MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
The 4485 meeting of the Brisbane City Council,
held at City Hall, Brisbane
on Tuesday 24 November 2015
at 2pm
Prepared by:
Council and Committee Liaison Office
Chief Executive’s Office
Office of the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4485 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 24 NOVEMBER 2015
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS _____________________________________________________________ i
PRESENT: ______________________________________________________________________ 1
OPENING OF MEETING: __________________________________________________________ 1
MINUTES: _____________________________________________________________________ 1
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: __________________________________________________________ 2
QUESTION TIME: ________________________________________________________________ 5
CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS: _________________________________________ 16
ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE _________________________________________ 16
A PERMIT TO OCCUPY BRUNSWICK STREET MALL, POD 1 – THE UNITING HANDS FOUNDATION
AUSTRALIA LIMITED _______________________________________________________________ 29
B ALBION NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN ____________________________________________________ 31
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE ___________________________________________________________ 32
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – CITY PARKING – INITIATIVES _______________________________ 35
B PETITION – REDUCE SPEED LIMIT ON WYNNUM ROAD TO 40 KM/H ________________________ 36
PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE ______________________________________________ 37
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – ADDITIONAL EARLY MORNING BUZ TRIPS ____________________ 39
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE ___________________ 40
A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION UNDER SUSTAINABLE PLANNING ACT 2009: DEVELOPMENT PERMIT MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION (HOTEL) AND INDOOR SPORT
AND RECREATION (GYM) – 1/23 MILES PLATTING ROAD, EIGHT MILE PLAINS – STRONGHOLD BTP
HOTEL PTY LTD ___________________________________________________________________ 42
B PETITION – OBJECTING TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR HEALTH SERVICES (MEDICAL
CENTRE) AT 158 WARRIGAL ROAD, RUNCORN (APPLICATION REFERENCE A004059861) ________ 44
C PETITION – OBJECTING TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, A
SHOP AND CARETAKER’S ACCOMMODATION AT 185 THISTLE STREET, GORDON PARK (APPLICATION
REFERENCE A004121400)___________________________________________________________ 45
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE ____________________________________ 49
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – SNAKES OF BRISBANE ____________________________________ 53
B PETITION – REQUEST THAT COUNCIL INSTALL ADDITIONAL STORMWATER DRAINS AT 300
BROADWATER ROAD, MANSFIELD, TO REDUCE FLOODING ________________________________ 54
C PETITION – OBJECTION TO THE WALTON BRIDGE PARK DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL ____________ 55
FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE _____________________________________________________________ 56
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – KELVIN GROVE ROAD AND WINDSOR ROAD INTERSECTION
UPGRADE _______________________________________________________________________ 57
B PETITION – PETITION REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL CLEAR THE STORMWATER DRAIN RUNNING
PARALLEL TO HOPE STREET, NORMAN PARK ___________________________________________ 58
BRISBANE LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE _________________________________________________________ 59
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – DEVELOPMENT OF THE WYNNUM COMMUNITY CENTRE ________ 61
FINANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE ______________________ 63
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – CHRISTMAS IN THE CITY 2015 ______________________________ 64
CONSIDERATION OF NOTIFIED MOTION – LOCATION OF PARK IN WEST END: ______________ 65
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:____________________________________________________ 77
[4485 (Ordinary) Meeting – 24 November 2015]
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4485 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 24 NOVEMBER 2015
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
GENERAL BUSINESS: ____________________________________________________________ 77
QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: ________________________________ 85
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: _____________________ 87
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4485 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 24 NOVEMBER 2015
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
PRESENT:
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) – LNP
The Chairman of Council, Councillor Angela OWEN-TAYLOR (Parkinson Ward) – LNP
LNP Councillors (and Wards)
Krista ADAMS (Wishart)
Matthew BOURKE (Jamboree)
Amanda COOPER (Bracken Ridge)
Margaret de WIT (Pullenvale)
Vicki HOWARD (Central) (Deputy Chairman of
Council)
Steven HUANG (Macgregor)
Fiona KING (Marchant)
Kim MARX (Karawatha)
Peter MATIC (Toowong)
Ian McKENZIE (Holland Park)
David McLACHLAN (Hamilton)
Ryan MURPHY (Doboy)
Adrian SCHRINNER (Chandler) (Deputy Mayor)
Julian SIMMONDS (Walter Taylor)
Steven TOOMEY (The Gap)
Andrew WINES (Enoggera)
Norm WYNDHAM (McDowall)
ALP Councillors (and Wards)
Milton DICK (Richlands) (The Leader of the
Opposition)
Helen ABRAHAMS (The Gabba) (Deputy Leader of
the Opposition)
Peter CUMMING (Wynnum Manly)
Jared CASSIDY (Deagon)
Kim FLESSER (Northgate)
Steve GRIFFITHS (Moorooka)
Shayne SUTTON (Morningside)
Independent Councillor (and Ward)
Nicole JOHNSTON (Tennyson)
OPENING OF MEETING:
The Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, opened the meeting with prayer, and then proceeded with
the business set out in the Agenda.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Point of order; Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I just notice there’s a flyer on our desk. When we had a group here seeking to
table a flyer to every Councillor, you refused to allow it. So, can you just tell me
what the procedure is, please, for speakers to provide flyers to every Councillor?
Chairman:
Certainly, Councillor JOHNSTON. Where the particular public speaker has
made a request through the Chairman of this Council via the Clerks requesting
permission to distribute the flyers, and those flyers were given to the Clerks
prior to the meeting, and the Clerks were able to distribute them to each
Councillor, that is the appropriate process for this Chamber.
MINUTES:
253/2015-16
The Minutes of the 4484 meeting of Council held on 17 November 2015, copies of which had been forwarded to
each Councillor, were presented, taken as read and confirmed on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES,
seconded by Councillor Kim MARX.
[4485 (Ordinary) Meeting – 24 November 2015]
-2-
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Mr Maxwell Bissett – The role of the Redland City Town Crier
File number: 137/220/701/238
Chairman:
I would now like to call on Mr Maxwell Bissett who will address the Chamber
on the role of the Redland City Town Crier. Orderly, please show Mr Bissett in.
Mr Bissett, you have five minutes; please proceed.
Mr Maxwell Bissett:
All you! All you! All you! Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors;
I bring greetings from Mayor Karen Williams and Redland City Council. I thank
you for the opportunity to address Brisbane City Council today.
Town crying is an honourable craft in Australia, and a Town Crier can add
colour and pageantry to civic events. In most cases, the town crier is a voluntary
position. The crier is appointed by council to act as council’s authorised
representative in the manner and as required from time to time by council. Each
council determines its crier’s role, and examples of activities include welcoming
distinguished visitors to the city, participation in civic events, and assistance in
charitable fundraising.
The main requirements for the position are a loud voice, good posture, a good
outfit, a stout pair of boots, and good preparation as you act as an ambassador
for your city.
Redland City Council will be hosting the 25th Annual Town Crying
Championships in 2016. Criers from capital cities, including Sydney and
Canberra, will attend. Many provincial centres such as Alice Springs, Geelong,
Gosford, Rockingham and Maryborough will also be present. It would be highly
desirable for a Brisbane City Crier to be available too.
Last month, in the absence of your own Town Crier, I was invited to be at
Brisbane Open House at this splendid City Hall and also in King George Square.
I have also been involved as town crier at Fort Lytton for your History Alive for
the past three years. I hope that next year, for these and similar functions, your
own Town Crier’s voice will be heard. May God bless Brisbane City Council,
and God Save the Queen!
Chairman:
Thank you, Mr Bissett. Councillor ADAMS, would you care to respond?
Response by Councillor Krista ADAMS, Chairman of the Brisbane Lifestyle Committee
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. It did feel like we needed to clap. Thank you, Mr
Bissett, that was spectacular. Can I say you obviously fill all the criteria of a
town crier, and not one of us envies you today in your beautiful costume in the
heat outside. You have done a magnificent job to be wearing full regalia today
in 35 degree heat.
