Works Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 9 April 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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                                                                                                     9 April 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


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, 9 April 2013 at 6:00pm

 

Committee Members:           The Mayor (T Bowen), Andrews, Belleli, D’Souza (Deputy Chairperson), Garcia, Matson, Moore, Nash, Neilson, Roberts, Seng, Shurey, Smith, Stavrinos and Stevenson (Chairperson)

 

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 - 12 March 2013

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Privacy warning;

In respect to Privacy & Personal Information Protection Act, members of the public are advised that the proceedings of this meeting will be recorded for the purposes of clause 66 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

Urgent Business

Works Reports

W9/13       Cleaning at Wylies Baths

W10/13     Tree Removal - Outside 83-85 St Marks Road, Randwick

W11/13     Emanuel School Use of Frank Doyle Park

W12/13     Endeavour Avenue, La Perouse - Petition    

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Works Committee                                                                                                     9 April 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W9/13

 

 

Subject:                  Cleaning at Wylies Baths

Folder No:                   F2005/00182

Author:                   Jorde Frangoples, Director City Services     

 

Introduction

 

In lieu of concerns raised by the public regarding the method of cleaning at Wylies Baths by employees/volunteers on behalf of the Wylies Baths Trust.

 

Issues

 

Council staff have been cleaning the pool surrounds as an interim measure using Council’s high pressure hot water cleaning equipment.  This has had some impact on our cleaning regime elsewhere at Coogee Beach. 

 

Council as part of its plant replacement strategy Plant and Equipment long term plan has purchased a new high pressure cleaner hot water cleaning machine.  It is proposed to donate as a “one-off” the old high pressure cleaner to the Trust.  The machine is in good working condition. 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 1:       Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction 1b:      Council is a leader in the delivery of social, financial and operational activities.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The trade in value of the high pressure cleaner is valued at $3,800.00.  Hence, Council would forgo this amount as income in its plant replacement strategy.

 

Conclusion

 

Council will forgo the $3,800.00 trade value of the high pressure cleaner in order to help the Wylies Bath Trust meet environmental standards.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council donate as a “one-off” the high pressure cleaner to the Wylies Baths Trust.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Works Committee                                                                                                     9 April 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W10/13

 

 

Subject:                  Tree Removal - Outside 83-85 St Marks Road, Randwick

Folder No:                   F2004/07359

Author:                   Bryan Bourke, Tree Management Officer     

 

Introduction

 

On 14 December 2012 the managing agents of 85 St Marks Road, Randwick, lodged a service request with Council alleging that roots from the Council owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ growing on the nature strip outside the property had damaged the sewer network.

 

Prior to this the owner of the property had lodged service requests with Council on 5 July 2012, 31 January 2012, 12 September 2011 and 8 April 2011 to have the subject street tree either severely pruned off the property or to have their sewer pipes cleared because of fig tree root intrusion. 

 

Issues

 

In addition to these requests from the owner of 85 St Marks Road, Randwick, for Council to undertake tree pruning and effect repairs to their sewer pipes, the owner of 83 St Marks Road, Randwick, lodged a service request on 25 January 2011 to prune the Ficus ‘Hillii’ outside their property because branches were overhanging the residence and roots were damaging the footpath and adjacent roadway.

 

The owner of this property had previously written to Council on 16 July 2009 requesting that the same fig tree be removed for a variety of reasons, including:

 

·      tree roots were breaking up the road, causing her to fall when alighting from her car;

·      the footpath had been temporarily fixed with tar and was uneven;

·      the roots were exposed on the nature strip and caused a danger to pedestrians and would eventually crack her fence;

·      the fruit that falls causes both the road and footpath to become slippery and dangerous;

·      bats were a huge problem in that they not only keep her and her family awake at night but they excrete onto cars parked underneath;

·      vehicle owners will not park under the tree, thereby exacerbating the limited parking situation;

·      the street has to be continually cleaned by Council because of the ongoing issue of leaf and fruit drop.

 

Subsequent to the receipt of that particular correspondence I inspected the tree and its surroundings and advised the property owner on 5 August 2009 that there was insufficient justification to remove this significant tree asset at that time.

 

On 19 February 2013 I instructed Council’s Tree Gang to trench along the frontages of both properties so that the severity and scope of fig tree root damage could be properly assessed and all management options assessed.

 

It was evident at the time of my inspection that tree root intrusion into the adjacent properties would probably be extensive as a major tree root was protruding above ground level and winding its way into the front of the adjacent property.

