Administrative Centre

30 Frances St

Randwick 2031

Tel: 02 9399 0999

Fax 02 9319 1510

DX 4121 Maroubra Junction

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

INCORPORATED

AS A MUNICIPALITY

22 FEBRUARY 1859

PROCLAIMED AS

A CITY JULY 1990

 

 

17 July 2007

 

 

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT AN ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANDWICK WILL BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, TOWN HALL, 90 AVOCA STREET, RANDWICK ON TUESDAY, 24TH JULY 2007 AT 6:00 PM

 

1           Prayer & acknowledgement of local indigenous people

 

Prayer

“Almighty God,

We humbly beseech you to bestow your blessings upon this Council and to direct and prosper our deliberations to the advancement of your glory and the true welfare of the people of the City of Randwick and Australia.

Amen”

 

Acknowledgement of local indigenous people

“I would like to acknowledge that we are here today on the land of the Bidjigal people of the Dharwahal Nation. The Bidjigal people are the traditional owners and custodians of this land and form part of the wider Aboriginal nations of the Sydney area. On behalf of Randwick City Council I would also like to acknowledge and pay my respects to the Elders both past and present.”

 

2           Apologies/Granting of leave of absences

 

3           Confirmation of the Minutes

 

CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY 26TH JUNE, 2007.

 

4           Declaration of Pecuniary & Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

5           Addressing of Council by Members of the Public

 

6           Mayoral Minutes

 

6.1                      

MAYOR'S MINUTE 61/2007 - MAYOR'S FUTURE CHAMPIONS FUND - REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE - MS NICOLE SOO.

2

6.2                      

MAYOR'S MINUTE 62/2007 - WAIVING OF FEES - ST PAULS ANGLICAN CHURCH COOGEE - CAROLS BY THE SEA.

3

6.3                      

MAYOR'S MINUTE 63/2007 - MAYOR'S FUTURE CHAMPIONS FUND - REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE - MS EMILY WATSFORD.

5

6.4                      

MAYOR'S MINUTE 64/2007 - MY DRESS, MY IMAGE, MY CHOICE-MUSLIM WOMEN EVENT.

6

 

Additional Mayoral minutes (if any) will be issued and listed in a supplementary agenda.

 

7           Urgent Business

 

8           Director City Planning Reports

 

8.1                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 45/2007 - 221-227 ANZAC PARADE, KENSINGTON.

8

8.2                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 46/2007 - 3 WINCHESTER ROAD, CLOVELLY.

16

8.3                      

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 47/2007 - 2007 SENIORS CHRISTMAS FUNCTIONS.

32

8.4

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING REPORT 48/2007 – 7 CLYDE STREET, RANDWICK.

34

 

9           General Manager's Reports

 

9.1                      

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 19/2007 - MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON TRANSPORT ISSUES WITH UNSW.

42

9.2                      

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 20/2007 - SSROC MEMBERSHIP FEES.

54

9.3                      

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 21/2007 - AFFIXING OF THE COUNCIL SEAL.

56

9.4                      

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 22/2007 - RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLAN 2007.

58

 

10         Director City Services' Reports

 

10.1                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 39/2007 - CONCEPT DESIGN FOR THE UPGRADE OF MAHON POOL FACILITIES.

60

10.2                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 40/2007 - POSSIBLE EXEMPTION FROM APPLICATION FEES OF LOW IMPACT FOR MINIMUM BUDGET FILMS.

65

10.3                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 41/2007 -  FEASIBILITY INTO THE INSTALLATION OF CCTV CAMERAS AT COOGEE AND OTHER LOCATIONS

68

10.4                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 42/2007 - CLOVELLY BEACH CARPARK - COASTAL WALKWAY.

82

10.5                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 43/2007 - FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION TO SHADE STRUCTURE FOR SOS PRESCHOOL IN BUNDOCK STREET, RANDWICK.

90

10.6                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 44/2007 - COUNCIL-OWNED FICUS 'HILLII' (HILL'S WEEPING FIG) GROWING OUTSIDE 8-10 ABBOTT STREET, COOGEE.

92

10.7                      

DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES' REPORT 45/2007 - RECYCLING OF PAPER WASTE GENERATED THROUGH LOCAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

101

 

11         Director Governance & Financial Services' Reports

 

11.1                      

DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES' REPORT 43/2007 - REQUEST FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT & SHIRES ASSOCIATIONS OF NSW FOR ASSISTANCE WITH LEGAL COSTS.

104

11.2                      

DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES' REPORT 44/2007 -     ADHERANCE TO COUNCIL'S CODE OF MEETING PRACTICE.

108

 

12         Petitions

 

 

 

 

13         Motions Pursuant to Notice

 

13.1                      

Notice of Rescission Motion by the Mayor, Councillors Andrews, Bastic, Sullivan and White – Ordinary Council Meeting, Tuesday 26th June, 2007 – Item 8.1 - Director City Planning Report 33/2007 – 1160-1198R Anzac Parade, Malabar (Pioneer Park).

112

13.2                      

Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Andrews, Bastic and Sullivan – Health, Building & Planning Committee Meeting, Tuesday 10th July, 2007 – Item 6.5 – Development Application Report – 19 Pacific Street, Clovelly.

122

13.3

Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Andrews, Bastic and Sullivan – Health, Building & Planning Committee Meeting, Tuesday 10th July, 2007 – Procedural Motion.

122

13.4

Motion By Councillor Belleli – Lighting for South Maroubra Village Green. 

123

13.5

Motion By Councillor Matson – Yarra Bay Sporting Field Option.

123

13.6

Motion By Councillor Matson – Need to Move HCB Waste from Orica to a Destruction Site.

123

 

14         Confidential Items (Closed Session)

 

15         Notices of Rescission Motions

 

 

 

 

…………………………………………….

GENERAL MANAGER


 

MAYOR'S MINUTE 61/2007

 

 

 

SUBJECT:

MAYOR'S FUTURE CHAMPIONS FUND - REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE - MS NICOLE SOO

 

 

DATE:

6 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07346

 

 

REPORT BY:            MAYOR   

 

 

Correspondence has been received from Ms Nicole Soo advising Council that she has been selected to participate in a Rotary Exchange Program in Germany for twelve months, commencing in January 2008. Council has been asked to assist financially to cover the costs associated with participating in this Program.

 

ISSUES:

 

The costs associated with allowing Nicole to participate in this Rotary Exchange Program are considerable and, as she is a resident of Randwick City, I believe support from Council is appropriate.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

A donation under the Mayor’s Future Champions Fund of $250.00 has been allowed for in the 2007/08 budget.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The Mayor’s Future Champions Fund was established in February 2006 to provide assistance to encourage sporting and academic excellence. This request meets the requirements to qualify for financial assistance under the terms of the fund.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council donate $250.00 to help cover the costs involved in allowing Ms Nicole Soo to participate in a Rotary Exchange Program in Germany for twelve months, such funds to come from the Mayor’s Future Champions Fund.

 

ATTACHMENTS:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

PAUL TRACEY

 

MAYOR

 

 

 

 

MAYOR'S MINUTE 62/2007

 

 

 

SUBJECT:

WAIVING OF FEES - ST PAULS ANGLICAN CHURCH COOGEE - CAROLS BY THE SEA

 

 

DATE:

10 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07843

 

 

REPORT BY:            MAYOR   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

A letter has been received from Mr Jack Kasses, Parish Council Secretary, St Paul’s Anglican Church,  South Coogee, advising that the church is currently planning its annual major community event of  “Carols by the Sea” to be held on Saturday, 8 December, 2007 at Grant Reserve.

 

ISSUES:

 

Mr Kasses expresses the Church’s appreciation of the support given by Council towards this major community event and seeks the waiving of fees to financially meet the high costs of staging such an event.

 

Supply and remove additional bins (based on 8 by 240L bins)      $   463.20

Connection to power                                                           $     86.80

Administration Fee                                                              $   450.00

Temporary Food Stall                                                 $     95.00

                                                          TOTAL:                        $1,095.00

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Should Council accept the report recommendation, the financial implication to Council is $1,095.00 and this amount will be funded from the Contingency Fund 2007/08.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

It is considered that St Paul’s Anglican Church is a non-profit organisation and to assist with this event, costs be allocated to cover the associated fees.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

a)       Council vote $1,095.00 to cover the fees associated with the event and funds be allocated from the 2007/2008 Contingency Fund;

 

b)       the event organiser undertake to appropriately and prominently acknowledge and promote Council’s contribution prior to and during the event; and

 

c)       the Mayor or his representative shall be given the opportunity to address the event on behalf of Council.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

PAUL TRACEY

 

MAYOR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

MAYOR'S MINUTE 63/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

MAYOR'S FUTURE CHAMPIONS FUND - REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE - MS EMILY WATSFORD

 

 

DATE:

4 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07396

 

 

REPORT BY:            MAYOR  

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Correspondence has been received from Ms Emily Watsford advising Council that she has been selected to represent Australia in the World Aerobics Championships being held in Belgrade, Serbia in October 2007. Council has been asked to assist financially to cover the costs associated with attending this competition.

 

ISSUES:

 

The costs associated with allowing Emily to attend this international competition are considerable and, as she is a resident of Randwick City, I believe support from Council is appropriate.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

A donation under the Mayor’s Future Champions Fund of $250.00 has been allowed for in the 2007/08 budget.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The Mayor’s Future Champions Fund was established in February 2006 to provide assistance to encourage sporting and academic excellence. This request meets the requirements to qualify for financial assistance under the terms of the fund.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council donate $250.00 to help cover the costs involved in allowing Emily Watsford to represent Australia at the World Aerobics Championships being held in Belgrade, Serbia in October 2007, such funds to come from the Mayor’s Future Champions Fund.

 

ATTACHMENTS:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

PAUL TRACEY

 

MAYOR

 

 

 

 

 

MAYOR'S MINUTE 64/2007

 

 

 

SUBJECT:

MY DRESS, MY IMAGE, MY CHOICE-MUSLIM WOMEN EVENT

 

 

DATE:

12 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07079

 

 

REPORT BY:            MAYOR   

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

I have been informed that Randwick Town Hall has been booked for a women only event to promote better understanding of Muslim women’s traditional dress code.  Similar events have been held over the last seven years in Victoria and this event is under the auspice of the Islamic Council of Victoria with funding from the Federal Department of Immigration and Citizenship. The free event which is to be held in Sydney for the first time, is scheduled to be held in the Randwick Town Hall on Friday 17 August 2007 from 11am to 2.30pm.  A similar event will be held in Castle Hill on 18 August.

 

The event gives women from all backgrounds the opportunity to experience the lives of Australian Muslim women first hand and demystifies aspects of Islam, especially in regard to women’s dress.

 

ISSUES:

 

In 2006 Council in conjunction with the Columban Mission held a successful Christian-Muslim Peace Forum to foster community harmony through understanding and respect for the teachings of the two religions. The “My Dress, My Image, My Choice” women’s event, complements Council’s continuing efforts to promote a culturally diverse and harmonious community. The event is being held independently of Council and will include a fashion parade, luncheon and an opportunity to meet Muslim women who are passionate about making a difference in today’s world. I understand that Randwick Town Hall was chosen for the event as it has good public transport access, is close to the University of NSW and Randwick has an increasing Muslim population especially Indonesian and Bangladeshi communities.

 

Because of the proximity of the function to Council’s Administration Building, it is hoped that some of Council’s female staff may also be able to attend the function.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

The organisers have not requested any contribution towards this event. The Town Hall hire has been provided at the not–for-profit community agency rate, which provides 20% discount on the standard hire fee for use of the Town Hall. There are no other costs associated with this event, which is funded by a grant to the Islamic Council of Victoria from the Australian Government. 

 

 

 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

This initiative promotes community harmony and reflects Council’s commitment to its culturally diverse community. The event, whilst not directly under the aegis of Council, should be supported and the local community encouraged to attend it, to foster a more harmonious and respectful Australian society.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council support the My Dress, My Image My choice Muslim Women event on 17 August 2007 in the Randwick Town Hall as an important community harmony initiative.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

PAUL TRACEY

 

MAYOR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Director, City Planning Report 45/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

221-227 Anzac Parade, Kensington

 

 

DATE:

13 July, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/720/2002/A & PROP009913

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Attached is a Development Assessment Report for Section 96 – Modification application to amend conditions Nos 55, 61 and 74 which relate to external drainage works at No. 221-227 Anzac Parade, Kensington.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the application in accordance with the recommendations contained in the attached report.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Development Application Report dated 12 July 2007.

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

EMMA FITZROY

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

A/COORDIANTOR DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMETN

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

12 July, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/720/2002/A & PROP009913 720/2002 ‘A’

 

PROPOSAL:

 Section 96 (1A) application to amend conditions 55, 61, and 74  which relate to external drainage works

 

 

PROPERTY:

 221-227 Anzac Parade, Kensington

WARD:

 West Ward

APPLICANT:

 Lipman Pty Ltd

OWNER:

University Of NSW Union

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application is for a Section 96(1A) modification to development consent 720/2002 which is for construction of an educational building at UNSW.

 

The subject application seeks to amend conditions 55(g), 61 and 74 which relate to external drainage works.

 

The application is referred to Council for determination as the original application (DA 710/2002) was determined by Council at an Extraordinary Council Meeting on 17 December 2002.

 

The proposed amendments to conditions 55 and 74 will allow the university to undertake an alternative drainage solution for diverting stormwater flows around the site. Council’s engineers support the alternative drainage solution and it is recommended that conditions 55 and 74 be amended to allow the alternative drainage strategy to be adopted.

 

Condition 61 currently requires the UNSW to meet all costs associated with the stormwater diversion works. The subject S96 application seeks to amend this condition to allow for the university to pay only 10% of the cost of the works.

 

Given that the external drainage works are required as a direct result of the development, it is considered inappropriate for Council to fund 90% of the works. However, given that the works will benefit the community, it is recommended that the Council agree to pay 50% of the total construction cost (up to a maximum of $100,000), for the external drainage works.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The section 96 application seeks consent to modify conditions 55 (g), 61, and 74 of development consent.

 

Condition 55 and 74

 

Conditions 55 (g) and 74 currently state:

 

55.    The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to:

g)       Carry out drainage construction works in Anzac Parade and Barker Street generally in accordance with Option 4 as presented in the report titled “UNSW Unisearch House- Hydraulic Calculations of Flood Levels”, including restoration of footpaths, reconstruction/construction of kerb and gutter and any associated roadworks.

 

74.    Stormwater from the site shall be directed to the stormwater pipeline required to be constructed in Anzac Parade (construction of this pipeline being a condition of this development consent with the pipeline/s being referred to in Option 4 of the document – “UNSW Unisearch House Hydraulic Calculations of Flood Levels” by ARUP).

 

Note that a reflux valve should be constructed within the outlet pipe from the silt arrester pit (and located within the development site so that it can be serviced by the owner/manager of the development).

 

The above conditions require the applicant to construct a new pipeline in accordance with Option 4 of the document – “UNSW Unisearch House Hydraulic Calculations of Flood Levels” by ARUP. The new pipeline was to be routed south along Anzac Parade (from the existing low point in front of the site) and then west down Barker Street to a surcharge pit.

 

The subject 96 application seeks to modify the consent to allow for adoption of an alternative drainage strategy that utilises an existing under-utilised pipeline within the UNSW. Specifically, the application seeks to amend condition 55 (g) and 74 to reference ARUP’s amended external drainage design titled ‘L5 Building – Anzac Parade Stormwater’ dated 28/7/05. The applicant proposes the following wording:

 

55.       g) The university or Council (as agreed) manage the implementation of the drainage construction works in Anzac Parade in accordance with Arups design titled ‘L5 Building – Anzac Parade Stormwater’ dated 28/07/05, comprising drawings C001 to C00-4 inclusive. The works is to include restoration of footpaths, reconstruction/construction of kerb and guttering and associated roadworks.

 

74.       Stormwater from the site shall be directed to the new stormwater pipeline crossing Anzac Parade and feeding into the University’s pipeline in accordance with Arups design titled ‘L5 Building – Anzac Parade Stormwater’ dated 28/07/05 and approved by RCC. Completion of this work and satisfying this condition shall include all necessary easements and agreements on use of the UNSW pipeline.

 

Condition 61

 

The application also seeks to modify Condition 61 which currently states:

 

61.       The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to carry out all works associated with the new Council stormwater pipeline/s.

 

The applicant seeks to amend this condition to allow for the university to pay only 10% of the cost of the stormwater diversion construction works. The applicant proposes the following wording:

 

61.       The applicant will meet the full cost of the drainage design and documentation for the proposal and 10% of the cost for Council or Council’s approved contractor to carry out all works associated with the new Council stormwater pipelines.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located in the western side of Anzac parade within the block bounded by Barker Street, Day Avenue and Houston Lane.

 

There is a low point in Anzac Parade adjacent to the site and, prior to construction of the new educational building; an overland flow path existed through the site to Houston Lane.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

Development Consent 720/2002 granted approval for construction of a new educational facility (known as the L5 Building) at the subject site.

 

A flood study (by ARUP dated November 2002) was submitted in conjunction with this development application. The flood study determined that the proposed works would block off an existing flow path which allowed water from Anzac Parade to be directed though to Houston Lane.

 

In order to allow the development to proceed without increasing the flood levels in Anzac Parade, the flood study determined that compensatory drainage works would need to be undertaken to divert the flows around the development site. The flood study provided four drainage options for Council’s consideration.

 

The original application was conditioned in accordance with option 4 of the flood study from ARUP (which involved construction of a new pipeline from the pit in front of the development site to a new surcharge pit in Barker Street). Condition 61 requires the applicant to meet the full cost for these works to be undertaken.

 

Subsequent to development consent being granted, the UNSW in consultation with Council has developed an alternative cheaper drainage solution which allows water to be diverted into an existing drainage pipeline within the UNSW grounds (on the eastern side of Anzac Parade).

 

The subject 96 application seeks to modify the consent to allow for adoption of the alternative drainage strategy as well as modification of Condition 61 to allow for the university to pay only 10% of the cost of the stormwater diversion works.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The proposed modifications relate to amending the issued conditions of consent only and will not impact adjoining properties. Consequently, the proposal does not require public notification.

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

Council’s Drainage Engineer has reviewed the alternative drainage design and advised that no objections are raised to conditions 55 and 74 being amended to reflect the new design.

 

Council’s Director of City Services has advised that whilst the alternative drainage strategy is supported, it is considered inappropriate for Council to fund 90% of the works as they are required as a direct result of the development. However, given that the works will benefit the community, it was recommended that the Council agree to pay 50% of the total construction cost (up to a maximum of $100,000), for the external drainage works.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The site is zoned 5 Special Uses under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the use of the site for education purposes is permissible with Council’s consent.

 

8.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

Under the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if “it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all) under this section”.

 

The proposal is to amend the issued conditions of consent only and will not result in a change to the nature of the original application.

 

Assessment of Issues

 

Construction of the external stormwater drainage works as detailed in the amended design by ARUP titled ‘L5 Building – Anzac Parade Stormwater’ dated 28/07/05 will benefit the community by reducing the amount of flooding in Anzac Parade. Consequently, it is considered reasonable for Council to contribute towards the cost of the works.

 

However, given that the external drainage works are required as a direct result of the subject development, it is considered inappropriate for Council to fund 90% of the works as proposed by UNSW in the Section 96 application. This matter was discussed with UNSW and it was agreed that a more appropriate split would be for both the University and Council to contribute 50% of the total construction cost, with the UNSW meeting all design costs, project managing the works and accepting the risk of contingencies and variations.

 

To facilitate implementation of the alternative drainage solution and the above sharing of construction costs, conditions 61 and 74 of development consent should be amended as detailed below:

 

61.    The external drainage works detailed in the plans numbered 83951, drawings C001-C004, Issue 01, dated 28/07/05 by ARUP and the accompanying UNSW L5 Building – Stormwater Drainage Specification by ARUP dated September 2004 shall be constructed by the applicant in general accordance with the plans prior to both the issue of a final occupation certificate and release of the bonds held in accordance with condition 62 of this consent. This includes restoration of footpaths, reconstruction/construction of kerb and gutter and any associated road works.

