Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

20 February 2017

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 20 February 2017 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 20 February 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO COUNTRY

 

NOTICE OF WEBCASTING OF MEETING

 

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

 

Confidential Items

 

1.       Council Merger Proposal Court Action

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

2.       Senior Staff Contracts

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (a) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the matter will involve the discussion of personnel matters concerning a particular individual; it further being considered that discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to public interest by reason of the foregoing. 

 

public forum

 

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

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

2.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 5 DECEMBER 2016

 

Orders Of The Day

 

Officer Reports for Determination

 

3.       Council Merger Proposal Court Action

 

4.       Northwood Shops Planning Proposal 29

 

5.       Fleming Street Private Road Re-naming

 

6.       Conduct of the September 2017 Local Government Election

 

7.       Adoption of the Reconciliation Action Plan

 

8.       2nd Quarter Review of the 2016-2017 Budget

 

9.       January 2017 Traffic Committee Meeting

 

10.     Proposed Road Closure, 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

 

11.     Future of Shorelink - Exit by Willoughby City Council

 

Officer Reports for Information

 

12.     Illegal Dumping from Multi Unit Dwellings

 

13.     2nd Quarter Review of the 2016-17 Delivery Program and Operational Plan

 

14.     Council Snapshot  

 

 

 

 

                      


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Council Merger Proposal Court Action

 

 

Subject:          Council Merger Proposal Court Action   

Record No:    SU5558 - 4513/17

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is provided so that Council can determine its position in relation to lodging an appeal against the decision in the Land and Environment Court regarding the State Government merger proposal. Following the case being dismissed, initially Council at its meeting of 10 October 2016, resolved to Lodge a Notice of Intention to Appeal the decision and to conduct a briefing session by the legal team prior to the expiration of the appeal period on 19 December 2016. Subsequently, Council at its meeting of 5 December 2016 resolved to press ahead with lodging an appeal and seek orders to adjourn the appeal until after the decision in the Woollahra case is handed down to allow time to consider the impact of the decision on the merits of Council’s case.

 

The Woollahra decision has now been handed down and confidential legal advice and a briefing from the HWLE Lawyers has been provided as part of consideration of this matter. In light of the Woollahra decision and the legal advice, Council will need to determine whether to pursue an appeal against the Land and Environment Court Judgment.

 

Background

 

On 20 September 2016 Justice Moore dismissed action taken by Hunters Hill and Lane Cove Council’s in the Land and Environment Court in respect of the Merger proposal.

 

Following consideration of a Mayoral Minute on this judgment, Council at its meeting on Monday 10 October 2016 resolved to:-

 

1.   Lodge a Notice of Intention to Appeal against the judgment brought down in the Land and Environment Court against Council on 20 September 2016; and

2.   Conduct a timely briefing session by the HWLE legal team upon the release of the Woollahra judgment or at least two (2) weeks prior to the expiration of Council’s appeal period.

 

HWLE Solicitors were advised of Councils decision and instructed to prepare in readiness for lodgment, the Notice of Intention to Appeal, with the three (3) month Appeal period expiring on 19 December 2016.

 

However, prior to the expiration of the appeal period, Council at its meeting on 5 December 2016 gave further consideration to the matter following a briefing from HWLE and resolved to delegate authority to the General Manager to:-

 

1.   Lodge an appeal to the Court of Appeal and seek orders to adjourn the appeal until a date after  the decision in the Woollahra case is handed down, to allow sufficient time to consider the decision and determine if the appeal is to proceed and if so in what form; and

2.   If the appeal is not adjourned, convene an extraordinary meeting of Council to determine further conduct of the appeal.

 

HWLE formally lodged the Notice of Intention to Appeal and as a result, the Court scheduled a Directions Hearing for 22 February 2017.Additionally, the Minister for Local Government agreed to extend an undertaking to Council not to proceed with any merger proposal until at least 5pm on 22 February 2017.

 

However, the Directions Hearing was subsequently brought forward to 13 February 2017 following a Motion from the Minister to hear all Court of Appeal amalgamations proceedings together i.e. proceedings from all councils who have lodged appeals. The Court subsequently made orders that the Appeals be listed for hearing on 3, 4 and 6 April 2017.

 

In the interim, the Court of Appeal handed down a decision in the Woollahra case on 22 December 2016 and HWLE were subsequently instructed to examine the determination and advise Council on the impacts of the decision on the merits of Council’s case. Confidential legal advice and a briefing from HWLE have been provided in this regard, in a report to Closed Committee.

 

Conclusion

 

Having regard to the advice from HWLE, Council will need to determine whether to proceed with the appeal of the decision of the Land and Environment Court.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council determine its position on appealing the judgment handed down by Justice Moore in the Land and Environment Court on 20 September 2016.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Northwood Shops Planning Proposal 29

 

 

Subject:          Northwood Shops Planning Proposal 29    

Record No:    SU6464 - 5209/17

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Terry Tredrea 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

A planning proposal was lodged with Council on 11 November, 2016 in relation to land at 4-18 Northwood Rd, 274 & 274A Longueville Rd Lane Cove .The purpose is to amend the current permissible uses in the B1 zone in order to permit a 130-bed residential care facility above age-related retail uses on the site. Planning Proposal 29 has been the subject of initial community consultation by the applicant.

 

A similar previous proposal for shop top housing was rejected by Council in 2013, on grounds of adverse impacts on traffic and parking, visual character and scale, bushfire, retail levels, infrastructure and environment. This decision reflected the overwhelming objection by the community (93% of 463 submissions) to the proposal.

 

The current proposal differs from the 2012 proposal in several ways. It seeks:

 

·    To maintain the existing B1 Neighbourhood Centre & R4 High Density Residential zonings;

·    a height of RL70.25 = approx. 14m-22m front to rear (not an 18m height overall);

·    an FSR of 1.98:1 (not 2.25:1); and

·    to insert a permissible use to allow 'seniors housing' on the subject site (not a rezoning to B1 Neighbourhood Centre);

 

However, many of the issues raised in the previous proposal continue to apply to the current proposal. These are:

 

·    The proposed bulk and scale is out of proportion with the 1-2-storey context of the area, and challenges the primacy of the Village CBD, sending mixed messages to other uses in this and other B1 Neighbourhood Centres. The proposed street façade is bland and lacks articulation.

·    The traffic impact significantly underestimates the impact of the proposal on the state and local roads, in particular, traffic impacts to the Northwood residential precinct.

·    Necessary intersection design and road modifications are outdated or not addressed.

·    Proposed parking is unlikely to cater for staff and visitors, especially on the weekend.

·    The proponent has failed to adequately make a case why Council should support the expansion of permissible zone uses to include seniors housing.

·    It has the effect of isolating No.272 Northwood Road from achieving the minimum site area for residential flat developments appropriate to its R4 zoning.

·    Council has amenity and safety reservations about the location of a residential care facility on such a busy intersection.

·    The draft plans submitted would need to be modified to comply with DCP Part H for land adjacent to bushland, should Council support the planning proposal.

 

With a number of these issues not being adequately addressed, or being in conflict with objectives of the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone, it is therefore recommended that Council not support Planning Proposal 29 to permit a residential care facility at 4-18 Northwood Rd, 274 & 274A Longueville Rd Lane Cove.

 


 

Background

 

The site

 

 

The following planning controls apply the site:

 

Zoning

R4 High Density Residential &

B1 Neighbourhood Centre

Site Area

5,013 sqm (approx)

Current FSR

0.8:1 (for R4 zone) &

1:1 (for B1 zone).

Height Limit

12 metres (for R4 zone) &

9.5 metres (for B1 zone).

