Logo Watermark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes

Ordinary Council Meeting

20 May 2019, 7:00pm

All minutes are subject to confirmation at a subsequent

meeting and may be amended by resolution at that meeting.

LC_WebBanner


Ordinary Council 20 May 2019

Minutes

 

PRESENT: Councillor P. Palmer (Chair), Councillor S. Bennison, Councillor K. Brent, Councillor D. Brooks-Horn, Councillor K. Morris, Councillor D. Strassberg Councillor F. Vissel and Councillor A. Zbik.

 

ALSO PRESENT: General Manager, Executive Manager – Corporate Services, Executive Manager – Environmental Services, Executive Manager – Open Space & Urban Services,  Executive Officer to the General Manager, Coordinator – Strategic Planning and Manager – Governance.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST:

Councillor Brooks-Horn declared a non pecuniary conflict of interest that is significant in relation to  “Financial Assistance Grants to Community Groups: 2019 / 2020”  as he is on the Board of Sydney Community Services.  He advised he would vacate the Chamber and not debate or vote on that part of the item.

Councillor Bennison declared a pecuniary conflict of interest in relation to “Financial Assistance Grants to Community Groups: 2019 / 2020  he is an auditor of Longueville Sporting Club.  He advised he would vacate the Chamber and not debate or vote on that part of the item.

Councillor Brent declared a non pecuniary conflict of interest that is significant in relation to “Financial Assistance Grants to Community Groups: 2019 / 2020  as she is President of Centrehouse Inc.  She advised she would vacate the Chamber and not debate or vote on that part of the item.

Councillor Strassberg declared a non pecuniary conflict of interest that is significant in relation to “Financial Assistance Grants to Community Groups: 2019 / 2020  as he is the Treasurer of Centrehouse Inc.  He advised he would vacate the Chamber and not debate or vote on that part of the item.

 

APOLOGIES 

Apologies were received on behalf of Councillor D. Hutchens.

69

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brooks-Horn and Palmer that the apology be accepted and leave of absence be granted.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

The meeting was opened with a prayer by Karen Paull of Lane Cove Uniting Church.

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

The Mayor gave an acknowledgement of Country.

 

WEBCASTING OF COUNCIL MEETING

The Mayor advised those present that the Meeting was being webcast.


 

 

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

70

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Zbik and Brooks-Horn that Standing Orders be suspended and that members of the public who wish to address Council be allowed to do so for a maximum of three (3) minutes.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

PUBLIC FORUM

Katie Schliebs of Lane Cove West in regards to off leash dog walking at Blackman Park and tabling supporting documentation including a petition.

 

Danielle Downs of Lane Cove in regards to off leash dog walking at Blackman Park.

 

Katherine Tanifero of Lane Cove North in regards to off leash dog walking at Blackman Park.

 

Alice Beauchamp of Lane Cove in regards to the Draft Code of Meeting Practice.

 

Sam Sirdah on behalf of Silver Pond in regards to Planning Proposal 34 - Sites in Canberra Avenue And Holdsworth Avenue, St Leonards”.

 

Helena Miller of MG Planning on behalf of Greaton Developments in regards to “Planning Proposal 35 - Sites in Berry Road, Holdsworth Avenue, River Road and Park Road, St Leonards” and tabling a letter to Councillors.

 

John Southwood of Greenwich in regards to off leash dog walking facilities in Lane Cove and the consideration of the St Leonards South Planning Proposal by the Independent Planning Commission.

 

Merri Southwood of Greenwich on behalf of the Greenwich Community Association in regards to the Draft Code of Meeting Practice and the consideration of the St Leonards South Planning Proposal by the Independent Planning Commission..

 

Doug Stuart of Longueville in regards to the Draft Code of Meeting Practice and 1 Sirius Road, Lane Cove West.

 

Tony, Riley and Finn Nolan of Lane Cove in regards to the ‘Thinkers Cove’ creative thinkers and science club and their upcoming free information night scheduled on 5 June at the Lane Cove Public School.

 

Anita Jubian of St Leonards in regards to Planning Proposals 34 and 35 for St Leonards and the Draft Code of Meeting Practice.

 

Arlette Jubian of Greenwich in regards to Planning Proposals 34 and 35 for St Leonards and the Draft Code of Meeting Practice.

 

Albert Jubian of St Leonards in regards to Planning Proposals 34 and 35 and the Draft Code of Meeting Practice.

 

Penny Mabbutt of Greenwich in regards to the consideration of the St Leonards South Planning Proposal by the Independent Planning Commission.


 

 

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

71

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brooks-Horn and Brent that Standing Orders be resumed.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 15 APRIL 2019

72

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Strassberg and Brooks-Horn that the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on the 15 April 2019 be received.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

73

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brooks-Horn and Brent that the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on the 15 April 2019 be confirmed.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Orders Of The Day

The Mayor:-

·         Presented an award received by Council at the Small Business Friendly Councils Conference 2019 for its support of and participation in the NSW Government’s Small Business Friendly Council Program.

Notices of Motion

 

Lane Cove Literary Awards Review

74

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brent and Strassberg that:-

1.   A report on exploring additional or different ways in which to run the Lane Cove Literary Awards, with respect to its frequency, reach and financing, be prepared for Council; and

2.   Council’s Manager - Library Services and all staff at the Lane Cove Library be thanked for their dedication in making the Literary Awards such a resounding success in its first five (5) years.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 


 

Officer Reports for Determination

 

Planning Proposal 34 - Sites in Canberra Avenue and Holdsworth Avenue, St Leonards

75

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Brooks-Horn that:-

1.       Having considered the advice from the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel meeting of 7 May 2019, Council rejects Planning Proposal No.34 in full and such not be forwarded to the Minister for a Gateway Determination, as:-

a)      It fails strategic merit test

Reason

Not consistent with the findings of the Draft 2036 Plan which recommends that the St Leonards South Planning Proposal be referred to the Independent Planning Commission for review. Further, Council’s Planning Proposal and its supporting documents already responds to a change in circumstances.

b)      It fails site-specific merit test

Reason

Council’s Planning Proposal 25 has been done on a precinct-wide basis and the proponent’s Planning Proposal does not consider the potential impacts (i.e. relocating the central east-west connection) it will have on the proposed future uses of Areas 5 & 6. 

c)      Council’s legal advice confirms that Planning Proposal 25 has the status of a ‘proposed instrument’ and has been the subject of public consultation under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act. The proponent also uses Council’s Planning Proposal as justification yet fails to comply with Planning Proposal 25.

d)      The proposed relocation of the 15m wide east-west pedestrian link fails to satisfy the planning reasons for the original location being:

i.        a contiguous straight line of travel from Newlands Park to the new park between Berry & Park Roads;

ii.       a connected accessible link, including people with a disability, involving ramps and lifts which connect in with other community facilities and infrastructure (in Areas 5 and 17);

iii.      a coherent east-west visual corridor and central ‘pedestrian boulevard’.

The bonus FSR and Height is an incentive for Areas 7 & 8 to provide the 15m wide east-west pedestrian link in that location, as justified by points above. The applicant seeks the bonuses without seeking to satisfy the intent.

e)      Based on Council’s Urban Design advice, the proponent’s re-design of Areas 7 & 8 would not only have an adverse impact on its adjoining sites (i.e. Areas 5 & 6) but also adversely affect Areas 9, 10 & 11 in terms of potential solar access to units, and compliance with ADG requirements.

In addition, by reducing Areas 7 & 8, the building on Area 7 has been rotated 90 degrees, adversely affecting sunlight to the already narrowed Green Spine in Areas 9 & 10.

f)       In particular, Planning Proposal 34 is inconsistent with the following objectives of Planning Proposal 25:

i.        Amalgamations Patterns

Reason

These were designed and based on achieving specific urban design & planning outcomes while the proposed variations are designed to suit the proponent’s landholdings.

ii.       Green Spines

Reason

These are to be generally 24m wide but are shown as between 12m and 24m. The planning reason for requiring a generally uniform 24m width is to facilitate the creation of integrated “communal” open space with extensive (50+%) deep soil zones, consistent throughout the precinct.

iii.      Landscape Master Plan

Reason

The intent of the Landscape Master Plan is to ensure a consistently high level of landscaping is provided throughout the precinct.

