schedule - 2016    

Record No:     SU1915 - 71917/15

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):       Kirsty Beram 

 

 

 

The Ordinary Council Meeting Schedule for 2016 is proposed as follows:-

 

Monday 15 February 2016

Monday 21 March 2016

Monday 18 April 2016

Monday 16 May 2016

Monday 20 June 2016

Monday 18 July 2016

Monday 15 August 2016

Monday 19 September 2016^

Monday 24 October 2016*

Monday 21 November 2016

Monday 5 December 2016

 

^ Subject to outcome of Local Government Election

* 2016 LG NSW Conference is scheduled for the 16 to 18 October 2016

 

No meetings are scheduled for January 2016.

If required an Inspection Committee will meet on the Saturday preceding the Ordinary Council Meeting.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council Meeting Schedule for 2016 be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

November 2015 Traffic Committee

 

 

Subject:          November 2015 Traffic Committee    

Record No:     SU1326 - 72280/15

Division:         Open Space and Urban Services Division

Author(s):       Sashika Young 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Lane Cove Traffic Committee Meeting was held on Tuesday, 24 November 2015.  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, 24 November 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Patterson

Executive Manager - Open Space and Urban Services

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

AGENDA - Traffic Committee - 24 November 2015

46 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

MINUTES - Traffic Committee - 24 November 2015

43 Pages

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Successful Festival by the River

 

 

Subject:          Successful Festival by the River    

Record No:     SU5903 - 72110/15

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):       Corinne Dickinson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The inaugural Festival by the River was successfully delivered during the first two weeks of November. The Festival concept, marketing material and variety of events were well received providing a strong basis for its ongoing inclusion in Council’s annual festival and events program.

 

Background

 

In 2014 Council requested that an annual festival or similar event be held to celebrate life on the Lane Cove and Parramatta Rivers.

 

The inaugural Lane Cove Festival by the River was held from 1 – 15 November and included over 15 activities. 10 of these activities were organized by Council with other participating groups including Greenwich Baths Nippers (Blue Fit), 12ft Skiff Sailing Club, Greenwich Sailing Club, North Shore Rowing Club and Lane Cove Bush Kids.

 

70% of Council’s activities had never been included in a Festival program before including: Learn to Fish, Yoga on the River, Kayaking, Painting by the River, Dragon Boating, Picnic by the River and an opportunity for children to design their own banners reflecting their love of our local rivers.

 

Most events requiring bookings reached maximum capacity including the Aboriginal Astronomy event, River Boat Cruise, Bush Treasure Hunt and Dragon Boating. Learn to Fish was popular with over 100 people dropping in while the rain-affected Picnic by the River had 400 people attend. The Picnic by the River event also provided a platform to open the new Picnic Area at Tambourine Bay.

 

The North Shore Rowing Club event attract up to 40 people however similar to the other recreational club open days there were not necessarily many new attendees.

 

The program was primarily available online with postcards letterbox dropped to the community the week prior to the Festival commencing. The look and feel of the material was well-received with expressions of interest for sponsorship and business partnerships for 2016. Many of the images within the program came from the Captured Photography Competition including the cover image.

 

Discussion

 

The format and marketing collateral for the inaugural Festival by the River was extremely well received by the community. In 2016 Council can look to refine events and program distribution to maximize the opportunity that has been identified during the positive response to this year’s program. The rain-affected Picnic by the River showed the suitability for the Tambourine Bay Park site for Food & Wine by the River in 2016 perhaps as a launch or closing event for the Festival.

 

The 2016 program will also tie-in with the Centenary celebrations of the Greenwich Baths which provides a perfect opportunity to lift the profile of both the Festival and the significance of the 100 years. Sponsorship, business partnerships and expanded program distribution will assist in raising awareness of the program next year.

 

Conclusion

 

Lane Cove’s Festival by the River should be scheduled into the annual events calendar as a means for showcasing life on the rivers in Lane Cove.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Remembrance Day Poppy Project

 

 

Subject:          Remembrance Day Poppy Project    

Record No:     SU4985 - 72115/15

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):       Corinne Dickinson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council’s recent Poppy Project was well received as part of the Remembrance Day commemorations. 2015 poppies were placed onto a large display of the number ‘100’ by members of the community in the lead up to the Remembrance Day service. There was a strong, positive response from the community who left messages on the project and were inspired to reflect and discuss the significance of the act of remembrance of those who have served and/or been affected by War.

