Works Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 10 February 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Works Committee

10 February 2009

 

 

 

 

3 February 2009

 

Works Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Works Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick, on Tuesday, 10 February 2009 at 6:00 p.m.

 

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor, B Notley-Smith, Andrews (Chairperson), Belleli (Deputy Chairperson), Bowen, Hughes, Matson, Matthews, Nash, Procopiadis, Seng, Smith, Stevenson, Tracey, White & Woodsmith

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members.

 

NOTE:    At the Extraordinary Meeting held on 28 September 2004, the Council resolved that the Works Committee be constituted as a committee with full delegation to determine matters on the agenda.

 

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

 

Works Committee Meeting - 2 December 2008

 

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

 

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

 

Urgent Business

 

Works Reports

 

W1/09       Fern Street, Waverley - Bus Zone conditions

W2/09       Council - owned Ficus 'Hillii' (Hills Weeping Fig) growing outside 26 Maitland Avenue, Kingsford

W3/09       Nude bathing at Little Congwong Beach     

 

Closed Session

Nil

Notices of Rescission Motions

Nil

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Works Committee

10 February 2009

 

 

 

Works Report No. W1/09

 

 

Subject:                  Fern Street, Waverley - Bus Zone conditions

Folder No:                   F2004/08393

Author:                   Tony Lehmann, Manager Integrated Transport     

 

Introduction

 

Randwick Traffic Committee at its meeting in October, 2008, recommended the signposting of the statutory intersection ‘No Stopping’ restriction and a bus zone in Fern Street, Waverley.  Following representations from a local resident this matter has been called for consideration by Council.

 

(Note: In Fern Street, between Wallace Street and Varna Street, the boundary between Waverley and Randwick Councils runs along the front fence line of the properties on the north eastern side of the street – i.e. the odd numbered dwellings.)

 

Issues

 

Following a road safety complaint raised in May last year, with both Randwick City Council and the State Transit Authority, the Traffic Committee considered the dimensions of the bus zone on the eastern side of Fern Street, south of Wallace Street, Waverley.  The Committee has formed the opinion that the dimensions for a bus zone as proscribed under “Australian Road Rule 170” and “NSW Road Rules 2008 – No. 170” should be signposted. It also considered that the statutory intersection ‘No Stopping’ parking restriction should be signposted as well. A nearby resident, who originally raised the safety concern, now considers that the Bus Zone should be either retained with its existing dimensions or relocated further south.

 

The resident originally expressed concerns about the rear of the buses protruding into the southbound traffic flow of Fern Street, when stopping at this bus stop to pick up and set down passengers.

 

Under Australian Road Rule 195 and NSW Road Rules 2008 – No. 195 a vehicle cannot be parked within 20 metres of the approach side to a Bus Stop or 10 metres on the departure side of a Bus Stop; and also under Australian Road Rule 170 and NSW Road Rules 2008 – No. 170 a vehicle cannot be parked within 10 metres of an unsignalised intersection. The Traffic Committee considers that these dimensions should be signposted so that the rear of the bus does not protrude into the travelled lane and so that the bus can pull safely into the kerb to pick up or set down passengers.  Relevant extracts from the Traffic Committee meetings are attached, as is a diagram detailing the existing zone and the proposed signposting.

 

In March 2007, separate to the above matter, the Traffic Committee recommended that approval be given for the construction of a kerb extension at the intersection of Albion Street and Fern Street, provided that a satisfactory ‘in situ’ trial of the device by the STA is undertaken.  A copy of the Traffic Committee Item (including sketch diagram) is attached.  The device was then added to Council’s listing of traffic devices approved for construction. 

 

It is possible that, following construction of this device (if agreed to by the STA), the Bus Stop may be able to be shifted northerly by some 20 metres thereby gaining some 1½ car spaces in this area (existing driveway locations compromise a maximum gain in parking spaces).  The actual gain would not be known until a full detailed design was undertaken.  Currently this project is ranked no. 16 in the Council adopted Traffic Project listing.  It is therefore likely to be considered for construction in 2011/2012.

 

Petition

 

Following the Traffic Committee’s consideration of the matter a petition was submitted to Randwick Council stating:

 

“We the undersigned, are concerned residents who urge our Councillors to vote against the adoption of the Traffic Committee’s Recommendation to extend the bus zone on Fern Street Clovelly”

 

It was signed by 24 people.  Of the 24 signatories 18 lived nearby and six others lived from 500m to 4.5 kilometres away.  The 18 “local” residents came from 11 different properties; three of these properties are located within the Randwick City Council area.  The others are located within the Waverley Council area.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 9:         Integrated and accessible transport.

