Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

15 February 2016

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.

 

LC_WebBanner


 

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 15 February 2016 commencing at 7:00pm. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Craig - GMYours 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 15 February 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO COUNTRY

 

NOTICE OF WEBCASTING OF MEETING

 

public forum

 

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

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 7 DECEMBER 2015

 

Mayoral Minutes

 

2.      Response to Fit for the Future Merger Proposal

 

Orders Of The Day

 

Officer Reports for Determination

 

3.      Create Lane Cove: Cultural Plan

 

4.      Tender for the Appointment of a Project Management Consultant for the Rosenthal Avenue Car Park Redevelopment Project

 

5.      LEP Planning Proposal 26: 14-20 Orion Road

 

6.      Hospitals in the R2 Residential Zone

 

7.      Lane Cove and North Side Community Services - Financial Assistance Grant

 

8.      Lane Cove Traffic Committee - January 2016

 

9.      Towards New Local Government Legislation: Proposed Phase 1 Amendments

 

10.    Proposal to Renew Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas for New Years Eve in the Lane Cove LGA

 

11.    2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-2016 Budget

 

Officer Reports for Information

 

12.    St Leonards South Master Plan - Update

 

13.    Aquisition of Land for a Park in Pinaroo Place, Lane Cove North

14.    2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-16 Delivery Program and Operational Plan

 

15.    Council Snapshot  

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Response to Fit for the Future Merger Proposal

 

 

Subject:          Response to Fit for the Future Merger Proposal    

Record No:     SU5558 - 6941/16

Division:         Lane Cove Council

Author(s):       Councillor Deborah Hutchens 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Government announced on 18 December 2015 that a ‘merger proposal’ involving Lane Cove, Hunters Hill and City of Ryde Councils has been developed for consideration as the next step in the Local Government Reform process.

 

The purpose of this report is to outline the reform process moving forward, consider Council’s position and proposed response to the Delegate. However, given the significance of the issue and ongoing community interest and engagement, I will recommend that determination of Council’s response be deferred for consideration at an Extraordinary Meeting of Council on Monday 22 February 2016.

 

Background

 

The Minister for Local Government formally referred merger proposals to the Chief Executive of the Office of Local Government for examination and report under the Local Government Act (the Act) on Wednesday, 6 January 2016.

 

The Chief Executive has delegated the examination and reporting function to other people (Delegates). In this regard, Dr Robert Lang has been appointed as the Delegate to examine the proposed Lane Cove, Hunters Hill and Ryde Council mergers. In examining and reporting on merger proposals, Delegates have conducted a public inquiry, called for written submissions, and will prepare a report with due regard to the factors in section 263(3) of the Act. The factors in the Act include financial considerations, communities of interest, elected representation, employment of staff, impact on services and facilities, and the attitude of residents and ratepayers.

Once the Minister has received reports prepared by the Delegates and the Boundary Commission's comments on those reports, the Minister will make a decision on whether or not to recommend the implementation of each proposal to the Governor of NSW.

 

Discussion

 

Merger Proposal Timeline**

 

DATE

ACTION

06.01.16

Merger proposals forwarded to CEO of OLG and delegates appointed

02.02.16

Delegate holds public inquiry

28.02.16

Closing date for submissions

March

Delegate prepares report

Early April

Delegate refers report to Minister and Boundaries Commission

TBA

Boundaries Commission provides comments on report to Minister

TBA

Minister considers report from Delegate and comments from Boundaries Commission

TBA

Minister makes recommendation to Governor

30.06.16

Intended Proclamation Date

30.06.16

Governance structure of new entities yet to be determined, likely to be included in proclamation

01.07.16

New entity commences

04.03.17

Council elections more than likely to be deferred until March 2017

 

** Please note that all dates after 28.02.16 are not official but indicative only and on the basis the NSW Government proceeds.

Submissions

 

The Delegate Dr Robert Lang has indicated that written submissions will be one of the most important ways for Delegates to gather information.

 

Written submissions will close at 5pm on Sunday 28 February 2016. Submissions should refer directly to the merger proposal and respondents have been encouraged (but not required) to focus on one or more of the factors in section 263(3) of the Act, being:

·       the financial advantages or disadvantages of the proposal to the residents and ratepayers of the areas concerned;

·       the community of interest and geographic cohesion in the existing areas and in any proposed new area;

·       the existing historical and traditional values in the existing areas and the impact of change on them;

·       the attitude of the residents and ratepayers of the areas concerned;

·       the requirements of the area concerned in relation to elected representation for residents and ratepayers at the local level, the desirable and appropriate relationship between elected representatives and ratepayers and residents and such other matters as considered relevant in relation to the past and future patterns of elected representation for that area;

·       the impact of the proposal on the ability of the council to provide adequate, equitable and appropriate services and facilities;

·       the impact of the proposal on the employment of the staff by the council;

·       the desirability (or otherwise) of dividing the resulting area or areas into wards

·       the need to ensure that the opinions of each of the diverse communities of the resulting area or areas are effectively represented; and

·       Any other factors relevant to the provision of efficient and effective local government in the existing and proposed new areas.

 

Proposed Submission

 

Council has consistently opposed any amalgamation and consistent with this focuses on the factors outlined above. A submission is currently being drafted that responds to the factors outlined and emphasises the following major impacts and shortcomings of the merger proposal including:

·    The absence of any real community of interest between the three areas in terms of socio-economic demographics, cultural and sporting associations.

·    The merged entity does not meet all Fit for the Future benchmarks by 2020, whilst Lane Cove Council meets all financial benchmarks in its own right and is projected to do so for at least the next 10 years.

·    Address the KPMG report and flawed assumptions which overstate merger benefits and understate transitional costs in setting up a merged council and aligning services and systems.

·    Concerns of the community in respect to loss of local democracy, representation and access to elected representatives.

·    94% community satisfaction levels with Council services and high levels of community engagement.

·    Community groups concerns about loss of funding and engagement through Council’s substantial Financial Assistance Program ($504,000 in 2015-16).

·    The success of our ongoing Major Projects Plan in delivering financial benefits and fast tracking infrastructure.

·    Concerns about impact on infrastructure and services delivery.

·    Impact on the employment of staff.

·    Reference studies from Professor Dollery and Percy Allan which have established that many merged Councils are now operating under diseconomies of scale.

 

The submission in articulating Council’s firm opposition to the merger proposal, will also address issues Council would like addressed in the event of a forced amalgamation. These issues include levels of political representation and number of wards, service delivery guarantees, transitioning and staffing concerns.

 

Conclusion

 

In November 2015, Council once again reaffirmed its position to oppose the forced amalgamation of Councils and not to pursue a merger with any other Council and to seek to maintain its autonomy through participation in a Joint Regional Authority (JRA) with Ryde and Hunters Hill Councils.

 

I consider the disruption and the opportunity cost of amalgamations to our communities far outweigh any potential benefits which are significantly overstated in the merger proposal and KPMG reports. Residents will suffer a dramatic reduction in local representation, and the quality and quantity of local government services. Significant sums will be wasted on aligning systems, services, payroll parities and not to mention the impact on our staff. Many whose skills, experience and commitment to our communities will be lost to the industry through this unnecessary process.

 

Given these concerns and the ongoing community interest and engagement in the process, I propose that our submission be considered at an Extraordinary Meeting to be held next Monday night, 22 February 2016.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council consider its formal response of Fit for the Future at an Extraordinary Meeting of Council on Monday, 22 February 2016.

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Deborah Hutchens

Councillor

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

            


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Create Lane Cove: Cultural Plan

 

 

Subject:          Create Lane Cove: Cultural Plan    

Record No:     SU5276 - 7274/16

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):       Corinne Dickinson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council commenced its community consultation process for Create Lane Cove: A Cultural Plan in March 2015. Council has consulted with individuals, community groups, staff, and advisory committees and has also reviewed industry trends, survey results and the State government’s first Arts and Cultural Policy framework.

 

The result was a draft plan that was placed on public exhibition for nine (9) weeks during which time five (5) submissions were received. The main areas of discussion were around the balance of demographics, the opportunity to diversify reference to the arts and individual pursuits, the support for more communication and collaboration, and the provision of a multi-purpose performing arts space. Community groups saw the use of the word ‘investigate’ as a lack of commitment by Council to the provision of a multipurpose space, a position that Council must take since no feasible locations or funding sources are available at this time. Council is however committed to considering options as and when they arise and to helping work alongside community cultural groups to address the provision of suitable spaces.

 

The revised plan presented to this meeting includes changes based on feedback from the public exhibition. The 11 themes and related actions within the revised plan will nurture a strong sense of cultural identity, connection and expression in Lane Cove over the next 5 – 10 years.

 

Background

 

In 2004 Lane Cove was one of the first councils in NSW to produce a Cultural Action Plan. Council went on to receive an Award from Local Government NSW for their efforts and over the past 10 years has embedded arts, culture and cultural diversity across Council activities.

This plan has ensured the successful implementation of new facilities, public art programs, festivals and programs for the benefit of the local community. To ensure it continues to benefit the whole community for years to come Council has reviewed the Plan and produced Create Lane Cove: A Cultural Plan to help guide activities over the next 5-10 years.

The Plan’s vision is that Lane Cove, its people and its places have a strong sense of cultural identity, connection and expression. For the purpose of cultural planning in Lane Cove, culture has been defined asanything that contributes to your quality of life, sense of place, feeling of community or local identity’.

 

The Cultural Plan contains 11 themes and goals that were developed following initial community consultation in 2015. The Draft Cultural Plan was presented to the November Council meeting at which time the council endorsed the plan for the purpose of community consultation.

 

In addition, Council resolved that the feedback from the consultation period be provided to a sub-committee prior to its presentation back to Council.

 

 


 

Discussion

 

The initial community consultation ran from March – May 2015 during which time Council utilised SGL Consulting to conduct 20+ one-on-one consultations with key representatives from local community groups. In addition, the following consultation took place:

·    Cultural Advisory Committee – Met to discuss their interests and priorities for the community;

·    Community Consultation Meeting – A face-to-face meeting with community representatives to identify specific actions they see as beneficial to the community; and

·    Community Consultation Survey – An opt-in survey for community members to provide comprehensive feedback on their cultural interests, pursuits and opinions;

·    Key Staff Interviews – 18+ staff from across Council interviewed regarding their sector’s interests and priorities.

 

The second phase of the consultation was designed to determine whether the themes, goals and actions included within the Draft Cultural Plan were appropriate and supported by the community.

From 30 November 2015 – 1 February 2016 this second phase of consultation was undertaken with Council placing the Draft Cultural Plan on exhibition at Council’s Civic Centre, Lane Cove Library and online. An e-newsletter was sent out on Monday 30 November and an advertisement was placed in the North Shore Times on 2 December.

 

In addition Council presented the Draft Plan to the Cultural Advisory Committee meeting on 25 November and invited local community groups to have their say via an e-newsletter sent to over 90 groups on 15 December.  Community groups without email received a letter in the mail.

