agenda template council - mosman council - agenda.pdf · made my visit all the more rewarding and...

MOSMAN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

ORDINARY MEETING

AGENDA

MEETING DATE: 2 May 2005

INFORMATION ABOUT PROCEDURES FOR THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

Open Question Time Council meetings are scheduled to commence at 6.00pm. However, Open Question Time is held for a maximum of 10 minutes if required, from 6.00pm prior to the commencement of the meeting. Questions from members of the gallery may be directed to the Mayor on any relevant matter unless it is on the Agenda for this meeting. Open Question Time is an opportunity for questions only, not speeches, and every endeavour to answer will be given immediately by the Mayor or referred to the General Manager. Ordinary Meeting The Ordinary Meeting of Council commences in accordance with the Agenda prepared for the Meeting. Committee of the Whole The General Manager will ask residents prior to the commencement of the Council meeting if they seek to address Council on a General Manager’s and Departmental Report listed on the agenda and will register their names. Council will resolve into Committee of the Whole to allow residents to address the Committee and for Councillor discussion and questioning in relation to the report listed on the agenda. Reports on which residents wish to address Council will be dealt with expeditiously as possible between 6.00pm and 8.00pm. Should there be too many matters to be heard or should residents have major matters that need lengthy discussion, the affected residents will be advised to come back to the meeting at a particular time. All remaining items will be dealt with following resolution of reports which residents have an interest in. The Committee of the Whole is delegated authority to resolve items by majority vote. Supper Adjournment At approximately 9.00pm there is usually a recess break for 15 minutes at which time the Mayor will invite those people in the gallery to join the Councillors for supper. Resume Ordinary Meeting The Ordinary Meeting resumes at the conclusion of the supper break.

MOSMAN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS SEATING 2004-2007 MAYORAL TERM

Cr Patricia Harvey

East Ward

Manager

Governance

Minutes

Secretary

General Manager

Mayor

Cr Shirley Jenkins Director

Environment and

Planning

Manager Development

Services

Director Corporate Services

DirectorCommunity

Development

Balmoral Ward

Cr Denise Wilton

Cr David Strange

West Ward

Cr Lynette Elsegood

Cr Simon Menzies

Cr Anne Connon

Cr Martin Skipper

Cr Jim Reid

Middle Harbour Ward

Cr Andrew Brown

Cr Kate Traill

Cr Dom Lopez, OAM

AGENDA - ORDINARY MEETING 1. NATIONAL ANTHEM, PRAYER AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INDIGENOUS

PEOPLE 2. WELCOME TO VISITORS 3. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

4. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 5. DISCLOSURES OF NON-PECUNIARY INTEREST 6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Confirmation of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 18 April 2005.

7. MAYORAL MINUTES

MM/7 Mayoral Minute - Matthew Flinders Map...............................................................1 MM/8 Mayoral Minute - Lake Toba Summit....................................................................3

9. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORTS

GM/12 Local Government Reform Program.................................................................9 GM/13 MOSPLAN Quarterly Review - January to March 2005..................................11 GM/14 SHOROC ........................................................................................................19

10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORTS

CD/6 Aboriginal Heritage Study of Mosman LGA ....................................................21 CD/7 Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre ..................................................23 CD/8 Mosman Art Gallery: Art Sales, Commissions ...............................................25 CD/9 Mosman Festival 2005 ....................................................................................27 CD/10 Queenwood Walk-a-thon - Special Event .......................................................31 CD/11 Tsunami Relief - Community Conversations - Mosman's Ongoing Role ........33 CD/12 Picture Hanging Rail in Council Chambers .....................................................35

11. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORTS

CS/32 Compulsory Acquisition of Land in Awaba Lane and Mitchell Lane ...............37 CS/33 Delegations Manual ........................................................................................39 CS/34 Investments ....................................................................................................41 CS/35 Financial Statement to 31 March 2005 ...........................................................43 CS/36 2004/2005 Loan Borrowing Program..............................................................45 CS/37 Legal Services to Council ...............................................................................47 CS/38 Minutes of Council Meetings...........................................................................49 CS/39 Sound Recording of Council Meetings ...........................................................51 CS/40 Mosman Swim Centre ....................................................................................53 CS/41 Procurement Policy.........................................................................................57 CS/42 Privacy Management Plan..............................................................................59 CS/43 Protected Disclosure Act 1994 - Internal Reporting System...........................61 CS/44 Balmoral Skatepark ........................................................................................63 CS/45 Provision of Dinghy Racks at Inkerman Street Wharf.....................................65 CS/46 Purchase of Parking Meters ...........................................................................67

12. ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORTS

EP/110 Bushfire Hazard Reduction Program ..............................................................69 EP/111 Reginald Street Proposed Playground Improvements and Traffic Safety

Improvements .................................................................................................71 EP/112 The Esplanade Street Lighting .......................................................................73

EP/113 Land & Environment Court - Costs .................................................................77 EP/114 Spit Bridge - Manly Council's Response to Development Application ............79 EP/115 Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads and Glover Street -

Proposed Heritage Conservation Area ...........................................................83 EP/116 Domestic Waste Management - Waste and Recycling Services Contract

2002-2010.......................................................................................................89 13. TRAFFIC COMMITTEE

T/24 Hordern Place - Pedestrian safety in the Shared Zone ..................................95 T/28 Spit Road - Visibility problems at No 224 Spit Road.......................................97 T/30 Mitchell Road - Extension of "No Standing" Restriction..................................99 T/32 Parking in Parriwi Road/Chinaman’s Beach and Balmoral ...........................101 T/33 47 Macpherson Street (Middle Harbour Public School)................................103

14. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE.................................................................................. 105 15. CORRESPONDENCE

COR/10 Correspondence - Australian Local Government Association ......................107 COR/11 Correspondence - Broken Hill Council..........................................................109 COR/12 Correspondence - Glen Innes Severn Council .............................................111 COR/13 Correspondence - HMAS Penguin / 1 Commando Company ......................113 COR/14 Correspondence - National Union of Students .............................................115

16. NOTICE OF MOTIONS/RESCISSION MOTIONS

Notice of Motion: Code of Meeting Practice .....................................................................117 ATTACHMENTS

CD/11 Tsunami Relief - Community Conversations - Mosman's Ongoing Role ....... A1 CS/32 Compulsory Acquisition of Land in Awaba Lane and Mitchell Lane .............. A9 CS/35 Financial Statement to 31 March 2005 ........................................................ A11 CS/38 Minutes of Council Meetings........................................................................ A19 CS/42 Privacy Management Plan........................................................................... A29 CS/43 Protected Disclosure Act 1994 - Internal Reporting System........................ A53 CS/44 Balmoral Skatepark ..................................................................................... A73 EP/112 The Esplanade Street Lighting .................................................................... A83 EP/114 Spit Bridge - Manly Council's Response to Development Application ......... A89 EP/115 Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads and Glover Street -

Proposed Heritage Conservation Area ...................................................... A121 COR/10 Correspondence - Australian Local Government Association ................... A141

Reports to Ordinary Meeting of Council – 2 May 2005 Page 1

7. MAYORAL MINUTES

MM/7 Mayoral Minute - Matthew Flinders Map MOSPLAN REF: 09.07 RECOMMENDATION That the Mayoral Minute be noted. MAYORAL MINUTE On Friday 8 April 2005 I had the pleasure of opening Mosman Library’s National Trust Heritage Festival celebrations. The Library marked the occasion with a wonderful exhibition entitled ‘Mosman … this is your heritage’ which featured a fascinating collection of material which has been donated to the Library’s Local Studies collection by local residents, businesses and community organisations. The Heritage Festival was a great success and generated a lot of interest throughout the community, resulting in several new donations to the Local Studies collection. I congratulate the Local Studies Librarians, Donna Braye and Mary Lou Byrne on their curation of an outstanding exhibition. The opening night was also the occasion for the presentation of a map which has enormous historical significance for both Australia and Mosman. In June 2004 I read an article in the Sydney Morning Herald regarding the discovery of a chart drawn by Matthew Flinders in 1804. The map is important because it is the first document on which the name ’Australia’ appeared. The existence of the map was discovered by Mr Bill Fairbanks who subsequently sourced a copy from the British Hydrographic Office and arranged for reproductions to be made. Given the historical significance of the map and the connection with Mosman’s own Bungaree, who accompanied Flinders on the mapping voyage, I requested that a copy be obtained for Council. Mr Fairbanks has already presented copies to the Governor General and the Governor of New South Wales and is keen to see copies displayed in Council offices throughout Australia. In his speech following the presentation, Mr Fairbanks congratulated Mosman on being the first local government authority in Australia (and indeed the world) to recognise the significance of the map and to request a copy - another ‘first’ for Mosman. The map has now been framed and will be displayed in the Civic Centre. The cost to Council for the purchase and framing of the map was $480, $300 of which has been offset as I received that amount from the Japan Local Government Centre (CLAIR) for writing an article on Mosman and our environment in the Sydney context for a mayoral publication that will be issued in Japan later this year.


MM/8 Mayoral Minute - Lake Toba Summit MOSPLAN REF: 01.01.07 RECOMMENDATION That the Mayoral Minute be noted. MAYORAL MINUTE In February of this year I was honoured to receive a personal invitation to participate in the Lake Toba Summit and 1st General Assembly of the Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development (nrg4SD), Sumatra, 10-12th March 2005. Nrg4SD is the international Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development. The Network was formed by a group of regions committed to policies of sustainable development, at the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002. The 2005 Summit provided an opportunity for key players to hear about, and discuss, global partnerships on rehabilitation and reconstruction of post disaster settlements, in addition to sustainable development more generally. On 10 March the President of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, opened the High Level Segment which focused on sustainable reconstruction. The event was well attended by around 1,300 delegates and included representatives from UN agencies; the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN); government representatives from all levels; NGO’s; academics; experts; and the private sector. There was a very interesting array of speakers at the Summit, most of whom had global recognition, including Xanana Gusmao, President of East Timor; Secretary General of ASEAN, Ong Ken Yong; Erin Brokovich, from Save the World Air Inc. USA, to name but a few. I was particularly close to Cardwyn Jones, Minister for the Environment, Welsh Assembly, and the Governor of Northern Sumatra, Mr T. Rizal Nurdin, and his wife, who both made my visit all the more rewarding and enjoyable by ensuring that language was no difficulty through a personal ambassador. Sessions at the Congress and workshops were many and varied and I attended sessions of the government forum, which included discussions on: • global partnership for regional rehabilitation and development; • sustainable reconstruction; • an integrated role for sustainable development between national and regional

governments; • the contribution of regional governments in tackling climate change; • social responsibility to community, water and sanitation Councillors who require further information in relation to the sessions should not hesitate to contact me. Following the Network's decision to organise itself on a continental basis, the newly appointed Steering Committee met after the General Assembly on 12 March to elect six vice-Chairs who will represent the issues specific to each continent, in addition to the co-Chairs who represent the Network globally. The vice-Chair for Australia is Mr Andrew Higham, Sustainability Policy Unit, West Australian Government.


Outcomes: the nrg4SD 1st General Assembly adopted the following: a) The NRG4SD Strategy 2005-2011, which is summarised at Annex A b) The activities report of the Network during 2002-2004 c) Guidelines for the Tsunami crisis Solidarity Action Taskforce d) Policy papers on Sustainable Forest Management and Fair Trade e) The Lake Toba Call which was read by the co-Chairs during the closing ceremony of

the Summit and is attached at Annex B. The Summit was held between Medan, Parapat and Brastagi, which enabled the delegates to view a reasonable part of north Sumatra, to communicate and network with delegates from 48 countries as far away as Lapland. The Sumatran people were very grateful for the Australian help and extremely hospitable. The feeling was that the result of the earthquakes and tsunami was not something that could be finalised in the short term. It was reported on the radio this week how difficult Sweden was finding dealing with the trauma. Aceh is not only dealing with the trauma but with the devastation plus loss of infrastructure, records, personnel eg medical, local government, and the fear of more to come. There have to be world answers to such world disasters. We need to share the experiences of our disasters so that there is a consolidation of the world's knowledge on how to respond quickly to these emergencies on a world wide basis. It is now up to the delegates to return to their own countries to continue to give help where it is required, and to collect the experiences of their own countries with disaster management and pool the results with the nrg4SD network. We have contacts from Aceh and Sri Lanka who would like our help. The Thai consulate is in Mosman and they too are interested in our help. It is up to Council to develop a plan for future help. Manly Council, for example, is sending their General Manager to supervise local labour in the building of two schools in Aceh and has sent 30 tonnes of medical supplies. I also made a significant contact for Taronga Zoo with the hope of exchanges between the two Rahmat Shah zoos in north Sumatra. The North Sumatran Tourist Board has been given contacts on our Tourism Board. I will be submitting a report on my attendance to both the ALGA and the NSW LGA and following the return of the Manly General Manager from Aceh the matter is to be listed at SHOROC with the possibility of arranging a regional response. In the meantime I am continuing to discuss ways in which we can possibly offer further assistance with Mosman service clubs. Should it be necessary I will submit a report in this regard to either Council or one of the advisory groups. Council allocated an amount of $3,000 towards my attendance, I met my own airfares of $1,120, and costs to Council were $1,805.


ANNEX A SUMMARY OF THE NRG4SD STRATEGY 2005-2011 1. The mission, vision and challenge. The mission The mission of NRG4SD is to be a voice for and to represent regional governments at the global level in promoting sustainable development at the regional level around the world. The vision The vision of NRG4SD is to increase the collaboration between regions all over the world and contribute to the international discussions and negotiations in the field of sustainable development from a regional point of view. The Challenge It is a challenge for NRG4SD to clarify the distinction between the local level (understood as the municipal or city level) and the regional level (within the state-national level) and strive to establish recognition for the regional level, which is often ignored, in the international arena. 2. Thematic priorities At the global level, the Strategy of NRG4SD will go hand in hand with the international multilateral agenda, specifically with the international strategy for sustainable development and the Multi-Year Programme of Work of the Commission on Sustainable Development. NRG4SD is especially committed to strengthening sustainability issues within the Millennium Development Goals process set at the United Nations Millennium Declaration of September 2000 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. 3. Networking and cooperation projects Exchanging information and experiences about policy making at the regional level and promoting understanding, collaboration and partnerships in the field of sustainable development shall be key features of NRG4SD. This will be done through internal networking amongst members; external networking with other organisations and stakeholders committed to sustainable development; and concrete cooperation projects between developed and developing regions. 4. Products and tools The other practical side of NRG4SD will be the products and tools developed by the Network to be applied and used by the regional governments and associations of regions. These products and tools of NRG4SD will be policy papers, a common set of regional sustainable development indicators, reports, internet for a, the matrix and NRG4SD conferences and seminars. 5. Contributing to international strategies and discussions Contributions will be made through the active participation of NRG4SD in the negotiation process of relevant international conferences. NRG4SD shall present written official positions in the sessions and intervene in multi-stakeholder dialogues on behalf of regional governments. NRG4SD shall also organise side-events at official global events or UN related meetings to present the expertise, contribution and reports of the Network. The Network will also take part in all relevant consultation processes launched by both international and supranational continental organisations.


6. Internal organisation of the Network An efficient and sound internal organisation of the NRG4SD depends on strong membership; the functioning of the Steering Committee, the Treasury and the Secretariat; and the achievement of representation or accreditation of the Network before the United Nations and other international organs. 7. Work programme NRG4SD will also be guided by a mid-term 2005-2008 work-programme. 8. Website Further information about nrg4SD is available at www.nrg4sd.net


ANNEX B LAKE TOBA CALL FOR ACTION On behalf of the Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development (nrg4SD) we offer our thanks to North Sumatra for their generosity in hosting our fifth conference and first General Assembly, and to their courageous decision to continue with the event after the tragic events that befell this area on 26th December 2004. We also are deeply grateful to the co-sponsors of the conference – Damba-Intra-West Java, UNEP, UN HABITAT, UNITAR, ASEAN and APPSI. The Tsunami disaster re-focused the programme on sustainable reconstruction. All delegates who were able to go to Aceh during the conference were deeply moved by the scale of the disaster and the long-term challenge of reconstruction. As a Network we have committed ourselves this week to offer what expertise and support we can to the area. As regional governments from all parts of the World, we implement sustainable policies and believe we have a particular duty to share our relevant experiences by working closely and practically with our colleagues here at this time of disaster recovery so that we can help areas to rebuild strategically but in accordance with the aspirations of local communities. We have established a taskforce in the Network to work with all sectors to assist in the task of sustainable long-term reconstruction and capacity building in civil society – based on local needs and in line with the strategic sustainable development efforts of Indonesia and the UN approach. We have especially welcomed the opportunity this week to meet with our regional government colleagues from around the globe, UN agencies, local governments, NGOs, ASEAN and Indonesian communities. We have much to share and learn from co-operating with one another. We reaffirm our founding Gauteng declaration commitment to sustainable development as the only way forward for all governments and societies. We underline especially the importance of full participation of all parts of society in shaping our common future. We recognise particularly the role of small and medium enterprises and organisations in realising sustainable development. We have adopted two important policy papers which address issues at the heart of relations between developed and developing countries – Sustainable Forest Management and Fair Trade. By finding practical ways forward as regional governments on such difficult international issues, we believe we can help to make a lasting difference. Lastly, we call on regional governments throughout the World to join the Network and express their positive support for the vital role of this sphere of governance in delivering sustainable, harmonious, socially-equitable communities and settlements.


