RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

Ordinary Council Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

Tuesday 24 April 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 1300 722 542

Fax: 02 9319 1510

 council@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

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, First Floor, 90 Avoca Street Randwick  on Tuesday, 24 April 2018 at 6:00pm

 

 

Prayer and Acknowledgement of the 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 Randwick and Australia. Amen”

Acknowledgement of the 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.”

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 March 2018

Extraordinary Council Meeting - 17 April 2018 (will be distributed Friday 20 April 2018)

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Council 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 69 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

Audio/video recording of meetings prohibited without permission;

A person may be expelled from a meeting for using, or having used, an audio/video recorder without the express authority of the Council.

Mayoral Minutes

Mayoral Minutes, if any, will be distributed on the night of the meeting.

Urgent Business

Director City Planning Reports

CP7/18      Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Boundary Extension and inclusion of Local Heritage Items.................................................................................... 1

CP8/18      Update on heritage assessments for the Captain Cook Statue and Blenheim House...................................................................................................... 69

General Manager's Reports

GM7/18     Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan and Budget 2018-19............. 133

Director City Services Reports

CS6/18      Albi Place Reserve, Randwick - Swings................................................. 141

CS7/18      Tree Removal - Outside 49 Ritchard Avenue, Coogee.............................. 147

CS8/18      Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Yarra Bay and Clovelly Bay Catchments – Simplified Flood Study....................................................................... 159

CS9/18      Sports Committee Meeting Minutes...................................................... 201

CS10/18    Pillars Place, Matraville - Resident Petition against proposed footpath construction.................................................................................................... 225

CS11/18    18 Judge Street, Randwick - Damaged Private Retaining Wall - Assistance.. 231

CS12/18    Street Garden Policy and Guidelines..................................................... 239

CS13/18    Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee............................... 261

Director Governance & Financial Services Reports

GF13/18    Pensioner Rebate............................................................................. 293

GF14/18    Monthly Financial Report as at 28 February 2018.................................... 295

GF15/18    Monthly Financial Report as at 31 March 2018........................................ 305

GF16/18    Investments Report - March 2018....................................................... 315

GF17/18    Appointment of Investment Advisors................................................... 325

GF18/18    Contingency Fund - status as at 31 March 2018..................................... 329

GF19/18    Housing Density and Diversity Conference 2018..................................... 333  

Petitions

Motion Pursuant to Notice

NM29/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Da Rocha - Removal of Return & Earn bottle Facility - Randwick Golf Club........................................................................... 335

NM30/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Da Rocha - Objection to proposed removal of 1 hour parking Bunnerong Road, Matraville..................................................... 337

NM31/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Veitch - Support for residential renters in the Randwick LGA............................................................................................... 339

NM32/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Reconstituting the Environment Committee 341

NM33/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Reduce parking competition around POW and to improve work health and safety for staff............................................. 343

NM34/18   Notice of Motion from Cr  Matson - Provide foot washing facilities at the new Coogee amenities block on the lower beach promenade.......................... 345

NM35/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Promote ERLGATSIF upcoming 'Living Cultures' awards in May................................................................................. 347

NM36/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - Return & Earn Vending Machines in LGA 349

NM37/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - Efficient Measures in Reporting Road Maintenance ................................................................................... 351

NM38/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Parker - Estabilishment of a Community Affairs Committee...................................................................................... 353

NM39/18   Notice of Motion from Cr Said –Anti Social Behaviour Devices at Yarra Bay/La Perouse......................................................................................... 355   

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil.

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP7/18

 

Subject:             Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Boundary Extension and inclusion of Local Heritage Items

Folder No:                   F2017/00174

Author:                   Emese Wolf, Environmental Planning Officer       

 

Introduction                                                                          

Council at its Ordinary Council Meeting of 28/02/2017 resolved the following:

 

“(Matson/Shurey) that:

 

1.     the item at No 48 Dudley Street be placed on the heritage schedule of the Randwick LEP, with the appropriate provisions for protection and management of the item;

 

2.     the heritage schedule and heritage map of the Randwick LEP be amended to include the proposed extension of the Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area to include the site at 48 Dudley Street and the properties fronting the southern side of Dudley Street in the block between Mount and Byron Street;

 

3.     Council commence preparation of a planning proposal for submission to the Department of Planning and Environment concerning both the above-mentioned amendments; and

 

4.     subject to the Gateway review and outcome, commence the exhibition of the LEP and community consultation.”

 

The map provided below illustrates the Council resolution to extend the Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area and 48 Dudley Street, Coogee.

The heritage significance of these properties was identified through various heritage reports commissioned to support the listing of 48 Dudley Street, Coogee which was subject to an Interim Heritage Order (IHO) in 2016. The IHO was later revoked by the NSW Land and Environment Court in April 2017 as the property did not warrant local heritage significance. The building at 48 Dudley Street, Coogee has since been demolished.

A subsequent heritage report (Attachment 1) has identified the properties 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee as potential items of local heritage significance that warrants heritage listing in the RLEP.

This report identifies that the residences of 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee have local heritage significance under a number of heritage assessment criteria and, accordingly, qualifies the properties for inclusion in the RLEP as items of local heritage significance. It is recommended that the RLEP be amended by placing the above items on the heritage schedule of the RLEP and to amend the RELP heritage map accordingly.

 

The Planning Proposal process will involve the preparation and submission of a planning proposal to the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC). Currently the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) has delegation to prepare the determination on behalf of the GSC. The Planning Proposal will essentially address the strategic merit of the proposed amendment to the GSC/DPE for a Gateway determination. The GSC/DPE will assess the proposal and if it is determined that a proposal should proceed, a Gateway determination will be issued and the matter will be returned to the Council as the relevant planning authority (RPA) to finalise in accordance with any conditions imposed by the Gateway process and also proceed to public consultation.

 

Issues

Background Summary Table

Interim Heritage Order (IHO)

On 8 September 2016, an IHO was placed on the building and curtilage at 48 Dudley Street, Coogee following Council’s Heritage Planner’s opinion that the subject building warranted further investigation to determine its level of heritage significance.

                      

At the time the IHO was issued, the building was under threat of demolition based on a Complying Development Application for its proposed demolition. Accordingly, if an IHO had not been placed on the building, the certifier may have proceeded to issue a certificate allowing for the demolition of the building. The site was also the subject of a development application for the demolition of existing structures, construction of a 4 storey residential flat building containing 11 dwellings, basement car parking for 16 vehicles, landscaping and associated works.

 

Heritage Assessment

An independent heritage assessment of the site was subsequently carried out by GML Heritage in January 2017 for Randwick Council, in accordance with the standard heritage significance criteria and gradings of the NSW Heritage Office publication Assessing Heritage Significance, 2001.

                               

While the assessment did not recommend listing 48 Dudley Street as a heritage item under the RLEP 2012 (as the property did not meet State Heritage Register (SHR) criteria at a local level), it identified that the site together with a number of properties fronting the southern side of Dudley Street (between Mount and Byron Streets), have contributory value based on their architectural character and as evidence of early twentieth century residential development characterising this part of Coogee.

 

The assessment accordingly recommended that the boundary of the Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area be adjusted to include 48 Dudley Street and the properties along the southern side of Dudley Street between Mount and Byron Streets (properties being 38, 40, 42, 44 and 46 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee).

                                                                         

In January 2017, a peer review of the GML heritage assessment was undertaken by Colin Brady Architecture + Planning, in line with the aforementioned NSW Heritage Office criteria.

                                             

The Colin Brady assessment concluded that the subject site does qualify for inclusion in the RLEP 2012 as an item of local heritage significance, meeting the NSW Heritage Office criteria of historic, aesthetic and social significance.

 

The assessment concurred with the GML assessment that the consistent grouping of residences of similar aesthetic forms in Dudley Street, warrants inclusion in the Dudley Street HCA, together with the site 48 Dudley Street, Coogee.

 

In June 2017, Colin Brady Architecture + Planning undertook a further report on the Dudley Street Conservation Area extension. The report recommended that the Dudley Street HCA is extended east to encompass the existing sites of 38, 40, 42, 44 and 46 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee. The residences at 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street and 122 Mount Street, Coogee are also identified as being significant to warrant being listed local heritage items. 

Council Resolution to extend heritage conservation area and list 48 Dudley Street, Coogee as a local heritage item.

Council considered both heritage assessments at its meeting on 28 February 2017 where it was resolved that 48 Dudley Street be placed on the heritage schedule of the RLEP 2012 and that the boundary of Dudley Street HCA be extended to include 48 Dudley Street, Coogee together with properties fronting the southern side of Dudley Street in the block between Mount and Byron Street. 

Land and Environment Court decisions

An appeal was lodged by Strebora Pty Ltd (the owner of 48 Dudley Street, Coogee) pursuant to 30(1) of the Heritage Act 1977 (NSW) (Heritage Act) against the making of an IHO by Randwick City Council over the property at 48 Dudley Street, Coogee. The IHO on 48 Dudley was later revoked by the court case ruling in April, 2017. 48 Dudley Street was then demolished under a complying development certificate approval. The proposed development for the site was also refused by the court.

 

Local Heritage Items

The heritage significance of the properties 38, 42, and 44 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee are outlined in the attached Draft Heritage Data Forms (See attachment 2, 3, 4 and 5) prepared by Colin Brady Architecture + Planning. These inventory sheets have been prepared in accordance with the Heritage Branch SHR data base standards. Provided below is a map illustrating the adjusted Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area boundary extension (excluding 48 Dudley Street, Coogee) and the identified proposed items of local heritage significance.

Community Consultation

As a preliminary consultation measure, in March 2018 letters were sent to the property owners of 38, 40, 42, 44 and 46 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee to advise them of the Council resolution to extend the Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area and the proposed heritage listing of 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street and 122 Mount Street, Coogee. Council was contacted by an individual on behalf of one of the property owners of the affected properties and they were generally supportive of the listing. Council received one written submission from the property owner of 38 Dudley Street, Coogee. The owner objects to the proposed listing on the basis that:

·      At the time of purchase of this property, he was not aware of Council’s intention to include his property as an item of environmental heritage, and

·      The potential listing denies him property rights.

·      The owner states that he will be commencing preparation of a preliminary design to propose works to the subject property and that the current guidelines will be the basis for the development application.

The Council should note that should the Gateway determination be issued by the Minister of Planning it will outline the consultation requirements which would give the opportunity for effected properties to comment on the Planning Proposal.

 

Heritage Planner Comments

Council’s Heritage Planner, Ms Lorraine Simpson is in agreement with Mr Colin Brady of Architecture + Planning’s assessment that the properties 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee are of local heritage significance and that the Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area should be extended to include 38, 40, 42, 44 and 46 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 7:       Heritage that is protected and celebrated

Direction 7a:      Our heritage is recognized, protected and celebrated

 

 

Financial impact statement

 

The costs to date associated with the heritage assessments has been $15,340.00 (approximately). The costs associated with progressing the Planning Proposal would be accommodated within Council’s operational budget.

 

Conclusion

 

The assessment of the heritage significance of 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee  prepared by Colin Brady indicates that, on a number of heritage assessment criteria, the residences at 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee are worthy as items of local heritage significance. Accordingly, it is recommended that a Planning Proposal be prepared and the items be placed on the heritage schedule of the Randwick LEP and that the Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area boundary by extended. In summary, the Colin Brady heritage assessment provides a sound basis for Council to form the opinion that the item at 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee are of local heritage significance.

 

Recommendation

 

That Council:

 

1.       Amend the provisions under the Randwick LEP 2012 to include No 38, 42 and 44 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee on the heritage schedule and that the associated heritage map of the RLEP be amended, and that the Dudley Street Heritage Conservation Area map boundary be extended to include 38, 40, 42, 44 and 46 Dudley Street, Coogee and 122 Mount Street, Coogee;

 

2.       Prepare a draft planning proposal to be forwarded to the Greater Sydney Commission or it’s delegate requesting ‘Gateway Determination’ under section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979;

 

3.       Following ‘Gateway Determination’ exhibit the draft Planning Proposal in accordance with the conditions of the gateway determination and bring back a report to Council detailing the results of the community consultation for final consideration by Council;

 

4.       Authorise the Director, City Planning to make typographical, grammatical or formatting changes to the documentation.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Dudley Street Conservation Area Extension Assessment. June 2017, Colin Brady Architecture + Planning

 

2.