 

In total, five (5) submissions were received from two (2) individuals and three (3) community groups. The main areas of discussion were around the balance of demographics (i.e. too youth-centric in original draft), the opportunity to diversify reference to the arts and individual pursuits, the support for more communication and collaboration, and the provision of a multi-purpose performing arts space.

 

The feedback has been summarised below. Included in this summary is initial feedback provided during the Cultural Advisory Committee Meeting.

 

Summary of key points in submissions

Response from Council

General Feedback on Approach

 

Important that Council is even-handed and does not encourage or discourage cultures

Comment noted

Balance needed between demographic groups eg. emphasis on young people

Changes to 1.8, 2.11, 10.3 and 11.9 to reflect broader demographics

Too much emphasis on young people

Changes to 1.8, 2.11, 10.3 and 11.9 to reflect broader demographics

It is most important that the current cultural needs are met before long terms ideas are imagined

Long-term vision assist in providing a sense of direction while the prioritisation of critical, important and beneficial help determine current actions

Consider including overt statement in Plan to avoid influence of administrators towards their favourite fringe

Covered by Council staff Code of Conduct as this is not limited to cultural activities but rather all Council activities

Council should avoid being accused of promoting un-Christian activities to the detriment of Christian activities eg. Lunar New Year is referenced but no Carols or Christmas.

Covered under 2.4 “Nurture partnerships with community leaders from diverse cultures, service clubs, religious and spiritual organisations to support arts and cultural programs”.

Refreshing draft Plan, that covers heritage, arts, cultures

Comment noted

Impressed by its breadth and inclusiveness of the many different interests and needs of both professional and voluntary cultural groups, with a demographic spread from school age to seniors

Comment noted

Fully support consultation with a large variety of groups and people, and to regularly review the Council's Plan over coming years

Comment noted

Pleased to note that Council is providing good spaces and opportunities for cultural activities around its LGA

Comment noted

Hope Council's Plan will be able to be implemented and continued after the undesired amalgamations

Comment noted

Communication & Collaboration Theme

 

Collaboration required – a sense that Council and community groups do not understand each other. Performing arts groups being treated differently to other cultural groups

Actively addressed under ‘Collaboration’ theme.

All community groups have different needs, Council will continue to work with the unique needs of each group

Continued collaboration is essential, particularly for getting new groups involved

Comment noted

Communication remains difficult. Many people will not read weekly or monthly newspapers, noticeboards etc. Social media could appeal to all ages, word of mouth still works best in engaging newcomers

Challenge acknowledged through inclusion of ‘Communication’ theme to ensure its constant prioritisation in the Plan

Creative Economy Theme

 

Ideas may be more feasible with Council amalgamations? It is difficult for ‘not for profit’ groups to relate to this

This theme complements the State government’s emphasis on nurturing creative industries. While it may not appeal to community groups in their traditional form, it is intended to be for both individual artisans as well as promoting opportunities for sustainable community groups utilising economic values

Community for All Theme

 

Never possible to appeal or cater to everyone. There are many who don’t wish to be involved with their community or neighbours. If you try to please everyone, you please no one

This theme aims to ensure that those who want to participate have the opportunity to do so ie. It aims to create a community which can be accessed by all should they so wish

Community Wellbeing Theme

 

Unfortunately many whose wellbeing would be enhanced by community involvement will not participate, despite encouragement to do so.

Council will continue to provide an environment that fosters wellbeing for everyone

Cultural Diversity, Identity and Expression

 

These elements are very well and regularly celebrated in the Plaza, and very much enjoyed

Comment noted

Cultural Heritage Theme

 

Unfortunately a bit late in preserving our Aboriginal Heritage eg. rock carvings near Longueville Wharf

Comment noted

Art

 

Why art mainly? There is a strong emphasis on public art whereas other forms of creativity could and should be promoted. Eg. Design, craft and technics

Council has added a definition of the arts to the Plan to help clarify that it refers to all creative cultural pursuits, individually and collectively.

 

Addition of 5.16 “Provide activities that nurture and celebrate individual forms of creative expression, for example handicrafts, design and technics”

 

Art should be mentioned for its benefits, rather than its products Eg. Men’s Shed mentioned re: social isolation however benefits of art is not mentioned

Comment noted

Comment regarding the need to seek commitment to public art from new developers

Council is setting the example by requiring public art to be integrated into its major projects

The Art fraternity is well catered for

Comment noted

Performing Arts Space

 

No need to further investigate, investigation already taken place

See further discussion

Investigation does not indicate a solid commitment

See further discussion

Listed as critical, should be actioned urgently

Comment noted

Purpose-built space will help address unique diversity, training opportunities, showcases and other activities listed in the plan

Comment noted

2,500 members of the performing arts community will benefit from the space

Comment noted

Northern end of Rosenthal Avenue is best location for foot traffic, local businesses and nighttime economy

There is no building on the northern end of Rosenthal Avenue development.

Opportunity to investigate former Centrehouse site

Comment noted

The word ‘investigate’ was not seen to be the commitment required to initiate a new space

See further discussion

Closure of Town Hall created need for wheelchair accessible venue with parking, performance space, rehearsal and warm up space, supper space, grand piano and now a need for rental assistance

Council will continue to investigate the opportunity to provide a multi-purpose space

Commitment to provide a multipurpose performance space is critical to any creative plan for any community. This is the most important statement in the Plan.

The provision of a space is listed as critical.

Disappointed that Council has still not progressed to providing a performance space which is urgently needed and requested by many groups – it should be listed as provide, not investigate a performance space.

See further discussion

Integrate cultural spaces in major development is a step in the right direction

Comment noted

Specific actions

 

Tree trail may be more than beneficial given impact of 10/50 rule

To be reflected in Open Space Plan

Informative tree trail is a great idea

To be reflected in Open Space Plan

Creative ways to enhance public amenity and reduce graffiti was seen to be critical

Comment noted

What’s on calendar supported

Comment noted

Community noticeboards/bus shelter notices needed to help generate more publicity

Comment noted

Welcome packs is a great idea

Comment noted

Welcome packs is a good suggestion – should include a cultural calendar

Comment noted

Continue to include arts and cultural awards in Citizenship Awards

Comment noted

Curate exhibitions that feature works from the Council Art collection is a good suggestion

Comment noted

Provision of affordable transport for geographically and economically isolated community members to attend cultural events would be very helpful for those in Seniors accommodation, nursing homes that attend our events

Comment noted

Street parties were a wonderful way of creating neighbourliness unfortunately they have virtually ceased due to regulations – could this be remedied?

Council has produced the Guide to Street Parties in Lane Cove which includes the option for Council to assist in providing Public Liability Insurance

 

Council has welcomed the feedback from the community for the Draft Cultural Plan and made amendments to actions as a result. This includes amendment to the action related to the provision of a multipurpose cultural performance space which now reads: “Continue to investigate opportunities for a multipurpose cultural performance space and work alongside community cultural groups to ensure the solutions is viable and sustainable.”

 

This change acknowledges Council’s commitment to finding workable solutions both now and in the future and reflects Council’s extensive work to date on this objective.  A summary of Councils work to date is included as AT-2. That is, the immediacy of action requested by the community groups can be eased with funding assistance as well as an openness to look at alternative options as there is no provision for a building on the Rosenthal Avenue development or anywhere in the Lane Cove village centre in the short term. Council continues to explore options within new and existing developments for a multipurpose space, either as a new or repurposed space. However there is currently no suitable space or feasible funding model. This plan reflects the capacity to which Council can currently commit and given the need that locations within previous investigations are not available, the word investigate remains relevant.

 

The 11 themes and goals within Create Lane Cove: A Cultural Plan provide for an exciting future direction in Lane Cove that will help to nurture the unique arts, cultural and cultural diversity needs of our local community. 

Conclusion

 

Create Lane Cove: A Cultural Plan provides the framework for Lane Cove, its people and its places to have a strong sense of cultural identity, connection and expression. It is proposed that the Draft Create Lane Cove: A Cultural Plan document be formally adopted and that Council continue to integrate the actions within this plan throughout its operational and strategic plans.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the revised DRAFT Create Lane Cove: A Cultural Plan dated February 2016 as attached at AT-1.

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Draft Cultural Plan - February 2016

52 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Background to Council Activities Multipurpose Cultural Performance Space

6 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Tender for the Appointment of a Project Management Consultant for the Rosenthal Avenue Car Park Redevelopment Project

 

 

Subject:          Tender for the Appointment of a Project Management Consultant for the Rosenthal Avenue Car Park Redevelopment Project    

Record No:     SU6057 - 8377/16

Division:         General Managers Unit

Author(s):       Geoff Douglas 

 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council conducted a selective tender in accordance with its Tender and Quotations Procedures, for the appointment of an external Project Management consultant to manage the Rosenthal Avenue Car Park Redevelopment Project. This report provides details on the tender process conducted and recommends that General Manager be authorised to award a tender to AECOM Pty Ltd.

 

Background

 

Council’s adopted Major Projects Strategic Management Plan 2007-2016 includes the redevelopment of the Rosenthal Car Park site. The redevelopment involves the following three (3) components:-

1.   Below Grade Retail - approx 5,400m2;

2.   Below Grade Car Park with up to 500 car spaces; and

3.   Above Ground Public Domain approximately 6,750m2

 

Council committed to proceed with the project at its meeting of 21 September 2015.

The project delivery timetable allows for the staged development of the project over a four (4) year timeframe with construction works scheduled to commence in 2017. The project is intended to be constructed in two (2) stages so that some parking will be available throughout the construction process.  Half of the existing surface car park will remain available for use while the basement car park and building structure closest to Lane Cove Plaza (the south end) is constructed.  Then the first half of the new basement car park is opened to the public, while the second half of the project is built (north end).

The project timetable and key milestones are as follows:

·    Early 2016             Project Manager appointed

·    Late 2016              Design +Construct Contractor appointed

·    Early 2017             Construction commences

·    Late 2019              Project completion

 

Procurement Process

 

A two (2) stage selective tender process was undertaken to procure the Project Manager. 

 

Expression of Interest Process

 

A Request for Expressions of Interest for a Project Management Consultant was called on 14 October 2015.  Advertisements were placed in the North Shore Times and Sydney Morning Herald on 13, 14 and 17 October 2015.  The EOI was conducted using the NSROC e-Tendering portal (ref NSRC-700053).

 

The EOI described the project, and set out the skills and experience sought in an external Project Manager.  The Evaluation Criteria (below) were set out in the EOI document.   