While the proponent provides some elements the missing elements (a continuous north-south and east-west accessibility link, children’s play areas, much formal seating for gathering) are essential to the vision of a communal open space that welcomes users of all ages and abilities.

iv.      Bonus Heights and Floor Space Ratios

Reason

The intent of Council’s site-specific incentive heights and FSRs is to prevent development in areas identified for public parks, communal open spaces (Green Spines), walkways and roads and provide bonus heights and FSRs in return for identified outcomes. Most of the proponent’s proposed changes are not consistent with overall amenity outcomes.

g)      A number of matters raised in the proponent’s Planning Proposal are relatively minor in nature and should be addressed at the Development Application stage. However, Council would advise the proponent that:

i.        Proposed parking basements are inconsistent with Council’s Draft Development Control Plan which requires deep soil as a minimum of 50% of the Green Spine. Council’s Urban Design advice states that proponent’s basements are too extensive and intrude into deep soil and Green Spine areas.

ii.       It is noted that the proposed park extension on Holdsworth Avenue (in Area 11) could be acceptable subject to other considerations.

2.       The following Lane Cove Local Planning Panel additional reasons for rejection of Planning Proposal 34 be accepted and endorsed:

"The Panel has assessed both Planning Proposals, both on their individual merits and against the provisions of the Council's Planning Proposal 25 which, under the Act, is required to be taken into account.

·        Planning Proposal 25 is at an advanced stage and should be given appropriate weight.

·        That the Panel accepts and understands that the proponents of these Planning Proposals have had difficulty in amalgamating all the required lots to achieve the proposed amalgamated patterns.

·        Nevertheless, Planning Proposal 25 should be allowed to run its course and these Planning Proposals 34 and 35 do not conform with such, in a number of respects, as identified in the assessment reports.

·        The submissions of the residents go to the acceptability of Planning Proposal 25 rather than to these individual Planning Proposals.

·        The Panel supports the findings contained in the assessment reports in each case and endorses the reasons for the recommendations in those reports."

 

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Planning Proposal 35 - Sites in Berry Road, Holdsworth Avenue, River Road and Park Road, St Leonards 

Note:    A letter to Councillors was tabled during the public forum by Helena Miller of MG Planning on behalf of Greaton Developments in regards to “Planning Proposal 35 - Sites in Berry Road, Holdsworth Avenue, River Road and Park Road, St Leonards”.

76

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Brooks-Horn that:-

1.       Having considered the advice from the Lane Cove Local Planning Panel meeting of 7 May 2019 Council rejects Planning Proposal No. 35 in full and such not be forwarded to the Minister for a Gateway Determination, as:

a)      It fails the strategic merit test

Reason

Not consistent with the findings of the Draft 2036 Plan which recommends that the St Leonards South Planning Proposal be referred to the Independent Planning Commission for review. Further, Council’s Planning Proposal and its supporting documents already responds to a change in circumstances.

 

b)      It fails the site-specific merit test

Reason

The proponent’s Planning Proposal does not consider the potential impacts (i.e. relocating the east-west connection) it will have on the proposed future uses of Areas 18 & 19. It will also significantly disadvantage the owners of properties in Park Road. 

c)      Council’s legal advice confirms that Planning Proposal 25 has the status of a ‘proposed instrument’ and has been the subject of public consultation under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act. The proponent also uses Council’s Planning Proposal as justification yet fails to comply with Planning Proposal 25.

d)      The proposed relocation of the 6m wide east-west connection in the East Quarter is not appropriate.

Reason

The original location of Council’s 6m wide east-west pedestrian pathway is intended to provide a contiguous straight-line pedestrian link and a safe, legible and coherent east-west corridor from Newlands Park to Canberra Avenue and Berry Road.