38 Dudley Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

 

3.

42 Dudley Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

 

4.

44 Dudley Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

 

5.

122 Mount Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

 

 

 

 


Dudley Street Conservation Area Extension Assessment. June 2017, Colin Brady Architecture + Planning

Attachment 1

 

 


38 Dudley Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

Attachment 2

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


42 Dudley Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

Attachment 3

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


44 Dudley Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

Attachment 4

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


122 Mount Street Coogee - Draft Heritage Data Form

Attachment 5

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP8/18

 

Subject:             Update on heritage assessments for the Captain Cook Statue and Blenheim House

Folder No:                   F2017/00333

Author:                   David Ongkili, Coordinator Strategic Planning      

 

Introduction

 

At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 27 June 2017, it was resolved:

 

“(Neilson/Shurey) that:

 

a)   Council note that two significant heritage items in the city of Randwick need greater heritage status:

·      BLENHEIM HOUSE, 17 Blenheim St, Randwick is listed as a heritage item under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Consolidation), is classified by the National Trust of Australia (NSW) and is on the Register of the National Estate. However, it is not on the State Register and legislative changes have meant the Register of the National Estate is no longer relevant but unfortunately the necessary changes were not made to address this.

  *Blenheim House was built by Simeon Henry Pearce, later the first Mayor of Randwick, in early 1848. It is the oldest residence in Randwick, built and occupied by “the Father of Randwick,” Simeon Henry Pearce and his family up to the First World War.

·      Statue of Captain James Cook R.N., Avoca Street & Belmore Road, Randwick, This was the first statue erected in New South Wales to Cook. It represents the Colonial wish to commemorate Cook in the 1870s and was erected by Captain Thomas Watson in the grounds of his residence Cooks Lodge on the 27th October 1874 on the anniversary of Cook's birthday. Unveiled in 1874, the statue was presented to the Municipal Council of Randwick by H.S. Gibson in 1910. The figure and pedestal are both composed of Pyrmont freestone, and are the work of a colonial artist, Walter McGill, of Sydney.

b)   Council staff commence relevant actions to ensure Blenheim House and Captain Cook Statue are listed on all relevant heritage lists to ensure the appropriate recognition of their importance to the city of Randwick and NSW.

 

This report provides an update on the heritage assessment of the Captain Cook Statue and Blenheim House which has been undertaken to date and the process involved in pursuing state heritage listing for these significant heritage items.

 

Issues

 

In 2015, Council engaged City Plan Services to update the heritage status and condition of heritage items in the Randwick Junction Town Centre which resulted in the preparation of new Heritage Data Sheets for these items including the Captain Cook Statue. Additionally, in September 2017, Godden McKay Logan (GML) were engaged to undertake a heritage assessment of Blenheim House (including a site inspection and fabric analysis, physical description of the building, historical outline of the site, comparative analysis and preparation of statement of significance).

The respective assessments essentially found that the Captain Cook Statue and Blenheim House had significance at the local level. Notwithstanding this, Council conducted a peer review of these reports which was undertaken by Colin Brady. The outcome of Colin Brady’s review of the two items are summarised as follows:

 

Captain Cook Statue

 

In reviewing the Draft Heritage Data Sheet for the Captain Cook Statue, Colin Brady advises as follows:

 

“Whilst the format and incorporated information is considered accurate, the absence of substantial historical information regarding the statues original owner and financier Captain Thomas Watson has limited the basis of assessment. Investigation of Watson’s life has identified his instigation/promotion of the three principal memorials to Captain Cook erected in NSW prior to 1879, the Randwick Statue being the second of these. There is considerable documentary evidence that Watson knew Cooks widow whilst a youth in London’s East End and that his father Daniel Watson sailed with Cook. These associations appear the basis of Thomas Watson’s lifetime dedication to commemoration of Cook. Comparison with dates of other memorials to Cook in Hawaii, New Zealand and the United Kingdom supports the Randwick statue being the first full statue of Cook provided anywhere in the world.

 

It is recommended that preliminary research into the life and associations of Captain Thomas Watson his association with Cook and his efforts to commemorate ‘the great navigator’ are included in the data sheet and considered in the heritage assessment of the statues significance which appears considerable.”

 

In summary, Colin Brady recommends that additional research be undertaken (primarily of the life and role of Captain Thomas Watson as the original owner and financier for the statue) and be included in the Heritage Data Sheets prepared by City Plan Services to further inform the statue’s significance and eligibility for nomination to the State Heritage Register.

 

Blenheim House

 

Following an assessment of Blenheim House against standard criteria in the NSW Heritage Office Guidelines, GML do not consider Blenheim House to be of state significance primarily for the following reasons: its setting has been significantly reduced with increasing suburban development around the property; it is unlikely to contribute to a sense of place due to its seclusion from the public domain; it has a significantly altered building stock both externally and internally; and it is representative of suburban development at the Randwick local government level, not at the State level.

 

Notwithstanding GML’s assessment, Colin Brady, in the peer review, advises that:

 

The GML Assessment finds Blenheim House of local heritage significance.  Consideration of State heritage significance is not supported on the basis of the location largely obscured from public view; the degree of altered internal form and fabric; and the historic profile of Simeon Pearce considered of local not State importance.

 

Factors that weigh against this assessment and warrant  further  consideration  including submission to the NSW Department of Environment and Heritage for recognition as an item of State Heritage Significance  include the age, form and comparative rarity of Blenheim House; the comparative significance  of the remaining fabric relative to other structures from the early European settlement of Randwick Municipality; and  the historical  prominence of Simeon Pearce as an associate and primary influencer of established members of the Anglican Church and NSW State Government.

 

The more esoteric aspects of significance in particular the community’s demonstrated association of Blenheim House with a sense of place are not particularly addressed in the GML Report. These should be considered, particularly in the current age of urban densification. The history of the site records three phases of dramatic change to built form in the immediate setting. Recent amendment to strata laws and demand for residential accommodation could see a further substantial change in the surrounding built fabric. Local rather than State heritage listing would have limited ability to determine the nature of the immediate setting and potentially lead to a challenge to retention of Blenheim House based upon the limited significance identified in the GML heritage assessment.

 

In short, Colin Brady recommends that there is merit in pursuing a State heritage significance listing subject to the findings of:

·      a comparative assessment of Blenheim House against other state listed structures of similar alteration and removal of original fabric.

·      further assessment being given to the widely published biographical details of Simeon Henry Pearce.

·      further consideration being given in the heritage assessment to the community identity of Randwick the place and Blenheim House as its notional beginning.

 

Colin Brady’s peer review of both the Captain Cook Statue and Blenheim House heritage assessments has been reviewed by Council’s Heritage Planner and the heritage planner supports the additional actions recommended by Colin Brady.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 7:       Heritage that is protected and celebrated.

Direction 7a:      Our heritage is recognised, protected and celebrated.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The costs to date of the heritage assessments has been approximately $14,500. Based on the cost for the existing peer reviews, it is estimated that additional assessment required for the two properties will be approximately $6,000.

 

Conclusion

 

In relation to both the Captain Cook Statue and Blenheim House, Colin Brady has recommended that additional investigative works be undertaken to determine their eligibility for nomination to the State heritage listing. It is recommended that Council support carrying out the additional investigations as recommended by Colin Brady.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     Council carry out the additional required investigative works for the Captain Cook Statue and Blenheim House

b)     the additional and existing investigation material be submitted to the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage as part of a request for State heritage listing.

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Blenheim House, Randwick, Heritage Assessment, Draft Report, November 2017 (with Appendices)

 

2.

SHI Form - 145M Belmore Road, Randwick, August 2015

 

 

 

 


Blenheim House, Randwick, Heritage Assessment, Draft Report, November 2017 (with Appendices)

Attachment 1

 

 


SHI Form - 145M Belmore Road, Randwick, August 2015

Attachment 2

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

General Manager's Report No. GM7/18

 

Subject:             Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan and Budget 2018-19

Folder No:                   F2018/03004

Author:                   Anne Warner, Manager Corporate Performance     

 

Introduction

 

The pinnacle of Council’s Integrated Planning and Reporting framework is the 20-year Randwick City Plan. This Plan is the overarching document underpinned by the Resourcing Strategy and a suite of medium term plans such as An Inclusive Randwick and the Recreational Needs Study.

 

The Resourcing Strategy outlines how we will meet our obligations now and in the future, taking into account our workforce, our finances and our assets. The Strategy enables the delivery of services and projects to the community in a cohesive and sustainable way, and includes:

 

·           a Long Term Financial Plan;

·           an Asset Management Strategy;

·           a Digital Strategy; and

·           a Workforce Plan.

 

In late 2017 Council underwent a major review to measure the Plan’s progress and consider the changes in the community’s priorities, demographic information, Council’s new obligations, technological advances and ongoing studies, and modify the planning documents accordingly.

 

At the same time a new Financial Strategy had been developed to resource the revised Randwick City Plan including those changes mentioned above. This financial strategy included applying to IPART for a three year 19.85% special rate variation, a new Port Botany Business rating sub-category and the utilisation of loan borrowings.  

 

The review of the City Plan saw major new projects proposed, offering our community facilities of scale and diversity and provides for intergenerational equity in their provision and resourcing.

 

Council conducted a comprehensive community engagement program on the Special Rate Variation, namely Our Community Our Future, to inform residents and ratepayers about the full impact of the proposal and to provide them with multiple opportunities to be involved and to have their say.

 

The community consultation was guided by a community engagement strategy reported to and endorsed at the Randwick Council Meeting of 28 November 2017. The consultation period was open for eight weeks from 1 December 2017 to 5pm 1 February 2018. This was double the required length of consultation as required by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) and Office of Local Government guidelines.

 

The reviewed 20-year Randwick City Plan and Resourcing Strategy were reviewed and adopted in February 2018 in line with legislation and the local government electoral cycle. Council also resolved to apply to IPART for a three year 19.85% permanent special rate variation. The 2018-19 Operational Plan and Budget have been developed on the assumption that the application is successful.

 

Towards the end of 2017, and in the preparation of the Operational Plan 2018-19, Council engaged the City’s precinct committees in a series of conversations about their funding priorities. The priorities identified through these and other consultation activities were incorporated into our planning and budget deliberations.

 

The Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan 2018-19 meets the requirements of s.404 and s.405 of the Local Government Act 1993 which specify the information that is to be included in a Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

 

All actions in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan are further detailed in internal departmental plans, project plans, service standards and individual work plans. The Delivery Program and Operational Plan are supported by integrated planning software which includes a clear assignment of responsibility, timeframe of projects and key performance indicators for services. All actions are reported on and accountability is observed through quarterly reporting.

 

Issues

 

The Draft Operational Plan 2018-19 is aligned to the Draft Randwick City Council Budget 2018-19, which is a detailed draft estimate of income and expenditure and the draft Statement of Fees, Charges and Pricing Policy. These documents are provided under separate cover.

 

The first two sections of the Draft Operational Plan explain how our planning process works and how it is translated into action. The outcomes and directions from the City Plan and the actions from the Delivery Program are used to develop our one-year operational actions.

 

This is followed by the Key Activities section, which is organised according to our six themes. As in previous years, we have outlined our long and medium-term plans related to each theme to give readers a better sense of how we implement our planning and illustrate our long-term planning in action.

 

Our Themes:

Responsible management

A sense of community

Places for people

A prospering City

Moving around

Looking after our environment

 

The final section ‘Our Budget 2018-19’, contains all of the statutory information required in the Local Government Act 1993, including Council’s 2018-19 Revenue Policy. In this section we include accountability for the ongoing Sustaining our City Program by providing budget estimates for all projects across the Program.

 

Activities

 

The activities detailed in the Draft Operational Plan and Budget aim to foster a sense of community and enhance the liveability of Randwick City. The plan is underpinned by a participatory democracy approach and strong governance as outlined in the Responsible Management theme.

 

Activities range from the continued delivery of high quality services, projects and capital works; and initiatives through the Sustaining our City and Our Community Our Future programs. Some of the specific projects include construction of the Mahon Pool amenities; activating the La Perouse museum; ongoing construction of the coastal walkway; and continued planning towards a new indoor multi-purpose sporting facility and gymnastics facility at Heffron Park.