 

EOI  -  EVALUATION CRITERIA

%

Worked successfully with a Local Government client

10%

Understands the Local Government tender and probity processes

10%

Has relevant experience in dealing with the community during project delivery

10%

Has the capacity to deliver a project of this importance and size

20%

Has proven capability to work with a D+C contractor to drive a workable design solution and achieve cost savings in a D+C/GMP procurement environment

20%

Has experience in delivering high quality public open space projects

10%

Has experience in delivering retail shopping centre developments

10%

Demonstrates experience in dealing with a major national supermarket and an international mini-major tenant

10%

Total

100%

 

The EOI closed at 2pm Tuesday 10 November.  18 submissions were received from the following companies / individuals: AECOM Australia, Altus, APP, Artazan, Aver, Bloompark, Cadence, Case, CBRE, Compass, Michael Williams, DCWC, Montlar, Nix, P+I, RCP, Savills, TSA.

 

An evaluation panel comprising: Director - Major Projects, Manager – Assets and Urban Design Planner met on 23 November.  At that meeting six (6) proponents were selected to be invited to tender for the Project Management consultant works.

 

The six (6) organisations selected to be invited to Tender were: APP, Savills, RCP, AECOM, P+I and Compass.

 

Selective Tender Process

 

The six (6) selected tenderers were issued a Request for Tender document via the NSROC e-Tendering portal (private notice ref NSRC-710124) on 12 January 2016.  A detailed description of the service requirements and the evaluation criteria were set out in the RFT document. 

 


 

The evaluation Criteria and weightings were as follows:

 

RFT  -  EVALUATION CRITERIA

%

Price

35%

Understanding of the task

30%

Qualifications and demonstrated past experience of the Tenderer’s Key Personnel

25%

Work Health and Safety

5%

Insurance

5%

Total

100%

 

Tenders closed on 2 February 2016, providing for a three (3) week tender duration.  Six (6) tenders were received, however the tender from P+I was non-conforming.  Since no conforming tender was supplied by P+I no further consideration was given to their submission.

 

Tender Evaluation

 

A Tender Evaluation Panel comprising the Director - Major Projects, Manager – Assets and Manager – Special Projects was established.  The panel met and determined to interview the three (3) lowest priced tenderers.  Should no acceptable tender have been found in that group, the panel would then have interviewed the other (higher priced) tenderers.  Each tenderer was given an opportunity to present their team and capabilities and then each tenderer was asked the same questions.

 

Following the interviews it was felt that a successful tender was likely to be found from the three (3) tenders interviewed, therefore it was decided not to interview the remaining tenderers.

 

The evaluation panel agreed to recommend the tender be awarded to AECOM Pty Ltd.

 

 

Price

Understanding of the task

Key Personnel

WHS

Insurance

Total Score

 

35%

30%

25%

5%

5%

100%

APP

Preferred

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

 

Savills

 

 

 

 

Equally Preferred

 

RCP

 

 

 

Preferred

Equally Preferred

 

AECOM

 

Preferred

Preferred

 

Equally Preferred

Preferred

Compass

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

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

 

Having recorded the highest overall scores in the weighted criteria and having regard to positive references regarding the nominated key personnel in the project delivery team, the Tender Evaluation Panel recommends:-

1.   The tender for the provisions of external consultant project management services for overall delivery of the Rosenthal Avenue Car Park redevelopment project be awarded to AECOM Australia Pty Ltd for an amount of $973,000 + GST.

2.   The General Manager be authorised to enter into a contract with AECOM Australia Pty Ltd.

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:-

1.   The tender for the provisions of external consultant project management services for overall delivery of the Rosenthal Avenue Car Park redevelopment project be awarded to AECOM Australia Pty Ltd for an amount of $973,000 + GST.

2.   The General Manager be authorised to enter into a contract with AECOM Australia Pty Ltd.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

LEP Planning Proposal 26: 14-20 Orion Road

 

 

Subject:          LEP Planning Proposal 26: 14-20 Orion Road    

Record No:     SU5407 - 72169/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):       Terry Tredrea 

 

 

Executive Summary 

 

Council has received a planning proposal (AT-1) from Ducru Pty Ltd on 16 October, 2015, seeking Council’s support to:-

·    Rezone 14-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove West from IN2 Light Industrial to B4 Mixed Use (thereby permitting residential use);

·    Increase the maximum height limit on the site from 18m to 55m;

·    Increase FSR from 1:1 to 2.5:1; and

·    Make a local planning provision for a minimum area of non-residential floor space (approximately 2,000m2) on the site.

 

A detailed response to the proposal is attached at AT-2 and discussed in the report.

 

The proponent submits that the rezoning proposal is justified on the grounds that:-

1.         The site is well suited for residential use.

2.         It is consistent with the strategic planning framework.

3.         Commercial use is economically unviable in LCW (proposal’s Appendix B at AT-3).

4.         Industrial use is economically unviable in LCW, now and in the future (Appendix C at AT-4).

5.         Benefits to the LCW Business Park.

6.         The precedent at 150 Epping Road.

7.         Harmonious interface with surrounding uses.

8.         Traffic is “easily accommodated”

9.         Contamination can be remediated to Residential level (Appendix E).

10.       Employment reduction is a “marginal impact”.

11.       Parking is provided on-site.

 

The planning proposal’s Appendices D (Traffic Report), E (Prelim. Environmental Review), F (Correspondence with SJ Johnson) and G (Deed of Novation; Durham deed) are circulated electronically as supplementary material.


In response to these grounds, it is recommended that Council not support the Planning Proposal as:-

1.   This location in Lane Cove West industrial area does not provide adequate and accessible social infrastructure or amenity for residential development. It creates the relative social isolation of the subject site. An isolated development of 459 apartments is unlikely to create its own “neighbourhood community”.

2.   It fails the objectives and criteria of the NSW Department of Planning & Environment’s Employment Lands Assessment Checklist. The Checklist, “ensures the State has an adequate and appropriately located supply of land for industrial developments” (Metropolitan Strategy, p.38). Mixed Use is more appropriate to areas such as Macquarie Park, where commercial, industrial and residential land uses are better integrated and catered for.

3.   It pre-empts the findings of the DPE’s recent investigation into the potential of employment lands regionally, and would most likely create an expectation among industrial land-owners in favour of further residential redevelopment at the expense of current industrial land uses. 

4.   The Urbis Economic Assessment (against the viability of commercial development in LCW) does not make a plausible case for the capacity of Lane Cove West Business Park (LCWBP) to accommodate predicted industrial floorspace demand. It significantly under-estimates employment projections relative to actual recent growth.

5.   In arguing against the viability of industrial development in LCWBP, the assumptions and variables provided to the JLL Report are unrealistic and therefore do not support the conclusions drawn by this analysis.

6.   Apart from residences, the proposal adds no new uses to those currently permitted on-site in terms of retail, commercial and child care uses.

7.   The reasons for approval of residential development at 150 Epping Road do not apply to 14-20 Orion Road. It was approved under the State’s former Part 3A system as development quite separate from the Lane Cove West IN2 industrial precinct and as a site unsuited for industrial configuration. It also adjoins a major bus route. Council did not support the approval of residential development at 150 Epping Road, and has no strategic plans to “further contribute to the residential presence of the area”.

8.   Residential users of an industrial area will inevitably lead to some amenity conflict with future industrial neighbours, regardless of the setbacks. Residential use would compromise future IN2 uses in the precinct.

9.   It is possible that the proposal is not likely to contribute to any traffic congestion in the precinct. However, the current level of traffic is at an acceptable level, as indicated in the consultant report for Council by Traffix of 2012.

10. Site soil remediation must proceed to EPA standards before residential use is permitted.

11. Residential development is not needed to meet Council’s housing target.

12. The proposed residential buildings, while offering excellent “leafy” views, would also be highly visually intrusive from most viewing points. A comparable but less visual impact is the development at 150 Epping Road.

13. From the 1 Sirius Road experience, it can be concluded that detailed design of residential proposals will need to consider the height impacts of the nearby Lane Cove Tunnel Stack, and the odour impact of the Ingredion factory. This would affect building locations, heights and provision of private/communal/ public open space.

 

The proposal may be a short-term solution to one land-owner’s financial priorities. It creates a precedent for residential towers throughout an industrial estate, and is counter to the Metropolitan Strategy’s policy of protecting industrial land.

 


Background 

 

This application to amend Lane Cove LEP 2009 with respect to 14-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove West was made by Ducru Pty Ltd, the owner, on 16 October, 2015.

 

The Site

 

As shown on the maps below, the site is approximately 1.7ha, located on the northern end of the Lane Cove West Business Park. The site consists of two lots:

·    14-16 Orion Rd =  Lot 1 DP 1095363 -  7,922sqm (southern portion)

·    18-20 Orion Rd =  Lot 2 DP 1095363 -  8,938sqm (northern portion)

 

 

14-16 is a mostly vegetated undeveloped block, sloping down along the northern boundary with Lot 2.  18-20 is a developed site with a 9-storey commercial block and 4 levels of car park, and slopes very steeply away along the northern edge (which it shares with the SC Johnson site 25m below to the north).

replace pic.jpg

Figure 1: Site Location

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18-20

 

Figure 2: Aerial View

14-16

 

 

Previous Approvals History

 

(i)                  Durham Deed, 7 May 1986:

 

Under this Deed, the registered proprietor of the land, Durham, dedicated land to Council and constructed part of a road to provide improved vehicular access to the industrial estate (Sam Johnson Way) in return for an equivalent credit of development floor space (45,127sqm of Development of which 49% was for Commercial Development/Office Buildings, comprising a total of 22,112sqm) and Section 94 obligations. Under the Deed, commercial premises are permitted on 14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road with a FSR of up to 2:1.

 

Ducru purchased the land, and Council consented to the transfer of all rights and obligations under the Deed from Durham to Ducru Pty Ltd. The novated (transfer Deed) Deed in 2007 clarified:

 

·    Although the original Durham deed may have not been signed, both parties undertook their obligations as if the deed were signed.

·    The S94 contributions in relation to this site has been satisfied with regard and on account of works provided in kind.

·    In order to ensure the proposed deed is unambiguous, it confirms that the remaining floor space area allowed to be developed on the Land, 14-16 Orion Road, Lane Cove, shall be up to 11,984m2 (including 10,582m2 of office space) and 432 car parking spaces.

 


The proposed floor space would approximate to the Durham Deed’s 45,000m2, but the use of such floor space for residential purposes is not permissible under the Durham Deed.

 

(ii)                 Development Applications:

 

The history of the last 26 years of the site is summarised below:-

 

DA No.

Date

Proposal

Decision

83/1988

 

1991

Northern lot: 9-storey commercial/child care (10,376m2 GFA) and parking for 380 cars.

Upheld in L&EC

510/1999

5/5/2000

Southern lot:  8-storey building + 450 vehicles (88% office; 6% warehouse; 6% gym/café/retail)

Approved. Lapsed

04/413

24/4/2005

Southern lot: 8-storey industrial building + 450 vehicles (GFA 10901m2)

Approved. Lapsed

28/09

June 2009

Southern lot: 5-storey commercial building FSR 2:1

Approved. Renewed in 2014.