 

Council will contribute 50% of the total construction cost for these external drainage works (up to a maximum of $100,000) provided that:

a.  UNSW meet all design costs;

b.  UNSW obtain all relevant approvals from the RTA prior to the commencement of works in the road reserve.

c.  UNSW project manage the construction works;

d.  UNSW accept the risk of contingencies and variations during construction; and

e.  The works are completed to the satisfaction of Council and the RTA.

 

74.    Stormwater from the site shall be directed to the new stormwater pipeline crossing Anzac Parade and feeding into the University’s pipeline in accordance with ARUP's design titled ‘L5 Building – Anzac Parade Stormwater’ dated 28/07/05. Completion of this work and satisfying this condition shall include all necessary easements and agreements on use of the UNSW pipeline.

 

Note that a reflux valve shall be constructed within the outlet pipe from the silt arrester pit (and located within the development site so that it can be serviced by the owner/manager of the development).

 

Further, condition 55 (g) is no longer appropriate as is makes reference to the external drainage works being completed by Council or a Council approved contractor. Therefore, condition 55(g) should be deleted.

 

9.    RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:    Excellence in urban design and development.

Direction 4a: Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

10. FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

Council’s contribution towards the cost of the external drainage work is limited to $100,000.

 

11. CONCLUSION

 

The alternative external drainage strategy is supported by Council’s engineers and it is recommended that the conditions of consent be modified to allow for the amended design.

 

It is inappropriate for Council to fund 90% of the external drainage works as they are required as a direct result of the development. However, given that the works will benefit the community, it is recommended that the Council agree to pay 50% of the total construction cost (up to a maximum of $100,000), for the external drainage works.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

THAT Council as the consent authority grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No. DA/599/2005 by amending conditions  55, 61, and 74  which relate to external drainage works for 221-227 Anzac Parade, KENSINGTON in the following manner:

 

A.        Delete Condition No. 55 (g)

 

B.        Amend Condition No. 61 to read:

 

61.    The external drainage works detailed in the plans numbered 83951, drawings C001-C004, Issue 01, dated 28/07/05 by ARUP and the accompanying UNSW L5 Building – Stormwater Drainage Specification by ARUP dated September 2004 shall be constructed by the applicant in general accordance with the plans prior to both the issue of a final occupation certificate and release of the bonds held in accordance with condition 62 of this consent. This includes restoration of footpaths, reconstruction/construction of kerb and gutter and any associated road works.

 

Council will contribute 50% of the total construction cost for these external drainage works (up to a maximum of $100,000) provided that:

a.  UNSW meet all design costs;

b.  UNSW obtain all relevant approvals from the RTA prior to the commencement of works in the road reserve.

c.  UNSW project manage the construction works;

d.  UNSW accept the risk of contingencies and variations during construction; and

e.  The works are completed to the satisfaction of Council and the RTA.

 

C.        Amend Condition No. 74 to read:

 

74.    Stormwater from the site shall be directed to the new stormwater pipeline crossing Anzac Parade and feeding into the University’s pipeline in accordance with ARUP’s design titled ‘L5 Building – Anzac Parade Stormwater’ dated 28/07/05. Completion of this work and satisfying this condition shall include all necessary easements and agreements on use of the UNSW pipeline.

 

Note that a reflux valve shall be constructed within the outlet pipe from the silt arrester pit (and located within the development site so that it can be serviced by the owner/manager of the development).

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

EMMA FITZROY 

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

A/CO-ORDINATOR DEVLOPMENT ASSESSMENT 


 

Director, City Planning Report 46/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

3 Winchester Road, Clovelly

 

 

DATE:

6 July, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/142/2007 & PROP009816

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Attached is a Development Assessment Report for construction of a carport and driveway to the front of one half of a pair of existing semi-detached dwellings, a new deck with pergola to the rear of the existing dwelling.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the development application in accordance with the recommendations contained in the attached report.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Development Application Report dated 6 July 2007

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

MR SACHA KALESS

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

STUDENT ASSESSMENT OFFICER

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

6 July, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/142/2007 & PROP009816

 

PROPOSAL:

 Construction of a carport and driveway to the front of one half of a pair of existing semi-detached dwellings, a new deck with pergola to the rear of the existing dwelling.

PROPERTY:

 3 Winchester Road, Clovelly

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 Peter Baillie

OWNER:

Ms K Moses & Mr M England

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

1.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The application has been referred to the Council meeting for determination at the request of Councillors John Procopiadis, Paul Tracey, Alan White.

 

The application proposes the construction of a carport and driveway to the front of one half of a pair of semi-detached dwellings, and a new deck with pergola to the rear of the dwelling. The existing verandah is proposed to be removed to accommodate the car space and new soft landscaping. The proposed hardstand car space for one vehicle will be constructed of brick pillars with timber detailing and a tiled roof to match the existing dwelling and located abutting the southern side boundary. The existing timber deck is proposed to be replaced by a new timber deck lowered by 200mm and extended from 2.2m deep to 3m with a pergola over the top.

 

No submissions were received in relation to the proposal however it is considered that the proposed hardstand car space will have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the symmetrical pair of semi-detached dwellings. Car parking in the street is predominantly located to the side of dwellings however there is an example of a double hardstand carport located at no. 11 Winchester Road and a front hardstand car space at no. 24 Winchester Road. The existence of these structures does not warrant approval of the carport structure as it is considered to detract from the character and appearance of the pair of semi-detached dwellings.

 

The proposed rear deck with pergola is considered to be acceptable and will not result in any adverse impacts to neighbouring properties including privacy. The application is recommended for approval, subject to the deletion of the carport structure from the plans.

 

2.    THE PROPOSAL

 

The application proposes the construction of a carport and driveway to the front of one half of a pair of existing semi-detached dwellings, and a new deck with pergola to the rear of the dwelling. The existing verandah is proposed to be removed to accommodate the car space and new soft landscaping including the removal of the Acacia tree. The proposed hardstand car space for one vehicle will be constructed of brick pillars with timber detailing and a tiled roof to match the existing dwelling and located abutting the southern side boundary. The existing timber deck is proposed to be replaced by a new timber deck lowered by 200mm and extended from 2.2m deep to 3m with a pergola over the top.

 

3.    THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Winchester Road between Boundary Street and Burnie Street in Clovelly and is presently occupied by one half of a pair of existing two storey semi-detached dwellings. The site has a frontage width of 6.16m, a side boundary depth of approx. 40.6m and has an overall site area of 248.8m².  Neighbouring the property to the north is the other half of the pair of semi-detached dwellings, to the south is one half of a pair of single storey semi-detached dwellings and to the rear is one half of a pair of semi-detached dwellings. The surrounding area is residential in character and consists of a mixture of single and two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings and residential flat buildings.

 

Photo 1: The existing pair of semi-detached dwellings.

 

4.    SITE HISTORY

 

a.    APPLICATION HISTORY

There is no relevant history applicable to this development.

 

5.    COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The owners of the adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.  As a result of this notification, no submissions were received.

 

6.    TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

The application has been referred to the relevant technical officers, including where necessary external bodies and the following comments have been provided:-

 

6.1 ENGINEERING

 

An application has been received for alterations and additions at the above site.

 

This report is based on the following plans and documentation:

  Sheets 1 & 2 by P Baillie dated 6/2/07.

 

Landscape Comments

There is a False Acacia tree located in the front yard of the site which would require removal. Permission is granted for its removal.

 

 

 

6.2   BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA

 

Under the Building Code of Australia, the classification of the building is:-

Dwelling House – Class 1a,

Non-habitable building/structure – Class 10a/10b.

 

7.    RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The site is zoned Residential 2A under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998 and the proposal is permissible with Council's consent.

 

The proposal has been assessed in relation to compliance with the following controls:-

-        Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998;

-          Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended;

-        Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies, Parking;

-        Building Code of Australia.

 

8.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

8.1  DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS

 

a. Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

The DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies states that a proposal is deemed to satisfy the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP if it complies with the corresponding preferred solutions. Therefore, the tables below assess the proposal against the preferred solutions, and where non-compliance results, assessment is made against the relevant objectives and performance requirements. 

Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

40% of the total site area is provided as landscaped area.

Approx. 37% of the site is landscaped area; Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

A minimum of 25m² of useable private open space is to be provided.

The rear yard has an area of approx. 57m²; Complies.

S1

Each dwelling must provide an area of private open space capable of containing a rectangle of minimum dimensions of 3m x 4m with minor changes in level.

The above area has dimensions of approx. 9.5m x 6m; Complies.

S1

Private open space in the front yard area is located behind the building line.

The above area is located in the rear yard; Complies.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

Approx. 31% of the site is permeable; Complies.

Landscaping to the subject site is considered to be acceptable although the proposal including the carport would result in a minimal non-compliance with the total landscaping calculation. As part of the construction of the proposed driveway and carport structure the approval from the Development Engineers has been granted for the removal of the Acacia tree in the front yard of the subject site. The deletion of the front carport structure by condition will retain a significant amount of landscaping and enhance the visual quality and setting of the existing semi-detached dwellings.

 

Height, Form & Materials

 

The proposed rear deck with pergola over is not considered to be excessive in bulk and scale and is consistent with the existing character and appearance of the dwelling and the locality. An existing deck at a higher level is present at the subject site and while the proposed deck will be extended it will also be lowered and will not increase privacy impacts. The proposed deck is located in the rear yard of the semi-detached dwelling and is compatible with the built form character and adopts the appropriate roof form, pitch, and materials and finishes.

 

Building Setbacks

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Front setback is average of adjoining dwellings or 6m.

Not applicable.

S2

No part of the building is closer than 4.5m from rear boundary.

The proposed dwelling is approx. 9.2 metres from the rear boundary; Complies.

S3

Side setbacks to be 900mm for any part of the building at ground level.

The proposed rear deck is setback 1.1m the southern side boundary; Complies. 

S3

Side setbacks to be 1.5m at second floor level.

Not applicable.

S3

Side setbacks to be 3.0m at third floor level.

Not applicable.

 

The proposed rear deck is considered to be acceptable as it fulfils the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP by ensuring that there is adequate access to sunlight, daylight and fresh air to building occupants and neighbours.

Car parking and driveways in Winchester Road are located abutting side boundaries therefore the side setback of the proposed carport is considered to be acceptable.

Visual & Acoustic Privacy

 

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Habitable room windows within 9m of another dwelling’s windows are offset by 45 degrees or have fixed obscure glazing below 1.5m above floor level.

Not applicable.

S1

Direct view into open space of an adjoining dwelling is obscured or screened within 9m and is beyond a 45 degree angle.

The ground floor rear deck will overlook the rear yard of the adjoining property; Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

Windows have sill heights of 1.5m or more or fixed obscure glazing below that height.

Not applicable.

S3

Buildings comply with AS 371 and AS 2107.

Development conditioned to comply with the BCA.

The objective of the DCP is to ensure that new buildings and additions meet the occupant and neighbours requirements for visual and acoustic privacy. Although the rear deck will be extended in depth the floor level of the existing deck will be lowered and is not considered to increase privacy impacts due to the existing level of overlooking between the subject site and neighbouring properties.

 

The other half of the pair of semi-detached dwellings is screened by an existing party wall between the two properties therefore due the lowering of the deck privacy will be increased by the proposal.

 

An existing deck on the other neighbouring property at no. 5 Winchester Road currently overlooks the subject site, and is overlooked by the existing deck on the subject property. The proposal will not increase the potential for overlooking and existing landscaping to the subject site and neighbouring property assist in minimising privacy impacts.

Photo 2: The rear yard of the subject site and the rear yard and deck of the neighbouring property at no. 5 Winchester Road, Clovelly.

 

Garages & Driveways

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Council’s Parking DCP requires 1 space, for dwellings with 2 bedrooms or less, or 2 spaces, for dwellings with 3 bedrooms or more.

The existing dwelling has no on-site car spaces. The application proposes the provision of one (1) on-site car space; Complies.

S1

Car parking spaces have a minimum dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m.

The dimensions of the parking spaces are approx. 5.5m x 2.7m; Complies.

S1

Driveways have minimum width of 3m and are set back at least 1m from the side boundary.

The proposal is setback 0m from the side boundary; Does not comply – see assessment below.

S1

Driveways have a maximum width of 3m at the property boundary.

The proposed driveway is approx. 2.7m at the front property boundary; Does not comply however driveways are to be 3 metres wide.

S1

Driveway gradients should not exceed a maximum of 1 in 8 for the first 5m from street alignment and 1 in 6 thereafter.

Complies.

S1

With respect to garages and carports to rear lanes these should be set back 1m to improve pedestrian visibility.

Not applicable.

S2

Parking and access is provided from the rear of the allotment where possible.

Not applicable.

S2

Garages and carports located behind the building line where parking only available from the front of the site.

The proposed carport is located in front of the building line; Does not comply – see assessment below.

S2

Driveways, car parking spaces and structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment

The proposed carport occupies approx. 51% of the width of the site frontage; Does not comply – see assessment below.

The objectives and performance requirements of the DCP include that car parking and driveways are not visually obtrusive and do not detract from the appearance of the dwelling and the streetscape; and structures are compatible in scale, form, materials and finishes with the associated dwelling.

The proposed carport would have a negative impact on the appearance of the pair of semi-detached dwellings which are highly symmetrical. On-site car parking in Winchester Road is predominantly made up of garages located behind the building line to the side of dwellings therefore car parking in front of the building line would not be consistent with the establishment pattern of development in the area. However it should be noted that there are two instances of car parking in front of the building line. The first instance is a hardstand car space in front of the building line at no. 24 Winchester Road, Clovelly (BA/1372/1985) which was approved in 1985 under a Building Application. The second instance is a double carport to a property at No.11 Winchester Road which had approval granted by the Land and Environment Court for a double carport located in front of one half of a pair of semi-detached dwellings.

 

Photo 3: The double carport structure at no. 11 Winchester Road, Clovelly which was previously approved by the Land and Environment Court.

 

The carport structure at no. 11 Winchester Road is in close proximity to the subject site however its existence does not justify approval of the carport which is considered to have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the semi-detached dwellings.

 

9.    RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 5:  Excellence in urban design.

Direction 5a and associated key action:  Improved design and sustainability across all development.

 

10. FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

11. CONCLUSION

 

The proposal is permissible with consent in the Residential 2A zone and the proposed rear deck is considered to be acceptable for the subject site and will not result in any adverse impacts to neighbouring properties and will not be visible from the streetscape. The proposal in this regard complies with the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies.

 

Contrary to this, the proposed front carport structure is considered to have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the pair of symmetrical semi-detached dwellings and is therefore not considered to be appropriate for the subject site.

 

The proposal will not result in any adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality, subject to the removal of the proposed carport structure from the plans. The application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.     THAT Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No DA/142/2007 for a new deck with pergola to the rear of the existing dwelling at No. 3 Winchester Road, Clovelly subject to the following conditions:

 

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the unnumbered plans dated 6th February 2007 and received by Council on the 23rd February 2007, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

2.       The proposed carport and associated driveway must be deleted from the plans referenced in condition No. 1 of this consent. The plans accompanying the construction certificate application shall be amended accordingly.

 

3.       The external materials, colours and finishes of the rear deck are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing building.

 

4.       There must be no encroachment of the structure/s onto any adjoining premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place, unless permission has been obtained from the owner/s of the adjoining land accordingly.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations:

 

5.       The requirements and provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, must be fully complied with at all times.

 

Failure to comply with these legislative requirements is an offence and may result in the commencement of legal proceedings, issuing of `on-the-spot` penalty infringements or service of a notice and order by Council.

 

6.       All new building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), in accordance with Clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

7.       Prior to the commencement of any building works, a construction certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

A copy of the construction certificate, the approved plans & specifications and development consent conditions must be kept on the site at all times and be made available to the Council officers and all building contractors for assessment.

 

8.       Prior to the commencement of any building works, the person having the benefit of the development consent must:-

 

i)     Appoint a Principal Certifying Authority for the building work; and

 

ii)     Appoint a principal contractor for the building work, or in relation to residential building work, obtain an owner-builder permit in accordance with the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989, and notify the Principal Certifying Authority and Council accordingly in writing; and

                                        

iii)    Unless the person having the benefit of the consent is the principal contractor (i.e. owner-builder), notify the principal contractor of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority; and

 

iv)    Give at least two days notice to the Council, in writing, of the person’s intention to commence building works.

 

         In relation to residential building work, the principal contractor must be the holder of a contractor licence, in accordance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

9.       The building works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority (or another certifying authority if the Principal Certifying Authority agrees), in accordance with sections 109 E (3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 162A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, to monitor compliance with the relevant standards of construction, Council’s development consent and the construction certificate.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must specify the relevant stages of construction to be inspected in accordance with section 81A (2) (b1) (ii) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and a satisfactory inspection must be carried out, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to proceeding to the subsequent stages of construction or finalisation of the works (as applicable).

 

Documentary evidence of the building inspections carried out and details of compliance with Council’s consent is to be maintained by the Principal Certifying Authority.  Details of critical stage inspections carried out and copies of certification relied upon must also be forwarded to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

The principal contractor or owner-builder (as applicable) must ensure that the required critical stage and other inspections, as specified in the Principal Certifying Authority’s “Notice of Critical Stage Inspections”, are carried out to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority and at least 48 hours notice (excluding weekends and public holidays) is to be given to the Principal Certifying Authority, to carry out the required inspection, before carrying out any further works.

 

10.     A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site for the duration of the works, which contains the following details:

 

     Name, address, contractor licence number and telephone number of the principal contractor, including a telephone number at which the person may be contacted outside working hours, or owner-builder permit details (as applicable);

     Name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority; and

     A statement stating that “unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited”.

 

11.     An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority prior to any occupation of the building work encompassed in this development consent (including alterations and additions to existing buildings), in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

An Occupation Certificate must not be issued for the development if the development is inconsistent with the development consent.  The requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and conditions of development consent must be satisfied prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

12.     Prior to the issuing of an interim or final occupation certificate, a statement is required to be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority, which confirms that the development is not inconsistent with the development consent and the relevant conditions of development consent have been satisfied.

 

Details of critical stage inspections carried out by the principal certifying authority together with any other certification relied upon and must also be provided to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

13.     In accordance with clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition, that in the case of residential building work, a contract of insurance must be obtained and in force, in accordance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

Where the work is to be done by a licensed contractor, excavation or building work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA):-

 

     Has been informed in writing of the licensee’s name and contractor number; and

     Is satisfied that the licensee has complied with the insurance requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989, or

 

Where the work to be done by any other person (i.e. an owner-builder), excavation or building work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority:-

 

     Has been informed of the person’s name and owner-builder permit number; or

     Has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land that states that the market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work does not exceed $5,000.

 

Details of the principal building contractor and compliance with the provisions of the Home Building Act 1989 (i.e. Details of the principal licensed building contractor and a copy of the Certificate of Insurance) are to be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of works, with the notice of appointment of the PCA / notice of intention to commence building work.

 

14.     The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, is to be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, in accordance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

At the time of this development consent, Long Service Levy payment is applicable on building work having a value of $25,000 or more, at the rate of 0.35% of the cost of the works.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies relevant standards of construction, and to maintain adequate levels of health, safety and amenity during construction:

 

15.     The removal, storage, handling and disposal of building materials must be carried out in accordance with the relevant requirements of WorkCover NSW, the NSW Department of Environment & Conservation (formerly the Environment Protection Authority) and Randwick City Council policies and conditions, including:

 

·                Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000;

·                Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001;

·                Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 2001;

·                WorkCover NSW Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos;

·                Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures;

·                The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996;

·                Relevant Department of Environment & Conservation (DEC) / Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and WorkCover NSW Guidelines;

·                Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy (adopted 13 September 2005).

 

A copy of Council’s Asbestos Policy is available on Council’s web site at www.randwick.nsw.gov.au in the Building & Development section or a copy can be obtained from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

16.     All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely in accordance with appropriate professional standards and excavations are to be properly guarded and supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

Retaining walls, shoring or piling must be provided to support land which is excavated in association with the erection or demolition of a building, to prevent the movement of soil and to support the adjacent land and buildings, if the soil conditions require it.  Adequate provisions are also to be made for drainage.

 

Retaining walls, shoring, or piling must be designed and installed in accordance with appropriate professional standards and the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standards.  Details of proposed retaining walls, shoring or piling are to be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority for the development prior to commencing such excavations or works.