 

Public exhibition

 

The draft Plan is required to undergo public exhibition for a period of at least 28 days. The proposed exhibition period is 1 May to 1 June to allow for the collation and consideration of submissions.

 

We are planning to advertise this ‘exhibition period’ in the Southern Courier; as a subject of the Mayoral column; as a media release; as a feature in the Beast and Scene magazines; on local bus shelters; and online on Council’s webpage, on our Your Say specialised consultation website www.yoursayrandwick.com.au/budget2019, the myRANDWICK smart phone app; e-news; Twitter and Facebook.

 

In addition, hard copies of the Draft Operational Plan and Budget will be displayed at our local libraries, the Des Renford Leisure Centre and customer service desk.

 


 

Budget 2018-19

 

The Draft 2018-19 Budget has been compiled in accordance with the Council’s adopted Resourcing Strategy (Asset Management Plans, Workforce Strategy, Digital Strategy and Long Term Financial Plan). It has also been developed on the assumption that the special rate variation application made to IPART is approved in full.

 

The following tables summarise the use of funds and the source of funds.

 

Table 1: Use of funds

 

Expenditure type

Amount ($)

Employee costs

64,718,902

Materials and contracts

37,976,028

Net Capital Expenditure

67,648,884

Other operating expenses

15,464,638

Loan Repayments

2,107,616

Total

187,916,068

 

Table 2: Source of funds

 

Revenue type

Amount ($)

Rates and annual charges

116,667,175

User fees and charges

18,593,424

Grants and contributions

10,954,888

Other revenues

9,053,421

Reserves

4,024,555

Investment Income

1,624,964

Borrowings

27,000,000

Total

187,918,427

 

The proposed Budget for 2018-19 is balanced and sustainable, with a surplus of $2,359.

 

The major source of revenue for Randwick City Council is rates and annual charges.

 

Rates

 

The Council’s rating policy is structured on an ‘ad valorem’ basis with all rateable properties within Randwick City are categorised as either residential or business. For each category, a minimum rate applies.

 

As mentioned above Randwick City Council has applied to IPART for a three year 19.85% permanent special rate variation. For the 2018-19 financial year the increase applied would be 7.64%. Council would also determine a new Port Botany Business sub-category for rating commencing in the 2018-19 rating year. 

Environmental Levy

 

In 2004-05 the Minister for Local Government approved a five-year Environmental Levy calculated at 6% of the Council’s overall rates income. In July 2009 and again in June 2014 the Levy was re-approved for a further five years. The continuation of the Levy has allowed Council to continue the Environmental Program for another five years and fund a comprehensive range of programs and initiatives aimed at achieving a substantial enhancement of Randwick’s environment. The 2018-19 financial year will be the final year of the existing approved levy.

 

Domestic Waste Management Charge

 

Under s.496 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council must make and levy an annual charge for providing domestic waste management services. Under s.504 of the Act, income from the charge must not exceed the reasonable cost to the Council of providing those services.

 

The domestic waste management charge is proposed to increase from $554 to $567.85 for each residential service in 2018-19.

 

The increased Domestic Waste Management Charge will provide for existing services, charges for tipping to landfill, the ongoing operation of the Perry Street Recycling Centre, continuation of Council’s Contaminated Site Remediation Program and Council’s commitment to Alternate Waste Technologies, in an effort to increase the amount of rubbish diverted from landfill.

 

Pensioner Rebates

 

The pensioner rebate has remained unchanged since it was set by the State Government at a maximum of $250.00 back in 1989. Originally the pensioner concession was 50% of the combined rates and domestic waste management charge, up to the maximum of $250.00.

 

Rates and charges have been indexed every year since the introduction of the $250.00 maximum rebate, however the pensioner rebate amount has remained static. It has been 19 years since the pensioner rebate last represented 50% of the combined rates and charges for a ratepayer on the minimum rate.

 

Council has previously lobbied the State Government to increase the statutory pensioner rebate amount. The State Government response has been that Council is free to offer additional concessions to eligible ratepayers, however any additional rebates would not be subsidised by the State Government.

 

Council currently has 4,565 eligible pensioners, making up over 9% of all residential properties. The total cost of pensioner rebates is currently $1,141,250 per annum. From this total, the State Government provides a 55% subsidy totalling $627,687 per annum. This leaves an annual cost to Council of $513,563.

 

Increasing the pensioner rebate by $50.00 to $300.00 per annum would result in an additional annual cost of $228,250 and there would not be any State Government subsidy received towards the additional rebate. If applied to the domestic waste management charge this additional rebate expense would form part of the annual domestic waste reasonable cost calculation, as required under s504 of the Local Government Act 1993, and would therefore not require funding from Council’s general revenue.

 

The 2018-19 Budget has been developed to include an addition pensioner rebate of $50.00 per annum to be granted by Council to eligible pensioners from the 2018-19 rating period on their domestic waste management charge.

 

Stormwater Management Service Charge

 

The Stormwater Management Service Charge was introduced in the 2008-09 financial year to establish a sustainable funding source for providing improved stormwater management across Randwick City. The amount chargeable has been prescribed under the Local Government Act 1993 at:

 

·           Residential property: $25 per annum (approximately 48 cents per week)

·           Residential strata property: $12.50 per annum (approximately 24 cents per week)

·           Business property: $25 per annum plus an additional $25 for each 350m or part thereof by which the parcel of land exceeds 350m

·           Business strata property: calculated as per a Business property and apportioned by unit entitlement for business strata lot with a minimum charge of $5.

 

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 1c:      Continuous improvement in service delivery based on accountability, transparency and good governance.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The Council is in a strong financial position with a sustainable and balanced budget, sufficient unrestricted cash and available working capital, strong liquidity, sufficient cash reserves, and a good debt collection ratio.

 

Conclusion

 

The recent review of the City Plan saw major new projects proposed, offering our community facilities of scale and diversity and provides for intergenerational equity in their provision and resourcing.

 

The Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan and Budget 2018-19 have been prepared under the 2018-21 Delivery Program, as established through the review of the City Plan and outline the activities of the forthcoming year. Some of the specific projects include construction of the Mahon Pool amenities; activating the La Perouse museum; ongoing construction of the coastal walkway; and continued planning towards a new indoor multi-purpose sporting facility and gymnastics facility at Heffron Park.

 

Following Council’s consideration of the Draft Operational Plan, it will be placed on public exhibition over the period from 1 May to 1 June 2018, providing the community with time and information to consider the proposed activities.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)       the Draft Randwick City Council Operational Plan 2018-19, which includes the 2018-19 Budget and associated Fees and Charges be placed on public exhibition for not less than 28 days, from 1 May to 1 June, inviting submissions from the public;

 

b)       at the conclusion of the period of public exhibition a meeting of the Council is held to consider any submissions made concerning the draft Plan and Budget and consider the final 2018-19 Operational Plan and Budget; and

 

c)       the General Manager be authorised to make any minor changes if required.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

2018-19 Draft Operational Plan and Budget

Included under separate cover

2.

2018-19 Draft Fees and Charges

Included under separate cover

 

 

  


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS6/18

 

Subject:             Albi Place Reserve, Randwick - Swings

Folder No:                   F2004/08218

Author:                   Joe Ingegneri, Manager Technical Services     

 

Introduction

 

In July 2017, Council officers became aware that 2 home-made swings and a tree house located 5m above the ground had been installed on the Weeping Fig located in Albi Place Reserve, Randwick.

 

Correspondence and community representation was received both in support and in opposition to the installations within the tree. An assessment at the time found that the condition and structural capacity of the tree was adequate to accommodate the swings.  However, the tree house was removed due to safety risks.

 

Council has continued to receive ongoing complaints from adjacent residents about noise and antisocial behaviour by youths and young adults congregating at the swings late in the evening.

 

Issues

 

Locality

The location of Albi Place Reserve, the weeping hills fig and the swings is shown in the aerial photograph below.

 

Location of Weeping fig and swings

Albi Place Reserve is an open space area serving as a drainage reserve.  The reserve provides pedestrian links between Dolphin Street, Coogee Street and Albi Place.  The reserve also provides passive recreational opportunities.

 

Council does not have any playground equipment installed at Albi Place Reserve. The nearest playground is located in Dolphin Street at Alby Smith Memorial Reserve, approximately 450m away. 

 

Play Structures

Two rope swings with a timber seat and a timber tree house 5m above the ground were installed in the public weeping hills fig at the southern end of the reserve.  This equipment was installed without approval from council. Information about the installation indicates that the structures were installed by teenagers.

 

Discussion

The support for the installation of the swings indicates that the swings and tree house provide enjoyment to people of all ages and has increased the number of users of the reserve.

 

On this basis, the initial assessment by Council officers concluded to permit the swings to remain. 

 

However, there have been complaints about the unintended consequences arising from the swings.  The concerns state that teenagers and young adults are congregating around the swings for long periods late at night up to 11pm.  The activities include drinking, smoking, yelling and playing music.  This has created noise impacts.  Further, due to the vicinity of the swings to private residences, there are concerns about privacy.

 

Assessment

The planning for new playgrounds includes identification of suitable locations and consultation with local residents. The aim is to ensure that the planned play equipment is suitable and addresses any potential impacts to local residents.

 

Play equipment is selected to meet Australian Standards and is installed with soft fall material to protect children from injury.  Play equipment is inspected regularly to ensure it remains safe and free from defects.  

 

The home-made swings in the tree appear to be well built and the tree branches appear to have adequate structural capacity. It is unlikely that the rope will impact on the tree's health in the short to medium term. Longer term, the rope may fray and without regular inspections, there is a risk that the swings can fail. Further, there is some concern with trip and fall risks due to many large exposed roots that make the ground under the tree uneven. 

 

There appears to be sufficient demand for formal play equipment to be installed in the reserve.  Due to the nature of the reserve, the play equipment would be limited to a swing set and 1 or 2 other play items.

 

The location of the new play equipment would be selected in consultation with the local residents.

 

Removal of the swings in the tree would remove the safety risks and public liability risks associated with the swings. It would also address the unintended antisocial issues that have arisen from the installation.


 

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

Outcome 6:        A liveable City

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

The cost for the installation of a small playground at Albi Place Reserve is estimated at $75,000.  Funding would be considered in a future capital works program.

 

Conclusion

 

Community members installed swings and a tree house in a weeping hills fig located in Albi Place Reserve.  Whilst the swings allow local children an opportunity to play, they have had unintended consequences including noise and privacy impacts on adjacent residents.

 

Due to the impacts of the unauthorised swings, maintenance requirements and public liability risk, it is proposed that the swings be removed.

 

However, to address the demand for play equipment at Albi Place Reserve, it is proposed to plan for a small playground.  The planning will include community consultation to determine a suitable location within the reserve.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)   Council commence planning for a small playground at Albi Place Reserve including community consultation.

 

b)   funding for the playground be considered in a future capital works program.

 

c)   the unauthorised swings placed in the weeping hills fig be removed.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Works Committee Report  - Attachment 1 - Albi Place Reserve - Swings

 

 

 

 


Works Committee Report  - Attachment 1 - Albi Place Reserve - Swings

Attachment 1

 

 


 


 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS7/18

 

Subject:             Tree Removal - Outside 49 Ritchard Avenue, Coogee

Folder No:                   F2018/07359

Author:                   Bryan Bourke, Tree Management Officer      

 

Introduction

 

On 16 January 2017, a builder representing the owners of 49 Ritchard Avenue, Coogee, wrote to Council advising that roots from a large Council owned Ficus macrocarpa var. ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) located on the nature strip outside that property were causing damage to the brick retaining wall along the front of the property.

 

He expressed concern that these tree roots had a high potential to invade and undermine the footing system of the dwelling, thereby causing substantial structural problems for the residence.

 

He advised that the owners of the property wished to preserve the tree and that the option of installing a tree root barrier adjacent to the front property boundary should be investigated and assessed.

 

Issues

 

Investigation

The subject tree has caused ongoing damage to Council infrastructure for well over two decades. The footpath adjacent to the tree has been replaced on several occasions. Large fig tree roots have been severed wherever possible.

 

In order to assess the damage being done to both public infrastructure and private property by the roots of this tree and to assess the viability of installing a reinforced concrete tree root barrier, in July 2017, the footpath was removed and we trenched along the front property boundary.