Outcome 9b:       The community is informed, educated and encouraged to use sustainable transport.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is only a minor cost impact on Council to signpost these restrictions - $200.00.

 

Conclusion

 

The Australian and NSW Road Rules detail (inter alia) where vehicles may park. These Rules do not allow vehicles to park within 10 metres of the Wallace Street intersection (10m No Stopping at a intersection) and within 20 metres on the approach side of the Fern Street Bus Stop. Safety issues were raised and have been confirmed by the Police, the RTA and the STA, as well as the author of this report. Allowing parking to occur at this location, contrary to Australian Road Rules and NSW Road Rules, may place Council at risk if a serious vehicle crash occurs, resulting in injury.

 

It may be that the situation could be improved when the previously approved kerb nib is constructed.  This should be investigated at the time that the detailed design is undertaken.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     Council endorse the October, 2008, Traffic Committee recommendation (by majority support) to install a 10m No Stopping zone and a 30m Bus Zone on the eastern side of Fern Street, measured southeast of Wallace Street, Waverley; and

 

b)     Investigations be undertaken into possible improvements to the parking supply at this location when the detailed design of the proposed kerb nib is undertaken.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Extracts from Traffic Committee Minutes of March, 2007, and, June, July, August, September and October, 2008 including Sketch Plan of location and existing and proposed parking arrangements

 

 

 

 

 


Extracts from Traffic Committee Minutes of March, 2007, and, June, July, August, September and October, 2008 including Sketch Plan of location and existing and proposed parking arrangements /

Attachment 1

 

 



 


Works Committee

10 February 2009

 

 

 

Works Report No. W2/09

 

 

Subject:                  Council - owned Ficus 'Hillii' (Hills Weeping Fig) growing outside 26 Maitland Avenue, Kingsford

Folder No:                   F2004/07359

Author:                   Bryan Bourke, Tree Management Officer     

 

Introduction

 

The owners of 26 Maitland Avenue, Kingsford, have written to Council requesting the removal of the Council-owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing on the nature strip outside their property and for it to be replaced with a more appropriate tree species.

 

Issues

 

The tree concerned is approximately 16 metres tall with a canopy spread of around 18 metres. It is in excellent health and it contributes significantly to the streetscape of Maitland Avenue. It is also an important provider of habitat and food source for a variety of native birds and other fauna.

 

A predominance of the tree’s canopy is growing across the front yard area of the property and is almost touching the roof. The sheer size of the canopy impacts quite severely on the amount of sunlight entering the residence – particularly in winter.

 

The tree is getting too large in the context of its proximity to dwellings and infrastructure.

 

The owners of 26 Maitland Avenue have indicated:

 

The root system is causing structural damage to our front brick fence, ultimately this will destroy the fence completely, as it has to the fence of our neighbour.  

 

There is a root, 220mm in diameter,  which runs underneath the fence line, has destroyed the footpath to the point where it is irreparable, and is destroying the fence itself.

 

Our neighbour is currently renovating, and as part of this process their fence has been removed and the roots have been exposed, revealing the significance of the problem to us.

 

The matter requires your urgent attention, delay will result in a potential for danger and expense.

 

We have been told by council workmen that it is impossible to repair the footpath properly given the situation with the tree, and they have used a temporary measure using tar, to provide a walkway.

 

The undulating nature of the footpath causes water runoff to be directed under our garage door into our garage causing water damage to anything on the ground inside, as well as potential structural damage over time.

 

The root system causes constant problems with sewerage, infrastructure requires constant attention and clearing by plumbers with the electric eel - I think we average 2-3 visits a year.

 

In addition, the boughs of the tree hang well into our property to the point where some branches are within 1 metre of the front of the house.

 

This represents a spread of approximately 10 metres from the trunk, and 7 metres hang over our fence.  We are concerned that the situation is becoming dangerous should winds or storms cause damage to the tree, and therefore damage to our property or family members.

 

Seasonally, the fruit from the tree causes incredible mess on the footpath and in our front garden area. This is as a result of dropping and rotting fruit, and a substantial amount of bat droppings.

 

This situation is disgusting, and probably constitutes a health hazard.