The bonus FSR and Height is an incentive for Areas 18-20 & 22 to provide site amalgamation and provide the 6m wide east-west pedestrian link in that location. The applicant seeks the bonuses without seeking to satisfy the intent.

e)      In particular, Planning Proposal 35 is inconsistent with the following objectives of Planning Proposal 25:

i.        Amalgamation Patterns

Reason

These were designed and based on achieving specific urban design & planning outcomes while the proposed variations are designed to suit the proponent’s landholdings.

ii.       Proposes to use a site protected from development (i.e. proposed new road between Park and Berry Roads) in order to achieve its development potential in the West Quarter.

iii.      Green Spines

Reason

These are to be 24m wide, but are 18m wide in the West Quarter.  The 24m width is to facilitate the creation of integrated “communal” open space with extensive (50+%) deep soil zones, consistent throughout the precinct.  The resultant Green Spines in the West Quarter are inadequate.

iv.      Landscape Master Plan

Reason

The intent of the Landscape Master Plan is to ensure a consistently high level of landscaping is provided throughout the precinct. While the proponent does provide some elements the missing elements (a continuous north-south and east-west link, children’s play areas, adequate formal seating, BBQ/shelter area and Kickabout lawn) are essential to the vision of a communal open space that welcomes users of all ages and abilities.

v.       Bonus Heights and Floor Space Ratios

          Reason

The intent of Council’s site-specific incentive heights and FSRs is to prevent development in areas identified for public parks, communal open spaces (Green Spines), walkways and roads and provide bonus heights and FSRs in return for identified outcomes. Most of the proponent’s proposed changes are not consistent with overall amenity outcomes.

f)       All other matters raised in the proponent’s Planning Proposal are relatively minor in nature and can be addressed at the Development Application stage. However, Council makes the following comments:

i.        Proposed parking basements are inconsistent with Council’s Draft Development Control Plan which requires deep soil as a minimum of 50% of the Green Spine.  As proposed they intrude into deep soil and Green Spine areas, particularly in the East Quarter.

2.       Council accepts and endorses the additional reasons of the Lane Cove Planning Panel for rejection of Planning Proposal 35 being:-

a)      The Panel has assessed both Planning Proposals, both on their individual merits and against the provisions of the Council’s Planning Proposal 25 which, under the Act, is required to be taken into account;

b)      Planning Proposal 25 is at an advanced stage and should be given appropriate weight;

c)      That the Panel accepts and understands that the proponents of these Planning Proposals have had difficulty in amalgamating all the required lots to achieve the proposed amalgamated patterns;

d)      Nevertheless, Planning Proposal 25 should be allowed to run its course and these Planning Proposals 34 and 35 do not conform with such, in a number of respects, as identified in the assessment reports;

e)      The submissions of the residents go to the acceptability of Planning Proposal 25 rather than to these individual Planning Proposals; and 

f)       The Panel supports the findings contained in the assessment reports in each case and endorses the reasons for the recommendations in those reports.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 


 

 

Draft Code of Meeting Practice Post Consultation Report

77

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Strassberg and Brent that the amended Draft Code of Meeting Practice be adopted subject to the following further amendments:-

1.    Amend clause 4.2 to read:

4.2       Public forums are to be chaired by the Chairperson of the meeting.

2.    Insert new clause 4.3:

4.3       Public Forums shall be limited to two (2) hours’ duration;

3.    Amend clause 4.4 (previously draft clause 4.3) to:

4.4      To speak at a public forum, a person wishing to address the council during a public forum must register their details with Council by 5:00pm on the day of the Council meeting at which the individual is speaking. This information includes:-

a.         Identification of the matter on which the person wishes to speak; and

b.         The speakers name and address; and

c.         Relevant contact information (email and phone number) to allow Council to follow up with speaker should this be required;

4.    Reorder and amend clauses 4.5  to 4.9 (previously draft clauses 4.4 to 4.8) as follows:-

4.5       Speakers at the Public Forum will be invited by the Chairperson, in order of registration, to address the Council.

4.6       Speakers who have not registered to speak at the public forum may be invited to address Council by the Chairperson after the registered speakers have addressed Council.

4.7       A person may speak on any number of items of business on the agenda of the council meeting or on any other topic.

4.8       A representative acting on behalf of others, including legal representatives and consultants, are not to be permitted to speak at a public forum unless they identify their status as a representative when applying to speak at the public forum.

4.9       Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of three (3) minutes to address the Council. This time is to be strictly enforced by the Chairperson.

5.    Amend clause 4.10 (previously draft clause 4.9) as follows:-

4.10     Speakers at the public forum are to register with the Council any visual or audio material to be presented to the Council at the public forum in support of their address within their timeframe allocated in 4.9, and to identify any equipment needs by 12 noon on the day of the council meeting at which the individual is speaking. The General Manager or their delegate may refuse to allow such material to be presented.

6.    Amend clause 4.13 and 4.14 (previously draft clauses 4.12 and 4.13) as follows to clarify that speakers’ questions cannot be answered during the forum:-

4.13     If a speaker at a public forum poses a question to the Council, Councillors or Council staff, the question is not required to be answered during the public forum.

4.14     The General Manager may, with the concurrence of the Chairperson, address the Council during a public forum to clarify an issue.

7.    Delete previous draft clause 4.14;

8.    Delete draft clauses 4.18; and

9.    Renumber all clauses accordingly and amend any references to clauses in Section 4 of the Code as required.

 

Councillor Bennison left the meeting at 8:34pm.

Councillor Bennison returned to the meeting at 8:36pm.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn and Strassberg (Total 5).

Against the Motion were Councillors Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 3).

 

Draft Code of Conduct Post Consultation Report

78

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brent and Brooks-Horn that:-

1.   Council adopt the Draft Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW and associated Procedures for the Administration of the Code based on the Model Code prescribed by the Local Government (General) Regulation on 14 December 2018; and

2.   Training in the new Code of Conduct be provided for all staff, Councillors, committee members, volunteers and relevant contractors.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Financial Assistance Grants to Community Groups 2019/2020

 

Procedural Motion

79

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Palmer and Vissel that the Financial Assistance Grants in relation to and Sydney Community Services, Longueville Sporting Club and Centrehouse Inc be dealt with ad seriatim prior to the consideration of the remaining Financial Assistance Grants and subsequent parts of the Recommendation.

 

Councillor Brooks-Horn left the meeting at 8:46pm.

80

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Brent that Council:-

1.      Allocate a Financial Assistance Grant of $254,410 to Sydney Community Services

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 7).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

Absent was Councillor Brooks-Horn (Total 1).

 

Councillor Brooks-Horn returned to the meeting at 8:48pm.

Councillor Bennison left the meeting at 8:48pm.

81

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brooks-Horn and Brent that Council:-

2.       Allocate a Financial Assistance Grant of $4,033 to Longueville Sporting Club (Standard Rates and Contributions).      

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 7).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

Absent was Councillor Bennison (Total 1).

 

 

Councillor Bennison returned to the meeting at 8:49pm.

Councillors Brent and Strassberg left the meeting at 8:49pm.

82

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brooks-Horn and Vissel that Council:-

3.      Allocate Financial Assistance Grants to Centrehouse Inc of:-

·      Centrehouse Inc.

$63,875

·      Centrehouse Inc. – Lloyd Rees Memorial Youth Art Award        

$9,500

·      Centrehouse Inc. – Arts and Mental Health

$8,000

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brooks-Horn, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 6).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

Absent were Councillors Brent and Strassberg (Total 2).

 

Councillors Brent and Strassberg returned to the meeting at 8:50pm.

83

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Zbik

4.       Council allocate the following Financial Assistance Grants to Community Groups for 2019-20:-

·      Cameraygal School of Performing Arts (LC Theatre Co)

$5,000

·      Lane Cove Art Society

$500

·      Lane Cove Choristers

$2,000

·      Lane Cove Concert Band

$1,250

·      Lane Cove Music

$800

·      Lane Cove Music and Cultural Association

$1,000

·      Lane Cove Theatre Company

$10,000

·      Lane Cove Youth Orchestra

$4,000

·      Sydney Eisteddfod

$1,100

·      StreetWork Incorporated

$4,000

·      Taldumande Youth Services

$4,000

·      Early Education (EarlyED) Inc.       