 

 

The Proposal (AT-1)

 

Zonings and Scale (Current & Proposed)

 

As the following maps show, the proposal is to rezone the two Lots from IN2 to B4.


Current Zoning (IN2)                                       Proposed Zonings (B4)

Figures 3 to 8: Planning Controls

 

 


In addition, as shown in the Planning Proposal (AT-1), it is proposed to amend the FSR from 1:1 to 2.5:1, and the height of building from 18m to 55m.

 


Current Height (18m)                          Proposed Height 55m

 

 


Current FSR (1:1)                               Proposed FSR (2.5:1)

 

The built form is proposed to comprise:-

·    Floor space: 42,178sqm (residential) and 2,050sqm (retail/commercial)

·    459 apartments

·    4 towers from 10 to 16 storeys

·    A commercial building of 3 storeys.

 


Discussion

 

The rezoning proposal is assessed in terms of issues raised by the proponent and other matters raised by Council. The proponent seeks to justify the proposal on a range of issues, which are summarised under the 13 headings below. Further detail is given in AT-2.

1.         Residential use has merit here

2.         It is consistent with the strategic planning framework

3.         Commercial use is economically unviable (Appendix B)

4.         Industrial use is economically unviable, now and in the future (Appendices B&C)

5.         Benefits to the LCW Business Park

6.         The Precedent at 150 Epping Road.

7.         Harmonious interface with  surrounding uses

8.         Traffic is “easily accommodated”

9.         Contamination can be remediated to Residential level (App E)

10.       Employment  reduction – a “marginal impact”

11.       Parking is on-site

 

Further Council issues:

12.       Air Quality

13.       Visual Impact

 

In more detail:-

 

1.   Proposal: The site is well suited for residential use. because it:

a.   Provides housing with close access to jobs;

b.   Provides excellent access to services;

c.   Is close to parks & recreational spaces;

d.   Offers a “leafy outlook”;

e.   Creates its own community;

f.    Has “abundant” bus services; and

g.   Is connected to major centres.

 

Response: The site is surrounded by approximately 500,000sqm of industrial land, and separated from 150 Epping Road by a private valley (see Figure 1), contributing to the relative social isolation of the subject site.  An isolated development of 459 dwellings is unlikely to create its own “neighbourhood community”. However, the need for residential amenity (against odour, noise, glare, etc) is highly likely to create conflicts with existing industrial neighbours. In this respect, it fails to address the fundamental planning principle of separating conflicting land uses.

 

The site does provide “leafy” outlooks for high-rise residences, but, at the same height as the more distant 150 Epping Road development, would have a more intrusive visual impact within the precinct and wider region.

 

While locating residences with close access to jobs is in principle desirable, it is not in practice if it is at the expense of nearly 100 jobs (in this proposal).

 

It is agreed that the subject site is moderately well located in relation to parks and recreational spaces. It is serviced by strong public transport connections to major centres at Sydney CBD, Macquarie Park, Chatswood, North Ryde, St Leonards, and North Sydney.

 

2.   Proposal: The proposal is consistent with the strategic planning framework because it meets the housing objectives of A Plan for Growing Sydney  by:

a.   Accelerating housing supply and local housing supply across Sydney; and

b.   Improving housing choice to suit different needs and lifestyles.

 

Furthermore, in a Meeting in May 2015, the Dept of Planning & Environment (DPE) were “positively encouraging”.                          

 

Response: Council is currently able to reach its 2031 residential target under LEP2009.

This proposal allows residents to choose to live in isolation from an established residential neighbourhood. However, this is not supported.

 

Of more importance is the strategic document referenced in the Metropolitan Strategy: Employment Lands Assessment Checklist, which reflects one of the Department of Planning & Environment’s “most important land management roles” of “ensuring the State has an adequate and appropriately located supply of land for industrial developments”. The staff assessment in AT-2 (Item 1) concluded that the planning proposal is inconsistent with the objectives and criteria of the Employment Lands Assessment Checklist. Furthermore, it pre-empts the findings of the DPE’s recent investigation into the potential of employment lands regionally, and would most likely create an expectation among industrial land-owners in favour of residential redevelopment.

 

In several discussions with the Department, including planning meetings with North Subregion councils in late-2015, Department officers have indicated to Council their view that the IN2 Light Industrial employment land at Lane Cove West is appropriate to be protected from non-industrial development. This is based on a long-term view of the potential future need for employment land within the Northern Subregion. A recent letter to Council from the Department reiterates their recognition of the precinct’s “important contribution” to employment and services in the area.

 

3.   Proposal: Commercial use is of LCW is economically unviable because:-        

a . The location is inferior to that of competitors ( Macquarie  Park/North Ryde, etc);

b.  The vacancy rate on-site has been around 40% for the last 4 years; and

c.  The future capacity of LCW can accommodate predicted floorspace demand.

 

Response: LCW does lack the quality of retail services of Macquarie Park. It lacks the larger floor plates of larger corporations, and presumably the grade of office space found elsewhere (although the applicant does not define the grade of office space currently at the site). The applicant has focused on competition with commercial areas of higher quality, and not addressed the site’s possible market niche for more moderately priced, mid-range office space on a site uniquely combining office and industrial buildings. As the population grows, demand for such stock is expected to increase, noting that 60% of the current building is occupied.

 

With respect to the future capacity of LCW to accommodate predicted floorspace demand, it is demonstrated in AT-2 (Item 3.3) that predicted demand is extrapolated from significantly under-estimated employment projections (in Table 4.2) relative to actual recent growth. It therefore, and should be relied upon as a basis for the future capacity of LCW to accommodate predicted floorspace demand.

 

4.   Proposal: Industrial use of the site is economically unviable, now and in the future (App B&C) because:        

a.   There is a trend towards a lower population of Lane Cove residents now employed in the Industrial sector;

b.   The resident employment sector slowing for Industrial sector;

c.   The JLL Analysis (Appendix C) shows the site is financially unviable as Industrial Use;

d.   Industrial demand is moving towards larger warehouse space; and

e.   There are topographical and vegetation constraints on developing the site.

 

Response: Addressing the five (5) reasons in order:

 

a/b. Lane Cove residents are less likely now to work in industrial land uses than formerly, according to demographic data. However, this is of less relevance to the demand for light industrial floorspace than the broader regional demand for employment in Lane Cove West. As Table 2.2 (Appendix B) shows, demand for jobs in Lane Cove West (mostly IN2 jobs) has grown by over 40% in 5 years. These figures suggest a strongly growing demand for industrial-zoned land in LCW.

 

c.    The “adopted hypothetical development schemes and construction cost estimates” are questionable. Three assumptions in particular are unproven (see AT-2):

·   a maximum on-site FSR is 0.75:1 (current potential is 1:1);

·   an assumed construction cost of $1,800/sqm is more associated with higher commercial or residential costs;

·   an adopted sale price is $2,100/sqm. The LCW average sale price is shown as $2,584/sqm. No reason is given for a sale price so low and only $300/sqm above construction cost.

 

d.    The demand for “traditional industrial uses” (large lot manufacture and warehousing) in the North Subregion is low because such demand is moving west. However, in general, the major undersupply is for serviced IN2 undeveloped land. This latter is suited to small lot high-tech. industries. The subject site may be well-suited to these uses.

 

e.    The site topography is similar to that of much of the industrial land in the precinct, which has not been constrained from IN2 development. Consent 28/09 did not consider vegetation a constraint to development of a 5-storey commercial building on 14-16 Orion Road.


 

5.   Proposal:  Offers benefits to the LCW Business Park in the form of:        

a.   Retail & Child Care;

b.   Commercial & Employment.

 

Response: Child care centres and Neighbourhood shops are currently permitted in the IN2 zone, and under the Durham Deed that covers the site, Retail/commercial uses are currently permitted. The proposal adds nothing that is not currently permitted.

 

6.   Proposal:  The Precedent at 150 Epping Road in the form of:        

a.    A Residential precedent; and

b.    Same height at top of building.

 

Response: The factors resulting in residential development at 150 Epping Road do not apply to 14-20 Orion Road, in particular as it was approved under the State’s former Part 3A system. The land at 150 Epping Road, unlike this site, is located on a major highway with nearby convenient public transport. It is separated from the industrial estate by a deep valley of natural bushland and waterway, and considered as a site unsuited for industrial configuration. It is therefore, by contrast, a less unsuitable site for residential development than 14-20 Orion Road. In addition, Council did not support the approval of residential development at 150 Epping Road, but acknowledged at the time of approval that 150 Epping Road is a development quite separate from the Lane Cove West IN2 industrial precinct.

 

The highest ground level along the Mars Road ridgeline is approximately 55AHD, approx. 40m below the proposed height of the tallest building on 14-16 Orion Road. Therefore, the proposed buildings would dominate the built skyline. The visual impact of the proposed buildings, greater in visual impact than 150 Epping Road, would be intrusive and unjustified.

 

7.   Proposal:  A harmonious interface with  surrounding uses in the form of:        

a.    Setbacks to future industrial neighbours; and

b.    Vegetation barriers.

 

See the following Concept Design.


Concept Design

 

Response: A predominantly residential development will inevitably lead to a common constraint on further industrial development caused by the need to not impact on the amenity of residents within the subject site (such as noise, odour, glare, etc). Likewise, “vegetative buffers” to future industrial neighbours do not guarantee that “conflict in land uses” can be avoided.

 

8.   Proposal:  Proposed traffic is “easily accommodated”:        

“the proposed development… may result in an increase in additional localised traffic movements on weekends only which is currently absent with the commercial use. Any such increase in weekend residential traffic movements would be outweighed by the overall decrease in traffic generation across the week through the change of use.” (Planning Proposal p26). This refers to residential traffic travelling in the opposite direction to incoming employment traffic.

 

Response: Although the proposal is not likely to contribute to traffic congestion in the precinct, the current level of congestion is at an acceptable level.

 

9.   Proposal:  Asbestos, etc. contamination can be remediated to EPA Residential standard by RAP.

 

A Preliminary Environmental Review conducted by Coffey (Appendix E) concluded that the following contamination issues identified in this report require further consideration:

·    Asbestos bundles of fibres in samples from 14-16 Orion Road, most likely associated with fill imported onto the site. No asbestos contamination materials were identified in samples collected from 18-20 Orion Road.

·    Concentrations of nickel, zinc, TPH C15-C28 and Benzo(a) pyrene.

 

Coffey has concluded the site can be made suitable for mixed residential and commercial/industrial development with remediation or management of asbestos.

 

Response: Conditions of approval DA28/2009 for a 5-storey commercial development at14-16 Orion Road, Lane required:

·    A Site Audit Statement; and

·    Asbestos Removal and Disposal.

 

These conditions may be superseded by more stringent conditions for Residential development.

 

10. Proposal:  Loss of employment – a “marginal impact”

 

The proposal represents a reduction from 269 to 189 full-time equivalent jobs. This is a result of:

a.  The assertion that commercial development on-site is not viable; and

b.  Employment opportunities will be represented by commercial and retail tenancies being permissible on the site.

 

Response: Within a mostly industrial workforce of over 5,000 full-time jobs, a loss of 80 commercial jobs is a “marginal impact”.

 

11. Proposal: Parking is on-site

 

“The traffic assessment carried out demonstrates on-site parking and access and egress can be appropriately accommodated on site.” (PP p. iii).

                            

Response: Presumably this refers to the required parking being accommodated on site.

 

Further Concerns Of Council:

 

12. Proposal: Air Quality

 

The planning proposal does not address the issue of air quality in relation to the Lane Cove Tunnel Air Vent and  Starch Odour from 170 Epping Road.

 

The applicant would need to address issues raised by consultants, Jacobs and AECOM in relation to the recent 1 Sirius Road planning proposal. For example, more current data is required (such as Council’s air quality report, produced by CAMM). Secondly, public health concerns should be addressed, especially in relation to use of open space by residents. See AT-2.

 

From the 1 Sirius Road experience, it can be concluded that detailed design of residential proposals will need to consider the height impacts of the LCT Stack, and the odour impact of the Ingredion factory. This will affect building locations, heights and private/ communal/ public open space provisions:

 

13. Proposal: Visual Impact.

 

This concern is dealt with above under Issue 6 The Precedent at 150 Epping Road, and concludes that the visual impact of the proposed buildings would be intrusive and unjustified.

 

 

Conclusion

 

In conclusion, the subject site at 14-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove West is not suitable for the proposed rezoning of IN2 Light Industrial land to a B4 Mixed Use zone.

 

The application by Ducru Pty Ltd to amend the Lane Cove LEP 2009 to rezone IN2 Light Industrial land at 14-20 Orion Road, in the Lane Cove West to B4 Mixed Use, including an increase in FSR from 1:1 to 2.5:1 and height increase from 18m to 55, is not supported. It is in conflict with:-

·    The fundamental planning principle of separating conflicting land uses;

·    The Metropolitan Strategy of ensuring an adequate supply of well located industrial land;

·    The visual character of the 1-5-storey precinct;

·    The economic  stability of industrial land uses in the precinct; and

·    Expectations of adequate accessible social infrastructure or amenity of future residents.

 

It is a short-term solution for one site that would impact the entire precinct with significant economic and land use implications.  The proposal pre-empts the findings of the DPE’s recent investigation into the potential of employment lands regionally, and is further likely to create an expectation among industrial land-owners in favour of further residential redevelopment.  The developer’s analyses suggesting that commercial and industrial development are not feasible on this site and possibly in the entire LCW precinct are based on inconclusive evidence and questionable assumptions and variables (eg unnecessarily low FSR comparisons).  Further issues related to the visual impact of a building comparable in height with 150 Epping Road, and constraints imposed by soil and air pollution have not been fully addressed.  Council is requested not to support the Planning Proposal to rezone 14-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove West from IN2 Light Industrial to B4 Mixed Use.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:-

1.         Not support the Planning Proposal to rezone 14-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove West from IN2 Light Industrial to B4 Mixed Use, including not changing the current FSR and Height of Building controls for the site; and

2.         Write to the applicant informing them of this decision.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Planning Proposal -  14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road 16 Octoober 2015

59 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Council Assessment in Detail of Planning Proposal 26 to rezone 14-20 Orion Rd, Lane Cove West from IN2 to B4

14 Pages

 

AT‑3View

Application for Local Environmental Plan Amendment - Appendix B - Economic Assessment - 14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road Lane Cove West

 

Available Electronically

AT‑4View

Application for Local Environmental Plan Amendment - Appendix C - Industrial Feasibility Anaysis - 14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road Lane Cove West

 

Available Electronically

AT‑5View

Application for Local Environmental Plan Amendment - Appendix D - Traffic Report - 14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road Lane Cove West

 

Available Electronically

AT‑6View

Application for Local Environmental Plan Amendment - Appendix E - Preliminary Environmental Review - 14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road Lane Cove West

 

Available Electronically

AT‑7View

Application for Local Environmental Plan Amendment - Appendix F - Correspondence with S C Johnson ( SCJ ) Land - 14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road Lane Cove West

 

Available Electronically

AT‑8View

Application for Local Environmental Plan Amendment - Appendix G - Deed of Novation - Durham Deed - 14-16 and 18-20 Orion Road Lane Cove West

 

Available Electronically

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Hospitals in the R2 Residential Zone

 

 

Subject:          Hospitals in the R2 Residential Zone    

Record No:     SU3813 - 7725/16

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 a development application within a low density residential suburb.

 

It is intended to cap the scale of hospitals in an R2 zone to ensure they are compatible.

 

Council is requested to approve the preparation of a draft DCP amendment for exhibition that limits the unreasonable expansion of non residential uses within low density residential zones.

 

Background

 

Council, at its meeting of 7 December 2015, resolved:-

“5.  A further report be submitted to the February Council Meeting regarding the options for controls which:-

a)   Where a development which was approved under the provisions of permissible use, extension of the use be prohibited; and

b)   Where a new development under the provisions of permissible use classification is proposed there shall be a minimum 800m separation from a similar use”.

 

Discussion

 

Recently a hospital located in a low density residential zone sought approval to expand by acquiring an adjoining residential property.  The proposal was granted after a polarising community consultation that highlighted a range of adverse amenity and physical impacts with the current and proposed use.

 

Hospitals in low density residential precincts must have regard to the amenity, wants, needs and character of the neighbourhood precinct.

 

Notwithstanding the need for a hospital to consider the above, the reality is that many of the functions of a modern hospital are in conflict with the predominant reasonable amenity expectations of a residential neighbourhood:

·        Staff and visitor parking;

·        Specialist doctors and professionals;

·        Ambulance deliveries and pick ups;

·        Delivering of goods/services.

 

All impact on the reasonable amenity of a low density residential area.

 

Any intensification of a hospital would only exacerbate these impacts and potentially adversely affect the existing residential amenity of the area.

 

Based on current consents and the relative impacts of this scale of activity, it is recommended that Council consider the inclusion of a clause in the DCP that limits the number of beds to a maximum of forty beds. 

                                                     

The draft DCP provisions should then be exhibited in accordance with Council’s consultation policy. This would occur within the exhibition of the current DCP general review.

 

 

Conclusion

 

The DCP is proposed to be amended in response to matters raised in the course of development assessment.

 

Council is requested to approve the preparation and exhibition of a draft DCP clause that limits the number of beds of a hospital in the R2 Low Density Residential Zone to a maximum of forty beds. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council prepare a draft DCP amendment and exhibit with the current DCP general review. 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Lane Cove and North Side Community Services - Financial Assistance Grant

 

 

Subject:          Lane Cove and North Side Community Services - Financial Assistance Grant    

Record No:     SU6104 - 927/16

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):       Jane Gornall 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council has a long-standing Financial Assistance Program the purpose of which is to assist the development of a range of community based services which meet, and are responsive to, changes in the needs of people living and working in the Lane Cove local government area, and which promote equitable outcomes in terms of access to services and quality of life for all residents. The grants operate under Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993. The largest of the grants provided is given to Lane Cove and North Side Community Services (LCNSCS), in the 2015/2016 year the amount provided was $239,165 plus GST.  LCNSCS have written to Council to request consideration of a move from an annual financial assistance grant to a five (5) year funding agreement. This Report recommends agreeing to that request.

 

Background

 

Three (3) organisations annually receive over $20,000 from Council in terms of Financial Assistance Grants:-

·    LCNSCS;

·    Centrehouse; and

·    The Meeting House.

 

In addition to the funds allocated each of these three (3) organisations also receives subsidised rent and other in-kind benefits from Council. 

 

With the provision of the financial assistance grant funding a Service Agreement is entered into each year. The Service Agreements outline the mutual obligations between Council and the organisation and stipulate how the organisation will use the funds against performance measures. 

 

The guidelines also recommend that a substantial evaluation should be undertaken every three to five years for groups receiving funding of over $20,000.

 

Discussion

 

Council has received correspondence from Lane Cove and North Side Community Services (AT-1) requesting that Council give consideration to moving from an annual allocation to entering into a five (5)  year funding agreement.

 

In 2016, Lane Cove and North Side Community Services, will experience a number of challenges.  These include relocating from their current premises at 164 Longueville Road into new premises in the Little Lane development and probably more significantly the impact of the State and Federal Government changes to the community service sector, specifically the move to a more client centred funding process as well as the gradual phasing out of traditional block funding from levels of government and the change to flexible individualised funding.

 

Organisations such as Lane Cove and North Side Community Services will need to review all services and effectively market themselves into the new community service landscape. Indeed, LCNSCS is already progressing in this regard, however given these factors there is uncertainty about the future of the Service.  If Council is prepared to agree to a longer term financial funding agreement then the future of the service would be more secure. Currently the funding provided to LCNSCS is increased by the general rate increase received by Council. LCNSCS have requested that this practice is retained.

 

LCNSCS has served the local community for more than 50 years and its services include:-

·    Home Nursing;

·    Meals on Wheels;

·    Recreation Rendezvous;

·    Home Maintenance and Home modifications;

·    Gardening;

·    Shopping;

·    Linen Services; and

·    A range of social events that significantly decrease social isolation in our community.

 

LCNSCS also provides multiple opportunities for members of our community to volunteer and assist others.+

 

Community Consultation

 

Council will need to give public notice in accordance with Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993 that it proposes to provide this financial assistance.  This process will also meet the ‘Cartaker’ s23 guidelines issued by the Minister during the period the current merger proposal is under consideration. 

 

Conclusion

 

It is recommended that a five (5) year service agreement between Council and LCNSCS be prepared.  This agreement would outline the mutual obligations of each organisation in general terms for the five (5) year period. In addition, it is recommended that each year a service program be submitted to Council outlining how the funds are to be expended and listing accountability outcomes.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:

1.   Council agrees to the request from Lane Cove and North Side Community Services to enter into a five year funding agreement;

2.   A five year Service Agreement be entered into between Council and Lane Cove and North Side Community Services outlining the mutual obligations;

3.   An annual program outlining how the funds are to be expended and listing timeframes and accountability outcomes be submitted in February each year and that this program be reviewed as part of the Financial Assistance Grants process; and

4.   Council gives public notice in accordance with Section 356 of the Local Government Act 1993 that it proposes to provide this financial assistance. A further report on providing the five year funding agreement only be submitted if there is adverse comment arising from the public notice.