 

The excavation revealed large fig tree roots entering the property and advice provided by Council’s Tree Gang arborists was that none of these roots could be severed as this would adversely impact the health and long-term viability of the tree as well as compromising its stability.

 

It is stipulated in Australian Standard AS 4970 – 2009 – Protection of trees on development sites that wherever any proposed tree root cutting is greater than 10% of the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) or is inside the Structural Root Zone (SRZ), it must be demonstrated that the tree will remain healthy and viable should any required root cutting take place.

 

The radius of the Tree Protection Zone is calculated by multiplying a tree’s diameter at breast height (DBH) x 12 where DBH is measured at 1.4 metres above ground. In this case the radius of the TPZ would extend to 10 metres from the trunk of the tree and the location of any proposed tree root barrier would be well within that zone.

 

In relation to the SRZ of a tree, a general rule is that no root cutting works can be undertaken within the following recommended radial distances from any Council owned tree on public land.

 

 

Trunk Diameter @ DBH

 

Restricted Radial Distance

 

Less than 200mm

 

2 metres

 

Between 200mm – 400mm

 

3 metres

 

Greater than 400mm

 

4 metres

 

In this particular case, the lateral roots of the Hill’s Weeping fig directly outside 49 Ritchard Avenue, Coogee, are well within both the Tree Protection Zone and the Structural Root Zone and therefore severing any of the roots entering the property is not an option.

 

Background

Requests for the repair of damaged footpath sections and the adjacent driveway go back to December 2004. Requests to prune overhanging fig tree branches clear of the property and its roof go back to the same period.

 

The previous owners of this property wrote to Council in July 2006 requesting that the fig tree be removed because of damage being caused to the property by its invasive root system.

 

There have also been ongoing issues with copious amounts of fig tree fruit and flying fox excreta dropping onto the footpath, roadway and parked vehicles on a seasonal basis.

 

A request to severely prune or remove this tree because of concerns about bat virus and its health risks was lodged with Council in September 2010 but this was also refused.

 

In November 2012, the current property owners wrote to Council advising of their concerns with the damage being done to their property by the root system of the large fig tree outside their property.

 

They made the point that they loved the tree and that the Hill’s figs along this section of Ritchard Avenue made the area what it was and that they would be heartbroken to see any of them ever removed.

 

At the time, Council removed the footpath adjacent to the property and severed as many intruding tree roots as possible and reinstated the footpath.

 

Subsequent to these works being completed, the property owner wrote to Council in December 2012 reiterating his desire to have the tree retained and offering to pay for more substantial roots being cut and to absolve Council from any claim for damages involving his property.

 

It was subsequently determined by Council tree officers that further root cutting was not possible at that time without having a very serious and detrimental impact on the tree.

 

The tree root issues are further compounded by the fact that the tree is growing on a rock shelf that runs along Ritchard Avenue and, as a consequence, soil depth is quite shallow and fig tree root spread is very extensive.

 

No further root pruning works were investigated or undertaken until Council received correspondence in January 2017.

 

Tree Assessment

The subject tree is estimated to be approximately sixty years old and it has been assessed as having high scenic and amenity value and providing habitat and food source for a variety of fauna. Because of the ongoing and increasing damage being caused by its roots, the impact of removal on land degradation would be negligible.

 

Using Australian Standard ASDR99307, it has been calculated that the tree has an amenity value of $10,800.

 

Because of the size and amount of root material that has previously been removed from this tree over many years to effectively deal with the damage being caused by its roots, root pruning is no longer a viable option.

 

This is compounded by the fact that the majority of weight in the canopy of the tree is on the northern side overhanging the roadway and low voltage powerlines. Any root pruning of any significance could lead to the tree collapsing onto the road.

 

The loss of visual amenity from removal of this tree would be mitigated to some degree by the fact that there is a mature Hill’s fig on either side of this tree as well as one on the opposite side of the street to the north-west.

 

When the tree was inspected by tree management staff on 14 March 2018, no nests or hollows were found and there were no signs of birds or fauna inhabiting the tree.

 

The habitation of birdlife and other fauna within Council tree assets is a primary consideration of tree management staff whenever trees are inspected for pruning or removal works.

 

In addition, it is a requirement for all tree trimming contractors to inspect trees for fauna/wildlife habitation prior to any tree works being undertaken on Council trees.

 

This on-site inspection forms part of the site specific risk assessment all tree contractors undertake prior to works being undertaken and if any wildlife is encountered they ensure they contact WIRES to have any such fauna removed and relocated.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 10:      A Healthy Environment.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

The cost to remove and stump grind this Council street tree and to replace it with two super-advanced Waterhousia floribunda (Weeping Lilly Pillys) is estimated of $10,000.

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

There have been ongoing and increasingly serious problems associated with this tree for well over two decades and Council has taken whatever steps it could to retain this significant public tree asset.

 

However, these problems have increased to the point that there are serious concerns that roots from this fig tree will inevitably cause structural damage to the adjacent residential building.

 

Large tree roots have already damaged and compromised the front brick fence as well as lifting and damaging the front entranceway.

 

The property owner has written to Council conceding that although every effort has been made over a long period to retain this tree, there is now no effective option for dealing with existing and potential tree root damage other than removal and replacement of the tree with a more appropriate species.

 

Council has resolved that where Ficus ‘Hillii’ constitute the predominant species in any street and where those trees have recognised historic and heritage significance, no more than five (5) percent of vegetative canopy cover is to be removed in any one calendar year.

 

The proposed removal of this street tree asset will not contravene the resolution and removal is only being recommended because there are no viable management options available that would deal with the damage being caused by the roots of this tree.

 

Recommendation

 

That the Council owned Ficus ‘Hillii’ (Hill’s Weeping fig) growing outside 49 Ritchard Avenue, Coogee, be removed and replaced with two advanced Waterhousia floribunda (Weeping Lilly Pillys).

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Attachment 1 - Photographs

 

 

 

 


Attachment 1 - Photographs

Attachment 1

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS8/18

 

Subject:             Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Yarra Bay and Clovelly Bay Catchments – Simplified Flood Study

Folder No:                   F2017/00465

Author:                   Joe Ingegneri, Manager Technical Services; Sebastien  Le Coustumer, Drainage Engineer      

 

Introduction

 

Randwick Council has either undertaken or is in the process of completing the Floodplain Management Process for 5 of its major catchments, including:

 

·           Green Square-West Kensington,

·           Kensington-Centennial Park,

·           Maroubra Bay,

·           Coogee Bay, and

·           Birds Gully and Bunnerong Road.

 

Combined, these studies provide reliable information on flood behaviour for approximately 70% of the Randwick Local Government Area.

 

These catchments are being studied in accordance with the NSW Government’s Flood Prone Lands Policy and NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual to reduce the impact of flooding and flood liability on individual owners and occupiers of flood prone property. The process for the Floodplain Management Process involves various phases and can take several years to complete.

 

The remaining area comprises 10.58km2, and includes the catchments of Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Yarra Bay, and Clovelly Bay. These will be studied progressively in accordance with the detailed process outlined in the NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual as resources and funding become available.

 

However, it is anticipated that it could take a number of years to complete the comprehensive floodplain management process for all of the remaining catchments.  During this time, both property owners and Council will not have access to the reliable information needed to ensure that flood risks can be properly managed to protect individuals and property from flooding. 

 

To manage these outstanding catchments, a specialist flood consultant has been engaged to undertake a simplified flood study that will enable overland flow paths and areas of inundation to be determined with a high degree of confidence.

 

The study outputs allows properties to be identified that are potentially flood affected in these unstudied catchments so that some preventative actions can be taken to minimise the impacts of flooding and reduce public and private losses.

 


 

Issues

 

As part of the Floodplain Management Process, upon completion of a flood study that is considered to be reliable, Council is obliged to share information with property owners who may enquire whether their property is flood affected.  The establishment of flood related development controls is fundamental to managing future risk of flooding.

 

Flood studies allow the identification of properties that are flood affected.  Notations for the identified properties are added to the Section 149 Planning Certificates and subsequently activate the requirement for developments to comply with flood related development controls.

 

Determining the Flood Planning Area

The Flood Planning Area (FPA) is used to identify properties that are flood affected. The NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual typically defines the FPA by the 100 year Average Return Interval (ARI) flood level + 0.5m freeboard.

 

The FPA defined in the NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual typically relates to areas prone to flooding due to rising water levels in lakes and rivers. The manual does not offer guidance in the case of overland flow scenarios as experienced throughout the Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Clovelly and Yarra Bay catchments. An analysis of the flooding characteristics within the catchment has identified that the use of 0.5m freeboard is excessive because it will burden a large number of property owners whose properties are not prone to flooding in even the most severe of storms.

 

In the catchments where the Floodplain Management process has been undertaken, the Floodplain Management Committees have adopted a process of trimming the flood extents to remove areas of inundation where the depth is less than 150mm and the area of inundation is small.  This same approach has been recommended by the consultant who undertook the simplified flood study covering the Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Clovelly and Yarra Bay catchments.

 

Applying this approach results in 980 properties within the catchments that would be considered as potentially flood affected in the 100 year ARI. Flood related development controls would apply to these properties for the purposes of residential development. For the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) there are 2,108 properties identified as potentially flood affected. Flood related development controls would apply to these properties for the purposes of types of development other than residential.

 

Planning Certificate Notations

Should this approach be adopted, then it will be necessary to tag properties so that correct information can be included in section 7A of the section 149(2) Certificates (Flood Related Development Controls). The information included within the section 149(2) section 7A should be consistent with section 4 of Council’s Flooding Advice and Flood Related Development Control Policy. See attachment.

 

It is also proposed that a notation be included in the Planning Certificate - section 149(5) – Flooding, as follows:

 

Council has completed an initial assessment of flooding for properties located within the Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Clovelly and Yarra Bay catchments which identified the land as a potential flood control lot. The Randwick Local Environment Plan 2012 and Randwick City Council Development Control Plan include flood planning provisions. Developers are required to undertake a flood study to determine the level of flood risk and appropriate management controls on this land.”

 

Flood Related Development Controls

Development controls will apply to tagged properties to ensure that the habitable floor level of developments is above the level of the flood. The Flood Planning Level (FPL) can vary depending on the use and vulnerability of the building/development to flooding.

 

The simplified flood study reliably models flow paths and areas of inundation, but is not of sufficient detail to determine flood depths on a specific property in some circumstances.  Property owners planning to develop a property identified as flood prone within the Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Clovelly and Yarra Bay catchments will be required to conduct a site specific flood study during the development process to assess the impact of the development on the flow behaviour and set the minimum floor level.

 

The controls that currently exist within Section B8 of Council’s Development Control Plan apply to developments within the Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Clovelly and Yarra Bay catchments.  However, they can only be implemented if a property is identified as flood affected.

 

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.

 

Financial impact statement

 

No financial impact.

 

Conclusion

 

A Simplified Flood Study for Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Yarra Bay and Clovelly Bay Catchments has been completed.

 

For the 100 year Average Return Interval (ARI) flood, 980 properties have been identified as potentially flood prone in these catchments with 2,108 identified for the PMF.

 

It is proposed to update the S149 planning certificates for the properties identified as potentially flood prone to reflect the relevant information in relation to flood affectation in accordance with our disclosure obligations.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     Council adopts the Simplified Flood Study for Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Yarra Bay and Clovelly Bay Catchments.

 

b)     Planning Certificate - section 149(2)-7A Flood related development controls information be updated for the properties identified as a flood control lot in the catchments.

 

c)     Planning Certificate - section 149(5)- Flooding – Additional – be updated to take into account the Simplified flood study for Lurline Bay, Malabar, Matraville, Yarra Bay and Clovelly Bay Catchments.

 

d)     Council notify the affected property owners.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Catchment area

 

2.

Simplified Flood Modelling Report for Lurline Bay, Matraville, Malabar, Yarra Bay and Clovelly Catchments

 

3.

Flooding Advice and Flood Related Development Controls Policy

 

 

 

 


Catchment area

Attachment 1

 

 


Simplified Flood Modelling Report for Lurline Bay, Matraville, Malabar, Yarra Bay and Clovelly Catchments

Attachment 2

 

 


Flooding Advice and Flood Related Development Controls Policy

Attachment 3

 

 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS9/18

 

Subject:             Sports Committee Meeting Minutes

Folder No:                   F2005/00446

Author:                   Chris  Hunter, Acting Manager Infrastructure Services      

 

Introduction

 

The Sports Committee Minutes for the meeting held on 21 February 2018 in the Matraville Room, Randwick City Council Depot, 192 Storey Street, Maroubra are presented at the Council Community Committee.

 

Issues

 

As scheduled, the Sports Committee has met and the minutes of the meeting, which reflects discussions and outcomes, are attached.

 

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 recommended that Council acknowledges and accepts the minutes of the attached Sports Committee.

 

Recommendation

 

That the minutes of the Sports Committee Meeting held on 21 February 2018 be received and noted.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Randwick City Council Sports Committee Minutes - 21 February 2018

 

 

 

 


Randwick City Council Sports Committee Minutes - 21 February 2018

Attachment 1

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 

 


 


 

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS10/18

 

Subject:             Pillars Place, Matraville - Resident Petition against proposed footpath construction

Folder No:                   F2017/01301

Author:                   Stephen Audet, Coordinator Engineering Services      

 

 

Introduction

 

The construction of a new footpath in Pillars Place, Matraville was included in the adopted 2017-18 footpath capital works program.

 

Residents were notified of the upcoming construction of the footpath and a petition was lodged opposing the project.

 

Issues

 

In recent years, Council has completed footpath programs to ensure that every street has a footpath on at least one side where a footpath is feasible.  Pillars Place, Matraville was included in this program of works in 2007.  However, at that time, a resident petition was tabled against the footpath. The footpath was not constructed and Pillars Place remains as one of the few streets without a footpath on either side.

 

Pillars Place was identified by Council staff as being a missing link in the footpath network.  It was once again included in the capital works program in line with Council’s objective to provide a comprehensive footpath network.  A further petition against the construction of the path was received in March 2018.  The petition contains signatures from 10 of the 14 addresses within Pillars Place.  The petition explains that 3 tenanted dwellings were not approached.

 

The petition states the following grounds for opposing the footpath:

 

·           The general streetscape will be impaired and individual properties with open plan appearance will be disadvantaged;

·           Vehicular movement is minimal, as is pedestrian traffic, and is mostly used by the residents.

 

Pillars Place is a cul-de-sac situated close to the Matraville town centre.  There is direct connectivity from Daunt Avenue to the end of Pillars Place via a concrete walkway and footpath within the park which extends to the northern end of Pillars Place.  The concrete footpath terminates at the park, making Pillars Place a missing link in the footpath network.  Whilst alternative routes do exist, Pillars Place does offer a more direct route to Matraville town centre for pedestrians making their way to and from Paterson Street, Gwydir Avenue and Windsor Street and areas further to the east. 

 

The footpath in the walkway and park, and the surrounding streets are shown below.

 

 

Whilst the connectivity benefits appear logical, Council has not received any requests for the construction of a footpath within Pillars Place.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 9:       Integrated and Accessible Transport.

Direction 9a:      A network of safe and convenient walking paths and cycleways linking major land uses and recreational opportunities.

 

Financial impact statement

 

The cost of constructing a 1.3m wide concrete path has been estimated as $23,920.  This amount has been funded in the 2017-18 Footpath Capital Works Program.

 

Conclusion

 

The majority of residents in Pillars Place have objected to the proposed construction of a footpath.  Whilst the construction of a footpath on the southern and western sides of Pillars Place would create a network link, there are viable alternative routes available in close proximity.  Council has also not received any requests for the construction of this link.

 

However, the footpath would link to Daunt Avenue and Matraville town centre to Paterson Street.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     the petition from the residents of 10 of the 14 addresses within Pillars Place objecting to the construction of a footpath be received and noted.

 

b)     Council proceed with the construction of a footpath in Pillars Place.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

2007 and 2018 Resident Petition Opposing Construction of New Footpath in Pillars Place, Matraville.

 

 

 

 


2007 and 2018 Resident Petition Opposing Construction of New Footpath in Pillars Place, Matraville.

Attachment 1

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS11/18

 

Subject:             18 Judge Street, Randwick - Damaged Private Retaining Wall - Assistance

Folder No:                   F2013/00369

Author:                   Joe Ingegneri, Manager Technical Services     

 

Introduction

 

In April 2016, the Works Committee considered a report on a damaged private retaining wall at 18 Judge Street, Randwick.  The report outlined that the owner was initially disputing responsibility for the wall and subsequently, was seeking funding assistance from Council to repair the damaged sandstone wall.

 

The works Committee resolved as follows:

 

(Matson/Andrews) that the General Manager bring forward a report after having conducted negotiations with the owners of 18 Judge Street, Randwick, on how the matter may be resolved.

 

This report outlines the background and the outcome of negotiations.

 

Issues

 

Locality

The location of 18 Judge Street is shown in the aerial photograph below.  The sandstone retaining wall subject of this report is located along the front property boundary and partly along the northern side boundary. 

 

Aerial Image – Location of 18 Judge Street, Randwick

A photograph of the sandstone retaining wall is shown below.  The stairs are located on public land and are managed by Randwick Council. 

 

Photograph of the Sandstone Retaining Wall at 18 Judge Street

 

Background

In 2013, Council officers became aware of damage to the sandstone retaining wall located along the front boundary of 18 Judge Street, Randwick.  Subsequently, the public stairs were closed to protect the pedestrians from injury arising from collapse of the wall.

 

Since contacting the owner and requesting that the wall be repaired, we have undertaken extensive investigations to resolve the following:

 

·           The ownership of the wall (including who may have constructed the wall).

·           The heritage status of the wall.

·           A claim that Council’s stormwater caused damage to the wall.

 

The matter has progressed to a stage where the owner submitted a Development Application (DA) to remove the existing retaining wall, rebuild a lower boundary fence / wall and terrace the front yard.  The DA was determined in December 2017.

 

The owner is continuing to request that council provide financial and procedural assistance with the reconstruction of the private sandstone retaining wall.  The owner is seeking a 50% financial contribution from council on the basis of the following claims:

 

1.     The owner considers that Council built the wall at the same time as the public sandstone stairs along the front of the property. This claim is based on a sketch dated 1938.

 

2.     Schedule 5 to the 2012 Randwick Local Environmental Plan (LEP) incorrectly listed this wall as a heritage significant council wall. 

 

3.     The wall was damaged when council’s stormwater line blocked during a rain event, resulting in overland flow across the property.

 

Council has previously investigated and assessed these claims.  We engaged a structural engineer to assess the nature of the damage to the wall and whether the overland flow was the cause of the damage.  The report concluded that the type of failure is indicative of inadequate design and bearing capacity of the footings.  The pattern of cracking is typical of overloading by lateral soil pressure.

 

A survey of the retaining wall was undertaken to determine the location in relation to the property boundary.  The survey indicates that the retaining wall continues along the side boundary between 16 and 18 Judge Street.  The survey shows that the retaining wall sits primarily within the property with minor encroachments of up to 0.11m onto public land, particularly from deformation of the wall.

 

An assessment of the sandstone workmanship was undertaken by an experienced stonemason. The inspection found the stones used in the stair wall to be of different workmanship and shape to the stones used in both the boundary wall and also walls located within 18 Judge Street.  The stonemason also identified differences in the bedding mortar and the pointing between the boundary wall and the public wall on the outside of the stairs.

 

A further observation is that a brick fence with steel horizontal rail has been constructed on top of the sandstone retaining wall. This brick fence also returns along the side boundary fence.

 

On the basis of Council’s assessment, we have concluded that the sandstone retaining wall is an asset within 18 Judge Street, benefits of the property and therefore the responsibility of the property owner.

 

In addition, it is considered that council is not responsible for the failure of the retaining wall.  The wall lies within an overland flow path and will be subjected to groundwater and overland flow from time to time.  Retaining walls are required to be designed to withstand hydrostatic pressure behind the wall.

 

Negotiation

The negotiations were only able to proceed once the owner acknowledged that the sandstone retaining wall is located and forms part of the property at 18 Judge Street, Randwick. 

 

The owner is seeking a funding contribution from Council for 50% of the costs incurred in resolving the ownership and heritage status, the development of documents for a DA and the estimated cost of the work.  The owner advised that the total cost is $216,568. A 50% contribution is $108,284.

 

In general, there is no requirement for Council to provide financial assistance for a private asset.

 

However, it is acknowledged that the incorrect listing of the sandstone retaining wall’s heritage significance and the statement that it is council’s wall has resulted in costs for professional and legal services being incurred by the owner.

 

On this basis, an assistance package was offered to the owner.  The package includes financial assistance to the value of $52,000 to cover professional and legal costs incurred. The assistance also includes an in-kind contribution estimated at $15,000.  This component of the offer covers the costs for works required in the DA consent including:

·           The cost to demolish the stairs to facilitate access to the retaining wall.

·           Restoration of the public infrastructure assets (footpath, kerb and gutter, drainage pit and road pavement) that may be damaged during the works to the wall.

·           Restoration of the adjacent reserve.

 

The total value of the financial assistance being offered is $67,000.

 

The owner has considered the offer but has advised that she is seeking her original claim for $108,284 and therefore has not accepted the offer.

 

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.

 

Financial impact statement

 

This report recommends a funding contribution of $52,000 plus additional in-kind works estimated at $15,000 to restore public assets following works to the retaining wall.

 

It is proposed to include this amount in the 2018-19 Capital Works Program.

 

Conclusion

 

The ownership of the damaged sandstone retaining wall along the frontage of 18 Judge Street, Randwick was complicated by the listing of the wall as a heritage significant element in our 2012 LEP.  Further, the Heritage Data sheet stated that this and the adjacent stair walls were owned by Randwick City Council.

 

The status of the sandstone retaining wall has been clarified and determined that the wall is not deemed to have heritage status.

 

Other key factors including the location and alignment of the sandstone retaining wall, the workmanship of the sandstone construction and the brick fence on the wall demonstrate that the retaining wall is within the property at 18 Judge Street, benefits the property and therefore the responsibility of the owner.

 

Negotiations have been undertaken to seek a resolution on reconstruction of the wall to allow the reopening of the public stairs.  The owner is seeking a 50% funding contribution from Council worth $108,284.  This amount includes design and construction works. 

 

Having established that the wall is a private retaining wall benefiting the property, it is considered that council should not contribute towards design and construction costs.

 

However, it is acknowledged that the owner incurred professional and legal costs to clarify the heritage status of the wall and delays due to the incorrect statement that the wall was a Council wall in the heritage data sheet accompanying the 2012 LEP.

 


 

On this basis, it is proposed to offer a $52,000 financial contribution to offset the professional and legal costs incurred by the owner.  Further, it is proposed to provide in-kind assistance estimated at $15,000 by undertaking restoration work to public infrastructure on behalf of the owner as required by the DA consent conditions.

 

Recommendation

 

That:

 

a)     A financial contribution of $52,000 for costs incurred due to the listing of the private sandstone retaining wall at 18 Judge Street, Randwick as a heritage significant item be endorsed.

 

b)     Payment of the contribution be 50% once works to repair the retaining wall have substantially commenced and 50% at the completion of the work.

 

c)     Council undertake the restoration of public assets as required in the development application consent and the restoration of the Judge Street Closure Reserve on behalf of the owner of 18 Judge Street.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Attachment 1 - Photographs of damaged private retaining wall

 

 

 

 


Attachment 1 - Photographs of damaged private retaining wall

Attachment 1

 

 


 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS12/18

 

Subject:             Street Garden Policy and Guidelines

Folder No:                   F2018/00166

Author:                   Angus Palmer, Landscape Architect      

 

Introduction

 

Council has identified the need to review the existing Nature Strip/Road Verge Planting Policy which was developed in 2005. This is largely due to increasing community interest and requests for the installation of street gardens.

 

The existing policy generally does not permit the installation of street gardens. However, where it is unsafe to mow the grass, it outlines a procedure for the approval of a nature strip garden. The existing policy is inconsistent with the needs of the community.

 

The new policy aims to expand and reconsider the framework and processes for residents to create, install and maintain a garden in the nature strip. This policy is also accompanied by supporting guidelines which outline key objectives in ensuring a desired outcome for the resident, Council and pedestrians.