$2,200

·      Keystrokes Choir

$1,000

·      The Shepherd Centre                     

$1,000

·      Lane Cove Community Men's Shed

$5,000

·      Lane Cove Swimming Club

$5,000

·      The Meeting House

$35,000

·      North Shore Rowing Club

$11,798

Proposed Standard Rates and Contributions: 2019 / 2020

·      Anzac Ceremony

$1,500

·      Lane Cove Bowling and Recreation Club

$7,025

·      Pottery Gardens Aged Homes

$13,350

·      Birrahlee Kindergarten

$10,196

·      Lane Cove Art Award         

$11,600

7.    Give Public Notice of the proposed Financial Assistance Grants to Community Groups in accordance with the consultation strategy outlined in this report, and subject to no objections being received Council grant the funding.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Lane Cove 2019 Bike Plan

84

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Zbik and Bennison that:-

1.         Council adopt the Draft 2019 Bicycle Plan for the purpose of public exhibition;

2.         Council undertake community consultation for a period of six (6) weeks as per the consultation strategy outlined in the report; and

3.         Following public exhibition, the Draft 2019 Bicycle Plan together with a report on any submissions received, be considered at a subsequent Council meeting.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Burns Bay Road / Penrose Street Pinch Point

85

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Zbik and Vissel that Council:-

1.       Write to RMS requesting the allocation of funding for the upgrade of the Burns Bay Road / Penrose Street intersection under the NSW Government’s Pinch Point Program; and

2.       Write to the local member, The Hon. Anthony Roberts MP, Member for Lane Cove, requesting his support.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Matter Arising

PENROSE STREET AND BURNS BAY ROAD INTERSECTION ALTERATIONS

86

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Zbik and Strassberg that any proposed alterations to the intersection at Penrose Street and Burns Bay Road factor in improvements to safe crossing for cyclists and pedestrians. 

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Matter Arising

request for Expansion of rms pinch point program

87

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Zbik and Vissel that Council submit the following motion to Local Government NSW for the Local Government Conference in October 2019 “That LGNSW advocate to the NSW State Government to expand the Roads and Maritime Service Pinch Point program to extend to intersections and identified pinch points that cross both State roads and Regional roads.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

 

 

Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Determination for Councillor Fees

88

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Vissel that the following annual fees be paid to the Mayor and Councillors for 2019/20:-

·    Councillors $20,280; and

·    Mayor $44,230 (in addition to the Councillors fee).

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

3rd Quarter Review of the 2018-19 Delivery Program and Operational Plan

89

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Brent that the 3rd Quarter Review of the 2018-19 Delivery Program and Operational Plan be received and noted.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Greenwich Library - Results of Opening Hours Survey

90

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Palmer and Brooks-Horn that consideration of the matter be deferred to the June Councillor Workshop with a view to standardising opening hours.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 


3rd Quarter Review 2018 - 19 Budget

91

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Vissel and Bennison that the 2018 – 2019 Budget be varied as follows:-

 

Original Budget

000’s


1st Quarter Adjustments

000,s

 

2nd Quarter Adjustments 000,s

 

3rd Quarter Adjustments

000,s

 

Revised Budget

000,s

Expenditure

$44,180

$124

$66

$105

$44,475

Income

$96,762

$142

$100

$130

$97,134

Surplus / (Deficit)

$52,582

$18

$34

$25

$62,659

Surplus / (Deficit) before Capital Grants / Contributions

$31,063

$18

$34

 

$25

 

$31,140

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 


 

 

Local Planning Panel Delegation to Conduct Appeal Matters

92

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Strassberg that:-

1.       The General Manager seek from the Local Planning Panel a delegation to the General Manager to respond to all Appeals as they see fit, and keep them advised of the appeals process; and

2.       Subject to the Local Planning Panel granting the delegation, the General Manager be authorised to accept the delegation.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

1 Sirius Road, Lane Cove West

93

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Bennison and Brooks-Horn that Council make a submission to the Minister detailing the concerns and Council’s suggestions outlined in the report to minimise the likely environmental impacts of the current design to strike a better balance between economic benefits and adverse environmental impacts, including the following items:-

  • Coastal SEPP; and
  • Location of the high voltage connection to the site.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

Officer Reports for Information

 

Council Snapshot

94

RESOLVED on the motion of Councillors Brooks-Horn and Brent that the report be received and noted.

 

For the Motion were Councillors Palmer, Bennison, Brent, Brooks-Horn, Strassberg, Vissel, Zbik and Morris (Total 8).

Against the Motion was Nil (Total 0).

 

CLOSE

 

The meeting closed at 9:13pm.

 

Confirmed at the Ordinary Council Meeting of Monday, 17 June 2019, at which meeting the signature herein is subscribed.

 

 

MAYOR

 

 

********* END OF MINUTES *********