Thank you very much for coming in and address us. I know that you have run
into many of our councils around the place; Fort Lytton, et cetera and Open
House. We do use town criers. We don’t have a set town crier who is the
Brisbane Town Crier, but we do use them on many occasions. So I am glad that
you were able to help us with the Open House. We had our anniversary of
World Expo in 2013, and we had a town crier that actually led the parade. So we
do have events where we have town criers that we use, but I think in a city this
size, having one town crier, I think we need to keep our options open for the
available town criers as well.
As you said, the Open House program was fantastic on 10 November; another
very warm weekend. I imagine you well and truly did your job outside there in
King George Square in your regalia as well. Thank you very much. We had over
4000 people that came into City Hall on that day, so that is fantastic, too, for
your to show off your talents there as well.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
-3The other event—and I say this in the absence of former Councillor
Victoria Newton—we had a penny farthing ride from City Hall to Sandgate in
November 2013 as well, where we had a town crier who delivered a
hand-written letter from the LORD MAYOR and read it out at the Town Hall at
the end of the ride. That was the same town crier that we used for the World
Expo 88 anniversary as well.
Can I suggest that we get in contact with you, because we do have many, many
events at City Hall, and Epicure, who runs City Hall, actually also has the
opportunity if people want to use town criers for their events that they may have
in City Hall as well. So, thank you so much for coming in today and showing us
your performance. It was absolutely spectacular. Let’s get in contact, and we’ll
talk about opportunities to help us out here in Brisbane. Thank you.
Chairman:
Thank you, Mr Bissett. If you’d like to provide your business card to the
Orderly, I am sure he will pass that on to Councillor ADAMS for you. Thank
you so much for coming in.
Jane Milburn – The need to create a more sustainable clothing culture
File number: 137/220/701/254
Chairman:
I would now like to call on Ms Jane Milburn who will address the Chamber on
the need to create a more sustainable clothing culture. Orderly, please show Ms
Milburn in.
Welcome, Ms Milburn; the material that you have provided to the Clerks has
been distributed to all Councillors. Please proceed; you have five minutes.
Ms Jane Milburn:
Thank you; Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors: today you are
either wearing natural fibres or synthetic fibres derived from petroleum. Every
day we eat and we dress, and in the same way we’ve become conscious of our
food, we are now more conscious of our clothing and what we are wearing. This
pinafore was created from rescued wool suits that were one step away from
landfill. I’m a natural fibre champion, and I’ve got a background in issues based
communication, and I am now seeking to help create a more sustainable clothing
culture.
Thank you for this opportunity. The past decade has seen a transformational
shift in where and how our clothing is made, and that raises ethical issues.
Consumption is increasing. In two decades, individual annual fibre use across
the globe has doubled from seven to 13 kilograms each. That is the average.
There has been a fibre change. A decade ago, half of new clothing was natural
fibres and half was synthetics. Now, two-thirds of new clothing is synthetics,
and research shows that it is shedding micro-plastic particles with every wash.
There is a waste mountain. Charities do a great job with the mass of cast-off
clothing, yet only about 20 per cent of donations find a new owner locally; the
rest is ragged, dumped or sent overseas. Every year Australia exports 70 million
kilograms of used clothing, and it is sold for $1 a kilo.
There is modern day slavery existing in other parts of the world; that is why our
clothing is so cheap. Garment workers are being exploited in developing
nations. Rana Plaza showed us that, and it sparked a fashion revolution of which
I am part. There is a loss of knowledge; we treat clothing as disposable. There is
little understanding of the skill and time involved in making, and there is an
inability to even sew on a button or mend a hem that might fall down.
So, global awareness of clothing waste is rising, and responses are emerging. In
the UK they have a sustainable clothing action plan run by a resource group
called WRAP which works with industry and consumers. They have a ‘Love
your Clothes’ campaign to help consumers buy, use and pass on clothing to
reduce textile waste to landfill. This program is extending into Europe with the
European Clothing Action Plan. It is a €3.6 million pilot project which aims to
ensure less clothing goes to waste, and encourages consumers to buy less and
use it for longer.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
-4In the US there is a textile collection system in New York apartments called
Wearable Collections, because clothing is not garbage, and San Francisco has a
zero textile waste strategy. Wouldn’t it be great if we could bring this
consciousness to Brisbane and Australia? We recycle paper, glass, metal,
plastic, probably other things as well, but there is an opportunity to be more
proactive with textiles. We need leadership to help create that sustainable
clothing culture. I am just one person, and I am trying to create change through
my actions. I launched Textile Beat at a Green Heart fair in 2013. I do talks and
workshops; I share this slow fashion manifesto. I hope that, by being here today,
it is the start of a broader sustainable clothing conversation that can help build
on Brisbane’s great sustainability ethos. Thank you.
Chairman:
Thank you, Ms Milburn.
Councillor McLACHLAN, would you care to respond, please?
Response by Councillor David McLACHLAN, Chairman of the Field Services Committee
Councillor McLACHLAN:
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Jane, for coming in today. It is a bit of
a hard act to follow, after the previous speaker, and it is a very serious subject,
but we thank you for coming in here today to talk about the issues that you are
so passionate about. We share your passion for reuse and recycling. It is
probably fair to say, though, we probably haven’t applied ourselves as fulsomely
as we could have to textiles. You have given us some serious food for thought.
At our waste transfer stations, we do have receptacles for clothing, for textiles,
but I think it is fair to say we probably don’t promote it as well as we should. I
think with the booths that are around the city that are disappearing because they
are generally abused, the receptacles that are provided in little shopping centres
for clothing for the charities have essentially been taken out in a lot of locations
unfortunately. I think we do have to recreate the culture of reuse of those
clothes.
I will certainly make it part of my mission, as the Chair of Field Services, and
responsible for waste and resource recovery, to look at what we can do to help
promote the cause of textile reuse. We see about 4 per cent of what ends up in
landfill is textile related, and that is too much. Anything we can do to drive
down that sort of proportion of clothes that are simply being thrown away is a
good thing.
It is probably fair to say, though, that when people go to our transfer stations
with a trailer load of materials, they probably aren’t thinking that that is a good
location to offload the old wardrobe of clothes. That is something that we can
probably draw attention to, to make sure that people are aware that we do have
that facility at the transfer stations.
We met, I think, on the night of the Sustainable Cities awards where you spoke
at City Hall with a similar message. That was following the Recreate Twilight
Markets that were out here in City Hall, which is a great event, drawing
attention to recycling of paper in particular. I think it would be great if we
continue to have that sort of event around National Recycling Week to provide
an opportunity for a catwalk presentation of refashioned clothes, and something
I can certainly talk to you offline about what we can do for our event next year.
But thank you very much for coming in today. Thank you for your passion for
reuse, recycling. I am in the Carl Stefanovic school of suits, so one suit worn
lots, but I dry clean it from time to time. I am not too sure about Carl. But I do
think that that is an important message, that we don’t necessarily need to be
buying lots of new clothes all the time, and thank you for bringing that message
here today to City Hall.
Chairman:
Thank you, Ms Milburn.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
-5-
QUESTION TIME:
Chairman:
Are there any questions of the LORD MAYOR or a Chairman of any of the
Standing Committees?
Councillor MARX.
Question 1
Councillor MARX:
Yes, thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR. I
understand that this Administration has rolled out a new clearer parking signage
program. Can you please explain why this was done, and what benefits you
think this new clearer signage will bring to Brisbane residents?
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor MARX for her
question. In June of last year, there was a trial commenced around new signage,
advisory signage, which was to supplement the regulated signage in those seven
localities. Of course, this came on the back of the Parking Taskforce which was
chaired by the DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor SCHRINNER, and was a process
where several organisations and community groups were engaged to look at
parking generally. It contained 55 recommendations, and this was just one of
those recommendations that emerged.