9. GENERAL MANAGER’S REPORTS

GM/12 Local Government Reform Program MOSPLAN REF: 01.03 REPORT BY: General Manager, Viv May SUMMARY Department of Local Government 'Promoting Better Practice Review'. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The General Manager recommends: That the advices be received. REPORT When considering the final report by the Ombudsman of an investigation of a complaint against certain Councillors, I reported in October 2004 that, as a consequence, the Department of Local Government had indicated it would be prepared to undertake a review of a number of governance issues, including the management of the development process as part of its promoting better practices and procedures. At the workshop dealing with development issues held on 7 April it was indicated that the review would take place during this quarter and I can now confirm that the department is undertaking a 'Promoting Better Practice Review' of the Council. The Department advises that this review is designed to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of Council's operations. It comprises a visit to Council to examine Council's practices and compliance with relevant legislation, regulations and guidelines. The review will also examine Council's framework for monitoring its own performance and its strategic management. The review system is also designed to provide feedback to Council to assist it to improve its performance. A Departmental practice checklist and strategic management assessment containing a series of questions relating to Council's activities and functions has been submitted and is to be returned to the Department together with a number of documents requested by them. The Department indicates that it will be reviewing the documents and the response and a review team consisting of two Departmental officers will visit the Council in the week commencing 6 June. The correspondence notes that the review team will meet with the Mayor, General Manager and other Council staff. They also propose to examine a range of Council documents and processes. In discussions with the Department it has also been indicated that the Council's response in August 2003 to the Minister's request for local government structural reform will also be canvassed and should any Councillor wish to meet with the Departmental officers contact should be made with my office so I can endeavour to make the necessary arrangements. The correspondence notes that following the visit, the Department will provide Council with a draft report of any conclusions reached during the review process. The Department will also provide Council with a list of recommendations of actions that Council should undertake to


address issues identified during the review. Council will be given the opportunity to comment on the draft before the review team finalises the report.


GM/13 MOSPLAN Quarterly Review - January to March 2005 MOSPLAN REF: 01.02.03 REPORT BY: Nicola Atmore, Executive Officer – Corporate & Human

Development SUMMARY By way of exception, the following reports MOSPLAN and CEC targets that were not met or were exceeded for the quarter 1 January 2005 to 31 March 2005. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Executive Officer recommends: That the advices be received: REPORT In accordance with Section 407 of the Local Government Act, 1993, MOSPLAN Program Convenors have undertaken a review of their responsibility areas for the 1 January 2005 to 31 March 2005 quarter of the financial year. Strategies and performance targets have been reviewed and the following report highlights for Council any significant strategies or targets exceeded or underachieved for particular reasons. All other Management Plan activities are considered to be on target and within appropriate time frames and budgets. The format of the Quarterly Review has been amended for clarity. Where a Statement of Means is linked to various objectives, this is indicated in the right hand column of the first objective, and noted against any others below. PROGRAM 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Sub-Program 05.01: Policy and Administration and Customer Focus

Objective A. To ensure responsible environmental management, consistent with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, is incorporated into all Council’s operations, activities and contracts for the provision of works and services, to a standard which will meet or exceed all legislative and regulatory requirements.

Comments Meets other Objectives

Draft Environmental Management Plan on public exhibition with MOSPLAN 2005/2008. -

As a result of resource constraints the date for completion of the Environmental and Public Health Incident Response Plan has been rescheduled to the end of June 2005.

-

Sub-Program 05.02: Atmospheric Environment Objective A. To reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Mosman. Comments Meets other Objectives

CCP Plus/Australian Greenhouse Office household energy efficiency project will be completed by the end of May 2005.

-

Energy conservation measures identified in the "Detailed Facility Study" section of the Energy Performance Contract, but unfunded.

-


Sub-Program 05.03: Water Cycle Management Objective D. To reduce the rate of consumption of water by Council and the community. Comments Meets other Objectives

Energy Performance Contract unfunded in 2005/06. Water conservation initiatives identified in the Every Drop Counts program are being implemented under existing budgetary allocations.

-

As a result of resource constraints the completion date for the Greywater Reuse Systems Guidelines has been rescheduled to the end of June 2005.

-

Sub-Program 05.08: Environmental Education Objective A. To have effectively delivered environmental education that engages with the greatest

number of Mosman residents Comments Meets other Objectives

Draft Environmental Management Plan on public exhibition with MOSPLAN 2005/2008. -

Establishment of a staff ESD consultative committee is under review pending identification of resource requirements for the Environmental Management Plan implementation.

-

State of the Environment report, Environmental Management Plan and Ecological Footprint project information published in all available media.

-

Ecological Footprint project to be completed by the end of May 2005. -

PROGRAM 6 - PUBLIC HEALTH Sub-Program 06.02: Waste Management

Objective A. To minimise the generation of waste by encouraging its avoidance. Comments Meets other Objectives

The development of a program of waste and recycling community education initiatives has been incorporated as a component of the Waste section of Council's draft Environmental Management Plan.

B, C

The revision of Council's waste reduction and procurement plan has, and will be, incorporated as a component of the Policy and Waste sections of Council's draft Environmental Management Plan.

B, C

Objective B. To maximise resource recovery. (See comments in above objectives.)

Objective C. To dispose of residual waste in an environmentally sound manner. (See comments in above objectives.)

Objective D. To provide a high quality, cost effective and equitable waste management service. Comments Meets other Objectives

The preparation of a Waste Management manual will follow a review of Council's waste management function scheduled for August 2005 as identified in MOSPLAN 2005-2008.

-

Sub-Program 06.04: Disease Prevention Objective A. Identify, anticipate and respond to public health risks in the community. Comments Meets other Objectives

The development of an environmental health policy and procedures manual (scheduled for June 2005) will be undertaken consequent to a review of the environmental health responsibilities and functions of Council, which is scheduled in the draft MOSPLAN 2005-2008 for December 2005

B

Objective B. Ensure that premises regulated by Council meet all legislative and regulatory requirements. (See comments in above objectives.)


PROGRAM 7 - COMMUNITY SAFETY Sub-Program 07.01: Collaboration, Communication and Accountability

Objective C. To educate residents about how to call for Police and Ranger Services and what responses to anticipate.


Promoted through Mosman 2088 insert periodically -

Promoted through Local Solutions to Local Crime and Safety Issues Review and through press release to local media.

-

Sub-Program 07.02: Community Involvement in Crime Prevention Strategies Objective A. To improve the community’s understanding of their civic responsibilities and how to

report crime. Comments Meets other Objectives

Local area kept informed about crime prevention strategies and their duty to report crime or suspicious circumstances achieved through use of Mosman 2088 insert in particular, also through Community Development Advisory Group and Business Watch.

C

Unable to assist police in their investigation of development of a Community Safety and Crime Awareness program using electronic broadcasting due to security constraints and Police's own issues with developing such a system.

-

Holiday home safety tips promoted in Mosman 2088 edition periodically. B, C

Objective B. To increase the numbers of volunteers and to support them in appropriate roles. (See comments in above objectives.)

Objective C. To involve community organisations, residents and businesses with Police in order to implement agreed safety and crime prevention strategies.


Information to educated local retailers to help them reduce the risk of crime taking place in their premises circulated through Business Watch and annual Police Retailer Workshops.

-

Business Watch continuing to be facilitated in Mosman. -

Police and Rangers invited to attend School Principals Liaison Group to get feedback from principals on community safety and crime related issues.

-

Sub-Program 07.03: Combating Offences and Crime Objective B. To support and, where appropriate, develop with the Crime Coordinator long and short

term strategies to combat offences and crime. Comments Meets other Objectives

Continuing to promote the SHOROC Safety Parties Kit and the Party Register through Council outlets including the Youth Centre and to School Principals Group.

-

Sub-Program 07.05: Event Management - Safety and Traffic Aspects Objective A. To work closely with Harbourside Local Area Command through the Traffic Supervisor

and other stakeholders in order to ensure the provision of well run civic and community events.


All local events continue to be organised in accordance with Council's Special Event Management Policy.

-

Regular meetings of the local inter agency Special Event Management working party call to ensure ongoing coordination for special events.

-

All event organisers continue to be informed of their responsibilities in regards events in the local area.

-


All residents considering holding events are provided with Council's Special Event Management Policy and whatever assistance they require from Council staff.

-

PROGRAM 8 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES Sub-Program 08.03: Children/Family

Objective A. To plan, develop, implement and facilitate the equitable provision of needs based support and leisure services for children, adults and families.


One-off Set up and Sustainability grants totalling $6 875 received Feb 05 for Kidzone Vacation Care. In response to successful submission to Federal Government for Child Care Benefit Funding.

-

Funding allocated for seating and shade at the Occasional Child Care Centre. G

15 additional family day care places funded by Federal government, additional carers recruited and increase in the number of children aged 0-2 cared for.

C

Jack and Jill Kindergarten has commenced works to upgrade the former Mosman Women's Bowling Club in Alexander Avenue to operate a 2-5s long day care centre with 10 affordable places.

C

CSDE Funding Application submitted to RS Mosman in April 2005 to contribute to Kidzone Vacation Care operational costs.

-

Networking Report, Community Capacity Building Report and associated recommendations for funding submitted to Families First.

-

Objective B. To regularly involve volunteers and consumers in the planning, delivery and evaluation of services to ensure quality, relevance and consumer satisfaction.


Staff and carers are participating in the Quality Assurance process of self study to review and improve practice in Before/After and Vacation Care and Family Day Care.

E

Objective C. To promote awareness of the range of services available to children, adults and families. (See comments in above objectives.)

Objective E. To provide and promote readily accessible, up-to-date information, advice and referral on children, adult and family services. (See comments in above objectives.)

Objective G. Comply with legislation, standards and regulations relating to children and children's services.


Family Day Care staff and carers attended Child Protection Training workshop -

Staff and carers participated in First Aid, Orientation, Safe Food Handling, Quality Assurance and Administrative Software training

-

PROGRAM 9 - LIBRARY AND INFORMATION Sub-Program 09.03: Library Services

Objective D. To improve services to young adults particularly students through the provision of quality stock and services.


Children’s/Youth Services

Five hundred children aged from 5-16 years registered for the Library’s two summer holiday reading programs Treasure Trove (5-11years) and Reading Rave (11years and over). The programs ran from December 2004-January 2005. Loans of items from the Young Adult Collection showed an increase of 35% compared with the same period in 2003/04 Promotion/Activities During the summer holidays in 2004/2005 the Library ran the successful Knitting for Charity Program. Participants in the program ranged from children to seniors and they knitted 100 teddies for the Red Cross Trauma Teddy Program and 500 squares for knitted rugs for the Wrapped with

-


Love Charity. The completed items were presented to the Red Cross by the Mayor at a ceremony in February 2005

Sub-Program 09.05: Library Building Objective C. To provide a comfortable, clean, safe, and attractive library building for the community. Comments Meets other Objectives

Regularly monitor cleaning contractors and inspect public areas to ensure that the standards of cleanliness and the attractive appearance of the library is maintained.

D

Objective D. To provide a functional, safe and efficient work environment for library staff. (See comments in above objectives.)

Sub-Program 09.07: Local Studies Objective B. To utilise developing technology to provide greater access to the collection, and

awareness of the collection, whilst preserving the original material. Comments Meets other Objectives

The Library held a very successful exhibition in March called 'Lost Mosman' which featured 60 unidentified photographs from the Local Studies collection. The exhibition generated a great deal of interest and resulted in 18 images being identified

-

Sub-Program 09.09: Mosman Website Objective B. To develop the Website as an integral part of Council’s communication strategies for

staff and community. Comments Meets other Objectives

Teens weblog launched in March as part of the Mosman Library 'Wired for Youth' Project -

PROGRAM 10 - PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE Sub-Program 10.03: Recreational Facilities

Objective C. To implement the Recreation Strategy Action Plan which reflects the recreation needs and desires of the Mosman Community for the 0-5 year timeframe in the categories of Sporting Facilities, Youth Facilities, Playgrounds, Aquatic Facilities, Informal Recreation Areas, Hockey Facilities and Disability Access.


Completion of the construction of the skate park at Balmoral Oval was achieved in March 2005 -

Sub-Program 10.05: Cultural Development Objective A. To plan, facilitate, initiate or directly provide cultural events and performing arts

programs and activities that are entertaining, informative and innovative such as theatre groups, musical societies and orchestras and literary events.


Currently developing a program of "Puppet Shows" to complement the "Mr Squiggle" exhibition and Mosman Spring Festival in September.

-

Objective D. To plan for and introduce public art into Mosman’s fine range of parks, gardens, foreshores and civic spaces.


Currently planning the 7th Mosman Address scheduled for July 1. Guest speaker, Moffatt Oxenbould, to confirm invitation.

-

Insufficient funds have been allocated to this project; consequently, it can not proceed at this time. -


Objective F. To celebrate the achievements of Mosman residents of all ages. Comments Meets other Objectives

Currently planning a retrospective exhibition of the life and career of Norman Hetherington, the inventor, maker and producer of Mr Squiggle. The exhibition will be supported by a program of puppet shows and workshops which will be presented in September as part of the Mosman Spring Festival.

-

Sub-Program 10.06: Gallery Exhibitions and Activities Objective B. To develop and promote a broad, responsive and regularly changing program of

exhibitions and activities that explores a variety of media and new technologies. Comments Meets other Objectives

The major Australian artist exhibition for 2005 features the work of Diana Davidson, master printmaker and founder of Whaling Road Studios at Neutral Bay. The exhibition is scheduled for August. The Guy Warren Retrospective touring exhibition has successfully completed its tour.

-

New street signage for the Gallery is currently being prepared for Mosman Square, Vista Street and Myahgah Road.

-

Objective D. To properly house, care for, document and develop the Mosman Art Collection so that it is both accessible and well preserved and to ensure the proper running of the Mosman Art Prize.


2005 Survey due for completion by June. -

"Wearable-Art making workshop" completed for the 'Shore-Shocked Youth Arts Festival' in April. This highly successful workshop was presented by staff of the Gallery, Youth Centre and Library and attracted approximately 500 participants.

-

Sub-Program 10.08: Civic/Community Events organised by Council Objective A. To plan and provide civic and community events and celebrations for the enjoyment of

the community. For example, Mosman Day, Mosman Address, the Spring Festival and the Civic Church Service.


Continuing to seek sponsorship and other funding for community events organised by Council. Sponsorship received for International Women's Day Function in March 2005.

-

Community Volunteer Working party established for co-ordination of 2005 Mosman Spring Festival. All other events under way with planning.

B

Objective B. To ensure that events are effectively managed in order to maximise public safety and enjoyment, minimise adverse impacts on the social and physical environment, and ensure that Council’s regulatory and legal responsibilities are fulfilled.


All Council organised events done in accordance with Special Event Management Policy. -

Sub-Program 10.09: Community/Commercial Events approved/facilitated by Council Objective A. To facilitate community and commercial events and celebrations through a range of

planning and environmental controls and particularly through the Special Event Management Policy, for example, Shakespeare by the Sea, Mudgee Food and Wine Fair, Mini Mosmarathon.


Event information distributed through council outlets and included in Mosman Daily fortnightly column and Mosman 2088 bi-monthly insertions.

-


Sub-Program 10.10: Friendship Agreements Objective A. To foster community partnerships between Mosman and our friendship communities which currently comprise: • Glen Innes • Norfolk Island • Isle of Wight • Paciano, Italy • Mudanjiang, China • Douglas Shire, Queensland

and to develop new relationships when appropriate. Comments Meets other Objectives

The 'Australia China Cultural Exchange Project' was completed in March. The Project comprised an exhibition of paintings and drawings titled, "Australian Visions", a photography exhibition titled, "Post Cards from Mosman", and an "Artist in Residence", Ann Cape. The project was presented in Mudanjiang in August, September 2004 then presented at the Mosman Art Gallery in March, 2005, along with the results of Ann Cape's residency period. The Project was an unqualified success, as demonstrated by letters of appreciation received from the Deputy Mayor of the Mudanjiang Government and members of the Mudanjiang Art Institute.

B, C, D

Objective B. To stimulate environments through which the community will creatively learn, work and solve problems together through reciprocal cultural, educational, municipal, environmental and professional exchange of projects. (See comments in above objectives.)

Objective C. To create opportunities for all age groups, particularly young people, elected members and staff to expand and explore other cultures through long-term community relationships. (See comments in above objectives.)

Objective D. To ensure no negative effect in Council’s budget. (See comments in above objectives.)

PROGRAM 11 - TRANSPORT AND TRAFFIC Sub-Program 11.02: Roads

Objective A. To maintain the infrastructure and ensure the value of the asset is not eroded. Comments Meets other Objectives

Road Condition Survey is currently in progress and due for completion by June 2005. Review of funding levels and preparation of forward works program will be undertaken on completion of survey.

-

PROGRAM 12 - ECONOMIC AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT Sub-Program 12.01: Policy and Administration and Customer Focus

Objective A. To remain abreast of community aspirations about economic development and to utilise that knowledge in developing appropriate initiatives.


No formalised Business Kit for new businesses prepared - but ongoing support and information available through Council's Business Enterprise Centre Manager, Community Relations Manager and Marketing Officer

B, C

Objective B. To develop a strong, evident sense of Mosman the place, and the village-style community to underpin all economic and wider community endeavours. (See comments in above objectives.)


Objective C. To ensure that the community is aware of business and visitor services and activities. Comments Meets other Objectives

Support provided to 'The Mosman Guide' a shopping guide to the local area. Council also continuing to work to promote local business under the Mosman Is scheme.

-

Recommendation endorsed by General Manager.