 

Issues

 

Currently, Council has ongoing issues with installation of unauthorised gardens on the nature strip. A number of these gardens are installed in a manner which cause access and public safety issues for pedestrians, motorists and cyclists. The current policy does not permit the installation of verge plantings unless it is unsafe to mow the grass nature strip. Therefore, it does not provide any guidance or outline requirements to consider other road users.

 

The objective of the proposed Policy is to provide guidance and a framework for residents to create, install and maintain an authorised nature strip garden or planter box on the nature strip in front of their property while:

 

a)     Considering responsibility in relation to other users including pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.

b)     Consider other functions of the land including garbage collection, stormwater management, utility service corridor, parking and street trees.

c)     Promote and guide effective management and maintenance of established street gardens.

d)     Reduce hazards that may result in injuries or damage to property.

 

The proposed Policy and guidelines have been developed with feedback from a range of stakeholders and has resulted in practical, user friendly documents.

 

The policy is designed to allow residents to install a compliant nature strip garden by simply complying with the guidelines.  A formal approval process is not required. However, for planter boxes, a formal approval process has been developed to address the more complicated issues that arise from placing the structures on the footway.

 


 

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.

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed Street Garden Policy provides a detailed, balanced approach that allows residents to establish a compliant nature strip garden or an authorised planter box in front of their property.

 

The supporting guidelines provide detailed information on the requirements and criteria that must be met to ensure the street garden proposal is compliant and well managed throughout its life.

 

Recommendation

 

That the draft policy and guidelines be exhibited for community consultation and a report bought back to Council on outcome.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Attachment 1 - Street Garden Policy

 

2.

Attachment 2 - Street Garden Guidelines

 

 

 

 


Attachment 1 - Street Garden Policy

Attachment 1

 

 


 


 


Attachment 2 - Street Garden Guidelines

Attachment 2

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Services Report No. CS13/18

 

Subject:             Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee

Folder No:                   F2018/00158

Author:                   Tony Lehmann, Manager Integrated Transport      

 

Introduction

 

Following consideration of Mayoral Minute 29/17, at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 10 October 2017, the Council resolved to establish the Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee.

 

The current terms of reference for the Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee are:

 

1.     Report to the Works Committee;

2.     Enhance consultation between Council and the bike riding community;

3.     Advance implementation of the planned and funded cycle ways in the Randwick local government area;

4.     Review and provide advice on proposed Council bike related capital works projects;

5.     Participate in the yearly draft budget process by recommending appropriate bike related projects;

6.     Be consulted by Council on cycle way and bike facility issues involving significant planning proposals and Development applications before Council;

7.     Regularly review and propose updating of the Randwick Council bike plan; and

8.     Help advance a Regional Cycle Strategy with neighbouring Councils


Two meetings of this Advisory Committee have since been held. One on the 21st November 2017 with the second one being held on 22nd February 2018. Meetings are held quarterly. Councillors, Council staff, representatives of BIKEast, UNSW and members of the community have been in attendance.

 

Issues

 

The Advisory Committee has considered numerous matters of importance to bicycle riders in the Randwick council area.  These have ranged from early consideration of the two major separated cycleways proposed through to matters such as pram ramp widths etc.  The Committee has been well received by local bicycle riders and the positive participation of residents, including representatives of ‘BIKEast’, has been very welcomed.

 

With regard to the Committee’s Terms of Reference, a variation to Term no.7 was suggested at the November 2017 meeting.  It was suggested that it be varied to read:

 

7.     Regularly review and propose updating of the Randwick Council bike plan in line with the strategic direction of priority cycleways as detailed within “Sydney’s Cycling Future”; and

 

This variation was endorsed by the Advisory Committee.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 9:   Integrated and accessible transport

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

Key action:    Integrated community transport, pedestrian and cycle links between town centres and key locations.

 

Financial impact statement

 

Any proposals for expenditure arising from the Committee’s recommendations are either covered by existing funding allocations or would be the subject of separate reports to the Council for funding.

 

Conclusion

 

The Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee has proved to be a positive forum for consideration of matters important to bicycle riders and its recommendations should be sanctioned by the Council.

 

Recommendation

 

That: 

 

a)     the Terms of Reference of the Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee be amended as detailed within the report; and

                 

b)         the other recommendations detailed within the minutes of the recent Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee meetings are endorsed.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee - November 2017 Minutes

 

2.

Cycleways and Bicycles Facilities Advisory Committee - February 2018 - Minutes

 

 

 

 


Cycleways and Bicycle Facilities Advisory Committee - November 2017 Minutes

Attachment 1

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Cycleways and Bicycles Facilities Advisory Committee - February 2018 - Minutes

Attachment 2

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF13/18

 

Subject:             Pensioner Rebate

Folder No:                   F2013/00352

Author:                   Greg Byrne, Manager Financial Operations; Mitchel Woods, Manager Corporate and Financial Planning      

 

Introduction

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of 27 February 2018 Council resolved:

 

(Andrew/Da Rocha) that Council review the current Pensioner Rebate of $250.00 given to Pensioners on their Council Rates and consider increasing the Pensioner Rebate by a further $50.00, bringing the rebate to $300.00 per annum.

 

Issues

 

The pensioner rebate has remained unchanged since it was set by the State Government at a maximum of $250.00 back in 1989. Originally the pensioner concession was 50% of the combined rates and domestic waste management charge, up to the maximum of $250.00.

 

Rates and charges have been indexed every year since the introduction of the $250.00 maximum rebate, however the pensioner rebate amount has remained static. It has been 19 years since the pensioner rebate last represented 50% of the combined rates and charges for a ratepayer on the minimum rate.

 

For the current 2017-18 financial year, the $250.00 rebate represents only 19% of the combined rates and charges for a property that is on the minimum rate with a single domestic waste management charge. For properties above the minimum rate, the pensioner rebate represents an even smaller percentage of the combined rates and charges.

 

Council has previously lobbied the State Government to increase the statutory pensioner rebate amount. The State Government response has been that Council is free to offer additional concessions to eligible ratepayers, however any additional rebates would not be subsidised by the State Government.

 

Council currently has 4,565 eligible pensioners, making up over 9% of all residential properties. The total cost of pensioner rebates is currently $1,141,250 per annum. From this total, the State Government provides a 55% subsidy totalling $627,687 per annum. This leaves an annual cost to Council of $513,563.

 

Increasing the pensioner rebate by $50.00 to $300.00 per annum would result in an additional annual cost of $228,250 and there would not be any State Government subsidy received towards the additional rebate.

 

As a voluntary rebate, in addition to the statutory rebate, Council is free to allocate any additional rebate against the general rates, against the domestic waste management charge, or a combination of both. It is recommended that the best way to administer any additional rebate would be to allocate against the annual domestic waste management charge.

This additional rebate expense would then form part of the annual domestic waste reasonable cost calculation, as required under s504 of the Local Government Act 1993, and would therefore not require funding from Council’s general revenue.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome   1:     Leadership in sustainability.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

An increase in the pensioner rebate by $50.00 to a total of $300.00 per annum, would result in additional rebate expenditure of $228,250.

 

If allocated against the domestic waste management charge, the additional rebate would be funded from the domestic waste management reserve.

 

Conclusion

 

The additional rebate would provide financial assistance to help appease the rate burden faced by eligible pensioners within the Randwick LGA.

 

Recommendation

That:

 

a)     an additional pensioner rebate of $50.00 per annum be granted by Council to eligible pensioners from the 2018-19 rating period.

       

b)     the additional rebate be allocated against the domestic waste management charge.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF14/18

 

Subject:             Monthly Financial Report as at 28 February 2018

Folder No:                   F2017/00404

Author:                   Oliver Guo, Management Accountant      

 

Introduction

 

Section 202 of Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that the responsible accounting officer of a council must:

 

a)     establish and maintain a system of budgetary control that will enable the council’s actual income and expenditure to be monitored each month and to be compared with the estimate of the council’s income and expenditure, and

 

b)     if any instance arises where the actual income or expenditure of the council is materially different from its estimated income or expenditure, report the instance to the next meeting of the council.

 

Issues

 

This report provides the financial results of the Council as at 28 February 2018. Attachment 1 summarises the Council’s financial performance and its source and application of funds. It also summarises the operating result for each of the Council’s principal activities. Attachment 2 details the financial position of the Council as at 28 February 2018. Attachment 3 details the cash flow of the Council as at 28 February 2018.

 

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

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The Council’s Director Governance and Financial Services, as the Responsible Accounting Officer, advises that the projected financial position is satisfactory. The Current Ratio as at 28 February 2018 is 2.31 compared to 2.08 as at 30 June 2017. The Current Ratio is a financial indicator specific to local government and represents its ability to meet its debts and obligations as they fall due.

 

Recommendation

 

That the Administration and Finance Committee acknowledges that the Responsible    Accounting Officer has advised that the projected financial position of Council is satisfactory.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Monthly Financial Statements - Income Statements February 2018

 

2.

Monthly Financial Statements - Balance Sheet  February 2018

 

3.

Monthly Financial Statements - Cash Flow Statement  February 2018

 

 

 

 


Monthly Financial Statements - Income Statements February 2018

Attachment 1

 

 


 


 


 


 


Monthly Financial Statements - Balance Sheet  February 2018

Attachment 2

 

 


Monthly Financial Statements - Cash Flow Statement  February 2018

Attachment 3

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF15/18

 

Subject:             Monthly Financial Report as at 31 March 2018

Folder No:                   F2017/00404

Author:                   Oliver Guo, Coordinator Financial Planning and Analysis      

 

Introduction

 

Section 202 of Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that the responsible accounting officer of a council must:

 

a)     establish and maintain a system of budgetary control that will enable the council’s actual income and expenditure to be monitored each month and to be compared with the estimate of the council’s income and expenditure, and

 

b)     if any instance arises where the actual income or expenditure of the council is materially different from its estimated income or expenditure, report the instance to the next meeting of the council.

 

Issues

 

This report provides the financial results of the Council as at 31 March 2018. Attachment 1 summarises the Council’s financial performance and its source and application of funds. It also summarises the operating result for each of the Council’s principal activities. Attachment 2 details the financial position of the Council as at 31 March 2018. Attachment 3 details the cash flow of the Council as at 31 March 2018.

 

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

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The Council’s Director Governance and Financial Services, as the Responsible Accounting Officer, advises that the projected financial position is satisfactory. The Current Ratio as at 31 March 2018 is 2.50 compared to 2.08 as at 30 June 2017. The Current Ratio is a financial indicator specific to local government and represents its ability to meet its debts and obligations as they fall due.

 

Recommendation

 

That the Administration and Finance Committee acknowledges that the Responsible Accounting Officer has advised that the projected financial position of Council is satisfactory.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Monthly Financial Statements - Income Statements March 2018

 

2.

Monthly Financial Statements - Balance Sheet March 2018

 

3.

Monthly Financial Statements - Cash Flow Statement March 2018

 

 

 

 


Monthly Financial Statements - Income Statements March 2018

Attachment 1

 

 


 


 


 


 


Monthly Financial Statements - Balance Sheet March 2018

Attachment 2

 

 


Monthly Financial Statements - Cash Flow Statement March 2018

Attachment 3

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF16/18

 

Subject:             Investments Report - March 2018

Folder No:                   F2015/06527

Author:                   Gail  Johnston, Financial Operations Accountant      

 

Introduction

 

The Local Government (General) Regulation requires a written report to be provided to the ordinary meeting of the Council giving details of all monies invested and a certificate as to whether or not the investments have been made in accordance with the Act, the regulations and the Council’s Investment Policy.

 

Issues

 

Council is authorised by s625 of the Local Government Act to invest its surplus funds. Funds may only be invested in the form of investment notified by Order of the Minister dated 12 January 2011. The Local Government (General) Regulation prescribes the records that must be maintained in relation to Council’s Investment Policy.

 

The table in this report titled “Investment Register – March 2018” outlines the investment portfolio held by Council as at the end of March 2018. All investments have been made in accordance with the Act, Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

Investment Commentary

 

As at 31 March 2018, Council held investments with a market value of $72.66 million. The portfolio value decreased during March by ~$311 thousand. The decrease is representative of a negative cash flow for the month reflecting the net effect of revenue receipts (rates, grants & miscellaneous) offset by capital works expenditure and other operational payments.

