Minutes (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 2

31/01/2022

The Chairman reports that she has perused the minutes of the meeting of the Open Portion of the Council meeting held on Thursday 16 December 2021 and the minutes of the meeting of the Open Portion of the Special Council meeting held on Thursday, 20 January 2022, finds them to be a true record and recommends that they be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

Burnet

SHERLOCK                                               That the recommendation be adopted.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

The minutes were signed.

The Lord Mayor reported that as part of the role of Lord Mayor and the duties set out under the Local Government Act 1993, she has produced her 2020-2021 annual report.

It outlines the work that is carried out by Councillor Reynolds in her capacity as Lord Mayor to meet the eight specific functions and duties under legislation.

Some interesting statistics in key areas include:

·           Receiving and responding to 1,073 individual items of correspondence

·           225 one-on-one constituent meetings, including at 27 Mayor in the Chair sessions held in places around the City.

·           511 additional meetings with organisations, businesses and government agencies and politicians; and

·           Launched or opened 156 events, hosted 11 receptions, run 26 Town Hall sessions for schools and provided 77 media interviews.

The Report has been made available on the Council’s website.

Attachments

a    Lord Mayor Annual Report 2021   

The Lord Mayor welcomed Katy Cooper who has joined the City’s Executive Leadership Team as Director City Futures.

Katy will play a vital role in helping to shape our transforming city, our story telling and innovative plans that define our City as the ideal place to work, live and play.

Katy will lead the functional areas of strategic planning, city mobility, Design Lab, Welcome (Landing Pad) and Creative City.

Welcome Katy.

On behalf of Mr Ben Lohberger, Ms Kelly Grigsby (CEO) put the following question which was taken on notice by the Lord Mayor.

Question:

Can the Hobart City Council please release the confidential two-page briefing note about UTAS that it has sent to all Aldermen and Councillors, which reveals the Council is "keen to collaborate"  with UTAS on its proposal to redevelop the Sandy Bay campus?

Can the Council please explain how it can secretly collaborate with a property developer while also operating as the planning authority that will shortly be considering planning applications from the same property developer?

A number of HCC Aldermen/Councillors have a current financial association with UTAS, or a historical financial association during the past decade. Can those elected members please reveal their current and/or historical financial links to UTAS, and clarify whether they will exclude themselves from deliberations on UTAS proposals?

Mr Brian Corr put the following question which was taken on notice by the Lord Mayor.

Question:

My question relates to the “Elected Member Expenses Report” (Nov.2020 to Oct.2021, copy attached) and, in particular, the following payments for “Fuel Expenses” in April 2021:

Ald Behrakis     $497.51 excl GST  = $547.62 incl GST

Cr Coats             $410.60 excl GST  = $451.66 incl GST

Both elected members were on 'Leave of Absence' during the claim period, April 2021, being candidates in the state election.

Ald Behrakis claimed an average of $151.69 (incl GST) across the other 11 months of the year, so $547.62 is a major increase, c.3.6 times the average, while on 'Leave of Absence'.

Cr Coats claimed an average of $152.66 (incl GST) across the other 11 months of the year, so $451.66 is a major increase, c.3 times the average, also while on 'Leave of Absence'.

A rough guess is that Ald Behrakis would have travelled c.3,000km, with Cr Coats c.2,500km, based on $1.40 per litre and 8km per litre.

I understand that elected members have a generous petrol allowance, and that there is no separate allowance for depreciation, insurance, servicing, tyres, etc., but in my opinion, these claims, a period when on 'Leave of Absence', doesn't pass the 'pub test'.

My question is in 2 parts:

·         why were these claims accepted and paid, given that they cover a period when Ald Behrakis and Cr Coats were on 'Leave of  Absence'; candidates in the state election?

·         may I please have a copy of the petrol-station receipts involved?

9.1      1/14 Lord Street, 2/14 Lord Street, 12 Lord Street, Sandy Bay - Partial Demolition, Alterations, Extension and Two Multiple Dwellings (Two Existing and Two Proposed)

Ref:    Open CPC 7.1.1, 24/01/2022

Application Expiry Date: 3 February 2022

That the item be referred to the Council without recommendation.

Burnet

Behrakis

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for partial demolition, alterations, extension, and two multiple dwellings (two existing and two proposed), at 1/14 Lord Street, 2/14 Lord Street and 12 Lord Street Sandy Bay 7005 for the reasons outlined in the officer’s report and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:

GEN

The use and/or development must be substantially in accordance with the documents and drawings that comprise PLN­21­532 ­ 1/14 LORD STREET SANDY BAY TAS 7005 ­ Final Planning Documents, except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

TW

The use and/or development must comply with the requirements of TasWater as detailed in the form Submission to Planning Authority Notice, Reference No. TWDA 2021/01404­HCC dated 23 November 2021 as attached to the permit.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

PLN 1

Screening to a height of 1.7m above the finished floor level, with no more than 25% uniform transparency, must be installed and maintained along the western edge of the terrace above the garage prior to first occupation.

Reason for condition

To provide reasonable opportunity for privacy for dwellings.

PLN s1

No works are approved on 11 Duke Street as part of this planning permit.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

ENG sw1

All stormwater from the proposed development (including but not limited to: roofed areas, ag drains, and impervious surfaces such as driveways and paved areas) must be drained to the Council’s stormwater infrastructure prior to first occupation or commencement of use (whichever occurs first).