GM/14 SHOROC MOSPLAN REF: 12.04.01 REPORT BY: General Manager, Viv May SUMMARY Minutes of the SHOROC Executive meeting held on 20 April 2005. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The General Manager recommends: That the Minutes of the SHOROC Executive meeting held on 20 April 2005 be received and the recommendations contained therein be adopted. REPORT Minutes of the SHOROC Executive meeting of 20 April 2005 will be circulated separately. COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Minute Book Attachments • Minutes of the SHOROC Executive meeting of 20 April 2005


10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORTS

CD/6 Aboriginal Heritage Study of Mosman LGA MOSPLAN REF: 08.09.01 REPORT BY: Community Development Manager, Nick de Brett SUMMARY Report on the final draft of the Aboriginal Heritage Study of the Mosman Local Government Area. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Manager recommends: That the advices be received. REPORT The final draft of the Aboriginal Heritage Study of the Mosman LGA has been completed and is awaiting approval by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation. The Study was developed through a partnership of Mosman Council, Department of Environment and Conservation (previously National Parks and Wildlife Service), Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council and the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust. The Study, which was conducted by the Australian Museum Business Services, is in four parts: Volume 1: Main Report Volume 2: Aboriginal Site Descriptions Volume 3: Maps Volume 4: Public Document. Volume 4 is the only publicly accessible document. Volumes 1 – 3 are confidential and can only be open to perusal, published or otherwise reproduced, in accordance with directions laid down in the Licence Agreement between Council and the Department of Environment and Conservation. This Agreement allows usage only by Council staff and contractors. Any requests for information in the confidential volumes are referred to the Licensor for determination. The aim of the Mosman LGA Aboriginal Heritage Study was to provide a greater understanding of the Aboriginal heritage of the Mosman area, and provide guidance to the Department of Environment and Conservation, Sydney Harbour Federation Trust and Mosman Council on the management and conservation of Aboriginal cultural heritage values. Developing a framework for identifying and managing Aboriginal cultural heritage values of the Mosman LGA was a key objective of this study. A number of management strategies have been formulated to achieve this objective, which aim to provide DEC, SHFT and Mosman Council with a framework for managing Aboriginal cultural heritage. General management objectives include: • Protection of the known Aboriginal archaeological sites; • Protection of any identified cultural values or places of social significance; • Protection of areas of archaeological potential;


• Aboriginal sites and potential archaeological deposits which are being affected by

natural processes or which are to be destroyed through development or other activities should be adequately investigated or salvaged;

• Active mitigation measures should be implemented at sites which are deteriorating but have been determined to be significant with respect to archaeological or cultural values; and

• Identification of interpretation or educational opportunities within the Mosman LGA. Specific management strategies cover: • Management of known Aboriginal sites. • Site specific management recommendations. • Management of areas of cultural significance. • Protocol regarding the detection of additional Aboriginal archaeological sites or objects. • Opportunities for further investigation of a number of sites. • Education and interpretation opportunities. Once the Study is approved by the Department of Environment and Conservation, priorities will be established for the implementation of the management strategies that are relevant to the land under Council’s jurisdiction. Particular consideration will be given to education and interpretation opportunities and specific site management recommendations. Priority setting and implementation will be undertaken in consultation with the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council. A copy of Volume 4 of the Study, the public document, is available for perusal from the Community Development Manager. Recommendation endorsed by Director Community Development.


CD/7 Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre MOSPLAN REF: 08.01.04 REPORT BY: Community Development Manager, Nick de Brett SUMMARY Update report on actions undertaken to retain the Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Manager recommends: That the advices be received. REPORT Under the guidance and coordination by Councillor Simon Menzies, the community action committee established to prevent the closure of the Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre has taken a number of further initiatives. These have followed the public meeting of 7 September 2004 aimed at preventing the closure of the Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre. Councillor Menzies and members of the action committee attended a series of community consultation workshops in December 2004 that were arranged by Northern Sydney Health. These were held over four days with the workshops progressively addressing a number of criteria and service locations and related issues in order to arrive at preferred service options. Locations included the Cremorne and Chatswood centres and Royal North Shore Hospital. The outcome of the workshops clearly showed that the Cremorne Centre should be retained and refurbished and the Chatswood centre’s site should be redeveloped. These decisions were conveyed to the Minister for Health. However to date the Minister has not advised of his decision. The action committee subsequently organised a petition signed by 50 Mosman General Practitioners calling for the Minister to uphold the outcomes of the community consultation. This was tabled in the NSW Parliament. In consultation with Councillor Menzies and the action committee, Jillian Skinner MP, Member for North Shore, with Gladys Berejiklian MP, Member for Willoughby, arranged a debate in the NSW Legislative Assembly on mental health funding with particular reference to the need to maintain Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre. Most recently, Councillor Menzies met with the General Manager of Willoughby Council to discuss the role that Willoughby Council might play in supporting the retention of the Cremorne and Chatswood centres. Subsequently, the Mayor of Willoughby, Councillor Pat Riley, tabled a Mayoral minute at the following Council meeting announcing that he will seek a delegation to the Minister for Health to request implementation of the December 2004 community consultation outcomes. Council will be informed of further developments as they arise, including the Minister’s decision on the future of the Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre. Recommendation endorsed by Director Community Development.


CD/8 Mosman Art Gallery: Art Sales, Commissions MOSPLAN REF: 10.06.01 REPORT BY: Cultural Services Manager, Tony Geddes SUMMARY Sales Commissions at Mosman Art Gallery. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Cultural Services Manager recommends: That the commission practice as described in the report be endorsed. REPORT The Mosman Art Gallery charges sales commission of 33.3% on the sale of all artworks. This practice applies when the Gallery is dealing directly with artists. When the Gallery is dealing with an artist's agent or dealer, the sales commission is 40%. This commission is split equally between the Mosman Art Gallery and artist's agent. This split commission practice is an accepted standard within the visual arts industry and amongst commercial art galleries. It is therefore important and necessary that the Mosman Art Gallery complies with this practice. Many prominent artists (like musicians, writers etc) are represented by an agent, who attends to their commercial interests. In such cases, the agent takes a fee for their representations on the artist's behalf. This situation can occur in relation to the Mosman Art Prize when the agent of a prominent artist submits a painting on their behalf. The Mosman Art Prize is the flagship exhibition of the Mosman Art Gallery and consequently, it is important that the Prize attracts as many prominent artists as possible. Such artists raise the profile of the Mosman Art Prize and exhibition, and by association, the Mosman Art Gallery. It is worth noting that not all prominent artists are represented by an agent, therefore the incidence of split commissioning is not common. Furthermore, it only occurs if the artwork is sold. In the vast majority of cases, the Mosman Art Gallery deals directly with artists and consequently, split commissioning is rare. Recommendation endorsed by Director Community Development.


CD/9 Mosman Festival 2005 MOSPLAN REF: 10.08.06 REPORT BY: Community & Business Relations Manager, Susan Wardle SUMMARY Details of planning for the 2005 Mosman Festival. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Community Development recommends: That the advices be received. REPORT The Mosman Festival will run from 2 September 2005 to 8 October 2005 with a number of the events on the program being co-ordinated by a volunteer community committee. To date, highlight events of the draft Festival program will include: Date Time Event

Description

Friday 2 September

6.30pm Opening of Festival and Mr Squiggle: the Art of Norman Hetherington Exhibition by James Valentine in Mosman Art Gallery.

Exhibition featuring a variety of original puppets, drawings, cartoons, promotional material and memorabilia.

Saturday 3 September

8.00am – 3.00pm

Mosman Village Green Arts & Crafts Market.

Monthly arts & crafts market.

Saturday 4 September

Mosman is Shopping Week starts with retailer promotions across the week.

The week will comprise in-store workshops, talks, demonstrations, discounts as well as special feature days including; Mosman is Kids, Mosman is Fashion, Mosman is Home etc.

Thursday 8 September

tbc Mosman is Fashion, Beauty Style Parades.

Local business community.

Sunday 11 September

Mr Squiggle Day at Mosman Art Gallery & Community Centre.

Special promotion with live performances at Mosman Art Gallery.

Sunday 11 September

12noon – 5.00pm

Sand Sculpture & Pavement Art Competition at Balmoral.

Family Day Balmoral.

DRAFT – to be confirmed


Wednesday 14 September

10.00am – 11.30am

Children’s Fair on Allan Border Oval.

Free event for children accompanied by an adult including Jumping Castle, children’s entertainers, fairies, clowns, storytellers and much more.

Sunday 18 September

11am – 3.00pm

Pets Day Out on Mosman Village Green.

Dog Obedience and agility demonstrations, competitions with prizes and stalls featuring a range of pet related products and giveaways.

Thursday 22 September

6.00pm Mosman Garden Competition Presentations. Mosman Art Gallery.

Annual Mosman Garden Competition presentations.

Sunday 25 September

Youth Activity planned by young people.

Saturday 1 October

Mosman Village Green Arts & Crafts Market.

Saturday 8 October

10am Freedom of Entry and Community Street Parade.

1 Commando Regiment will exercise their right to Freedom of Entry through Mosman this will be followed by a Community Street Parade.

Saturday 8 October

10am – 2pm

Community Fair Day on Allan Border Oval.

Following the Freedom of Entry and Community Street Parade there will be a Community Fair Day.

Freedom of Entry Parade Council has granted approval to the 1 Commando Regiment to exercise their right of Freedom of Entry to Mosman on 8 October. The parade will marshal in Prince Albert Street and proceed up Military Road. It will halt just past the Fire Station and then proceed up to Spit Junction where it will turn left and then left again into Vista Street, finishing on Allan Border Oval where the Mayor and Saluting Officer will inspect the Regiment. 1 Commando Regiment have requested vehicular access to Allan Border Oval for the Saluting Officer and the Mayor. A Traffic Management Plan is being prepared by Council staff for approval through the Traffic Committee.

DRAFT – to be confirmed


Community Street Parade As part of the 2005 Mosman Festival it has been agreed that the Freedom of Entry will be followed by a Community Street Parade. It is envisaged that the Street Parade will step off five to ten minutes after 1 Commando Regiment and follow the same route. Local community groups, schools, churches and sporting organisations have been invited to participate. Some of the local organisations that have indicated their willingness to participate in the parade include; HMAS Penguin, Mosman Fire Station, Mosman State Emergency Services, Mosman Croquet Club, Mosman Day & Evening College, and Mosman Swans Junior Football Club. The Community Parade will follow the same route as the Freedom of Entry and will be covered by the same Traffic Management Plan. Community Fair Day Following the Freedom of Entry and Community Street Parade it is proposed that there will be a Community Fair Day on Mosman Village Green. It was originally proposed that this event be held on Allan Border Oval however, due to use of the Oval for Mosman Cricket Club it is instead proposed that the Fair Day be held in Mosman Square and on Mosman Village Green. Local sporting groups, community organisations, service clubs etc have been invited to have a stall on for the Fair. This is not intended to be like a ‘Market Day’, instead it would largely feature local groups and organisations with local food stores / businesses being given the opportunity to sell food. It is hoped that sponsorship can be obtained for this event to allow a portable stage with amplification and entertainment throughout the day from local school musical groups and other local musical groups and bands. It is anticipated that the Fair Day would draw crowds of 2,000 – 3,000 people. Affected residents would be notified of the event and advised that there will be use of amplified sound however that this will be keep to the minimum to ensure enjoyment of patrons at the event without impact on residents. Marketing and Promotion A festival program will be produced and will appear in the August edition of Mosman 2088 and extra copies will be produced for distribution throughout the area. The program will also be printed in a one page advertisement to appear in the Mosman Daily the last week of August. The local print media will be approached for sponsorship support in the form of publicity and a feature promoting the Festival and all the activities incorporated under that umbrella. In house posters and flyers will be distributed through Council outlets. Local businesses will be approached to display promotional material.


It is hoped that sponsorship funding can be gained to supplement advertising with production of professionally produced colour posters and flyers. Sponsorship will be sought for the overall festival and also for individual events. The full extent of entertainment available at the Community Fair Day will be largely dependent on sponsorship funding. Recommendation endorsed by Director Community Development.


CD/10 Queenwood Walk-a-thon - Special Event MOSPLAN REF: 10.09 REPORT BY: Susan Wardle, Community & Business Relations Manager SUMMARY Details of an application by Queenwood Girls School to hold a Walk-a-thon for student and students’ families in September. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Community Development recommends: That the report be noted and, subject to submission and approval of a traffic management plan for the event, the application be approved. REPORT Queenwood School for Girls have submitted an application to hold a Walk-a-thon starting at Allan Border Oval and finishing at Balmoral on Sunday 18 September, 2005. The event would involve between 250 and 300 students and students’ families. Under Council’s Special Event Management Policy this event would be classified as a Private Special Event Minor and would incur the following fees and charges under the Draft 2005 / 06 Pricing Policy Special Event Application Fee $235 (including GST) Special Event Management Fee (Balmoral) $1160 (including GST) Refundable Security Deposit $1000 Subject to the organisers submitting an appropriate Traffic Management Plan to Council for consideration through the Traffic Committee, it is proposed that the event be approved. Recommendation endorsed by Director Community Development.


CD/11 Tsunami Relief - Community Conversations - Mosman's Ongoing Role

MOSPLAN REF: 10.08.00 REPORT BY: Kay Clarke, Director Community Development SUMMARY Outcomes from the Community Conversations held on Tsunami Relief and Mosman’s ongoing role. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Community Development recommends: Submitted for determination. REPORT Following the Mayoral Minute on 7 February 2005 two Community Conversations were held. One on 22 March and one on 23 March 2005. The Community Conversations were promoted through Council’s Page 13 advertisement in the Mosman Daily, distribution of flyers and display of posters from Council’s Civic Centre, Community Information Centre, Library, Art Gallery and Youth Centre, through the local schools and churches as well as information being included in mailouts from Council. Six people attended each, 11 of whom were residents. The report on these Community Conversations is attached. The first Community Conversation concluded that:

There should be an ongoing community role in support of Tsunami affected people. That Mosman should establish a relationship with a smallish area in Thailand such as Phang Nga province and if the second Community Conversation agreed, the Thai Consulate-General should be invited to speak to interested residents about the issues and the needs and how we can best help. That a community committee should be formed and that representatives of the Tsunami Sunday effort should be encouraged to attend the second Community Conversation particularly in view of the surprisingly small number of people who attended the Community Conversation.

The second Community Conversation concluded that:

They do think the community should play an ongoing role in Tsunami relief. They agreed that the community should take a direct role and it should be a community effort because that is most effective. People like to be thanked and a direct result gives them that satisfaction. There shouldn’t be any religious, political or other such connotations.


Council should be involved in some way but not necessarily be the instigator but its role as a local government authority is important in relation to governance and accountability matters.

The issue of charity beginning at home must be considered. Are people over the first wave of enthusiasm of Tsunami support? It was agreed each attendee of the Community Conversations should talk to 10 Mosman residents and get their feedback as to the outcomes of the Community Conversations. There was some discussion as to whether 12 people (the number of attendees at the two conversations) was sufficient to get something kick started. Attendees of both Community Conversations were requested to also talk to 10 Mosman residents and get their feedback. Of the attendees two people subsequently contacted Council with further feedback. One in support of Council having an ongoing role and the other with the contrary view that there wasn’t really an ongoing role for Council and felt people should do their own thing. In conclusion, should Council wish to take an ongoing role, there was general consensus that a friendship agreement with a community in Thailand would be the best course. However, given the small response it would be difficult to recommend any further action. Recommendation endorsed by General Manager. COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations Community Conversations 22 & 23 March 2005, Tsunami Relief - Report


CD/12 Picture Hanging Rail in Council Chambers MOSPLAN REF: 10.06.01 REPORT BY: Cultural Services Manager, Tony Geddes SUMMARY Picture hanging rail in Council Chambers. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Cultural Services Manager recommends: That the picture hanging rail system be installed in the Council Chambers as described in the report. REPORT Several Councillors have recently expressed a desire to see more of the Mosman Art Collection exhibited in the Council Chamber for the benefit and enjoyment of Councillors and residents. To achieve this outcome, the current picture hanging rail must be replaced, as it is very old, poorly designed and difficult to use. Furthermore, the lines on which the pictures hang are also worn and difficult to interchange, and consequently, pictures from the Mosman Art Collection are not easily rotated or changed. The cost of replacing the picture hanging rail and line with a new and more efficient system, which is interchangeable with the Art Gallery, is approximately $2,800. This would enable works from the Mosman Art Collection to be changed on a regular basis, say 3 - 4 times per year. A new hanging system would also allow the Council Chamber to be used as an alternative exhibition space for special thematic displays in almost any two dimensional media, including photographs, drawings, prints and framed architectural designs and plans. The Manager of Property & Assets, Gordon Brown advises that funds can be made available from savings that are likely to accrue across the civic centre, recurrent budget cost areas. The new picture hanging rail could be installed once contractors are engaged, along with a different selection of paintings from the Mosman Art Collection. Recommendation endorsed by Director Community Development.


11. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORTS

CS/32 Compulsory Acquisition of Land in Awaba Lane and Mitchell Lane

MOSPLAN REF: 02.02.08 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Proposed compulsory acquisition of spite strips of land in Awaba Lane and Mitchell Lane. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends that: A. Under the power conferred by Sections 177 and 178 of the Roads Act 1993, Council

compulsorily acquire the land described as Lot 30 Section B DP 3558; Lot 11 Section C DP 3558; and Lot 12 Section C DP 3558, being the strips of land at the western end of Awaba Lane; in Mitchell Lane adjoining 1A Bapaume Street; and in Mitchell Lane adjoining Council’s drainage reserve respectively, pursuant to the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 for road purposes.

B. The Council obtain approval of the Minister for Local Government and the Governor

to compulsorily acquire the land described as Lot 30 Section B DP 3558; Lot 11 Section C DP 3558; and Lot 12 Section C DP 3558, being the strips of land at the western end of Awaba Lane; in Mitchell Lane adjoining 1A Bapaume Street; and in Mitchell Lane adjoining Council’s drainage reserve respectively.

REPORT Three parcels of land have been identified as remnant spite strips being residues of old subdivisions in Awaba Lane and Mitchell Lane. The land is identified in Council Rate Register and located as follows: • Lot 30 Section B DP

3558

Assess. No 13437

At the western end of Awaba Lane adjoining 22 Killarney Street (Lot A DP 319907 & Lot 1 DP 199387) and 61 - 63 Awaba Street (Lot 19 Section B DP 3558 & Lot 1 DP 936220)

• Lot 11 Section C DP 3558

Assess. No 13436

In Mitchell Lane adjoining 1A Bapaume Street (Lot 21 DP 793450)

• Lot 12 Section C DP 3558

Assess. No 13436

In Mitchell Lane adjoining Council’s drainage reserve (Lot 28 DP 4287) which adjoins 1 Mitchell Road and 129 Spit Road

The location of the land is indicated on the plans attached to the business papers.


The spite strips have had no land value attributed to them by the Valuer General and are therefore non-rateable. The owner of the three parcels of land is Mr Frank Gumley who is untraceable. It is proposed that Council acquire the land for dedication as roadway in order to formalise these areas of residue land. The compulsory acquisition is the most effective method of acquiring the land. In order for the process to commence, Council must resolve to compulsorily acquire the land and to make application to the Minister for Local Government and the Governor for approval to compulsorily acquire the land. As provided under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms) Compensation Act, Council has made due enquiry to trace the owner of the land. The compulsory acquisition will not affect the current use of the land. Should any adjoining owners prove an existing benefit from the land, Council may be required to pay compensation to the owners for acquisition of their interest in the land. This is considered to be unlikely or not significant in the instances of these spite strips. Once Council resolves to acquire the land, notice to the untraceable owner will be published in local and national papers following which application to compulsorily acquire the land will be made to the Minister and Governor. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services. COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • Plans of proposed compulsory acquisition of spite strips in Awaba Lane and Mitchell

Lane


CS/33 Delegations Manual MOSPLAN REF: 01.03.00 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Review of the delegation to the General Manager for authority to designate and implement positions for disabled parking in all Council Car Parks. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends: That Clause 16, Program 11, Transport and Traffic of the Delegations Manual delegating authority to the General Manager be amended to delete the words ‘Deputy Chairman of the Policy and Finance Committee’ and replace with the word ‘Mayor’, as follows: 16. Authority, in consultation with the Deputy Chairman of the Policy and Finance

Committee Mayor, to designate and implement positions for disabled parking in all Council Car Parks. (29/8/89 - F/159) 11.04) (Director Environment and Planning)

REPORT Delegations were reviewed by Council at its meeting on 5 July 2004 (GM/15) in accordance with Section 380 of the Local Government Act which provides each Council must review all its Delegations during the first 12 months of each term of office. The Delegations Manual that was circulated and adopted contained the following clause in Program 11, Transport and Traffic delegating authority to the General Manager: 16. Authority, in consultation with the Deputy Chairman of the Policy and Finance

Committee, to designate and implement positions for disabled parking in all Council Car Parks. (29/8/89 - F/159) 11.04) (Director Environment and Planning)

This is incorrect and the Deputy Chairman of the Policy and Finance Committee should have been replaced at that time by the Mayor. It is appropriate to amend the delegation so that consultation is made with the Mayor. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services.


CS/34 Investments MOSPLAN REF: 02.02.01 REPORT BY: Manager Finance, Mark McDonald SUMMARY Investments Schedule for the month of April 2005. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Finance recommends: That the schedule of Investments be adopted. REPORT A Schedule of all monies invested under Section 625 of the Local Government Act for the month of April 2005 will be circulated prior to the meeting. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services. COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Minute Book Attachments • Investment Schedule for the month of April 2005.


CS/35 Financial Statement to 31 March 2005 MOSPLAN REF: 02.02.01 REPORT BY: Manager Finance, Mark McDonald SUMMARY Quarterly Financial Review to 31 March 2005 OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Finance recommends: That the Financial Statement for the quarter ended 31 March 2005 including the revised estimates and recommendations contained within the Manager Finance’s Report be adopted REPORT The Financial Statement for the quarter ended 31 March 2005, together with the summary of recommended forecasted budget variations are attached to Councillors’ Business Papers. Councillors who wish to discuss any aspect of the Financial Statement to 31 March 2005 should contact the Manager Finance Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Minute Book Attachments • Budget Review Statement • Summary of Recommended variations to March 2005


CS/36 2004/2005 Loan Borrowing Program MOSPLAN REF: 02.02.01 REPORT BY: Manager Finance, Mark McDonald SUMMARY Funding of Council’s 2004/2005 Loan Program in accordance with the adopted 2004/2005 Program Budget and Strategic Financial Plan OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Finance recommends: That: A. Council agree to borrow a total amount of $1,300,000. B. The Common Seal be affixed to the appropriate Deeds. C. The General Manager be delegated authority to accept the interest rate most advantageous to Council. REPORT The 2004/2005 Estimates provide for a loan borrowing program of $300,000 for General Fund and $1,000,000 for the Community Environmental Contract (CEC) for which Council has received approval from the Minister for Local Government on 6 July 2004. The General Fund allocation of $300,000 has been utilised to fund a number of capital initiatives as outlined in the 2004/2005 Budget whilst the $1,000,000 will be utilised to fund capital projects allocated within the CEC with the debt being repaid solely by the additional 5% rate stream until 2011/2012. A number of financial institutions have been contacted to quote on 2 separate loan agreements, the first for $300,000 for a fixed 8 year loan period and the second for $1,000,000 for a fixed 7 year period. The rates provided to date are indicative rates only and may vary marginally when actually secured however due to the commercial nature of the transaction, the quoted rates will not be summarised in the report but conveyed to the Council following acceptance. The repayments on both loans will be Principal and Interest on a semi annual basis, with Council requesting that the funds be advanced to it prior to 31 May 2005. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services


CS/37 Legal Services to Council MOSPLAN REF: 02.01.05 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Update on the calling for expressions of interest from local government specialist firms for the provision of legal services to Council effective 1 July 2005. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends: That the advices be received. REPORT Council at its meeting on 7 March 2005 resolved to invite submission of expression of interests for the provision of legal services to Council effective 1 July 2005 and that a Working Party, consisting of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Councillor Traill (Councillor Wilton as alternate), General Manager and Director Environment and Planning to consider proposals and make a recommendation for Council’s consideration at the 2 May 2005 meeting. Invitations to submit expressions of interest for the provision of legal services to Council were subsequently extended to the following 13 firms: • Abbott Tout • Cutler Hughes and Harris • Blake Dawson Waldron • Bartier Perry • Deacons • Maddocks • Mallesons Stephen Jaques

• Michell Sillar • Phillips Fox • Pike Pike and Fenwick • Shaw Reynolds • Staunton Beattie • Wilshire Webb

Submission of proposals closed on Monday 11 April 2005 and proposals were received from the following 7 firms: • Abbott Tout • Blake Dawson Waldron • Cutler Hughes and Harris • Michell Sillar • Pike Pike and Fenwick • Staunton Beattie • Wilshire Webb Maddocks responded indicating that it would not be submitting a proposal and they would prefer to take time to build up knowledge of Council’s operations and the issues affecting it and suggested a way to do this was for Council staff to participate in their training seminar program.


Mallesons Stephen Jaques responded indicating that whilst they are currently providing legal services to a small number of local government clients, due to client alignment and conflict of interest policies, they are not growing that practice further at this time. A late submission was received from Shaw Reynolds and cannot be considered. No response was received from the remaining firms. The Working Party has not been in a position to conduct interviews and make a recommendation in time for the 2 May 2005 meeting. It is proposed that a report will be submitted to the 6 June 2005 meeting. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services.


CS/38 Minutes of Council Meetings MOSPLAN REF: 01.01.02 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Question Without Notice concerning the recording of recommendations in the Minutes of Council meetings. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends: That the advices be received and the matter be determined by Council. REPORT At the Council meeting held on 7 March 2005, Councillor Elsegood asked the following Question Without Notice:

“If the Minutes of Council's meetings are to be a true and accurate record of Council's resolutions then could the entire resolution be recorded and not parts of recommendations or only new motions?”

The Director Corporate Services informed Councillors that the Minutes conform with the requirements of the Local Government (Meetings) Regulation 1999 and the Council's adopted Code of Meeting Practice however a report will be submitted to Council on the proposal. The Minutes referred to by Councillor Elsegood are the draft Minutes prepared and circulated to Councillors for confirmation at the following meeting and detail inter alia all motions and amendments moved, however do not detail the Officer’s Recommendation. The draft Minutes circulated for confirmation are a record of the conduct of the meeting in the order that matters are dealt with. The draft Minutes are posted to Council’s web site. Upon confirmation of the Minutes by Council, the ‘draft’ Minutes on the web site are amended to ‘confirmed’ Minutes and a full and complete Minute Book for the meeting is prepared. The Minute Book includes all reports, recommendations, amended and further recommendations, attachments that were to be incorporated in the Minutes and a copy of the confirmed circulated Minutes. The Minute Book is then signed by the Mayor confirming them as a true and accurate record of the meeting. The Minute Book is then scanned to produce a CD-ROM for public access and document security purposes. The Officer’s recommendations are not duplicated in the circulated Minutes, as the Officer’s recommendations are available in the agenda and are ultimately incorporated in the Minute Book. This has been done primarily to make reading of the circulated Minutes less cumbersome and to reduce the size of the Minute Book. The reader of the circulated Minutes in the Minute Book would simply refer to the report collated in the Minute Book for the officer’s recommendation together with any attachments. Whilst the circulated Minutes are intended to be a record of the conduct of the meeting only, it is acknowledged that it may be beneficial to the reader of the circulated Minutes should the


Officer’s recommendations precede the motions and amendments moved on the item. It would not be proposed to duplicate the conditions of development consent recommended by the Officer in development application reports in the circulated Minutes, as this would unnecessarily make the Minute Books too voluminous and is not supported particularly at a time when the storage space for Minute Books has become an issue. The complete Officer’s recommendation for all other items would be included in the circulated Minutes. Should Council desire the Officer’s recommendations to be included in the circulated Minutes, it would be proposed that the Officer’s recommendations for development applications comprise simply the DA Number, Proposal and Recommendation précis which appears on the report cover page. Accordingly the Officer’s recommendation on DA items would generally be shown as “Approval with conditions” or “Refusal”. Sample Minutes have been prepared on this basis and are attached to the business papers for Council’s determination on whether the method of Minute preparation be altered to include the Officer’s Recommendations in the circulated Minutes. (Refer to items 18 and 19 in the attached sample Minutes for the proposed method of dealing with DA items.) Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services COUNCILLORS’ ATTACHMENTS Circulations Sample draft circulated Minutes incorporating Officer’s Recommendation


CS/39 Sound Recording of Council Meetings MOSPLAN REF: 01.01.02 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Question Without Notice concerning the sound recording of Council meetings. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends: That the advices be received. REPORT At the Council meeting held on 7 February 2005, Councillor Skipper asked the following Question Without Notice:

“The new Code of Conduct requires Councillors to, apart from other obligations, "recording reasons for decisions" and "keeping proper records". This is a very onerous responsibility. Can consideration be given to tape recording Council meetings for this purpose and the matter be brought to Council for debate.”

The Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW is based on a number of key principles, including integrity, leadership, selflessness, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and respect. In relation to the key principle of accountability, the Code of Conduct states:

“You are accountable to the public for your decisions and actions and must consider issues on their merits, taking into account the views of others. This means recording reasons for decisions; submitting to scrutiny; keeping proper records; establishing audit trails.”

This is a general principle upon which the Code of Conduct is based and which has equal application for Councillors, members of staff and delegates of the Council. It is not the intent of the Code of Conduct that Councillors would be required to record the reasons for the way they vote on every matter before Council and it is suggested that the debate during a Council meeting may not necessarily provide a record of the reasoning behind the decisions of individual Councillors. It would be reasonable though to expect that Councillors would be able to recall their reason for voting on contentious matters before Council. Should Councillors need to keep a record in this regard, that is a matter for them. Notwithstanding the above, the matter of the sound recording and Hansard Reporting of Council meetings has been considered by previous Councils and no further action has been taken due to the expense of both options and the fact that challenges to the accuracy of the minutes would not be eliminated under such proposals. The introduction of recording minutes online during Council meetings was designed to ensure the accuracy of the Minutes in the absence of other electronic records. Whilst debate during Council meetings is important, the priority is to ensure the exact intent of the Council


is actioned, something recording minutes online and projecting them onto the various screens has successfully achieved. The introduction of sound recording of all proceedings of Council meeting may provide an accurate recording of the debate, but it will not record how Councillors voted or necessarily offer a record of the reason why Councillors voted one way or another and will always be open to challenge as to which Councillor said what. In addition, tape recording the proceedings of Council meetings may be in breach of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (PPIP Act). Privacy NSW has issued guidelines to assist councils in this regard and note that the types of personal information collected at council meetings could include: • The identities of any speakers and personal opinions held by them that they express in

the meeting; this includes councillors, staff and members of the public who address the meetings.

• Information or opinions about other people; this is where a speaker talks about a third

party whose identity is apparent or is reasonably ascertainable. The advice of Privacy NSW is that councils must first decide why they are tape recording their meetings and then if this purpose complies with the relevant information protection principles of the PPIP Act. Should councils decide to tape record meetings, Privacy NSW recommend that council’s codes of meeting practice ensure that: • Tape recordings of meetings are only used for verifying the accuracy of minutes. • Tape recordings of meetings are not made available to the public or disclosed to any third

party except where allowed under the PPIP ACT or compelled under court order, warrant, subpoena or other law.

• Tape recordings of meetings are destroyed as soon as their original purpose is served or

three months after their creation (whichever is later), subject to any requirements or recommendations under the State Records Act 1998.

• Appropriate signage is displayed in the public gallery or at the public entrance to Council

meetings and verbal statements made at the start of each meeting to notify the public. In view of the advice of Privacy NSW, it is doubted that Council may tape record proceedings of its meetings for the purpose of "recording reasons for decisions". From previous quotations a sound amplification/recording system would cost at least $25,000 to implement together with staff cost in operating the system during meetings and in retrieval of audio files when they are required. Having regard to the above, it is recommended that no action be taken in relation to the tape recording the proceedings of Council meetings. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services


CS/40 Mosman Swim Centre MOSPLAN REF: 10.03.09 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Recommendations arising from the audit and performance review of Mosman Swim Centre and the submission of the draft Annual Management Plan for 2005/2006 from Aquatic Leisure Management. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends that: A. The contract with Aquatic Leisure Management (ALM) for the Mosman Swim Centre and

Cafe be amended in the following terms:

i. Council require a net return of $35,000 per annum for 2 years, whilst ALM continues to deliver the quality of services expected. Net return equating to the fixed and turnover rent paid to Council for both the Swim Centre and café less the management fee paid by Council to ALM. This abatement is to be effective from 1 July 2004.

ii. The financial arrangements to revert to tender after 2 years that is on 1 July 2006.

iii. The marketing and sales strategy be developed in conjunction with a review of

cost of staffing and cost of sales to maximise return to the Centre, and to be supported by detailed P&L targeted budgets for the two years of the abatement period and for the year following when financial arrangements revert to tender.

iv. GST exempt swimming lessons be introduced.

v. The administration fee that ALM are charging to the Centre be adjusted to cover

only those overheads associated with Mosman Swim Centre and be fairly distributed between all of ALM’s facilities.

vi. Effective 1 July 2005 and subject to the change in hours being advertised,

operating hours be altered to:

a. Shortened weekday operating hours 5.00am to 8.00pm b. Shortened Sunday operating hours 8.00am to 6.00pm

and Council retain the right to require ALM to reinstate the reduced weekday hours should a future review indicate a sustainable demand for these hours.

vii. ALM provide to Council a business plan addressing A (i) to (vi) above. B. Council not accede to the request to amend rental arrangements altering the turnover

rent rates from 15% to 5% and placing a ceiling of $95,000 (with escalation clause) on swim centre rent, however review the request to amend the turnover thresholds and rates at the end of the 2 year abatement period.


C. Endorse the proposed fee structure for the Swim Centre for 2005/2006 currently on

exhibition in the Council’s draft 2005/2006 Pricing Policy. REPORT Council was advised in the draft Program Budget papers considered at the Extraordinary meeting on 11 April 2005 that it has been in discussions with the operator of the Mosman Swim Centre, Aquatic Leisure Management (ALM) regarding the financial arrangements under the contract. It was indicated that an audit and performance review of the Swim Centre has been conducted by an independent consultant (Smart Connection Company) and it is anticipated that short term rental abatement will be offered to ALM on a revenue neutral basis to Council, to alleviate some financial stress arising from the start up of the new facility. The report of the consultant confirms that whilst the Centre is generating significantly more income than anticipated in the tender submission, there are additional costs that were not addressed or included in the tender and the café operation is below target. All of this gives ALM a financial problem which it cannot sustain. The tender submission was deficient in the areas relating to under budgeted costs, unforseen costs and additional costs (predominately staffing) associated with the extra income. The facility would appear to be overstaffed by industry standards. Further, it is considered that ALM’s financial position has been exacerbated by the generous turnover rent provisions included in the tenders for both the Swim Centre and café. ALM have also submitted its draft Management Plan for 2005/2006 requesting the following: 1. Alteration to operating hours. 2. Internally partition off part of the café to create dedicated Manager’s office. 3. Installation of signage on adjoining commercial building. 4. Alteration to rental arrangements altering the turnover rent rates and placing a ceiling of

$95K (with escalation clause) on swim centre rent. 5. Increased Centre fees in line with CPI or slightly above. As the issues surrounding the audit and performance review and the recommendations of ALM contained within its draft Management Plan for 2005/2006 are related, they have been dealt with together and a without prejudice offer was made to ALM to alter the contract to assist it in growing the business. The offer of a rental abatement under the lease for the Swim Centre and café was made on the basis of ALM providing to Council a business plan that allows inter alia:- • Council receiving a net return of $35,000 per annum for 2 years, whilst ALM continues to

deliver the quality of services expected. Net return equating to the fixed and turnover rent paid to Council for both the Swim Centre and café less the management fee paid by Council to ALM. This abatement is to be effective from 1 July 2004.

• The financial arrangements to revert to tender after 2 years that is on 1 July 2006. • The marketing and sales strategy be developed in conjunction with a review of cost of

staffing and cost of sales to maximise return to the Centre, and to be supported by detailed P&L targeted budgets for the two years of the concession period and for the year following when financial arrangements revert to tender.

• GST exempt swimming lessons be introduced. • The administration fee that ALM are charging to the Centre be adjusted to cover only

those overheads associated with Mosman Swim Centre and be fairly distributed between all of ALM’s facilities.


• Those recommendations contained within ALM’s Management Plan agreed upon or

supported by Council as indicated below. ALM have made a number of recommendations in the draft Management Plan and the following responses have been made to ALM in respect of these matters:- 1. Alteration to operating hours:

a. Shortened weekday operating hours 5.00am to 8.00pm b. Shortened Sunday operating hours 8.00am to 6.00pm

The operating hours of the Mosman Swim Centre are presently: Monday to Friday 5.00am to 9.30pm Saturday to Sunday 7.00am to 7.00pm Public holidays 7.00am to 7.00pm Closed Good Friday and Christmas Day

On 3 May 2004 ALM was granted approval by Council to alter the operating hours of the Mosman Swim Centre on Saturdays from 5.00am to 9.30pm to 7.00am to 7.00pm effective 1 July 2004. A further request to reduce operating hours is contained within the draft Management Plan. Attendance during the shoulder hours of 8.00pm to 9.30pm Monday to Friday and 7.00am to 8.00am and 6.00pm to 7.00pm on Sundays has been very low. Whilst there are often no patrons using the facility during these hours, the operator is incurring the same costs as if it is being fully utilised by having the facility open. The proposal to shorten the hours is supported however Council retains the right to require ALM to reinstate the reduced hours should a future review indicate a sustainable demand for these hours.

2. Internally partition off part of the café to create dedicated Manager’s office.

ALM have been advised that partitioning of the café or any reduction in its size will not be supported.

3. Installation of signage on adjoining commercial building.

ALM wish to explore more prominent signage for the Swim Centre however opportunities are limited by the strata management of the residential building in which the Centre is situated. Signage on the adjoining building to gain exposure to Military Road traffic is a matter for ALM should it wish to negotiate rights to space and lodge a development application for a sign.

4. Alteration to rental arrangements altering the turnover rent rates and placing a ceiling of

$95K (with escalation clause) on swim centre rent.

A reduction in the turnover rent rate effective from $500,000 from 15% to 5% and $95,000 ceiling is not supported. Council may consider a review at the end of the 2 year abatement period.

5. Increased Centre fees in line with CPI or slightly above.

Agreed and included in Council’s draft 2005/2006 Pricing Policy. Other matters contained within the draft Management Plan such as the Risk and Safety Management Plan and Marketing and Communication Plan require further work before being accepted by Council.


ALM have indicated they are prepared to accept this offer subject to Council approval and are preparing a business plan to address all matters and to give Council the confidence that the facility will support a sustainable and growing business. It is important to note that the tender of ALM was accepted on the basis that the net cost to Council would be within a recurrent $60,000 per annum cost to Council. Due to better than expected turnover Council is entitled to a larger than anticipated rental return from the Swim Centre in the form of turnover based rent. The proposal to require ALM to return to Council a net $35,000 per annum for the 2 year abatement period will offset a $25,000 transfer to the Swim Centre asset replacement reserve and $20,000 maintenance contingency provided in the 2005/2006 budget. ALM have now also accepted an earlier offer of a $5,000 per annum contribution by Council towards the provision of office space for its management activities having regard to the less than satisfactory office facilities provided on site at the Swim Centre. In total the proposal is a $15,000 per annum cost to Council for 2 years however is a revenue positive response for Council being a $45,000 per annum improvement on the proposed $60,000 per annum recurrent cost to Council for the facility when the tender was accepted. With no abatement offered the net return to Council under the terms of the leases for the Swim Centre and the café could otherwise be expected to be $31,000 in 2005/2006, yet unsustainable for ALM. The proposal is a $46,000 per annum cost to Council for 2 years. In considering the request for rental abatement and/or any permanent change to the financial arrangements with ALM under the contract for the Swim Centre, it is important to give regard to the financial proposals submitted by other tenderers in the tender process that occurred in 2003. It should be noted that Council would not have been better off financially under the proposal of the other preferred tenderer, as it is estimated that a return would have not been made to Council until at least year 4. Should Council ever grant ALM in the future any reduction in the turnover rent thresholds or rates, as has been asked in the draft Management Plan, Council must be careful not to place ALM in a better position then that of the other preferred tenderer if it had been awarded the contract. The proposal now relates to ensuring a return to Council of $35,000 per annum for 2 years only, returning to as tendered after the 2 years, with an indication that Council may consider a review of the turnover thresholds and rates only at that time. ALM are required to submit a business plan that supports the proposed financial arrangements. ALM’s current request in the draft Management Plan to reduce the turnover rent rate from 15% to 5% is not acceptable. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services


CS/41 Procurement Policy MOSPLAN REF: 01.03.05 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Further amendment to the Procurement Policy. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends: That the Procurement Policy be amended, replacing the existing Clause 7.2.11 with the following: “Any two of the General Manager, Director Corporate Services, Manager Governance, Manager Finance (as alternate) or another officer authorised by the General Manager must be in attendance at the opening of tenders received at the time specified for the close of tenders. Members of the public in attendance for the opening of tenders must be permitted to view the opening and are entitled to ask and to be told whether a specific tender has been received and the number of tenders received. Immediately following the opening of tenders, either the General Manager, Director Corporate Services, Manager Governance, or Manager Finance (as alternate) must record the names of the tenderers and the amounts (if applicable and appropriate) that appear to have been tendered for the contract and prepare a tender list specifying, in apparent order of those amounts, the names of the tenderers. (The tender list does not show the amounts tendered.) The tender list must then be placed on public display on the noticeboard located in the Environment and Planning Department. The officer preparing the tender list may add to the list other information considered appropriate. The tender list shall remain on public display until the tender is determined by Council. Once each tender has been determined by Council, a notice specifying the name of the tenderer whose tender was accepted and the amount of the successful tender, will be placed on public display on the noticeboard located in the Environment and Planning Department or, if no tenders were accepted, a notice to that effect.”

REPORT Council at its meeting on 4 April 2005 considered a report recommending various amendments to the Procurement Policy. It was recommended that Clause 7.2.11 which relates to the opening of tenders, be amended to reflect the tendering regulation as follows:

“For each tender called by Council, a record of all tenderers will be placed on public display in Council’s Civic Centre. The list will be arranged in the order that tenders are opened. Where a tender requests a specific lump sum price with no options or schedule of rates, the specific price will be listed against each tenderer. The notice shall remain on public notice until the tender is determined by Council. A record of the names of the tenderers and the amounts that appear to have been tendered shall be prepared. This record is not placed on public display. A further record shall be prepared for public display specifying, in apparent order of the amounts that appear


to have been tendered, the names of the tenderers. The officer preparing the notice may add to the notice other information considered appropriate. The notice shall remain on public display until the tender is determined by Council. Where a tender specifies a price with a number of options or schedule of rates making it not practical to record in the order of the tendered price, a notice shall be arranged in the order that tenders are opened.

Once each tender has been determined by Council, a notice specifying the name of the tenderer whose tender was accepted and the amount of the successful tender, will be placed on public display in Council’s Civic Centre or, if no tenders were accepted, a notice to that effect.”

Council resolved inter alia that Clause 7.2.11 be amended as follows:- "A further list shall be prepared for public display…" Having regard to Council’s resolution on 4 April it is proposed that Clause 7.2.11 be further amended so that the protocol for the opening of tenders is clear, unambiguous and in adherence to the tender regulation. It is proposed that existing Clause 7.2.11 be replaced with the clause listed under the Officer’s Recommendation. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services


CS/42 Privacy Management Plan MOSPLAN REF: 01.03.01 REPORT BY: Manager Governance, Anthony Fitzpatrick SUMMARY Review of Council’s Privacy Management Plan. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Governance recommends: That the Privacy Management Plan as amended and circulated be adopted. REPORT The Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (PPIP Act) commenced on 1 July 2000 and required all statutory bodies to have in place by that time a Privacy Management Plan. Council at its meeting on 20 June 2000 delegated authority to the General Manager to implement a draft Privacy Management Plan and on 29 August 2000 Council adopted the Privacy Management Plan. In doing so Council reviewed its procedures regarding the collection and the provision of information to ensure compliance with the Act and the Privacy Code of Practice for Local Government, Local Government Act and Freedom of Information Act, but with the specific aim of continuing to provide ready access to Council files where appropriate, particularly in relation to development applications. Change to processes included the making of declarations and disclosures that all public submissions will be subject to public scrutiny. The Plan has operated without event since that time, with Council’s Open File Policy continuing to provide to residents free and unhindered access to information. Council has received no unresolved privacy complaints or requests to suppress or remove personal information from Council’s records. It is however appropriate to review the Plan at this time to clarify a number of matters. The Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002 (HRIP Act) commenced 1 July 2004 and creates a framework to protect the privacy of peoples’ health information in NSW. It applies to all organisations in NSW that provide a health service. It regulates how organisations collect, hold, use and disclose health information. Council collects health information as part of it children’s services and human resources activities. Up until the introduction of the HRIP Act, the PPIP Act protected the privacy of all personal information (including health information) collected or held by NSW public sector agencies. With the commencement of the HRIP Act, the PPIP Act no longer regulated health information, but continued to regulate all other personal information collected or held by NSW public sector agencies. Health information is now specifically protected by the HRIP Act. It is appropriate that Council’s Privacy Management Plan acknowledges the HRIP Act and the way health information is dealt with. On 4 March 2005 the Administrative Decisions Tribunal handed down its first decision under the PPIP Act involving a council (NV v Randwick City Council [2005] NSWADT 45). The


decision found disclosure of complaints letters by a council breached privacy requirements, in that Council in allowing access to complaint letters disclosed personal information relating to the complainant and the neighbours that the complaints concerned. Council’s procedures in relation to complaints are clear in that the identity of a complainant will not be disclosed. Objections to development applications for instance, do not constitute a complaint. Council staff are instructed not to disclose the identity of a complainant and to refrain from advising residents when investigating a complaint that the investigation has arisen from a complaint. In relation to the latter, whilst it may be obvious to a resident that a complaint has been made, Council should avoid doing anything that would allow the resident to be able to surmise who the complainant was. The Plan has been amended to clarify Council’s responsibilities in this area. The Plan has also been amended to clarify the need for consent to access information about the personal affairs of a person that is contained in a document obtained under Section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act. Further the Plan now specifies Council’s requirements in relation to the inspection of internal layout plans submitted with development and other applications by the public. The Privacy Management Plan has been amended as indicated above and a copy tracking the amendments is attached to the business papers. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Minute Book Attachments • Amended Privacy Management Plan as at May 2005


CS/43 Protected Disclosure Act 1994 - Internal Reporting System MOSPLAN REF: 01.02.07 REPORT BY: Director Corporate Services, Max Glyde SUMMARY To review the Internal Reporting System for handling disclosures made under the Protected Disclosures Act 1994 (Whistleblowers). OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Corporate Services recommends: That the draft Internal Reporting System as required under the Protected Disclosures Act 1994 as amended by the strikeout and underlining as attached to the agenda be adopted. REPORT Council on 17 September, 1996 adopted the model internal reporting policy as published by the Ombudsman’s Office as its Protected Disclosures Act 1994 – Internal Reporting System. Since that time the Ombudsman’s Office have published some minor amendments to its draft which includes definitions and more explanations which are now recommended to be incorporated into Council’s policy. These amendments are shown in the attached draft document with deletions shown in strikeout and additions underlined. Recommendation endorsed by General Manager COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • Draft Mosman Council Protected Disclosure Act 1994 – Internal Reporting System • Department of Local Government Brochure – Thinking about blowing the whistle


CS/44 Balmoral Skatepark MOSPLAN REF: 10.03.14 REPORT BY: Director Corporate Services, Max Glyde SUMMARY To list for consideration of Council, Questions without Notice in relation to Balmoral Skatepark facility. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Corporate Services recommends: That the advices be received. REPORT At the Ordinary Council meeting held on 4th April 2005 the following Questions without Notice were asked by Councillors Wilton and Elsegood respectively:

“Is the skate ramp built to the plan which was passed by Councillors in December 2003? What changes if any were made? Has the surface been treated for noise attenuation? What can be done to make the "bowl" safer? Could a graphic sign show people at ground level that there is a bowl with a 2 metre drop above them? What plan of management is there to remove graffiti and rubbish regularly?”

“In relation to the skateboard facility on Balmoral Oval, could Councillors be advised of the following: a. Could Balmoral Oval and Reserve be an alcohol free zone. b. Could a report be brought to Council on the facility and its associated

problems and possible solutions? c. Was the design changed or altered when the facility was relocated to its

present location? d. Were noise attenuation considerations taken into account with the design and

construction? e. Is Council leaving the difficulties of late night usage and noise up to the

residents to deal with? f. Does Council have in place a plan in case of an accident and is there easy

access for an ambulance? g. If a small child or dog fall into the "bowl" as occurred last week when an

Labrador was trapped, will this be the responsibility of bordering residents?” Attached to Councillors’ business papers is a letter received from Mr and Mrs Corbett of Kahibah Road outlining concerns with the new Skatepark facility and Council’s reply addressing Mr Corbett’s issues which also addresses the majority of issues raised in the above questions. In relation to the construction of the skate park there were several minor changes made to the design during the construction phase due to safety and skateability reasons identified by the contractor and sub-contractor however the overall size, depth and location of the bowl was not changed.


A copy of the signage erected at the skate park detailing the warnings and prohibitions follows.

Recommendation endorsed by General Manager. COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • Letter from Mr and Mrs Corbett re Balmoral Skatepark • Council reply to Mr and Mrs Corbett


CS/45 Provision of Dinghy Racks at Inkerman Street Wharf MOSPLAN REF: 10.04.01 REPORT BY: Manager Property & Assets, Gordon Brown SUMMARY To report on the proposal to construct a dinghy storage facility in the unformed section of Inkerman Street adjacent to the Inkerman Street Wharf, Quakers Hat Bay. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Property and Assets recommends: A. That the advices be received. B. The actions in submitting the application for funding under the Maritime NSW

“Sharing Sydney Harbour Access Programme” be endorsed. C. The General Manager be authorised to accept a tender and undertake the

construction of a dinghy storage facility containing 10 racks at the Inkerman Street wharf site, Quakers Hat Bay subject to the cost not exceeding $20,000.

D. A further report be submitted to Council on funding the works upon ascertaining the success of the application for funding assistance.

REPORT Background A report was submitted to the Policy & Finance Committee on 3 February 2004 regarding the provision of dinghy racks at the Inkerman Street Wharf at Quakers Hat Bay where it was resolved as follows:

“That the Officer’s Recommendation be adopted and an inspection of the Inkerman Street Wharf site be undertaken by the Committee with the view to providing a small facility to be used by neighbouring residents.”

Report The provision of dinghy racks in the Quakers Hat Bay area has been under consideration by Council for many years. A facility making provision for 40 dinghies located at Quakers Hat Bay off Bay Street was completed in 2005 to service the area. Demand has meant all spaces have now been taken up however, with Joel’s Boatshed to be closed due to the redevelopment of this site there still remains a large number of dinghies at the base of the Inkerman Street steps adjacent to the wharf. These dinghies are cluttering the area behind the seawall and there are public safety concerns regarding their existence in the present state. Photographs of the site follow showing the dinghies and their means of storage.


Council is currently preparing contract documents for a major rehabilitation of the wharf and seawall at this location within this financial year 2004/05. This scheme affords an opportunity for Council to minimize disruption in the area as well as minimizing costs by combining the wharf work and the provision of racks into one contract. A preliminary design has been prepared for the racks, together with cost estimates which show they would almost double in price from $15,000 to $30,000 if they are completed in isolation of the wharf works due to the difficulties in accessing the site as a whole. It is proposed that a contract would be let in June 2005 with a completion in August 2005. Enquiries have been made with Maritime NSW with regard to funding assistance for the dinghy racks and it is likely that the works will meet the criteria for a 50% grant from the 2005/06 “Sharing Sydney Harbour Access Programme”. Application for this grant closes Friday 29 April 2005 with results being advised mid to late June 2005. In view of this an application has been submitted. If this application is successful this will mean a cost to Council of between $7,500 and $10,000. Finally, the storage facility would operate on the same basis such as those at Mosman Bay, Quakers Hat Bay and Pearl Bay, where licences are issued for the use of a rack upon payment of an annual fee. As there is no Council funding specifically for this work consideration could be given for an up-front licence fee for say a two to three year period to cover Council’s commitment. Recommendation endorsed by Director Corporate Services.


CS/46 Purchase of Parking Meters MOSPLAN REF: Program 11 REPORT BY: Manager Ranger Services, Colin DeCosta SUMMARY To recommend a preferred tenderer for the purchase of new foreshore reserve parking meters OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Ranger Services recommends that the advices be received. REPORT At its meeting on 25 August 1992 Council resolved to implement pay and display parking scheme in its foreshore reserves and Council has installed nine parking meters at six foreshore reserves since 1992. The parking meters are located at: South Balmoral car park 2 meters Clifton Gardens car park 2 meters Rosherville Reserve car park 1 meter Spit West car park 2 meters Spit East car park 1 meter Ellery Park car park 1 meter Through normal operation and usage the parking meters have now reached an age where their replacement is required. There have been on going breakdowns and the availability of spare parts is becoming an issue. New technologies in meters are now available which allow the use of credit cards and mobile phones for payment options. These alternative payment options are vital as the current parking rates, and the locations of the machines, make it difficult to obtain sufficient coins to purchase a ticket. Council recently participated in a joint tender for the supply, installation and maintenance of parking meters and the collection of cash with Pittwater Council and Warringah Council. The tender was coordinated and overseen by Pittwater Council however all three Councils had significant input into the tender specification document and the analysis of tenders. Four tender submissions were received for the supply, installation and maintenance of parking meters. No submissions were received for the collection of cash. The Director Corporate Services and the Manager Ranger Services represented Council on the joint Council tender assessment panel. The panel rated the tender submissions using a criteria of price, quality, maintenance and usability. Further analysis is still being undertaken by Council staff and a further report will be submitted to Council prior to the meeting.


12. ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORTS

EP/110 Bushfire Hazard Reduction Program MOSPLAN REF: 05.04.12 REPORT BY: Bushland Officer, Steven Smith SUMMARY Report on Council’s current fire management approach within Bushland Reserves. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Assets and Services recommends: That the report be received and noted. REPORT Council at the meeting on 8 July 2003 (Item NE/18) considered a report on Council’s bushfire hazard reduction program and resolved inter alia to hold a workshop on the matter for all Councillors. The workshop was originally proposed for 16 September 2003 but had to be postponed due to the unavailability of some Councillors. It was then proposed to be held in conjunction with the Wyargine Reserve community workshop evening in February 2004 but again deferred due to the nature of the matter under discussion that evening and the time that it would take to deal with the issues. It was then decided that the workshop be further deferred until Council’s annual hazard reduction program was provided to the Manly Mosman District Bushfire Management Committee (MMDBMC) so that Council’s plan could be discussed and explained in detail. The workshop was then postponed due to the 2004 Council elections and has not been revisited since. Bushland within Mosman is largely made up of Sydney Sandstone Gully Forest (SSGF). This vegetation generally requires a burn every 10-12 years to maintain a high level of biodiversity. Conversely, burning more frequently than this could seriously and irreversibly cause a decline in biodiversity. Mosman’s bushland has suffered from very long inter-fire periods and has, in many areas, undergone a mesic shift (a move towards a more closed monoculture canopy forest) away from fire-dependent species toward less fire-tolerant species resulting in a greatly reduced level of biodiversity. Many native plant species found in Mosman rely on fire to germinate their seeds. Undoubtedly there is remnant native seed lying dormant in the soil in all bushland reserves in Mosman waiting for fire to start the germination process. The distinct lack of fire in bushland reserves in the urban areas of Mosman contributes to the mesic shift described above. Fire usage is also important as Council has statutory responsibilities in relation to fire hazard reduction in bushland areas under its control. A program of hazard reduction burns is annually prepared and submitted to the MMDBMC of which Councillor Reid is Chairman and Council’s Bushland Officer a member. Once the Committee is satisfied with each Land Manager’s proposed burns for the year the list is then sent


to the Department of Environment and Conservation (former EPA) and if approved, all burns are then completed throughout the year when weather conditions are suitable. Mosman Council’s program is assembled on the basis of inspections undertaken with the NSW Fire Brigade and on weed removal locations where weed debris is piled for bush regeneration purposes and to reduce the fire hazard in those areas. This program has been extremely effective in the last couple of years with fire hazard reduction and ecological burns regularly and successfully carried out in bushland areas. Results have not only reduced the fire hazard in selected areas but fire has increased native plant species numbers in all bushland areas exposed to fire and in some cases has increased the actual biodiversity of plants in the bushland. An example of this is Curraghbeena Reserve where after a small ecological burn, Blood Root, a native plant not previously recorded at this site, has appeared in good numbers. When a burn is to be carried out in a reserve the NSW Fire Brigade and Council inform residents by letter and by door knocking on the day of the fire. This has resulted in no formal complaints being received from residents regarding fire usage in Mosman. In view of the difficulties in attempting to secure a workshop date at the time and the success of Council’s fire hazard reduction program in the interim it is not proposed to hold the workshop. Mosman Council’s fire management program has been extremely effective in the last couple of years with fire hazard reduction and ecological burns regularly and successfully carried out in Mosman bushland areas. Results have not only reduced the fire hazard in selected areas but fire has increased native plant species numbers in all bushland areas exposed to fire and in some cases has increased the actual biodiversity of plants in the bushland.


EP/111 Reginald Street Proposed Playground Improvements and Traffic Safety Improvements

MOSPLAN REF: 11.04.01, 10.02.02 REPORT BY: Manager Assets and Services, Scott Turner SUMMARY Report on options to fund playground and traffic safety improvements in Reginald Street following Council’s consideration of the draft budget for 2005/2006. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Assets and Services recommends that: A. The report be received and noted. B. The original allocation of $45,000 for upgrade of the playground at Reginald Street

Park in the draft 2005/2006 budget estimates stand. C. The funding of $13,000 in the draft 2005/2006 budget estimates originally allocated

to provision of street lighting at the pedestrian crossing at Hunter Park be transferred to traffic safety improvements in Reginald and Brierley Streets.

D. Following review of the need for median islands in Brierley Street and the outcome of Council’s grant application to the RTA, any additional funds required for the traffic safety work in Reginald and Brierley Streets be dealt with as part of Council’s quarterly budget review process.

REPORT Council at the meeting on 11 April 2005 in considering the draft budget resolved inter alia that in relation to the allocation of $45K in the Budget for the Reginald St playground, work not proceed until Council in consultation with the local community has identified priorities in relation to this matter and possible traffic safety initiatives. The proposed upgrade of the playground at Reginald Street Park was originally proposed to be undertaken in the 2002/2003 financial year and funds were provided accordingly. Community consultation on the proposal for improvements to the playground and those proposed at Bay Street and Reid Park was undertaken in the latter part of 2003 and early 2004 with a report on outcomes presented to the Council meeting of 3 May 2004 (Item EP/4). Council resolved inter alia not to proceed with the proposal for Reginald Street and to undertake further community consultation due to the level of concern expressed by the community with the proposal. In considering the 2004/2005 budget estimates, Council determined not to revote the funds for the Reginald Street playground due to the unlikelihood of the necessary consultation being able to take place in time for construction to commence in the financial year, considering Council’s financial position at the time and on the understanding that the necessary funds would be provided in the 2005/2006 budget. Accordingly staff provided $45,000 in the draft estimates for 2005/2006. Proposals for traffic safety improvements in the Reginald Street and Brierley Street area have been considered by Council on numerous occasions over a long period of time. At the meeting on 14 May 2002 Council resolved that:


A. The Officer’s Recommendation be adopted subject to the median islands not being installed in Brierley Street and if causing a traffic problem within the first six months then the median islands be installed.

B. Cartref Lane be investigated for relocation of islands. C. The money be found urgently in the 2002-2003 budget for works to be

undertaken. The Officer’s Recommendation was that the traffic calming Option B for Oswald, Brierley and Reginald Streets, shown in plan TR 588B, be listed on Council’s works programme. Since that time funding has not been provided in Council’s annual budgets or any of the quarterly budget reviews undertaken and as such the work is yet to be completed. In addition the review of median island locations in Brierley Street has not been undertaken. The cost to construct the entire scheme would be approximately $40,000 and this includes the median islands in Brierley Street that are yet to be reviewed. An application has also been made to the RTA for a grant of $20,000 towards the cost of the project. Assuming the application is successful, Council must provide $20,000 of its own funds towards the cost of the works. Whilst it is understood that some residents of the area may perceive that traffic safety issues should take priority over reconstruction of the children’s playground, Council had previously indicated its intention to provide funding for the playground in the 2005/2006 financial year. Council has generated an expectation in the community that the playground upgrade will go ahead in 2005/2006 and it is considered that to not provide the funding would be unfair to the considerable number of residents that have shown an interest in this matter and taken Council’s past undertakings in good faith. Staff are already fielding enquiries from interested residents keen to know timelines and progress of the further consultation to be undertaken. In addition it must be noted that the equipment in the Reginald Street playground is constructed of CCA treated timber, and therefore should be removed as soon as possible. If Council were to redirect the funds currently allocated to the playground works, the old CCA treated timber equipment would still have to be removed and local residents would be left without any play equipment, perhaps for some considerable time. It is therefore considered inappropriate to use the funding allocated to the playground upgrade for traffic related works. Staff have therefore been examining possibilities to provide the funding for the traffic safety improvements from other sources. Council has allocated $13,000 in the draft budget for the provision of lighting at the new pedestrian crossing in The Esplanade at Hunter Park. The design and costing for this work has recently been received from Energy Australia and it appears that Council will not actually have to pay a capital cost for these works. As such these funds are savings and available to be re-allocated. It is recommended that they be allocated to the traffic calming works in Reginald and Brierley Street. A review is still to be undertaken of the proposed medians in Brierley Street and pending that review, additional funds may be required. The outcome of Council’s application to the RTA will also have an impact on how much funding Council must find. Whilst the $13,000 may ultimately not be enough to undertake all of the works identified in the plan, it is certainly enough to commence the approved works in Reginald Street. If any additional funds were required, pending resolution of the aforementioned matters, they could be provided in the appropriate quarterly budget review. Recommendation endorsed by Director Environment and Planning


EP/112 The Esplanade Street Lighting MOSPLAN REF: 11.03.04 REPORT BY: Manager Assets and Services, Scott Turner SUMMARY Report on alternative proposal for lighting of pedestrian crossing at the corner of The Esplanade and Raglan Street. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Assets and Services recommends: That Council proceed to light the pedestrian crossing in The Esplanade at the corner of Raglan Street in accordance with plan no. CCC011613 as prepared by Energy Australia as an interim measure and explore further options to provide the necessary lighting in accordance with the Australian Standard in view of: A. The expense involved in lighting the new pedestrian crossing to the requirements of

the relevant Australian Standard in accordance with the design prepared by Energy Australia.

B. The location of the required poles which would interfere with proposed outdoor dining

in The Esplanade and detract from the amenity of the area as well as impede views for residents.

C. The additional poles would be located very close to existing poles. D. The level of lighting proposed by the alternate plan from Energy Australia represents

a significant improvement over the existing lighting at this location and is considered suitable as an interim measure.

E. A further report be prepared on alternatives once investigations are complete. REPORT Council completed the last stage of the environmental adaptation of The Esplanade in late 2003. Part of this final stage of works included a reconfiguration of the intersection of The Esplanade and Raglan Street. This included installation of a new pedestrian crossing in The Esplanade, changing the priority for traffic flow, construction of kerb build-outs and reconfiguration of parking in the area. Given that a new pedestrian crossing was installed, it has to be lit. Council therefore requested Energy Australia to prepare a design to light the new crossing, and the existing crossing across Raglan Street to the requirements of Australian Standard 1158 – Road Lighting, which is the relevant standard for such installations. At the time Council was also attempting to facilitate the undergrounding of the power lines in The Esplanade between Raglan Street and Botanic Road. This proposal did not proceed and Energy Australia therefore prepared a design based on the installation of three additional poles at the intersection. Two of the additional poles were located very near to existing poles


and were required to ensure compliance with the standard. These two poles are in the Esplanade, one outside the Balmoral Lifesaver Café and the second on the opposite side of The Esplanade, just north of the new crossing. They are shown as poles C and D on the first plan no. CCC010773 attached to Councillors business papers. The third new pole is shown as pole B and the plan and was to be located on the apex of the corner outside the Bottom of the Harbour Fish Shop. The cost of this proposal was a capital cost of $47,300, design fee of $500 and an increase in the annual street lighting tariff of $705.72. All costs include the GST. Council accepted the costing and had budgeted for the expenditure in the allocation for the project. Subsequent to this Council has been waiting for the lights to be installed and to date no work has commenced. In addition, Council has since considered proposals for outdoor dining in The Esplanade on the kerb build outs that have been constructed. A project involving installation of shade sails/umbrellas, and fencing and pavement markers to define the outdoor dining areas has been approved by Council. During the course of consultation on this matter the owner of the adjacent building, Mr Brian Ahearne became aware of the accepted street lighting design. Pole C as shown on the plan is effectively in the middle of the proposed outdoor dining are closest to the intersection with Raglan Street. Mr Ahearne also raised concerns about the effects on views to the beach from the units on the first floor of the building. A copy of his letter to Council is attached to Councillors’ business papers. Subsequently Council staff have been liaising with Energy Australia to determine if there is an alternative to the agreed proposal for street lighting. A revised proposal has been received and is also attached to Councillors’ business papers as plan number CCC011613. This proposal does not involve the installation of any new poles but simply the installation of more powerful lights on the existing poles. It does not meet the requirements of AS 1158 for either pedestrian crossing. The cost of this proposal would be an increase in the annual street lighting tariff of $376.86 and a design fee of $330. No capital charges would apply as the lights are to be installed on existing poles. The matter for Council now is to determine whether to proceed with the design that meets the Australian Standard, or the revised design that does not. In regard to the existing crossing across Raglan Street, Council does not have an obligation to light this to the requirements of the Australian Standard as it has existed for a long time, and pre-dates the standard. There are many old pedestrian crossings across Sydney that do not meet the requirements of the Standard. However, the new crossing should be lit to the requirements of the standard as it is a new facility. This would require two additional poles as outlined earlier in the report. Whilst a costing has not been provided by Energy Australia for this option only, it would be in the order of $33,000 based on a pro-rata rate for the three new poles. Given these issues and the expense of lighting the area to the requirements of the Australian Standard in accordance with the design prepared by Energy Australia, it is proposed to seek alternate designs from private lighting consultants. Through its involvement in the Street Lighting Improvement Program, Council has access to considerable expertise in this area and there may be other ways to light the area to the requirements of the standard. In the interim whilst investigations are under way it is proposed to proceed with the revised proposal from Energy Australia as it will provide improved lighting for the pedestrian crossing. Given Council’s current budget position, the funding of $45,000 allocated for this work has been re-allocated as part of the quarterly budget review. In the event that additional funding is required as a result of the investigations, it can be dealt with as part of the relevant future quarterly budget review. Recommendation endorsed by Director Environment and Planning


COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • Original Proposal by Energy Australia Plan no. CCC010773 • Correspondence from Brian Ahearne • Revised proposal by Energy Australia Plan no. CCC011613


EP/113 Land & Environment Court - Costs MOSPLAN REF: 04.02 REPORT BY: Director Environment & Planning SUMMARY Response to Question Without Notice about legal costs. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Environment & Planning recommends that the existing practice of reporting progress costs on Land and Environment Court cases on a monthly basis be continued. REPORT At the meeting on 13 December 2004 Councillor Lopez asked the following Question Without Notice: "Could Council please be given a breakdown on all Land and Environment Court appeals where the court exceeds $20,000?" Council, by resolution, requires that details of appeals before the Land & Environment Court to be provided on a monthly basis. These reports contain details of the address, the proposal, staff, council and court decisions and the costs to date. Practice had been to list all appeals for which funds are expended in a given financial year. More recently Council has requested that the report also refer to appeals for which no expenditure has been made. While it may be a generalisation most, if not all, appeals where the costs exceed $20000 are those where Council has overturned a staff recommendation and external consultants have been engaged in defending the appeal. These cases are well known to Council. Regular reports are provided to Council on the outcomes of appeals where they have proceeded to hearing. Should Council have concern about the expenditure on a particular case this provides the opportunity for closer review. It is worth noting that in an effort to reduce costs the opportunity has been taken in a number of recent cases to settle matters where both Council's experts and court appointed experts recommend accordingly. This is reflected in the reports with more cases being discontinued or determined by consent orders. The number of contested hearings is hence lower as are overall costs. Recommendation endorsed by General Manager


EP/114 Spit Bridge - Manly Council's Response to Development Application

MOSPLAN REF: 04.02 REPORT BY: Director Environment & Planning SUMMARY Update on decisions by Manly Council in response to development applications for widening of Spit Bridge and related transport issues. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Environment & Planning recommends Council write to Manly Council seeking clarification on points C - F of its resolution of 7 March 2005 adopting draft conditions for the development application for widening of Spit Bridge and, in particular, the apparent departures in these points from the content of the SHOROC Regional Transport Policy and the SHOROC Integrated Transport Plan - Draft Action Plan. REPORT Background Councillors will recall that following consideration of development applications lodged with Mosman and Manly Councils in 2003 both councils resolved to request the Minister for Infrastructure Planning & Natural Resources to have the applications withdrawn. The matter was the subject of a formal mediation meeting convened by a Commissioner of Inquiry for Environment & Planning which was unsuccessful. In August 2004 both councils were directed by the Department of Infrastructure Planning & Natural Resources (DIPNR) to submit draft conditions of approval for consideration by the Minister in determining the development applications. On 21 September 2004 Council considered the DIPNR directive and resolved to submit draft conditions for consideration. This was done and subsequently on 4 April 2005 requested revisions by the applicant (RTA) were considered by Council. The August 2004 letter also included an invitation for DIPNR "...to discuss with Council a strategic context for the decision, including opportunities for broader transport package and implications." This led to a meeting convened by DIPNR and attended by staff representatives of SHOROC and NSROC councils, State transport agencies, the SHOROC Chairman, Councillor Macdonald and at the Chairman's invitation, Councillor Reid (Chairman of the SHOROC Transport Committee). This meeting discussed a range of issues related to peninsula transport as well as traffic improvements at various locations. The substance of the submissions was compiled as the SHOROC Integrated Transport Plan - Draft Action Plan for consideration and response by the State agencies. An agency response was to be made to SHOROC via DIPNR before Christmas 2004 but, to date, no formal response has been received. During this period Manly Council had not submitted draft conditions. On 7 March 2005 Manly Council considered the matter and resolved to submit certain draft conditions for the Minister's consideration (see copy attached to Councillors' Business Papers). In addition to the draft conditions Manly's resolution also stated, inter alia, that:


"C. Council seek from the Minister for Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources a

written agreement in the form of a MOU to work with SHOROC Councils to progress an integrated package of additional measures to improve both road and water-based public transport and traffic flows on the Northern Beaches.

D. The integrated transport package commit to investment in improved ferry and bus

services, rather than the high levels of expenditure necessary to progress a road tunnel as an additional Middle Harbour crossing.

E. The Warren Centre Report that has been provided to Councillors and the proposals recommended in that document be forwarded to the Minister. F. The matter of the weekend clearway on the eastern side of Spit Road between Spit

Bridge and Spit Junction be expedited." Implications for Council 1. The draft conditions prepared for Manly Council and submitted are generally similar

to those sought by Council and in that regard are considered appropriate. 2. The additional recommendations attached to the draft conditions of consent may be

of greater concern as they are, in part, at odds with the SHOROC Regional Transport Policy (adopted 14 May 2002) and Council's adopted approach to aspects of traffic and transport management in Mosman and the area generally.

It is not clear on what basis the parts of the motion quoted above were arrived at as they did not appear to be part of the officer's report submitted to the Council's Committee meeting. The minutes on Manly Council's website show the motion to have been put and following an equality of voting carried on the casting vote of the Chair, Councillor Lambert. As regards the content of the respective parts of the resolution the following comments are made: Resolution C The SHOROC Integrated Transport Plan - Draft Action Plan (the Draft Action Plan) was annexed to the report considered by Manly Council. This document states that the development of a partnership agreement with SHOROC is a means for the State Government to show commitment to addressing the broader transport needs of the region and achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness in our transport system. The Manly resolution seems not to be fully inclusive of this intent as it seems to focus any integrated package on improving road and water based public transport and traffic flows on the Northern Beaches. It is not clear whether this is at the expense of amenity and traffic flows in Mosman. Resolution D The Vision for the SHOROC Regional Transport Policy is for "The provision for the SHOROC region of a high standard, convenient, demand managed, public transport system, in conjunction with a well connected road network which incorporates an additional crossing of Middle Harbour, and which is not reliant on significant population increases in the SHOROC region." While the SHOROC Regional Transport Policy recognises the benefits of "Making Buses Better" it has been recognised throughout that this is but one element of the transport system and provision also needs to be made for the use of private motor vehicles. The Draft Action Plan identifies an additional Middle Harbour Crossing as a suggested long term solution for public and private transport use.


Resolution E At the time of drafting this report it is not clear which Warren Centre documents were referred to Manly councillors and, in turn, to the RTA and DIPNR. Resolution F Section 2.3 of the SHOROC Regional Transport Policy states: "There needs to be greater priority for buses on our road system. SHOROC will work closely with the bus operators and the RTA on implementation of transit lanes, T3/T2 lanes, bus bays, bus lanes and 'B' signals for bus priority travel. Further opportunities to implement clearways and T2/T3s to increase bus priority during peak hours will be investigated." The Draft Action Plan repeats this by referring to "Greater priority for buses on our road system during peak hours..." On 18 April 2005 Councillor Reid asked a Question Without Notice: "MOSPLAN confirms that we oppose extension of clearways/busways through Mosman. How does this reconcile with the much vaunted SHOROC integrated transport program where a major part of this program calls for quality bus corridors through Mosman." The Draft MOSPLAN at Program 11.01 contains a Statement of Means to "Vigorously oppose any increase in clearway hours ...and oppose dedicated bus only lanes along main road corridors". While it is true that the SHOROC Regional Transport Policy and Draft Action Plan call for improvements in bus services it is clearly the case with both documents that such improvements do not envisage extension of peak hour clearways through Mosman to facilitate busways. MOSPLAN and the SHOROC transport documents are consistent in this respect. It is of concern, however, that Manly Council is lobbying contrary to both SHOROC documents for the weekend clearway on the eastern side of Spit Road. Council previously has lobbied the RTA opposing such extension of clearway conditions. CONCLUSION The recent resolution of Manly Council raises issues regarding the consistency of its positions on a third Middle Harbour Crossing, the extension of clearways to non-peak hour periods and proposed MOU with SHOROC Regional Transport Plan it endorsed on 22 July 2002. It is suggested that Council write to Manly Council requesting clarification on these departures from the adopted SHOROC position. Recommendation endorsed by General Manager COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • SHOROC Regional Transport Policy 2002 • Manly Council consent conditions letter • SHOROC Integrated Transport Plan - Draft Action Plan


EP/115 Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads and Glover Street - Proposed Heritage Conservation Area

MOSPLAN REF: 03.04.02 REPORT BY: Strategic Planner, Maxine Bayley SUMMARY Report into Consultant’s findings of proposed Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) at Belmont, Cowles, Cabramatta and Bardwell Roads and results of the Community Information Evening held for residents regarding the proposed HCA. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Planning and Transport recommends that: A. The report be received and noted. B. As part of the review of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Council resolve to

include Belmont, Cowles, Cabramatta, Bardwell Roads and Glover Street as a Heritage Conservation Area as identified in the Conservation Area Study.

C. Desired Future character objectives and necessary planning controls be developed

for inclusion in the RDCP Review. D. The HCA be named the Glover and Nathan’s Estates Conservation Area. E. The group of early Federation Italianate style dwellings at 107-123 Belmont Road be

investigated for listing as a Heritage Item Group subject to the allocation of funding. F. Affected residents who made a submission be notified of Council’s resolution. REPORT Background Initiation of investigations into the heritage significance of Glover Street and surrounding streets began in 2002. Investigations included community consultation, a heritage assessment report by consultants and consideration of reports to Council. Council resolved in May 2004 to amend Mosman LEP 1998 to include Glover Street as a HCA. Preliminary investigations by the consultants into surrounding streets recommended further examination of Belmont Road (between Cowles and Military Roads) and Cabramatta Road as having potential heritage significance. A questionnaire was distributed to residents regarding the proposed HCA. The responses indicated approximately half of all respondents supported the proposal, whilst the remaining half were against the proposal. A Community Information Evening for Belmont, Cabramatta and Cowles Road residents was held on 10 March 2004. In May 2004 Council resolved to proceed with the heritage assessment of Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads. Council further resolved to amend the Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 to list Glover Street as a Heritage Conservation Area.


Consultants were engaged by Council in August 2004 to undertake the heritage assessment of Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads. The assessment was completed in January 2005. A Community Information Evening to discuss the findings was held in March 2005. Consultant’s Report The consultant’s report includes an investigation into the history of the study area and an analysis of the built environment. Each building was assessed and ranked according to its level of intactness and its contribution to the significance of the area. The report is available for viewing on Council’s website. A summary statement of significance was developed for the study area:

‘The study area, consisting of Cabramatta Road and sections of Belmont, Cowles and Bardwell Roads along with Glover Street form a precinct that is significant as a relatively intact and representative example of the late 19th and early 20th century phase of development in the Mosman area. This phase of development was the major period of residential growth in the local area as consolidated estates were subdivided and sold to speculative developers. The area is characteristically Federation period residential development demonstrating cohesive patterns of form, scale and materials due to its almost comprehensive development during the Federation period. The area demonstrates a good diversity of building types and styles as development ranged from the Italianate Cottages of the early 1890s in Belmont Road to the Californian Bungalows of the 1920s in Cabramatta Road. The significance of the streetscape has been diminished slightly due to the intrusive, yet reversible, introduction of high walls and the painting of original face brick. However, the study area has been considerably less affected by these intrusive elements than other areas of a similar character and period in the Mosman area.’

The report makes the following recommendations:

- That the recommendations from the Glover Street Conservation Area Study be upheld;

- The study area demonstrates the same qualities, characteristics and significant values as Glover Street and is therefore considered to be worthy of inclusion in a Conservation Area. It is recommended that the study area be listed as a Heritage Conservation Area which incorporates Glover Street in the Mosman LEP 1998;

- Should these areas be listed in the LEP it is recommended that ‘Desired Future Character Objectives’ and the necessary planning controls be developed to conserve the significant character of the area;

- Should it be listed the Conservation Area ought to be named the Glover and Nathan’s Estates Conservation Area after the names of the original estates;

- That the area is not amalgamated with the Holt Estate Conservation Area. The area should be independent and defined by the original estate subdivisions;

- That the boundary for the Conservation Area be according to the Conservation Area Ranking Map in Section 5.2 of the consultant’s report;

- That the group of early Federation Italianate style dwellings at 107-123 Belmont Road are investigated for listing as a Heritage Item Group at a time appropriate for Council.


COMMUNITY CONSULTATION Community Information Evening A second Community Information Evening for residents of Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads was held on 3 March 2005. All residents in this area were invited to attend and advice about the meeting was placed in the Mosman Daily, in the ‘What’s on’ section contained in the Mosman 2088 magazine and on Council’s website. Prior to the Community Information Evening a copy of the consultant’s report was placed on Council’s website for viewing. The purpose of the evening was to discuss the findings of the consultant’s report and to provide residents the opportunity to ask questions regarding the possible listing of the streets. Information packages regarding HCAs and heritage in Mosman were distributed at the meeting. The consultant’s report was made available on CD to any residents who requested a copy. In attendance were Councillor Connon, Councillor Wilton, Council staff, Robert Staas (Council’s Heritage Advisor), consultant Ben Peachy and approximately 30 residents. The evening proceeded in two parts:

1. Presentation by Ben Peachy discussing the findings of the report; and 2. Time for residents to ask questions of Council’s Heritage Advisor and the

consultant. The consultant’s presentation provided a synopsis of the background to the heritage study of Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads and discussed the recommendations of the report. The ranking system used for each individual property was detailed, as were planning issues associated with the proposed HCA. Issues discussed included suitable alterations and additions, appropriate fencing, painting and infill development. Residents were then able to address questions to Ben Peachy and Robert Staas. Issues raised included individual property rankings in the consultant’s report, development potential of properties located in HCAs, additional costs of development for properties in HCAs and the impact of already modified properties on the streetscapes. Residents indicated they would like to provide additional feedback to Council. It was decided that a questionnaire would be distributed to all residents, accompanied by additional information regarding heritage in Mosman and Heritage Conservation Areas. Questionnaire Following the Community Information Evening, a covering letter, questionnaire and a colour copy of the Conservation Area Ranking Map were distributed to all residents. A copy of the questionnaire and colour map are attached to the report. To assist residents to understand more about HCAs information regarding heritage and HCAs was placed on Council’s website. Residents were also able to request a hard copy of the documents through Council. The interest in the information provided on the website and responses to questionnaire indicate residents are well informed of HCAs. During March, 2301 hits were recorded on the Heritage section of Council’s website. This number shows a high level of interest in the proposal, as well as heritage in Mosman. This is also indicated by the high proportion of respondents who indicated awareness of the study. Information on Council’s website includes;

- Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads, Mosman Conservation Area Study


- Belmont, Cabramatta, Cowles and Bardwell Roads Conservation Area

Ranking Map - Extract from Mosman Residential Development Control Plan - Extract from Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 - Extract from Mosman Heritage Review Main Report 1996

A total of fifty nine (59) questionnaires were completed and returned to Council. This represents a return rate of 24%. Of these thirty one (31) supported the proposal, twenty five (25) did not support the proposal and three (3) did not indicate whether they supported the proposal or not. The distribution of responses were as follows:

Road For Against Undecided Total Belmont 7 11 2 20 Cabramatta 19 10 1 30 Bardwell 1 1 Cowles 5 3 8 Total 31 (53%) 25 (42%) 3 (5%) 59

Reasons given by those residents in favour of the proposal included: - Preserving existing character of the street - Preservation of old buildings - Halt inappropriate development - Gradually rectify unsightly new additions - Increased property value Reasons given by those residents against the proposal included: - Too much Council control - Guidelines are currently sufficient to preserve character and streetscape - Reduced possibility of off street parking - Listing appropriate for some properties only - Decreased land value - Proposal too late to retain streetscape character as many properties have already been

modified Fifty eight (58) out of fifty nine (59) respondents indicated they were aware of the heritage assessment being conducted. One (1) respondent did not supply an answer to that question. This response indicates that Council has been successful in raising awareness of the heritage assessment amongst affected residents. A summary of submissions received is attached to Councillor’s Business Papers. Conclusion As Council is aware it is proposed to carry out a comprehensive review of Mosman LEP 1998 this year. In order to best allocate resources and be consistent with Council’s resolution on 18 April 2005 regarding amendments to the LEP it is considered that any proposed amendments to include a new HCA be carried out as part of the comprehensive review. Advice recently received from the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources states that LEP amendments will not be processed during the transition period to the introduction of new standardised LEPs. It is therefore appropriate that the amendment be incorporated with the comprehensive review. The results of the community consultation


indicate support for a HCA. It is considered that the recommendations of the consultant’s report be endorsed by Council. Recommendation endorsed by Director Environment and Planning COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • Resident questionnaire regarding proposed HCA • Summary of questionnaire responses • Study Area Ranking Map • Advice from DIPNR regarding LEP amendments


EP/116 Domestic Waste Management - Waste and Recycling Services Contract 2002-2010

MOSPLAN REF: 06.02.04 REPORT BY: Senior Waste Officer, Ziggy Shlemon SUMMARY Claim by United Resource Management Group (URM) against Council for compensation due to delays to enter into stage 2 of the Waste and Recycling Services Contract 2002 – 2010. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Director Environment and Planning recommends that: A. Council pay to URM ($215,679.20) and extend the term of the Contract for Waste and

Recycling Services with URM by way of compensation for delays to the introduction of Stage 2 of the domestic waste services term of the Contract and all other claims of URM up to the present time.

B. The Waste and Recycling Services Contract with URM be amended to accommodate

agreements reached in respect of the Company’s claim for compensation for the delayed introduction of Stage 2 of the domestic services portion of the Contract and other amendments made appropriate by the operation of the Contract since its commencement, such amendments include:

• Extension of the term of the Contract to 30 June 2012; and

• Amendment of Schedules 2 and 4 of Part D of the Contract to properly reflect the resources to be applied to the provision of domestic waste services and the prices to be charged for those services.

C. Because of extenuating circumstances, a satisfactory result would not be achieved by inviting tenders for the services to be provided pursuant to or as a consequence of Resolutions A and B, the extenuating circumstances and reasons for this decision being:

• If the amendments are not made and tenders are called, compensation would be payable to URM in substitution for the extended term and benefits URM receives consequent upon the amendments thereby negating any benefits which inviting tenders may provide.

• As the incumbent contractor with equipment available and knowledge gained from operating the contract, URM is best placed to perform the services in an economical manner.

• URM may claim against Council for contracting out services it has already contracted to obtain from URM.

• If another Contractor was to provide the services consequent upon acceptance of a tender, Council would have the invidious situation of two competing contractors in the area providing services of a similar nature.


REPORT The Contract with United Resource Management Pty Limited (URM) for waste and recycling services was executed on 12 December 2002 and is to run until December 2010. For Domestic Waste Services, the Contract term was divided into 2 stages with the objective of phasing out the 55 litre garbage bins during Stage 1 and introducing mobile garbage bins (MGBs) for Stage 2 which was to commence on 1 July 2003. During the period when tenders were being invited it became apparent that there was in the community a reluctance to stop using the 55 litre bins. Because of this the Contract to be entered into by Council and the successful tenderer was amended to retain for Council the option of continuing the then existing domestic waste service using a mix of 55 litre bins and MGBs. Notwithstanding this, it remained an objective of Council during Stage 1 to persuade residents to use MGBs and the Contract obliged Council to undertake a comprehensive education and marketing campaign aimed at residents who had two 55 litre bins, 120 litre and 240 litre bins to reduce their waste. This campaign was termed the Resident Communication Strategy (RCS). In preparing its tender for the Contract, URM was guided by the representations as to Council’s objectives and accordingly allowed for labour, trucks and equipment suitable for 55 litre bins in Stage 1 and for the purchase of new vehicles and equipment suitable for MGBs in Stage 2. The entrenchment of 55 litre bins in the Mosman community was underestimated and the reluctance to use MGBs meant that Council’s RCS had to proceed very carefully in introducing the idea of new bins. Council also intended to trial smaller 60 litre MGBs for which it thought the community might be receptive, however, following testing of samples and an assessment of OHS risk these MGBs were deemed to be unsuitable. The consequences of the difficulty in introducing MGBs were an extended Stage 1 period of the Contract (by approximately 21 months) and a delayed commencement of Stage 2 when Council was finally able to convert from 55 litre bins to MGBs. In turn, this meant that URM was required to retain the old vehicles and equipment and additional labour necessary for the 55 litre bin system much longer than intended whilst delaying the purchase of vehicles and equipment necessary for MGBs. When it eventually purchased the vehicles URM was forced to pay higher prices and it had a shorter period of the Contract over which it could amortise the outlay for the vehicles and equipment. Because of the additional expense occasioned by the delayed introduction of Stage 2, URM claimed compensation from Council (11 January 2005) and whilst it was acknowledged that the delayed introduction of Stage 2 did result in additional expense, it was considered that URM’s claim was excessive and that unnecessary compensation to the company would not be conceded. Consequently, the Senior Waste Officer undertook a thorough and methodical review of URM’s claim to validate or otherwise its assertions. This review was made in consultation with the Managers Environment and Services and Finance, and for independent probity reasons with Council’s Solicitors and Auditors. On 13 April 2005 the General Manager, Director of Environment and Planning, Manager Environment and Services, the Senior Waste Officer and Manager Finance (part of the meeting) attended a without prejudice meeting with representatives of URM to resolve the issues and the following agreement was reached:


1. Increased cost of vehicles and equipment

URM’s claim: $68,508 This claim was conceded in full. It is recognised that the delayed introduction of Stage 2 of the Contract as caused by Council resulted in a delay to URM in purchasing the vehicles and it incurred increased costs as a result. Amount allowed: $68,508.00

2. Increased maintenance costs

URM’s claim: $145,110.55 URM conceded this claim. It was argued that any increased maintenance costs associated with the continuing use of old vehicles would have been offset by capital cost savings during this period. Amount allowed: Nil.

3. Additional Labour Costs

URM’s claim: $154,446.80 Again it is recognised that the delayed introduction of Stage 2 resulted in additional labour being required and that these costs were significant. URM’s claim was reduced by approximately 10% to $139,600.00. Amount allowed: $139,600.00.

4. Increased Costs of Amortisation

URM’s claim: $366,243.24 It was recognised that the shortened Stage 2 period reduced the amortisation period for the capital cost of the vehicles and an extension of the Contract term was seen as an economically viable concession. Amount allowed: Extension of the Contract to 30 June 2012 to coincide with the end of the financial year. While it could be argued that the extension should be limited to 21 months it was agreed that extending the Contract by 24 months to the end of June 2012 is considered advantageous to Council as it would mean that the tendering process would not overlap with the Christmas and New Year period and would coincide with the end of the financial year.

5. Commercial Waste

URM’s claim: $48,283.23 Council’s officers refused to negotiate on this issue. URM were informed that Council may consider a separate offer from URM to purchase its commercial waste business. Amount allowed: Nil.

6. Increased Interest Charges

URM’s claim: $15,142.41 A compromise of 50% of the claim was reached. Amount allowed: $7,571.20.


7. Unit Rate for the Collection of Domestic Waste

This was not raised in URM’s original claim, however, it was discussed at the meeting and the Unit Rate for collection of waste bins in Stage 2 was agreed at $0.695. This amount is consistent with the fee tendered by URM for a MGB collection service and will necessarily have CPI applied as appropriate.

Accordingly, URM’s full claim of $797,734.23 has been reduced to $215,679.20 which is considered a fair result for both parties. The alternative of litigation would have involved much time and effort on behalf of Council putting together a difficult and complex case and an extended hearing which could have resulted in costs exceeding any benefit which was to be gained. Additionally the agreement has been examined and accepted as being fair to both parties by Mr Graham Steer of Council’s auditors, Spencer Steer Pty Ltd. Having regard to the extended Stage 1 period a claim was anticipated and the recommended compensation is fully funded in the current budget. The agreement is subject to Council’s approval and it is recommended that this be granted. The recommendation includes provision for amendment of the Contract to provide for the resources which are presently being expended and other amendments made appropriate because of the issues which have been resolved. Recommendation endorsed by General Manager


13. TRAFFIC COMMITTEE

TRAFFIC COMMITTEE

The Traffic Committee met in the Council Chamber, Mosman Square on 20 April 2005 from 10.05 am to 11.28 am. PRESENT The Chairperson (Councillor D J Lopez OAM) in the Chair with Mrs Marilyn Cameron (representative of Jillian Skinner, MP), Mr Geoff Cox (RTA), Sergeant Anthony Fenton (Harbourside Police), together with the Manager Planning and Transport, Contract Engineer and Traffic Engineer. Councillors D.M. Wilton and A.S. Connon were in attendance. APOLOGIES An apology was received from Councillor Elsegood. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest from Councillors or Senior Staff. DISCLOSURES OF NON-PECUNIARY INTERESTS There were no disclosures of non-pecuniary interests from Councillors or Senior Staff. Items RESOLVED pursuant to authority delegated to the Committee: Item No Description T/14 Upper Almora Street/Military Road – Pedestrian T/15 Bond Street – Parking restriction T/16 Dream House Lane – Parking Problems T/17 The Spit – Parking Restrictions in front of Royal Volunteer Coastal Patrol

(RVCP) T/18 Erith Street – Safety issues at Macpherson Street T/19 Military Road – Removal of kerbside parking T/20 Military Road – Increase in length of Bus Zone T/21 Botanic Road Change to angle parking T/22 The Spit East Side – Provision of short Term Parking and Loading Bay T/23 The Esplanade – Pedestrian crossing at Hunter Park and pedestrian

safety T/25 Hordern Lane – Introduction of short length of “No Stopping” restriction. T/26 Raglan Street – Provision of a Disabled Parking Space T/27 Sirius Avenue – Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) T/29 Military Road – Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) T/31 Raglan Street – Introduction of Parking Restriction


T/24 Hordern Place - Pedestrian safety in the Shared Zone MOSPLAN REF: 11.04.01 REPORT BY: Contract Engineer, Brian Leckey SUMMARY Consideration of pedestrian safety in the Share Zone in Hordern Place. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Planning & Transport recommends: That the Police be requested to carry out periodic speed radar checks in Hordern Place and to advise Council of the results. Can this Item be resolved by the Committee: Yes The Police advised that a radar could not check vehicles under 40km/hr. COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION Motion Cox/Cameron That the matter be deferred to the Council Meeting of 2 May 2005 for determination. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY HISTORY Council receives complaints regularly about the speed of vehicles using the Shared Zone in Hordern Place and has erected additional Shared Zones signs and has marked a large “10” in a circle indicating the speed limit, on the road pavement at the Brady Street entrance to Hordern Place. REPORT This matter was raised again at the meeting of the Traffic Committee on 7 February 2005 as an additional item; the Chairman ruling the matter as one of urgency. It was stated at the meeting that the Place is well used by elderly residents and many have expressed concern that most vehicles disregard the rule that pedestrians have right-of-way in a Shared Zone and disregard the speed limit of 10 km/hr. Although Council has not yet used its speed counter in Hordern Place to check on vehicle speeds, it is obvious from observations that most vehicles are exceeding the 10 km/hr speed limit. Council’s speed counter will only verify these observations. There are two large “Share Zone” signs at the Brady Street entrance to Hordern Place with the 10 km/hr speed limit on both signs. Under each sign is another sign “Pedestrians have Right-of-Way”. Marked on the road pavement is a large “10” in a circle indicating the speed.


There are two “Share Zone” signs with the 10 km/hr speed limit at the northern end of the brick paved section and two more “Share Zone” signs with the 10 km/hr speed limit 40 metres north of the end of the brick paved section. Additional signposting is unlikely to change drivers’ attitudes. It is now an appropriate time for the speed limit to be policed. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications.


T/28 Spit Road - Visibility problems at No 224 Spit Road MOSPLAN REF: 11.04.01 REPORT BY: Contract Engineer, Brian Leckey SUMMARY Consideration of a request for the installation of a traffic mirror to improve safety when egressing No 224 Spit Road. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Planning & Transport recommends: That a traffic mirror be installed on the footpath on the eastern side of Spit Road in front of No 211-213 Spit Road to facilitate vehicular egress from No 224 Spit Road, subject to the location of the mirror being to the satisfaction of Council’s Traffic Engineer and subject to all costs associated with the installation and maintenance of the mirror being met by the owners of No 224 Spit Road. Can this Item be resolved by the Committee: Yes Mr & Mrs Joseph (224 Spit Road) addressed the Committee. The RTA and the Police advised that the erection of a mirror at this location did not conform with the RTA Guidelines for the installation of traffic mirrors and they would not support the erection of a mirror. COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION Motion Cameron/Fenton That in light of the RTA and Police informing the Committee that they will not support a mirror on the road reserve, an appropriate letter be sent to the owners opposite to determine whether they would be prepared to have a mirror erected on their property at the cost of the owners of 224 Spit Road. HISTORY This matter has no history. REPORT Council has received a letter from the residents at No 224 Spit Road, Mr A J & Mrs L Joseph, requesting the installation of a traffic mirror. A copy of their letter is attached to the members’ business papers. The property No 224 Spit Road is located on the western side of Spit Road on the sharp bend opposite Upper Spit Road.


Sight distance of north bound (downhill) traffic in Spit Road is very poor when leaving the property and is less than “Stopping Sight Distance” for a speed of 40 km/hr. Some vehicles exceed this speed. The installation of a traffic mirror on the eastern side of Spit Road approximately opposite the entrance to No 224 Spit Road would improve visibility considerably of downhill traffic in Spit Road and improve safety for the residents when leaving 224 Spit Road in their motor vehicle. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications as the cost of erecting and maintaining a traffic mirror is to be met by the owners of No 224 Spit Road. COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • Letter from Mr A J & Mrs L Joseph, 224 Spit Road – requesting traffic mirror


T/30 Mitchell Road - Extension of "No Standing" Restriction MOSPLAN REF: 11.04.01 REPORT BY: Contract Engineer, Brian Leckey SUMMARY Consideration of a request to extend an existing “No Standing” restriction in Mitchell Road to facilitate vehicular access to a property. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Planning & Transport recommends: That the matter be deferred for further investigation and report to the next Traffic Committee meeting. Can this Item be resolved by the Committee: Yes Ms Sandra Philpott (10 Bapaume Road) addressed the Committee. The Committee was advised of the receipt of two further letters on this matter from Heather Hall of 16 Mitchell Road and Beverley Haskell of 12/23 Mitchell Road. Copies of the letters were circulated to members of the Committee. COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION Motion Fenton/Cox That the “No Standing” restriction on the eastern side of Mitchell Road, opposite the rear of No. 10 Bapaume Road, be extended in a northerly direction to the southern edge of the vehicular entrance to No. 9 Mitchell Road and be changed to a “No Parking” restriction in accordance with the Australian Road Rules. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY HISTORY This matter has no history. REPORT No 10 Bapaume Road was sold last year and the new owner of the property, Ms Sandra Philpott, has advised that she cannot access her garage at the rear of the property in Mitchell Road if a car is parked on the eastern side of Mitchell Road, directly opposite her garage. Some years ago, “No Standing” restrictions were introduced at various locations along Mitchell Road to facilitate vehicular access to properties, as access problems were created when cars parked opposite garages. This was due to the narrowness of Mitchell Road. The “No Standing” restriction on the eastern side of Mitchell Road near Ms Philpott’s property ended opposite the side boundary between Nos 7 and 9 Mitchell Road. This permitted a car to park on the eastern side between the end of the restriction and the vehicular entrance to


No 9 Mitchell Road which is directly opposite the garage at the rear of No 10 Bapaume Road. This did not cause a problem for the previous owner of No 10 Bapaume Road as he owned a small vehicle that could manoeuvre around a vehicle parked opposite. The present owner has a large vehicle that cannot manoeuvre around a vehicle parked opposite. The problem would be overcome if the “No Standing” restriction was extended approximately 5.5 metres in a northerly direction to the southern side of the vehicular entrance of No 9 Mitchell Road. One kerbside parking space would be lost. The matter was taken up with the owner of No 9 Mitchell Road, Mrs M Chan, and she was concerned about the loss of a carparking space. She indicated that she was about to commence the widening of her garage from a single garage to a double garage and she believed the problem would be solved when the wider vehicular crossing was constructed to suit the double garage. The matter has been held in abeyance until work on the construction of the double garage has commenced to enable the problem to be further assessed. The construction of the double garage is now well advanced and it will still be possible to park a vehicle opposite the garage at No 10 Bapaume Road. Therefore, the problem of accessing the garage at No 10 Bapaume Road will not be solved. The extension of the restriction has been advertised and Mrs Chan has been advised. A letter has been received from M & S McEvoy, 13 Mitchell Road, concerning the removal of one parking space. A copy of the letter is attached to the members’ business papers. It is proposed to arrange a site meting with M & S McEvoy by the end of April 2005. Therefore, it is recommended that the matter be deferred for further investigation and report to the next Traffic Committee meeting. The Australian Road Rules provide for the phasing out of the “No Standing” restriction and its replacement with either “No Stopping” or “No Parking”. The appropriate replacement restriction in Mitchell Road is “No Parking”. This has already been conveyed to the residents of Mitchell Road as a separate matter, and no objections have been received. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost of relocating and changing the parking restriction sign can be financed from the Traffic Facilities Fund.


T/32 Parking in Parriwi Road/Chinaman’s Beach and Balmoral MOSPLAN REF: 11.04.01 The Chairman raised this item as a matter of urgency and tabled a letter from Mr & Mrs Steel, 3/46B Parriwi Road. Mr John Steel, 3/46B Parriwi Road, addressed the Committee on his letter of 9 May 2001. No reply was received from Council. COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATION Motion Cameron/Fenton That the matters raised by Mr & Mrs Steel in their letter of 9 May 2001 be investigated and a report be prepared for the next Traffic Committee meeting. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY


T/33 47 Macpherson Street (Middle Harbour Public School) MOSPLAN REF: 11.04 The Chairman raised this item as a matter of urgency. Development Application for an Organic Food and Farmers Markets on the site every Saturday from 9 am to 1 pm – Traffic and Parking implications. Mrs Trish Arber, Mr Richard Slatter and Mrs Joseph addressed the Committee. The Committee was advised that the details submitted with the Development Application were not sufficient to assess the traffic and parking implications of the proposal and a Traffic Management Plan would be required. A Traffic Management Plan was submitted by the applicant on 12 April 2005. No action has yet been taken to assess this plan. In accordance with Council’s practice, the plan will be submitted to the Roads & Traffic Authority and the Police for comment. It will then be listed for consideration by the Traffic Committee. COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION Motion Cameron/Cox The Traffic Committee expressed its grave concern at the establishment of an organic market at Middle Harbour Public School and further that the previous traffic submission by the applicant is totally inadequate. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY


14. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Questions Without Notice to be submitted by Councillors for consideration.


15. CORRESPONDENCE

COR/10 Correspondence - Australian Local Government Association MOSPLAN REF: 01.01.11 RECOMMENDATION That the correspondence be received. CORRESPONDENCE The President of the ALGA writes to the Mayor: COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS Circulations • Australian Local Government Association's submission on 2005/06 Federal Budget


COR/11 Correspondence - Broken Hill Council MOSPLAN REF: 05.03.05 RECOMMENDATION That the correspondence be received. CORRESPONDENCE The Mayor of Broken Hill Council has circulated the following media release:

"The Darling River can not deliver the greedy demands that have been put on the river by large commercial growers of crops that are driven by the huge profit margins that are derived from those crops. The growers are destroying a very much heritage river. The people of Australia have to make a decision whether to support the survival of the river or filling the pockets of these greedy growers. Mayor Ron Page said, “If the people believe what I believe, the time is now to send a very loud message to their State Member that they’re not happy with the treatment of the river and they need to ask the State Member if they support the survival of the river or these greedy growers.” Mayor Page said, “we need to support the river now so the river can support our grandchildren for their future so they can have good quality drinking water for the future.” Mayor Page is now calling on the Prime Minister to cut Queensland’s federal funding to force the Queensland Government to work with the rest of Australia in regard to Cubbie Station. Cubbie Station is receiving the majority of their water free of charge and we as taxpayers should not be paying to buy the water back off this Station for the survival of the river. If Cubbie Station and Queensland continue doing what they’re doing they should suffer a financial loss because the people of Australia will have to pick up the financial burden to fix the river in years to come. Let’s show the Australian spirit and support the Darling River now for the future’s of our children and our grandchildren."


COR/12 Correspondence - Glen Innes Severn Council MOSPLAN REF: 10.10.02 RECOMMENDATION That the correspondence be received and Mosman Council reaffirm its Friendship Agreement with the newly proclaimed Glen Innes Severn Council. CORRESPONDENCE The Acting General Manager of Glen Innes Severn Council writes to the GM:


COR/13 Correspondence - HMAS Penguin / 1 Commando Company MOSPLAN REF: 01.01.11 RECOMMENDATION That the correspondence be received. CORRESPONDENCE On 18 October 2004 the Mayor wrote to the Hon Tony Abbott in the following terms:

You will recall that as part of the Government's decision to withdraw an Army presence at Middle Head and Georges Heights it was announced that the 1 Commando Company would be relocated into the HMAS Penguin compound. When your colleague, Brendan Nelson, made the formal announcement he also indicated that there would be some new building activity on the area presently housing the Navy sailing school in the area adjacent to Balmoral Oval.

The announcement by the Government was welcomed by the Mosman community and initial consultations took place at officer level in relation to the Department of Defence's plans. They even got to the stage of Defence looking at relocating the Council's stormwater filtration device (SQID) at the southern end of Balmoral Beach in order that the existing creek could be rehabilitated in an environmentally sensible way.

I have now heard (though on the grapevine) that the Department of Defence is re-thinking its decision to relocate 1 Commando Company into HMAS Penguin. This would be a decision that I must say would breach an understanding that my mayoral predecessors have worked extremely hard to achieve.

Viv May and I will be in Canberra from 7 to 10 November to attend the National General Assembly of Local Government and I would welcome the opportunity during that period of discussing this matter with you and/or receiving a briefing from Defence personnel on the current state of play. Viv has advised that Mayors of the day have been given such briefings in the past and if you can oblige in this regard it would be very much appreciated.

The world is changing and I am very aware of the Government's attention to national security but in view of the fact that the Commando Company (and regiment) have a heavy reliance on maritime infrastructure a move to Penguin seems to make sense.

I look forward to hearing from you. The Mayor and General Manager met with Mr Abbott in Canberra in November, and the Mayor has now received correspondence from Mr Abbott enclosing the following letter he received from the office of the Minister for Defence in response to his representations on the Mayor's behalf:


COR/14 Correspondence - National Union of Students MOSPLAN REF: 01.01.11 RECOMMENDATION That the correspondence be received. CORRESPONDENCE The National Union of Students writes to the Mayor:


16. NOTICE OF MOTIONS/RESCISSION MOTIONS

Notice of Motion: Code of Meeting Practice SUBMITTED BY: Councillor Wilton MOSPLAN REF: 01.01.02 NOTICE OF MOTION That the Code of Meeting Practice be amended in relation to Petitions Clause 32 points [1] and [2] to read:

A member of the public or a Councillor can read and present a petition to the Mayor, the General Manager and other Councillors prior to any Council Meeting.

The Code of Meeting Practice document for Mosman Council states that: “The words appearing in italics in this code are supplementary provisions to the act and Regulation which are not inconsistent with legislation.” Therefore, changing the wording of clause 32 is permissible under the Local Government Act. The suggested change of wording reflects a democratic right of the public to present community concerns to the Council.

agenda template council - mosman council - agenda.pdf · made my visit all the more rewarding and...

Documents