 

A site-specific Development Control Plan also applies – appearing as ‘Locality 2’ in Part D: Commercial Development and Mixed Use Localities of Council’s DCP. It envisages a mixed use precinct with a “low-scale, small retail use” and potentially allowing small scale residential uses above ground floor. This could potentially result in a development of “up to 3-4 storeys high”, with the upper floor setback by 3 metres.

 

An outline of each of the proposals have been provided below

 

Current Planning Proposal

 

A planning proposal was lodged with Council on 11 November, 2016 (see AT-3, to AT-10). The owners propose amendments to the current permissible uses in the B1 zone which would permit a 130-bed residential care facility above age-related retail uses on the site. Therefore the planning proposal seeks to:-

 

·    Retain existing Land Use zonings on site;

·    Insert a permissible use to allow 'seniors housing' on the subject site.

·    Increase the height limit to RL 70.250 (height to underside of top level ceiling);

·    Increase the floor space ratio of the entire site to a maximum of FSR 1.98:1; and

·    Introduce a savings provision for the site to allow any DA to be assessed concurrently with the Planning Proposal; and

 

A proposed cross-section & ground floor plan of the development is shown below.

 

 

Previous (2012) Planning Proposal for this site:

 

A previous planning proposal for shop top housing for this site was lodged with Council in November 2012. After extensive negotiations post-lodgment with Council regarding an acceptable bulk and scale, it sought to:-

 

·    Rezone 274 & 274A Longueville Road and part of the rear of 16 Northwood Road to B1 Neighbourhood Centre;

·    Increase the height limit of the entire site to a maximum of 18 metres;

·    Increase the floor space ratio of the entire site to a maximum of FSR 2.25:1; and

·    Amend the neighbourhood shop control to permit a single shop of up to 1,000 m2.

 


 

The cross-section and ground floor plans of the previous proposal are shown below:

 

Previous Proposal (cross-section)

 

 

Previous Proposal (Ground floor plan)

 

Council approved the proposal for public exhibition, which was undertaken in 2013 from 28 June to 9 August. The key issues discussed in the majority of public submissions during the exhibition related to traffic and parking, visual character and scale, bushfire, retail levels, infrastructure and environment - refer to Attachment  AT-1.

 

Council’s resolution not to proceed reflected the overwhelming objection by the community (93% of 463 submissions) to the proposal- refer Attachment AT-2.

 

Comparison of Planning Proposals:

 

The following table summarises a comparison of the two Proposals:

 

 

PP14 – Northwood Centre

PP29 – Northwood Shops

Re-zoning

Rezone all to B1 Neighbourhood Centre

No change (additional use only)

Proposed use

Shop-top housing. 85-105 units;

Residential care facility (130 beds) – to trigger the Seniors Housing SEPP

Height

18m (varying from RL70.9, at rear, to RL72.45, at front)

14m – 22m front-to-rear   (RL70.25)

FSR

2.25:1

1.98:1

Site Area

5,013sqm

 

Based on the cross-sections and plans, shown above, the new planning proposal has elements similar to the previous planning application. It contains a similar number of levels (residential & commercial) while the height has only been marginally reduced.

 

Discussion

 

Community consultation by Applicant:

 

Prior to submission of the planning proposal, the applicant undertook a community consultation (refer to AT-9). The issues of concern were overwhelmingly traffic-related. Other issues of concern included parking, land use, bulk and scale, and contamination.

 

Outstanding Issues:

 

Advice was sought from Council officers with respect to the issues. These are discussed below.

 

Issue 1: Traffic

 

The impact of the proposal on both River/Northwood Roads and the local roads (Arabella; Woodford; Kenneth) is problematic. The proponent’s traffic study claims there will be “no additional traffic demand”. However, Council’s traffic engineers state that the methodology for measuring current traffic numbers is considered to be inappropriate and inflated, and is likely to significantly underestimate the impact of the proposal on the state and local roads.

 

Secondly, the in-principle NSW Roads and Maritime Services support for the intersection design is based on a development proposed four years ago in 2012. The RMS position could well have changed, and the conditions for that support have not been addressed.

 

Thirdly, road modifications Council raised as necessary during the previous proposal – i.e. signals at the River Rd West/Northwood intersection and a central road barrier opposite the development – have not been addressed. The area is a road with a significant accident history and requires local evidence of traffic modification and control.

 


 

Issue 2: Parking

 

The current proposal for 46 on-site spaces, while much less than the previous 175 spaces proposed,  is still queried. The suggested 20 fulltime staff for 130 residents seems under-estimated (to include support staff and intensive personal care by nursing staff). Given the absence of public transport on Sunday, and the limited bus service Saturday, 46 spaces is considered inadequate to cater for staff and visitors, especially on the weekend. On-street parking overflow onto local streets is extremely likely,

 

Issue 3: Bulk and Scale

 

The proposed street frontage of three stories, stepping back 5m to a fourth storey may disguise and marginally reduce the expected visual impact to Northwood Road compared with the previous proposal. However, the proposal is out of scale with the 1-2-storey context of the area, and highlights a bulky street façade devoid of articulation and presenting as a higher commercial precinct than envisaged in Council’s LEP.  It is only a slight reduction in height compared with the previous planning proposal while retaining a similar number of storeys.

 

The proposal has an excessive and unjustified bulk and scale for a neighbourhood centre (B1). The proposed height and FSR exceeds that of the Lane Cove CBD (B2). As such, it is in conflict with the primacy of the existing CBD in Lane Cove. This proposal would send mixed messages to the market, and create demand for even greater development on the other side of Northwood Road.

 

In general, the bulk and scale of the proposed building would result in adverse traffic, parking and visual impacts. By adopting a more moderate bulk and scale, the proposal may create more favourable impacts. Stepping down the site with a 3-level building, for example, would significantly reduce the bulk and scale of any structure as seen from the north, and may have a more moderate impact on the through traffic and local streets.

 

Issue 4: Land Use

 

The applicant has made the case that the aging of the Lane Cove Local Government Area population justifies residential care in the area. From 2011 to 2016 the percentage of residents over the age of 65 increased from 13% of the population to 14%. While in general agreement about the changing needs of residents, Council has reservations about the location of a residential care facility on such a busy intersection, in terms of residential amenity, safety, and public transport (as discussed above).

 

The proponent has failed to undertake a broad analysis in support of its land-use change, and to make a case why Council should expand the range of permissible uses in this B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone to include seniors housing. There has been little attempt to identify likely land-use impacts of such an inclusion into the permissible range of uses or how such would be ameliorated and minimised.

 

Furthermore, under SEPP provisions, Council cannot refuse development consent on the grounds of landscaped area if a minimum of 25 square metres of per residential care facility bed is provided. Due to the number of beds, the required landscaped area would not be able to be accommodated onsite. This places additional pressures on surrounding facilities, some of which involve crossing busy main road to access, or a steep downhill descent to the golf course.

 

Issue 5: Trees and bushland

 

The site is affected by Council’s Development Control Plan Part H as the private properties are identified as land adjacent to bushland. The DCP Part H Objective in relation to Buffer Areas is:

 

 “to provide a transition area between the building and bushland area so as to reduce the impacts of development upon bushland.”

 

The DCP therefore requires that the buffer area between bushland and the development is a minimum of 10 meters wide. Therefore the draft plans submitted would need to be modified as they do not comply with Council’s DCP Part H.   

 

The survey of trees identifies eight Turpentine trees on the 274/274A Longueville Rd portion of the site. Two of these trees (10 & 11) while not rare or endangered, should be protected, and would require  relocation of the rear road entry into the basement.

 

Issue 6: Isolation of 272 Northwood Road

 

No.272 Northwood Road is situated between the proposed amalgamation site and 268-270 Northwood Road, within the R4 zone. The site area of 272 Northwood Road is approximately 1,082sqm. As this is less than the 1,500sqm required for a residential flat building, the proposed amalgamation would have the effect of isolating No.272 Northwood Road from achieving the minimum site area for residential flat developments under Clause 3.2 of the Lane Cove DCP. 