 

The size of the investment portfolio may vary significantly from month to month as a result of cash flows for the period. Cash outflows (expenditure) are typically relatively stable from one month to another. Cash inflows (income) are cyclical and are largely dependent on the rates instalment due dates and the timing of grant payments including receipts of the Financial Assistance Grants.

 

The following graph illustrates the movement in the investment portfolio from March 2017 to March 2018. Peaks are representative of the rates instalment periods.

 

Council’s Portfolio                               

 

The portfolio is highly liquid, with 12% of investments available at call and a further 18% of assets maturing within 3 months. Council has a large allocation to senior FRNs (approximately 42% of investments) which provide additional liquidity and are generally accessible within 2-3 business days.

 

 

Council’s portfolio is well diversified with term deposits at 46%, liquid floating rate notes at 42% and call accounts at 12%. The investment portfolio is diversified across the higher rated authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs).

 

The following graph indicates the allocation of investment types held at the end of March 2018.

 

 

 

The investment portfolio is regularly reviewed in order to maximise investment performance and minimise risk. Comparisons are made between existing investments with available products that are not part of the Council’s portfolio. Independent advice is sought on new investment opportunities.

 

Credit Quality

 

On 22 May 2017, S&P Global Ratings downgraded the long term credit ratings of 23 financial institutions operating in Australia due to the build-up of economic imbalances". These rating downgrades have resulted in Council’s portfolio having exposure to BBB investments which it would not have otherwise invested in.

 

The downgrades did not include the big four domestic banks (ANZ, CBA, NAB and Westpac) as well as Macquarie Bank as they were deemed “too big to fail” and would receive government support in the event of a crisis.  Their longer term credit rating do however remain on “Negative Outlook”.

 

At the time of the downgrade, Council held the following investments:

Institution

Downgraded Rating

Exposure
as at 22 May 2017

Bank of Queensland

BBB+

9,500,000.00

Bendigo Adelaide Bank

BBB+

7,500,000.00

Rural Bank

BBB+

2,000,000.00

 

This exposure has been reduced by $13.0 million since the downgrade. Term deposits that mature are recalled and reinvested in higher rated institutions. Sell opportunities for FRN’s are assessed when funds are required or when new product offerings come to market that represent an appropriate addition to the portfolio.

 

Council’s current allocation is as follows:

^ Under the Financial Claims Scheme (FCS), the first $250,000 is guaranteed by the Federal Government (rated AAA by S&P), per investor, per ADI

 

 

Counterparty

 

The table below shows the individual counterparty exposures against Council’s current investment policy (based on S&P ratings). Overweights reflect downgrades, in the case of BOQ and Bendigo Bank and portfolio changes resulting in Suncorp’s overweight position. Suncorp’s position will be addressed as existing deposits mature over the next few months.

 

 

 

Performance

 

The following graph shows the investment returns achieved against the AusBond Bank Bill Index and the official Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) cash interest rate for the period March 2015 to March 2018.

 

 

Investment performance for the financial year to date is above the industry benchmark AusBond Bank Bill Index with an average return of 2.51% compared with the benchmark index of 1.75%.

 

The official Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) cash interest rate remained at the historical low of 1.50%.

 

Term Deposits

 

At month end, term deposits accounted for 46% of the total investment portfolio.

Six deposits totalling $6 million matured and were withdrawn in March. There were five new term deposits taken up during March totalling $6 million.

As at the end of March, the weighted average deposit yield stood at 2.60%, up 1 basis points (bp) from the previous month or around 53 basis points (bp) over bank bills.

 

Floating Rate Notes (FRNs)

 

The portfolio includes $30.55 million in floating rate notes.

 

A new 5 year Westpac FRN issue at +83bp was purchased on the 6 March 2018 for $2,000,000.00.

 

Floating Rate Notes are classified as “held for trading” requiring that they are reported at the latest indicative market valuations at month end.

 

The indicative market value of the FRN’s as at the 31 March 2018 decreased by ~$63k.

 

Ministerial Investment Order

 

In late 2007, the NSW Government commissioned a review of NSW local government investments. The review, known as the Cole Report included eight recommendations that were all adopted by the NSW Government and incorporated into the Ministerial Investment Order dated 31 July 2008. A revised Investment Order was issued on the 12 January 2011 and includes changes that:

 

·           Remove the ability to invest in the mortgage of land;

·           Remove the ability to make a deposit with Local Government Financial Services Pty Ltd;

·           And includes the addition of “Key Considerations” with a comment that a council’s General Manager, or any other staff, with delegated authority to invest funds on behalf of the council must do so in accordance with the council’s adopted investment policy.

 

Investment Register

 

The investment register is maintained with details of each individual investment including; financial institution; amount invested; date invested; maturity date and the applicable interest rate.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction:  Long term financial viability is achieved

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

Funds are invested with the aim of achieving budgeted income in the 2017-18 financial year and outperforming the AusBond Bank Bill Index over a 12 month period. The budget provision for investment income from this source is $1,414,455.00. Investment income to 31 March 2018 amounted to $1,326,970.86.

 

Conclusion

 

All investments as at 31 March 2018 have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act, the regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

Recommendation

 

That the Investment Report for March 2018 be received and noted.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer - 31 March 2018

 

 

 

 


Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer - 31 March 2018

Attachment 1

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF17/18

 

Subject:             Appointment of Investment Advisors

Folder No:                   F2016/06527

Author:                   Greg Byrne, Manager Financial Operations     

 

Introduction

 

Council’s Investment Policy contains the following provisions around the use of Investment Advisors:

 

Council may use the services of a suitably qualified and experienced investment advisor for the purposes of achieving the objectives of this policy. The Council’s investment advisor must be approved by Council and be licensed by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission.

 

The advisor must be independent and have no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to investment products being recommended and is free to choose the most appropriate product within the terms and conditions of the policy. This includes receiving no commissions or other benefit in relation to the investment being recommended or reviewed.

 

Manufacturers and distributors of investment products are excluded from acting as investment advisors to Council.

 

Issues

 

Late last year, Council staff conducted a review of Investment Advisory services and invited three organisations to submit a proposal for investment advisory services and associated investment management tools and reporting. The three advisors invited were:

 

·           CPG Research and Advisory

·           Laminar Capital

·           Imperium Markets

 

CPG Research and Advisory are Council’s current investment advisors and have provided investment advice for over 10 years. In recent times there have been key personnel changes at CPG which have impacted the resourcing and the associated level of service received for investment advice.

 

In addition to the investment advisory service provided by CPG, for the past three years Council has also been using an investment management product called Treasury Direct from Laminar Capital. The Treasury Direct product is an on-line portfolio management tool that identifies any pending maturities, provides real time market pricing, validates investment limits, undertakes required transactions and records all of Council’s investment movements.

 

Imperium Markets is a relatively new player in the industry made up of staff that have extensive experience in investment management and advice. Council’s former principal advisor at CPG has taken up the role as Head of Client Advisory at Imperium Markets. Council has taken advantage of a free trial of Imperium’s products and services in recent months to assess their performance.

 

The three submissions are similar in regard to the advisory services they offer. Only two of the three proposals provided for both investment advisory services and an on-line investment management platform.

 

The CPG Research and Advisory proposal is for investment advisory services and reporting only. It does not include an on-line investment portfolio management platform. This would require Council staff to maintain spreadsheets on the investment portfolio or use a third party platform product as has been the case in recent years with the use of the Treasury Direct product from Laminar Capital.

 

The Laminar Capital proposal would add investment advisory services to the existing investment portfolio management platform (Treasury Direct).

 

The proposal from Imperium Markets provides for both investment advisory services and associated reporting, along with an on-line investment portfolio transacting and management platform.

 

In addition to the information provided in the proposals, Council staff have conducted trials of the services from all three organisations. From this review and analysis, the quality of the investment advice and the ease of use of the on-line platform from Imperium Markets was rated higher than the other two companies.

 

With respect to pricing, the current arrangements incur the following costs:

 

CPG Research and Advisory investment advice             $24,000 per annum

Treasury Direct on-line platform fee                          $15,000 per annum

 

Total annual fees                                                    $39,000 per annum

 

The new proposals from the three suppliers provided the following pricing quotes:

 

CPG Research and Advisory (advice only)                   $20,000 per annum

 

Laminar Capital                                                      $18,000 per annum

(Treasury Direct platform and investment advice)

 

Imperium Markets                                                  $18,000 per annum

(Advisory Service plus Full Platform Capabilities)

                                                                                    

Based on the proposals submitted, the extensive testing conducted on the available platforms and the quoted pricing, the recommendation to Council is that Imperium Markets be appointed for ongoing investment advisory services and associated investment management tools and reporting.

 

The appointment of Imperium Markets will result in a saving of $21,000.00 per annum in investment management fees from what currently exists.

 

The term of the investment advisory service will be on a month to month basis and may be terminated by either party by giving 7 days’ notice in writing to the other party.

 

The appointment of new investment advisors was considered by the Internal Audit Committee on 21 March 2018. The Internal Audit Committee supported referring the matter to Council with a recommendation to engage Imperium Markets as new advisors.

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome:  Leadership in Sustainability.

Direction:  Long term financial viability is achieved

 

Financial impact statement

 

The annual cost of engaging Imperium Markets is $18,000 per annum. This represents a cost saving of $21,000 per annum on the fees currently paid to existing service providers.

 

Conclusion

 

The appointment of investment advisors contributes to the prudent management of Council’s investment portfolio.

 

Recommendation

 

That Imperium Markets be appointed as Council’s investment advisors.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF18/18

 

Subject:             Contingency Fund - status as at 31 March 2018

Folder No:                   F2017/07396

Author:                   Julie Hartshorn, Senior Administrative Coordinator      

 

Introduction

 

The purpose of this report is to detail the progressive amount of donations, allocations, waiving of fees and other similar contributions for the 2017-18 financial year.

 

Issues

 

For the 2017-18 financial year there have been 38 allocations totalling $139,202.56. All allocations are listed in the table below.

 

Meeting

Details

Approved allocation

2017-18

Annual contribution (ongoing)

Planning Committee – 13 Mar 2012

Annual contribution – Australia Day Botany Bay Regatta

$750.00

Ord Council

17 Sept 2013

Annual Contribution (5 years from 2015-16 to 2019-20) Waiving of Fees – Rainbow Club Australia Inc – Murray Rose’s Malabar Magic Ocean Swim

 

$14,500.00

Ord Council  23 Sept 2014

Annual contribution (5 years from 2015-16 to 2019-20) - Randwick Boys High School - 'Mayor's Award'

$1,000.00

Ord Council – 26 April 2016

Annual contribution (5 years from 2015-16 - Sydney Children’s Foundation Gold Telethon)

$5,000.00

Ord Council – 26 April 2016

Annual contribution (5 years from 2016-17 - Sydney Children’s Foundation Lights for Kids Christmas campaign)

$2,000.00

Ord Council – 25 Jul 2017

Annual contribution (5 years from 2017-18 to 2021-22) - Randwick Girls’ High School - 'Mayor's Award'

$1,000.00

2017-18 Contingency Fund allocations

Ord Council – 28 Mar 2017

Financial assistance – Randwick Boys & Girls High Schools – 2017 combined production