Any private or private shared stormwater system passing through third­party land must have sufficient receiving capacity.

Reason for condition

To ensure that stormwater from the site will be discharged to a suitable Council approved outlet.

ENG 3a

The access driveway, and parking module (parking spaces, aisles and manoeuvring area) must be designed and constructed in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 (including the requirement for vehicle safety barriers where required), or a Council approved alternate design certified by a suitably qualified engineer to provide a safe and efficient access, and enable safe, easy and efficient use.

Advice:

It is advised that designers consider the detailed design of the access and parking module prior to finalising the Finished Floor Level (FFL) of the parking spaces (especially if located within a garage incorporated into the dwelling), as failure to do so may result in difficulty complying with this condition.

Reason for condition

To ensure the safety of users of the access and parking module, and compliance with the relevant Australian Standard.

ENG 4

The access driveway and parking module (car parking spaces, aisles and manoeuvring area) approved by this permit must be constructed to a sealed standard (spray seal, asphalt, concrete, pavers or equivalent Council approved) and surface drained to the Council's stormwater infrastructure prior to the commencement of use.

Reason for condition

To ensure the safety of users of the access driveway and parking module, and that it does not detract from the amenity of users, adjoining occupiers or the environment by preventing dust, mud and sediment transport.

ENG 1

Any damage to council infrastructure resulting from the implementation of this permit, must, at the discretion of the Council:

1.         Be met by the owner by way of reimbursement (cost of repair and reinstatement to be paid by the owner to the Council); or

2.         Be repaired and reinstated by the owner to the satisfaction of the Council.

A photographic record of the Council's infrastructure adjacent to the subject site must be provided to the Council prior to any commencement of works.

A photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure (e.g. existing property service connection points, roads, buildings, stormwater, footpaths, driveway crossovers and nature strips, including if any, pre­existing damage) will be relied upon to establish the extent of damage caused to the Council’s infrastructure during construction. In the event that the owner/developer fails to provide to the Council a photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure, then any damage to the Council's infrastructure found on completion of works will be deemed to be the responsibility of the owner.

Reason for condition

To ensure that any of the Council's infrastructure and/or site­related service connections affected by the proposal will be altered and/or reinstated at the owner’s full cost.

ENV 1

Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to prevent sediment from leaving the site must be installed prior to any disturbance of the site, and maintained until all areas of disturbance have been stabilized or re­vegetated.

Advice:

For further guidance in preparing a Soil and Water Management Plan – in accordance with Fact sheet 3 Derwent Estuary Program click here.

Reason for condition

To avoid the sedimentation of roads, drains, natural watercourses, Council land that could be caused by erosion and runoff from the development, and to comply with relevant State legislation.

ADVICE

The following advice is provided to you to assist in the implementation of the planning permit that has been issued subject to the conditions above. The advice is not exhaustive and you must inform yourself of any other legislation, by­laws, regulations, codes or standards that will apply to your development under which you may need to obtain an approval. Visit the Council's website for further information.

Prior to any commencement of work on the site or commencement of use the following additional permits/approval may be required from the Hobart City Council.

BUILDING PERMIT

You may need building approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016. Click here for more information.

This is a Discretionary Planning Permit issued in accordance with section 57 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.

PLUMBING PERMIT

You may need plumbing approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016, Building Regulations 2016 and the National Construction Code. Click here for more information.

STORMWATER

Please note that in addition to a building and/or plumbing permit, development must be in accordance with the Hobart City Council’s Infrastructure By law. Click here for more information.

RIGHT OF WAY

The private right of way must not be reduced, restricted or impeded in any way, and all beneficiaries must have complete and unrestricted access at all times.

You should inform yourself as to your rights and responsibilities in respect to the private right of way particularly reducing, restricting or impeding the right during and after construction.

STRATA AMENDMENT

You will be required to amend strata plan 59085 pursuant to the provisions of the Strata Titles Act 1998 in order to reflect the completed development works.

FEES AND CHARGES

Click here for information on the Council's fees and charges.

DIAL BEFORE YOU DIG

Click here for dial before you dig information.

Amendment

Sherlock

Fox                                                                                                                                

That an additional condition be included which reads:

PLN s2

The doors between the dwelling on Lot 2 and the private open space for that dwelling must be sliding doors.

AMENDMENT CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

SUBSTANTIVE MOTION LOST

VOTING RECORD

Coats

Briscoe         

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council refuse the application for partial demolition, alterations, extension, and two multiple dwellings (two existing and two proposed), at 1/14 Lord Street, 2/14 Lord Street and 12 Lord Street, Sandy Bay for the following reasons:

1.    The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or performance criterion with respect to clause 11.4.3 P1(b) or (c) because the proposal the new dwelling has insufficient private open space and insufficient space for gardens and landscaping.

2.    The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or performance criterion with respect to clause 11.4.3 P2(b) because the private open space will not receive any or sufficient sunlight.

3.    The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or performance criterion with respect to E6.7.3 P1 because no vehicle passing area is proposed but is required in the circumstances.

MOTION LOST

VOTING RECORD

COUNCIL RESOLUTION:

In the absence of a decision from the Council, this application will be determined by the Director City Planning pursuant to a delegation under section 6(3) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, as set out below:

To exercise the power of the Council as planning authority pursuant to Section 59 (7) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 to determine applications where no request to make a decision has been lodged with the Resource Management and Appeal Tribunal.