I am able to report to the Chamber and Councillor MARX, directly to you
through the question, that the seven locations were based in Elizabeth Street,
Brisbane City; in Colchester Street at South Brisbane, Wickham Street,
Fortitude Valley; in Alice Street, in the city; Ann Street, in the city; Boundary
Street, Spring Hill; and Waterworks Road at Ashgrove.
Of those seven locations, the great news out of this is that we saw between 16
and 60 per cent improvement in compliance, with an average of 35 per cent
improvement in compliance. That is exactly what we want. We want to see the
behavioural change.
Out of that, there was a discussion held through 600 face-to-face interviews with
motorists to seek their views and to understand what they thought of the new
signage and also a view in relation to the regulated signage. So, as we are all
aware, the State Government sets down regulated signage. All local authorities
throughout Queensland are required to abide by those regulated signs. They are,
if you like, the legal signs.
What we have done is to simply place, in addition to those regulated signs,
advisory signs. They are a colour coded sign. They are a clock sign which
basically gives, in the case of some parking spaces where you have multiple
uses of that space at different times of the day, it gives a better understanding,
according to motorists, of what that parking space is used for.
Of the 600 face-to-face interviews, 45 per cent found it difficult to understand
regulatory signs; 59 per cent of people said that the advisory signage was easier
to read, and 63 per cent want the advisory parking signage to complement
regulated parking control signs at complex and unusual parking locations.
With that in mind, I have today written to the State Transport Minister, the
Deputy Premier, Jackie Trad, simply advising her of our findings over this trial.
We believe that this is a world-first trial in terms of this type of advisory sign,
and so because of the fact that it has been as successful as it has in terms of
compliance, we are proposing now to roll it in up to another 200 locations
during the course of this financial year.
So, Madam Chairman, I throw out the offer today to all Councillors, and indeed
to all residents of Brisbane, to come forward with some suggestions. Residents
are welcome to obviously contact their local Councillor; they are welcome to
contact the contact centre with their thoughts. We will proceed in terms of those
suggestions that come forward, looking at taking the best of those on board to go
forward with.
But clearly this has been a very good outcome for our city. The idea,
interestingly, came from New York. It was from a lady who had felt she had
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
-6been fined too often, and that lady, Nikki Sylianteng, is one who decided, as a
graphic designer, to go ahead and prepare her own signage. So it is not an idea
that we claim, but it is certainly one that we grab with both hands.
Interestingly, while the City of New York hasn’t taken it up, I think there are
other locations, such as Los Angeles, that are now considering taking it up, and
certainly since our trial commenced, we have had interest from other local
authorities around it. It forms part of the $3.4 million of initiatives in the 201516 budget towards improved parking outcomes and fulfilling recommendations
of the Parking Taskforce.
Chairman:
Further questions?
Councillor DICK.
Question 2
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR.
Mr Michael Roth of the RACQ said other congested roads should be fixed
before your $650 million gold-plating of Kingsford Smith Drive. He said, ‘It’s
the 14th out of 16 in terms of congestion.’ So, of the important corridors, the
majority of them are more congested than Kingsford Smith Drive. Why do you
think you are right but Queensland’s peak motoring organisation of over 1.2
million members is wrong?
LORD MAYOR:
Well, Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor DICK for the question, but I also
remind him of what he said in this Chamber. At the time when there were
48,000 vehicles on this road, Councillor DICK said it was a car park and we
needed to fix it. I thought we were all board in this place. We saw both sides of
the Chamber supporting the resumptions of property along the corridor to create
three lanes in each direction, and right at the eleventh hour, of course, the
Opposition have had a change of heart.
So, look, Mr Roth is entitled to his view, as indeed are the RACQ. They are
absolutely entitled to express a view. But I know this: I know that that road
carries 15 per cent of freight traffic. I know that if we are to create a safe
environment for cyclists, we need to create off-road cycling opportunities along
that corridor. I know that the road is going to continue to grow into the future. I
know that there is no other road in this city carrying 75,000 vehicles a day as it
will into the not too distant future.
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Well, it is 65,000 now, right; 65,000 now, and I don’t know of any other road in
Brisbane that is carrying those numbers that does not have three lanes in each
direction. So, in the case of Wynnum Road, we are clearly going to have to
rethink it, aren’t we, if based on—
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
They say that 65,000 vehicles a day can cope—
Councillors interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Well, I am just saying, if your logic—if you are going to carry on with this
logic, it would follow that you ought to be rethinking your position on Wynnum
Road, Councillor SUTTON.
Councillors interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Councillor SUTTON, Councillor SUTTON, Councillor SUTTON needs to—
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
No, I am not. No, I am not. So, Councillor SUTTON, the simple—you’ve
already got bad form on this. You’ve wanted bus lanes; you’ve come in here
publicly wanting bus lanes only in those peak hours, and you have proven to be
absolutely out of touch with people in that respect. You still haven’t got up in
this Chamber and said whether you’re still backing your previous statements or
whether you’re now changing your position in light of that community
feedback.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
-7Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor SUTTON!
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor SUTTON! Enough interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Plenty of opportunity for Councillor SUTTON to get up in General Business,
Madam Chairman; we will give her that opportunity today where she can clarify
her position on Wynnum Road if she wants to interject on that.
But I am simply saying this: we know the numbers that are going in to Hamilton
Northshore. We know the numbers that the State Government are putting into
there—the multistorey buildings that are going into that location. They have to
be serviced somehow. I haven’t heard a State Government commitment around
an extension of Doomben Winstaines rail line as was proposed by former
Deputy Premier Paul Lucas, even if they had proceeded. We knew then, as we
know today, that that is not going to be sufficient to cope with the increased
demand on that road corridor.
We are doing this for good reason. As I have always said, we are building a city,
not just a road. That particular road corridor, as well as Wynnum Road, will be
good design. It will cater for this city’s needs as a city that wants to show good
design within those road developments, where we are not just building it for
cars; we are building it for public and active transport. We are building it as a
piece of design work which the city can also be proud of, but also functional in
that it will be catering for the increased demand that will be required along that
road corridor.
So, Madam Chairman, we are committed to it. It is the right decision to make
for the future of this city. We will be continuing to get on with Wynnum Road,
as we have promised to do. We are continuing to undertake the necessary
acquisitions, undertake the necessary design work around Wynnum Road as
well. So it is not just about Kingsford Smith Drive; it is about making sure that
we undertake the necessary road works in this city.
So, again, I come back to where I started. It is all very well for the Opposition
Leader to raise these things. The point is he wanted this work done; he backed
this work through resumptions of properties along this corridor.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor MURPHY.
Question 3
Councillor MURPHY:
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman; my question is to the Chairman of the
Infrastructure Committee, Councillor SCHRINNER. I understand that, due to
economic and population growth, Brisbane’s traffic is expected to increase by
50 per cent over the next 15 years, faster than every state capital in Australia
with the exception of Perth. Can you explain this Administration’s approach to
dealing with traffic congestion, and can you talk about some alternative views?
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor MURPHY for the question, a very
pertinent one indeed. I was driving home the other day, near the Carina Leagues
Club, and I saw this giant Labor billboard that said they were going to fix
congestion in the city. I thought, oh, that’s great, that’s great. Thanks for
coming. I should just resign. There’s no more work to be done.
Councillors interjecting.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
So, it got me thinking: what is Labor’s plan for congestion? Because they have
made the big claim, but there is not a lot of meat on the bones. When you
actually have a look at what their plan involves, it is very, very revealing indeed.
The last time they actually put a plan in writing was when they were in
Administration in this Council. That plan, available for everyone to see, was the
Transport Plan for Brisbane. That plan involved little gems like a congestion tax
or cordon toll on the currently free road network, so that is taking free roads and
putting a tax on—
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
-8Councillors interjecting.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
That would take the city backwards, not forwards, there is no doubt. The other
thing that it involved was putting a car parking tax on all inner city car parking
spaces, so that is private and public. Back at that time, the tax I think was going
to be around $400 per space per year.