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Letter from LCNSCS - Request for Consideratino of Five Year Funding Agreement - Financial Assistance Grants

1 Page

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Lane Cove Traffic Committee - January 2016

 

 

Subject:          Lane Cove Traffic Committee - January 2016    

Record No:     SU1326 - 7199/16

Division:         Open Space and Urban Services Division

Author(s):       Sashika Young 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Lane Cove Traffic Committee Meeting was held on Tuesday, 19 January 2016.  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, 19 January 2016.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Patterson

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

AGENDA - Lane CoveTraffic Committee - Janaury 2016

33 Pages

 

AT‑2View

MINUTES - Lane Cove Traffic Committee - January 2016

22 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Towards New Local Government Legislation: Proposed Phase 1 Amendments

 

 

Subject:          Towards New Local Government Legislation: Proposed Phase 1 Amendments    

Record No:     SU218 - 7188/16

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):       Kirsty Beram 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Following investigations and consultations undertaken by the Review of Local Government Acts Taskforce and the Independent Local Government Review Panel, the Office of Local Government is now consulting on the Proposed Phase 1 Amendments to the Local Government Act. The proposed amendments, relevant to Lane Cove are detailed in the report. It is recommended that Council make a submission based on the comments included in this report.

 

Background

 

In 2012, then Minister for Local Government appointed a four (4) member Taskforce to review the Local Government Act 1993 and look at how the legislation could be modernised to ensure that it would meet the future needs of communities and the Local Government Sector.

 

The four (4) stage review included several rounds of consultation which allowed opportunities to discuss options for streamlining the legislation and cutting red tape with councils, communities and other stakeholders. Taskforce members also worked with the Independent Local Government Review Panel to ensure that the two (2) review processes were suitably aligned.

 

 

2013-14

 

2012-13

 

2012

 

2013

 

 

The Taskforce completed its work in late 2013 and its final report and recommendations were exhibited for public comment in early 2014.  Council made a submission at that time responding to each of the recommendations outlined in the report which included a number of positive reforms designed to strengthen the financial position and governance arrangements of councils generally.  However, the legislation of structural reforms was not support.

 

The NSW Government subsequently delivered its response to the Taskforce recommendations in September 2014 and the Office of Local Government has now released an explanatory paper which provides details of the first or two stages of proposed amendments. 

 


 

Discussion

 

The proposals set forth in Towards New Local Government Legislation.  Explanatory Paper: Proposed Phase 1 Amendments” (attached as AT-1) build on the work carried out by the Local Government Acts Taskforce and the Independent Local Government Review Panel.

 

Some of the proposed reforms for Phase 1 include:-

·      A stronger role for Integrated Planning and Reporting;

·      Reductions in administrative red tape;

·      Simplified reporting;

·      A new way for councils to measure their performance;

·      Increased accountability to the community;

·      Longer terms for Mayors and clearer roles for council leaders; and

·      More flexibility for councils with procurement and managing contracts.

 

Later phases will address recommendations arising from reviews being undertaken by the IPART about the regulatory burden imposed on councils and the revenue-raising powers of councils. 

 

The proposed amendments, relevant to Lane Cove, are detailed below:-

 

Amendment

Comment

1. GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE ACT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

1.1 Purpose of the Local Government Act

The purpose of the Local Government Act is to:-

•     Establish a legal framework for the NSW system of local government, in accordance with section 51 of the Constitution Act 1902 (NSW);

•     Describe the nature and extent of the responsibilities and powers of local government; and

•     Create a system of local government that is democratically elected, engages with and is accountable to the community, is sustainable, flexible, effective and maximises value for money.

 

 

 

 

Supported. This amendment is designed to update and streamline the current purpose.

1.2 Role of Local Government

1.3 The Guiding Principles of Local Government

The council charter in section 8 to be replaced by provision that:

•     Describes the role of local government; and

•     Establish guiding principles for local government.

Supported.  Amendment is based on the Taskforce recommendation but modified to more closely reflect the Destination 2036 vision for Local Government in NSW, use more simple language, remove duplication and focus on the context in which council’s operate thus providing a clear reference point in guiding the day to day conduct of councils. 

2. STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT

2.1 The Role of the Governing Body

It is proposed to replace the current prescribed role of the governing body (i.e. Elected Councillors) which is focussed on the board-like function of the body with the Panel’s more expansive list:

·    To provide effective civic leadership to the community;

·    To consult regularly with community organisations and other key stakeholders and keep them informed of council’s activities and decisions;

·    To direct and control the affairs of the council in consultation with the general manager and in accordance with the Act;

·    To ensure as far as possible the financial sustainability of the council;

·    To determine and adopt the community strategic plan, delivery program and other strategic plans and policies;

·    To determine and adopt a rating and revenue policy and operational plans that ensure the optimum allocation of the council's resources to implement the community strategic plan and for the benefit of the area;

·    To make decisions in accordance with those plans and policies;

·    To make decisions necessary for the proper exercise of the council's regulatory functions;

·    To keep under review the performance of the council and its delivery of services;

·    To determine the process for appointment of the general manager and monitor his/her performance; and

·    To ensure that the council acts honestly, efficiently and appropriately in carrying out its statutory responsibilities.

Supported.  Amendments are designed to provide greater clarity by describing the collective role of councillors as members of the governing body, as opposed to their individual role as elected representatives.

2.2 The Number Of Councillors

Section 224 prescribes the numbers of councillors a council may have (between 5 and 15) and the manner in which that number is to be determined.

Proposes councils must have an odd number of councillors and mayor.

 

Supported. Consistent with the Panel’s recommendation. Will reduce the risk of Mayor being drawn from the ‘hat’ and the need for casting votes.

3. THE GOVERNING BODY OF COUNCILS

3.1 The Role of The Mayor

It is proposed to describe the role of the Mayor differently. 

The Mayor should have the following additional responsibilities:

•     To be the leader of the council and the community and advance community cohesion;

•     To promote civic awareness and, in conjunction with the general manager, ensure adequate opportunities and mechanisms for engagement between the council and the local community;

•     To be the principal member and spokesperson of the governing body and to preside at its meetings;

•     To ensure that the business of meetings of the governing body is conducted efficiently, effectively and lawfully.

•     To lead the councillors in the exercise of their responsibilities and in ensuring good governance;

•     To ensure the timely development of the governing body’s strategic plans and policies, and to promote implementation;

•     To exercise, in cases of necessity, the policymaking functions of the governing body between meetings of the council;

•     To represent the governing body on regional organisations and in inter-government forums at regional, State and federal levels;

•     To advise, manage and provide strategic direction to the general manager; and

•     To carry out the civic and ceremonial functions of the mayoral office.

Supported.  Clarifies the role of the Mayor as a community leader and representative of the council and to clarify and minimise conflict with the role of general managers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·    Consistent with Council’s previous submission, the proposal to advise, manage and provide strategic direction to the General Manager’ is not supported. This is considered to be contrary to the existing Act which was modeled on the Governance arrangements of a public company.  From a governance perspective limiting the power ensures the functions of the governing body set out in 2.1 which stipulate that collectively the council is to direct and control the affairs of the council in consultation with the General Manager are maintained and that all councillor views are considered.

3.2 The Mayor’s Term of Office

The proposed length of term for a mayor is either:

•     Two (2) years for mayors elected by councillors; or

•     Four (4) years for mayors popularly elected by the electors.

Supported.  Two (2) year terms for mayors elected by councillors will enhance political leadership and stable government.

 

Popularly elected mayors not supported.

3.3 The Role of Councillors

It is proposed to recast section 232 to focus on individual responsibilities of councillors, rather than their responsibilities as members of the governing body of a council.

Supported. Consistent with the recommendation of the panel and provide clarity on the role of councillors.

3.4 Councillors’ Term of Office

Section 234 to be amended to clarify that a vacancy will occur in the civic office of a councillor in the event that they are elected to another civic office in the council, (i.e. the office of a popularly elected Mayor).

Supported.  This is currently unclear.

3.5 Oath or Affirmation of Office

It is proposed to require all councillors, including the Mayor to take an oath or affirmation of office in the prescribed form before commencing duties.

Supported.  Current practice in QLD and Victoria.  Amendment will reinforce the importance of the role and duties entailed.

3.6 Councillors’ Expenses and Facilities

Proposed to replace the requirement under section 252 for councils to annually adopt an expenses and facilities policy with one simply requiring councils to adopt a policy within the first 12 months of their terms.

Supported.  Does not limit councils to reviewing the policy where required.

3.7 Mayor / Councillor Professional Development

New provisions are proposed to require:-

·    Councils to develop an induction program for newly elected and returning councillors and a specialist supplementary program for the mayor to assist them in the performance of their functions.

·    To develop annually an ongoing professional development program for the mayor and each councillor to assist them in the performance of their functions.

The introduction of mandatory professional development programs for Mayors and Councillors is supported to ensure they are equipped with the skills and knowledge for the role. 

3.8 Role and Functions of Administrators

Where a sole administrator is appointed to a council, they are to exercise the role and responsibilities of the mayor and a councillor as prescribed under the Act.

Where more than one administrator is appointed, all administrators are to exercise the role and responsibilities of councillors as prescribed under the Act.

Supported.  Proposed amendments are designed to address ambiguity in the current Act by better articulating the nature of an administrator’s role within a council and aligning this with the proposed prescribed role of the mayor and councillors. 

3.9 Financial Controllers

Amendment proposed that the Minister will be able to appoint a financial controller to a council that is performing poorly with respect to its financial responsibilities.

A financial controller would only be appointed through the existing performance improvement order process or an investigation undertaken that shows the council is not performing.

 

Supported.  However, the structure of the amendment is considered to be potentially ambiguous.  It is recommended that the amendment clarify that the ‘financial controller’ referred to relates to the financial controller appointed by the Minister and not a councils CFO.

3.10 Meetings

Amendment proposes that the Regulation may prescribe a Model Code of Meeting Practice.

The Model Meeting Code will comprise mandatory provisions and non-mandatory best practice provisions.

Councils will be required to adopt meetings codes that incorporate the mandatory provisions but will not be obliged to adopt the non-mandatory best practice provisions in order to respond to local requirements.

The mandatory provisions will largely incorporate the existing meetings provisions, which will be updated to:

·    address existing procedural ambiguities;

·    modernise procedural requirements;

·    require councils to review and adopt a meeting code within 12 months of each ordinary election.

Supported.  Council has an adopted Meeting Code and the amendments will still allow for local arrangements that do not conflict with mandatory provisions.

3.11 Delegation of Functions

It is proposed to remove the restriction on the delegation of the acceptance of tenders and to allow councils to delegate the provision of community financial assistance where:

·    the financial assistance is part of a specific program;

·    the program applies uniformly to all persons within the council’s area.

Supported.  Will remove impediments to regional collaboration by allowing delegation of the acceptance of tenders by NSROC and the like, without the requirement for individual Council resolutions.

4. ELECTIONS

4.1 Extension of the Option of Universal Postal Voting to All Councils

It is proposed to provide that the option of universal postal voting is available to all councils after the next ordinary election.

 

Supported on the basis it is not compulsory.  Universal postal voting would reduce the costs to councils for conducting elections.