9.2      62-66 Clare Street, New Town - Partial Demolition, Alterations and Extension

Ref:    Open CPC 7.1.3, 24/01/2022

Application Expiry Date: 16 February 2022

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for partial demolition, alterations and extension at 62­66 Clare Street, New Town 7008 for the reasons outlined in the officer’s report attached to item 7.1.3 of the Open City Planning Committee agenda of 24 January 2022 and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:

GEN

The use and/or development must be substantially in accordance with the documents and drawings that comprise PLN­21­693 ­ 62­66 CLARE STREET NEW TOWN TAS 7008 ­ Final Planning Documents except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

ENG sw1

All stormwater from the proposed development (including but not limited to: roofed areas, ag drains, retaining wall ag drains and impervious surfaces such as driveways and paved areas) must be drained to the Council’s stormwater infrastructure prior to first occupation or commencement of use (whichever occurs first).

Any private or private shared stormwater system passing through third­party land must have sufficient receiving capacity.

Advice:

Under section 23 of the Urban Drainage Act 2013 it is an offence for a property owner to direct stormwater onto a neighbouring property.

Reason for condition

To ensure that stormwater from the site will be discharged to a suitable Council approved outlet.

SW 9

Prior to occupancy or the commencement of the approved use (whichever occurs first), stormwater discharges from the development must be installed.

A stormwater management report and design must be submitted and approved prior to the issue of any approval under the Building Act 2016 or the commencement of work on the site (whichever occurs first). The stormwater management report and design must be prepared by a suitably qualified engineer and must:

1.      Include detailed design and supporting calculations of the detention tank showing:

1.      detention tank sizing such that there is no increase in flows from the developed site up to 5% AEP event and no worsening of flooding;

2.      the layout, the inlet and outlet (including long section), outlet size, overflow mechanism and invert level;

3.      the discharge rates and emptying times; and

4.      all assumptions must be clearly stated;

2.      Include a supporting maintenance plan, which specifies the required maintenance measures to check and ensure the ongoing effective operation of all systems, such as: inspection frequency; cleanout procedures; descriptions and diagrams of how the installed systems operate; details of the life of assets and replacement requirements.

All work required by this condition must be undertaken and maintained in accordance with the approved stormwater management report and design.

ENG 1

Any damage to council infrastructure resulting from the implementation of this permit, must, at the discretion of the Council:

1.      Be met by the owner by way of reimbursement (cost of repair and reinstatement to be paid by the owner to the Council); or

2.      Be repaired and reinstated by the owner to the satisfaction of the Council.

A photographic record of the Council's infrastructure adjacent to the subject site must be provided to the Council prior to any commencement of works.

A photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure (e.g. existing property service connection points, roads, buildings, stormwater, footpaths, driveway crossovers and nature strips, including if any, pre­existing damage) will be relied upon to establish the extent of damage caused to the Council’s infrastructure during construction. In the event that the owner/developer fails to provide to the Council a photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure, then any damage to the Council's infrastructure found on completion of works will be deemed to be the responsibility of the owner.

Reason for condition

To ensure that any of the Council's infrastructure and/or site­related service connections affected by the proposal will be altered and/or reinstated at the owner’s full cost.

ENV 1

Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to prevent sediment from leaving the site must be installed prior to any disturbance of the site, and maintained until all areas of disturbance have been stabilized or re­vegetated.

Advice:

For further guidance in preparing a Soil and Water Management Plan – in accordance with Fact sheet 3 Derwent Estuary Program click here.

Reason for condition

To avoid the sedimentation of roads, drains, natural watercourses, Council land that could be caused by erosion and runoff from the development, and to comply with relevant State legislation.

HER 18

The Radiata Pine trees must be protected throughout excavation and post construction.

A report must be submitted for approval as a Condition Endorsement prior to the commencement of work. The report must:

1.      Be prepared by a suitable qualified person; and

2.      Show all tree protection zones and relevant measures specified under Section 3 Determining the Protection Zones of the Selected Trees, Section 4 Tree Protection Measures and Section 5 Monitoring and Certification of AS 4970­2009 Protection of trees on development sites, around the Radiata Pine.

All work required by this condition must be undertaken in accordance with the approved report.

Advice:

This condition requires further information to be submitted as a Condition Endorsement. Refer to the Condition Endorsement advice at the end of this permit.

Reason for condition

To ensure that development at a heritage place is undertaken in a sympathetic manner which does not cause loss of historic cultural heritage significance.

OPS 3

The four Pittosporum trees identified for removal are to be removed prior to the commencement of other works.

Replacement trees will be required, two for everyone to be removed, to the satisfaction of the Director City Amenity.

On completion of planting of all trees, the developer must arrange for an installation inspection by the Council. Once all the trees have been planted to the satisfaction of the Council's Director City Amenity, the Council will issue a statement confirming satisfactory planting of all street trees.

All street trees must then be watered and maintained in a healthy state by the developer for a period of two (2) years from the date of that statement.

Advice:

For further information regarding satisfaction of this condition, and to arrange an Installation Inspection by the Council, please liaise with the Council's Program Leader Arboriculture and Nursery by phoning 6238 2807.

A final plan showing the tree protection measures and the location of replacement plantings is to be submitted before building approval is sought or before works commence, whichever occurs sooner.