We know that other Labor governments across Australia have done exactly this.
When the tax started off at about $400, it has grown to $900 in some cases, $750
in other cases, and State Governments and councils become addicted to that
revenue, and that is exactly what Labor’s plan is. That is what they’re not telling
you.
They also wanted to increase the cost of on-street and off-street parking. They
want to essentially force people out of their cars. This is the critical difference
between this side of the Chamber and the other side. When they say they want to
do something about congestion, what they mean is to force you out of your car.
That is exactly what they mean.
Councillors interjecting.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
There are some things that have happened in recent times that gives further
insight into Labor’s plan. Councillor DICK talks about this plan being a long
time ago. Well, just recently there was a little book released called Decongestion
which quoted Helen ABRAHAMS, and in that book, Helen—obviously she was
thinking about retirement, so she was being a little bit more honest and open
about her views—said, a cordon tax is the way to go. That is not 15 years ago;
that was very recently, in a newly released book.
So we know what Labor’s plan is. They will keep it secret until after the
election, but then, whoompa, before you know it, you will be paying a toll to use
roads that are currently free. That is the reality. This Administration, in contrast,
has a very clear record, and it has always been about choice; it has always been
about choice. We have invested in roads. We have invested in public transport.
We have invested in cycling infrastructure and pedestrian infrastructure, and we
say to people: you choose the mode that suits you best. We are not going to
force you to pay a toll if you don’t want to. You can use the free road network.
We are not going to force you out of your car. By the same token, if you want to
cycle, or if you want to walk, we are going to make it easier for you. That is a
real plan. That is a balanced plan.
Councillor interjecting.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Yet again, Labor says providing bikeways and pedestrian infrastructure is gold
plating. It is outrageous that they can get away with saying that in a modern city
like Brisbane. The reality is this Administration over the past 10 years has
invested more than $8 billion into building infrastructure. Guess how much of
that money went into tunnels—only $2 billion out of the $8 billion. We got $7
billion worth of tunnels and bridges built for an investment of $2 billion from
Council. That is a good bang for your buck, because we have private sector
investment, we had Federal Government investment, and indeed, that road
network that we have built is now taking 120,000 vehicles a day off surface
roads—120,000 vehicles a day.
I keep convincing the LORD MAYOR: we need to shut down the toll road
network for one day and see what happens. Then Labor will have egg on their
face. Then the RACQ will have egg on their face when they say that these roads
aren’t working. But the other thing that’s happened—
Chairman:
DEPUTY MAYOR, your time has expired.
Further questions?
Councillor GRIFFITHS.
Question 4
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, Madam Chair, I’d like to ask the only Lord Mayor who has introduced toll
roads into Brisbane why he spent $10 million on upgrading Illaweena Street,
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
-9Drewvale, but failed to fix the problem there? Rod Harding has committed $14
million to properly flood-proof Illaweena Street to stop the massive traffic
congestion whenever it rains and water closes the road. LORD MAYOR, will
you match Mr Harding’s promise to properly flood-proof Illaweena Street and
fix the problem for residents in Drewvale?
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor GRIFFITHS for the incompetent question.
I will just tell you what the question was again. LORD MAYOR, as the only
Lord Mayor in Brisbane’s history to introduce toll roads—I think his memory of
history is very short—very, very short.
He clearly forgets that the Story Bridge had a toll on it for a start. He forgets
about the Walter Taylor Bridge. He forgets about Clem7. He forgets about—
Councillors interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
That’s right, the one they wanted to call the Jim Soorley Tunnel, and so on and
so forth. Look, Councillor GRIFFITHS, thank you for the question. I do note
that, within all of the commitments, that they happen to fall into Labor’s
survival kit plan, we call it. All of those projects are all within Labor sitting
Councillor wards—all of those projects.
The last time I did a bit of a count across both sides of the Chamber, I think two
thirds of the city reside on this side of the Chamber, but they only apparently
seem to have eyes on a lot of their own wards—well, the ones that are staying,
that is right.
But that said, there are always demands around this city. The infrastructure race
is one which is never over; it’s never over. There will always be demands in
terms of projects across this city. But the one thing that I do say to you is this: I
just ask people to look back at the history of this city, and make a decision based
around those who have actually delivered things versus those who have talked
about things. Talk is cheap. Election talk is also cheap.
I remember all sorts of commitments in the past that were made. Former Lord
Mayors who were going to take the ferry to work every day; they were going to
do all sorts of things that never came to pass. So it is in terms of public
transportation; lots of claims made. I always make the point that—
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
When you’ve finished interjecting.
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor SUTTON! I hereby caution you that, if you continue to interject and
disrupt this Chamber, you will be warned.
LORD MAYOR:
When it comes to infrastructure build, I just say this: you can rely on this side of
the Chamber—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
LORD MAYOR:
—any day of the week—
Chairman:
Point of order against you, LORD MAYOR.
Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Chairman, if I had have talked over you like that, there would be hell to
pay. So, Madam Chairman, I would ask that you reinforce to the
LORD MAYOR what the rules are in this place with respect to speaking over
you as you tell us day in and day out.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, I do not need to be told how to conduct the business of
this Chamber by you. That was not a rude interjection. The LORD MAYOR was
merely following on in answering the question, and there was a lot of noise
coming from that side of the Chamber. So I have been incredibly patient today,
and I expect people to behave accordingly.
LORD MAYOR.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 10 LORD MAYOR:
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. But to the question—I just say this to
you, Councillor GRIFFITHS: we will not be committing to Illaweena Street, and
there is a very, very good and sound reason why that is so. I live on the south
side, as you know. I live at Eight Mile Plains. The State Member, Duncan Pegg,
has pledged to fix Illaweena Street. That is his State Government pledge. I’ve
got the brochure. That is the State Government’s pledge.
So why would we as a Council want to come along, when the member of the
Government has clearly made the pledge at the election that he is going to fix
Illaweena Street? I don’t know why the Labor Party would want to be doubling
up. They seem to be intent on letting the State Government off the hook at every
turn—at every single opportunity, if they’ve got the chance to let the
Government off the hook, they will do it.
Councillors interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Rather than use the ratepayers’ money, why don’t you just say to your local
State Member, Mr Pegg, you’ve promised it; get on and deliver it.
Chairman:
Further questions?
Councillor HOWARD.
Question 5
Councillor HOWARD:
Thank you, Madam Chairman; my question is to the Neighbourhood Planning
and Development Assessment Committee, Councillor COOPER. The draft
Bulimba Barracks Master Plan has been produced on the basis of extensive
community consultation. I understand that last month Council, with the support
of the Queensland Government, released the Master Plan for community
comment. Can you please provide the Chamber with the outcome of the
community consultation, and the progress of the finalisation of the Master Plan?
Councillor COOPER:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I would like to thank the
Deputy Chair for Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment for
her pertinent question. Councillor HOWARD, certainly there has been a huge
amount of work by Council officers working in partnership with the
State Government to consider the future of this important site in our city. In June
this year, the LORD MAYOR wrote out to local residents advising them that
Council would be undertaking a master planning exercise for the site on Apollo
Road.
Then again in August, Council wrote out to residents to advise that preliminary
community engagement had commenced with an online survey, and calls for
nominations to the community planning team, or CPT. The feedback in August
indicated overwhelmingly that the community wanted to see significant
riverfront parkland, so about 94 per cent of responses said that; riverfront
access, with land-based Riverwalk facilities—96 per cent response rate; and
local shops, cafès, offices, and community facilities, about 80 to 89 per cent of
responses supporting those outcomes.
Then Council drafted a Master Plan which saw a range of housing types
proposed for the site, including streets that integrate with the surrounding
neighbourhood and provisions for generous park and community facilities. The
Master Plan was then made available for public consultation again in October,
and during that period Council received almost 500 responses from the local
community.
So, over the whole course of the master planning period, Council has seen more
than 1000 people provide their comments on the future of the Bulimba Barracks
site. So it has been absolutely fantastic to see the interest and the strong
passionate advocacy of the local residents.
In terms of their feedback and the recent process, we have seen their main
concerns being traffic congestion in the wider area, 68 per cent; parking, 36 per
cent; and infrastructure associated with density, 28 per cent. So Council has
certainly taken that feedback on board, and the Master Plan has responded to the
commentary made as part of that consultation process.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 11 It is important to note, of course, the Master Plan has specific provisions such as
provisions for streets that are wide enough to cater for on-street parking
throughout the site, and indeed the officers advise me that there are
approximately 600 spaces for cars within the site to address issues relating to car
parking. In relation to traffic concerns, of course Council has already planned
through the Wynnum Road upgrade stage 1—so that is $115 million investment
by Council which will improve traffic flow within the area and cater to the
demands of additional traffic.
In fact, the planning for the Wynnum Road upgrade already assumed that site
would have 1000 new dwellings as a part of the planning work that was
undertaken by Council. So we have been reviewing the feedback that has been
received, and of course with the support of the Queensland State Government,
have been making amendments to the Master Plan where necessary.
As part of the preparation of the Bulimba Districts Neighbourhood Plan,
Council placed very high importance on planning for this significant 21 hectare
site, and strongly believes that this Master Plan has been the next step, an
important activity working with the local community, to ensure the right future
development occurs on this site.
Of course, Council understands that the community is also concerned about how
that Master Plan will have force against any future development application for
the site, learning, of course, that the Department of Defence have advised that
they are seeking to dispose of this site by the end of the calendar year. It has
always been proposed that the Master Plan, together with the statutory weight of
the Neighbourhood Plan, would be used in any development assessment process
made to Council.
However, to give the community confidence in the process, Council will now be
looking at making the Master Plan statutory, and we will therefore be bringing
to the Council Chamber a Temporary local planning instrument to put in place
that protection which will, of course, require State Government support as part
of that process.
I would like to really thank the LORD MAYOR for the support that he has
provided to the Master Plan, and that he has been very keen to work closely with
the local community and, indeed, with the State Labor Government to deliver a
fantastic outcome for this particular site, this important site for our city’s future.
I really do appreciate the fact that we will be seeing a Temporary local planning
instrument coming to the Chamber for debate in the weeks ahead. Thank you
very much, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Further questions?
Councillor CASSIDY.
Question 6
Councillor CASSIDY:
Thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR. Last week
you refused to answer the question I asked on why you were refusing to match
Rod Harding’s commitment to a $30 million upgrade of Lemke Road at Taigum
to fix the congestion hot spot between the Sandgate Hawks Football Club and
the Telegraph Road roundabout. As you know, this upgrade includes signalising
the intersection, widening the road to four lanes, and duplicating the bridge
across Cabbage Tree Creek. Why are you ignoring the concerns of Bracken
Ridge and Deagon Wards by refusing to support this project?
LORD MAYOR:
Well, Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor CASSIDY for the question. Again
he demonstrates his newness to this place by his quotations. I would be going
back to the drawing board if I were you, Councillor, and doing some more
arithmetic on that project as outlined in terms of the scope that you have
mentioned.
The reality is that Councillor CASSIDY is short-changing that project very, very
significantly; that is the facts of the matter. We will be making our own
announcements in due course. I am not going to engage in a Dutch auction here
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 12 today with Councillor CASSIDY or anybody else. We have set our program
down in terms of where we are in relation to the budget.
Councillor CASSIDY can continue to do what he will out on the ground. But I
just say to him that, come time to deliver it, I would be inclined to throw a few
more bikkies into the stocking if I were you in relation to that particular project
as outlined in terms of the scope you have mentioned here today. That is as
much as I intend to offer Councillor CASSIDY today, but I thank him very
generously for his question.
Chairman:
Further questions?
Councillor WINES.
Question 7
Councillor WINES:
Thank you, Madam Chairman; my question is to the Chairman of the Brisbane
Lifestyle Committee, Councillor ADAMS. This Administration recognises that
our city’s libraries are no longer simply places to borrow books and access other
resources, but community hubs where people can meet and participate in a range
of library services which is why we are continuing to upgrade these important
facilities for Brisbane. A good example of this is the newly upgraded $1.9
million Holland Park Library. Can you please tell us more about these upgrades
to libraries across our city?
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank Councillor WINES for the question,
because he knows how much I love to speak about our fantastic libraries right
across Brisbane. We recognise the important role our libraries play in providing
that thriving platform for all of our Brisbane residents to make sure that they can
learn and socialise and connect, right through from young ones to our seniors as
well, and our lifelong learners.
Today in Committee we actually did look at the Holland Park Library in
particular, a $1.9 million refurbishment, part of the LORD MAYOR’s
deliverables this term. We are very, very proud of that latest addition. It is a
spectacular upgrade to a local library that was brand new in 1980—very 1980,
let’s put it that way. Not many trees around. They decided that the feature was
going to be rocks. It is now looking like a very different library, and it is
fantastic to see that outcome.
But it is not just about our major refurbishments; it is about a vision for all our
libraries to make sure that they are hubs, as I said, for an informed community,
to make sure that we have that vision of new world city for our residents, that
we can foster inclusivity, stronger communities, expand our services beyond the
walls out to our courier services, to our seniors and to our Australia Post, those
that are at home that still cannot get to a library and need books as well.
With our Holland Park Library, it was officially opened by the LORD MAYOR
on 5 September, and we had nearly 4000 people attend on that day. But it was
fantastic to see that, within the last two years, we have actually done the
Mitchelton Library in June 2013, the Grange Library in 2014, the Coopers
Plains Library in August 2014, and the Mount Ommaney Library in March
2015.
What we are seeing at Holland Park is accessible community gardens, the same
as Mitchelton, wheelchair accessibility, outdoor workshop, meeting areas,
children’s story times places, new accessible ramps, pathways, wi-fi throughout
the library, and this is what we are continuing. In each library upgrade and
refurbishment, it’s getting a little bit smarter and a little bit cleverer in the way
that we present the opportunities to our residents.
Works on Corinda and Carina libraries have recently commenced, ensuring the
facilities remain vibrant community hubs for years to come. Corinda Library
opened in 1966, and it is our oldest library building in Brisbane. It was actually
built in 1895 as the Corinda School of Arts, which later became the Sherwood
Community Hall. It is a very popular library. We had 71,000 people last year,
which is quite a bit number for a small library. It does need that work to
continue into the future. We are looking at a makeover project of $780,000 by
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 13 the end of this financial year to make sure that it stays up with our other small
libraries as well.
In that same time line, we have the Carina Library, as Councillor MURPHY
knows, first opened in March 1966. It has fewer people arriving there because
obviously we also have our Carindale Library quite close. More than
53,000 people visited that facility last year alone. We are looking at a
reconfiguration of the floor plan and complete refurbishment inside and out, to
help ensure the library is a vibrant space for people of all ages to enjoy.
We really are proud of the creation of space for all our patrons that we are
developing through all our libraries. We have a 95 per cent satisfaction rate from
our library users, which I think many other parts of Council would love to
emulate as well. People see them as being an integral part of staying connected,
smart thinking and easy living in our new world city.
As to some of the fantastic workshops and outcomes that we have in our
libraries, we deliver over 6000 children’s literacy programs to over 227,000
children and parents each year. Our Coderdojo is providing future generations
with the skills that align with digital technology. It is fantastic to see that being
doubled this year, Councillor SIMMONDS. Thank you for your support for the
digital technology strategy into our libraries as well.
Our learning programs are becoming increasingly popular as activities connect
learning from books and other information to hands-on experience as well. In
our learning programs, we had nearly 400,000 participants in the last financial
year. Our e-collections of e-books, e-magazines, Zinio, Freegal have increased
1081 per cent since 2011, so people are really starting to realise that we are
more than books. You don’t actually need to visit the library to access the
facilities we have in Brisbane City Council libraries. Our wi-fi has grown by
624 per cent in the same period. Our meeting room usage has increased by 23
per cent since 2011.
Of course, we have our fantastic programs like Writers in Residence and the
Autograph Collection that the LORD MAYOR launched in August, which has
got a beautiful collection of 46 autographed books arranged in 33 exhibits that
are rotating around our libraries for the next three years, so every resident can
have that little touch of closeness to maybe their favourite author that they have
read, either growing up or in adult life as well.
Chairman:
Councillor ADAMS, your time has expired.
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Further questions?
Councillor SUTTON.
Question 8
Councillor SUTTON:
Thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR. Two weeks
ago you indicated that you had met with the members of the Maritime Officers
Union to discuss their concerns about TransDev’s employment practices.
Subsequent to this meeting, the Maritime Officers Union members have voted to
take protected industrial action against TransDev as a result of 18 months of
workplace negotiations going nowhere. Isn’t this also a vote of no-confidence in
your ability to effectively manage the delivery of CityCat and ferry services in
Brisbane and avoid future industrial action?
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. I thank Councillor SUTTON for the
question. The reality is that we have a contract with TransDev as a Council.
TransDev were, of course, in a joint venture arrangement going back, even back
in the days of a Labor Council before my time back in Cabinet for a second
time.
I would just say this: I have had in the last week the opportunity also to meet
with Bob Carnegie of the Maritime Union of Australia, as well as his assistant,
Jason, and I thank them for their time in coming in and meeting with me and
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 14 Councillor MATIC. We wanted to, as I indicated, hear firsthand at least what
the issues were from the perspective of the two unions involved.
At the end of the day this is a matter between TransDev and those industrial
associations. I respect the right of any industrial association, if they are not
happy with the outcome, to act within the law, to take action. That is what this
nation is. We are a democratic nation. We are a nation where people have the
right to withdraw their labour if that is their belief that they are not getting a fair
deal.
So, in this particular case, it is not up to me or this Council to solve the issues
for TransDev. We are, of course—
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Well, we would be on that basis, Councillor SUTTON, stepping in and propping
up companies or doing what you need to do in terms of a whole lot of contracts
that we have. So that was not a matter—
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Look, Councillor SUTTON, stop interjecting, if you would. I am happy to deal
with your interjections. You know well that that was not a matter involving
labour or industrial relations; that was a matter involving competence of
performance.
I would just say this: we have a very good ferry service out there and CityCat
service. I get on well with the officers that are engaged both in terms of the
masters of those ferries and the staff, as was recognised by the MUA the other
day. Many of the staff have seen me on the CityCats on different occasions, and
I congratulate them on the job that they do.
But, in the end, this is a matter for the parties to come to a resolution. If that
resolution can’t be arrived at, there are two courses of action: one is that the
individual members of the union have that right to withdraw labour, and the
Industrial Relations Commission then has a responsibility to try to reach a
resolution between the parties. That is the way the laws of our land operate.
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
I am sorry that you object to the laws of the land, Councillor GRIFFITHS. But
that is the way our laws exist, and that is the way it ought to be. I defend the
rights of workers to engage in what they need to do if they believe that they are
not getting a fair and proper deal.
So, I want to thank Bob Carnegie and Jason for coming in and expressing
frankly their views and representing the desires of their members in terms of
these negotiations. I just say again that it is a matter between the contractor and
the relative industrial organisations, and if it can’t be sorted out, then the
Industrial Relations Commission will need to sort that out for them.
Chairman:
Further questions?
Councillor TOOMEY.
Question 9
Councillor TOOMEY:
Thank you, Madam Chairman; my question is to the Chairman of Field
Services, Councillor McLACHLAN. Can you please outline the results being
achieved in Field Services as Council’s workplace coal face improving work
safety outcomes for Council workers and contractors, and what are some of the
barriers to meeting the objectives of Council’s Towards Zero Harm strategy?
Councillor McLACHLAN:
Thank you, Madam Chairman, and to Councillor TOOMEY for the question. It
is a very important question, because it is important to recognise what Field
Services is doing to make sure of the safety of our workers. Safety of our
workforce is at the very top of the list when it comes to delivering all of the
important work that we do for and on behalf of the people of Brisbane.
It is Field Services employees or our contractors who provide on-ground
delivery to the people of Brisbane, in the coal face, as you call it, in areas like
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 15 construction, asphalt laying, our quarries, numerous asset services and urban
amenities tasks, all the functions required for waste and resource recovery, and
our fleet servicing.
Field Services has a proud track record in delivery of a safer work place. The
benefits are not only for our workers but also for the increasing productivity and
value for money for our ratepayers. A safe work place stems from developing a
safety culture which ensures that any work place safety issues are quickly
recognised and addressed. We are seeing real results. Our lost time injury
frequency rate, the measure of injury frequency resulting in missed shifts,
continues to trend downwards across the Field Services Group. There were
approximately 28 per cent fewer lost time injuries in the year to September 2015
than there were in the previous corresponding year. The Field Services Group’s
rolling reportable rate has also fallen significantly this year. This means that
fewer WorkCover claims have needed to be placed, and it means few time off
injuries for workers. It means we’ve got a safer work place.
We have also seen an increase in reporting of near-miss incidents across the
Field Services Group, and this is a good thing. It is a sign of a strong culture of
reporting work place safety issues. In the past, near-miss incidents were not
reported unless there was an actual injury or loss of productivity to be concerned
with. However, we have succeeded in building a culture that encourages
reporting near-misses, so that any underlying issues with procedure, equipment,
or work place amenity can be addressed quickly, and there is less chance of a
later accident occurring. These are great results, and results of which we are
enormously proud in this Administration, and of which our leading officers and
managers are also rightly proud.
We all share that as an absolute goal, to ensure, as the number one priority
remains the safety of those workers for whom we are responsible. We have a
clear path and plan, and are committed to continuing to work towards achieving
the goal of zero harm in our Council workforce.
Madam Chairman, I was also asked about any challenges or barriers we are
facing in delivering a safer work place. I regret to say it appears that the Labor
Party in this place does not support this Administrations’ determination to
improve worker safety. Their opposition to the provision of safer, more efficient
and more easily operated street cleaning equipment is well documented. They
say we should just buy more brooms for the street cleaning crews—
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor McLACHLAN:
—and more—okay, I know their view on this.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor McLACHLAN:
Okay, but let me tell you, three weeks ago, just three weeks ago—
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor McLACHLAN:
—in this place, I was absolutely staggered when you, the Labor Party, voted
against the provision of vital safety equipment for workers responsible for Story
Bridge maintenance. The installation of a static line to improve safety for
workers: they voted against it.
The static line is a crucial addition to keeping our hard-working Story Bridge
maintenance workers safe. When they descend to the lower sections of the
bridge, underneath the walkway, they now clip on to a line that will arrest their
fall in the event of an incident. It helps to provide safe access to the lower cords
of the Story Bridge.
The new safety line will be available for both routine and emergency access.
The half a million dollar contract that the Labor Party voted against also
provides permanently fixed ladders connecting to the lower sections of the
bridge via access hatches in the infill banners on the road and footpath, 72 points
along the bridge. Each ladder will have a vertical static line attached to ensure
safe access where those workers climb down to the lower cord below.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 16 When our workers identified the need to us, it was a no-brainer. It was a
no-brainer. We had to do it. We know that the Labor Party picks up and chooses
what to support or not support in those contracts and tendering reports. They
read the report. They understood what the measure provided for, and then they
took the decision to vote against it. The party that claims to represent the
interests of the workers, it is almost beyond belief, but consistent with their
general cynical behaviour in this place.
Chairman:
Thankfully, Madam Chairman, we have the numbers on this side, and we will
stand up for real improvements and not simply mouth hollow rhetoric when it
comes to worker safety measures. We are for the workers.
That ends Question Time.
CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS:
ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK), Chairman of the Establishment and
Coordination Committee, moved, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER), that
the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 16 November 2015, be adopted.
LORD MAYOR:
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Just before coming to the report itself,
I would just like to comment on a few other issues if I may. Firstly,
25 November, tomorrow, is White Ribbon Day. Of course, this is very much
about raising awareness among Australian men and boys in particular about the
roles that they can play in preventing violence against women. The campaign
calls for men across Australia to speak out and take an oath swearing never to
commit, excuse or remain silent about violence against women.
This week we will also see the staging of the Asia Pacific Screen Awards. This
event again has been getting very significant coverage across the Asia Pacific
region. As one example of that, in the Philippines last week, Brisbane was
covered on page 1 and page 3 of their national newspaper about this event,
simply because of the fact that one of their actresses has been short-listed for an
award at the Asia Pacific Screen Awards. The event is a very important event
for our position within the Asia Pacific region, and will continue to be so.
The event, now in its second year, is coupled with the Brisbane Asia Pacific
Film Festival, and that is this year presenting more than 100 feature films. It is
an opportunity for the people of Brisbane to get out and to experience many of
the films that are also associated with this awards ceremony.
I wanted to comment also about the recent placement of a 200-year-old cannon
at the Botanic Gardens. This is a revisiting of this cannon. At one time in our
history, going back to 1862, Queen Victoria donated 12 such cannons to our
city, and they lined what is now the Botanic Gardens, protecting our Brisbane
City against any potential invaders at that time. One of the 12 cannons has been
reinstated in its location, and it is there with a little history showing the story
line behind it. It is again another point of interest for our city, and I certainly
endorse and recommend people going down and having a look at that cannon.
They were all cast between 1797 and 1810, and there it is.
Also, City Hall opened its doors last week to a gathering of our city’s history
groups. This was an opportunity for various historical societies to interact with
each other, to put on display the various research works by way of the local
history books that they have produced.
I want to pay my thanks to all of our historical societies around this city. They
make a terrific contribution in capturing the history of Brisbane, undertaking the
necessary research and then, in many cases, seeing those pieces of research
combined in the form of books relative to different areas of our city. So I thank
the various historical societies.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 17 I would like to think that this could become an annual event where they have the
opportunity to put out on display to the people of Brisbane their various wares
and fares; many of them attend festivals around our city. As I move around
Brisbane at the 75-plus festivals that this Council supports during the course of
the year, many of those historical societies are out there, and we thank them
very much for the voluntary hours that they put in to our city.
Last week we also launched a new hotel in the city, in terms of the
announcement by Western. They will be developing a new hotel. It will be
alongside the Four Points by Sheraton Hotel. I was asking a question down
there, when I was there: how was Four Points going? They had just the night
before done 100 per cent occupancy. While we appreciate that not all hotels in
the city are doing those sorts of numbers, it is great that we are getting some of
these big international brands in our city. They are good for Brisbane, not only
now but also into the future. Of course, coupled with the W, which is another
Starwood hotel coming to our city; it does provide that additional offering.
We have two items on the agenda today, the first of which is a permit to occupy
the Brunswick Street Mall. This is pod number 1. It is recommended today that
we provide an opportunity for the Uniting Hands Foundation Australia Limited,
be given a nine-year permit to occupy and use the Brunswick Street Mall pod
number 1. This is a group that assists people in need and other marginalised
members of the community. They have submitted a proposal with restaurant
drawings which are provided in attachment E, so we are recommending to this
Council that we provide this opportunity for this group, and in turn we know
that the funds raised by them will be returned to the community of Brisbane
through that provision of help to those most in need in our city.
Item B is a neighbourhood plan. This is the Albion Neighbourhood Plan. If we
look at the historical arrangements here, with the first State Interest Check
undertaken on 12 August 2014, that saw the whole of the Chamber support the
Albion Neighbourhood Plan at that stage. The second State Interest Check was
then undertaken on 3 February 2015, and again we saw the support of the whole
Chamber around that.
The Albion Neighbourhood Plan has now been out over recent months,
undertaking community consultation, after seeing a return from the Queensland
Government of those State interest reviews. The Queensland Government did
not identify any changes that needed to be made, and advised Council that we
could progress to public consultation.
Council released the Albion Neighbourhood Plan for public consultation from
13 July 2015 through to 24 August 2015. Through this period we received
35 submissions, 32 of which were properly made. Council has reviewed the
feedback received from these submissions, and has responded through a
submission report that is presented to Council today. A number of the
submissions received showed general support for the Neighbourhood Plan,
especially comments regarding the desire to see change and renewal within the
area.
A large portion of submissions were focused on what you might call spot
zonings, asking Council to change the classification, the zone, in a specific lot.
This is generally not in accordance with Council’s approach. We like to ensure
that there is a consistent and identifiable precinct within these plans. The
Neighbourhood Plan has been created following a review of the current
neighbourhood plan provisions back in 2011.
The review indicated that the planning provision required updating, and provide
consistent building height provisions, encouragement of more mixed use
development, and ensuring that the plan responds to Council’s updated planning
provisions since the introduction of City Plan 2014. The Neighbourhood Plan
has been the product of extensive engagement with the local community. In
2013 Council began engaging with the community to understand the local
community’s views on the Albion area and how they wanted to see it progress
for the future. The key focus from residents throughout the consultation has
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 18 been that Albion could improve; that the area lacked a community hub and a
sense of place.
So, Council has responded, ensuring that the planning provisions for that area
include greater development potential to provide urban renewal outcomes.
Future development will create greater pedestrian amenity around the
Albion Village and improved connections to the Albion train station. The key
outcomes of this neighbourhood plan are to encourage high quality design—
Chairman:
LORD MAYOR, your time has expired.
254/2015-16
At that point, the LORD MAYOR was granted an extension of time on the motion of the DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES.
Chairman:
LORD MAYOR, please continue.
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. So the key outcomes of the
Neighbourhood Plan are to encourage high quality design that contributes to a
strong sense of place, enable the creation of a higher density urban community
with mixed use, improved community facilities and encourage development to
provide public space, provide clarity about how new development could
maintain public view corridors such as City Centre, Brisbane River and
Mt Coot-tha. The Neighbourhood Plan also provides clear guidance for
development within those precincts.
I might leave it to Councillor COOPER, who I am sure will be speaking on this
also to provide some further detail in relation to it. But I am happy to move the
report.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, I rise to speak on Item A.
Seriatim - Clause A
Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON requested that Clause A, PERMIT TO OCCUPY BRUNSWICK STREET
MALL, POD 1 – THE UNITING HANDS FOUNDATION AUSTRALIA LIMITED, be taken seriatim for
voting purposes.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I rise with some concern about what we are being asked to sign off on today as
this Council. We are being asked to sign off on the use of one of the pods that
have been located in the Valley Mall. I certainly understand that the
LORD MAYOR is desperate to find people to go into them, having promoted
them so strongly. But I have some very genuine concerns about what is
proposed in this report before us today, and what the LORD MAYOR has just
said is the purpose of it, which I don’t think is reflected in the report.
What we are being asked to sign off on is a nine-year permit to occupy, to an
organisation that was set-up as a charity five months ago that does not have a
track record in this city. It is not an organisation that we know. I am concerned
with the material that has been provided to support the application. For example,
attachment C is a single page statement with very vague references to assets and
liabilities, and the statement by the accountant who has signed off on it which
says, “The attached special purpose financial statement has been compiled on
the basis of information provided by the director of the company and is
exclusively for the benefit of the director”.
So, the information in this report has been provided by the person who wants to
get the lease with Council, and the accountant, who is signing off on it, is
specifically saying that he hasn’t been able to independently verify it. He is
saying that this has been given to him by the director. I am a little bit concerned
about why we would be entering into a nine-year contract or permit to occupy
with an organisation that we don’t know.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 19 The LORD MAYOR has provided a little further advice which he said, and I
quote, “This is an organisation that is there to help the people of the City of
Brisbane”. If that is the case, LORD MAYOR, are you aware that the purpose of
this organisation is to provide funding to overseas charities? That is what it says
in their own material, in the stuff before us today.