 

5. COUNCIL’S WORKFORCE

5.1 Determination of the Organisation Structure

It is proposed to amend the Act to provide that:

·    the organisation structure is to be determined on the advice of the general manager;

·    the adopted structure must reflect the priorities set out in the council's IPR framework

·    the adopted structure may only specify the roles and relationships of the general manager, designated senior staff and other staff reporting directly to the general manager; and

·    the general manager is to be responsible for determining the balance of the organisation structure but must do so in consultation with the governing body.

Supported as the amendment clarifies the respective roles of the general manager and councillors in determining the organisation structure.

5.2 The Role of General Managers

It is proposed to describe the role and responsibilities of the general manager in the Act consistent with the following:

·    To conduct the day-to-day management of the council in accordance with the governing body's strategic plans and policies;

·    To advise the mayor and the governing body on the development and implementation of policies and programs;

·    To prepare, in consultation with the mayor and governing body, the community strategic plan resourcing strategy, delivery program and operational plan, annual report and community engagement strategy;

·    To certify that Integrated Planning and Reporting requirements have been met in full, and that council's annual financial statements have been prepared correctly;

·    To ensure that the mayor and councillors receive timely information, advice and administrative and professional support;

·    To implement lawful decisions of the governing body in a timely manner;

·    To exercise such of the functions of the governing body as are delegated by the Council to the general manager;

·    To appoint staff in accordance with an organisation structure and approved resources

·    To direct and dismiss staff; and

·    To implement the council's workforce management strategy.

Supported.  The amendments clearly sets out the responsibilities of the general manager and emphasise the general managers core role as being responsible for the day to day management of Council’s administration.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·    For clarity, it is recommended that Section 337 which stipulates the general manager may appoint or dismiss senior staff only after consultation with the council, be combined with this point so that these are considered in conjunction.

6. ETHICAL STANDARDS

6.1 Consolidation of the Prescription of Ethical Standards

6.2 Investigation of Pecuniary Interest Breaches

Provisions in the Act and the Regulation relating to the disclosure of pecuniary interests and the management of pecuniary conflicts of interests will be replicated in the Model Code of Conduct.

Supported as it consolidates ethical obligations and behavior into a single instrument i.e. the Code of Conduct.

7. COUNCILS’ STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK

7.1 Integrated Planning and Reporting Principles

New provisions will be included to establish overarching Integrated Planning and Reporting principles and require councils to undertake strategic business planning in accordance with those principles including:

•     Lead and inspire residents, businesses and others to engage with their council;

•     Identify and prioritise key community needs and aspirations;

•     Develop strategic goals to meet these needs and aspirations;

•     Identify activities and prioritise actions to work towards these strategic goals;

•     Plan holistically to deliver on strategic goals within their resources;

•     Foster community participation to better inform local and state decision making;

•     Manage council’s current and future financial sustainability;

•     Be transparent and accountable for decisions and omissions;

•     Maintain an integrated approach to planning, delivery, monitoring and reporting;

•     Collaborate to maximise achievement of key community outcomes; and

•     Honestly review and evaluate progress on a regular basis.

Supported.  Council’s current IP&R Framework incorporates these principles and the majority of strategic business planning activities. 

7.2 Streamlining the Existing Integrated Planning and Reporting Provisions

Sections 402 to 406 will be amended so that they are confined to setting out the purpose of each document and when they must be delivered. Detailed process requirements for how this must be done will be moved to the Regulation.

Supported.  Aim is for IP&R provisions to be simplified with prescriptive detail contained in the Regulation.

7.3 Council’s Integrated Planning and Reporting to Reflect Regional Priorities

Amendments are proposed to ensure that regional priorities are reflected in individual strategic business plans requiring the identification of key regional priorities and strategies and collaboration with adjoining councils and agencies.

Supported.  Council already includes regional priorities within its existing delivery program and operational plan.

7.4 Expanded Scope of Delivery Programs

Section 404 will be amended to clarify that delivery programs are to capture all council activities.

Currently a requirement of the mandatory Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines.

7.5 Fiscal Sustainability

Regulation will be amended to require councils to establish revenue polices with a view to ensuring fiscal sustainability and provide clear rational for the structure of rating systems and their objectives.

Draws on current Integrated Planning and Reporting guidelines to help produce more robust and useful strategies.

7.6 Expanded Scope of Councils’ Community Engagement Strategies

It is proposed to broaden the existing requirement that a council must adopt a community engagement strategy to inform the development of its community strategic plan.

If amended, the Act would require the adoption of a community engagement strategy to inform all council activities.

Supported.  Council’s existing Community Consultation Policy and Methods Guide address these principles and ensure that all community engagement activities are carefully designed around a unique ‘Statements of Intent’ which address the scope, timeframes and resource requirements of the consultation process, the level of consultation and expected outcomes based on a comprehensive consultation matrix.

8. COUNCIL PERFORMANCE

8.1 Annual Reports

It is proposed to require the information reported in councils’ annual reports to be endorsed as factually accurate by an internal audit committee.

Supported.  It being noted that Council’s Annual Financial Statements are referred to the Audit Committee prior to reporting to Council.

8.2 State of the Environment Reports

Amendment proposes to remove the requirement under 428A to include a State of the Environment Report every four (4) years in favour of reporting on environmental issues relevant to the objects set out in our Community Strategic Plan in both Annual and End of Term Reports.

Supported.  In Council’s 2013 submission to the discussion paper ‘A New Local Government Act for NSW’ it had previously requested that the requirement to produce an End of Term Report and Statement of the Environment Report be reviewed as these reports are a duplication of the reporting requirements of IPR. 

8.3 Performance Measurement

Amendments provides for the introduction of a performance management and reporting framework that should:-

·    Provide a statutory basis to establish new indicators and benchmarks for reporting purposes;

·    Expressly require councils to collect and report against these indicators in accordance with guidelines;

·    Establish annual performance statements as part of council annual reports, which will be subject to oversight and attestation requirements;

·    Align performance reporting to the Integrated Planning and Reporting cycle; and

·    Provide the capacity to establish a state-wide community satisfaction survey.

Supported in principal provided it is not overly onerous on councils and that councils have input into the development of new indicators / benchmarks. 

8.4 Internal Audit

It is proposed to introduce a mandatory requirement for councils to have an internal audit function.

Supported. Council currently complies with the requirements set out in the proposed amendments in relation to its internal audit functions.

 

8.5 Sector-Wide Performance Audits by the Auditor-General

8.8 External Audit

It is proposed to empower the Auditor General to conduct issue-based performance audits in key areas of local government activity and to place Local Government audits under the aegis of the NSW Auditor-General.

Not supported.  This amendment would effectively eliminate Council’s ability to undertake a competitive tendering process in regards to audit functions and potentially lead to significant scope and cost increases which are not warranted, particularly if the Auditor-General simply outsources the audit program and adds a margin.

Note: Councils’auditors PriceWaterHouseCoopers were re-appointed in 2013 for a six (6) year term.

8.6 Financial Management

8.7 Financial Reporting

It is proposed to adopt a more ‘principles-based’ approach to the management of council funds by moving detailed requirements to the Regulation and the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting, which is prescribed under the Act.

Supported.  Should result in greater clarity of financial governance and reporting requirements.

 

The Office of Local Government is seeking the views of councils and their communities, and other stakeholders, on phase 1 of the development of new Local Government legislation. It is recommended that Council make a submission based on the comments included in this report. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council make a submission on the ‘Towards New Local Government Legislation.  Explanatory Paper: Proposed Phase 1 Amendments’ based on the comments included in this report. 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Towards New Local Government Legislation.  Explanatory Paper: Proposed Phase 1 Amendments

32 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Proposal to Renew Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas for New Years Eve in the Lane Cove LGA

 

 

Subject:          Proposal to Renew Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas for New Years Eve in the Lane Cove LGA    

Record No:     SU3530 - 79190/15

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):       David Wilson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At its meeting of the 6 February 2012 Council resolved to “undertake a review of New Years Eve arrangements at Greenwich with a view to minimising alcohol related antisocial behaviour at future celebrations”.

 

After consultation with representatives of the Local Area Command, Council officers were advised that the most effective means of controlling future gathering on New Year’s Eve, would be to establish Alcohol Prohibited Areas (APA) and Alcohol Free Zones (AFZ) for the period of 31 December and 1 January at those parks or public places that are likely to attract persons that want to gather and consume alcohol on streets and car parks in proximity of these public reserves.

 

Following community consultation, Council resolved to establish APA’s in all parks and reserves and AFZ’s in the streets surrounding these reserves that are in proximity of Sydney Harbour/Lane Cove River for 4 years (maximum period allowed).

 

As these zones expired on the 1 January 2016, it is proposed that public consultation be undertaken with a view to renewing these APA’s and AFZ’s for a further 4 years from 31 December 2016 to 1 January 2020.

 

Background

 

In 2011 a number of Councils in the vicinity of Sydney Harbo ur implemented APA and AFZ’s across their Local Government Area’s (LGA) to assist in managing the increasing number of people that were gathering in public areas to participate in the New Year’s Eve celebrations. In recent years the level of alcohol consumption and unruly behaviour lead to a greater number of public areas being declared as APA and AFZ’s.

 

With the adoption of APA and AFZs in North Sydney LGA in 2011, the Manns Point location became a more attractive location for those looking to consume alcohol whilst participating in NYE celebrations in and around the Harbour foreshore. As a result, approximately 2000+ people were in attendance at this location, with anecdotal reports that a large number of heavily intoxicated persons were present, some sections of the crowd were unruly and with some people requiring medical assistance.

 

The following morning (1 January 2012) Council was in receipt of a large number of complaints regarding the amount of waste that was covering the Manns Point Reserve. The waste comprised of significant amounts of bottles, litter and camping furniture.

 

Additional waste bins and additional temporary toilet facilities were provided at Manns Point consistent with the resources that were provided in the previous years, but with the number of people gathering at this location, these facilities were inadequate to cope with such an increase in numbers at this location.

 

 

 

Discussion

 

In consultation with the Local Area Command, the following parks and roads in the Lane Cove LGA were established as APA’s and AFZ’s from 6.00pm on 31 December 2012 to 9.00am on 1 January 2016 in accordance with Section 632A and Section 644 of the Local Government Act 1993:

 

Alcohol Free Zones (streets, car parks and footpaths):-

·    Prospect Street Greenwich;

·    O’Connell Street Greenwich;

·    Albert Street Greenwich;

·    George Street Greenwich;

·    Victoria Street, Greenwich;

·    O’Connell Street, Greenwich;

·    East Street, Greenwich;

·    Mitchell Street, Greenwich;

·    Dunois Street, Longueville;

·    Wharf Road, Longueville;

·    Wilson Street, Longueville;

·    Arabella Street, Longueville;

·    Nott Lane, Longueville;

·    Stuart Street, Longueville;

·    Mary Street, Longueville;

·    Northwood Road (to Point Road) Northwood;

·    Kellys Esplanade, Northwood;

·    Kallaroo Road, Riverview; and

·    Karingal Road, Riverview.