Once the plan has been approved, the Council will issue a condition endorsement (see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement). It is recommended that documentation for condition endorsement be submitted well before submitting documentation for building approval. Failure to address condition endorsement requirements prior to submitting for building approval may result in unexpected delays.

Reason for condition

To ensure that the amenity of public open space is maintained and that works are undertaken in accordance with the City of Hobart Street Tree Strategy 2017 and Australian Standard AS 4970 Protection of trees on development sites.

OPS 5

All trees to be retained in the vicinity of the development site and in particular the closest Pinus radiata pine tree, must be protected from damage during works. Canopies, trunks and root protection zones (as defined as the Tree Protection Zone in the Australian Standard for Protection of trees on development sites AS4970) are to be protected from damage, or compensation will be payable.

Before works commence, tree protection fencing must be installed around the trees to be retained. No vehicular access, excavation, placement of fill, storage of materials or soil disturbance is to occur within the fencing. There must be no pruning, lopping or damage to the tree (including its trunk and roots). Details of tree protection measures must be clearly notated on any plans submitted to the Council under the Building Act 2016.

A final plan showing the tree protection measures and the location of replacement plantings must be submitted before building approval is sought or before works commence, whichever occurs sooner.

Advice:

Once the plan has been approved the Council will issue a condition endorsement (see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement). It is recommended that documentation for condition endorsement be submitted well before submitting documentation for building approval. Failure to address condition endorsement requirements prior to submitting for building approval may result in unexpected delays.

Reason for condition

To ensure that the amenity of public open space is maintained and that works are undertaken in accordance with the City of Hobart Street Tree Strategy 2017 and Australian Standard AS 4970 Protection of trees on development sites and that to ensure that development at a heritage place is undertaken in a sympathetic manner which does not cause loss of historic cultural heritage significance.

ADVICE

The following advice is provided to you to assist in the implementation of the planning permit that has been issued subject to the conditions above. The advice is not exhaustive and you must inform yourself of any other legislation, by­laws, regulations, codes or standards that will apply to your development under which you may need to obtain an approval. Visit the Council's website for further information.

Prior to any commencement of work on the site or commencement of use the following additional permits/approval may be required from the Hobart City Council.

CONDITION ENDORSEMENT

If any condition requires that further documents are submitted and approved, you will need to submit the relevant documentation to satisfy the condition via the Condition Endorsement Submission on Council's online services e­planning portal. Detailed instructions can be found here.

A fee of 2% of the value of the works for new public assets (stormwater infrastructure, roads and related assets) will apply for the condition endorsement application.

Once approved, the Council will respond to you via email that the condition has been endorsed (satisfied).

Where building approval is also required, it is recommended that documentation for condition endorsement be submitted well before submitting documentation for building approval. Failure to address condition endorsement requirements prior to submitting for building approval may result in unexpected delays.

BUILDING PERMIT

You may need building approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016. Click here for more information.

This is a Discretionary Planning Permit issued in accordance with section 57 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.

PLUMBING PERMIT

You may need plumbing approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016, Building Regulations 2016 and the National Construction Code. Click here for more information.

NOISE REGULATIONS

Click here for information with respect to noise nuisances in residential areas.

WASTE DISPOSAL

It is recommended that the developer liaise with the Council’s Cleansing and Solid Waste Unit regarding reducing, reusing and recycling materials associated with demolition on the site to minimise solid waste being directed to landfill.

Further information regarding waste disposal can also be found on the Council’s website.

DIAL BEFORE YOU DIG

Click here for dial before you dig information.

Burnet

Harvey                                                  That the recommendation be adopted.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

9.3      30 McRobies Road, South Hobart - Outbuilding (Storage Shed)

Ref:    Open CPC 7.1.5, 24/01/2022

Application Expiry Date: 14 February 2022

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for outbuilding (storage shed) at 30 McRobies Road, South Hobart 7004 for the reasons outlined in the officer’s report attached to item 7.1.5 of the Open City Planning Committee agenda of 24 January 2022 and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:

GEN

The use and/or development must be substantially in accordance with the documents and drawings that comprise PLN­21­492 ­ 30 MCROBIES ROAD SOUTH HOBART TAS 7004 ­ Final Planning Documents, except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

ENG sw1

All stormwater from the proposed development (including but not limited to: roofed areas, ag drains, retaining wall ag drains and impervious surfaces such as driveways and paved areas) must be drained to the Council’s stormwater infrastructure prior to first occupation or commencement of use (whichever occurs first).

Any private or private shared stormwater system passing through third­party land must have sufficient receiving capacity.

Advice:

Under section 23 of the Urban Drainage Act 2013 it is an offence for a property owner to direct stormwater onto a neighbouring property.

Reason for condition

To ensure that stormwater from the site will be discharged to a suitable Council approved outlet.

ENG 1

Any damage to council infrastructure resulting from the implementation of this permit, must, at the discretion of the Council:

1.      Be met by the owner by way of reimbursement (cost of repair and reinstatement to be paid by the owner to the Council); or

2.      Be repaired and reinstated by the owner to the satisfaction of the Council.

A photographic record of the Council's infrastructure adjacent to the subject site must be provided to the Council prior to any commencement of works.

A photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure (e.g. existing property service connection points, roads, buildings, stormwater, footpaths, driveway crossovers and nature strips, including if any, pre­existing damage) will be relied upon to establish the extent of damage caused to the Council’s infrastructure during construction. In the event that the owner/developer fails to provide to the Council a photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure, then any damage to the Council's infrastructure found on completion of works will be deemed to be the responsibility of the owner.

Reason for condition

To ensure that any of the Council's infrastructure and/or site­related service connections affected by the proposal will be altered and/or reinstated at the owner’s full cost.

ENV 1

Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to prevent sediment from leaving the site must be installed prior to any disturbance of the site, and maintained until all areas of disturbance have been stabilised or re­vegetated.

Advice:

For further guidance in preparing a Soil and Water Management Plan – in accordance with Fact sheet 3 Derwent Estuary Program click here.

Reason for condition

To avoid the sedimentation of roads, drains, natural watercourses, Council land that could be caused by erosion and runoff from the development, and to comply with relevant State legislation.

ADVICE

The following advice is provided to you to assist in the implementation of the planning permit that has been issued subject to the conditions above. The advice is not exhaustive and you must inform yourself of any other legislation, by­laws, regulations, codes or standards that will apply to your development under which you may need to obtain an approval. Visit the Council's website for further information.

Prior to any commencement of work on the site or commencement of use the following additional permits/approval may be required from the Hobart City Council.

BUILDING PERMIT

You may need building approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016. Click here for more information.

This is a Discretionary Planning Permit issued in accordance with section 57 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.

PLUMBING PERMIT

You may need plumbing approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016, Building Regulations 2016 and the National Construction Code. Click here for more information.

STORMWATER

Please note that in addition to a building and/or plumbing permit, development must be in accordance with the Hobart City Council’s Infrastructure By law. Click here for more information.

FEES AND CHARGES

Click here for information on the Council's fees and charges.

DIAL BEFORE YOU DIG

Click here for dial before you dig information.

Burnet

Behrakis                                              That the recommendation be adopted.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

10.      Monthly Building Statistics - 1 December - 31 December 2021

Ref:    Open CPC 8.1, 24/01/2022

That the building statistical report of the Director City Planning be received and noted:

During the period 1 December 2021 to 31 December 2021, 46 permits were issued to the value of $15,427,382 which included:

(i)      25 for extensions/alterations to dwellings to the value of $3,734,587;

(ii)     6 new dwellings to the value of $2,363,195;

(iii)    27 new multiple dwellings to the value of $3,950,000; and

(iv)    1 major project:

(a)     431 Elizabeth Street, North Hobart - 27 Multiple Dwellings - $3,950,000;

During the period 1 December 2020 to 31 December 2020, 56 permits were issued to the value of $11,649,479 which included:

(i)      31 for extensions/alterations to dwellings to the value of $4,509,648;

(ii)     7 new dwellings to the value of $2,567,000;

(iii)    2 new multiple dwellings to the value of $500,000; and

(iv)    0 major projects:

In the twelve months ending December 2021, 608 permits were issued to the value of $254,943,922; and

In the twelve months ending December 2020, 641 permits were issued to the value of $180,406,244.

Burnet

SHERLOCK                                             That the recommendation be adopted.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

11.      Monthly Planning Statistics - 1 December - 31 December 2021

Ref:    Open CPC 8.2, 24/01/2022

That the planning statistical report of the Director City Planning be received and noted:

During the period 1 December 2021 to 31 December 2021, 65 permits were issued to the value of $58,775,140 which included:

(i)      6 new single dwellings to the value of $3,380,000;

(ii)     1 multiple dwellings to the value of $100,000;

(iii)    25 extensions/alterations to dwellings to the value of $3,252,204;

(iv)   13 extensions/alterations to commercial properties to the value of $27,507,136;

(v)     2 major projects:

(a)     225 Harrington Street, Hobart - Partial Demolition, Alterations, New Building for Residential (Hostel), Alterations to Access and Associated Works - $16,000,000;

(b)     87-91 Campbell Street, Hobart - Partial Demolition, Alterations, Extension and New Building for Residential (Communal Residence), Educational and Occasional Care, and Food Services - $9,863,636;

During the period 1 December 2020 to 31 December 2020, 82 permits were issued to the value of $31,591,689 which included:

(i)      10 new single dwellings to the value of $3,954,000;

(ii)     19 multiple dwellings to the value of $6,997,000;

(iii)    43 extensions/alterations to dwellings to the value of $7,458,964;

(iv)   11 extensions/alterations to commercial properties to the value of $12,992,060;

(v)     3 major projects:

(a)     23 Commercial Road, North Hobart - Partial Demolition, Alterations, Extension, New Building for Educational and Occasional Care (Gymnasium), Signage and Associated Works - $9,400,000;

(b)     30 Romilly Street, South Hobart - Subdivision (Boundary Adjustment), 10 Multiple Dwellings (Nine New, One Existing), Works in Road Reserve and Associated Hydraulic Infrastructure - $3,600,000;

(c)     125 Bathurst Street, Hobart - Partial Demolition and New Building for Seven Multiple Dwellings and Food Services - $3,000,000;

In the twelve months ending December 2021, 735 permits were issued to the value of $284,761,309; and

In the twelve months ending December 2020, 802 permits were issued to the value of $300,100,753.

# This report includes permits issued, exempt and no permit required decisions.

Burnet

Sherlock                                            That the recommendation be adopted.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

12.      E-Scooter Trial

Alderman Briscoe, Alderman Zucco

Motion

“As a matter of firm and strong leadership from the Council

That the current trial for e – scooters be paused for at least a month to enable an urgent report on the following. (Noting that the resumption of the trial would depend on the full council be satisfied with allowed areas and speeds)

A)

1.   The safety or near misses issues that have arisen to be comprehensively assessed

2.   The statistics on injuries be collated from ED reports or otherwise

3.   Changes to the policies such as possible lower speed limits or increase the no entry zones that could be implemented to increase safety

4.   The idea of having formal drop off /pick up points

5.   A publicity and/or police blitz to encourage compliance

6.   Other feedback from the public via emails, messages, FB comments or the Councils own e scooter portal be collated

7.   Evidence that it has reduced  (or not) vehicle use and congestion in the city rather than just a transfer of walking to e scooters (ie reducing active transport)

8.   Evidence from the two operators on unsatisfactory practices or issues they have experienced and how they will improve

9.   The suitability or physical state of the inner city footpaths to have them as a shared space with e scooters

10. Other relevant safety and regulatory information from other Australian cities

11. Consultation with the relevant disability & elderly associations.

B)        The revenue to the city from the operators to be made public”

Rationale:

“A)

It has been stated that 20,000 e scooters journeys a week have been undertaken in Hobart leading to possibly 80,000 journeys during the trial period so far. This is a sufficient data set to do a preliminary evaluation.

Many cases of people inappropriately using e scooters have been reported including doubling up, vandalism, kids under 16 using them, no helmets, inappropriate speeds and other unsafe practices.

The current Covid crisis means that the health system is under strain. It is not the right time to add further drains to Police and Health resources.

The city can reduce injuries during this time that require ED. Other cities such has Brisbane have huge number of ED presentations including serious injury deaths from conflicts with e-scooters.

Disability advocates and more senior citizens have expressed deep concerns on the use of scooters on footpaths. The concept of a footpath as a shared space with recreational vehicles could be considered to be a deeply flawed concept in hilly Hobart.

The city needs evidence based data to see whether or not congestion or vehicle use has been reduced rather than just ‘good intentions’. That walking has been replaced by use of e scooters maybe is what is happening.

Our footpaths are not in a good state to have powered vehicles due to uneven and varying surfaces, narrow width, overhanging branches and business signs.

Having no formal drop-off or pickup points means that the scooters are left anywhere, often inappropriate places causing safety and other issues.

B)

That the revenue from the operators to the city is ‘Commercial in Confidence’ does not fit in with a good governance model when other commercial rates and fees and charges (e.g. parking) are open and transparent.”

Zucco

Briscoe                                               

That the following revised motion be adopted:

As a matter of firm and strong leadership from the Council:

1.    The Council in conjunction with e-scooter providers undertake urgent consultations with relevant disabled and senior associations including the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner and Tasmania Police regarding the use of scooters on public footpaths with an urgent report back to the Council with outcomes by the end of 28 February 2022, or as soon as practicable thereafter.

2.    That an audit of all footpaths in the permitted zones, be audited by Council officers in consultation with e-scooter operators to assess them for suitability for hire e-scooter use, taking into consideration the width of the footpath to allow for safe two-way passing, the safety of the footpath surface, the gradient of footpaths and any other relevant factor impacting rider and pedestrian safety as part of an urgent report.

3.    That as part of the Audit an overlay be prepared for the use of e-scooters on all footpaths within the current use zone to determine which footpaths within the zone should be prohibited from use and which would be acceptable for use, including options in dealing with the appropriate parking of e-scooters not creating a nuisance or safety issues to others as part of the consultation process in clause 1.

4.    That the necessary action be taken to lower the maximum speed on appropriate footpaths for e-scooters from 15km to 10 km/ph.

5.    That the e-scooter operators implement a Zero Tolerance policy (as per the conditions of hire) for appropriate breaches of use that is reported or known by the operators on the basis of or similar that are;

a.    First Breach – Immediate one month suspension use

b.    Second Breach – 3 month suspension of use

c.    Third Breach – 1 year suspension of use

d.    Any third party booking that allows a suspended user to use an e-scooter - immediate 6 month suspension of use 

6.    That the e-scooter operators immediately implement a 1300 number and or other options so members of the public are able to report any breaches of use and the detail of such breaches are reported to Tasmania Police and the Hobart City Council.

7.    That a further report be prepared and prioritised within 3 to 6 months to address the following issues and concerns which have been raised by community groups, business groups, advocacy groups and members of the public

·                what the objectives are of the introduction of hire e-scooters into our city, such as reduce need for car travel

·                a summary of the policies that other Australian cities have in relation to hire e-scooter use, including permitted areas and maximum speeds

·                how the issues of e-scooter riders under the age of 16 will be addressed or the feasibility or reducing the minimum age and in particular, any insurance issues in this situation

·                the number and nature of safety incidents and near misses to date

·                the number and nature of (positive and negative) feedback on the trial received by the Council to date from all sources, including social media and corporate correspondence

·                the feasibility of designated pick up and drop off points and e-scooter parking 

·                the statistics on injuries be collated from emergency department reports or otherwise

·                the criteria for determining no-go zones, an assessment of current and potential no-go zones and outline of the timelines and process associated with adjusting no-go zones

·                how public education will be undertaken and associated roles, responsibilities, times frames, costs and measures of success

·                the outcome of discussion with Tasmania Police in relation the capacity and capability to promote compliance and address non-compliance

·                what information and data will be used during and beyond the trial to assess what, if any, impact the introduction of hire e-scooters is having on traffic and parking

·                what, if any, impact the trial has had to date on traffic congestion and the basis on which this statement is made

·                what, if any, impact the trial has had on users choosing to use an hire e-scooter rather than walking and the basis on which this statement is made

·                how seasonality will impact the safety and prevalence of scooters, such as decreased usage during icy winters 

·                evidence from the two operators on unsatisfactory practices or issues they have experienced and how they will improve

·                the feasibility of the monthly reports that are provided by the companies to the Council, being made public rather than ‘commercial in confidence’

·                A detailed criteria for success of the trial be provided which is made publicly available.