 

Comparison of Issues of Concern:

 

The following table summarises very briefly the issues raised by the previous and the current Proposals:

 

Issue

PP14 – Northwood Centre

PP29 – Northwood Shops

Traffic

Roundabout at Northwood/River – not guaranteed by RMS.

Intersection lights at Northwood/river – not guaranteed by RMS.

Impact on River Road (already a crash history).

Inappropriate methodology -> unknown likely impact.

Impact on local roads.

Inappropriate methodology -> unknown likely significant impact.

Parking

175 spaces on-site.

46 spaces on-site (low number queried).

Bulk and scale

Height & FSR “excessive”.

Frontage height and FSR reduced – but still retain relatively similar heights

Bushland

Bushfire hazard (BFP) – subject to Asset Protection Zone.

Land no longer BFP land Also, setback required (land adjacent to SEPP19 bushland).

Trees

Not addressed.

Two turpentine trees in north of site conflict with driveway.

Land use

Residential Flats Buildings not seen as “public benefit” to justify increased scale.

Aging population justifies residential care in the area. Staff of 20 seems inadequate -> impact on street parking.

Public transport

Not raised as an issue.

Relevant to aged care facility staff and visitors (limited Sat / none Sun)

 

 


 

Conclusion

 

The residential care facility proposed at land at 4-18 Northwood Rd, 274 & 274A Longueville Rd Lane Cove is considered inappropriate for the site in its present form for the following reasons:

 

·    The proposed bulk and scale is out of proportion with the 1-2-storey context of the area, and challenges the primacy of the Village CBD, sending mixed messages to other uses in this and other B1 Neighbourhood Centres.

·    The proponent has failed to make a supportable case for the land use changes proposed.

·    The traffic impact significantly underestimates the impact of the proposal on the state and local roads, in particular, traffic impacts to the Northwood residential precinct.

·    Necessary intersection design and road modifications are outdated or not addressed.

·    Proposed parking is unlikely to cater for staff and visitors, especially on the weekend.

·    Has the effect of isolating No.272 Northwood Road from achieving the minimum site area for residential flat developments appropriate to its R4 zoning.

·    Council has amenity and safety reservations about the location of a residential care facility on such a busy intersection.

·    The draft plans submitted would need to be modified to comply with DCP Part H for land adjacent to bushland.

 

While refusal of the proposal in its current form is recommended, Council may wish to consider a development of more modest scale (height; FSR), once the issues raised have been satisfactorily addressed.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council not support Planning Proposal 29 to permit a residential care facility at 4 -18 Northwood Rd, 274 & 274A Longueville Rd Lane Cove for the following reasons:-

 

(i)         The proposed bulk and scale is out of proportion with the 1-2-storey context of the area, and challenges the primacy of the Village CBD, sending mixed messages to other uses in this and other B1 Neighbourhood Centres.

(ii)        The proponent has failed to make a supportable case for the land use changes proposed;

(iii)       The traffic impact significantly underestimates the impact of the proposal on the state and local roads, in particular, traffic impacts to the Northwood residential precinct;

(iv)       Necessary intersection design and road modifications are outdated or not addressed;

(v)        Proposed parking is unlikely to cater for staff and visitors, especially on the weekend;

(vi)       It has the effect of isolating No.272 Northwood Road from achieving the minimum site area for residential flat developments appropriate to its R4 zoning;

(vii)      Council has amenity and safety reservations about the location of a residential care facility on such a busy intersection;

(viii)     The draft plans submitted will need to be modified to comply with DCP Part H for land adjacent to bushland.

 

 


 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

REPORT Northwood Centre Planning Proposal - Request for determination

14 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Copy of RESOLUTION Northwood Centre Planning Proposal - Request for determination (for online exhibition)

1 Page

 

AT‑3View

Summary of proposal

3 Pages

 

AT‑4View

Appendix 2 - Traffic Report

69 Pages

 

AT‑5View

Appendix 3 - Urban Design Report

48 Pages

 

AT‑6View

Appendix 4 - Contamination Report

28 Pages

 

AT‑7View

Appendix 5 - Arborist Report

11 Pages

 

AT‑8View

Appendix 6 - Flora and Fauna

80 Pages

Circulated Separately

AT‑9View

Appendix 7 - Consultation Report

140 Pages

Circulated Separately

AT‑10View

Appendix 8 - Traffic Survey

1 Page

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Fleming Street Private Road Re-naming

 

 

Subject:          Fleming Street Private Road Re-naming    

Record No:    SU4577 - 4093/17

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      Terry Tredrea 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

On its 20 June 2016 meeting, Council resolved to name the private internal roadway between 18 and 20 Fleming Street to Nichols Close. This decision was submitted to NSW Land & Property Information.  The Geographical Names Board has not approved the name Nichols Close and is likely to reject it on the grounds that it is too “similar” to an existing Nichols Lane, Chatswood and because it is within a “radius of 10km”.

 

The GNB has since pre-approved a list of suitable names, which is attached (AT-1). The previous public submission elicited support for Pendray Close. Council is therefore requested to choose Pendray Close for this private road.

 

Background

 

* 21 March 2016 meeting. Council was given a choice of 8 historical names. The name Nichols was recommended after Sarah Nichols, the first female landholder in the area. The proposal was publicly exhibited from 30 March 2016 to 11 May 2016.

 

* 20 June 2016 meeting. 6 of 8 residents favour renaming. Two preferred Pendray (an orchardist and original name of Northwood as Pendray Point). However, Nichols was chosen. “Pendray can be kept in reserve for future use”.

 

* 21 July 2016. Council notified all agencies, including NSW Land & Property Information. Council’s decision was placed on the Valuer-General’s database, in accordance with State policies.

 

* 20 January 2017. The GNB indicated by telephone that it would not approve the name, as described above.

 

The Site

 

As shown in the maps below, the site is a group of houses surrounding an un-named private road curving northward and downhill from a place between 18 and 20 Fleming Street, Northwood.

                                                                                           

Fig2.jpg

 

Discussion

 

According to the GNB’s NSW Addressing User Manual, (consistent with Australian Standard AS/NZS 4819:2011) under Principles of Road naming:

 

“Names of early settlers, war servicemen and women and other persons who have contributed to the heritage of an area, local history themes, flora, fauna, ships etc. are usually most suitable for applying to roads.”                                    

(Section 6.7)

 

Using the previous names suggested by Council’s Local History Librarian and Lane Cove Historical Society, this list has now been trimmed to remove names not approved by the GNB.  As detailed in AT-1 (Proposed Road Names – Northwood – GNB Approved), they are:

1.         William Pendray - Who had a 20 acre orchard in the area (original name for Northwood was Penry or Pendray Pointt).

2.         Marguerite Moloney – (1914-2010) Well regarded local artist and ceramicist.

3.         Edmund Blackett -  Northwood House was built in c1877/78 by Mrs Jane Davy, and designed by Edmund Blackett.

4.         Wade (or Wahid or Wadi) - In 1903 Northwood House purchased by Abdul Wade (possibly Wahid or Wadi), a famous Broken Hill cameleer.

5.         William Pidgeon - Lived in Northwood Rd; a three (3) time Archibald Prize winner.

 

During the previous exhibition in June 2016, two residents expressed support for the name “Pendray”. It is therefore recommended that Council adopt the name “Pendray Close” for the private road.

 

Community Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to determine public opinion of the name of the private roadway.  Any comments received will be reviewed and evaluated to determine whether or not to proceed with the chosen name.

 

Method

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Inform

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community and community groups

Owners of properties along and adjacent to the private roadway.