 

17.     Except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all building, demolition and associated site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays and all building activities are strictly prohibited on Sundays and Public Holidays.

 

18.     Noise and vibration emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents and the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 must be satisfied at all times.

         

19.     Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works.

 

The roadway, footpath and nature strip must be maintained in a good, safe condition and free from any obstructions, materials, soils or debris at all times.  Any damage caused to the road, footway or nature strip must be repaired immediately, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from the Council and other relevant Authorities prior to excavating or opening-up the road or footway for services or the like.

 

20.     Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials or construction equipment must not be placed upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time and the footpath, nature strip and road must be maintained in a clean condition and free from any obstructions, soil and debris at all times.

 

Bulk bins/waste containers must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval of the Council, unless the waste container is located upon the road in accordance with the Roads & Traffic Authority Guidelines and Requirements, and the container is exempt from an approval under Development Control Plan for Exempt & Complying Development and Council’s Local Approvals Policy.  Applications to place a waste container in a public place can be made to Council’s Building Services section.

 

21.     During construction stages, sediment laden stormwater run-off shall be controlled using the sediment control measures outlined in the manual for Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction, published by the NSW Department of Housing.

 

Stockpiles of soil, sand, aggregate or other materials must not be located on any footpath, roadway, nature strip, drainage line or any public place and the stockpiles must be protected with adequate sediment control measures.

 

Building operations such as brick cutting, washing tools or equipment and mixing mortar are not permitted on public footpaths, roadways, nature strips, in any public place or any location which may lead to the discharge of materials into the stormwater drainage system.

 

A warning sign for soil and water management must be displayed in a prominent position on the building site, visible to both the public and site workers.  The sign must be displayed throughout the construction period.  Copies of a suitable warning sign are available at Council’s Customer Service Centre for a nominal fee.

 

22.     A local approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Services section prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road, nature strip or in any public place:-

 

·           Install or erect any site fencing, hoardings or site structures;

·           Operate a crane or hoist goods or materials over a footpath or road;

·           Placement of a waste skip (grater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

The following conditions have been applied to ensure that adequate security provisions are made for vehicular access, parking and public infrastructure:

 

23.     The applicant must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's footpath, kerb & gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's footpath and roadway. 

 

ADVISORY MATTERS:

 

A1      Building or excavations works must not be commenced until a construction certificate has been obtained from Council's Building Certification Services or an Accredited Certifier and either Council's Building Certification Services or an Accredited Certifier has been appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) for this development.

 

Failure to obtain a Construction Certificate and appoint a PCA before commencing works is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

A2      The applicant is advised that the Construction Certificate plans and specification must comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and the construction certificate must not be inconsistent with the development consent.

 

In this regard, the development consent plans do not detail compliance with the deemed-to-satisfy provisions of the BCA.

 

Details of compliance with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia and conditions of development consent are to be provided in the plans and specifications for the construction certificate.

 

You are therefore advised to ensure that the development is not inconsistent with Council's consent and to consult with Council’s Building Certification Services or an accredited certifier prior to submitting your construction certificate application to enable these matters to be addressed accordingly.

 

A3      The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil .

 

 

 

 

………………………………

 

 

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

MR. SACHA KALESS

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

STUDENT ASSESSMENT OFFICER

 

 


 

Director, City Planning Report 47/2007

 

SUBJECT:

2007 SENIORS CHRISTMAS FUNCTIONS

 

 

DATE:

20 June, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07694

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING   

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

The Seniors Christmas functions are popular community events staged by Council which attracts a total of 1200 older persons.  Each year 2 separate functions are held. One of the functions has always been held at Randwick Race Course and 800 residents attend this event. The second function, which attracts 400 seniors, has been held at either South Sydney Juniors Football Club or the Ritz Cinema. The events are well anticipated by the community with residents ringing from as early as July to enquire about the end of year performances.  The total cost of both functions for 2005/2006 was $36,000.

 

ISSUES:

 

This year it is proposed to hold two concerts at the Randwick Race Course, with each concert catering for 800 seniors.  The 1st concert would be held at 9am ending at 11.30 and the second at 3.30pm ending at 6pm

 

The function at the Randwick Race Course is the most popular event with the majority of guests nominating this as their preference.  Many have in the past missed out and have taken the second preference offered, traditionally the Ritz Cinema. The demand for attending the function has always been greater than what Council has been able to cater for in the past years.  With a second function held at the Randwick Race Course approximately 400 extra older persons will be able to participate. It is noteworthy to point out that Council consistently receives a high level of satisfaction regarding this event.

 

The Older Persons Advisory Group have indicated their support to the concerts planned and programme for 2007 especially with the inclusion of local older persons acts.

 

Sentimental Productions have overseen the shows for many years and again will assist Council in securing the entertainment for the day.  This year it is also proposed to invite local older persons act to be included.  The Coast Centre for Seniors has several dance acts that would add colour and local flavour to the performances.

 

The date of Wednesday 28th November has been selected with the Shannon Room for both events.

 

The Ambulance Band has agreed to perform at the concerts, backing the entertainers, and are keen to be involved, with no cost to Council.

 

The Australian Jockey Club (AJC) has also agreed to sponsor the event by waiving the hire fee.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2Enrich our range of community services that meet our community’s needs

Direction 2b: Celebrate the range of cultures and people within Randwick City

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

The 2006/07 Community Events Budget has an allocated amount of $36,000.  The two concerts scheduled for 2007 will cost:

 

$20,000                  1st Concert Catering

$20,000                  2nd Concert Catering

$360                      First Aid

$720                      Parking Attendants

$9,000                    Entertainment (both concerts)

$900                      Printing                            

$50,980                     TOTAL

 

Council has been able to secure a number of sponsorships for this event. Souths Juniors sponsoring the event by providing a $5,000 cash contribution and $500 in the form of gifts. The Clovelly Bendigo Bank is providing a $500 cash contribution. The AJC has sponsored the event by waiving the hiring fee of $6,000.

 

In addition, Darrell Lea and Food For Less at Randwick are also supporting the events through the provision of gifts for the participants. Sponsors logos will be included on all advertising and promotional material regarding the functions.

 

Therefore the total cost of both events to Council will be $45,480. This will be $9,400 over the previous years as well as 2006-2007 allocated budget, however an additional 400 seniors will be able to attend this very popular event.  This amount however could be absorbed in 2006/2007 Community Events Budget.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The Seniors Functions are both important and well anticipated events on the Community Calender.  With the inclusion of a second function at the AJC a total of 1,600 older persons will be catered for, in order to meet the increasing demand of attendance at these concerts.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council support the two (2) Seniors Christmas Concerts to be held at the Randwick Race Course.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

SHANNON BISHOP

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

EVENT CO-ORDINATOR

 


 

Director, City Planning Report 48/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

7 Clyde Street, Randwick

 

 

DATE:

16 July, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/993/2006 & PROP006295

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING 

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Attached is a Development Assessment Report for remove existing street tree and construct a new hardstand carspace to the exist dwelling

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council consider and determine the development application in accordance with the recommendations contained in the attached report.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Development Application Report dated 16 July 2007.

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

EMMA FITZROY

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

A/COORDINATOR DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT

 


 

Development Application Report

 

 

 

REPORT BY:           DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

 

DATE:

16 July, 2007

FILE NO:

DA/993/2006 & PROP006295

 

PROPOSAL:

 Remove existing street tree and construct a new hardstand carspace

 

 

 

PROPERTY:

 7 Clyde Street, Randwick

WARD:

 North Ward

APPLICANT:

 Tim and Jo Power

OWNER:

Tim and Jo Power

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

LOCALITY

PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

This application is referred to Council as is relates to Council’s policy of assessment of applications in areas that may be subject to flooding.

 

On the 17 November 2006, Council received a development application for a new hardstand car space at 7 Clyde Street (DA/993/2006). The development application was referred to the Development Engineers for technical comment and it was identified that the site is located in an area that may be subject to flooding during major storm events.

 

Under Section 79 C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended); Council must consider the suitability of the site for the proposed use prior to granting development approval. A parcel of land that may be inundated by stormwater may not suitable for use as a formal parking space as vehicles may be damaged if the water levels reach a height sufficient to enter the vehicle.

 

Given that 7 Clyde Street is located in an area that may be subject to stormwater inundation, Council officers are unable to assess the suitability of the site for the intended purpose without a flood study being undertaken to determine the flood levels. The applicant was requested to submit a flood study on the 19 December 2006.

 

The applicant has written to Council advising that they consider the requirement for a flood study unreasonable given the scope of works proposed. The applicant was advised on the 29 January 2007 that Council is legally required to give due consideration to flooding in the assessment of the application and was the given the option of either submitting the required flood study or withdrawing the application.

 

Until a flood study is completed, it is not possible to advise whether the outcome from the study will allow the car space to be approved.

 

Council currently requires all car spaces to be a minimum of 150 mm above the 1 in 100 year flood level to ensure that vehicles are not adversely impacted by flood water. Should the study determine that the depth of ponding around the site is above the existing kerb level, it may not be possible to raise the proposed car space (which is located immediately behind the property boundary) to a sufficient level.

 

A flood study was requested from the applicant more than six months ago, and given that the information has not yet been provided it is recommended that the application be refused. Until a flood study is completed, it is not possible to assess the suitability of the site for the intended purpose.

 

2.       THE PROPOSAL

 

The application is for removal of an existing street tree and construction of a new hardstand car space at the front of the existing semi-detached dwelling.

 

3.       THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA:

 

The site is located on the eastern side of Clyde Street between Oswald and Coogee Streets and is presently occupied by an existing semi-detached dwelling. Neighbouring the property to the south is the adjoining semi-detached dwelling and to the north is a residential float building. The site has a frontage width of 6.545 metres and an overall site area of 268.8m2

4.       SITE HISTORY

 

There is no relevant history for this site

 

5.       COMMUNITY CONSULTATION:

 

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development is accordance with the DCP – Public Notification of Development Proposals and Council’s Plans. As a result of this notification, the following submission was received:

 

Margaret Collinson – 11 Clyde Street, Randwick

 

Issue

 

Comment

Concerned that the new car space will reduce the amount of on-street car parking available  due to the narrow width of Clyde Street necessitating a clear zone of at least a metre either side of the new driveway

 

Whilst Clyde Street is a narrow cul-de-sac, other properties in Clyde Street have driveway access off Clyde Street and it is unreasonable to refuse the application on the basis of on-street parking being lost.

Loss of street tree

 

Council’s Landscape Development Officer has advised that the street tree is located beneath overhead wires and may be removed

 

 

6.       TECHNICAL OFFICERS COMMENTS

 

The application has been referred to the relevant technical officers, including where necessary external bodies and the following comments have been provided:-

 

Development Engineering

An application has been received for a hardstand car space in the front yard of the above site.

 

Drainage Comments

The Planning Officer is advised that the subject development site is located adjacent to a localised low point and may be subject to stormwater inundation during major storm events.

 

The applicant shall submit a flood study (including plans and drainage calculations compiled by a suitably experienced and qualified Civil Engineer) which determines the 1 in 100 year flood level for the site.

 

The flood study should be undertaken using “DRAINS” Urban Drainage Simulation Model (and HECRAS for determining flow depths). Alternative flood modelling programs may be used, however, the applicant will be required to meet the full cost for an independent hydraulic consultant to review the model as Council does not have the computer software to run alternative flood modelling programs.

 

 

 

 

 

The following information must be submitted to Council with the flood study:

 

a)    All “DRAINS” and “HECRAS” data files on 3 1/2" MS-DOS formatted diskettes together with a suitable index to relate data files to the various run parameters.

 

b)    Plans showing:

 

·             All catchments and sub-catchments areas contributing to flows in the vicinity of the development site;

·             “DRAINS” sub-catchments and areas and nomenclature used to define the various piped reaches;

·             Overland flow paths;

·             Location and sections of all drainage lines showing pipe sizes and grades;

·             Pit/gully surface levels as well as invert levels of inlet and outlet pipes;

·             Proposed finished surface levels and 0.2m contours over the development site (it is noted that all levels shall be relative to the Australian Height Datum); and

·             Location of all “HECRAS” cross sections.

 

Landscape Comments

There is a Bottlebrush tree (4.0m high) located on Council’s nature strip, under wires, which will require removal to allow for the construction of the vehicular access. Permission is granted for the removal of the Council tree subject to the applicant meeting the amenity value of the tree as well as costs associated with its removal.

 

7.       RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

The Development application has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the following relevant planning documents:

·         Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

·         Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended)

·         Development Control Plan – Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

·         Building Code of Australia

 

8.       ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

 

The site has been inspected and the application has been assessed having regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended.

 

It is noted that the assessment cannot be completed until a flood study is undertaken.

 

8.1   Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 1998

The proposal is consistent with the general aims of RLEP 1998 and the specific objectives of the zone in that the proposed activity and built form will enhance and compliment the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality.

 

 

8.2   Development Control Plans

 

Development Control Plan - Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies

The DCP for Dwelling Houses and Attached Dual Occupancies states that a proposal is deemed to satisfy the Objectives and Performance Requirements of the DCP if it complies with the corresponding Preferred Solutions.  Therefore, the tables below assess the proposal against the Preferred Solutions, and where non-compliance results, assessment is made against the relevant Objectives and Performance Requirements. 

·         Landscaping

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

40% of the total site area is provided as landscaped area.

45% of the site is available as landscaped area in the rear yard and side passage area. Complies.

S1

A minimum of 25m² of useable private open space is to be provided.

The proposal does not impact upon the complying usable area of private outdoor open space within the existing rear yard.

S1

Each dwelling must provide an area of private open space capable of containing a rectangle of minimum dimensions of 3m x 4m with minor changes in level.

Complies within rear yard.

S6

20% of the total site area has permeable treatment.

The proposed car space has no impact upon the rear yard area which complies with the minimum soft landscaping, in addition the proposed car space includes perimeter landscaping beds which will provide for an area of permeable landscaping and will also assist in softening the effect of the hard stand car space as viewed in the local streetscape.

 

There is a Bottlebrush tree (4.0m high) located on Council’s nature strip, under wires, which will require removal to allow for the construction of the vehicular access. Council’s Landscape Development Officer has advised that permission would be granted for the removal of the street tree subject to the applicant meeting the amenity value of the tree as well as costs associated with its removal.

 

·         Garages & Driveways

 

Preferred Solution

Assessment

S1

Car parking spaces have a minimum dimension of 5.5m x 2.5m.

The proposed parking space is approx. 3.0m x 5.5m which complies.

S1

Driveways have minimum width of 3m and are set back at least 1m from the side boundary.

Complies with respect to the width, however is sited only 800mm from the side boundary. There are no objections to the side boundary setback not complying in that the narrow width of the site makes it difficult to comply, and in addition, the setback will not result in any adverse impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties or streetscape.

S1

Driveways have a maximum width of 3m at the property boundary.

 

Complies.

S1

Driveway gradients should not exceed a maximum of 1 in 8 for the first 5m from street alignment and 1 in 6 thereafter.

 

Complies.

S2

Driveways, car parking spaces and structures do not occupy more than 35% of the width of the allotment

The proposed car space occupies almost 50% of the width of the site frontage, which does not comply; however, the position and width of the car space will not detract from the appearance of either the dwelling or streetscape and satisfies the objectives and performance requirements of the DCP.

 

8.3   Site Suitability

 

Until a local flood study is completed, it is not possible to assess the suitability of the site for the intended use.

 

The suitability of the site will be dependant on the flood level determined and whether the proposed car space can be raised 150mm above the flood level.

 

9.       RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:      Excellence in urban design and development

 

Direction 4a:    Improved design and sustainability across all development

 

10.   FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

11.   CONCLUSION

 

Council is obliged to assess development applications in accordance with section 79C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and cannot disregard potential flooding issues.

 

Without the submission of a flood study, Council is unable assess the suitability of the site for the proposed use. The applicant has not submitted the required flood study within the specified time frame or elected to withdraw the application. Consequently, the application is recommended for refusal on the basis of inadequate information.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

A.       That Council as the responsible authority, refuse development application No. DA/142/2007 for a new hardstand car space at the front of the existing semi-detached dwelling at 7 Clyde Street, Randwick for the following reasons:

 

·         Failure to submit information required to properly assess the application in accordance with S79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended).

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

SIMA TRUUVERT

EMMA FITZROY 

DIRECTOR, CITY PLANNING

A/CO-ORDINATOR DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 19/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON TRANSPORT ISSUES WITH UNSW

 

 

DATE:

12 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2006/00681

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER     

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

A draft Memorandum of Understanding (draft MOU) on Transport Issues has been jointly prepared by Council and the University of New South Wales (UNSW).  The purpose of the MOU is to formalise a working relationship between the UNSW and Council in the management of transport issues that have been identified in the UNSW Masterplan, during preparation of the DCP - UNSW Kensington Campus and community consultation.  The draft MOU promotes the cooperation, and clarifies the responsibilities, of both Council and the UNSW, in implementing a transport strategy for sustainable, integrated and accessible transport in the area surrounding the University.

 

This report provides details on the contents of the draft MOU and recommends that Council endorse its finalisation.

 

ISSUES:

 

A copy of the draft MOU is included as Attachment 1 to this report.  The draft MOU includes standard clauses identifying its purpose and objectives and administrative clauses relating to matters such as duration, review, termination, intellectual property and confidentiality. 

 

The Schedule of the draft MOU identifies the program of joint activities between the UNSW and Council including:

 

·                 an annual travel survey of UNSW staff and students

·                 joint submissions and lobbying of the State Government in relation to public transport improvements

·                 coordination of bike paths in the proximity of the UNSW

·                 preparation of a local street parking plan

·                 civil works (pedestrian, bicycle, parking or public transport) improvements

·                 UNSW representation at relevant meetings of the Randwick Local Traffic Committee.

 

The program of activities in the draft MOU relates directly with the requirements of Council’s Development Control Plan – UNSW Kensington Campus in relation to preparation of a Transport Strategy (refer Attachment 2).

 

 

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 3:    An informed and engaged community.

Direction 3a:  Effective communication methods and technology are used to share information and provide services.

 

Outcome 9:    Integrated and accessible transport.

Direction 9a:  A network of safe and convenient walking paths and cycle ways linking major land uses and recreation opportunities.

Direction 9c:  Advocate and/or plan for integrated local and regional transport improvements, including high capacity transport such as light/standard rail.

Direction 9e:  Parking is managed to balance convenience against reduced car reliance.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.  Staff resources of approximately two weeks were allocated to progress and finalise the draft MOU.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The draft MOU promotes the cooperation, and clarifies the responsibilities, of both Council and the UNSW, in implementing sustainable, integrated and accessible transport in the area surrounding the University.  It is recommended that Council endorse the finalisation of the draft MOU by the General Manager and Chief Operating Officer of the UNSW.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council:

 

(a) note and endorse the draft Memorandum of Understanding on Transport Issues between Randwick City Council and University of New South Wales;

 

(b) note that a joint signing of the document will be arranged to promote the cooperation between Council and the University of New South Wales; and

 

(c) agree that minor modifications to the draft MOU may be made prior to finalisation.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1. Draft Memorandum of Understanding on Transport Issues between Randwick City Council and University of New South Wales

2. Extract from Randwick Development Control Plan – UNSW Kensington Campus.

 

 

.....................................

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

 

ON TRANSPORT ISSUES

 

 

 

 

 

Between

 

 

 

RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL

 

 

 

And

 

 

 

UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made this ………. day of ……………………… 2007 between

 

Randwick City Council (RCC)

 

and

 

the University of New South Wales (UNSW)

 

hereinafter referred to as “the Parties”.

 

 

RECITALS:

 

A.  RCC is established as a Council in the State of New South Wales;

 

B.   UNSW is a corporation under the University of New South Wales Act 1989 and an institution of higher learning in Australia;

 

C.   RCC and UNSW are parties to a collaboration agreement dated 20 November 2006 in relation to environmentally sustainable outcomes;

 

D.   The Parties wish to record their intention to co-operate to mutual advantage in relation to transport issues affecting the locality.

 

 

 

1. PURPOSE

 

The purpose of this MOU is to formalise a working relationship between the Parties to co-operate in the management and resolution of identified transport issues, to the benefit of the Parties.