 

During this time the significant amount of fruit bats attracted to the tree are a pest, both as a result of their droppings and the noise, which continues all night.

 

This tree has been root pruned a number of times over the past two decades by Council’s tree gang because of root damage that was being caused to the adjacent footpath area. Roots have also undermined the front fence of the property and have caused cracking to the entranceway inside the property.

 

Tree roots have also had to be cleared from the sewerage pipes within the property over a protracted period of time and have now travelled underneath the residence and its foundations. The tree has been pruned away from the property alignment on a number of occasions and has also regularly been pruned away from the overhead electricity mains.

 

The tree has been assessed as having a low risk potential. It has also been assessed as having a medium hazard rating when issues such as failure potential, target rating and the size of any potential branch failures are considered.

 

It has been recognised as having high scenic/environmental amenity and with providing important habitat/food source. The effect of removal on soil stability/land degradation would be negligible.

 

The tree has been calculated as having an amenity value of $16,200 – using the Standards Australia AS – DR99307 valuation guide.

 

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 tree and to replace it with a 100-litre super-advanced replacement tree would be in the vicinity of $2,500. This money would come from Council’s tree management budget.

 

Conclusion

 

The problems associated with this tree have been getting progressively worse over a period of at least ten years and a report was considered by Council in relation to its removal on 11 October, 2005.

 

At that time there was some infrastructure damage being caused by roots to the adjacent footpath, kerb and gutter and there was also some undermining of the nearby front fence. It was noted that the tree also had to be regularly pruned away from the property alignment and overhead powerlines.

 

Sewer blockages have occurred over a protracted period and these now average 3-4 per year. Although this probably indicates that the sewerage system needs upgrading.

 

Because of the prominence of this tree in the streetscape and the fact that its roots had at that time caused only relatively minor infrastructure damage to both public and private property, Council resolved in 2005 that the tree be retained until there was a more compelling case for removal.

 

This was particularly the case since two large trees of the same species had only recently been removed and stump ground in Helena Street and the removal of this particular tree would have exceeded the limit set by Council resolution that no more than five percent of canopy cover in any significant streetscape be removed in any twelve month period.

 

However, the situation has changed markedly within the past three years and the owners have written to Council requesting that, because of an increase in root intrusion into their property and the damage that this has caused, Council remove the tree and effect repairs to their property.

 

The problems being experienced by the property owners are only going to get worse and if the tree is not removed it could prove to be very expensive for Council in the longer term.

 

At the very least the adjacent footpath area will need to be uplifted and any invading tree roots severed. This ongoing root pruning procedure has serious implications for the long term health and stability of this large tree species and allows the introduction of fungal pathogens into the base of these trees.

 

The only effective long-term management option in relation to this particular tree would be to remove it and replace it with a more appropriate species - as has been the case with a number of Ficus ‘Hillii’ street trees in the same street.

 

Recommendation

 

That the Council-owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing on the nature strip outside 8 Helena Street, Randwick, be removed and replaced with a more appropriate species.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Series of photographs demonstrating tree root damage and intrusion into private properties

 

 

 

 

 


Series of photographs demonstrating tree root damage and intrusion into private properties

Attachment 1

 

 




 


Works Committee

10 February 2009

 

 

 

Works Report No. W3/09

 

 

Subject:                  Nude bathing at Little Congwong Beach

Folder No:                   F2005/00881

Author:                   Mark Shaw, Manager Technical Services     

 

Introduction

 

A petition was tabled at the Council Meeting on 16 December 2008, from The New South Wales Free Beach Action Group regarding nude bathing at Little Congwong Beach, La Perouse. This petition contained 680 signatures predominantly from people living outside the Randwick Local Government Area.

 

Issues

 

Previously, Council at its meeting on 22 November 2005, resolved on the Motion of Councillor Belleli and Woodsmith that:-

 

“Council oppose any plans to turn Little Congwong Beach into a Nudist Reserve by it being declared “a clothing optional beach…”     

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome: 5       Excellence in recreation and lifestyle opportunities.

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

 

Council has previously resolved to oppose any plans to turn Little Congwong Beach into a Nudist Reserve by it being declared “a clothing optional beach…”

 

Recommendation

 

That Council reconfirm its policy and oppose any plans to turn Little Congwong Beach into a Nudist Reserve by it being declared a clothing optional beach.

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil