This post has been made by the Editor on behalf of residents concerned about the new lights at Beaconsfield Rd.

(A local Willoughby resident has started an online petition looking to remove the Left Turn Only restriction when exiting from Beaconsfield Rd. Over 150 people have signed an electronuic petition to that effect. This is the link to the petition – Fix the lights .

The original proposal for traffic lights at the intersection of Ralston St, Mowbray Rd West and Beaconsfield Rd came from Lane Cove Council. The reason touted for the necessity of the light was to provide relief for vehicles attempting to make a right-hand turn from Ralston St into Mowbray Rd West. Willoughby Council’s response, based on concern that drivers would continue across the intersection an ‘rat-run’ through Willoughby streets, was that they did not support the lights,

Over the next couple of years,  Lane Cove Council refused to discuss a range of safety proposals for Mowbray Rd West until Willoughby Council agreed to the lights.

Lane Cove Council finally got the ear of the RTA (now RMS) and more specific details of proposed lights were prepared.

At this stage Willoughby Council held a public meeting. An overwhelming number of attendees voted against installation of lights,

However, due to the desire to see safety initiatives implemented along Mowbray Rd, Willoughby Council reluctantly agree to consider a configuration that precluded movements between Ralston St and Beaconsfield Rd.

This is how the lights were implemented (against the wishes of the majority of Willoughby residents).

To read more about the lights, type in ‘Beaconsfield’ into the ‘Search by keyword‘ box on the upper right hand side of this page.

A local Willoughby resident has started an online petition looking to remove the Left Turn Only restriction when exiting from Beaconsfield Rd. Follow the link below:

Fix the lights

Residents of Range Street were a target of a drug addict wandering about from 1AM on Sunday 16 November when this bizarre young man set ablaze an 11 year old Mazda Metro in the well lit undercover section of the car park at 126 Greville Street. He then walked through the open gate into Range Street. He attempted to steal a truck at rear of 5 Millwood Avenue. The steering lock saved movement except to block Range Street. A white Corolla outside No1 Range St had its rear side window broken. The villain remained in the street till 5am when police took him into custody. Residents helped the police officer manouver the truck so vehicles could pass at 9.45AM.

The Progress Association is receiving positive feedback on its new electronic communication ‘West Ward Bytes’. ‘Bytes’ is a way for the Association to engage with a wider community between editions of the printed West Ward News which is delivered to 6,000 households.

It would be great for ‘Bytes’ to reach as many WestWarders as possible. You can assist.

Please recommend to your friends to subscribe to the ‘West Ward Bytes’ by sending an email to seccwwpa@gmail.com

Whilst this item has been deferred by Council to 2014, the following questions were submitted to Council.

On behalf of the Chatswood West Ward Progress Association I have a number of questions relating to the report that I am hoping you can oblige with a response.

1.      Where can one obtain a copy of Volume 2 of the report?

2.      Where is the data showing relative cost per paid parking compared with the costs for similar periods in off-street parking stations?

3.      Can some attention be given into the report for the consistent use of terms such as Town Centre, Regional Centre, CBD etc or can definitions be provided for these terms?

4.      There are a number of inconsistencies with numbering and the like in the report. Many maps are not readable in black and white format. It looks to the reader that the report has been rushed to publication. Can some attention be given to these matters?

5.      The term ‘fringe’ is used on a number of occasions, as such it is non-definitive. Can the term fringe be defined (even loosely)?

6.      This report is predominately a STREET Parking Strategy, yet within the report there is mention of off-street parking. Can we have a single report that holistically deals with parking (including off-street parking)/

7.      We thought that Council’s community engagement strategy called for engaging the community for instances such as this in the actual development of the draft Policy. Why hasn’t the community been engaged in the development of the Draft Policy?

8.      It appears that this Strategy has not been reviewed by the Willoughby Traffic Committee. Why not?

9.      What is the source of the figure that 35,000 of the 65,000 jobs within Willoughby are filled by local residents?

10.  What is the source of the figure that 24,000 vehicles come into the City to satisfy the 65,000 jobs?

11.  The majority of section is difficult to understand (including Table 1. Can this section be reworked?

12.  In section 3.3 how (specifically) is it proposed to either provide additional dedicated mobility parking spaces or to encourage the use of existing spaces already provided in off-street car parks?

13.  The question unanswered by the ‘at capacity’ argument is where do drivers seeking short term roadside parking go now? Wouldn’t we assume they go to one of the carparks that are cheaper than on-street short term parking on the fringes of the cbd?

14.  The study uses a simple radius approach. Chatswood West of the Highway is steep and the 20min extent would in fact be much closer to the Highway than shown. Can a more appropriate method of drawing the desire lines be developed?

15.  Re 3.5.2 regarding paid parking in residential streets, is there an alternative to parking meters available?

16.  With regard to the suggestion of all day parking for”the cost of a cup of coffee” (around 50 cents per hour) how confident can we be that cash-strapped Councils will not increase the fee)?

17.  In relation to the excess funds raised by paid parking being invested in specific sustainable transport initiatives, how confident can we be that cash-strapped Councils will adhere to such a policy? (A similar policy was initially adopted when paid parking was first introduced in the city. Within a couple of years money raised was going into consolidated revenue).

18.  How confident is it that households will be able to be issued with 3 perking permits given the requirement that the number of permits cannot exceed the number of available on-street spaces?

19.  Where do we have ‘designated long-stay parking areas’. Are they like a parking  station or are they designated residential streets? If the latter, wouldn’t these by definition (that the parking strategy favours residents near employment and transport nodes) be in residential streets further from the nodes? If these are new parking stations, how much will they cost and how would they be funded?

Terry Fogarty

Secretary Chatswood West Ward Progress Association

Council Saville asked the following question of Council officers. There response is included below:

QUESTION
Where is Council up to with regards to strategic emergency management planning?
What strategic plans are in place?
What organisations are involved?
In which organisations related to strategic emergency planning, is Council involved formally/at executive level?
How can Council keep Councillors and the community updated?

Answer
While New South Wales emergency management arrangements are based around local government areas the role of local government in emergency management is poorly defined. The Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) makes very little mention of Local Government in emergency response.

With regard to preparing for an emergency, the local council is to provide secretarial and technical support to the Local Emergency Management Committee (LEMC) which prepares the local emergency plan. The LEMC is made up of a representative from the local council, Ambulance Services of NSW, Fire & Rescue NSW, NSW Police Force, NSW State Emergency Services (SES), LEOCON (Police) and the Regional Emergency Management Officer (as an observer) and has the General Manager of the local government authority or his representative as the chair of this committee. While Council does have some role to play in emergency management, it is the State agencies, appointed committees and to a large extent the police officers appointed as the Local and Regional Emergency Operations Controllers who have a more significant role in managing, planning, preparation for and response to a local emergency.

It is a requirement that the local LEMC prepares a local Disaster Plan for the Willoughby and Lane Cove Local Government areas. This plan includes emergency preparedness, response to and recovery arrangements and ensures a coordinated response by all agencies having responsibilities and functions in emergencies. Our Local Displan was recently updated this year and staff contributed to this review.

Councillor L Saville moved the following Notice of Motion. It was partially supported.

THAT Willoughby City Council:
1. Notes with concern that over the last decade the amount of public open space held by local councils across NSW is reported to have fallen by 18.3%

2. That a report is provided by staff which includes:
a) any change in the amount of public open space under Council control since 2001/02;
b) pressures on Council owned public open space;
c) a strategy for Council to maintain and increase the amount of public open space under its control; and
d) quantification of the amount of open space per head in the CBD currently available and compared with data previously provided in WCC S94 Plan

RESOLUTION
That Willoughby City Council:
1. Notes with concern that over the last decade the amount of public open space held by local councils across NSW is reported to have fallen by 18.3%.
2. That a report is provided by staff which includes quantification of the amount of open space per head in the CBD currently available and compared with data previously provided in WCC S94 Plan

The Planning Proposal for the redevelopment of the Acoustics Laboratory site has now been determined. More than likely, this will see the demolition of the buildings on the site. The next stage in the process will be for the applicant to lodge Development Application (DA). Presumably, the DA will be determined by the Joint Regional Planning Panel (not by Willoughby Council). A full copy of the Panel’s determination follows.

A number of local residents attended the meeting with the panel. By and large, many felt that they were not given a fair hearing.

The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure directed the Sydney East Joint Regional
Planning Panel (regional panel) to be the rel On 31 October 2013, the panel members met to

planning proposal.be briefed on the planning proposal and to the relevant planning authority (RPA) for the above

review material relevant to the proposal.

The resolution of the panel is:

1. The Panel resolves unanimously to recommend to the Minister to make the LEP. This recommendation should accompany the s59 report of the Department of Planning and
Infrastructure.

2. The Panel’s resolution is subject to the relevant authority’s adoption of the Development
Control Plan at the same time as the LEP is made. The DCP is to be based on the draft
DCP as exhibited except as below.

3. The word “staged” is deleted from cl 26.

4. The objectives of the DCP are:

To ensure that development

a) does not adversely impact on bushland within the portion of the site in Zone E2 or on
adjoining land in Blue Gum Park, Greville Street Reserve or the Lane Cove National
Park (by loss of natural vegetation and of significant geological features);

b) includes rehabilitation of native riparian vegetation along the creek; and

c) does not disrupt drainage patterns, alter water tables or increase bushfire hazard.

5. Clause 8 is replaced with the following words: “A Bushland Management Plan, including

a Vegetation Management Plan, a Threatened Species Management Plan and a Bushfire
Management Plan are to be submitted with the DA. The E2 Zone and riparian corridor
around the creek is to be protected and restored in accordance with the Vegetation
Management Plan.”

6. Additional provisions are added:

a) The development is to comply with the Planning for Bushfire Protection and AS 3959
– 2009 Construction of Buildings in Bushfire Prone Areas.

b) The internal access road shall have a minimum carriageway width of 6.5m. Suitable
turning provisions shall be provided for a tanker at the end of the internal access road
and at the first right-hand turn intersection into the eastern precinct. An emergency
link vehicular access shall be provided at Range Road.

c) A Bushfire Emergency Evacuation Plan is to be submitted with the DA, in accordance
with the NSW Rural Fire Service document Guide for Developing a Bush Fire
Emergency Evacuation Plan.

7. The LEP is to limit the maximum number dwellings on the area to which the LEP refers to
60 and nominate the lot sizes as 220 square metres.

8. The Panel has considered the objectors’ concerns about the bushfire risk to this area.
The Panel notes that under the current zoning, the Asset Protection Zone could be
subdivided into individual rear yards, whereas under the proposed LEP, the E2 Zone and
the riparian corridor along the creek will be protected and restored.

Endorsed by
Dr John Roseth
Chair, Sydney East
Joint Regional Planning Panel
31 October 2013
1. The Panel resolves unanimously to recommend to the Minister to make the LEP. This
recommendation should accompany the s59 report of the Department of Planning and
Infrastructure.

If you have read some prior posts you would be aware that Council embarked on a review in November 2012 of its assets. All assets were identified and their condition logged. The next step the Council took was to work with the community on acceptable levels of service for asset. Thresholds that trigger projects to renew assets were produced. From this information, Council officers have been able to determine the funding levels required to maintain Council assets to an acceptable condition. The (not surprising) outcome was that increased levels of funding are required.

The next phase of this project is to determine source of funds for asset renewal. One source of funding is from business efficiency improvements another way is by getting approval for a Special Rate Variation.

If Council obtains permission to seek a spacial rate variation, all ratepayers will be engaged and their support sought.

The Chatswood West Ward Progress Association wishes to object to the proposed Modification 9 for the redevelopment of the Thomas Street Car Park in Chatswood. Already it is hard enough for disabled people seeking medical treatment to gain entry to edical premises at 12 Thomas Street via the disabled ramp coming from Fleet Lane, but now Meriton want to make it harder.

Willoughby Council, with due recognition of the disabled, guaranteed a Right of Way via a proper road and pedestrian pathway through the development site “before, during and after” construction.

The developers appear to have side stepped this condition for development, making it very difficult for the disabled to access. Now, I hear the developers wish to convert the Right of Way and access for the disabled into a zone shared with heavy service vehicles accessing the loading dock in the building! What next? Such changes will place all pedestrians, including the aged frail, the wheelchair bound, people with children in pushers, those dependent on walking aids, and people with visual impairment and others with significant handicaps in jeopardy.We are getting tired of “Meriton creep”. Boundaries and time limits are set and Meriton push them out.

Please stand up to them. They will be gone in couple of years with their pockets bulging, but we will still be here! Modification 9 is a denial of justice to residents and medical professionals and others offering services.

Yours sincerely,

R.L.Lawrence, Vice President

The Willoughby Council area with 9 legal brothels outnumbers other Council’s on the North Shore. Council recently considered the matter. Clr Mustaca is quoted as saying that ‘Council should be considering greater distances from each other and schools and other places where people might be offended’. In the past, Council had a policy of locating brothels within industrial and commercial areas. This had seemed to assist reducing the number of illegal brothels in the area.

There was a move to ban brothels outright or in industrial areas.  Councilors voted against the outright bans. However, the matter will be discussed further next year.

It is reported that there are 34 illegal brothels within a 5km radius of North Sydney. 19 of these illegal brothels operate within the Willoughby local government area.