 

 

2. OBJECTIVES

 

This MOU will assist in implementing the sustainable, integrated and accessible transport outcomes highlighted in the Randwick City Plan 2006.

 

This MOU will assist in implementing the Transport Strategy documented in the Kensington Campus Development Control Plan 2007.

 

 

3. PROGRAM OF JOINT ACTIVITIES

 

In pursuance of the objectives in clause 2 the Parties will co-operate in the program of joint activities ("Program") referred to in the Schedule of this MOU.  No particular priority is given to any activity in the Program.

 

4. CONSULTATION AND REVIEW

 

The Parties will consult together upon request of either Party regarding any matter relating to this MOU and will endeavour to co-operatively carry out the Program.

 

The Parties will meet annually to review the allocation of resources and progress of the Program.

 

 

5. DURATION

 

This MOU will commence upon signature by representatives of the Parties and will remain effective for a period of 5 years, after which it may be extended by a written agreement signed by the Parties.

 

 

6. AMENDMENT

 

This MOU may be amended by written agreement between the Parties at any time during its term.

 

 

7. TERMINATION

 

A Party may terminate this MOU for any or no reason at its own discretion by giving the other Party 30 days written notice of termination.

 

 

8. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

 

The ownership of any intellectual property created or developed jointly by the Parties in carrying out the Program under this MOU will be owned jointly by the Parties. This will be in proportion to the contribution of each Party to the creation of the intellectual property, subject to a licence that each Party hereby grants to the other Party such that each may use, copy, adapt or publish the jointly developed intellectual property for purposes directly connected with that Party's statutory functions, excluding the purpose of commercialisation.

 

 

9. CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLOSURE

 

The Parties will not disclose or distribute to any third party, any information that is supplied and marked or stated to be “in-confidence” by the originating Party except as and to the extent authorised in writing by the originating Party.

 

The Parties may disclose publicly the terms of this MOU.

 

The Parties support the release of information to the public media and to residents and ratepayers of RCC and the UNSW campus community on the progress of the Program. The Parties will endeavour to consult with each other before the release of such information where the releasing Party should reasonably expect the other Party to wish to, or be entitled to, have an interest in the subject matter or the nature of the release.

 

10. FINANCIAL COMMITMENT AND STAFF RESOURCES

 

The Program carried out under this MOU will be subject to the availability of funds and staff resources each Party determines, in its absolute discretion, to commit to the Program or any part of it.

 

The costs of joint activities will be funded as mutually agreed between the Parties.

 

Subject to this clause, each Party will provide staff resources adequate to carry out its own commitments made from time to time in relation to the Program.

 

 

11. LEGAL STATUS

 

While this MOU formalises the working relationship between the Parties, it is not intended by either of them to have any legally binding effect save for Clauses 8 and 9.

 

It is expressly declared that this MOU and the relationship between the Parties so established does not constitute a partnership, joint venture or contract of employment between them.  Neither Party is appointed, or may become, the agent of the other under this MOU.

 

The Parties recognise that this MOU in no way affects or derogates from the statutory and other lawful functions and responsibilities which a Party has.  Each Party remains solely responsible for its own such functions and responsibilities.

 

 

12. LIABILITY

 

Each Party will be liable for the acts and omissions of its own employees while acting in the scope of their employment and in implementing the Program in the Schedule.

 

 

13. PROGRAM OFFICERS

 

The Parties agree that the officers nominated in this clause (or advised in writing from time to time) (each, a "Program Officer") will be the primary point of contact for the collaboration on the Program contemplated by this MOU.  Each Program Officer will ensure that all Program activities are effectively coordinated on behalf of the Party he or she represents and will endeavour to keep the Program Officer of the other Party informed of all Program activities in a timely and effective manner.

 

 


 

 

 

UNSW Program Officer:

 

 

Name and position

 

 

 

Telephone:

 

Mobile:

 

Fax:

 

Email:

 

 

RCC Program Officer:

 

 

Name and position

 

 

 

Telephone:

 

Mobile:

 

Fax:

 

Email:

 

 

 

 

 

Signed on behalf of Randwick City Council by:

 

 

 

 

Mr Ray Brownlee, General Manager

Date:

 

 

 

 

Signed on behalf of the University of New South Wales by:

 

 

 

 

Mr Peter Graham, Chief Operating Officer

Date:

 

 

 

 


SCHEDULE

 

PROGRAM OF JOINT ACTIVITIES

 

 

1. TRAVEL SURVEY

 

The Parties support the use of an annual travel survey of UNSW staff and students to measure progress in reducing travel by private car. To achieve this, the following activities will be carried out:

 

  Discuss and agree on the content of the annual travel survey;

  UNSW to conduct an annual on-line sample survey of staff and students;

  Exchange the survey data and analyse the results;

  Conduct local street surveys as appropriate;

 

2. BUS TRAVEL

 

The Parties support the provision of additional bus services and improved existing services to the UNSW campus. To achieve this, the following activities will be carried out:

 

  UNSW to identify existing and new service improvement needs and options;

  Explore options to improve existing bus operations in High Street and Anzac Parade;

  Explore options to improve the comfort and convenience of bus customers, particularly at the termini;

  UNSW to conduct surveys of bus services as appropriate;

  Exchange the survey data and analyse the results;

  Consult with other major trip generators in the region;

  Prepare submissions to Sydney Buses for additional and/or amended services as appropriate;

  Consult with and lobby State Government agencies as appropriate;

 

3. RAIL TRAVEL

 

The Parties support the provision of a rail connection to the UNSW campus. To achieve this, the following activities will be carried out:

 

  Prepare a submission to the State Government for a light/standard rail connection;

  Lobby State Government agencies and Members of Parliament for support as appropriate;

  Consult with other major trip generators in the region;

 

4. BICYCLE TRAVEL

 

The Parties support the provision of additional bikeways to the UNSW campus. To achieve this, the following activities will be carried out:

 

  Participate in the Council review and update of the Randwick Bicycle Plan 1998;

  Explore and discuss options to improve existing bikeways specifically within 3 km of the campus;

  UNSW to continue to provide bike racks on the campus in appropriate locations as demand occurs;

 

 

5. LOCAL STREET PARKING PLAN

 

The Parties support the staged implementation of a parking plan for local streets surrounding the UNSW campus. To achieve this, the following activities will be carried out:

 

  Discuss and agree on the content of the UNSW annual travel survey;

  Conduct street surveys as appropriate of those streets nominated in the travel survey;

  Exchange the survey data and analyse the results;

  Explore options to provide a mix of short-term, resident and unrestricted parking;

  Consult with affected residents during implementation of the plan;

  RCC to implement and manage any parking changes arising from the plan;

 

 

6. CIVIL WORKS

 

The Parties support improvements to transport-related civil works in the public domain in the vicinity of the UNSW campus. To achieve this, the following activities will be carried out:

 

  Negotiate the form and extent of any pedestrian, bicycle, parking or public transport improvements that maybe required to support UNSW activities;

  Negotiate on the amount of monetary contribution that maybe required from UNSW and RCC;

  Consult with State Government agencies as appropriate;

 

 

7. RANDWICK LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE

 

The Parties support the representation of UNSW at meetings of the Randwick Local Traffic Committee where transport issues of mutual interest are discussed. To achieve this, the following activities will be carried out:

 

  Distribute copies of agendas and minutes of meetings to the UNSW representative;

  Invite a UNSW representative to attend those meetings where transport issues of mutual interest are discussed;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


5.10 Transport and Parking

Making transport more sustainable is one of the key platforms of the Campus 2020 Master Plan. This is to be achieved by improving access to the campus by public transport in preference to private vehicle use. Parking is to be reduced over time, but made more available across the day and night for students, staff and visitors. Other modes of transport such as cycling and walking are also to be made more attractive and safer.

 

UNSW is the largest single employer in the eastern suburbs and the largest generator for bus passengers in Sydney. It can achieve improvements to its transport systems by economies of scale. The improvements to bus services and bike routes would benefit the local community, not just the University.

 

The backbone of the Transportation Strategy is the agreement to measure transport demand every year to avoid subjectivism and focus on policies and cooperation between UNSW, Council and transport agencies.

Transport/Parking Objectives

1. Adopt a sustainable transportation strategy, reducing car dependence.

2. Reduce parking for the University adjusted with any expansion of the University.

3. As the transport, traffic and parking effects of the campus affect the surrounding local area, seek agreement with Council to implement the transport and parking measures outlined in the Transportation Strategy.

4. Improve bus services to the campus, including safe night time services.

5. Improve the connectivity, safety and attractiveness of bike routes to the campus.

6. Maintain a spread of parking throughout the campus.

7. Prepare transport management plans to deal with special events on campus.

8. Improve the public domain adjacent to and in the vicinity of the campus in consultation with Council.

9. Implement traffic improvements to address traffic congestion.

 

Transport/Parking Provisions

a. The reduction in car dependence is to be achieved through a combination of:

• Reduction in parking supply

• Public transport upgrades

• Location of university accommodation

• parking charges, and

• An interactive information system

As set out in the Transportation Strategy in Figure 5.12.

b. The total number of parking spaces on campus is to be maintained until such time as it is demonstrated through the annual parking survey that the total number may be reduced without adversely impacting parking on the surrounding streets.

c. Surface parking within the campus is to continue to be relocated to be under new buildings or within structured car parks (see Figure 5.13).

• New car parking areas are to be constructed under new buildings on western campus and on lower campus (possibly also under new buildings) to replace 300 existing permit and reserved parking as lost due to redevelopment.

• 100 short-term parking spaces are to be located in lower campus with access from High Street over time as new visitor parking for the campus.

d. Maintain the provision of Disabled Parking and Loading Zones throughout the campus.

e. All new DAs (excluding university accommodation) are to include an assessment of whether the proposal involves an increase in staff, student or other visitations to the campus or only a relocation or up-grade of existing facilities in the context of the total campus population and parking trends, as set out in the Transportation Strategy in Figure 5.12. Where an increase is proposed, the DA is to be supported by a Traffic and Parking Report which addresses:

• The potential increase in parking demand

• The potential impacts on campus parking supply and demand and on-street parking demand

• Achievements in reducing parking demand across the campus, and

• Any specific measures proposed to lower parking demand or avoid potential adverse impacts. Specific pedestrian, bicycle, public transport or parking initiatives/improvements may be required prior to occupation of specific proposal.

f. The University is to contribute to the cost of external civil works that relate to specific DAs such as improving/upgrading bikeways and pedestrian footpaths in the vicinity of UNSW. g. All new/amended car parking areas, access roadways, internal circulation areas and ramps shall comply with the requirements of AS 2890.1 (2004) and AS 2890.2 (2002).

h. The location of vehicle access/egress points is to be determined subject to an assessment of the impacts on existing traffic flows.

i. Parking demand for new university accommodation is to be based on the following minimum rates:

• 1 space per 10 students/staff for accommodation greater than 800 metres from the Campus

• 1 space per 15 students/staff for accommodation at or within 800 metres of the Campus. Parking generation rates for university accommodation may be reduced through sustainable transport initiatives such as car pool/car club arrangements. Residents in university accommodation are to be excluded from Council’s Resident Parking Scheme.

j. At some time in the future, and dependent on the future growth of the University, the top deck of the existing car parks may be reused as sporting or other facilities.

k. Opportunities to remove vehicles from the Rupert Myers courtyard are to be investigated.

l. Consideration is to be given to a dual pedestrian entry into the campus from Anzac Parade being made legible by two pedestrian crossings, one at each end of bus stops.

m. Public domain improvements such as paving and extended pedestrian crossings are to be introduced at the bus stops at Gates 2 and 8 in High Street with the axis from these stops strengthened, signposted, illuminated and inclusive of evening activity.

 



 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 20/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

SSROC MEMBERSHIP FEES

 

 

DATE:

10 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/06659

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At the May meeting of SSROC a report in relation to the strategic review of SSROC was accepted.  In accepting the report, the delegates noted that an increase in membership fees was likely. 

 

ISSUES:

 

SSROC have appointed a firm of consultants (Dowling Consulting) to review the strategic direction of the organisation.  As part of the review a number of fee options have been discussed, with the General Managers’ Group (at the June 2007 meeting) indicating a preference for an increase in fees to $50,000 (for full members) and $30,000 (for associate members) from 1 January 2008

 

Randwick City Council is a full member of SSROC and the current annual membership fee is $26,860.90 (or $24,419.00 exclusive of GST).

 

This matter is to be determined at the August meeting of SSROC and, if supported, will result in the following membership fees for Randwick City Council for 2007/2008:

 

Date

 

Inclusive of GST

Exclusive of GST

June 2007 to December 2007:

50% of $26,860.90

$13,430.45

$12,209.50

January 2008 to June 2008:

50% of $50,000.00

$25,000.00

$22,727.27

Total:

 

$38,430.45

$34,936.77

 

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:    Leadership in sustainability.

Direction:      A ‘sustainable city’ is one that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own environmental, economic and social needs.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Council’s 2007/2008 budget for membership fees allows for $24,419 for SSROC membership.  The budget allocation will need to be increased by approximately $10,516 (to $34,936.77) at the first quarterly review of the 2007/2008 budget, if the fee increase is approved.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

It is recommended that the SSROC fee increase be approved in accordance with the recommendation of the SSROC Executive and General Managers’ Group.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the increase in the SSROC membership fee from 1 January 2008 be approved and the budget allocation for membership fees be adjusted accordingly at the September Quarterly review of the 2007/2008 budget.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

.....................................

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 21/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

AFFIXING OF THE COUNCIL SEAL

 

 

DATE:

4 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07367

 

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

 

Clause 400 (Part 13) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that the Seal of the Council must not be affixed to a document unless the document relates to business of the Council and the Council has resolved (by resolution referring to the document) that the Seal be so affixed.

 

ISSUES:

 

It is necessary for the Council’s Seal to be affixed to the signing of agreements between Council and:

 

1.  Sylvia Vivian Farina (T/As Tango Cafe) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 209A Coogee Bay Road, Coogee.

2.  Ying Zhang (T/As O’Le Portuguese Style Chicken & Burgers) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 142 Anzac Parade, Kensington.

3.  Barry Fung (T/As The Art Lounge Café) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 275 Arden Street, Coogee.

4.  Antonio Vizza (T/As Cucinella) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 209B Coogee Bay Road, Coogee.

5.  David Baleinagusui (T/As Cold Rock Ice Creamery Randwick) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 50 Perouse Road, Randwick.

6.  George Young Hotels Pty Ltd (T/As Churchill’s sports Bar & Tavern) in relation to a lease for the purpose of outdoor dining and smoking area at 532 Anzac Parade, Kingsford.

7.  Sydney Eastern Sydney & Illawarra Area Health Services in relation to a licence for the purpose of an early childhood health centre at 40 Arden Street, Clovelly.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 7:    A Liveable City that Balances Growth and Change.

 

Direction 7f:   Town Centres that meet the needs of our community as places to work, shop, live and socialise.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

In signing of these agreements, Council will receive the following income:

 

1.  A licence agreement with Sylvia Vivian Farina (T/As Tango Cafe) will generate an annual income of $2,580.00 + GST.

2.  A licence agreement with Ying Zhang (T/As O’Le Portuguese Style Chicken & Burgers) will generate an annual income of $2,643.80 + GST.

3.  A licence agreement with Barry Fung (T/As The Art Lounge Café) will generate an annual income of $1,920.90 + GST.

4.  A licence agreement with Antonio Vizza (T/As Cucinella) will generate an annual income of $2,426.40 + GST.

5.  A licence agreement with David Baleinagusui (T/As Cold Rock Ice Creamery Randwick) will generate an annual income of $1,707.75 + GST.

6.  A lease agreement with George Young Hotels Pty Ltd (T/As Churchill’s sports Bar & Tavern) will generate an annual income of $16,660.00 + GST.

7.  A licence agreement with Sydney Eastern Sydney & Illawarra Area Health Services will generate an annual income of $377.00 + GST.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

As Clause 400 (part 13) of the Local Government (General) Regulation requires that the Council pass a resolution authorising the Affixing of the Seal, it is necessary for this action to take place to facilitate legal formalities.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That authority be granted for the Council’s Common Seal to be affixed to the agreements between Council and:

 

1.  Sylvia Vivian Farina (T/As Tango Cafe) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 209A Coogee Bay Road, Coogee.

2.  Ying Zhang (T/As O’Le Portuguese Style Chicken & Burgers) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 142 Anzac Parade, Kensington.

3.  Barry Fung (T/As The Art Lounge Café) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 275 Arden Street, Coogee.

4.  Antonio Vizza (T/As Cucinella) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 209B Coogee Bay Road, Coogee.

5.  David Baleinagusui (T/As Cold Rock Ice Creamery Randwick) in relation to a licence for the purpose of outdoor dining at 50 Perouse Road, Randwick.

6.  George Young Hotels Pty Ltd (T/As Churchill’s sports Bar & Tavern) in relation to a lease for the purpose of outdoor dining and smoking area at 532 Anzac Parade, Kingsford.

7.  Sydney Eastern Sydney & Illawarra Area Health Services in relation to a licence for the purpose of an early childhood health centre at 40 Arden Street, Clovelly.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

.....................................

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


 

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT 22/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLAN 2007

 

 

DATE:

10 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2005/00390

 

 

REPORT BY:            GENERAL MANAGER      

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Randwick City Council’s inaugural Business Continuity Plan, including the Crisis Management Plan, outlines the key procedures to enable Randwick City Council (RCC) to continue to operate with minimal downtime in the event of a disruption or disaster.

 

The main purpose of the Plan is to have critical business activities operating effectively during a disaster/disruption and to effectively recover after a disaster/disruption.

 

The Plan covers all of the operations of the Randwick City Council that are located in the Council’s Administration Centre. 

 

In addition, consideration has been given of the impact of a disaster/disruption at the Bowen Library, Moverly Children’s Centre and Council’s Works Depot by way of an abbreviated risk analysis, business impact analysis and response plan.

 

ISSUES:

 

Randwick City Council’s approach to implementing Business Continuity Management is consistent with Council’s Risk Management Strategy which is based on Australian Standard AS/NZS: 4360.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:            Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction 1a: Council has a long term vision based on sustainability.

Direction 1d:          Continuous improvement based on accountability, transparency and good governance.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The Business Continuity Plan, version 1 July 2007 outlines the key procedures required to ensure that critical business activities operate effectively during a disaster/disruption and effectively recover after it.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the Business Continuity Plan, version 1 July 2007 be adopted as the Business Continuity Plan for Randwick City Council.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

.....................................

GENERAL MANAGER

 

 

 

 


 

 

Director, City Services' Report 39/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

CONCEPT DESIGN FOR THE UPGRADE OF MAHON POOL FACILITIES

 

 

DATE:

5 July, 2007

FILE NO:

PROJ/10267/2006

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES      

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Arising from the Mayor’s Minute 6/2006 from Tuesday 28 February 2006 Council resolved the following:


That Council allocate $3,000.00 for the amendments to the plan and $30,000.00 for an architectural concept plan in the 2006/2007 budget for engagement of appropriate consultants to undertake review of the
Maroubra Beach Plan of Management Overview and preparation of concept plans where required.

 

In response to the above resolution Council allocated funds in the 2006/07 Budget to undertake the above mentioned Project. As outlined in the Council Report of February 2006 the main component of this project were to:

 

·                 develop architectural concept plans for the upgrade of the toilet facilities and a provision of a Café at Mahon Pool

·                 determine priorities for new and outstanding works and to develop new programmes.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

The development of a Café/Kiosk at the Mahon Pool site will require an amendment to the existing Plan of Management (POM). This is because this would be an additional purpose for the reserve. An adopted plan of management may authorise an additional purpose however the Crown Lands Act 1989 sets out the consultation and other processes that must be followed in the preparation of a POM that authorises an additional purpose. Community consultation and public exhibition of the amendments are required to fulfil the legislation.

 

With the objective of reviewing the Plan of Management it is necessary to initially investigate the proposed upgrade of facilities at Mahon Pool. This investigation provides an important component in making decisions on priorities and reviewing the Plan of Management.

 

In response to this requirement Council engaged the services of an Architectural Consultant. This Consultant has developed a preliminary Concept Design for upgraded facilities at Mahon Pool (refer Attachment 1). The building is sited and designed to have least impacts on surrounding development and the scenic coastal zone. The building would be low with masonry (preferably sandstone) walls enclosing the amenities and café /kiosk. The design consists of two separate buildings laid out in an ‘L” shape. One block contains the public amenities the other contains the kiosk/café including back of house seating.

 

This building has the following characteristics and components:

 

·                 in the Café/Kiosk there is internal seating for approximately 25 and external seating for 25 persons-The servery would provide both table service and takeaway

·                 public amenities includes 3 female toilets and 3 male toilets plus a urinal

·                 public amenities include 2 showers in the each of the male and female areas

·                 a storage area is  provided for the users of Mahon Pool

 

ISSUES:

 

A number of steps need to be undertaken to continue with the review of the Maroubra Beach Plan of Management. The steps include:

 

1.       Feedback by Councillors of the proposed design for Mahon Pool Café/Kiosk and associated amenities.

2.       Further review of the priorities for completion of works arising from the Plan of Management.

3.       Identification of any additional works that need to be completed in the area covered by the POM.

4.       Extensive community consultation needs to occur to meets the requirements of the Crowns Land Act (1989) to amend the POM and include the new facilities at Mahon Pool.

5.       Source of funds would need to be identified for the construction of the new facilities.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6a:  Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

Direction:       Assets are managed strategically to deliver intergenerational equity and to meet Council’s obligation as the custodian of our community’s assets.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Council officers now need direction from Council on the concept design for the upgrade of the Mahon Pool Facilities. If Council is satisfied with the design, layout and facilities provided in the concept plan (refer Attachment 1) Council Officers will move forward with the development of the design. They will also undertake cost estimates for the construction of the facility.

 

As part of this project Council Officers will also take a detailed review of the Plan of Management, set priorities for completion of works and undertake the necessary community consultation to amend the existing Plan of Management.

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council supports the Concept Design for the Mahon Pool Café/Kiosk provided in this report (refer Attachment 1) and that the required steps are taken by Council Officers to amend the Maroubra Beach Plan of Management.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Mahon Pool Cafe/Kiosk Proposal - Concept Design

     

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK SHAW

KERRY COLQUHOUN

A/DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

LANDSCAPE DESIGN COORDINATOR

 

 

 


 

ATTACHMENT 1:  Mahon Pool Cafe/Kiosk Proposal - Concept Design

 



 

Director, City Services' Report 40/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

POSSIBLE EXEMPTION FROM APPLICATION FEES OF LOW IMPACT FOR MINIMUM BUDGET FILMS

 

 

DATE:

26 June, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07608

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES      

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Council at its meeting held on 27 February 2007, resolved on the Motion of the Mayor, Paul Tracey that:

 

a)     Council assist UNSW student Renae Begent by waiving the fees associated with the student filming made for the Tropfest Film Festival amounting to $681.00 and the funds be charged to the Contingency Fund 2006/07;

 

b)     the film maker undertakes to appropriately and prominently acknowledge and promote Council’s contribution to the filming for the Tropfest Film Festival; and

 

c)     a report be brought back to Council on the possible exemption from application fees of low impact or minimum budget films, such report to also distinguish between commercial and non-commercial use.

 

ISSUES:

 

Council receives numerous requests from organisations, companies and individuals seeking exemption from payment of fees in relation to the hiring of Council’s parks, beaches, reserves and streets.  The purpose of the hire of the facility varies significantly and may be for a community event, student activity or for the purpose of a location for the filming of a television commercial on behalf of a ‘not for profit’ organisation .  The value of the fee exemption requested also varies and may at times be simply related to the administration fee for processing of the application through to more substantial fees involving several thousands of dollars.

 

Council also receives applications from students undertaking course related assignment or training work.

 

At other times, the request may come from a fund raising organisation which may in turn be aiming to raise awareness of a charitable group or even seeking donations for the charitable group.  In these instances it is often difficult to precisely determine whether the request for the waiving of fees is benefiting the charitable organisation directly or whether it may favour the professional organisation acting on the charity’s behalf.  This matter needs to be clearly established prior to further consideration of the request being made.

 

In the area of filming, many requests come from groups stating that they have a “zero budget” or that they working on a “low budget” production for a particular client.  At times, the client may be a state or federal government agency or department.  At other times, the production may be for a non-commercial purpose such as the production of a community information campaign. Enquiries with the NSW Film and Television Office (FTO) indicates that it is often difficult to define what constitutes a ‘low budget’ production as this may often be a slightly misleading term whereby the production may well comprise a low budget, but the main or leading actors could command a significant fee for their role in the production (ie, a significant portion of the total production budget).  The reason for this may be that a high profile actor is deemed necessary in order for the production to appeal to the target audience or for the production to be effective.

 

The FTO advises that the size of the production crew is often a good gauge of production budget.  This coupled with the intended purpose of the production (commercial versus non-commercial) should provide sufficient guidance as to whether the request for waiving of fees should be given credence as a bona fide application for that purpose.  Still photography may be considered to fall within similar guidelines.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:    A vibrant and diverse community.

Direction 2cStrong partnerships between Council, community groups and government agencies.

Key Action:    Champion our community’s needs to other community service providers and government agencies to advocate on our community’s behalf.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Council has over recent years waived application, site hire and other associated fees for individuals and organisations that have demonstrated that the nature of the event has been of benefit to the community and has essentially been not for profit.  The mechanism for approving waiving of fees has been via a Mayoral Minute, which has had the effect of encumbering Council with an administrative task, which could be made more efficient given adoption of appropriate guidelines and delegation of approval for such matters to the General Manager or other appropriate officer.

 

It is considered that where an applicant for the hire of a Council park, beach, reserve or street can demonstrate that the event:

 

·                 is for the benefit of the community;

·                 is of low impact;

·                 has a minimal budget;

·                 is for essentially a non-commercial purpose or substantially for a charitable purpose

 

then the waiving of fees associated with the application and/or event be waived provided that the quantum of the fees remains below $2,000 and that the fees be charged to the Councillor’s contingency fund.  In the event that the assessed fees are greater than $2,000, then it is considered appropriate that a report be prepared for Council’s consideration of the matter.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

(a) Where an applicant for the hire of a Council park, beach, reserve or street can demonstrate that the event:

 

i.                    is for the benefit of the community;

ii.                   is of low impact;

iii.                 has a minimal budget;

iv.                is for essentially a non-commercial purpose or substantially for a charitable purpose

 

(b) then the waiving of fees associated with the application and/or event be delegated to the General Manager provided that the quantum of the fees remains below $2,000.

 

(c) That the waived fees be charged to the Contingency Fund Budget.

 

(d) Where the assessed fees are greater than $2,000, a report be prepared for Council’s consideration.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK SHAW

JOHN CALVANI

A/ DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

PARKS AND RECREATION COORDINATOR


 

Director, City Services' Report 41/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

FEASIBILITY INTO THE INSTALLATION OF CCTV CAMERAS AT COOGEE AND OTHER LOCATIONS

 

 

DATE:

14 June, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/08007

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Council resolved (Notley-Smith/Matson) the following:

 

(a)      Council liaise with the Local Area Command to determine an appropriate scope for this project together with numbers and locations for CCTV cameras;

 

(b)      Council invite the Local Area Command to enter into a partner program in relation to this project;

 

(c)      Following determination of the scope of the project, a more detailed costing plan be prepared for Council’s consideration; and

 

(d)      Council agree in principle to proceed with the project subject to the matters outlined above and a community consultation exercise be undertaken to ascertain the community’s acceptance or otherwise for this proposal prior to implementation.

 

Further investigations and research have been undertaken into the installation and operation of CCTV cameras and the findings are presented in this report.

 

ISSUES:

 

More recently, the Eastern Beaches Local Area Command (LAC) together with the State Transit Authority have undertaken a Community Safety Audit of a number of locations within the City which have been of concern to both parties.  The areas of concern are La Perouse (intersection of Anzac Parade and Bunnerong Road), Little Bay (Jennifer Street to Little Bay Road), Memorial Park Matraville and parts of Maroubra Junction. 

 

Recommendations of the audit include a request to Council to install CCTV cameras at the above locations.  This would require the installations of seven cameras.

If agreed to by Council, this will add significantly to the scope of the project as well as to the costs, given the geographical separation of the areas.

 

It is also considered that a static monitoring system will not be of great benefit and that a “live” or “partly live” monitored system will deliver the most effective crime prevention and response system, particularly with an effective communication and partnering program with the Eastern Beaches LAC.

 

In relation to the Coogee Beach area, discussions have been held with Inspector Brad Hodder, Eastern Beaches LAC, and a joint inspection was conducted of the Sydney City CCTV programme in December 2006. The Sydney City CCTV camera programme is monitored by Council staff with Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights in particular proving to be the time that incidents of crime most frequently occur. At that time, Sydney City used a VCR system which proved to be less efficient in terms of searching for specific incidents and copying to allow for production as evidence to the authorities.  Sydney City staff indicated that a hardware upgrade to a digital recording system would significantly improve the quality of recording and the time required to retrieve video footage of interest.

 

A number of staff are involved in the Sydney City operation and annual operating costs are reported as being in the order of $900,000.  This would appear to be the most extensive local government CCTV programme in Australia. A number of information documents have been prepared in association with the Federal Government’s National Community Crime Prevention Programme.  Tip Sheet number five (attached) indicates the following in relation to costs and puts the Sydney City programme into perspective:

 

CCTV has both a set up cost and an ongoing recurrent operating cost. These costs can make it expensive to implement and maintain. Furthermore technology is constantly improving requiring ongoing decision making as to whether the equipment being used will need to be upgraded. There are a wide range of costs associated with CCTV systems, with the most expensive involving many cameras, 24 hour monitoring and ‘active’ monitoring (IRIS 2005,Wilson & Sutton 2003). Research conducted in 2002 refers to the following examples of annual operational cost for local government CCTV systems – Sydney $900,000, Melbourne $400,000, Adelaide $310,000, Ipswich $444,000, Fairfield $340,000, and Toowoomba $85,000 (Wilson & Sutton 2003).

 

The Federal Government’s National Community Crime Prevention Programme Tip Sheets Number Five & Six are appended to this report for information.

 

Inspector Hodder has indicated that from a policing perspective, the area of surveillance by CCTV should be extended to include parts of Dunningham Reserve in the north and through to Grant Reserve in the south.  Within the Coogee commercial area, camera coverage to include Coogee Bay Road up to Brook Street would also be required together with extensive coverage of Goldstein Reserve and parts of Coogee Oval.  The number of cameras required to effectively cover this expanded area would be in the order of 20 to 25 depending on type and quality of camera implemented.

 

Discussions were also more recently conducted with Steve Williamson, Community Safety Officer from Rockdale City Council. An inspection of their installation and facility at Brighton was also conducted. The Brighton facility consisted of eight cameras setup on a wireless relay link.  The wireless relay requires that there be line of sight installation between one camera and the next in order for the relay to operate.  This monitoring room is cable connected to the last relay point and hence needs to be in relative close proximity to the installation site.  Rockdale Council had previously installed an internet based system which was monitored by a security firm based in the Ryde area.  Issues arose with this operation in that it was found that monitoring staff lacked local knowledge and had poor local geographical knowledge, thus reducing the effectiveness of the monitoring.

 

Rockdale City Council only “live” monitors the cameras on three nights a week in the summer season. This is conducted by staff supplied by Council’s external security service provider.  The live monitoring is conducted for 19 hours per week at a cost of around $30 per hour.  Other live monitoring is conducted when there may be a special event occurring in the area or when requested by the LAC in conjunction with a special operation.

 

The Rockdale system has recently been upgraded to a digital recording system.  All images are recorded to the system hard drive and held for a period of approximately 40 days before the recording system overwrites with new video footage.  Any footage of an incident of interest needs to be extracted from the system within the 40 day recording loop period.  The length recording loop can be increased by installation of larger hard drives.

 

 

Figure 1 - Typical CCTV Control Room Setup

 
 

 

 


The supply cost per pole including a PTZ (pan, tilt and zoom) camera and wireless relay equipment is in the order of $4,500.  Additional costs are incurred for installation of the pole/camera assembly. System costs will also need to cover control room establishment, computer system and operating software for the system.  Hardware establishment costs for a 20 - 25 camera system would be in the order of $150,000.  Identifying and establishing an appropriate control room would be additional to the hardware establishment cost.  Operating costs would vary dependant upon the level of surveillance determined appropriate.  Direct operating costs could vary from between approximately $10,000 (Rockdale model) upwards to several hundred thousands of dollars for a fulltime monitored system.

 

Figure 2 - Typical wireless CCTV pole, relay and camera –

Cnr Bay & Moate Sts, Brighton

 

 
 

 

 

 


CCTV camera technology is moving rapidly with new products and transmission methods improving dramatically over short periods of time.  It is a specialist area and one that needs specialist advice to provide Council with best value for money.  A number of supply companies have contacted Council and it is evident that a competitive market exists for the supply and installation of a CCTV surveillance system.  Judging from some of the experiences at Rockdale, it would be prudent to engage one company to take full responsibility for the design, supply and installation of the system rather than segment the project into discreet components.  An appropriate option in this regard is to call expressions of interest from suitably experienced companies to provide Council with an installation strategy and ‘order of cost’ estimates.  It may also be prudent to seek a staged implementation project which may include expansion of a CCTV system to include other known areas of concern including the locations mentioned by the Eastern Beaches LAC earlier in this report. Council can then make an informed decision as to whether the project provides an appropriate benefit cost to its community.

 

 

Figure 3 - Signage used by Rockdale City Council

to advise of the presence of a CCTV system in the area.

 
 

 

 

 

 


RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6:            A liveable city.

Direction 6b:          Our town centres, beaches, public places and streets are safe, inviting, clean and support a recognisable image of our City; and

Direction 6c:           The safety of our community is paramount and is acknowledged and supported through proactive policies, programmes and strategies.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

The cost for the installation of CCTV system, monitoring room and associated hardware are expected to be in the order of $150,000 to $200,000.  The cost of monitoring the system will depend on the level and method of live monitoring finally determined appropriate and could vary from $10,000 to several hundred thousand dollars.  It is considered that a part ‘live’ monitored system focusing on the evening to night periods of Thursday through to Sunday nights would cost in the order of $70,000 per annum.

 

Funds for this project have not been identified at this time but subject to Council adopting a Community Crime Prevention Programme that encompasses CCTV camera installation as a recommendation could see much of the infrastructure costs being defrayed by a successful grant application under the Federal Government’s National Community Crime Prevention Programme.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

It is considered that the installation of a CCTV camera system may assist in the reduction of crime in the nominated areas and that there may be a greater sense of safety by community members.

 

Information provided via the Federal Government’s National Community Crime Prevention Programme suggests that:

The Research suggests that CCTV is most successful in reducing or solving crime when there is an active police interest in:

–      providing surveillance information to inform the setting up of CCTV

–      being involved in monitoring the CCTV

–      using the evidence it can provide

 

Accordingly it is considered that Council should seek further assistance form the LAC in the establishment of the CCTV monitoring control room and in active surveillance.

 

It is also considered that Council seek expressions of interest from suitably experienced companies to provide Council with an installation strategy and ‘order of cost’ estimates.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

(a) Council write to the Eastern Beaches LAC seeking assistance with the establishment of the CCTV monitoring control room and with active surveillance; and

(b) Council seek expressions of interest from suitably experienced companies to provide Council with an installation strategy and ‘order of cost’ estimates.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1.     Federal Government's National Community Crime Prevention Program  Tip Sheets Number Five

2.     Federal Government's National Community Crime Prevention Program Tip Sheets Number Six 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK SHAW

JOHN CALVANI

A/ DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

COOORDINATOR PARKS AND RECREATION

 


 

 

ATTACHMENT 1

                                     

 

NATIONAL COMMUNITY

CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMME

­­­­­­­­­­_____________________________________

CCTV as a crime
prevention measure

What is CCTV?

Closed Circuit Television Cameras (CCTV) are used to monitor and record images of what takes place in specific locations in real time. The images collected are sent to a monitor and recorded on video tape or as digital information. The cameras can be fixed or set to scan an area or they can be operated by controllers. Monitors can be watched by controllers or left unmonitored. The recorded information can be stored and/or reviewed by those who have access to the recordings at their convenience.

This Tip Sheet details how CCTV can be used as a part of a community crime prevention strategy. It details the way CCTV works as a crime prevention tool and presents evidence about its effectiveness in certain settings. Examples are also given of its use in Australia.

Prepared in partnership with the Australian Institute of Criminology

 

 

 

How does CCTV work to prevent crime?

CCTV is an environmental crime prevention tool. Commentators have described its possible effects as including:

  providing a surveillance function that may work to deter people from committing crimes in the area in which it is used

  signifying to the public that an area with CCTV is a safe place and the increased use of the space means that crime is less likely to happen as there are more potential witnesses

  the presence of CCTV may act as a prompt to remind people to take other security measures such as locking their car (Welsh & Farrington 2006).

Is CCTV useful as a crime prevention tool?

  Evaluations indicate that CCTV is useful in certain circumstances. A comparison of 22 evaluations showed that 11 found a positive effect (decrease in offences), five an undesirable effect (increase in crime), five found no effect and in one case the evidence was unclear (Welsh & Farrington 2002).

  Evidence from the UK shows that its use may reduce theft of motor vehicles and some other forms of acquisitive crime. There is also evidence that it works best in small enclosed areas (Gill & Spriggs 2005).

  Research suggests that CCTV is most successful in reducing or solving crime when there is an active police interest in:

– providing surveillance information to inform the setting up of CCTV

– being involved in monitoring the CCTV

– using the evidence it can provide.

  There is also evidence that improving street lighting reduces crime. As both street lighting and CCTV appear to separately reduce crime then it has been suggested that combining these elements may have even greater impact on crime reduction in environments like car parks in reducing vehicle crime (Welsh & Farrington 2004).

What is the cost of CCTV?

CCTV has both a set up cost and an ongoing recurrent operating cost. These costs can make it expensive to implement and maintain. Furthermore technology is constantly improving requiring ongoing decision making as to whether the equipment being used will need to be upgraded. There are a wide range of costs associated with CCTV systems, with the most expensive involving many cameras, 24 hour monitoring and ‘active’ monitoring (IRIS 2005,Wilson & Sutton 2003). Research conducted in 2002 refers to the following examples of annual operational cost for local government CCTV systems – Sydney $900,000, Melbourne $400,000, Adelaide $310,000, Ipswich $444,000, Fairfield $340,000, and Toowoomba $85,000 (Wilson & Sutton 2003).

Where is CCTV used in Australia?

CCTV is used extensively and can be found in many places including in commercial premises, at ATM venues, on public transport, at airports, in central business districts, and shopping malls.

The rate of uptake seems to be accelerating. As most central business districts now have them the most recent and future expansion of CCTV will be in suburban and rural areas.

There seems to have been an increase over two years across Australia from 33 to 45 open air camera systems (IRIS 2005, Wilson & Sutton 2003).

In a recent survey of all local councils in Australia (excludes the ACT) nine per cent of local government councils reported that they had a CCTV system. In around 60% of cases the main CCTV was installed within the last six years. A further two per cent of councils reported they were currently considering installing a system (IRIS 2005).

Local government managed schemes have been categorised according to location and use of cameras (ARTD 2001):

·                 street/park/plaza surveillance

·                 council facilities (sports facilities, libraries etc)

·                 council administration buildings only

·                 portable cameras deployed at problem locations for limited time

·                 dummy cameras.

 

With the nine percent of local councils in Australia that have CCTV (IRIS 2005):

·                 32% have them in open air shopping malls

·                 54% have them in city centres other than malls, and

·                 48% have cameras on council property.

 

It is also common for the public transport system to use CCTV. For example in NSW, in 2001 (ARTD 2001):

·                 State rail had cameras on over 300 stations, including 5,500 cameras, 19 control centres and more than 100 staff operating the system.

·                 There was extensive CCTV coverage on public buses, ferry wharves, private buses and many taxis.

Are there guidelines for CCTV?

Australian standards for CCTV are currently under development by Standards Australia and may be available publicly by the second half of 2006. There are British codes of practice

www.bsi-global.com/Security/Electronic/BS7958:1999.xalter that contain much of the technical information that needs to be considered and understood when considering whether a CCTV system will work in local situations.

New South Wales has guidelines for CCTV operation in public places. Published in 2000 and endorsed at the national police commissioners’ conference in 1999, these guidelines are subject to regular review

www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/cpd/ll_cpd.nsf/vwFiles/cctv.pdf/$file/cctv.pdf

The guidelines outline principles under the following headings:

·                 Ownership of schemes and accompanying responsibilities

·                 Community consultation

·                 Setting clear objectives

 

 

·                 Integrated approaches to crime prevention

·                 Police involvement in public area CCTV schemes

·                 Managing and operating schemes

·                 Complaints

·                 Monitoring and auditing

See Tip Sheet 6 for information on establishing and implementing a CCTV project.

Further reading

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Australian Institute of Criminology 2004. AICrime reduction matters No. 18:

Closed circuit television (CCTV) as a crime prevention measure, Canberra, AIC.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/crm/crm018.html

Australian Institute of Criminology 2004. Closed-circuit television effectiveness and cost.

Crime Facts Info, No. 69. Canberra, AIC.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi069.html

Gill, M & Spriggs, A 2005 Assessing the impact of CCTV. Home Office Research Study

292, London, Home Office

IRIS Research Ltd. 2005, Australian Council’s CCTV Survey 2005, Wollongong,

IRIS Research.

NSW Attorney General’s Department 2000. NSW Government Policy Statement and

Guidelines for the Establishment and Implementation of Closed Circuit Television

(CCTV) in Public Places, NSW Attorney General’s Department.

www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/cpd/ll_cpd.nsf/vwFiles/cctv.pdf/$file/cctv.pdf

Welsh, BC & Farrington DP, 2002 Crime prevention effects of closed circuit television:

a systematic review, Home Office Study 252, London: Home Office Research,

Development and Statistics Directorate.

Welsh, BC & Farrington DP, 2004. Surveillance for crime prevention in public space:

Results and policy choices in Britain and America, Criminology & Public Policy;

Jul 2004; Criminal Justice Periodicals pg. 497

Wilson, D and Sutton A 2003. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice No. 271:

Open-street CCTV in Australia, Australian Institute of Criminology 2004.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi271.html

 


 

ATTACHMENT 2

 

NATIONAL COMMUNITY

CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMME

­­­­­­­­­­_____________________________________

Establishing and
implementing CCTV
in your local area

 

This tip sheet sets out information that will help communities to conduct a needs analysis and create a plan for the appropriate use of CCTV in their local area.

It also outlines the basic implementation issues that need to be thought through in deciding where to place CCTV, what kinds of systems might be the most useful and what the cost implications are. Evaluation is also addressed in this tip sheet.

 

 

Prepared in partnership with the Australian Institute of Criminology

 


Initial steps establishing CCTV as a

crime prevention strategy

Before establishing CCTV as a crime prevention strategy in a local area, the following steps are recommended:

·         establish clear objectives about why a CCTV system is needed to:

– effectively prevent or reduce crime in the area under surveillance (a deterrent for potential

offenders)

– improve sense of safety for general public in the area

– providing evidence that identifies offenders and events

·         involve a local crime prevention or safety committee

·         undertake community consultation before, during and after planning and installation.

·         identify the potential police role and interest and capacity for involvement. It is important to engage the people who will use the system in the beginning of the planning phase. Police particularly need to be involved as they will be asked to respond to incidents, to supply intelligence for installation and to make use of the images collected for evidence for prosecution later.

If possible, an initial trial of a CCTV system should be conducted. The trial may indicate if you need to modify or correct any problems.

Key implementation issues

Costs

·         The costs of CCTV can be significant, there is the initial set up cost and then recurrent operating costs. Systems that are actively monitored 24 hours will be the most expensive to implement and maintain.

·         Technology is also changing and there will be further costs associated with updating the system, as new technology becomes available.

·         Recent research investigated how local councils funded their open air or shopping mall systems. Twenty-two percent of local councils that had CCTV reported they shared the ongoing costs of CCTV systems with other organisations, with a business levy or rate being the most common source of this funding (IRIS 2005).

Legislation

·         It is important to be aware of and understand the implications of state or territory legislation that may affect the usage of CCTV and any images collected. The relevant areas to consider include but may not be limited to privacy laws, human rights, data storage and access, and freedom of information provisions.

·         Particular attention may need to be paid to any monitoring of private residences that may occur. The NSW guidelines suggest that in NSW no private residences should be monitored in the surveillance area without the residents’ explicit permission

see www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/cpd/ll_cpd.nsf/vwFiles/cctv.pdf/$file/cctv.pdf)

 

 

 

 

Technology

·         Skilled people who have knowledge of video production technology and the capacity to implement a CCTV scheme need to be involved in decisions about the purchase of equipment and in its installation and operation.

·         There are two types of camera, static or PTZ (pan, tilt and zoom) depending on whether operator controlled or not. In general, operators prefer PTZ but it is more expensive as it requires many cameras with overlapping vision.

·         Australian standards for CCTV are currently under development by Standards Australia and may be available publicly by the second half of 2006. There are British codes of practice that contain much of the technical information that needs to be considered and understood when considering whether a CCTV system will work in local situations

(www.bsi-global.com/Security/Electronic/BS7958:1999.xalter).

Type of coverage and level of monitoring

·         In Australia most local government operated schemes involve less than 25 cameras, and have colour digital cameras. Six out of ten CCTV systems in local areas have less than ten cameras (IRIS 2005).

·         The same survey of local councils revealed that a third of systems are monitored 24 hours and nearly a third of systems are not monitored at all.

·         Decisions regarding density of cameras and camera coverage and positioning are crucial to an effective CCTV system. Technical expertise and police intelligence information should inform decisions about how the CCTV system is set up in terms of placement and coverage.

·         Lighting is important. Some areas do not have adequate lighting at night for CCTV systems to be effective.

Managing and operating a system

·         It may be necessary to employ an experienced project manager with relevant broad knowledge and skills to bring together a diverse set of personnel to work together to plan and implement what can be a complex project.

·         Where local government cameras are actively monitored, different type of personnel may be involved in monitoring, such as council staff, private security personnel, police and volunteers.

·         Procedures need to be in place to cover the day to day operation of the system and data storage and access. Operating procedures are widely used to provide instructions to control room staff, to regulate program operation and the release of visual material.

·         Police involvement in the monitoring process makes for stronger linkages between surveillance and responses to incidents. If the police are not directly involved in monitoring, there needs to be procedures and resources in place to ensure there is an appropriate response to incidents. No response will effect community perceptions of the effectiveness of CCTV and its deterrence value.

Monitoring and evaluation

·         Accountability and external review can include a complaints procedure, signage that alerts the public to the presence of cameras, and audit committees.

·         The impact of the CCTV should be monitored over time, in terms of community safety and fear of crime.

·         NSW guidelines recommend evaluation in the first six months of operation.

 

 

·         An evaluation can include the following:

– benchmark crime statistics for the area and adjacent areas for the 12 months leading up to installation time

– crime statistics for the area and adjacent areas for at least 12 months after installation, to see if there have been any changes

– data on incidents where a response was initiated and no official intervention was required (to capture other incidents other than those that would generate official crime statistics).

Further reading

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Wilson, D and Sutton A 2003. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice No. 271:

Open-street CCTV in Australia, Australian Institute of Criminology 2004.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi271.html

Australian Institute of Criminology 2004. AICrime reduction matters No. 18:

Closed circuit television (CCTV) as a crime prevention measure, Canberra, AIC.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/crm/crm018.html

Australian Institute of Criminology 2004. Closed-circuit television effectiveness and cost.

Crime Facts Info, No. 69. Canberra, AIC.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi069.html

Gill, M & Spriggs, A 2005 Assessing the impact of CCTV. Home Office Research Study

292, London, Home Office

IRIS Research Ltd. 2005, Australian Council’s CCTV Survey 2005, Wollongong, IRIS

Research.

NSW Attorney General’s Department 2000. NSW Government Policy Statement and

Guidelines for the Establishment and Implementation of Closed Circuit Television

(CCTV) in Public Places, NSW Attorney General’s Department

www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/cpd/ll_cpd.nsf/vwFiles/cctv.pdf/$file/cctv.pdf

Welsh, BC & Farrington DP, 2004. Surveillance for crime prevention in public space:

Results and policy choices in Britain and America, Criminology & Public Policy;

Jul 2004; Criminal Justice Periodicals pg. 497


 

 

Director, City Services' Report 42/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

CLOVELLY BEACH CARPARK - COASTAL WALKWAY

 

 

DATE:

10 July, 2007

FILE NO:

PROJ/10171/2005

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES   

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

In the 2007-08 Capital Works budget Council has provided substantial funds to upgrade the Coastal Walkway in the City of Randwick. One of the projects identified for completion this financial year is the construction of the coastal walkway to the eastern perimeter of the car park on the southern headland of Clovelly Beach. The construction of this section of the walkway will provide a significant link in the walkway.

 

The Concept Design was placed on public exhibition from Friday 8 June to Friday 29 June 2007. The design concept provides for a perimeter pathway within the area of existing car park and thus the existing car park needs to be reconfigured. Council has now received a number of submissions from the community in response to the design. Generally these submissions are very supportive of construction the pathway for the coastal walkway but do not support the proposed reconfiguration of the car park. Council now needs to decide the most appropriate outcome for the layout of the car park.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

Details of Exhibited Concept Design

 

Currently there is no defined pathway for the coastal walkway around the southern headland at Clovelly Beach. An aerial photograph of the existing car park is provided in Attachment 1. The exhibited concept plan (Refer Attachment 2), proposes a new, accessible and even pathway, with seating areas and a reconfigured car park. In the exhibited concept plan the coastal walkway is set within the boundary of the existing car park thus taking up the first row of existing car spaces. This plan also converts a section of the existing grassed area into car parking and increases the number of car spaces by approximately forty-seven (47). This grassed area is currently defined as overflow parking in the Clovelly Beach Plan of Management.

 

The advantages of the exhibited concept design i.e. Option 1 include:

 

·       Provides an additional 47 car spaces associated with Clovelly Beach. The increase in the number of parking spaces is in response to concerns raised by the Precinct Committee and others for the need for more car parking in this area at peak times.

·       provides a high quality upgrade to the pathway including seats and landscaping that takes better advantage of the views

·       provides a clearly defined pedestrian only routes east/west across and surrounding the car park

·       greater pedestrians safety by separating walkers from vehicles

 

The disadvantages of this concept design include:

 

·       impinges significantly on the flat grassed area between the car park and Victory St

·       additional parking availability may put additional stress  on the facilities of Clovelly Beach environs

 

ISSUES:

 

Council has received feedback from a number of residents, the Precinct Committee and the Clovelly Surf Life Saving Club. A summary of their comments/concerns is provided in Attachment 4. The major issues raised in the submissions are as follows:

 

·         Strong support from all stakeholders for the construction of the coastal walk pathway at the eastern perimeter of the car park

·         The Precinct Committee supports the construction of the coastal walkway pathway; it does not support the central east-west pathway running through car park as shown in exhibited concept design. The Committee also recommends that the surface of additional car parking area utilises a soft surface solution eg. grid masonry paving with grass infill.

·         Six households from Victory St strongly oppose increase in car parking spaces by utilising a portion of the existing grassed area. The exhibited plan shows an increase of 47 spaces by formalising the overflow parking area. These residents submitted a number of reasons for their concern including loss of recreational area, increased vehicular traffic and stress on facilities and the environment.

·         One household from Victory St is not concerned with the loss of the grassed area but highlights issues associated with traffic flow in Victory St and the car park.

 

Development of Concept Design - Option 2

 

In response to the objections received from the residents Council Officers have developed a second option for the reconfigured car park. This design is the same as Option 1 in terms of the coastal walk location and other pedestrian pathways. The main differences in this Option 2 compared to the exhibited concept (Option 1) are as follows:

 

·       the total number of car spaces in the reconfigured car park for Option 2 are the same as the existing parking spaces 

·       impedes on the existing grassed area by only one row of  perpendicular parking to the eastern edge

·       provides substantial landscaping to the existing grassed area making it a more useable and pleasing area

·       The constructed walkways through the grassed areas has been removed.

 

The disadvantages of Option 2 include:

 

·       impinges marginally on the existing grass area

·       no increase of  parking in the area

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

 

Outcome: 5:    Excellence in urban design and development

Direction 5a:     Maximise opportunities for residents and visitors to enjoy both active and passive open space uses.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Randwick City Council has produced a design for the construction of a defined pathway for the coastal walkway to the eastern perimeter of the Clovelly Beach Car Park. Further to this it has developed options for the reconfiguring of the car park. Option 1 increases the car spaces numbers by 47; Option 2 generally retains the existing numbers of spaces.

 

Council now needs to decide the most appropriate outcome for the layout of the carpark. It would seem that the objective of this design project was for the purpose of extending and upgrading the coastal walkway.  Therefore in response to concerns raised it seems most appropriate at this time to maintain the status quo in terms of the number of car spaces. This strategy would result in recommending Council to undertake Concept Design- Option 2; that is the upgrade of the walkway and the retention of the current number of car spaces.

 

It should be noted that due to this area being Crown land in trust to Council any reconfiguration of the car park will require a development application.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council:

 

1.     supports Clovelly Beach Coastal Walkway Concept Plan – Option 2 (Refer Attachment 3). This option constructs the coastal walkway whilst generally retaining the current numbers of car spaces; and

 

2.     officers submit as required a Development Application for the works involved in Concept Design - Option 2 as shown in Attachment 3 of this report.

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

1:  Aerial Photograph of Existing Carpark

2:  Option 1 - Exhibited Concept Design

3:  Option 2 - Concept Design

4:  Summary of Comments from Stakeholders  

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK SHAW

KERRY COLQUHOUN

A/  DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

LANDSCAPE DESIGN COOORDINATOR

 


ATTACHMENT 1:  Aerial Photograph of Existing Carpark


 


 

ATTACHMENT 2:  Option 1 - Exhibited Concept Design

 

 

 

 


 

ATTACHMENT 3:  Option 2 – Coastal Walkway Upgrade Concept Plan

 


ATTACHMENT 4:  Summary of comments from Stakeholders

 

RESIDENT

COMMENTS

Minutes of Precinct Committee Meeting

7.30pm

Monday,

18 June 2007

    General response to the upgrading of the coastal walkway was positive.  One or two emails had been received raising concerns about the loss of green space near Victory St to increase parking lost due to the upgrade of the walkway.   There was also concern about the proposed pedestrian access route through the car park – as it was suggested this was not a route currently used by walkers and that it could potentially be a safety risk with pedestrians, particularly children moving through parked cars.  

    It was resolved that the Clovelly Precinct Committee support the upgrade in principal with the following provisions:  (a) That the pedestrian walkway through the car park be removed as it was considered to be unnecessary and potentially a safety risk, and (b) The residual green space area be appropriately landscaped with low lying planting to be implemented in the area to reduce the impact and improve the aesthetics.   Also request Council to review the type of surface utilised for the extra parking spaces and investigate soft-surface options eg. “grid masonry paving with grass infill” similar to the Southern end of the Dee Why car park where grassed/earth car spaces have been successfully implemented. 

 

Resident

12 Victory St

Clovelly

    Fully supports Council upgrade of the coastal walkway i.e. the pathway

    The more efficient car parking layout is commendable and would be further enhanced by speed calming measures.

    Does not support the taking over of the existing green space to introduce additional formal car parking.

    Suggests that Victory St should become single way or closed to reduce vehicular pedestrian conflict.

 

Resident

6 Victory St

Clovelly

 

    States “small area of grass is sometimes used as a play area and surely offers a welcome patch of green…” does not support changing the area for increased pathway.

 

Resident

6  Victory St

Clovelly

    Appalled at the proposed alterations  removing a flat grassed area which is used for play

    Does not support the idea of increased car parking as it causes more stress on the facilities and the environment

Resident

8 Victory St

Clovelly

 

   Does not support the increase of car spaces because it means reducing the park area immediately in front of Victory Street to add more car parking.

   Supports the pathway for pedestrian safety and provision of views.

   States that the inclusion of the high quality pathway does not require the increased car parking spaces.

 

Resident

16 Victory St

Clovelly

 

   Supports the upgrade of the coastal walkway and associated landscaping

   Does not support the proposal to convert the existing green space into car parking.

   Advises they do not believe that decreasing the limited green space is consistent with Council or State policies.

   Advises that in busy times the traffic flow is chaotic and suggests further thought into traffic management. - wants traffic claming measures and/or restricting access to Victory St.

 

 

Resident

20 Victory St

Clovelly

   Overall believes it is an excellent plan particularly in terms of pedestrian safety.

   Supports path through grassed area  for pedestrian traffic from Bondi to Coogee

   Supports raised thresholds to provide safe transit for pedestrians and slow vehicles.

   Is not concerned about the removal of the grassed area and suggests a compromise.

   Advises that during busy periods that cars park illegally in Victory St- suggests Victory St be made one way heading north.

Resident

4 Victory St

Clovelly

   Does not support the idea of the grassed area being made into car park

   Suggests walkway be built on a suspended timber walkway on the rocks

   Advises that car park only full on peak summer days

President

Clovelly Coastal Walkway Upgrade

   Wants to ensure replacement of existing Clovelly SLSC volunteer duty patrol member’s parking reserve car spaces.

   Wants police to be allowed to use these spaces

   Raises concern regarding the proposed walk way from west to east may be dangerous to small due to the perception of being a pedestrian crossing

   Concerned that shrubs and other landscaping may reduce or remove valuable recreational open spaces.


  

Director, City Services' Report 43/2007

 

 

 

SUBJECT:

FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION TO SHADE STRUCTURE FOR SOS PRESCHOOL IN BUNDOCK STREET, RANDWICK

 

 

DATE:

10 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07699

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

By email received 22 June 2007, Jo-Anne Ryan has sought Council’s consideration to contribution of 50% of the costs associated with the provision of a shade structure over the play facilities at the SOS Preschool located on Council’s property at 22 Bundock Street, Randwick.

 

ISSUES:

 

In her application, Jo-Anne Ryan has advised:

 

“The reason for my call was to follow up on our earlier discussions regarding Council assisting with shade cloth for the playground at SOS Preschool in Bundock St, Randwick. The estimates for the shade cloth are between $13,500 and $14,000. We are requesting that Council provide half of the funding ($7,000) and we would endeavour to raise the other half ourselves. We were initially planning to apply to the State Government for the other half under the Department of Sport and Recreation's Capital Assistance Program however when we last spoke to the Department they were unclear about whether that program would continue.

 

A bit of rationale - I believe that this request to Council is reasonable given that SOS is located within a Council building and that Council (as I understand it) has a policy to provide shade at all its facilities. I would think that a facility/ service targeting young children would certainly be a priority in this regard. Further, by way of background information I understand that Council has not already contributed in any way to the set up of the new SOS premises, or the shade cloth we already have - this was funded completely from the Centre's funds with some help from the Department of Community Services when we first moved into the new premises. Finally I should point out we are also paying a much bigger rent to Council than we did for the old premises, under Council's new Community Facilities Policy. Being a community based service, and charging affordable fees to local families, this higher rent reduces the funds we have available to help fund big items such as this.

 

Nonetheless we would certainly be very grateful if Council could help us with this important and expensive item.

 

Finally, as I mentioned we are planning the opening of the Centre towards the end of the year and it would be great to have the new shade cloth, and to formally acknowledge this as Council's contribution to SOS.

 

I appreciate your consideration of this request. Hopefully some funds left over in this year's capital works program, or some funds could be specifically allocated out of next year's budget for this project.”

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 6:       A Liveable City.

Direction 6a:      Our public assets are planned, managed and funded to meet the community expectations and defined levels of service.

Key Action:        Assets are managed strategically to deliver intergenerational equity and to meet Council’s obligation as the custodian of our community’s assets.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

The implementation of the recommendations of this report will cost Council a maximum of $7,000 to be provided from the 2007-08 playground and shade structure program.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The request for a funding contribution is considered to provide a benefit to users of the community based SOS Preschool which aims to provide an affordable child care programme to local families by keeping fees low.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That:

 

(a) Council contribute a maximum of 50% of the costs of the supply and installation of the shade facility at the SOS Preschool in Bundock St, Randwick up to a maximum of $7,000 excluding GST.

 

(b) Council’s contribution towards the shade facility be permanently displayed within the centre and that Council be given credit for its contribution at the opening of the centre and at other times as appropriate.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK SHAW

JOHN CALVANI

A/ DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

COOORDINATOR PARKS & RECREATION  


 

Director, City Services' Report 44/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

COUNCIL-OWNED FICUS 'HILLII' (HILL'S WEEPING FIG) GROWING OUTSIDE 8-10 ABBOTT STREET, COOGEE

 

 

DATE:

11 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/07359

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES  

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

The Works Committee, at its meeting held on 10 July 2007, resolved: 

 

“(Matson/Notley-Smith) that this matter be deferred to the next ordinary council meeting to allow for further community consultation with residents in the street.”

 

The report presented on the 10 July 2007 Works Committee Meeting is repeated below:

 

 

On 31 May, 2007, the owner of 8 Abbott Street, Coogee, wrote to Council expressing concerns about the damage being caused to his property by the roots of a Council-owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing on the nature strip outside his property and detailing a range of problems associated with that tree.

 

The owner of 10 Abbott Street, Coogee, has in the past also written to Council highlighting the problems he is experiencing with tree roots from the same Council-owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ growing on the nature strip outside his property and requesting that a range of damage be rectified by Council.

 

ISSUES:

 

The owners of both these properties have been experiencing a range of tree root-related issues for some years caused by the roots of this tree and up until now they have not requested the removal of the tree.

 

Specifically, the problems associated with the tree range from branches growing into powerlines and being regularly pruned, ongoing footpath damage and repair, large branches falling in high wind events, root damage to the roadway and adjacent kerb and gutter, and tree root problems now extend to structural damage to both adjacent properties.

A recent site inspection confirmed these problems and reinforced the fact that roots from the tree are causing ongoing and increasing damage to Council infrastructure, as well as increasingly serious damage within the front yard areas of both properties.

 

The tree concerned is in excellent health and is one of several growing along Abbott Street, Coogee. The tree is approximately 12-15 metres in height and is also around 15 metres across the canopy. It is an important provider of habitat and food source and provides significant visual amenity along the northern side of the street.

 

Council’s tree gang recently trenched along the front of both properties and discovered extensive tree root material fanning out into both residences. These tree roots are substantial and contribute significantly to the stability and vigour of the tree.

 

Because of the extent of tree root intrusion and the proximity of the property boundaries to the tree, it is not possible to sever intruding tree roots and to install a functional tree root barrier.

 

Root barriers are not historically effective with this species of tree and the amount of tree root material concerned would render the tree unstable if it were severed.

 

Any such action would also have an adverse effect on the long-term health and viability of the tree and would certainly allow the introduction and intrusion of fungal pathogens into the basal area of the tree.

 

Because the tree is growing on an embankment the removal of large amounts of root material on the northern side of the tree would seriously compromise its stability, particularly as the majority of canopy overhangs the roadway on the southern side of the tree.

 

Tree roots also extend a large distance along the embankment where the tree is growing and these constitute a serious liability issue to Council. The owner of 8 Abbott Street advises that what prompted him to write to Council seeking removal and replacement of the tree was the fact that his young son tripped on exposed tree roots whilst exiting their premises.

 

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 10:          A Healthy Environment.

Direction 10b:           Environmental risks and impacts are strategically managed.

Key Action:            Develop and implement policies, programmes and strategies to manage environmental risks and impacts.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

The cost to remove and stump grind this large street tree, to re-instate the damaged nature strip area and to replace the tree with one or two advanced Waterhousia floribunda (Weeping Lilly Pillys) would be in the vicinity of $3,500 and this would come from Council’s annual tree management budget.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The roots of this large Council-owned street tree are causing ongoing and increasing damage to the adjacent footpath, kerb and gutter and roadway and this will worsen for as long as the tree is retained.

 

Branches have to be regularly pruned out of the domestic service wires, overhead powerlines and the canopy creates significant shadowing of the adjacent footpath at night.

 

The roots of the tree have now intruded into several properties and are specifically causing (or have the potential to cause) increasing structural damage to the two adjacent properties.

 

Of major concern is that the tree will eventually cost Council a much more considerable amount of money for property repairs, as well as constituting an ongoing trip liability hazard, should it be retained.

 

The removal and replacement of this tree would certainly fall within the parameters originally set out in Council’s resolution relating to aggressive-rooted street trees, although its removal would have a major impact on the visual and wildlife habitat amenity of the surrounding streetscape.

 

The owners of both adjacent properties who are now directly affected by tree root damage are resigned to the fact that the only effective long-term solution for dealing with the tree root damage being caused to their properties is the removal of the subject tree. 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That the Council-owned Ficus microcarpa var. ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing on the nature strip outside 8 and 10 Abbott Street, Coogee, be removed and replaced with an appropriate number of more appropriate tree species, as per Council’s Street Tree Masterplan.

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Series of photographs showing size and location of Ficus 'Hillii' and detailing a range of damages issues.

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK SHAW

BRYAN BOURKE

A/ DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

TREE MANAGEMENT OFFICER


ATTACHMENT 1

 

Cracks appearing in front fence – caused by Ficus ‘Hillii’ tree roots

Ficus ‘Hillii’ viewed from Abbott Street

Extensive tree root material running into both 8 and 10 Abbott Street, Coogee

 

Tree roots growing under front brick fence

Roots growing under footing into property

 

Root mass adjacent front brick fences

Large tree root growing under entranceway into 10 Abbott Street

Entranceway into front of 10 Abbott St – pavers allowing temporary access

Tree roots undermining kerb and gutter and roadway

 

Tree roots have lifted kerb and undermined roadway

Roots protruding above nature strip – liability issue

 

Tree is highly prominent and significant in streetscape


Director, City Services' Report

45/2007 

 

 

 

SUBJECT:

RECYCLING OF PAPER WASTE GENERATED THROUGH LOCAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN

 

 

DATE:

11 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/06595 xr F2005/00171

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES    

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

At its Ordinary Coucil meeting of 24 April 2007, Council resolved on the motion of Councillor Belleli, seconded by Councillor Notley-Smith, that:

 

(a)      Council makes a paper recycling bin available, at no cost to Council, for disposal of paper and cardboard on conclusion of future election campaigns for local candidates;

 

(b)      Council contact all local candidates during election campaigns to let them know the facility is available; and

 

(c)      a report come back to Council detailing whether this exercise is revenue neutral or a profit making exercise for Council.

 

This report analyses the issues related to collection and recycling of paper and cardboard waste generated through election campaigns and options for recycling such waste.

 

During the local election campaign, a substantial amount of paper and cardboard waste is generated that is partly processed through Council’s residential recycling program.

 

Currently, Council provides kerbside recycling services for residential properties.  In addition, residents can drop-off any excess recyclables at Council’s Recycling Facility located at Bumborah Point Road, Port Botany.  Council also provides cardboard and paper recycling services to its commercial customers.

 

ISSUES:

 

1.     Residential Recycling Program

 

(a)  Kerbside recycling

 

Council provides fortnightly kerbside recycling collection services to the residential properties.  Annually Council collects over 21,000 tonnes of recyclables including over 7,500 tonnes of paper and cardboard. 

 

 

        (b)  Recycling at the Drop-off Centre

 

The residents of Randwick City Council can drop-off their excess recyclables at the Recycling Facility at Bumborah Point Road.  This is available to residential and commercial premises within the area.

 

2.     Commercial Recycling

 

        Council provides cardboard and paper recycling services to its trade waste customers encouraging them to manage their waste in an environmentally friendly way.  In 2006/07 Council collected through its trade waste recycling scheme and at the drop-off facility about 690 tonnes of paper and cardboard.  Council has recycled the material through AMCOR and has received over $32,000 of revenue.  The cost of providing the recycling services was over $150 per tonne.

 

3.     Options for Recycling Local Election Campaign Material

 

(a)  Use the Drop-off Facility at the Recycling Centre

 

There will be no additional cost to Council in managing the paper and cardboard dropped off at the recycling facility. In addition, Council will receive revenue from the processor.

 

(b)  Using Residential Recycling Services

 

The local election campaigners will be able to use the recycling services to dispose of paper and cardboard generated through local election campaign.  In this option, the campaigners will not be required to drive to the drop-off facility and will be able to recycle the material at home.  There will be no additional cost to Council in collecting the material and recycling through the residential recycling system.  However, there will be no revenue from recycling the paper.

 

        (c)  Providing Campaigners with Recycling Bins

 

Under this option, the Council will deliver paper recycling bins to election campaigners and will collect recyclables at an agreed frequency.  Collected material will then be transported to a processor.

 

        These services can be provided using the trade waste personnel and plants and equipments.

 

        This option will be more suitable for the campaigners.  However, there will be additional net cost to Council in delivering bins, collecting recyclables and transporting recyclables to a processing facility, and collecting the bins back from the campaigners.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 10:         A Healthy Environment.

Direction 10e:     Our community is encouraged to implement waste minimisation strategies.

 

Key Action:            Waste to resource initiatives are implemented.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

There are no financial implications of this report at this point in time.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Local election campaigns generate a substantial amount of paper and cardboard waste that can be recycled.

 

Council currently provides paper and cardboard recycling service to its commercial waste customers at a cost of $150 per tonne.

 

The paper and cardboard generated through the election campaign can be recycled either through the kerbside residential recycling program or at the drop-off facility at Council’s Recycling Centre at no cost to Council.

 

Council can extend its commercial recycling services to the local election campaigners by distributing bins and collecting recyclables at an agreed frequency.  There will be a net cost to Council to provide this service.  Any additional bins picked up will have a net cost whilst dropping off at Council’s facility has no net cost to Council.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council:

 

(a) notes that paper collection from the local election campaigners can be provided using Council’s commercial waste service resources at a net cost;

 

(b) agrees to provide paper and cardboard collection to the local election campaigners by distributing bins and collecting at an agreed frequency; and

 

(c) contact candidates prior to the election day to ensure they are aware the disposal options are available.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Nil

 

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

MARK SHAW

TALEBUL ISLAM

A/ DIRECTOR, CITY SERVICES

COORDINATOR WASTE SERVICES


  

Director, Governance & Financial Services' Report 43/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT & SHIRES ASSOCIATIONS OF NSW FOR ASSISTANCE WITH LEGAL COSTS   

 

DATE:

5 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/08250

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES    

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

Bankstown City Council has approached the Local Government & Shires Associations of NSW (LGSA) for assistance with legal costs for a court case in which it has been involved, and which culminated in action in the High Court.

 

ISSUES:

 

A copy of the Associations’ request is attached. 

 

This is the first request of this nature that Council has received since 2005.  At around the same time (2004-2005), Randwick City Council and a number of other Councils, were assisted through the LGSA program with legal costs associated with the Telstra/Optus Section 611 charges matter.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:    Leadership in sustainability.

Direction:      A ‘sustainable city’ is one that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own environmental, economic and social needs.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

Council’s annual budget allocation for this purpose is only $2,000.  The difference between the funds requested and the budget allocation (i.e. $16,355.69) will be funded from general revenue.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

The Associations have agreed that the matter in question is of great importance to all councils and should be appealed because if the decision was allowed to stand it would allow other land owners in similar circumstances to make claims against Councils for alleged damage to property where the Council in question would otherwise be protected by Section 733 of the Local Government Act.

 

The LGSA is recommending all Councils contribute to assist in covering the costs incurred.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Council contribute its proportion of the costs (being $18,355.69) to the LGSA to assist with Bankstown City Council’s legal costs incurred to afford Councils protection under Section 733 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

 

ATTACHMENT/S:

 

Letter from Local Government & Shires Associations of NSW - requesting assistance with legal costs.

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

GEOFF BANTING

JULIE HARTSHORN

DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES

SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR

 

 

 


 


 

 

 



  

Director, Governance & Financial Services' Report 44/2007

 

 

SUBJECT:

ADHERANCE TO COUNCIL'S CODE OF MEETING PRACTICE

 

 

DATE:

12 July, 2007

FILE NO:

F2004/06570

 

 

REPORT BY:            DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES    

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

 

This report is to provide Councillors with additional information to ensure Council and Committee Meetings are carried out in accordance with our adopted Code of Meeting Practice. This report specifically addresses what can be raised under “Urgent Business”, what constitutes a “Procedural Motion” and what are “Points of Order” and how they are to be dealt with.

 

ISSUES:

 

Legal advice in relation to this matter is being sought from Adam Seton (Partner) at Marsdens Lawyers.

 

Urgent Business:

 

Section 11 Clause (3) of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice states “For matters not listed on the Agenda of meetings and where less than three (3) days notice has been provided in accordance with Clause 8 of this Code, a motion of urgency will need to be passed by the Council prior to the matter being considered. The Motion of Urgency is to include the reason(s) why the matter is considered to be urgent.”

 

After listening to the reasons put forward as to why a matter is urgent, Councillors must vote to resolve whether or not they agree that the matter in question is indeed urgent and that it should be considered at the meeting.

 

A matter that could be the subject of a report at a subsequent Committee Meeting or be the subject of a Notice of Motion at a subsequent Council Meeting is not considered to be a matter of urgency. Matters of urgency are issues that suddenly arise and have to be resolved before the next Council or Committee Meeting.

 

Procedural Motions:

 

Section 34 Clause (3) of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice states:-

 

“(i)     Unless otherwise prohibited, a procedural motion may be moved at any time and must be dealt with immediately by the Chairperson. A Procedural Motion, having been moved and seconded, shall take precedence over the question before the Chair which shall be suspended pending decision on the Procedural Motion.

 

(ii)      Unless otherwise provided, debate on a procedural motion is not permitted and the mover does not have a right of reply.

 

(iii)      Unless otherwise provided, a procedural motion cannot be amended.

 

(iv)     Where the Procedural Motion is lost, the suspended business shall then proceed.

 

(NOTE: A Procedural Motion is not an amendment to the question before the Chair. As its description implies, it is directed towards the way or manner in which the Council will deal with the matter before it, and does not contain or imply a decision on the matter).”

 

Section 34 clearly states that a procedural motion is solely concerned with the conduct of meeting procedure, such as changing the order of business on the agenda. Procedural motions cannot be used to raise new matters, defer items to another meeting or to add new resolutions to the minutes of a Council or Committee Meeting.

 

Points of Order:

 

Under section 46 of the Code of Meeting Practice, a Councillor can only call a point of order if another Councillor commits one of the following acts of disorder:-

 

“(a)    contravenes the Act or any Regulation in force under the Act; or

 

(b)      assaults or threatens to assault another Councillor or person present at the meeting; or

 

(c)      moves or attempts to move a motion or an amendment that has an unlawful purpose or that deals with a matter that is outside the jurisdiction of Council, or addresses or attempts to address Council on such a motion, amendment or matter; or

 

(d)      insults or makes personal reflections on or imputes improper motives to any other Councillor; or

 

(e)      says or does anything that is inconsistent with maintaining order at the meeting or is likely to bring Council or the Committee into contempt.”

 

These are the only actions that constitute an act of disorder. Points of order cannot be called for any actions outside those listed above.

 

If a point of order is called and the Chairperson rules that it is not a valid point of order, the meeting continues where it left off. If the Councillor who raised the point of order calls for a dissent motion, a vote takes place immediately on that motion. If the dissent motion is defeated, the meeting continues where it left off, If the dissent motion is successful, the point of order becomes valid and is dealt with under section 46 (2) as outlined below.

 

If a point of order is called and the Chairperson rules that it is a valid point of order, the Chairperson, under section 46 (2), requires the Councillor in question:-

 

(a)      to apologise without reservation for an act of disorder referred to in (a) or (b) above; or

 

(b)      to withdraw a motion or an amendment referred to in (c) above and, where appropriate, to apologise without reservation; or

 

(c)      to retract and apologise without reservation for an act of disorder referred to in (d) or (e) above; and

 

(d)      to apologise without reservation for an act of disorder (committed at the preceding Council or Committee meetings) for which that Councillor failed to apologise for without reservation when requested by the Chairperson at the time.

 

The Councillor in question will also be called on to comply with one of (a) – (d) above if the Chairperson rules that a point of order is not valid and that ruling is overturned by a successful dissent motion.

 

If the Councillor in question complies with Section 46 (2) the meeting will then continue where it left off. If the Councillor refuses to comply then the Chairperson has the power to expel that Councillor under Section 46 (3) and (4) as follows:-

 

(3)      Prior to expulsion:

 

(a)      A Councillor may, as provided by Section 10(2)(a) or (b) of the Act, be expelled from a meeting of a Council for having failed to comply with a requirement under Sub-Clause (2). The expulsion of a Councillor under Sub-Clause (2) does not prevent any other action from being taken against the Councillor for the act of disorder concerned.

 

(b)      Prior to any expulsion the Chairperson must adjourn the meeting for a minimum period of five (5) minutes. 

 

(c)      Upon resumption of the Meeting, and prior to expulsion of a Councillor taking place, the Chairperson shall specify the breach of the Code/reasons for the proposed expulsion and provide an opportunity for the subject Councillor to respond to the alleged breach/reasons for expulsion. 

 

(4)      The Mayor may expel from a meeting a Councillor who fails to comply with a requirement made under Sub-Clause (2) above.

 

A flowchart has been provided under separate cover to give a clearer understanding of the above process at a glance.

 

RELATIONSHIP TO CITY PLAN:

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 13:            Excellence in Customer Service.

Direction 13b:          Council’s policies, standards and processes are efficient, effective and support the provision of quality customer service.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Stricter adherence to these three areas detailed in Council’s Code of Meeting Practice will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of both Council and Committee Meetings by ensuring debate is limited to relevant considerations on the agenda item under consideration.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That Councillors receive and note these points of clarification in accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

 

Flowchart outlining the process to be followed when raising a point of order (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

 

 

 

………………………………

………………………………

GEOFF BANTING

DAVID KELLY

DIRECTOR, GOVERNANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES

MANAGER, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES


MOTIONS PURSUANT TO NOTICE

 

13.1    Notice of Rescission Motion by the Mayor, Councillors Andrews, Bastic, Sullivan and White – Ordinary Council Meeting, Tuesday 26th June, 2007 – Item 8.1 - Director City Planning Report 33/2007 – 1160-1198R Anzac Parade, Malabar (Pioneer Park).  (DA/90/2007 & PROP025397)

 

That the resolution passed at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on Tuesday, 26th June 2007, reading as follows:-

 

That Council as the responsible authority grant its development consent under Section 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) to Development Application No 90/2007 for development comprising remediation, landscaping, construction of pathways, construction of three carpark areas providing parking for a total of 159 cars at Pioneers Park.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:-

 

1.                  The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered A1 Drawing No: 21-15005-C003 to 21-15005-C006 Revision A (inclusive) 21-15005-C100 to 21-15005-C108 Revision (inclusive), 21-15005-C200, 21-15005-C200 and 21-15005-C300 to 21-15005-C302 Revision C, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions as may be shown in red on the attached plans.

 

2.                  The lighting towers, amenities building and playing fields shall be deleted from the plans.

 

The following conditions are applied to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity and public health safety.

 

3.                  Prior to issuing a construction certificate for the development OR prior to the use of the new fields (which ever comes first)  the land must be remediated to meet the relevant criteria in the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure (NEPM) 1999 and the following requirements must be complied with:

 

a)     A Remediation Action Plan (RAP) is required to be prepared and be submitted to Council prior to commencing remediation works.  The RAP is also required to be reviewed by an independent NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) Accredited Site Auditor.

 

b)     The RAP is to be prepared in accordance with the relevant Guidelines made or approved by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation, including the Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites.

 

This RAP is to include procedures for the following:

 

·      Excavation of Hydrocarbon-contaminated soil,

·      Site management planning,

·      Validation sampling and analysis,

·      Prevention of cross contamination and migration or release of contaminants,

·      Ground water remediation, dewatering, drainage, monitoring and validation,

·      Unexpected finds.

 

c)     Prior to commencing any remediation works, a written statement is to be provided to the Council by the Site Auditor, which confirms that the Remediation Action Plan satisfies the relevant legislative guidelines and requirements and that the land is able to be remediated to the required level and be suitable for the intended development and use.

d)     The applicant is to engage a NSW Department of Environment and Conservation Accredited Site Auditor, accredited under sections 49 and 50 of the of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997. The Site Auditor is to assess the suitability of the site for its intended development and use.  The Site Audit Statement and Summary Site Audit Report is to be submitted to Council and must verify that the land has been remediated and the site is suitable for the intended development and satisfies the relevant criteria in the NEPM 1999.

 

Any requirements contained within an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which forms part of the Site Audit Statement and Site Audit Report, form part of this consent and Council must be consulted with prior to the development of the EMP.

 

e)     Remediation works shall be carried out in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997, environmental planning instruments applying to the site, guidelines made by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation and Department of Infrastructure Planning & Natural Resources, Randwick City Council’s Contaminated Land Policy 1999, the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Guidelines for the Assessment of On-site Containment of Contaminated Soil, prepared by Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, 1999.

 

f)      Any fill importation to the site is to be monitored and classified by the Site Auditor appointed for remediation of the site or a person with his qualifications. Only ‘Virgin Excavated Natural Material’ (VENM) is to be imported to the site, as defined within the NSW EPA ‘Environmental Guidelines; Assessment, Classification and management of Liquid and Non-Liquid Wastes. 1999’.

 

g)     A Site Remediation Management Plan must be prepared prior to the commencement of remediation works by a suitably qualified environmental consultant and be implemented throughout remediation works. A copy is to be forwarded to Council. The Site Remediation Management Plan shall include measures to address the following matters:

·            general site management, site security, barriers, traffic management and signage

·            hazard identification and control

·            worker health & safety, work zones and decontamination procedures

·            prevention of cross contamination

·            site drainage and dewatering

·            air and water quality monitoring

·            disposable of hazardous wastes

·            contingency plans and incident reporting

·            details of provisions for monitoring implementation of remediation works and persons/consultants responsible.

 

h)     The site remediation must be completed to the satisfaction of the Accredited Site Auditor and the written concurrence of Councils Manager Environmental Health and Building Services must be obtained prior to the issuing of the construction certificate.

 

i)        The works shall not give rise to environmental pollution or public nuisance or, result in an offence under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 or NSW Occupational Health & Safety Act (2000) & Regulations (2001).

 

4.                    The Site Audit Statement must, where no guideline made or approved under the NSW Contaminated Land Management Act is available (as with asbestos), clearly state the source of the standard adopted in determining the suitability of the land for the intended development and use and must also demonstrate its suitability to Council.

 

5.                    Site remediation must be carried out in accordance with the following general requirements (as applicable):

 

a)       Any variations to the proposed remediation works or remediation action plan shall be approved by the Site Auditor and a written statement is to be provided to the Council by the Site Auditor prior to the commencement of such works, which confirms the Site Auditors approval of the amended remediation action plan / works, and

 

b)       The Environmental Consultant and Auditor, in their assessment of appropriate soil investigation levels, must take into account all environmental concerns (for example, the potential effects on wildlife) and the protection of ground and surface water.

 

c)       Any odours from excavated materials shall be mitigated by the use of an odour suppressant, such as Biosolve, and shall not give rise to an offensive odour as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Stockpiles shall also be covered and dampened down to reduce odour and dust impacts.

 

On-site land farming of contaminated soil is not permitted, except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services.

 

d)       All trucks and service vehicles leaving the site shall go through a suitably constructed on site truck wash down area, to ensure no tracking of material occurs from the site onto roads adjoining the site. Details are to be submitted to Council in the Site Management Plan.

 

e)       Prior to the commencement and throughout the duration of the remediation and construction works adequate sediment and stormwater control measures shall be in place and maintained on site at all times.  Sediment laden stormwater shall be controlled using measures outlined in the manual Managing Urban Stormwater Soils and Construction produced by the NSW Department of Housing.

 

f)       Remediation work shall be conducted within the following hours:

     Monday – Friday       7am – 5pm

     Saturday                 8am – 5pm

     No work permitted on Sundays or Public Holidays

 

g)       A sign displaying the contact details of the remediation contractor (and the site manager if different to remediation contractor) shall be displayed on the site adjacent to the site access.  This sign shall be displayed throughout the duration of the remediation works.

 

h)       Any new information which comes to light during remediation, demolition or construction works which has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site contamination shall be notified to the Council immediately.

 

6.                Hazardous or intractable wastes arising from the demolition, excavation and remediation process being removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover NSW and the Environment Protection Authority, and with the provisions of:

 

·       New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 2000;

·       The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001;

·       The Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 2001;

·       Protection Of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) and

·       Environment Protection Authority's Environmental Guidelines; Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non Liquid Wastes (1999).

 

The following conditions have been applied to ensure that noise emissions from the site satisfy legislative requirements and maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the area:

         

7.                The proposed use of the park and the operation of all plant and equipment shall not give rise to an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

The following conditions are applied to satisfy the relevant pollution control criteria and to maintain reasonable levels of health, safety and amenity to the locality:

 

8.                    The use and operation of the premises shall not give rise to an environmental health or public nuisance.

 

The RTA has reviewed the development application and granted its concurrence under Section 138(2) of the Roads Act to the development application subject to the following conditions:

 

9.                    The proposed new entry and exit driveway crossings along Anzac Parade must be constructed generally in accordance with the Plans (Drawing No: 21-15005-c101, Rev: B, Dated: 02/02/07 and Drawing No: 21-15005-C102, Rev:B, Dated: 02/02/2007).

 

10.                The proposed entry and exit driveways to Anzac Parade are to be appropriately signposted

 

11.                The entry/exit points to Anzac Parade must comply with the appropriate sight distance criteria as stated within Section 3.2.4 of AS 2890.1 – 2004.

 

12.                The layout of the off-street parking areas associated with the subject development (including, grades, turn paths, sight distance requirements, aisle widths, and parking bay dimensions) should be in accordance with AS 2890.1-2004.

13.                Detailed civil design plans of the proposed driveway crossings, kerb and gutter works and fully pit re-construction should be submitted to Council for approval.

 

14.                All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development will be at no cost to the RTA.

 

15.                Any traffic control during construction must be carried out by accredited RTA approved traffic controllers.

 

16.                The proponent is to arrange with the RTA’s Transport Management Centre any required road occupancy licenses during construction.

 

17.                Council is to ensure that all vehicles during construction enter and exit the site in a forward direction.

 

18.                The proposed on-street car parking should only comply with the requirements of AS 2890.5 – 1993.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations:

 

19.                The requirements and provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, must be fully complied with at all times.

 

Failure to comply with these legislative requirements is an offence and may result in the commencement of legal proceedings, issuing of `on-the-spot` penalty infringements or service of a notice and order by Council.

 

20.                All new work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), in accordance with Clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

21.                Prior to the commencement of any works, a construction certificate must be obtained from the Council or an accredited certifier, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

22.                Prior to the commencement of any works, the person having the benefit of the development consent must:-

 

i)       appoint a Principal Certifying Authority for the work, and

ii)       appoint a principal contractor for the work and notify the Principal Certifying Authority and Council accordingly in writing, and

iii)      notify the principal contractor of the required critical stage inspections and other inspections to be carried out, as specified by the Principal Certifying Authority, and

iv)      give at least two days notice to the Council, in writing, of the person’s intention to commence works.

 

23.                The works must be inspected by the Principal Certifying Authority (or another certifying authority if the Principal Certifying Authority agrees), in accordance with sections 109 E (3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 162A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, to monitor compliance with the relevant standards of construction, Council’s development consent and the construction certificate.

 

The Principal Certifying Authority must specify the relevant stages of construction to be inspected in accordance with section 81A (2) (b1) (ii) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 and a satisfactory inspection must be carried out, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to proceeding to the subsequent stages of construction or finalisation of the works (as applicable).

 

Documentary evidence of the inspections carried out and details of compliance with Council’s consent is to be maintained by the Principal Certifying Authority. Details of critical stage inspections carried out and copies of certification relied upon must also be forwarded to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

The principal contractor or owner-builder (as applicable) must ensure that the required critical stage and other inspections, as specified in the Principal Certifying Authority’s “Notice of Critical Stage Inspections”, are carried out to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority and at least 48 hours notice (excluding weekends and public holidays) is to be given to the Principal Certifying Authority, to carry out the required inspection, before carrying out any further works.

 

24.                A sign must be erected and maintained in a prominent position on the site, which contains the following details:

 

•    name, address, contractor licence number and telephone number of the principal contractor, including a telephone number at which the person may be contacted outside working hours, or owner-builder permit details (as applicable)

•    name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority,

•    a statement stating that “unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited”.

 

25.                An Occupation Certificate must be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority encompassed in this development consent, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

An Occupation Certificate must not be issued for the development if the development is inconsistent with the development consent. The requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and conditions of development consent must be satisfied prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate.

 

26.                Prior to the issuing of an interim or final occupation certificate, a statement is required to be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority, which confirms that the development is not inconsistent with the development consent and the relevant conditions of development consent have been satisfied.

 

Details of critical stage inspections carried out by the principal certifying authority together with any other certification relied upon must also be provided to Council with the occupation certificate.

 

27.                The required Long Service Levy payment, under the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, is to be forwarded to the Long Service Levy Corporation or the Council, prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, in accordance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

At the time of this development consent, Long Service Levy payment is applicable on building work having a value of $25,000 or more, at the rate of 0.35% of the cost of the works.

 

28.                Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate or Final Certificate signage is to be installed in the vicinity of the open space at the northern end of the park. The signage shall be located in a clearly visible location and shall indicate that the extent of the “off-leash” dog exercise area and the times at which “off-leash” exercising is permitted.

 

The following conditions are applied to ensure that the development satisfies relevant standards of construction, and to maintain adequate levels of health, safety and amenity during construction:

 

29.                A copy of the construction certificate, the approved plans & specifications and development consent conditions must be kept on the site at all times and be made available to the Council officers and all contractors for assessment.

 

30.                All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection of the works must be executed safely in accordance with appropriate professional standards and excavations are to be properly guarded and supported to prevent them from being dangerous to life, property or buildings.

 

31.                Except with the written approval of Council’s Manager of Health, Building & Regulatory Services, all site works (including site deliveries) must only be carried out between the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive and (except as detailed below) between 8.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays.

 

All site works are strictly prohibited on Sundays, Public Holidays and also on Saturdays adjacent to a Public Holiday. In addition, the use of any rock excavation machinery or any mechanical pile drivers or the like is restricted to the hours of 8.00am to 5.00pm (maximum) on Monday to Friday only, to minimise the noise levels during construction and loss of amenity to nearby residents.

 

32.                Noise and vibration emissions during the construction and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents and the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 must be satisfied at all times.

 

33.                Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works.

 

The roadway, footpath and nature strip must be maintained in a good, safe condition and free from any obstructions, materials, soils or debris at all times. Any damage caused to the road, footway or nature strip must be repaired immediately, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from the Council and other relevant Authorities prior to excavating or opening-up the road or footway for services or the like.

 

34.                Building materials, sand, soil, waste materials or construction equipment must not be placed upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time and the footpath, nature strip and road must be maintained in a clean condition and free from any obstructions, soil and debris at all times. Bulk bins/waste containers must not be located upon the footpath, roadway or nature strip at any time without the prior written approval of the Council, unless the waste container is located upon the road in accordance with the Roads & Traffic Authority Guidelines and Requirements, and the container is exempt from an approval under Development Control Plan for Exempt & Complying Development and Council’s Local Approvals Policy. Applications to place a waste container in a public place can be made to Council’s Building Services section.

 

35.                Public safety must be maintained at all times and public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to be restricted, when work is not in progress or the site is unoccupied.

 

A temporary safety fence is to be provided to protect the public, located to the perimeter of the work site. Temporary fences are to have a minimum height of 1.8 metres and be constructed of cyclone wire fencing, with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control, or other material approved by Council.

 

Temporary fences or hoardings are to be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

The public safety provisions and temporary fences must be in place prior to the commencement of any site works and be maintained throughout construction.

 

If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings or amenities upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or any public place, the written consent from Council’s Building Services section must be obtained beforehand and detailed plans are to be submitted to Council for consideration, together with payment of the weekly charge in accordance with Council’s adopted fees and charges.

 

36.                A local approval application must be submitted to and be approved by Council's Building Services section prior to commencing any of the following activities on a footpath, road or nature strip or in any public place:-

 

•       Install or erect any site fencing, hoardings or site structures

•       Operate a crane or hoist goods or materials over a footpath or road

•       Placement of a waste skip (grater than 3m in length) or any container or other article.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for access, transport and infrastructure:

 

37.                A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to all works which are located externally from the site within the road reserve/public place, in accordance with the requirements of the Roads Act 1993.  Detailed plans and specifications of the proposed works are to be submitted to and approved by the Director of City Services prior to commencing any works within the road reserve/public place.

 

All works within the road reserve/public place must be carried out to the satisfaction of Council and certification from a certified practicing engineer is to be provided to Council upon completion of the works.

 

Relevant Council assessment and inspection fees, as specified in Council's adopted Pricing Policy, are required to be paid to Council prior to commencement of the works.

 

38.                Prior to the issue of a construction certificate, the applicant shall submit for approval and have approved by Council's Traffic Engineer a detailed construction traffic management plan. The plan shall demonstrate how construction and delivery vehicles will access the development site during the demolition and construction phase of the development.

 

All traffic associated with the subject development shall comply with the terms of the approved construction traffic management plan.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate consideration for service authority assets:

 

39.                A public utility impact assessment must be carried out on all public utility services on the site, roadway, nature strip, footpath, public reserve or any public areas associated with and/or adjacent to the development/building works and include relevant information from public utility authorities and exploratory trenching or pot-holing, if necessary, to determine the position and level of service.

 

40.                The applicant must meet the full cost for telecommunication companies, gas providers, Energy Australia and Sydney Water to adjust/repair/relocate their services as required.  The applicant must make the necessary arrangements with the service authority.

 

41.                Any electricity substation required for the site as a consequence of this development shall be located within the site and shall be suitably screened from view. The proposed location and elevation shall be shown on all detailed landscape drawings and specifications. The applicant must liaise with Energy Australia prior to lodging the construction certificate to determine whether or not an electricity substation is required for the development.

 

The following conditions are applied to provide adequate provisions for landscaping and to maintain reasonable levels of environmental amenity:

 

42.                Landscape works at the site shall be installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape DA Plans, L01-2, drawing numbers 21-15005-C300 – 301, revision C, dated 22.02.07 and stamped received at Council on 27 February 2007, subject to the following additional information being shown on amended plans, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority, prior to the issue of a construction certificate:

 

a.       Confirmation, through the inclusion of existing and proposed levels, that re-grading/re-profiling works will not result in an increase of surface flows or runoff towards the area of bushland located beyond the northeast corner of the site.

 

b.       The applicant will be required to demonstrate that any species proposed for use at the site, which have been identified as occurring naturally in the adjoining bushland reserve, will be sourced from local provenance stock through Randwick Council’s Community Nursery who can be contacted on 0399-0933.

 

c.       Provision of additional Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia’s) in the southwest corner of the site in order to compensate for the loss of the recently planted row of the same species on the Cromwell Place nature strip which need to be removed to accommodate the proposed car parking bay in the location shown.

 

43.                Documentary evidence is to be obtained from a suitably qualified Landscape Architect, and submitted to the principal certifying authority (PCA), and Council, if Council is not the PCA, prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate which confirms that the landscaping works have been completed in accordance with the approved landscaping plans and relevant conditions of development consent, to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

44.                Any areas of naturestrip upon either Council's footway or within the site which are damaged as a result of the proposed works shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Couch CT2 var (Cynodon dactylon) for those areas within the site, and Kikuyu for the nature strip. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

Tree Management

 

45.                With the exception of the grove of five Eucalyptus botryoides (Bangalay), and three Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) towards the southwest corner of the site, fronting onto Cromwell Place, which are to be retained, approval is granted for the removal of all other existing trees within the site boundaries which need to be removed in order to accommodate remediation works as shown.

 

Bushland Conditions

 

46.            In order to prevent damage or disturbance to the area of remnant bushland beyond the northeast corner of the site, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All detailed documentation submitted for the construction certificate application will be required to show that the subject area will be physically protected by the installation of 1.8 metre high steel mesh/chainwire fencing, where adjacent to the proposed works, finishing flush with the ground level.

 

b.       Shade/silt cloth shall be permanently attached to this fencing for its full length and height, in order to prevent any foreign matter entering the area during the course of the works.

 

c.       Both the fencing and filter fabric shall be installed prior to the commencement of construction works and shall remain in place until all works are completed, with the words “REMNANT BUSHLAND PROTECTION ZONE, DO NOT ENTER", clearly displayed.

 

d.       There is to be no pedestrian or vehicular access to the bushland, as well as no storage of materials or machinery or site office/sheds, nor is cement to be mixed or chemicals spilt/disposed of and no stockpiling of soil or rubble adjacent to the bushland.

 

Advisory Conditions

 

The applicant is to advise Council in writing and/or photographs of any signs of existing damage to the Council roadway, footway, or verge prior to the commencement of any building/demolition works.

 

BE AND IS HEREBY RESCINDED.

 

Upon the abovementioned Rescission Motion being carried, it is intended to move the following motion:-

 

That the application be approved as per the officers recommendation in support of the use of the park for sporting activities as indicated in the Director City Planning Report 33/2007.

 

13.2    Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Andrews, Bastic and Sullivan – Health, Building & Planning Committee Meeting, Tuesday 10th July, 2007 – Item 6.5 – Development Application Report – 19 Pacific Street, Clovelly. (DA/285/2007 & PROP032760)

 

That the resolution passed at the Health, Building and Planning Committee Meeting held on Tuesday, 10th July 2007, reading as follows:-

 

That this matter be deferred to allow the applicant to speak to relevant Council officers on options for parking at the rear of the property.

 

BE AND IS HEREBY RESCINDED.

 

Upon the abovementioned Rescission Motion being carried, it is intended to move the following motion:-

 

That the application be approved subject to standard conditions.

 

13.3    Notice of Rescission Motion by Councillors Andrews, Bastic and Sullivan – Health, Building & Planning Committee Meeting, Tuesday 10th July, 2007 – Procedural Motion. (F2004/06570)

 

That the resolution passed at the Health, Building and Planning Committee Meeting held on Tuesday, 10th July 2007, reading as follows:-

 

That it be noted in the minutes that the chair had to reprimand Cr Sullivan for three acts of disorder. (It is noted that Cr Sullivan apologised at the meeting)

 

BE AND IS HEREBY RESCINDED.

 

Upon the abovementioned Rescission Motion being carried, it is intended to move the following motion:-

 

That the sub-motion in relation to noting Chairperson’s ruling be rejected.

 

13.4    Motion By Councillor Belleli – Lighting for South Maroubra Village Green. 

 

That Council produces a report on the feasibility of constructing lights on the eastern side of the playground in the South Maroubra Village Green. This report should include a concept design and estimate of costs. The playground in the South Maroubra Village green was recently burnt by vandals. There are problems with anti-social behaviour in this area that could be improved by the installation of lights at the eastern side of the playground to reduce the likelihood of people vandalising the playground after dark.

 

13.5    Motion By Councillor Matson – Yarra Bay Sporting Field Option. 

 

That Council:

 

(a)              commence the conversion of open space at Bicentennial Park into a sporting field this financial year; and

 

(b)              open immediate discussions between Council, the Department of Education and appropriate sporting associations on a memorandum of understanding on the opening of sporting fields at South Sydney High and other schools for after hours use by sporting associations.

 

13.6    Motion By Councillor Matson – Need to Move HCB Waste from Orica to a Destruction Site. 

 

That Council will write to the MP for Maroubra requesting answers to the following questions concerning the State Government’s plans for dealing with the HCB waste on the Orica site:

 

(a)              will you accept responsibility on behalf of the Labor State Government for the many years of inaction on the HCB waste issue at Orica;

 

(b)              did the State Government have a fall back option prepared in case the German plan for the removal of the HCB collapsed as it subsequently did;

 

(c)              will you now move to initiate the alignment of State and Federal Government support for the assessing of alternative destruction sites within Australia and the allocation of money for any required facility upgrades;

 

(d)              what discussions have you had with Peter Garret, the Federal Member for Kingsford-Smith or on options for resolving the HCB waste issue at Orica.