 

Alcohol Prohibited Areas (public parks and reserves):-

·    Manns Point Reserve, Greenwich;

·    Greenwich Point Reserve, Greenwich;

·    Shell Park, Greenwich;

·    Aquatic Park, Longueville;

·    Griffith Park, Longueville;

·    Longueville Park, Longueville;

·    Wharf Road Reserve, Longueville;

·    Woodford Bay – Bicentennial Reserve, Northwood;

·    Lloyd Rees Park, Northwood; and

·    Tambourine Park, Riverview.

 

A Map of the expired AFZ’s and APA’s is attached as AT-1

 


By incorporating Public Reserves and surrounding streets into an AFP/AFZ Police are able to control and enforce this precinct and assist in the management of crowd behaviour within the area and surrounding streets. The Police have advised that by establishing  APA’s and AFZ’s it will allow them to manage and control these areas more effectively, where groups of people gather and consume alcohol that may result in the general amenity and safety of an area being negatively impacted upon.

 

Legislation

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

In regards to both Sections of the Act, extensive public consultation is required along with the approval from the Local Area Command prior to adoption by Council.

 

Community Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

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

 


Method

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Inform

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Open

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community and community groups

Key Message givers eg. Residents of affected areas. Owners of licensed premises, Local Police.

Lane Cove Community

Proposed Medium

Advertisement, and

E-newsletter

Notification Letters

 

Public and

Website Exhibitions

Indicative Timing

March to April 2016

March to April 2016

March to April 2016

 

Conclusion

 

The establishment in 2012 of the APA/AFZ for New Year’s Eve celebrations at Manns Point Reserve and the surrounding streets has ensured that for the past four (4) years that there is a safe environment that the community can enjoy, and an area where NYE fireworks can be viewed from without being impacted by intoxicated persons.

 

Accordingly it is proposed to extend the APA/AFZ’s for a further four (4) years and declare all parks in the Lane Cove LGA, where NYE celebrations can be viewed from, as APA’s and the streets that adjoin these public parks as AFZ’s from 6.00pm on 31 December 2016 until 9.00am on 1 January 2020.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:-

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Map of Lane Cove LGA AFZ's and APA's for New Years Eve

1 Page

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-2016 Budget

 

 

Subject:          2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-2016 Budget    

Record No:     SU757 - 6927/16

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):       Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

The Second Quarter 2015 - 2016 Budget Review involves a variety of variations in both income and expenditure. It is recommended that the Budget be varied in terms of the report.

 

Background

 

Council is required to prepare a Budget Review Statement each quarter, in accordance with Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. This report is prepared in accordance with the clause for the period ending 31st December 2015. The Office of Local Government has issued a prescribed format for reviews which is included as an attachment to this report. The purpose of these reviews is to ensure that the impact of financial variations are reflected in the forecast of Council’s global budgetary position to 30 June 2016, and the adopted Budget adjusted accordingly.

 

Discussion

The following is a summary of Council’s adopted Budget for 2015 - 2016 and the revised Budget following the adjustments included in this report:-

 

All Numbers(000’s)

Original Budget

30.09.2015
Quarter 1 Revised Budget

31.12.2015 Quarter 2 Adjustments

31.12.2015 Quarter 2 Revised Budget

Expenditure

$38,929

$261

$ 193

$39,383

Income

$50,175

$272

$204

$50,651

Surplus/ (Deficit)

$11,246

$11

$11

$11,268

Surplus/(Deficit) before

Capital Grants/Contributions

$389

$400

$11

$411

 

Operating Expenditure

There are a number of changes necessary to Operating Expenditure at the end of the second financial quarter. Maintenance accounts for new buildings including Waterview Community Centre, Blackman Park sports amenities and hall and Little Street Car Park have been set up for cleaning, utilities and maintenance. Legal expenses have exceeded original estimates due to appeals and prosecutions in the Land and Environment Court. This has been offset by the disbanding of Lane Cove Alive.

Capital Expenditure

Major adjustments to Capital Expenditure included the finalisation of Blackman Park sports amenities and hall and Tambourine Bay Pool. New Capital Expenditure was raised for the lift replacement at the Aquatic Centre which is funded by the Aquatic Centre Reserve.

Operating Income

 

Operating Income is recommended to change for fees and charges relating to Waterview Community Centre and Little Lane Car Park to offset maintenance and repairs. Development Application and Section 149 fees continue to exceed budget estimates and are recommended for review. However, lower than expected Section 94 fees in conjunction with the completion of Little Street Car Park will reduce the Section 94 portfolio and interest received.


Capital Income

 

The adjustments in Capital Income are to fund the Capital Expenditure Projects outlined above.

 

Conclusion

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

It is my opinion that the quarterly Budget Review Statement for Lane Cove Council for the quarter ended 31 December 2015 indicates that Council's projected financial position will be satisfactory at year end 30 June 2016, having regard to the projected estimates of income and expenditure and the original budgeted income and expenditure.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the 2015 – 2016 Budget be varied as follows:-

 

 

Original Budget

30.09.2014
Quarter 1 Revised Budget

31.12.2014

Quarter 2 Adjustments

31.12.2014 Quarter 2 Revised Budget

Expenditure

$38,929

$261

$193

$39,383

Income

$50,175

$272

$204

$50,651

Surplus/ (Deficit)

$11,246

$11

$11

$11,268

Surplus/(Deficit) before

Capital Grants / Contributions

$389

$400

$11

$411

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Budget review for Quarter ended 31 December 2015

 

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

St Leonards South Master Plan - Update

 

 

Subject:          St Leonards South Master Plan - Update    

Record No:     SU5993 - 7459/16

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):       Christopher Pelcz 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the status of Council’s St Leonards South Master Plan as per Council’s resolution of 7 Dec, 2015. The required planning documents have been prepared to support the Local Environmental Plan amendment (planning proposal) which reflect the Master Plan. It is recommended Council receive and note the report. 

 

Discussion

 

A number of key draft documents have been prepared by staff. They include:-

·    A formal planning proposal (Local Environmental Plan amendment)

·    A site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP);

·    Landscape Master Plan requirements; and

·    S94 works schedule

 

At the time of drafting this report Council staff were undertaking a final review of individual documents which include the location of public parks, community facilities, east-west links and roads for inclusion into the Planning Proposal. This includes a peer review of the legal wording of the LEP clauses.

 

Council is pursuing a range of prescriptive mechanisms within the LEP, DCP, Section 94 plan designed to provide certainty for quality redevelopment of the precinct, having regard to the broad ownership of the subject land. This is important to fulfill the vision for the precinct. Relevant mandatory and the interrelationship between these documents are in final review by solicitors and will be included in the final Planning Proposal and exhibition material.

 

Conclusion

 

Council staff have been working towards implementing the Master Plan which has involved research and external review of LEP and DCP mechanisms to ensure compliance with Departmental Standards and the Master Plan’s recommendations.

 

In terms of the LEP planning proposal, it is anticipated that the Planning proposal will have been submitted for ‘Gateway determination’ prior to this report being considered by Council. It is anticipated Council will give the Department of Planning a face to face briefing in the coming weeks.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Aquisition of Land for a Park in Pinaroo Place, Lane Cove North

 

 

Subject:          Aquisition of Land for a Park in Pinaroo Place, Lane Cove North    

Record No:     SU6135 - 8019/16

Division:         General Managers Unit

Author(s):       Craig Wrightson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report provides an update on acquisition of Land and Housing Corporation properties in Pinaroo Place, Lane Cove North for the purpose of a park.

 

Background

 

Council at its meeting of December, 2015 resolved in part that a further status report come back to Council in February 2016.

 

Discussion

 

As per Council’s previous resolution, Council remains committed to acquiring the land at Pinaroo Place for the purpose of a park. 

 

Negotiations have been ongoing with Land and Housing Corporation since 2014. Like many negotiations with State Government Authority’s such negotiations start off slow and therefore take a great deal of time. Pleasingly in late 2015, negotiations started to progress to a point where both Council and Land and Housing Corporation have agreed on a timeframe to complete the transfer of land by 30 June, 2016.

 

At this stage the exact commercial terms have not been finalised, these will be the subject of a further report to Council when agreement has been reached.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-16 Delivery Program and Operational Plan

 

 

Subject:          2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-16 Delivery Program and Operational Plan    

Record No:     SU238 - 5711/16

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):       Kirsty Beram 

 

 

Executive Summary

This report outlines the 2nd Quarter progress towards achieving the projects listed in the adopted 2015-16 Delivery Program and Operational Plan.  It is recommended that the report be received and noted.

Discussion

Council’s adopted 2015-16 Delivery Program and Operational Plan details the projects proposed to be undertaken during the financial year in order to meet the goals and objectives of Lane Cove 2025 - Community Strategic Plan. Council reports quarterly on the progress towards completing the projects and achieving the targets for the adopted performance measurements. The 2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-16 Delivery Program and Operational Plan is shown attached as AT-1

 

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

 

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

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

·    Sustainability Lane event was held as part of the Lane Cove Village Fair (October).

·    Annual review of Council’s Risks and Controls conducted in conjunction with InConsult (October 2015) and Job Safety Analysis (JSA) workplace inspections of Council workplaces carried out by the Health & Safety Committee (October and November)

·    Inaugural Festival by the River was successfully staged (November)

·    Closure and adaptive re-use of Tambourine Bay Pool completed (November) 

·    Council’s Annual Report developed as part of the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework was adopted (November).

·    Planning Proposal 20 for Lithgow/Christie was approved for exhibition 21 October with VPA and Planning Proposal 22 for 1-13 Marshall Ave was finalised by Council on 7 December.

·    Lane Cove Night Out event held to promote shopping locally (October), Kaleidoscope of Lane Cove 2015 hosted to celebrate cultural diversity in Lane Cove (November).and Lighting of the Christmas Tree and Chanukah events held in the Plaza (December).

·    Four primary school open days were held by Council attracting 240 young people (November and December)

·    Little Street Public Car Park opened (December).

·    Sustainability Action Plan adopted by Council (December)

·    Official opening for Waterview Community Centre at 304-314 Burns Bay Road (December).  Performance area and landscape upgrade now complete and open to the public.

·    Blackman Park Hall and Amenities building opened (December)

·    Share the Path (STP) event was held promoting the courteous and harmonious use of the shared user paths (December)

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

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the 2nd Quarter Review of the 2015-16 Delivery Program and Operational Plan be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

2nd Quarter Review of 2015 - 2016 Operational Plan

54 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 15 February 2016

Council Snapshot

 

 

Subject:          Council Snapshot    

Record No:     SU220 - 7457/16

Division:         General Managers Unit

Author(s):       Nikki Arnold 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

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

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Council Snapshot - February 2016

53 Pages