 

Background

 

In July 2014 Council established an ANZAC Centenary Working Party to co-ordinate local events and activities to mark 100 years of World War 1. In looking at events for 2015 it was identified that a poppy public art project could help to provide public interaction with the act of remembrance. The Working Party confirmed that this would be more appropriately run closer to Remembrance Day given the symbolic role that poppies play during this occasion.

 

Council staff arranged for the display of a large version of the number‘100’ to mark the Centenary commemorations. The blank numbers were positioned in the Plaza and the Library in the days leading up to Remembrance Day. 2015 poppies were made available to the community along with a leaf to write a message, their name or the name of a loved one. They were then asked to place a poppy onto the 100 display as part of a communal target to reach 2015 poppies by Remembrance Day.

 

Members of Lane Cove RSL Sub-Branch were selling poppies on most of the days that the project was in situ and on the afternoon of Remembrance Day Council staff also took on the role of selling the Sub-Branch’s merchandise given that the public were asking to make purchases/donations and the Council project was free.

 

Discussion

 

The Poppy Project was extremely well received with daily instances of intergenerational discussions, personal memorials, positive conversations and thanks for the project. It also received positive feedback on local social media.

 

Many children returned over the course of the project to show their families where they had placed their poppy and others returned with friends and family to encourage them to be put their own poppy in place. The Local Studies team ensured that there was a poppy on the project for each person listed on Lane Cove’s Honour Roll while one member of the public returned with photographs of family who served in the war and placed them onto the 100 piece.

 

The target of 2015 poppies in place was reached on Remembrance Day. The project formed part of the Remembrance Day Service in the Library and then returned to the Plaza where the community could see the 2015 poppies proudly displayed. Council deliberately chose 100 as the project format to ensure that it could continue to be used throughout the Centenary commemorations.

 

DSC_1443.JPG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

The Poppy Project was extremely successful. Not only were 2015 poppies put in place but the project provided an opportunity for individuals, families and friends to remember their connection to those who have served and/or been affected by War during the important Centenary commemorations.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 7 December 2015

Community Wellbeing Index

 

 

Subject:          Community Wellbeing Index    

Record No:     SU5061 - 72176/15

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):       Carol Sinclair 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the meeting of 21 September 2015 the findings of the Community Wellbeing Survey were presented to Council.  Since that time further work on the project has produced a numerical Wellbeing Index for Lane Cove, a table of Community Indicators and Community Wellbeing Framework as they relate to the Community Strategic Plan and an infographic to promote the results of the survey on the website and in Council’s newsletters. This information is presented in this report.

 

Background

 

Under the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework, Council is required to develop a range of Plans including a Community Strategic Plan.   The Framework requires Council’s to develop ways of measuring and understanding community wellbeing and reporting against community visions or aspirations. It also requires Councils to consider community concerns that may not directly relate to Councils’ responsibilities or under its controls or influence.

 

Discussion

 

Council first agreed to the development of a Community Wellbeing Survey, in July 2014 to provide a tool to assess the more subjective measures of community sentiment and to increase Council’s knowledge and awareness of current trends and issues in the community.

 

The findings of this report have been previously presented to Council at the Ordinary Council meeting of 21 September 2015. Further analysis has revealed that Council achieved an overall Wellbeing Index Score of 76.2/100 for its inaugural 2015 Community Wellbeing Survey.  The score is based on responses to 15 questions across a number of different aspects of wellbeing, ie. the things that make it possible for us to lead meaningful, happy and fulfilled lives. Any score above 60 means that most people reported positive views about their personal and community wellbeing.

 

An infographic, attached as (AT-1), was developed to give a pictorial representation of the survey results. It shows the overall Wellbeing Index and provides information in the areas of quality of life, connections to neighbors, how suitable Lane Cove is for particular groups, reasons why people live here, environmental sustainability, our natural environment, participation in cultural and physical activities, Council’s interaction with the community and safety.

 

Conclusion

 

The Community Wellbeing project has provided Council with a more comprehensive and holistic tool to measure the level of wellbeing in the community.  It can be used to measure Council’s performance against the objectives in the Community Strategic Plan and be repeated to determine if the community feels their sense of wellbeing has improved or declined.

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Lane Cove Wellbeing Infographic

2 Pages