8.    The estimated revenue the city is expected to receive from the operators and the basis on which this revenue is calculated be made public.

Rationale

To many visitors and residents alike the availability of shared e scooters have enabled many to have a fun experience with a different transport device. The movers of this motion accept that. We don’t want to be the ‘fun police’. Neither is this motion a ‘knee jerk’ reaction. However, the safety of our residents and visitors should be paramount to the council. The introduction of the e scooters has been problematic and important groups such as the police were not consulted. The companies have ramped up the compliance and safety messages.

Aldermen Zucco and Briscoe have had a recent meeting with the operators of the e-scooter companies to discuss ways to improve safety. Some of the ideas discussed have been accepted by the companies in a letter to the elected members.

It has been stated that 20,000 e scooters journeys a week have been undertaken in Hobart leading to possibly 80,000 journeys during the trial period so far. This is a sufficient data set to do a preliminary evaluation.

Many cases of people inappropriately using e-scooters have been reported including doubling  up, vandalism, kids under 16 using them, no helmets, inappropriate speeds and other unsafe practices.

The current Covid crisis means that the health system is under strain. It is not the right time to add further drains to Police and Health resources.

The city can reduce injuries during this time that require ED. Other cities such has Brisbane have huge number of ED presentations including serious injury deaths from conflicts with e-scooters. Melbourne is currently having a trial but excludes use of footpaths.

Disability advocates, the discrimination Commission and senior citizen groups have expressed deep concerns on the use of scooters on footpaths. The concept of a footpath as a shared space with recreational vehicles could be considered to be a deeply flawed concept in hilly Hobart.

The city needs evidence based data to see whether or not congestion or vehicle use has been reduced rather than just ‘good intentions’. That walking has been replaced by use of e scooters maybe is what is happening. Recent international research has shown that mode switches are occurring from more environmentally transport such as walking, cycling and public transport.

 (See Mode choice, substitution patterns and environmental impacts of shared and personal micro-mobility Daniel J. Reck a , Henry Martin b,c , Kay W. Axhausen)

Our inner city footpaths may not in a good state to have powered vehicles due to uneven and varying surfaces, narrow width, overhanging branches and business signs hence need for a detailed audit. It is intended that e-scooters would remain allowed bike paths or shared paths such as the intercity cycleway and linear park.

Having no formal drop off or pickup points means that the scooters are left anywhere, often inappropriate places causing safety and other issues.

That the revenue from the operators to the city is ‘Commercial in confidence’ does not fit in with a good governance model when other commercial rates and fees and charges (e.g. parking) are open and transparent.

Briscoe

Behrakis                                                                                                                   

That Alderman Zucco be granted an additional two minutes to address the meeting.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

Burnet

Behrakis                                                                                                                   

That Alderman Briscoe be granted an additional one minute to address the meeting.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

Burnet

SHERLOCK                                                                                                                  

That Alderman Behrakis be granted an additional one minute to address the meeting.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

Behrakis
SHERLOCK                                                                                                                  

That Councillor Harvey be granted an additional one minute to address the meeting.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

The Lord Mayor then put the motion.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

Motion

Harvey

Sherlock                                                                                                                  

That:            1.    The Council acknowledges the high user rate and popularity of e-scooters in Hobart.

2.     The Council recognises the shortage of safe, separated bike and scooter lanes; and commits to a report to accelerating development of infrastructure to create a safer environment for pedestrians, bike riders and scooter users.

Zucco

Behrakis                                                                                                                   

That the vote for clause 1 and 2 be taken separately.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

The Lord Mayor then put clause 1 of the motion.

MOTION CARRIED
CLAUSE ONE

VOTING RECORD

The Lord Mayor then put clause 2 of the motion.

MOTION CARRIED
CLAUSE 2

VOTING RECORD

COUNCIL RESOLUTION:

PART A

As a matter of firm and strong leadership from the Council:

1.     The Council in conjunction with e-scooter providers undertake urgent consultations with relevant disabled and senior associations including the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner and Tasmania Police regarding the use of scooters on public footpaths with an urgent report back to the Council with outcomes by the end of 28 February 2022, or as soon as practicable thereafter.

2.     That an audit of all footpaths in the permitted zones, be audited by Council officers in consultation with e-scooter operators to assess them for suitability for hire e-scooter use, taking into consideration the width of the footpath to allow for safe two-way passing, the safety of the footpath surface, the gradient of footpaths and any other relevant factor impacting rider and pedestrian safety as part of an urgent report.

3.     That as part of the Audit an overlay be prepared for the use of e-scooters on all footpaths within the current use zone to determine which footpaths within the zone should be prohibited from use and which would be acceptable for use, including options in dealing with the appropriate parking of e-scooters not creating a nuisance or safety issues to others as part of the consultation process in clause 1.