$4,000.00

Ord Council – 27 Jun 2017

Financial assistance – Souths Cares NAIDOC Festival 2017

$6,700.00

Ord Council – 27 Jun 2017

Financial assistance – Surfing NSW Grommet Surfing Titles

$15,601.00

Ord Council – 25 Jul 2017

Waiving of fees - NSW Police Force & International Students' Beach Soccer Day

$2,130.00

Ord Council – 25 Jul 2017

Donations - Rainbow Street Public School - Fundraising Cookbook

$750.00

Ord Council – 25 Jul 2017

Peter Hoffman - Commemoration

$500.00

Ord Council – 22 Aug 2017

Waiving of Fees - International Day of People with a Disability

$440.00

Ord Council – 22 Aug 2017

Waiving of fess - Filipino Cultural and Arts Festival 

$2,237.00

Ord Council – 10 Oct 2017

Waiving of fees - Friends of Malabar Headland

$110.00

Ord Council – 24 Oct 2017

Waiving of Fees - Carols by Candlelight - St Lukes Anglican Church, Clovelly

$4,118.00

Ord Council – 24 Oct 2017

Waiving of fees - Randwick Botany Cycling Club Inc - Retro Day

$823.00

Ord Council – 24 Oct 2017

Waiving of fees - South Maroubra Surf Club

$1,995.00

Ord Council – 28 Nov 2017

Waiving of fees – Carols by Candlelight – St Nicolas Anglican Church

$2,189.00

Ord Council – 28 Nov 2017

Financial assistance – Surfing NSW – World Tour Surfing event

$7,500.00

Ord Council – 28 Nov 2017

Waiving of fees – Greek Epiphany Festival – Jan 2018

$12,350.00

Ord Council – 28 Nov 2017

Sponsorship – 2018 Sydney Film Festival

$5,000.00

Ord Council – 28 Nov 2017

Financial assistance – Coast Centre for Seniors

$1,000.00

Ord Council – 12 Dec 2017

Waiving of fees – Surf Life Saving Sydney

$1,268.00

Ord Council – 12 Dec 2017

Financial assistance – Digging Deep for Myanmar

$2,000.00

Ord Council – 12 Dec 2017

Funding assistance – Vintage Sports Car Club of Australia – book launch Maroubra Speedway

$1,200.00

Ord Council – 12 Dec 2017

Financial assistance – Jarrah House

$1,500.00

Ord Council – 27 Feb 2018

Financial assistance - Randwick Boys' and Girls' High Schools Show 2018

$4,000.00

Ord Council – 27 Feb 2018

Prince of Wales Hospital Foundation 160 year anniversary

$4,857.56

Ord Council – 27 Feb 2018

Chifley Public School – Request for Assistance

$15,000.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Waiving of fees - Australian Mitochondrial Disease Foundation – ‘The Bloody Long Walk’

$1,619.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Waiving of fees - Regional Titles Surfing NSW Maroubra Beach

$5,407.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Waiving of fees - Special Olympics Sydney East at the Des Renford Leisure Centre

$1,390.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Donation – 2017 White Ribbon Walk

$2,000.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Waiving of fees and donation - Autism Awareness Week

$1,953.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Waiving of Fees – Maroubra Surfers Association and North Maroubra Surf Rider – Monthly Surfing Contests

$3,815.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Donation to ‘Can Too Foundation’ for Marathon Des Sables - Heather Hawkins

$500.00

Ord Council – 27 Mar 2018

Maroubra Volunteer Lifesavers - Request for Financial Assistance

$1,000.00

Total – 2017-18 Contingency Fund allocations

$139,202.56

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 2:           A vibrant and diverse community.

Our community will be proud to be part of our City and celebrate its range of cultures and people.

Direction 2b:         Enrich our range of community services that meet our community’s needs.

Key Actions:         Support the provision of services and facilities to meet the needs of our Target Groups and celebrate the range of cultures and people within Randwick City.

 

Financial impact statement

 

Council has allocated $95,000.00 in the 2017-18 Budget for contingencies. Budget adjustments, if required, will be dealt with as part of quarterly budget reviews.

 

Recommendation

 

That the status of the contingency funds allocations for 2017-18, be noted.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director Governance & Financial Services Report No. GF19/18

 

Subject:             Housing Density and Diversity Conference 2018

Folder No:                   F2005/00646

Author:                   David Kelly, Manager Administrative Services      

 

Introduction

 

The Housing Density and Diversity Conference is being held in Melbourne on 19-20 June 2018. Given the ever increasing demands on Council to plan ahead for an exploding population, this conference is one that is potentially of great value.

 

Issues

 

A key strategy to manage future residential growth is the provision of missing middle housing types. Momentum is clearly behind the growth of diverse housing typologies and the push is on to find quality designs and innovative housing delivery models for the middle ring suburbs of our cities, where future residential growth can be best integrated. However, community resistance to an increase in density, as well as a tough policy and political environment, presents challenges to planners, designers and developers. This conference will provide a platform to address the key issues and identify the strategies that will achieve quality housing outcomes moving forward.

 

This unique conference brings delegates the benefits of:

 

·           discovering the benefits of innovation and collaboration;

·           ion in housing delivery;

·           benchmarking against local government density strategies;

·           hearing how to better manage community resistance to change;

·           integrating density into the suburbs through quality design; and

·           overcoming funding and development challenges.

 

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

Councillors’ attendance at conferences has been specifically allowed for in the 2017 -18 budget.

 

Conclusion

 

It is important that Council is open to new ideas, is flexible enough to adapt to changing circumstances and experienced enough to know what to maintain and what to change as we plan well into the future for an increased population. This conference tackles these challenges and, as housing density and diversity is a priority issue for Randwick City, Councillors interested in attending this conference should advise the General Manager’s office.

 

Recommendation

 

That Councillors interested in attending the Housing Density and Diversity Conference being held in Melbourne from 19-20 June 2018 advise the General Manager’s office of their interest.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

  


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM29/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Da Rocha - Removal of Return & Earn bottle Facility - Randwick Golf Club

Folder No:                   F2006/00120

Submitted by:          Councillor Da Rocha, South Ward      

 

 

That Council write to the Randwick Golf Club and request that they remove the Return and Earn bottle facility located in their carpark, as it is affecting the amenity of the local residents.

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM30/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Da Rocha - Objection to proposed removal of 1 hour parking Bunnerong Road, Matraville

Folder No:                   F2004/07433

Submitted by:          Councillor Da Rocha, South Ward      

 

 

Write to the RMS and object to the removal of the 1 hr parking spots in Bunnerong Road Matraville from St Agnes School to Franklin Street and between Harold Street and Perry Street.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM31/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Veitch - Support for residential renters in the Randwick LGA

Folder No:                   F2004/07991

Submitted by:          Councillor Veitch, West Ward     

 

That Randwick City Council:

 

1.     Notes that a growing number of households in the Randwick Local Government area are renting their homes - currently 41.2% of people in Randwick are renters. Many of these are families, as well as an increasing number of older people, and people sharing homes.

 

2.     Acknowledges the importance of housing security and stability for those renting their homes in the Randwick Local Government Area.

 

3.     Recognises that current tenancy law in NSW does not provide adequate protections for renters against unfair evictions.    

 

4.     Assists residential renters in the Randwick LGA by supporting the Make Renting Fair NSW campaign.

 

5.     Brings back a report to council on conducting an information session at the Bowen Library or other suitable location to provide information to residential renters on their tenancy rights, and the support and advocacy services available to them.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM32/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Reconstituting the Environment Committee

Folder No:                   F2007/00645

Submitted by:          Councillor Matson, East Ward     

 

 

That Randwick City Council continues to signal to the community that it values its current high profile on environmental issues by reconstituting the Environment Committee to meet on an as required basis prior to the commencement of scheduled Councillor briefing sessions with no delegated authority on decisions. The committee shall;

 

a)     Report to full Council meetings recommendations arising from its deliberations;

 

b)     Be chaired by Councillor Neilson with Councillor Veitch as the Deputy Chair;

 

c)     Have a membership of 9 comprising the Mayor (ex officio) and two Councillors each from the Labor, Liberal, Greens and independent blocks to be advised to the General Manager;

 

d)     Have a quorum of 4 with the chair to exercise a casting vote;

 

e)     Have the following functions;

i.  To draft responses to local government implications arising from former Prime Minister Tony Abbotts’ 2016 signing of the Paris Agreement negotiated via the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC);

ii.  To review Council’s draft State of the Environment Report;

iii. To monitor and advise on key environmental priorities and performance indicators set in the Randwick Council City Plan (a 20 Year Plan) and the yearly Management Plan;

iv. To monitor the performance and drafting of projects under Council’s Sustaining Our City Program;

v. To be advised of issues arising from environmental arrangements with other councils, SSROC, the State and Federal Governments; Local Government NSW, the Australian Local Government Association; UNSW, environment groups, precinct committee’s and local resident groups;

vi. To receive reports from the Sydney Coastal Council network, the Greening Randwick Committee and other special committees and working groups as they arise; and

vii.  To contribute to drafting conference motions on environmental issues for Local Government NSW and the Australian Local Government Association.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM33/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Reduce parking competition around POW and to improve work health and safety for staff

Folder No:                   F2012/00032

Submitted by:          Councillor Matson, East Ward      

 

 

That Council seek to open negotiations with State Government and Prince of Wales Hospital authorities to allow hospital staff to have free access to the complexes on-site carpark in order to reduce parking competition with residents in adjacent streets and to achieve better work, health and safety for the staff.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM34/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr  Matson - Provide foot washing facilities at the new Coogee amenities block on the lower beach promenade

Folder No:                   F2004/07347

Submitted by:          Councillor Matson, East Ward      

 

 

That representatives of the Coogee Precinct Committee be invited to meet with Council officers at the Coogee amenities block on the lower promenade to assess options for providing readily accessible foot washing facilities at the entrance to the facility.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM35/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Matson - Promote ERLGATSIF upcoming 'Living Cultures' awards in May

Folder No:                   F2004/07650

Submitted by:          Councillor Matson, East Ward      

 

 

That Randwick City Council notes that Inner West Council is hosting the upcoming ‘Living Cultures’ awards in May on behalf of the Eastern Region Local Government Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Forum (ERLGATSIF) and resolves to promote the event as appropriate.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM36/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - Return & Earn Vending Machines in LGA

Folder No:                   F2006/00120

Submitted by:          Councillor Stavrinos, West Ward     

 

 

That Council:

 

a)     Write to the NSW Minister For Environment, the Hon. Gabrielle Upton requesting that Council be given the opportunity to have a say on the location of Return & Earn Vending Machines in our City, which are now not subject to any council approvals as they are exempt developments.

 

b)     As part of this letter, voice concerns in relation to Return & Earn Vending Machines being   placed in Residential Areas, which are impacting on the amenity of residents.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM37/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Stavrinos - Efficient Measures in Reporting Road Maintenance

Folder No:                   F2004/08251

Submitted by:          Councillor Stavrinos, West Ward     

 

 

That Council:

 

a)     Bring back a report on ways in which Council can enhance communication with residents,   in relation to road maintenance & footpath repairs, so that potholes, irregularities & rough         surfaces can be addressed more efficiently;

 

b)     As part of this report consider conducting more surveys and greater consultation with the         community, so that residents can report matters in a more timely manner.

 

c)     Promote through its communication channels, contact details for RMS with a list of RMS Controlled Roads & Streets in our City, so that residents can lodge concerns directly with   the appropriate government agency.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM38/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Parker - Estabilishment of a Community Affairs Committee

Folder No:                   F2007/00642

Submitted by:          Councillor Parker, Central Ward     

 

That:

 

a)     Randwick establish a committee to be known as the Community Affairs Committee;

  

b)     The committee shall:

 

a)     Report to full Council meetings recommendations arising from its deliberations;

b)     Be chaired by Councillor Said with Councillor Veitch as the Deputy Chair;

c)     Have a membership of 9 comprising the Mayor (ex officio) and two Councillors each from the Labor, Liberal, Greens and independent blocks to be advised to the General Manager;

d)     Have a quorum of 4 with the chair to exercise a casting vote;

e)     Function: to support the social and physical welfare of residents of Randwick Local Government area by fostering social cohesion and harmony in Randwick with emphasis on promoting equality, diversity and healthy lifestyles in the Randwick community to meet on an as required basis prior to the commencement of scheduled Councillor briefing sessions with no delegated authority on decision.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council                                                                                                     24 April 2018

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Motion Pursuant to Notice No. NM39/18

 

Subject:             Notice of Motion from Cr Said – Anti Social Behaviour Devices at Yarra Bay/La Perouse

Folder No:                   F2005/00935

Submitted by:          Councillor Said, South Ward      

 

 

That:

 

1)     Council officers to present a report on implementing CCTV cameras, better lighting, traffic calming devices, bollards in Yarra Rd and  surrounding streets, measures to end Anti-social behaviour not just move it elsewhere in our City.  

 

2)     Council conducts extensive consultation programme with all stakeholders, Residents, Businesses, Local and State Politicians, Sailing Club, RMS, Randwick Tourism and Police in the Little Bay, Yarra Bay and La Perouse Area within a six week period.

 

3)     Once all information is collated Council will conduct a four week  public exhibition, with the intention to commence implementation before the Summer months.