 

Apart from major cracking of the adjacent bitumen footpath there was also a crack in the front fence of the property at 83 St Marks Road and cracking in the entranceway into the property at 85 St Marks Road.

 

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, programs and strategies to manage environmental risks and impacts.

 

Financial impact statement

 

It is estimated that the removal of the two Hill’s Weeping figs outside 83-85 St Marks Road, Randwick, and their replacement with several super-advanced Waterhousia floribunda (Weeping Lilly Pillys) would cost in the vicinity of $9,000. The required funds would come from Council’s annual tree management budget.

 

Conclusion

 

The mature Council owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ street trees growing outside 83-85 St Marks Road, Randwick, have significant visual and historic significance. The subject trees are approximately sixteen metres in height with canopy spreads of between eight-ten metres. They are two of a number of mature trees of the same species planted along the eastern side of the street between Alison Road and Oswald Street. They are in good health and contribute significantly to the visual amenity of the St Marks Road streetscape. They are also important providers of habitat and food source for a variety of native birdlife and other fauna. They are estimated to be more than sixty years old and up until now Council has been committed to retaining them, despite the fact that associated tree root damage has progressively increased in both frequency and severity. Because of the damage being caused by their roots, however, the impact of removal on land degradation would be negligible.

 

The tree located outside 85 St Marks Road is the larger of the two trees and because it has undergone less pruning around adjacent powerlines it is a much better aesthetic example of the species. There is a power pole located directly between the two trees that supports the domestic service wires that run into both properties. The trenching undertaken by Council’s Tree Gang revealed a large number of fig tree roots undermining and damaging both public infrastructure and private property.

 

The bitumen roadway adjacent to the fig tree outside 83 St Marks Road has only recently been repaired as a result of tree root damage and those same roots are damaging the heritage sandstone kerb and gutter. Excavation revealed a number of very large roots entering the front of both properties, with the most severe damage being caused to the property at 83 St Marks Road, Randwick. Over the past decade the adjacent footpath has had to be repaired on a number of occasions because of tree root damage but roots continue to enter adjacent properties as well as causing ongoing and increasing damage to public infrastructure. There have been serious and ongoing sewer blockages within both properties for well over a decade and these have become more frequent during that period.

 

Council’s Tree Gang advises that it would not be possible to remove the amount of damaging tree root material required to abate the damage being caused by the roots of these trees without seriously compromising their stability and long-term viability. The severance of roots along adjacent property boundaries in such close proximity to the trunks of the two trees could result in their death or cause destabilization of the root plate due to the removal of supporting structural roots as well as vital feeder root mass. When used to attempt to control the spread of fig tree roots, root barriers are often effective for a limited time only before new roots either grow over or underneath any such barrier. Effectively, therefore, the only practical long-term management option would be to remove the subject trees and to replace them with a more appropriate tree species – as nominated in Council’s Street Tree Masterplan.

 

The removal of these two trees will certainly have a detrimental impact on the St Marks Road streetscape that will in no way be able to be significantly mitigated by the planting of advanced replacement trees. Even though Council’s Tree Gang has recommended the removal of both trees the effect on the streetscape would be profound, particularly because a large tree of the same species was removed only two-three months ago because of the root damage it was causing. The removal of both trees would also contravene Council’s resolution not to decrease the canopy cover in fig tree lined avenues by more than five (5) percent in any one calendar year.

 

The root damage being caused by the tree outside 85 St Marks Road is much less than that at 83 St Marks Road and this could be managed in the shorter term. If only one tree was removed it would allow replacement trees to become established and would mitigate to a small degree the removal of the second tree.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     the Council owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing outside 83 St Marks Road, Randwick, be removed and replaced with two advanced Waterhousia floribunda (Weeping Lilly Pillys) – as nominated in Council’s Street Tree Masterplan.

 

b)     the Hill’s Weeping fig outside 85 St Marks Road, Randwick, be retained for at least twelve months and that any proposal for removal be reassessed at the expiration of that period.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Series of photographs detailing the importance of the subject trees in the streetscape and the damage being caused to both public infrastructure and private property by their roots.

 

 

 

 


Series of photographs detailing the importance of the subject trees in the streetscape and the damage being caused to both public infrastructure and private property by their roots.