4.     That the necessary action be taken to lower the maximum speed on appropriate footpaths for e-scooters from 15km to 10 km/ph.

5.     That the e-scooter operators implement a Zero Tolerance policy (as per the conditions of hire) for appropriate breaches of use that is reported or known by the operators on the basis of or similar that are;

a.    First Breach – Immediate one month suspension use

b.    Second Breach – 3 month suspension of use

c.    Third Breach – 1 year suspension of use

d.    Any third party booking that allows a suspended user to use an e-scooter - immediate 6 month suspension of use 

6.     That the e-scooter operators immediately implement a 1300 number and or other options so members of the public are able to report any breaches of use and the detail of such breaches are reported to Tasmania Police and the Hobart City Council.

7.     That a further report be prepared and prioritised within 3 to 6 months to address the following issues and concerns which have been raised by community groups, business groups, advocacy groups and members of the public:

·                what the objectives are of the introduction of hire e-scooters into our city, such as reduce need for car travel

·                a summary of the policies that other Australian cities have in relation to hire e-scooter use, including permitted areas and maximum speeds

·                how the issues of e-scooter riders under the age of 16 will be addressed or the feasibility or reducing the minimum age and in particular, any insurance issues in this situation

·                the number and nature of safety incidents and near misses to date

·                the number and nature of (positive and negative) feedback on the trial received by the Council to date from all sources, including social media and corporate correspondence

·                the feasibility of designated pick up and drop off points and e-scooter parking 

·                the statistics on injuries be collated from emergency department reports or otherwise

·                the criteria for determining no-go zones, an assessment of current and potential no-go zones and outline of the timelines and process associated with adjusting no-go zones

·                how public education will be undertaken and associated roles, responsibilities, times frames, costs and measures of success

·                the outcome of discussion with Tasmania Police in relation the capacity and capability to promote compliance and address non-compliance

·                what information and data will be used during and beyond the trial to assess what, if any, impact the introduction of hire e-scooters is having on traffic and parking

·                what, if any, impact the trial has had to date on traffic congestion and the basis on which this statement is made

·                what, if any, impact the trial has had on users choosing to use an hire e-scooter rather than walking and the basis on which this statement is made

·                how seasonality will impact the safety and prevalence of scooters, such as decreased usage during icy winters 

·                evidence from the two operators on unsatisfactory practices or issues they have experienced and how they will improve

·                the feasibility of the monthly reports that are provided by the companies to the Council, being made public rather than ‘commercial in confidence’

·                A detailed criteria for success of the trial be provided which is made publicly available.

8.     The estimated revenue the city is expected to receive from the operators and the basis on which this revenue is calculated be made public.

PART B

That:   1.    The Council acknowledges the high user rate and popularity of e-scooters in Hobart.

2.     The Council recognises the shortage of safe, separated bike and scooter lanes; and commits to a report to accelerating development of infrastructure to create a safer environment for pedestrians, bike riders and scooter users.

13.      Refugees / Asylum Seekers - Humanitarian Settlement

Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Burnet

Motion

“That the Council:

1.    Advocate for the refugees and asylum seekers brought to onshore detention through medical evacuation (Medevac), approximately 30 of whom are currently held in the Park Hotel in inner Melbourne for what appears as an indefinite period. 

2.   Authorise the Lord Mayor to write to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs requesting urgent humanitarian settlement of these men who seek sanctuary and a safe home in Australia.

3.   Given the City’s status as a Refugee Welcome Zone, work with other stakeholders to settle those refugees and asylum seekers in Hobart, as soon as possible after leaving detention.”

Burnet

Sherlock                                  

That the recommendation be adopted with clause 2 amended to read as follows:

Authorise the Lord Mayor to write to all Tasmanian members of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs requesting urgent humanitarian settlement of these men who seek sanctuary and a safe home in Australia.

Sexton

Briscoe                                                                                                                      

That the vote for clauses 1 to 3 be taken separately.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

The Lord Mayor then put clause 1.

MOTION CARRIED
CLAUSE ONE

VOTING RECORD

The Lord Mayor then put clause 2.

MOTION CARRIED
CLAUSE TWO

VOTING RECORD

The Lord Mayor then put clause 3.

MOTION CARRIED
CLAUSE THREE

VOTING RECORD

COUNCIL RESOLUTION:

That the Council:

1.    Advocate for the refugees and asylum seekers brought to onshore detention through medical evacuation (Medevac), approximately 30 of whom are currently held in the Park Hotel in inner Melbourne for what appears as an indefinite period. 

2.   Authorise the Lord Mayor to write to all Tasmanian members of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs requesting urgent humanitarian settlement of these men who seek sanctuary and a safe home in Australia.

3.   Given the City’s status as a Refugee Welcome Zone, work with other stakeholders to settle those refugees and asylum seekers in Hobart, as soon as possible after leaving detention.

14.      Elected Member Professional Development Plan - Lord Mayor Councillor Anna Reynolds

Fox

Burnet

That the recommendation contained in the Special Report of the Deputy Lord Mayor, be adopted.

MOTION CARRIED

VOTING RECORD

COUNCIL RESOLUTION:

That the Professional Development Plan for the Lord Mayor Councillor Anna Reynolds, as attached to the Open Council Agenda of 31 January 2022 be received and noted.