Proposed Medium

Advertisement and

eNewsletter

Notification Letters

Indicative Timing

6 weeks

6 weeks

 

Conclusion

 

In conclusion, the NSW Geographical Names Board did not approve Nichols Close as the name for the private road off Fleming Street, Council is requested to choose a name from the amended, approved list in AT-1. The name “Pendray Close” did receive public support in the previous exhibition. Therefore the renaming to “Pendray Close” is likely to be supported by GNB.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

1.   Give notice of its intention to  name the private roadway off Fleming Street Pendray Close

2.   Exhibit the proposed street name for public comment for six (6) weeks as per the consultation strategy outlined in the report; and

3.   Consider a further report on the outcome of the public exhibition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Proposed Road Names - Northwood - GNB Approved

1 Page

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Conduct of the September 2017 Local Government Election

 

 

Subject:          Conduct of the September 2017 Local Government Election    

Record No:    SU5619 - 7343/17

Division:         General Managers Unit

Author(s):      Craig Wrightson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report outlines the proposed arrangements for the Council election due to be held on 9 September, 2017. Due to the current uncertainty as to whether the elections will be held and short time frame for preparation, it is recommended Council appoint the NSW Electoral Commission to administer the Council elections proposed for 9 September, 2017 (or other date as determined).

 

Background

 

The Minister for Local Government as part of the current Merger Proposal utilised s318B of the Local Government Act to defer Council’s election that was due to be held in September 2016 for 12 months to September 2017.

 

The Office of Local Government has advised “Under the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) any council subject to a pending merger proposal that has not been merged by 10 April 2017 will need to have an election date set (likely to be 9 September 2017) and the election conducted. The election will only be conducted if the merger does not proceed prior to the election date. If the election is conducted this will have no bearing on the status of the merger proposal.”

 

On this basis, Council must commence preparing for an election in September 2017 given Council’s future is uncertain and the merger may not have occurred.

 

Discussion

 

In 2011 the Local Government Act was amended to provide councils with the flexibility and choice to determine if they wish to manage an election or appoint the NSW Electoral Commission to do so. For the 2012 Election, Lane Cove conducted its own election, primarily due to the spiraling fees being charged by the Commission and the long delays in the results being available (up to two weeks) due to the centralised counting model  adopted by the Commission.

 

When Council staff undertook the role in 2012 in conjunction with an Independent Returning Officer and his staff, it did so with the support of some seven other councils who undertook their own elections. The councils met regularly to ensure that legislative compliance was delivered, training was developed for key personnel, stationary was joint procured and efficient systems were devised. It was the intention of staff to conduct the September 2016 elections on a similar basis. If the September 2017 election proceeds, however, none of the councils Lane Cove partnered with would be conducting their own election at that time, as they either have conducted their election in September 2016 or have been amalgamated. Logistically this would make the task very difficult.

 

In view of this, and given the relatively short timeframe to prepare for the election the option of appointing the NSW Electoral Commission should be considered.

 

Under the legislation if a Council wishes to appoint the NSW Electoral Commission, it must ordinarily provide 15 months notice, which obviously Council can not comply with. The Act does,  however, provide that the Electoral Commissioner can still administer the election if: (a) the council has resolved that an election arrangement for the election is to be entered into; and (b) the Electoral Commissioner is satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances that make it necessary or desirable for the election to be administered by the Electoral Commissioner.

 

The NSW Electoral Commission were contacted to determine their view on the current circumstances and if they would contemplate conducting the election. The Commissioner has expressed a preliminary view that, “in light of the issues relating to the timing of an election for the Council, there are exceptional circumstances which would make it necessary or desirable for the election to be administered by the NSWEC.”

 

In view of this, and given the relatively short timeframe to prepare for the election, it is recommended Council not conduct the election itself, and appoint the NSW Electoral Commission to administer the Council elections proposed for 9 September, 2017 (or other date as determined).

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         the report be received and noted; and

 

2.         Council appoint the NSW Electoral Commission to administer the Council elections proposed for 9 September, 2017 (or other date as determined).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Adoption of the Reconciliation Action Plan

 

 

Subject:          Adoption of the Reconciliation Action Plan    

Record No:    SU5096 - 5023/17

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):      Carol Sinclair 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report outlines the results of the consultation process for Council’s Draft Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan, March 2017 – June 2018 which is recommended for adoption.

 

Background

 

Council at its meeting of 19 September 2016 considered a report on the Draft Strategy for the Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan and resolved:-

 

1.   Council adopt the Draft Lane Cove Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan dated August 2016 - June 2018 for the purpose of public exhibition;

 

2.   The Draft Reconciliation Action Plan be placed on public exhibition for a period of six (6) weeks and consultation take place in accordance with the Consultation Strategy outlined in the report; and

 

3.   A further report be submitted to Council following the exhibition period, to consider the Reconciliation Action Plan for adoption.

 

Discussion

 

Community Consultation was undertaken for a period of six (6) weeks, closing on 10 November 2016, as per the consultation strategy outlined in the previous report. It included:-

 

·    Static public exhibitions at the Civic Centre and Library;

·    An email to all registered members of the community interested Council consultations;

·    A website exhibition; and

·    Public notice in the North Shore Times.

 

Council received four submissions. One respondent was not aware of any Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander residents in Lane Cove; one thought that developing a RAP was a waste of rate payer’s money and one recommended a business to work with to increase supplier diversity within Council.  The final respondent suggested wording changes for two actions.

 

For the purposes of this report the first two submissions have been noted but no further comment has been made.  The table below highlights the comments made in the submissions.

 

 

Comment

Current Status

1

I’ve just had a skim through your RAP, -if you want a way of completing item 2c on page 25 I highly recommend Messagestick communications for your voice conferencing.

 

Respondent is recommending an Aboriginal Business to work with – to be considered when implementing this action.

2

Suggested wording change to action (1a) in Goal 2 – Respect: Cultural Education and Cultural Competence

 

From: 

Identify at least one significant event each year for which a Welcome to Country from a Traditional Owner will be included.

 

To:

Identify at least one significant event each year for which a welcome from a Traditional Owner will be included

 

 

Wording change suggested to improve accuracy and feasibility of completing the action - adopt

 

3

Suggested wording change to the action (4d) in Goal 2 – Respect: Cultural Education and Cultural Competence

 

From:

Showcase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and cultures in the Cameraygal Festival

 

To:

Showcase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and cultures in Council’s annual events and festivals

 

Wording change will showcase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture beyond one Festival - adopt

 

 

Conclusion

 

It is considered that the minimal response during the public exhibition period reflects general community support for the Draft Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan. 

 

Items 2 and 3 above would improve accuracy of the plan and enhance the number of times Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures will be showcased.  It is therefore recommended that Council adopt the document AT-1 with the changes at comments 2 and 3, AT-2.

 

It is noted that Reconciliation Australia require Council to forward the adopted plan to them for final approval and endorsement.  The changes recommended in this report will be subject to their approval.

 

Once the Reconciliation Action Plan has been approved by Reconciliation Australia it will be published on their website and Council can begin implementation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Draft Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan  with the suggested changes in Goal 2, Respect: Cultural Education and Cultural Competence for actions 1(a) and 4 (d) in included as AT-2 be adopted by Council, subject to Approval by Reconciliation Australia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Draft Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan

32 Pages

 

AT‑2View

Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan

32 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

2nd Quarter Review of the 2016-2017 Budget

 

 

Subject:          2nd Quarter Review of the 2016-2017 Budget    

Record No:    SU757 - 4079/17

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

The Second Quarter 2016 - 2017 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 2016. 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 2017, and the adopted Budget adjusted accordingly.

 

Discussion

The following is a summary of Council’s adopted Budget for 2016 - 2017 and the revised Budget following the adjustments included in this report:-

 

All Numbers(000’s)

Original Budget

30.09.2016
Quarter 1 Revised Budget

31.12.2016 Quarter 2 Adjustments

31.12.2016 Quarter 2 Revised Budget

Expenditure

$40,862

$188

$186

$41,236

Income

$52,095

$706

$197

$52,998

Surplus/ (Deficit)

$11,233

$518

$11

$11,762

Surplus/(Deficit) before

Capital Grants/Contributions

$278

$18

$11

$307

 

Operating Expenditure

Adjustments are recommended to the operating expense accounts as shown in AT-1 for a total of $185,803. There are many minor adjustments recommended for this review. The major adjustments are $40,000 for professional fees relating to the redevelopment of 266 Longueville Road, $15,500 for software development for ‘Library to your Door’, $21,538 for a new Road Safety Program with other Northern Sydney Councils titled ‘Distracted?’ and $21,500 for additional maintenance at Market Square.

Capital Expenditure

There are also a number of changes recommended for Capital Expenditure. The major adjustments are $82,256 for bush regeneration at Centennial Avenue, an additional $110,000 to replace the Lane Cove Golf Course bridge, $45,000 for the demolition of the old Blackman Park Scout Hall, an additional $41,000 for consultancy costs relating to traffic signalisation at the corner of Epping Road and Coxs Lane and $1,200,000 to finalise the Little Lane redevelopment (fit out and bridge brought from the 2015/16 budget).


 

Operating Income

 

Adjustments for Operating Income include $39,000 in additional domestic waste charges, $45,000 in additional parking fines, a $35,000 further increase in interest on investments largely due to Section 94 and Voluntary Planning Agreements and a $40,000 increase in construction zone fees.

 

Capital Income

 

Capital income provides funding for new projects and carry forwards funded by Section 94, VPA’s and internal reserves.

 

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 2016 indicates that Council's projected financial position will be satisfactory at year end 30 June 2017, having regard to the projected estimates of income and expenditure and the original budgeted income and expenditure.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the 2016 – 2017 Budget be varied as follows:-

 

 

All Numbers(000’s)

Original Budget

30.09.2016
Quarter 1 Revised Budget

31.12.2016 Quarter 2 Adjustments

31.12.2016 Quarter 2 Revised Budget

Expenditure

$40,862

$188

$186

$41,236

Income

$52,095

$706

$197

$52,998

Surplus/ (Deficit)

$11,233

$518

$11

$11,762

Surplus/(Deficit) before

Capital Grants/Contributions

$278

$18

$11

$307

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Budget review for Quarter ended 31 December 2016

6 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

January 2017 Traffic Committee Meeting

 

 

Subject:          January 2017 Traffic Committee Meeting    

Record No:    SU1326 - 7360/17

Division:         Open Space and Urban Services Division

Author(s):      Santosh Rai 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Lane Cove Traffic Committee Meeting was held on Tuesday, 24 January 2017.  The Agenda is included as AT-1.  The Traffic Committee recommendations are shown in the Minutes of the Meeting, included as AT-2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopt the recommendations of the Lane Cove Traffic Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 24 January 2017.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Patterson

Executive Manager - Open Space and Urban Services

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

AGENDA - Traffic Committee - January 2017

64 Pages

 

AT‑2View

MINUTES - Traffic Committee -January 2017

15 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Proposed Road Closure, 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

 

 

Subject:          Proposed Road Closure, 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove    

Record No:    SU5583 - 8298/17

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report outlines the results of the public notification of the proposal to close and relocate a public road known as the existing pedestrian laneway located between 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove. (Illustrated AT-1)

                                 

Should the proposal be approved and subject to the redevelopment of 25-29 Longueville Road proceeding (which is being assessed separately), it is intended that Council enter into a formal agreement with the developer to install a new pathway within a publicly accessible easement at 29 Longueville Road, Lane Cove as part of the proposed redevelopment of 25-29 Longueville Road.

 

The proposed relocated laneway will potentially provide a number of community benefits including a much wider pedestrian access to Longueville Road from Taylors Lane, enhanced lighting and public safety, ramps for accessibility and landscape improvements.  The developer would be responsible for all costs associated with the closure of the existing laneway, creation of an easement and construction of a new pathway and improvements on the site.

 

This report considers the submissions received from the community and public utilities and will recommend on balance that in view of the public benefits of the proposal, application be made to the Department of Primary Industries – Lands, to formally close the existing Laneway.

 

Background

 

At its Ordinary Meeting on 10 October 2016, Council considered a report in respect of the closure and relocation of an existing pedestrian laneway between 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove and resolved to:

1.   Receive and note the information;

2.   Proceed with public notification to close the laneway between 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove at AT-1 in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding dated April 2006 with the NSW Department of Primary Industry-Lands; and

3.   Following public consultation, receive a further report outlining the submissions received with respect to the proposed laneway closure and for determining whether to proceed with an application to NSW Department of Primary Industry-Lands.

 

It is noted that the Department is responsible for approving such applications and has standardized procedures for Public Road Closure applications by a Council including the need to consult the community and public utilities and to address any reasonable concerns and objections from respondents.

 

Public Notification

 

The proposed road closure was advertised in the North Shore Times on 20 October 2016 allowing for a period of 28 days for submissions from the community and public utilities.

 

Letters were also sent to surrounding residents likely to have an interest in the proposal.

 

Responses

The following submissions were received:

A.  PUBLIC AUTHORITIES

1.   Sydney Water

Response

 

Sydney Water advised that they have a 300mm drinking water main within the laneway and therefore, lodged a formal objection to the closure. However, Sydney Water indicated that they will agree to lift their objection subject to the developer meeting their requirements including possible relocation of services.

 

Comment

 

The developer has reached agreement with Sydney Water who will lift their objection conditionally on their requirements being carried out.

 

2.   Ausgrid

Response

 

Ausgrid initially advised that they object to the proposed laneway closure as the laneway contains Ausgrid’s underground electricity distribution mains. Ausgrid therefore requires the relocation of all affected assets to be outside of the proposed closure and if services are relocated to the proposed new laneway, easements will be required.

 

Comment

 

The developer has reached agreement with Ausgrid who have lifted their objection conditionally on the above requirements being met.

 

Discussion – Public Utilities

Whilst Sydney Water and Ausgrid services are currently within sections of the proposed road closures, the developer has agreed to undertake to relocate the affected services in conjunction with the relevant public utilities requirements.  Should the services not be relocated prior to the gazettal of the proposed closure, easements for services in favour of the relevant authority(s) would be included on title until such time they are no longer required.

 

PRIVATE SUBMISSIONS

 

1.  Respondent 1

 

Response

 

 - Insufficient information of timing of closure and opening of new laneway. No information of design alternatives & stairs at Taylors Lane.  Provision if builder goes into liquidation. Comment on developer profit”.

 

Comment

The Deed provides that the existing laneway will not be closed until the new access is open. Therefore in the event the development does not proceed or finalise, Council will not accept handover of the pedestrian laneway and easement until it is satisfied it meets our requirements. The layout and design as shown at AT-1 was made available to the community as part of the notification process.

 

2.  Respondent 2

Response

 

 -Increase in pedestrian traffic, the proposed benefit of an accessible and wider footpath area for access to Longueville Road from Taylors Lane, along with enhanced lighting and landscape improvements does not  highlight that  the walk is actually longer  for pedestrians & snakes & winds itself back onto itself several times? The existing pedestrian laneways connecting Kara Street to Longueville Road is one long safe laneway.

Comment

The proposed access connects with improvements in pedestrian access along Taylors Lane and provides greater public safety measures and connectivity to the bus interchange and the Village.

 

3    Respondent 3

Response

 

Seeking clarification on: What is the close date for the current laneway, Where is the alternate route for pedestrians to get to the Lane Cove Bus interchange (on Longueville Road), What date will work start on the new laneway, What is the date when work is due to be completed & the laneway will be ready for pedestrians?

 

Comment

As per responses above, dates not known and existing laneway not to be closed prior to opening of new laneway

 

4    Respondent 4

Response

 

- the proposal will diminish the pedestrians sense of safety by removing the current clear line of vision, it is also only a few years ago that new concrete steps and rust resistant hand rails were installed, furthermore, given that almost all of the pedestrians who currently use the path go the entire length of the two sections, making only the section between  Taylors Lane and Longueville Road mobility friendly without also converting the lower section between Taylors Lane and Kara Street to mobility impaired accessible would appear to lack sense.

Comment

The proposal will facilitate better overall access for pedestrians with an improved path from Taylors Lane to Longueville Road.

 

The proposed pathway, although not having a direct line of sight to Kara Street will provide a more direct journey to the bus interchange on Longueville Road and the Village. Regarding safety, being able to see the entire length of the pathway from Kara street to Longueville Road does not eliminate the possibility of persons standing out of the line of sight in Taylors Lane.  Hence, by redirecting the pathway to a visibly open and wider route would significantly improve safety. 

 

5    Respondent 5 – Lane Cove North Residents Association

 

-While our community supports the improved position and design, increased width and lighting and landscaping of the proposed laneway we are very concerned that the Rest Stop half way should not be a place where people could gather to drink.  This was bought to the attention of LCNRA by local residents.

 

A bench is a good idea as we have older people who will use ramp and may need to rest but if we make it too comfortable with a table etc we might provide an opportunity for negative behavior from others.

Due to our position Kara St residents often have bottles deposited in gardens from people returning from the hotel late at night and we wouldn't want to provide an amenity for other such behavior. 

Comment

It is considered that the proposal will improve security in the vicinity due to lighting and width of access. The provision of seating in a laneway may create security or public nuisance issues.

 

6    Respondent – Owner of adjoining site 31-33 Longueville Road

 

Response

 

Raised a number of concerns relating to the possible impact of the new laneway on their property including security and safety, closeness of laneway to existing units, no line of site to Kara Street, concerns the proposal is largely for the benefit of the developer and concerned the advertised proposal is misleading.

 

Comment

A meeting took place with Council representatives to discuss the above concerns of the respondent in respect of the road closure.  Matters relating to a Development Application are not addressed in conjunction with the proposed road closure.

 

7    Respondent 7

 

Response

 

-You will remove the safety and comfort for parents and seniors when they can see from end to end of this laneway. I have watched parents watch their children walk the laneway to the bus stop knowing they use a safe passage.

 

The electricity, water and communications are located under this laneway. These connect the Chatswood ATM’s and will have dire consequences if interfered with. This is confirmed when the units close by fell into a sink hole created by Lane Cove Tunnel.

 

Comment

 

With regards to safety for parents and seniors travelling the entire length of the pathway, being able to see the entire distance does not eliminate the possibility of persons standing out of the line of sight in Taylors Lane.  Hence, by redirecting the pathway to a visibly open and wider pathway would significantly improve safety. 

 

Council is aware of infrastructure beneath the pathway.  Subject to this matter proceeding, relocation of the infrastructure will be accommodated.

 

8    Respondent – Owner of a Unit in 31-33 Longueville Road

 

Response

 

Comments included the walkway has been in existence long before the houses were built around it, servicing the pedestrians from Kara Street to Longueville road and the proposal is more for the benefit of the developer.

 

Also the relocation of the existing public footpath will create additional noise for people residing in block 31 who currently enjoy the peace and privacy with security and the public walkway will constrict access to the rear of block 31 and 33 Longueville Road. Concerned they have a four meter wide access which will be lost especially when the ground level will be altered.

Comment

Security and privacy concerns acknowledged. It is anticipated that the lighting and width of the access may address these issues. Respondent was provided clarification of aspects of proposal including width of access.

 

9    Respondent 9

Response

 

Objects to this proposed giving away of public land on the basis of:

(i).  A right of way in exchange for freehold Public Land is not the same thing;

(ii). The current laneway provides direct, efficient access, without lengthy twists and turns, and a line of sight;

(iii).            Personal safety and supervision – currently a user can look right through both laneways to check for any undesirable persons or incidents;

(iv).            Impact on residents of adjoining property;

(v). The developer is required to have a landscaped side setback in any case. The developer is not giving up anything of value and gains through a greater FSR; and

(vi).            Concerns about the strata controlling the access and extinguishing easement.

 

Comment

 

The proposed Road Closure aims to facilitate better access for pedestrians with an improved path from Taylors Lane to Longueville Road and Council/community having perpetual access to the new laneway.

 

The proposed pathway, although not having a direct line of sight to Kara Street will be a more direct journey to the buses on Longueville Road and or shopping vicinity. Regarding personal safety and supervision as noted in earlier responses, being able to see the entire length of the pathway from Kara street does not eliminate the possibility of persons standing out of the line of sight in Taylors Lane.  Hence, by redirecting the pathway to a visibly open and wider pathway would significantly improve safety. 

 

In relation to the easement, the owners corporation would not be able to extinguish it without Council’s approval. Additionally, the Deed provides for satisfactory maintenance levels of the area by the owners corporation.

 

Discussion

In summary, there were nine private submissions received and of these, seven were objections that maybe categorised into two groups; clarification of the proposal, and neighbouring lot owners with specific interests.

 

Responses relate to overall distance, safety, start/end date, cost to ratepayer and even a suggestion that the continuing pathways should be mobility impaired accessible. Adjoining lot owners were concerned about the impact of the relocated laneway on the development at No.31 Longueville Road in terms of security, closeness to existing units, loss of line of site to Kara Street and that the developer is the main beneficiary of the proposal.

 

However, the submissions by two public utilities outlined objections based on infrastructure that can be relocated.  Agreement has been reached between the developer and the public utilities, who will lift the objections on satisfactory relocation of existing services and assets.

 

It is pointed out that the existing laneway has the following limitations:

 

•     Width of walkway – 1.22 meters

•     Able bodied access only – steps at both ends

•     Gradient for the entire length

•     Bound by fencing on each side

•     No lighting or landscaping

•     Reduced security (passing width)

•     On-going maintenance cost to Council

 

Whilst subject to the redevelopment of 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove and the proposal proceeding, it is considered that the community would benefit from;

 

•     Increased pathway width to 2 meters;

•     Increased overall corridor width to 6 meters;

•     Accessibility to all pedestrian users i.e. ramps;

•     Lighting for visibility and security;

•     Landscaping for visual-aesthetics;

•     Maintained by newly created Owners Corporation;

•     No costs associated with proposal;

•     No increase in travel distance; and

•     More direct journey to Bus stop interchange and the Village.

 

Conclusion

 

Therefore, on balance, it will be recommended that Council make application to Department of Primary Industries – Lands to close the subject laneway.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

1.         Note that following public notification in the North Shore Times and by letters to relevant stakeholders, on balance there are significant community benefits to the proposed closure and relocation of Pedestrian Laneway between 25-27 Longueville Road, Lane Cove to between 29-31 Longueville Road; and

2.         Apply to the Department of Primary Industries – Lands to formally close as public road the Pedestrian Laneway between 25-27 Longueville Road as shown in AT 1.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Dalli

Executive Manager - Corporate Services

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Plan Highlighting Proposal Including Existing Laneway between 25-29 Longueville Road, Lane Cove

1 Page

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Future of Shorelink - Exit by Willoughby City Council

 

 

Subject:          Future of Shorelink - Exit by Willoughby City Council    

Record No:    SU1738 - 8847/17

Division:         Human Services Division

Author(s):      Jennifer Bice 

 

 

Executive Summary

The Shorelink Library Network is a library network that links the five Lower North Shore Council Libraries of Lane Cove, Manly (now part of Northern Beaches Council), Mosman, Stanton (North Sydney) and Willoughby Councils. The network was established in 1983 when the five participating Councils signed a Deed of Agreement.

 

Shorelink has enabled Lane Cove Library to co-operate regionally to achieve superior service outcomes for the Lane Cove community. All the Shorelink libraries perform above statewide standards, partly because Shorelink has fostered benchmarking, the sharing of ideas and co-operation to develop a range of joint projects

 

It is managed by a joint committee consisting of five Councillors and five Library Managers from the member councils: Lane Cove, Manly (now part of Northern Beaches), Mosman, North Sydney and Willoughby Councils.

 

In December 2016 Willoughby Council gave notice of withdrawal under Clause 17 of the Deed of Agreement to take effect December 2017. This withdrawal will be quite complex as there are a number of administrative, technical and contractual issues to be resolved. A bridging Deed of Agreement will need to be developed that will allow the Shorelink Library Network to operate until June 2018.

 

The Network has been such a successful joint venture that it would be a missed opportunity not to organise a meeting with Willoughby and the Mayors and General Managers of the other Shorelink member councils to investigate if arrangements could be put in place that would enable the Network to continue.

 

Background

Shorelink originally provided joint cataloguing and a shared membership database but over the last thirty years further co-operative opportunities have occurred. Shorelink now also provides: telecommunication infrastructure, Internet and WiFi, eResources (eBooks, eAudiobooks, eMagazines, eComics) and a courier service between the libraries.

 

Some of the benefits of Shorelink to our residents are:

 

·    members currently have access to more than 840,000 items and can borrow and return from any library in the Network;

·    the online catalogue is a 'one stop shop' , enabling customers to search, reserve and renew items across the member libraries; and

·    an excellent Inter-Library Loans service, with 87% of requests being satisfied within the Network

 

Other benefits that have contributed to Shorelink’s reputation for innovation and excellence in the provision of library information technology and recognition as an outstanding example of local government co-operation include:

 

·    sharing of professional expertise across the libraries; and

·    economies of scale: LMS, telecommunications infrastructure, downloadable eResources

 

On 15 December 2016 Willoughby Council wrote to all Shorelink member Councils notifying them that Willoughby City Council under Clause 17 of the Deed of Agreement would be withdrawing from Shorelink, in 12 months time.  In a Report presented to Willoughby Council on December 12, 2016 a number of reasons for their withdrawal were included such as the assumption that their future needs will be better met with a standalone Library Management System (LMS); increased focus on community hubs and activities other than collection management and lending; and that they no longer support the Shorelink funding model (specifically that Willoughby City Council currently contributes 37% of operating costs, based on annual circulation) whilst having only one vote (out of five) on the Shorelink Committee. The Shorelink funding modelhas remained relatively unchanged over the years and it may be able to be reviewed to address Willoughby’s concerns.

 

Discussion

Willoughby City Council’s decision to withdraw from the Shorelink Library Network will have an impact on the way borrowers on the Lower North Shore access library services and may lead to an increase in cost for members that remain.

 

Access to Resources

 

The main impact to the Lane Cove community will be the reduction in the number of items available through the Shorelink catalogue. The number of items will drop from 840,000 to 550,000 items.  Residents who want to borrow from Willoughby Libraries will need to have both a Willoughby card and a Shorelink card.  If both Lane Cove and Willoughby Councils decide to allow reciprocal borrowing i.e. allow residents to join the neighbouring library free of charge then Lane Cove residents will be able to be a member of both libraries. However, they will need to return items to the lending Library or restrict their usage to Lane Cove, Manly, Mosman or Stanton Libraries.

 

Intra Shorelink Loans

 

Borrowers also request Intra Shorelink Loans either via the catalogue or with staff assistance. In 2015/16, Lane Cove Library lent 2,017 items (26% of the Intra Shorelink Loans to the network) compared to Willoughby’s 1,983 items (25%) and borrowed 1,415 items (18% of the Intra Shorelink borrowing) compared to Willoughby’s 2,148 (28%). This indicates that Lane Cove Library is in a strong position to meet specific borrower requests from within its own collection. Lane Cove Library has a particularly in-depth collection that is strengthened by ongoing selection and de-selection of materials. Collection management is a core Library competency that ensures a collection remains relevant to the community.

 

Some interlending (guided by the Australian Inter Library Resource Sharing Code) from/to Willoughby Library should be possible but would normally be limited to out-of print items or items for which a special case can be made. The Shorelink Network allows access to more items than most public libraries outside the Shorelink Network would permit.

 

Cross Usage

 

While Intra Library loans indicate how many items were borrowed from Shorelink libraries from other Shorelink libraries on behalf of borrowers it does not indicate the popular feature of being able to borrow or return to any Library.

 

The table below indicates how many items were borrowed from Shorelink libraries from the members of each Library service in 2015/16. Borrowers from Shorelink Libraries can use their Library card at any of the Shorelink Libraries. In 2015/16 Willoughby members borrowed 49,227 items from Lane Cove Library while Lane Cove Library members borrowed 33,002 items from Willoughby Libraries.

Willoughby borrowers borrowing items from other libraries 2015/16

Willoughby Borrowing Branch

Lane Cove (inc. Greenwich)

Manly

Mosman

North Sydney

Artarmon

6,414

1,350

2,152

2,244

Castle Cove

175

47

138

612

Chatswood

38,272

3,236

5,039

32,287

Naremburn

558

17

80

1,153

Northbridge

690

45

600

3,589

West Chatswood

3,116

69

99

101

 

49,227

4,764

9,008

39,986

 

eResources

 

Shorelink has developed a Digital Library that includes eBooks and eAudiobooks from Overdrive and Bolinda BorrowBox; and eMagazines (Zinio) and eComics (ComicsPlus) from Wavesound. Shorelink has contracts with these suppliers and as contracts become due for renewal will have to notify the suppliers that Willoughby will no longer be purchasing eResources via Shorelink.

 

While Willoughby City Council may claim ownership of a percentage of purchased and metered (leased) eBook and eAudiobook titles they will need to arrange their own platform and pay hosting/service fees to suppliers.

 

Deed of Agreement

 

In order for the remaining Shorelink member Councils to participate in a library co-operative from January-June 2018 a bridging Deed of Agreement will need be drafted and an extension of the contract for the Library Management System for twelve months from July 2017 (inclusive of Willoughby’s withdrawal in December) will need to be negotiated. Negotiations will also need to take place with telecommunication and eResource suppliers.

 

The current Agent Council, North Sydney Council is developing an indicative draft budget for July-December 2017 that will be tabled at the February Shorelink Library Network Committee Meeting. Councils that have not given notice of withdrawal will meet separately to consider estimates for the full year (2017/18) for inclusion in their own draft estimates.

 

Conclusion

 

The Shorelink Library Network is a successful Library consortium that has provided significant benefits to Lower North Shore communities for more than 30 years. Willoughby City Council has notified member Councils that it will withdraw from the Network effective 13 December 2017.

 

There are a number of administrative, technical and contractual issues that need to be resolved to facilitate Willoughby City Council’s withdrawal. A bridging Deed of Agreement will need to be developed that will allow the Shorelink Library Network to operate until June 2018. Prior to June 2018 Lane Cove Council will need to decide whether it will continue to operate within a consortia model for 2018/19 and beyond.

 

It is recommended in this report that a meeting be held with the Mayors and General Managers from all of the current Shorelink Library Network members in an attempt to discuss the issues that Willoughby Council have raised and look at opportunities to continue this successful regional co-operative project.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

1.   Note the correspondence from Willoughby Council and its consequence that the Shorelink Deed of Agreement will terminate in December 2017.

2.   Continue to participate in a co-operative Library Network with the remaining Shorelink Councils for 2017/18.

3.   Host a meeting of Mayors and General Managers to see if there are changes to the way that the Shorelink Library Network operates that would present an opportunity for Willoughby to reconsider their current position to withdraw. 

4.   Be a party to a bridging Deed of Agreement (with the same terms and conditions as the 1983 Agreement), if required, to give a legal basis to the Library co-operative between January-June 2018.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Shorelink Deed - Notification of termination by Willoughby City Council

2 Pages

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Illegal Dumping from Multi Unit Dwellings

 

 

Subject:          Illegal Dumping from Multi Unit Dwellings    

Record No:    SU6278 - 4714/17

Division:         Environmental Services Division

Author(s):      David Wilson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

In January 2016, Council commenced the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Better Waste Recycling Fund sponsored Multi-Unit Dwelling Illegal Dumping Project.

 

The focus of the project has been to develop and implement strategies to address illegal dumping in and around high density areas. Research over an extended period has shown that these areas account for 63% of all waste dumping incidents and a targeted campaign may address this ongoing issue.

 

Illegal dumping of household/bulky waste from multi-unit dwellings and collection costs are subsequently borne by the community (Council).

 

The project to date has produced positive results with a 37% reduction in illegal dumping, which has implications for the future management of waste in the Lane Cove LGA as well as across the region.

 

Background

 

Historically, illegal dumping in the Lane Cove LGA has been concentrated in the Lane Cove North area, particularly Mowbray Road, Gordon Crescent, Mindarie and Murray Street as well as along Epping Road and Burns Bay Road.

 

In 2015, Council’s records show 159 dumps (comprising approximately 200 tonnes of waste) were collected and disposed of at the community’s expense. To address this ongoing issue, $210,000 in grant funding was sought from the NSW EPA’s Better Waste and Recycling Fund to employ a Waste Avoidance Project Officer for a period of up to two years,  and for marketing and promotional materials associated with the project.

 

The project aimed to reduce illegal dumping from multi-unit dwellings in Lane Cove North, particularly as residential unit development is increasing each year in the LGA, and anecdotally there appears to be a higher level of short term tenancies that may result in greater volumes of bulky waste being generated as people move in and out of the area.

 

Project Plan and Marketing

 

A project plan was prepared to address behaviour change in varying segments of the community  (AT-1) and marketing materials were created to communicate Council’s key messages about our waste and recycling services.

 

To reach new residents, a postcard titled Frantic First Week (AT- 2) was developed to target promotion of Council Clean Ups. These were distributed to rental properties to maximize awareness by new tenants. Council also partnered with Strata and Real Estate agents to ensure that all those selling their properties as well as those purchasing and or renting in Lane Cove,  were provided with information about Council’s waste service options (AT-3 & AT-4).

To dissuade dumpers, an Under Investigation flyer (AT- 5) was distributed to letterboxes nearby dumping incidents. Illegally Dumped Materials stickers were also used on dumps. These initiatives  had a significant impact on the severity of dumping with 34% of piles being self-removed the day following Council’s intervention.

 

Results

 

The project commenced in January 2016 and has resulted in 71 illegal dumps being collected from the study area in the past 12 months or 37% less than in 2015. The number of instances of dumping,  has decreased each month and throughout the past year (see Figure 1).

 

Of the 258 instances of dumping observed, 61% of piles were self-removed following council intervention (34% were removed the next day). This equates to a cost saving of approximately $60,000 in collection and disposal costs.

 

Overall, the cost to Council of collecting dumped waste has reduced, street amenity has also improved, and community satisfaction in Council services has been raised.

 

Trend in number of dumps collected at community’s expense

 

 

 

Figure 1: Graph showing trend in illegal dumping outside multi-unit dwellings in Lane Cove North target areas in 2016. Rapid response and tailored, constructive messaging from Waste Avoidance Officer proved effective for reducing dumping severity.

 

Discussion

 

The project to date has applied a combination of promotional and pro-active intervention measures to significantly reduce the dumping in focus areas. So far we have found that the most effective methods for reducing dumping impacts, were determined to be the pro-active, rapid response and tailored messaging to the nearby community. Coupled with positive promotions, investigation and constructive feedback effectively turned the responsibility for waste management back on residents and caused the majority of dumps to be self-removed.

 

This has significant implications for future management of illegal dumping, particularly the ongoing employment of staff working specifically on illegal dumping mitigation. While illegal dumping reduced over time as a result of Clean Up promotions, new instances of illegal dumping continue to occur and on-going intervention will be necessary to minimise the severity of materials dumped.

 

Conclusion

 

The NSW Government recently announced the extension of the Waste Less, Recycle More initiative with a further $337 million over 4 years from 2017-21. Of which, $39 million has been allocated to the Better Waste and Recycling Fund, the non-contestable funding program for levy paying councils. This funding will be available to Council in 2017-18 and an extension of the project beyond 2017 will be considered with this funding opportunity.

 

Investment in activities specifically targeting waste dumping prevention and management have produced tangible, financial and non-tangible (community amenity) results. Initiatives that enhance  behaviour change and mitigate dumping and clean streets are effective and provide a positive community streetscape

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1View

Waste Avoidance Project Plan - Multi Unit Dwellings

5 Pages

Circulated Separately

AT‑2View

Attachment 2 - FranticFirstWeek_Postcard

1 Page

Circulated Separately

AT‑3View

Attachment 3 - Council Clean Up - A3 alupanel sign

1 Page

Circulated Separately

AT‑4View

Attachment 4 - Council Clean Up - A4 Flyer

1 Page

Circulated Separately

AT‑5View

Attachment 5 - IllegallyDumpedMaterials - DL Flyer - Copy

1 Page

Circulated Separately

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

2nd Quarter Review of the 2016-17 Delivery Program and Operational Plan

 

 

Subject:          2nd Quarter Review of the 2016-17 Delivery Program and Operational Plan    

Record No:    SU238 - 5413/17

Division:         Corporate Services Division

Author(s):      Craig Dalli 

 

 

Executive Summary

This report outlines the 2nd Quarter progress towards achieving the projects listed in the adopted 2016-2017 Delivery Program and Operational Plan.  It is recommended that the report be received and noted.

Discussion

Council’s adopted 2016-2017 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 2016-2017 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:-

·    Accepted Design and Construction Tender for Rosenthal Redevelopment Project (November);

·    Official Opening – Lane Cove Community Hub (December);

·    Community consultation undertaken for:-

Proposed partial closure of Lithgow Street, St Leonards (November);

Proposal to close and re-locate laneway between 25-27 Longueville Road (November);

Proposed lease of Lane Cove Bowling and Recreation Club (October);  and

Lane Cove Draft Innovate Reconciliation Action Plan (December).

·    Christmas events including Christmas lights competition and tree in the plaza (December);

·    Highly successful events held including Lane Cove Night Out and Food and Wine by the River (November);

·    Unveiling of relocated WW1 Honour Roll (November);

·    Presentation of 2015/16 Annual Financial Statements (November);

·    Ongoing investigation of bus routes and frequency of services throughout the LGA;

·    Bid for long term lease of 266 Longueville Road accepted (November);

·    Design for installation of traffic signals at Tambourine Bay Road and Burns Bay Road. RMS approval to be sought (December);

 

·    Develop design options for proposed Pinaroo Park which will be subject to community consultation on = finalisation; and

·    Continued expansion of Bush Kids Program.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the 2nd Quarter Review of the 2016-2017 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 2016 - 2017 Operational Plan

56 Pages

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Council Meeting 20 February 2017

Council Snapshot

 

 

Subject:          Council Snapshot    

Record No:    SU220 - 6293/17

Division:         General Managers Unit

Author(s):      Craig Wrightson 

 

 

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 - January 2017

44 Pages