Attachment 1

 

 

Two large Ficus ‘Hillii’ are prominent in the streetscape along St Marks Road

 

Section of bitumen roadway has recently been repaired due to fig tree root damage

Large numbers of fig tree roots running into property at 83 St Marks Road, Randwick

 

Large tree root snakes along brick fence at 83 St Marks Rd and has cracked the fence

Mass of Ficus ‘Hillii’ tree roots undermining adjacent fence and entering property

 

Several very large fig tree roots within close proximity to brick fence and tree trunk

Larger fig located outside 85 St Marks Road could be retained in short term

 

Cracking inside the entranceway to 85 St Marks Road caused by fig tree root intrusion

Mass of tree roots located directly outside entrance into 85 St Marks Road

 

 

Although entranceway is very old fig tree roots are the most likely cause of cracking

 

 


Works Committee                                                                                                     9 April 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W11/13

 

 

Subject:                  Emanuel School Use of Frank Doyle Park

Folder No:                   F2009/07550

Author:                   Jorde Frangoples, Director City Services     

 

Introduction

 

Council has received a request from Emanuel School to utilise Frank Doyle Park for the students’ lunchtime break.

 

Issues

 

Council supports many local schools with free lunchtime use of its open space.

 

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

 

It is considered that Council should support this request from the Emanuel School to utilise Frank Doyle Park for students’ lunchtime break.

 

 

Recommendation

 

Council receive and note this report.

 

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.View

Letter from Emanuel School

 

2.View

Frank Doyle Park Location Map

 

 

 

 


Letter from Emanuel School

Attachment 1

 

 


Frank Doyle Park Location Map

Attachment 2

 

 


Works Committee                                                                                                     9 April 2013

 

 

Works Report No. W12/13

 

 

Subject:                  Endeavour Avenue, La Perouse - Petition

Folder No:                   F2006/00101

Author:                   Tony Lehmann, Manager Integrated Transport     

 

Introduction

 

Council has received a signed petition requesting “flat” speed humps to:

 

·      Prevent dangerous speeding, racing and burn-outs

·      Reduce the risk of pedestrian and motor vehicle collisions

·      Deter the congregation of hoons and the associated noise pollution and anti-social behaviour

·      Reduce the drain on police and council resources responding to incidents.

 

Issues

 

Council is in receipt of a petition from for the installation of speed humps to discourage “hoon” behaviour in Endeavour Avenue, La Perouse.  The 47 petitioners (from 34 dwellings, 28 from Endeavour Avenue) consider that the installation of such devices would make the area less attractive for these types of behaviours. 

 

Concurrently, at the March 2013 meeting of the Traffic Committee, a report was tabled for the extension of the No Stopping, 11pm – 3am restriction to encompass the frontage of the reserve opposite nos 9-23.  The extension would prohibit motorists from parking and congregating adjacent to the reserve.  The Traffic Committee recommendation was that the residents be surveyed to ascertain their views of the extension of the No Stopping, with a report being brought back to the Traffic Committee for consideration.

 

Caution should be exercised with regard to the installation of ‘speed hump’ style treatments in residential areas.  Notwithstanding the noise generated by ‘hoon’ behaviour there is additional noise which would be generated by vehicles traversing a speed hump.  Such noise may be audible with every vehicle which traverses such a device, every day and every night.  At other residential locations this has been a significant concern for residents, especially in the more noise sensitive early hours of the morning,

 

However, given the recently received petition, the scope of the proposed resident survey will be expanded to include traffic calming measures.  The survey will include information regarding the possible positive effects of speed humps as well as the possible negative effects.  A speed survey will also be undertaken to determine the extent (if any) of motorists speeding in the street.  The results of the resident and speed survey, including any recommendations for change, will be put to a subsequent meeting of the Traffic Committee for consideration. 

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 9:       Integrated and accessible transport.

Direction 9d:      Residential amenity is protected by appropriate traffic management.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Given the concerns shown by some residents it is considered appropriate to combine the resident surveys so that community attitudes about expansion of parking controls and about speed hump implementation is better understood.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     the residents from Endeavour Avenue be surveyed regarding their views on implementation of speed humps in the area

 

b)     the residents in the vicinity of nos 9-23 be also surveyed regarding the proposed expansion of the evening hour parking prohibitions (as detailed at the March 2013 Traffic Committee meeting)

 

c)     measurements be undertaken to assess the current extent of speeding in Endeavour Avenue

 

d)     a report on the results of these surveys be brought back to the Traffic Committee for consideration.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil