HCC Coat of Arms.jpg
City of hobart

 

 

 

 

AGENDA

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

 

Open Portion

 

Thursday, 10 November 2016

 

at 5:00 pm

Lady Osborne Room, Town Hall


 

 

 

 

THE MISSION

Our mission is to ensure good governance of our capital City.

THE VALUES

The Council is:

 

about people

We value people – our community, our customers and colleagues.

professional

We take pride in our work.

enterprising

We look for ways to create value.

responsive

We’re accessible and focused on service.

inclusive

We respect diversity in people and ideas.

making a difference

We recognise that everything we do shapes Hobart’s future.

 

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 3

 

10/11/2016

 

 

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

Business listed on the agenda is to be conducted in the order in which it is set out, unless the committee by simple majority determines otherwise.

 

APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

1.        Co-Option of a Committee Member in the event of a vacancy  4

2.        Confirmation of Minutes. 4

3.        Consideration of Supplementary Items. 4

4.        Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest. 4

5.        Transfer of Agenda Items. 5

6          Reports. 6

6.1     Bushfire Management 6

6.2     Street Trees - York Street (Near the Corner of Grace Street), Sandy Bay - Response to Petition. 25

6.3     Salvator Rosa Glen Creek Area, West Hobart - Dedication of Operational Land as Public Land. 31

6.4     Tasmanian Hockey Centre, New Town - Proposed Optus Infrastructure and Related Sub-Lease. 41

6.5     Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre Redevelopment 58

7          Motions of which Notice has been Given. 64

7.1     Memorial Plaques on Council Outdoor Furniture. 64

8          Committee Action Status Report. 67

8.1     Committee Actions - Status Report 67

9.        Questions Without Notice. 82

10.     Closed Portion Of The Meeting.. 83

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 4

 

10/11/2016

 

 

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting (Open Portion) held Thursday, 10 November 2016 at 5:00 pm in the Lady Osborne Room, Town Hall.

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Reynolds (Chairman)

Briscoe

Ruzicka

Sexton

Harvey

 

ALDERMEN

Lord Mayor Hickey

Deputy Lord Mayor Christie

Zucco

Burnet

Cocker

Thomas

Denison

Apologies:

 

 

Leave of Absence:

Alderman Denison

 

1.       Co-Option of a Committee Member in the event of a vacancy

 

 

2.       Confirmation of Minutes

 

The minutes of the Open Portion of the Parks and Recreation Committee meeting held on Thursday, 13 October 2016, are submitted for confirming as an accurate record.

 

 

 

3.       Consideration of Supplementary Items

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(6) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

Recommendation

 

That the Committee resolve to deal with any supplementary items not appearing on the agenda, as reported by the General Manager.

 

 

 

4.       Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(7) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

 

Aldermen are requested to indicate where they may have any pecuniary or conflict of interest in respect to any matter appearing on the agenda, or any supplementary item to the agenda, which the committee has resolved to deal with.

 

5.       Transfer of Agenda Items

Regulation 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

 

A committee may close a part of a meeting to the public where a matter to be discussed falls within 15(2) of the above regulations.

 

In the event that the committee transfer an item to the closed portion, the reasons for doing so should be stated.

 

Are there any items which should be transferred from this agenda to the closed portion of the agenda, or from the closed to the open portion of the agenda?

 


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 6

 

10/11/2016

 

 

6        Reports

 

6.1    Bushfire Management

          File Ref: F16/121130; 45-1-1

Report of the Program Leader Fire & Biodiversity, Group Manager Open Space and the Director Parks and City Amenity of 4 November 2016 and attachments.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 7

 

10/11/2016

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Bushfire Management

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Program Leader Fire & Biodiversity

Group Manager Open Space

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.      The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the status of key bushfire planning and management activities in 2016/2017. The report addresses the specific matters listed below.

1.1.1.    Status of implementation of City of Hobart Bushfire Management Strategy 2014.

1.1.2.    Bushfire Hazard Reduction Burning Program.

1.1.3.    New, State-wide Firebreak Design Guidelines and City Firebreak Augmentation Project.

1.1.4.    Preliminary draft Bushfire Management Plan for Knocklofty, McRobies, Ridgeway and Waterworks Reserves

2.         Report Summary

2.1.      Bushfire Management Strategy

2.1.1.    29 or 72% of the 40 Bushfire Management Strategy actions have been completed. The establishment of the Tasmania Fire Service Fuel Reduction Unit has significantly changed the context for bushfire planning and management in the City since the Strategy was adopted. This change coupled with substantial progress in implementing the strategy warrants early review to ensure the Council’s policies properly align with the current context and priorities.

2.2.      Hazard Reduction Burning Program

2.2.1.    Twelve hazard reduction burns were completed last financial year encompassing a total area of 270 ha. The 2016/2017 program comprises twelve burns encompassing 337 ha, including 106 ha of private bushland. Two programmed Spring 2016 burns, in Bicentennial Park and Knocklofty Reserve, have already been completed. A rolling 3-year hazard reduction program for the City has been prepared to facilitate early planning and better engagement with neighbours and stakeholders.

2.3.      Firebreak Guideline and Augmentation Project

2.3.1.    The City is commencing a project focussed on determining the implications of potential adoption of the newly developed State Government guidelines for design and construction of firebreaks. The project is proposed to include the construction of a number of trial demonstration firebreaks using the new guideline.

2.4.      Draft Bushfire Management Plan

2.4.1.    Finalisation of the current preliminary draft Fire Management Plan for Knocklofty, McRobies, Ridgeway and Waterworks Reserves for public exhibition was deferred pending determination of an appropriate firebreak design standard.

The State Government has recently prepared draft design guidelines and potential implementation of the guidelines requires assessment of their implications. A project has been initiated for this purpose and is planned to be completed this financial year.

The results of the project will enable consideration of the potential adoption of the fire break guidelines and hence it is proposed to defer any further consideration associated with the review of the City’s fire management plans until after the project has been completed in 2017/2018.
 

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      Progress in implementing the Bushfire Management Strategy 2014 be noted and a formal review of the Strategy be undertaken in the 2018 calendar year.

2.      The completed 2015/2016, planned 2016/2017 and rolling 3-year (2016/2017 – 2018/2019) bushfire hazard reduction programs, be noted.

3.      Upon release of the new State Government Guideline for design and construction of firebreaks, a number of trial demonstration fire breaks, using the guidelines, be constructed to enable an assessment of their suitability to be undertaken.

(i)      The General Manager be delegated authority to approve the selection and construction of trial demonstration firebreaks utilising the new guideline within the City’s bushland reserve system.

4.      Consideration associated with the review of the draft bushfire management plans for Knocklofty, McRobies, Ridgeway and Waterworks Reserves be deferred until the Council determines its position on the adoption of the State Government Fire Break Guidelines.

5.      Hazard reduction burning and the fire trail enhancement program and maintenance activities, in accordance with the preliminary draft bushfire management plans, be progressed.

4.         Background

4.1.      City of Hobart Bushfire Management Strategy

4.1.1.    The City of Hobart Bushfire Management Strategy 2014 was adopted by the Council in September 2014. The duration of the Strategy was proposed to be five years with formal review in 2019 or as required.

4.1.2.    The Strategy identified forty actions for implementation and progress is coordinated and overseen by an inter-divisional steering group that currently meets quarterly.

4.1.3.    Significant progress in implementing the Strategy has occurred in the two years since the strategy was adopted.

4.1.4.    A review of the implementation of the Strategy was recently completed and is attached to this report (Attachment A).

In summary, 29 or 72% of actions have been substantively completed. An additional two actions are proposed not to be progressed, primarily as these actions are more the remit of the Tasmania Fire Service, particularly with the establishment of the Fuel Reduction Unit (FRU). Nine actions are currently incomplete.

4.1.5.    Key achievements in the past year include:

4.1.5.1.      The establishment of the Fire and Biodiversity Program within the Bushland and Reserves Unit;

4.1.5.2.      The establishment of minimum fire competencies, completed competency-based training of most City of Hobart designated fire staff;

4.1.5.3.      The establishment of a ‘pool’ of designated fire staff to augment capacity for undertaking hazard reduction burning;

4.1.5.4.      The fabrication of two new fire ‘slip-on’ units;

4.1.5.5.      The preparation of rolling 3-year hazard reduction burn program and;

4.1.5.6.      Initiation of the establishment of interagency agreement with Tasmania Fire Service (TFS) Fuel Reduction Unit (FRU) to formalise responsibilities and arrangements for hazard reduction burning in the City.

4.1.6.    The establishment of the FRU has substantially changed the context for bushfire planning and management in the City since the Strategy was adopted. 

In particular, the FRU and other TFS units, are leading, and substantially increased the capacity for conducting, larger and more complex hazard reduction burning, and have also established a comprehensive framework for and delivering community education and capacity building initiatives.

4.1.7.    These changes warrant bringing forward formal review of the Strategy to ensure it properly aligns with the current context.  It is proposed the review be conducted during the 2018 calendar year.

4.2.      Bushfire hazard reduction burning program

4.2.1.    Twelve bushfire hazard reduction burns (HRB) were completed across the City during 2015/2016 and a map of the burns is attached to this report (Attachment B). 

A total area of 270 ha was treated across six bush land reserves and included 40 ha of contiguous private bushland.

4.2.2.    This achievement represents a five-fold increase on the past ten year annual average area burnt and reflects the larger scale of many of the burns which have been facilitated by the establishment of the FRU.

4.2.3.    A HRB program for 2016/2017, including the Spring 2016 and Autumn 2017 seasons has been prepared and a map of the areas is attached to this report (Attachment C). 

The program comprises a potential twelve burns within the City encompassing a total area of 337 ha including 106 ha of private or other tenure bush land.

4.2.4.    TFS will be planning and leading six of the HRBs, including almost all of the private and other tenure bushland.

4.2.5.    Two programmed Spring burns, in Knocklofty Reserve and Bicentennial Park and comprising a total area of 26 ha, have already been completed.  The remaining CoH led burns are planned for Autumn 2017.

4.2.6.    An annually updated 3-year rolling HRB program has also been prepared comprising the current year and two forward years out to 2018/2019. A map of the program is attached to this report (Attachment D).

4.2.7.    Flagging potential burn areas early in the planning process ensures sufficient time to better identify issues, engage with neighbours and stakeholders, and to complete required site preparatory works prior to conducting burns.

4.2.8.    The completed and proposed HRB programs have been made publicly available on the City’s website.

4.3.      New State firebreak (asset protection zone) guideline and augmentation project

4.3.1.    Given the proximity of extensive bush land areas to urban areas, wildfire has long been recognised as the most likely and significant natural disaster risk. The City adopts a risk management approach to bushfire management, primarily based on three main management activities; namely:

4.3.1.1.      Establishment and maintenance of a fire trail network;

4.3.1.2.      Annual hazard reduction burning; and

4.3.1.3.      Establishment and maintenance of asset protection zones (commonly referred to as firebreaks).

4.3.2.    Asset protection zones (APZs) are established along the bushland-urban interface. Most of the vegetation is removed or significantly modified to maintain fuel loads at low levels, primarily by mechanical means such as slashing.

4.3.3.    APZs provide spatial separation between fire prone bushland and built assets, such as houses, providing a level of protection to life and property. Wherever possible, they also provide a means to access the bushfire hazard for bushfire response and preparedness activities.


Example of an APZ/Firebreak adjacent to upper Strickland Avenue

4.3.4.    Currently, the City maintains over 100 discrete APZs along the bush land-urban interface, comprising a total area of approximately 51 ha.

4.3.5.    Until recently, no specific standard existed for the design and more specifically, the width of APZs. The City’s existing APZ network has been established over several decades and based on a range of prevailing principles for construction and rule-of-thumb design specifications. 

4.3.6.    TFS has developed and in September 2016 released to land management and other agency stakeholders, a draft state-wide guideline for the design, construction and maintenance of APZs for comment.

4.3.7.    The new State Guideline is the first science-based consistent design specification for APZ design and construction for Tasmania.

4.3.8.    Initial assessment of the State guideline indicates that APZs designed in accordance with the guideline are, in general, likely to have a larger footprint, being wider and with less retained vegetation, than most existing APZs.

4.3.9.    A preliminary and basic desk-top analysis applying the guidelines to the City suggests a potential doubling (or even trebling) of the total area of the City’s existing APZ network. That is, potentially an additional 50-100 ha of vegetation modified along the bushland-urban interface.

4.3.10.  Augmentation of the APZ network, whilst potentially improving bushfire risk management, may have associated effects including visual, biodiversity, cultural heritage and land stability impacts.

4.3.11.  Strong community views, both for and against, potential augmentation of the City’s APZ network would be expected.

4.3.12.  As currently proposed and consistent with past practice, the guidelines are advisory only, with uptake and application at the discretion of land managers.

4.3.13.  The City’s submission to the TFS in response to the release of the draft guideline made three recommendations; namely:

4.3.13.1.    The need for a more comprehensive consultation process beyond land managers and agency stakeholders only;

4.3.13.2.    The guidelines be made mandatory to avoid legal uncertainty; and

4.3.13.3.    The need for the guidelines to consider planning implications.

4.3.14.  The City has received a grant for $67,000 from the 2016/2017 Tasmanian Bushfire Mitigation Grants Program (TBMGP) for a project primarily focussed on determining the effects of the finalised State guideline for the City and how they might best be applied.

4.3.15.  It is proposed to include the construction of a number of trial APZ demonstration sites, utilising the State guideline to provide an opportunity to see what the new APZs will look like across a range of landscape and vegetation contexts.

4.3.16.  Subject to the State Government endorsing a final guideline, the TBMGP project is planned to be completed this financial year.

The results of the project and recommendation on adoption and best practice implementation of the guidelines for the City will be subject to a separate report to the Council.

4.4.      Preliminary draft bushfire management plan for Knocklofty, McRobies, Ridgeway and Waterworks Reserves

4.4.1.    In February 2016, the Council considered a report and adopted the recommendations of the Parks and Recreation Committee (PRC 7, 11/2/2016), regarding the preliminary draft bushfire management plan for Knocklofty, McRobies, Ridgeway and Waterworks Reserves.

4.4.2.    Of relevance to this report, the Council resolved, inter alia,

(2)     Specialist advice be sought to review and substantiate the most appropriate firebreak/asset protection zone standard for adoption by the City in its bush land reserves.

(3)     The specialist advice, when received be used to revise as appropriate the preliminary draft bushfire management plan for Knocklofty, McRobies, Ridgeway and Waterworks Reserves to enable the revised draft plan to be presented to the Council for endorsement to proceed to public exhibition.

4.4.3.    During the process of obtaining specialist advice, officer-level discussions with TFS confirmed that the agency was finalising a new State-wide guideline for design of firebreaks in Tasmania.  This has been previously detailed in Section 4.3 of this report.

4.4.4.    Obtaining separate, specialist advice was determined to no longer be required as the new TFS State-wide guidelines, when available, would be based on contemporary knowledge and best practice, and specifically tailored for Tasmania vegetation communities.  

4.4.5.    A draft of the new guidelines was distributed to key agency stakeholders, including City of Hobart, on 16 September 2016.

4.4.6.    As noted in Section 4.3.16 of this report, a TBMGP funded project focused on the guideline is planned to be completed this financial year. The results of the project and recommendation on potential adoption and best practice implementation of the guidelines for the city will be subject to a separate report to the Council.

4.4.7.    The Council’s adoption of a design standard for APZs is required to enable appropriate revision of the City’s Bushfire Management Plans.

4.4.8.    Accordingly, it is proposed to defer consideration of the revision of the bushfire management plans until 2017/2018 and following completion of the TBMGP project. It is however proposed to continue conducting hazard reduction burning and fire trail enhancement and maintenance activities in accordance with the recommendations in the preliminary draft bushfire management plan.

5.         Proposal and Implementation

5.1.      Bushfire Management Strategy

5.1.1.    An inter-divisional steering group already exists and a subset of the group will be established to initiate and review the Strategy during 2017/2018. 

5.2.      Hazard Reduction Burning Programs

5.2.1.    Preparation and implementation of annual hazard reduction programs are a recurrent activity of the City’s Bushland and Reserves Unit. Contemporary programs comprise generally larger burn units; often include contiguous private bushland, and require collaborative implementation with TFS and Parks and Wildlife Service. The increased scale and complexity of many of the burns has necessitated increased fire competency and capacity within council and has, and will continue to be required to be addressed by maintaining a sufficient pool of fire-trained staff from across council divisions, and potentially additional contract resources.

5.3.      Firebreak Guideline and Augmentation Project

5.3.1.    This project will be managed and delivered by the Bushland Reserves Unit with spatial analysis services provided by the Division’s Asset Information Coordinator. Specialist environmental assessment services and other services will be contracted as required. 

5.4.      Draft Bushfire Management Plan

5.4.1.    No specific action required.

6.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1.      Bushfire Management Strategy

6.1.1.    This item relates to Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 Strategic Objective 5.2.1

Manage bushfire risk through the implementation of the Hobart Fire Management Strategy.

6.2.      Hazard Reduction Burning Programs

6.2.1.    This item relates to Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 Strategic Objective 3.2.1

Develop, implement and review fire management plans and associated programs for bushland reserves.

6.3.      Firebreak Guidelines and Augmentation Project

6.3.1.    This item relates to Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 Strategic Objective 3.2.1

Develop, implement and review fire management plans and associated programs for bushland reserves; and

Strategic Objective 5.2.1

Manage bushfire risk through the implementation of the Hobart Fire Management Strategy.

(
specifically Strategy item 2A All CoH bushland is covered by fire risk management programs that include firebreak and defendable space management, and firetrail works.)

6.4.      Draft Bushfire Management Plan

6.4.1.    This item relates to Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 Strategic Objective 3.2.1

Develop, implement and review fire management plans and associated programs for bushland reserves.

7.         Financial Implications

7.1.      Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1.    Aside from Item 1.1.3 New State-wide Fire Break Design Guidelines and City Firebreak Augmentation Project, all items are funded from the 2016/2017 Fire and Biodiversity budget function. 

Item 1.1.3 will be part funded by a $67,000 TBMGP grant with matched funding allocated in the 2016/2017 Fire and Biodiversity budget function.

7.2.      Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1.    All items, except item 1.1.2 Bushfire Hazard Reduction Burning Program, will require specific budget allocation in 2017/2018 and this will be considered in the annual budget preparation process.

7.3.      Asset Related Implications

7.3.1.    Nil

8.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1.      The City has specific management obligations under the Fire Services Act 1979, specifically:

8.1.1.    Section 49: Fire Hazards;

8.1.2.    Section 56: Firebreak Formation;

8.1.3.    Section 63: Restrictions on Fire Lighting; and

8.1.4.    Section 64: Duties of Occupiers of Land.

8.2.      The City has fire management responsibilities under the Local Government Act 1993, specifically:

8.2.1.    Section 200:

‘The control of any ‘nuisance’ where nuisance is regarded as being ‘... causes or is likely to cause danger or harm to the health, safety or welfare of any person.’

(Fire hazards are a class of nuisance under this legislation)

8.3.      The City has a Common Law responsibility to provide for the protection of residents arising from natural hazards within its reserves.

8.4.      The intent of all items in this report has a common aim to reduce the City’s fire risk exposures as a land manager.

8.5.      All items include engagement with the community and stakeholders and as such the final design and outcome is more likely to be accepted and supported by the community.

8.6.      New and updated policy, plans and guidelines, aimed at fire risk mitigation, demonstrates Councils commitment to improved bushfire risk management.

9.         Delegation

9.1.      This matter is delegated to the Council.

 

 

 

 

 

 

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

 

Robert Bennett

Program Leader Fire & Biodiversity

Robert Mather

Group Manager Open Space

Glenn Doyle

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

 

Date:                            4 November 2016

File Reference:          F16/121130; 45-1-1

 

 

Attachment a:             Bushfire Management Strategy Status

Attachment b:             Completed Burns 2015/2016

Attachment c:            Proposed Burns 2016/2017

Attachment d:            Proposed 3 Year Burn Program   


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 17

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 22

ATTACHMENT b

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 23

ATTACHMENT c

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 24

ATTACHMENT d

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 25

 

10/11/2016

 

 

6.2    Street Trees - York Street (Near the Corner of Grace Street), Sandy Bay - Response to Petition

          File Ref: F16/125192; R0941

Report of the Manager Parks and Recreation and the Director Parks and City Amenity of 4 November 2016.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 26

 

10/11/2016

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Street Trees - York Street (Near the Corner of Grace Street), Sandy Bay - Response to Petition

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Manager Parks and Recreation

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.      The purpose of the report is to respond to a petition tabled at the Council meeting of 24 October 2016, seeking consideration to reverse the decision to remove two large Blue Gums, located in the centre median at York Street (near the corner of Grace Street), Sandy Bay, and to instead undertake the necessary maintenance required to ensure the health of the trees and safety of the residents who reside within the proximity of the trees.

2.         Report Summary

2.1.      For a number of years, the City has been closely monitoring the health of two Blue Gum (Eucalyptus globulus) specimens located at the front of the property at 14 York Street, Sandy Bay. The trees in question have been subject to numerous requests from residents in the area for maintenance and their possible removal.

2.2.      In February 2016, a large branch failed on one of the trees and resulted in damage to electricity infrastructure. At this time, a resident expressed concerns about the safety and suitability of both specimens. As a result of this request, a detailed inspection of both trees was completed by a Consulting Arborist engaged by the City.

2.3.      As a result of the inspection, it was recommended that both specimens should be removed due to concerns with the structural integrity of both trees and their potential for failure. Upon approval of the removal of both specimens, the City undertook a communication program to inform residents and stakeholders of the pending removal.

2.4.      As a result of this program, the City has received a number of objections and a petition from residents in the area who do not wish to see the trees removed and correspondence from other residents who wish to see the trees removed.

2.5.      It is the recommendation of Officers that due to their structural integrity and location, the trees be removed with replacement trees planted, to match the existing landscape, as part of the City’s annual tree planting program.


3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      The Council approve the removal of two Blue Gum (Eucalyptus globulus) trees, located in the centre median at York Street (near the corner of Grace Street), Sandy Bay, due to their structural integrity and location.

2.      The replacement specimens be planted to match the existing landscape to be undertaken as part of the City’s annual tree planting program.

3.      The petitioners be advised of the Council’s decision.

 

 

4.         Background

4.1.      The two specimens located at York Street have been subject to ongoing inspections and management for a number of years due to their size and location in the centre median of a street that has approximately 4,700 vehicle movements per day on average.

4.2.      As a result of a large branch failure on one of the specimens in February 2016, (which damaged electrical infrastructure and required attendance by emergency services) concerns were raised about the safety and suitability of both specimens at this location.

4.3.      Due to the failure of the large branch and resident concerns, an inspection of both specimens was completed in March 2016 by a Consulting Arborist. The Arborist report advised that whilst both specimens are considered to be in healthy condition, the structure of both trees displayed characteristics including problems with the branch and trunk unions that could lead to failure of either specimen at any time.

4.4.      The report also noted that in accordance with the Quantified Tree Risk Assessment (QTRA) process (used throughout the arboriculture profession), that whilst both specimens currently present an acceptable risk of potential harm, their current structural integrity combined with being on a relatively busy residential street are strong reasons why both specimens should be removed. It should also be noted that damage to both kerb and channel and road infrastructure is occurring due to the specimens being located in the narrow centre median.

4.5.      Following receipt of the Consulting Arborist’s report (recommending the removal of both specimens), a letter drop was undertaken informing residents of the proposed removal. This information was delivered to properties in Grace and York Streets, between Grosvenor Street and Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay.

In response, three letters of support to remove the specimens and two objections to the removal were received.

4.6.      After further review of the Arborist’s report and the feedback provided, a second letter drop was undertaken (in the same area) informing residents the removal works were proceeding on a nominated date. As a result of this correspondence, an article was published in “The Mercury” newspaper about opposition to the removal by residents in the area.

As a result of this publicity the planned works were deferred and Officers met with the residents’ concerned onsite.

As a result of this meeting, it was proposed the specimen located to the Western side of the centre median be initially removed and the second specimen would again be inspected to determine if it could remain.

The meeting noted that it would be unlikely that the second tree could be retained as specimen is of average structure and greater exposure to wind would increase the risk of failure of the specimen. Those in attendance were also informed they would be advised of the new date for the works to proceed.

4.7.      A third letter drop was undertaken as a result of the meeting informing residents that the planned removals were scheduled for Wednesday 19 October 2016.

On Monday 17 October 2016, a local resident presented the petition signed by nineteen residents opposing the removal of both specimens and requesting the City “to undertake maintenance as required to contribute to the safety of Residents and the health of the trees.”

4.8.      As a result of the receipt of the petition, City Officers met with the petition organiser and three residents to discuss the matter further. As a result of the meeting, it was decided to defer the planned works. The Council, upon the tabling of the petition at its meeting held on 24 October 2016, referred the matter to the next Parks and Recreation Committee meeting for consideration.

4.9.      Separate communication has been received from a number of residents residing in York Street supporting the removal of each specimen

4.10.   On Monday 31 October 2016, another branch fell from one of the specimens.

5.         Proposal and Implementation

5.1.      If supported, the removal of both specimens would be completed by the use of arboriculture contractors. As part of the program to complete this task, traffic control and associated measures would also be implemented to ensure the work can be completed safety with minimal disruption to both residents and stakeholders.

Upon completion of the removal, replacement specimens would be planted to match the existing landscape and this would be undertaken as part of the City’s annual tree planting program.

6.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1.      In accordance with the Capital City Strategic Plan 2015 – 2025, the proposal is aligned with the following strategic objectives;

5.2    Opportunities are embraced and risks are recognised and managed.

5.2.4 –  Identify and manage other risks that have the potential to create an emergency situation.

5.2.7 – Maintain a comprehensive understanding and response to the external environment.

7.         Financial Implications

7.1.      Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1.     The proposed removal of both specimens will be funded from the Arboricultural and Nursery Management budget function.

7.2.      Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1.     There is no impact on future year’s financial results through undertaking this task.

8.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1.      The recommendation to remove both specimens is based on the level of risk the City is exposed to if the trees in question remain. Whilst both specimens are considered to be in a healthy state, their structural integrity combined with their unsuitable location and potential internal faults support the need to undertake the planned removals.

9.         Environmental Considerations

9.1.      As a result of the proposed removal, works, there will be impacts on the surrounding environment and streetscape due to the loss of two mature specimen trees. Replacement specimens will be planted to match the existing landscape and this task will be completed as part of the City’s Annual Tree Planting Program.

10.      Community and Stakeholder Engagement

10.1.   Extensive community engagement has been undertaken which has included letter drops, telephone conversations, responses to customer enquiries and onsite meetings with residents and interested stakeholders.

11.      Delegation

11.1.   This matter is delegated to the Council.

 

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

 

Simon Harrison

Manager Parks and Recreation

Glenn Doyle

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

Date:                            4 November 2016

File Reference:          F16/125192; R0941

 

 

  


Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 31

 

10/11/2016

 

 

6.3    Salvator Rosa Glen Creek Area, West Hobart - Dedication of Operational Land as Public Land

          File Ref: F16/111709; 41-17-01

Report of the Park Planner, Group Manager Open Space and the Director Parks and City Amenity of 4 November 2016 and attachments.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 32

 

10/11/2016

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Salvator Rosa Glen Creek Area, West Hobart - Dedication of Operational Land as Public Land

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Park Planner

Group Manager Open Space

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.      The purpose of this report is to:

1.1.1.    Seek approval to formally dedicate the parcel of land along the Salvator Rosa Glen Creek, located between Salvator Road and Corby Avenue, West Hobart, as Public Land as described under Section 177A of the Local Government Act 1993.

1.1.2.    Seek approval to undertake improvements including the upgrade of the track and the installation of signage.

1.2.      Formal dedication of the land as Public Land, consistent with the adjoining Knocklofty Reserve, will formalise the public recreational status of the land as an entrance into Knocklofty Reserve.

2.         Report Summary

2.1.      The parcel of land along the Salvator Rosa Glen Creek in West Hobart (Title Reference: 121385/1) is located between Salvator Road and Corby Avenue. The land adjoins the south-eastern tip of Knocklofty Reserve, and is approximately 2,000m2.

2.2.      The land is owned by the City of Hobart and has been historically maintained as operational land, with minimal management intervention until recently.

2.3.      Following the widespread removal of willows in 2015, the City rehabilitated the area with native plants and installation of rock stormwater swales.

2.4.      An informal track traverses the area, from lower Salvator Road at the eastern end, to the small gravel car park off Salvator Road at the western end.

2.5.      Formal dedication of the land as Public Land is considered appropriate due to its public open space function as an entrance into Knocklofty Reserve, and the improvement works that have been undertaken.

2.6.      Following dedication of the land, it is proposed that further improvement works be made to the area, including upgrade of the informal walking track, and installation of park signage.

2.7.      Formalisation of the proposed track will provide a safe off-road pedestrian connection between lower Salvator Road and Knocklofty Reserve.

2.8.      A number of local neighbours have been very active in maintaining the area. There are opportunities to build on these relationships, and to investigate volunteer involvement in the management of the area through the City’s Bushcare Program.

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      The City-owned land along Salvator Rosa Glen Creek, located between Salvator Road and Corby Avenue, West Hobart (Title Reference 121385/1) be dedicated as Public Land as described under Section 177A (1) of the Local Government Act 1993 and incorporated as part of Knocklofty Reserve.

2.      The track renewal and signage works be program for 2017/2018 at an estimated cost of $38,000 to be funded from the Bushland and Reserves Asset Renewal Program.

3.      Annual maintenance costs estimated at $5,000 be considered for inclusion in the 2017/2018 Bushland and Reserves operating budget.

 

4.         Background

4.1.      The parcel of land along the Salvator Rosa Glen Creek is located between Salvator Road and Corby Avenue. The land adjoins the south-eastern tip of Knocklofty Reserve in the vicinity of a small gravel car park off Salvator Road (Photo 1 & 2).

 

Photo 1. Salvator Rosa Glen Creek Area West Hobart.

 

 

Photo2. Salavator Rosa Glen Creek Area, in the context of the adjoining Knocklofty Reserve.

4.2.      The lot is approximately 2000m2 and is the bisected by a small waterway known as Salvator Rosa Glen Creek.

4.3.      The creek is surrounded by introduced pasture grasses and recently revegetated embankments, and acts as a soakage. The area is often wet under foot and subject to infrequent inundation, although the creek catchment is relatively small.

4.4.      Photos 3 and 4 show the area in its current condition.

 

Photo 3. Salvator Rosa Glen Creek looking east from the track junction to Knocklofty Reserve.

 

 

Photo 4. Salvator Rosa Glen Creek showing the informal track and rehabilitated embankment.

4.5.      The land is owned by the City and has been historically maintained as operational land, with minimal management intervention until recently.

4.6.      Following the widespread removal of willows in 2015, the City rehabilitated the area including:

4.6.1.    Preparation for re-planting, including weed control and hydro-mulching.

4.6.2.    Re-vegetation of the embankment with native plant species.

4.6.3.    Installation of rock swales along the stormwater outlets from Salvator Road to minimise embankment erosion.

4.7.      An informal track traverses through the area. The western end of the track is of a higher quality than the east, and intersects with the gravel track into Knocklofty Reserve (refer Attachment A). Both the eastern and western entrances to the area are used at times for maintenance access.

4.8.      Formal dedication of the land as Public Land is considered appropriate due to its public open space function as an entrance into Knocklofty Reserve, and the improvement works that have been undertaken.


 

4.9.      Following dedication of the land, the following works are proposed to improve visitor amenity:

4.9.1.    Undertake a property survey to ensure that the upgraded track and other assets are located on City land.

4.9.2.    Upgrade the informal track to a Class 3 standard under the Australian Standards for Walking Tracks AS2156.2-2001.

The track will be constructed of compacted gravel consistent with the adjoining network in Knocklofty Reserve, and be raised approximately 300mm to minimise impact from inundation. See Attachment A for approximate alignment.

4.9.3.    Installation of reserve information and directional signage at either end.

4.10.   The upper section of Salvator Road does not have a footpath, and the narrow road width precludes the construction of one. Formalisation of the proposed track will provide a safe off-road pedestrian connection between lower Salvator Road and Knocklofty Reserve.

4.11.   The City will be responsible for the management of the land following dedication, consistent with the adjoining Knocklofty Reserve.

4.12.   Management will include regular mowing/slashing, maintenance of the revegetation (following completion of the external contract for this), weed management, and maintenance of the new track.

4.13.   A number of local neighbours have been very active in maintaining the area. There are opportunities to build on this relationship, and to investigate volunteer involvement in land management through the City’s Bushcare program.

5.         Proposal and Implementation

5.1.      It is proposed that:

5.1.1.    The land along Salvator Rosa Glen Creek, located between Salvator Road and Corby Avenue, be dedicated as Public Land under the Local Government Act 1993.

5.1.2.    The land be developed and managed as a minor entrance into Knocklofty Reserve.

5.2.      Implementation of this approach will include:

5.2.1.    Updating the Municipal Map to reflect the Public Land status of the Salvator Rosa Glen Creek area.

5.2.2.    Designation of the area as a Bushland and Reserves Unit asset.

5.2.3.    Implementation of the development and management works detailed in Section 4.9.

6.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1.      The Salvator Rosa Glen Creek area was not included in the Council’s Land Review process, however it is recognised as a worthwhile addition to the City’s open space network. The area provides a safe entrance into Knocklofty Reserve for West Hobart residents and other recreational users, and an opportunity to further contribute to riparian management within the City.

7.         Financial Implications

7.1.      Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1.    The City’s City Infrastructure Division funded the establishment and initial maintenance costs of the rehabilitation works, following the removal of the willows from the creek line.

7.1.2.    The establishment costs were in the order of $20,000.

7.1.3.    Maintenance has been undertaken by an external contractor at a cost of approximately $760 per two month block, since 1 April 2015.

7.1.4.    This external arrangement will be finalised on 1 April 2017, and the Bushland and Reserves Unit will take on the maintenance responsibility for the site.

7.2.      Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1.    The track upgrade is estimated to cost in the order of $37,000 ($170 per lineal metre) to be funded from the 2017/18 Bushland and Reserves Asset Renewal Program.

7.2.2.    Park signage is estimated to cost in the order of $1,000.

7.3.      Asset Related Implications

7.3.1.    Annual maintenance of the upgraded track is estimated to cost in the order of $500.

7.3.2.    Annual maintenance of the area, including mowing/slashing, and maintenance of plantings is estimated to cost in the order of $4,500 (approximately $2,000 for mowing and slashing and $2,500 for plantings and weeding).

7.3.3.    There are opportunities for neighbours and the broader community to be involved in the ongoing maintenance of the area, which will contribute to offsetting maintenance costs.

8.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1.      The land along Salvator Rosa Glen Creek will be dedicated as Public Land as described under Section 177A (1) of the Local Government Act 1993.

8.2.      The Municipal Map is to be amended to reflect the changed status of the land, as outlined in Section 177A (2) of the Local Government Act 1993.

8.3.      The Salvator Rosa Glen Creek area will be subject to the City’s Parks, Recreation and Natural Areas Bylaw.

8.4.      It is anticipated that the upgrade of the informal track will be exempt from requiring a planning permit under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. This will be confirmed following on-site investigation for threatened flora and fauna prior to construction.

8.5.      The track will be subject to infrequent inundation due to proximity to Salvator Rosa Glen Creek. The track will be designed and constructed to withstand infrequent inundation (e.g. raised track surface).

9.         Environmental Considerations

9.1.      The Salvator Rosa Glen Creek area was rehabilitated with native plant species in the spring of 2015.

9.2.      The majority of the plantings are located on the steep embankment on the northern side of the creek below the road, and will contribute to bank stabilisation.

9.3.      Three rock lined swales were also installed at the stormwater outfalls to minimise erosion of the embankment.

9.4.      Revegetation and installation of the rock lined swales will also contribute to maintaining water quality in the creek, by increasing filtration and minimising erosion.

10.      Social and Customer Considerations

10.1.   Upgrading the track will provide pedestrians and cyclists with improved access into Knocklofty Reserve from Salvator Road, and a safer alternative to walking on upper Salvator Road, which does not have a footpath.

11.      Community and Stakeholder Engagement

11.1.   Community engagement and notification was undertaken prior to the commencement of the rehabilitation works in 2015. Engagement was directed at local residents adjoining, or within close proximity to, Salvator Rosa Glen Creek. Following this, representations were made to have the area managed as part of Knocklofty Reserve.

11.2.   Dedication of the area as Public Land acknowledges the land’s open space value, and formally recognises it as part of the City’s open space network.

11.3.   A number of local residents are actively involved in the maintenance of the area. Continued community involvement will be encouraged through the City’s Bushcare Program.

11.4.   The Bushcare group that work in Knocklofty Reserve (Friends of Knocklofty Landcare), have been advised of the proposal and possible opportunities to undertake works.

12.      Delegation

12.1.   The matter is delegated to the Council.

 

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

 

Carrie Southern

Park Planner

Robert Mather

Group Manager Open Space

Glenn Doyle

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

 

Date:                            4 November 2016

File Reference:          F16/111709; 41-17-01  

 

 

Attachment a:             Approximate Track Alignment   


Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 40

ATTACHMENT a

 

 

 



Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 41

 

10/11/2016

 

 

6.4    Tasmanian Hockey Centre, New Town - Proposed Optus Infrastructure and Related Sub-Lease

          File Ref: F16/121551; 72-24-1

Report of the Program Leader Recreation and Projects, Manager Parks and Recreation and the Director Parks and City Amenity of 4 November 2016 and attachments.

This matter will also be considered by the Finance Committee at its meeting of 15 November 2016.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 42

 

10/11/2016

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Tasmanian Hockey Centre, New Town - Proposed Optus Infrastructure and Related Sub-Lease

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Program Leader Recreation and Projects

Manager Parks and Recreation

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.      The purpose of this report is to consider a request from Optus to place a mobile phone base station at the Tasmanian Hockey Centre, 1 Bell Street, New Town.

1.2.      The report also seeks consideration of a request from Hockey Tasmania to sub-lease part of the Centre to Optus for the base station.

2.         Report Summary

2.1.      The City has received correspondence from Optus requesting landlord approval to install telecommunication infrastructure at the Tasmanian Hockey Centre, New Town.

2.2.      Hockey Tasmania has also requested permission to enable a sub-lease with Optus at the Centre to allow for the proposed development.

2.3.      The proposal to install a new turret head frame and aerials on an existing light pole at the Centre on the south western corner of the property and a new equipment shelter in close proximity is considered a low impact facility under the City of Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 and as such a development application is not required. 

2.4.      Optus has undertaken community engagement, with a report detailing the results attached to this report (refer Attachment A).

2.5.      During the engagement period, there was one submission received raising concern as to the potential electromagnetic energy related to the proposal.

2.6.      The potential emissions have been assessed and will operate considerably below the Australian Standards which are based on strict World Health Organisation guidelines.

2.7.      As such the report is recommending that landlord approval and the request for the sub-lease be granted.


 

 

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      Landlord approval be granted for the installation of a new turret head frame and aerials on an existing light pole at the Tasmanian Hockey Centre.

2.      Hockey Tasmania be granted approval to enter into a sub-lease with Optus for the site of this proposal on the condition that the expiry of the sub-lease coincides with the expiry of the head lease in 2029.

 

 

4.         Background

4.1.      Optus has recently investigated opportunities to upgrade their services at a number of sites in and around Hobart and have identified areas in North Hobart, New Town, Glebe, South Hobart and Sandy Bay as having poor service.

4.2.      Optus is proposing a number of new installations across the City, a number of which are on City land including:

4.2.1.    Tasmanian Hockey Centre, New Town;

4.2.2.    Sandown Park, Sandy Bay; and

4.2.3.    TCA Ground, Queens Domain.

4.3.      In July 2016, a representative from Optus contacted the lessee of the Tasmanian Hockey Centre to request approval for new infrastructure to be installed at the Hockey Centre to provide an improved coverage in the North Hobart and New Town areas.

4.4.      Hockey Tasmania approved the proposal in-principle for Optus to install a new turret head frame and aerials on an existing light pole at the Centre on the south western corner of the property and a new equipment shelter in close proximity.

4.5.      Hockey Tasmania wrote to the City on 19 August 2016, requesting permission to enter into a sub-lease with Optus and for the 10 year option in their current lease agreement to be enacted thereby allowing the lease until 2029.

4.6.      A letter was sent to Hockey Tasmania granting approval for the 10 year option.

4.7.      Optus also made contact with the City’s Development Appraisal Planner who advised that the proposal was deemed to be low impact under the City of Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 and therefore a development application was not required, however the City would need to see evidence of community engagement prior to considering the request from a landlord perspective.

4.8.      Optus undertook the required consultation which included:

4.8.1.    Letterbox drop to 550 residential, recreational and commercial properties within a 500 metres radius of the proposal.

4.8.2.    Letters addressed to two community sensitive locations (The Friends School and Southern Childcare Services).

4.8.3.    Public advertisement in ‘The Mercury’.

4.8.4.    Two signs placed on site.

4.8.5.    Consultation page on the RFNSA (Radio Frequency National Site Archive) website. 

4.9.      The community engagement concluded on 9 September 2016, with one submission received raising concerns about potential electromagnetic energy from the proposed facility.

4.10.   The consultation report is attached to this report (Attachment A).

4.11.   Optus now requests the City consider the proposal from a landlord perspective and have supplied plans of the proposed development (refer Attachment B).

5.         Proposal and Implementation

5.1.      It is proposed that the Council provide landlord approval for the installation of a new turret head frame and aerials on an existing light pole at the Tasmanian Hockey Centre.

5.2.      It is also proposed that Hockey Tasmania be granted approval to enter into a sub-lease with Optus for the site of this proposal on the condition that the expiry of the sub-lease coincides with the expiry of the head lease in 2029.

6.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1.      The proposal is line with the Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025, Strategic Objective 2.3:

City and regional planning ensures quality design, meets community needs and maintains residential amenity.

7.         Financial Implications

7.1.      Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1.    There will be no financial implication to the City as a result of this proposal.

7.1.2.    Any income from the proposal will be subject to a commercial arrangement between Optus and Hockey Tasmania, with the income utilised to invest into the Centre and provide improved recreational opportunities.

7.2.      Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1.    None foreseen.

7.3.      Asset Related Implications

7.3.1.    All assets will remain the property of Optus, with the exception of the light tower which is owned by Hockey Tasmania.

8.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1.      As noted previously, the proposal does not require a development application as it is considered low impact.

8.2.      The terms of the sub-lease of the facility will need to be considered so as they comply with the lease between the City and Hockey Tasmania.

9.         Environmental Considerations

9.1.      As noted, there was one submission received during the community engagement period which raised concern as to potential electromagnetic energy from the site.

9.2.      Optus have advised that the potential emissions have been assessed and will operate considerably below the Australian Standards which are based on strict World Health Organisation guidelines.

9.3.      The resident who raised the concern has been advised of this and provided with relevant information.

10.      Community and Stakeholder Engagement

10.1.   As noted Optus have undertaken an extensive community engagement process with the results attached to this report (refer Attachment A).

11.      Delegation

11.1.   This matter is delegated to the Council

 

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

 

Shannon avery

Shannon Avery

Program Leader Recreation and Projects

Simon Harrison

Simon Harrison

Manager Parks and Recreation

Glenn Doyle

Glenn Doyle

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

 

Date:                            4 November 2016

File Reference:          F16/121551; 72-24-1

 

 

Attachment a:             Community Engagement Report

Attachment b:             Plans - Tasmanian Hockey Centre   


Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 47

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 54

ATTACHMENT b

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 59

 

10/11/2016

 

 

6.5    Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre Redevelopment

          File Ref: F16/114552; 33-21-13

Report of the Manager Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre and the Director Parks and City Amenity of 4 November 2016.

Delegation:     Committee


Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 60

 

10/11/2016

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre Redevelopment

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Manager Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.      The purpose of this report is to provide feedback on communications with the Glebe Progress Association in relation to the proposed redevelopment of the Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre.

1.2.      The report also provides an update on the development of the Master Plan which will be used to guide the refurbishment and redevelopment of the Centre.

2.         Report Summary

2.1.      The Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre is a very popular community asset.  As the Centre is now almost 20 years old, it is due for significant refurbishment.

2.2.      As reported to the Council previously, an initial planning exercise was undertaken and identified the potential to refurbish the interior of the Centre and undertake redevelopment to incorporate a warm water therapy pool and water slide.

2.3.      An Australian Government Funding Program was identified and a grant application for funding of $7.5M was lodged to enable the redevelopment to proceed. Unfortunately advice has been provided that this application was unsuccessful.

2.4.      A number of stakeholders were consulted during the preparation of the concept redevelopment plans. During this time a meeting was held with representatives of the Glebe Community and the architect.

2.5.      Concerns relating to the proposed redevelopment of the Centre were expressed to Aldermen by the Glebe Progress Association in correspondence dated 22 May 2016. This issue was considered at the Council meeting of 23 May 2016, where the following resolution was approved:

That:   1.    The recommendation be adopted.

            2.    Consideration be given to the matters raised in the correspondence from the Glebe Progress Association of 22 May 2016, with a further report to be provided to the Parks and Recreation Committee.

2.6.      In response to the Council resolution, the General Manager, the Manager Traffic Engineering and the Manager Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre attended a meeting of the Glebe Progress Association on Wednesday 24 August 2016.

2.7.      The meeting was well attended and included a comprehensive presentation on the proposed redevelopment of the Centre. The information provided was well received by those in attendance. The City’s representatives confirmed that there would be additional engagement opportunities provided before the proposed redevelopment is undertaken. 

2.8.      The initial plans were developed in a very short time frame to enable the grant application to be lodged. Given the circumstances and as work is now underway to procure an architect for the project, a review of the initial plans will be undertaken prior to their incorporation into the Master Plan.

 

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      Communication with the Glebe Progress Association regarding the internal refurbishment and proposed redevelopment of the Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre, be received and noted.

2.      The progressive redevelopment of the Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre Redevelopment Master Plan, be noted.

3.      The intent to lodge applications with any funding program that might provide opportunity to secure external funding to enable redevelopment of the Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre, be noted.

 

 

4.         Background

4.1.      The Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre is a very popular community asset. As the Centre is now almost 20 years old, it is due for refurbishment.

4.2.      As reported to Council earlier, initial planning was undertaken to establish the most practical and cost effective way in which the Centre could be improved.

4.3.      Improvements of the infrastructure at the Centre is to be progressed in two ways.

4.3.1.    Refurbishment

4.3.1.1.      There is a significant body of work required to address existing infrastructure within the Centre.  This work includes the following:

(i)      The total refurbishment of the Plant Room and associated mechanical systems.

(ii)     Refurbishment and renewal of the toilets and changerooms.

(iii)    Improved access into the Centre which will also involve the relocation of the entrance and refurbishment of the Cafe.

(iv)    Refurbishment and/ or new spa, sauna and steam room.

4.3.2.    Redevelopment

4.3.2.1.      The second element of the work involves the provision of a new warm water therapy pool and water slide. This work will not be undertaken unless external funding is secured.

4.4.      Initial plans were publicised when the City lodged its original application for grant funding.

4.5.      As a result of this publicity, concerns were raised by the Glebe Community that redevelopment of the Centre (particularly the proposed expansion) would have a detrimental impact on Glebe residents.

4.6.      Attendance at a subsequent meeting of the Glebe Progress Association by the City’s senior officers was well received and appears to have helped to allay the concerns held.

4.7.      There will be further opportunity for community engagement once the Master Plan prepared for the Centre is complete and released for community comment. There will also be an opportunity for any community concerns to be raised during the statutory planning application period.

4.8.      The initial plans prepared for the Centre’s development are undergoing review as a component of the process associated with the procurement of architectural services.

5.         Proposal and Implementation

5.1.      As reported earlier, attendance by senior officers at a Glebe Progress Association meeting was well received.

5.2.      Initial plans associated with the Centre’s upgrade and redevelopment were prepared in a very short time frame to enable the lodgement of a grant funding application.

5.3.      As the grant funding application was unsuccessful there is an opportunity now available to review the initial plans to ensure they remain appropriate.

5.4.      Work is progressing with the appointment of an architectural team to oversee the redevelopment. This will include a review of the initial plans.

5.5.      Once the review of the plan are complete, they will be incorporated into a redevelopment Master Plan for the Centre which will be released for community comment.

6.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1.      The redevelopment of the Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre aligns with Strategic Objective 4.2 of the City’s Strategic Plan 2015-2025:

Develop and maintain the Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre.

7.         Financial Implications

7.1.      Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1.    Physical improvements at the Centre (which has an annual turnover of $5M) will help ensure the future sustainable operation of the facility and avoid the need for operational subsidisation by the City.

7.1.2.    The City’s 10 year capital works program includes the following funding allocations:

2016/2017          $  2,519,386
2017/2017          $  1,020,000
2018/2019          $  8,500,000

Total                   $12,039,386

7.1.3.    An application for grant funding of $7,500,000 was lodged but was unsuccessful.         

7.1.4.    Investigations are underway to identify additional grant funding application to secure the money required to enable the expansion of the centre as proposed.

7.2.      Asset Related Implications

7.2.1.    The majority of the refurbishment works are asset replacement.  The redevelopment component to be funded by the grant funding (if secured) will be new asset and will result in the need to fund increased depreciation.

8.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1.      Refurbishment of the Centre will help mitigate risk associated with the extensive community usage of the facility.

9.         Environmental Considerations

9.1.      Both refurbishment and redevelopment of the Centre will be undertaken in a way to take advantage of contemporary technologies which will help drive down the operational costs of the Centre.

10.      Social and Customer Considerations

10.1.   Refurbishment of the Centre is desperately needed to help meet the needs of members and the customers who use the facility. As detailed in earlier reports the Centre is now 20 years old and fails in many respects to meet contemporary user expectations.

11.      Community and Stakeholder Engagement

11.1.   This report has been generated in response to concerns raised by the Glebe community.

11.2.   Those concerns have been responded to by attendance at a meeting of the Glebe Progress Association.

11.3.   Additional community engagement will be undertaken following the release of the Master Plan once updated. This feedback will be assessed and incorporated into the final plan as appropriate.

11.4.   Additional stakeholder engagement will be undertaken as more detailed plans are developed.

12.      Delegation

12.1.   This matter has been delegated to the Committee.

 

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

 

Susan Buckland

Manager Doone Kennedy Hobart Aquatic Centre

Glenn Doyle

Director Parks and City Amenity

 

Date:                            4 November 2016

File Reference:          F16/114552; 33-21-13

 

 

   


Item No. 7.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 65

 

10/11/2016

 

 

7        Motions of which Notice has been Given

 

7.1      Memorial Plaques on Council Outdoor Furniture

            FILE REF: F16/126012

 

Lord Mayor Alderman Sue Hickey

 

Motion

“That a report be provided to review Council’s current policy on plaques secured / affixed to infrastructure.

 

Rationale:

 

Plaques are important in celebrating the achievements of a community and its members, as well as providing historical context for current and future generations and serving as memorials.

 

The recommendations would need to be costed in such a way, for example, that a durable seat with a plaque would be cost neutral to the Council and that only the on-going maintenance would be borne by the Council.

 

There is great social and economic benefit to be realised through public investment in Council infrastructure.  The social benefit is that an individual, family or group have a sense of belonging and pride in the place they live, work or visit and a physical asset is a tangible way of commemorating a person or an event.  The economic value is realised by Council through a reduction in costs associated with purchasing infrastructure.

 

For the purposes of this motion, the following definition applies for a plaque:

 

A flat tablet of metal which includes text and/or images which commemorate an event or a person and/or provide historical or other information relevant to its location. Such a tablet is attached to an object, building or pavement.

 

This notice of motion is aligned with the Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025:

 

Goal 4 – Strong, Safe and Healthy Communities.

 

4.1      Community connectedness and participation realises the cultural and social potential of the community.

 

It is considered that the report would:

 

1.    Consider the community benefit for plaques to be used for commemorations and celebrations throughout the City.

2.    Address the application process and the commissioning of a standardised plaque to be used in a variety of ways, including the recognition of loved ones; the celebration of a person, event; a gift to the City which celebrates their connection and love of the City.  The plaque would be attached to the backrest of an existing or new seat; park bench; gym equipment; barbeques; planting of trees; picnic furniture; shelters; playgroup equipment, etc.

 

3.    Consider the sensitivity required through the management of memorials in managing the expectations of the next of kin and provide a ‘customer focussed’ notification process should a memorial be damaged, replaced or displaced through redevelopment of an associated site.

 

4.    Explore the opportunity for corporate investment to assist with the provision of the City’s recreational infrastructure where a corporation wishes to commemorate its contribution to the Hobart community by donating such infrastructure and having a plaque to recognise the donation.

 

5.    Review local, national and international government policies and identify guidelines to ensure the wording on the plaques is positive and uplifting to effectively commemorate of the individual, event or donation involved. (See images attached).

 

6.    Consider the introduction of the policy detailed above on the basis that the provision of the infrastructure and plaques will be at no cost to the City.”

 

Images below is examples of plaques that have been installed in Vancouver, Canada

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The General Manager reports:

 

“In line with the Council’s policy in relation to Notices of Motion, I advise that the matter is considered to be within the jurisdiction of the Hobart City Council as it considers a review of the Council’s policy titled Memorial Plaques and Tree Planting in Parks, Bushland and Reserves.

 

 

   


Item No. 8.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 68

 

10/11/2016

 

 

8        Committee Action Status Report

 

8.1      Committee Actions - Status Report

 

A report indicating the status of current decisions is attached for the information of Aldermen.

REcommendation

That the information be received and noted.

Delegation:      Committee

 

 

Attachment a:             Status Report    


Item No. 8.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting - 10/11/2016

Page 69

ATTACHMENT a

 

Page_000001


 

Page_000002


 

Page_000003


 

Page_000004


 

Page_000005


 

Page_000006


 

Page_000007


 

Page_000008


 

Page_000009


 

Page_000010


 

Page_000011


 

Page_000012


 

Page_000013


 

Page_000014

  


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 84

 

10/11/2016

 

 

9.       Questions Without Notice

Section 29 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

File Ref: 13-1-10

 

An Alderman may ask a question without notice of the Chairman, another Alderman, the General Manager or the General Manager’s representative, in line with the following procedures:

1.         The Chairman will refuse to accept a question without notice if it does not relate to the Terms of Reference of the Council committee at which it is asked.

2.         In putting a question without notice, an Alderman must not:

(i)    offer an argument or opinion; or

(ii)   draw any inferences or make any imputations – except so far as may be necessary to explain the question.

3.         The Chairman must not permit any debate of a question without notice or its answer.

4.         The Chairman, Aldermen, General Manager or General Manager’s representative who is asked a question may decline to answer the question, if in the opinion of the respondent it is considered inappropriate due to its being unclear, insulting or improper.

5.         The Chairman may require a question to be put in writing.

6.         Where a question without notice is asked and answered at a meeting, both the question and the response will be recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

7.         Where a response is not able to be provided at the meeting, the question will be taken on notice and

(i)    the minutes of the meeting at which the question is asked will record the question and the fact that it has been taken on notice.

(ii)   a written response will be provided to all Aldermen, at the appropriate time.

(iii)  upon the answer to the question being circulated to Aldermen, both the question and the answer will be listed on the agenda for the next available ordinary meeting of the committee at which it was asked, where it will be listed for noting purposes only.

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting

Page 85

 

10/11/2016

 

 

10.     Closed Portion Of The Meeting

 

The following items were discussed: -

 

Item No. 1          Minutes of the last meeting of the Closed Portion of the Council Meeting

Item No. 2          Consideration of supplementary items to the agenda

Item No. 3          Indications of pecuniary and conflicts of interest

Item No. 4          Committee Action Status Report

Item No. 4.1       Committee Actions - Status Report

LG(MP)R 15(2)(f)

Item No. 5          Reports

Item No. 5.1       The Springs Development Application

LG(MP)R 15(2)(f)

Item No. 6          Questions Without Notice