Are you aware, LORD MAYOR, that you are allowing them to undertake food
and beverage service with alcohol subject to gaining liquor licences? Why on
earth in an environment that is already chock-a-block full of nightclubs and
restaurants would we be providing liquor licences to an organisation in this
location? Either they are a charity that is providing a charitable benefit to the
people of Brisbane, or they are planning to operate a commercial business for
profit which then they may or may not provide some profit to overseas charities.
The purpose of this is unclear, and that troubles me, because this organisation
does not have a track record that I can see. It was only registered as a charity in
June this year. So I have very serious concerns about why we would be entering
into a nine-year contract and basically the permit fee is 4 per cent of the gross
sales. Four per cent of the gross sales is agreed to be distributed to local
charities. What if there are no gross sales? Are we going to provide free
accommodation for them?
I do not think this is a good deal for our city. I do not think it is a sensible
financial arrangement. We don’t even give clubs that have been lessees in this
city for 100 years longer than four years on a community lease, so why would
we be giving an organisation that was set up five months ago, a nine-year permit
to occupy? It does not make sense.
If we are going to enter into these types of commercial arrangements, we should
be doing it cautiously, perhaps on a year basis to see how it works, revise it after
a year to make sure that it works effectively. But I think there are some real red
flags here, and I am concerned it may not work down the track.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor HOWARD.
Councillor HOWARD:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise in support of Item A, the permit to occupy
the Brunswick Street Mall with pod number 1 and the Uniting Hands
Foundation of Australia Limited. I do so with a great deal of delight that we
have this organisation who will be working within the Brunswick Street Mall. I
guess one of the things that I’d like to talk about is a little bit of history. I know
that those on the other side don’t always like that. One of the first things when I
was elected as a Councillor in 2012 was to look at the many years of neglect of
the Fortitude Valley precinct and particularly the Brunswick Street Mall.
I really want to thank the LORD MAYOR for his vision in that we got quite a
number of traders together and we looked at what we needed to do to help the
economic development of this area. That is what we are talking about today. We
are talking about permitting someone to look at an economic reaction to how we
deal with some of our marginalised people, how we put together some of our
sustainable enterprises, and that is exactly as the local Councillor what I like to
do, not only here in the Brunswick Street Mall but throughout my ward.
I have quite a number of community groups and not-for-profits that are very,
very keen to be working to have sustainable enterprises that support the people
that they’re assisting. When some of these people came to see me, they talked
about some of the work they were doing with domestic violence, and I know
that that is a very big issue for this country that is being addressed at all levels of
government.
The organisation is certainly one that, as the Councillor for Tennyson was just
commenting, has a very wide range of support that they are doing. But certainly
we are looking at the people that they can support within this area. In terms of
the Brunswick Street Mall, it was certainly refreshed by our $4 million upgrade.
We saw the first pod, which was the Tuckeria that was installed not long after
we upgraded the mall—again, another amazing thing to happen, in that after
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 20 those years of neglect, in mid-2014, we were able to reopen the mall and to
assist the traders to make sure that we were helping them with the economic
growth of that area.
The Tuckeria was the first one. We also then installed The Pod which was
designed to activate the area, and has certainly been doing so. It’s often used for
live music within the mall, particularly during our markets on the weekend, and
I encourage anyone to wander down to the mall to sort of see the exciting things
that are happening.
So, Madam Chairman, with the upgrade of the mall and with the ability to have
these pods growing, we think that that is an absolutely marvellous thing for that
area. As I said before, it has suffered greatly over the years of the
Australian Labor Party being in charge of that particular ward. Very little was
done. We saw places such as the McWhirters, of course, and Waltons which had
long sort of passed their prime, but nothing was being done to help the traders,
to help people replace that economic growth. I think this is an extremely
positive thing for us to be seeing in the mall, and I commend it to the Chamber.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor SIMMONDS.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I just rise in support of Item A which
has just been covered by the local Councillor, Councillor HOWARD, regarding
the permit to occupy for the United Hands Foundation Australia. Perhaps I can
give the Chamber a little bit more flesh on the bones in terms of this particular
proposal, although I do note what I will be quoting is all in the papers itself for
Councillors to read, if they wanted to do the work of a Councillor in advance.
When they get their papers, they could go through and perhaps have answered
some of these questions themselves.
The Uniting Hands Foundation is a charitable foundation that is seeking this
permit to occupy for two charitable purposes. Number one is to give a
hospitality opportunity for at-risk youth in the Valley, in and of itself a very
important aim. We know about youth unemployment in the city. We know we
want to create jobs—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor SIMMONDS:
—so this charity is there to provide hospitality opportunities for at-risk youth.
They can do that because the people who operate the charity, if you go through
the papers, have a strong track record in restaurants of their own, albeit not in
Brisbane but in Buderim and other places, and in Caloundra as well.
They run a number of restaurants which have good reviews, quite successful as
you can see from their financial statements, so they know what it is to work in
hospitality. They know how to train young people, and this is a great
opportunity for youth who otherwise don’t have those opportunities, that don’t
currently have those skills, who are currently unemployed, to get those skills
and then, of course, go on to bigger and better things. That is number one.
Number two is they’d also like to support local charities. What we have done as
a Council is to enshrine that within the permit to occupy, and that is in one of
the attachments; attachment B, just in front of me. It says that an additional four
per cent of the gross sales of permit E in each permit year will be dispersed to
agreed local charities. Councillors should note the word ‘local’, specifically
enshrined in the permit to occupy—not overseas, local charities, and this is
4 per cent of the gross sales, not net sales.
The comment that, well, what if there are no gross sales, is extraordinary. That
would mean they literally did not open the doors. I am not entirely sure what the
purpose of building the thing would be. We are not talking net sales; we are not
talking about after tax, we are not talking about once they pay the directors; we
are not talking about any of that. Council is a bit smarter than that. It is four per
cent of their gross sales, their entire takings before they do tax, before they do
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 21 wages, before they do profit, before they do anything else—four per cent of
what comes through the door, that is what gross means—four per cent that
comes through the till will go to local charities.
What a fantastic initiative for Council and this Administration to be supporting,
and wouldn’t you love it if it was bipartisan support, for something as genuine
as that. I take the Independent Councillor’s point that this is a relatively new
charity. But Council again has done its due diligence. There is nothing to
suggest that there is anything financially untoward with this charity. There is
nothing to suggest that the directors haven’t done anything than discharge their
duties in other businesses that they have been a part of, and we have done all
that through the registered searches and everything else that you need to do.
Unlike the Independent Councillor, I am not willing to condemn in advance.
These are people who are running successful hospitality businesses, who have
decided to form a charity, who have found an opportunity to contribute to the
local economy, local charities, local youth opportunities, and I am not willing to
condemn them in advance. I am saying, well let’s get them in, let’s be part of
providing that opportunity.
The other thing that was discussed was the length of tenure. The reason the
length of tenure is nine years is because this particular charity, these individuals,
are in fact going to build the pod. So they are putting in the capital; they are
doing the DA; they are doing the design, and Councillors have an opportunity to
see that. They are putting in the capital cost of building this particular facility.
So it is a bit of an established principle within Council that, where people put in
their own capital, their own dollars and don’t rely on the ratepayers to do that,
they should get the tenure and the opportunity to recoup some of that
investment. I don’t think that any Councillors would consider that particularly
unreasonable. If it is your capital that you are putting in, and you are not asking
it of the ratepayers, well, fair enough.
Finally, of course, the other item that was mentioned was alcohol. Well, shock,
horror! Alcohol will be served in the Valley. Geez, quick, stop the presses for
everybody. You know, I don’t know, gee, if you can’t serve alcohol in the
Valley, I don’t know where else in the city you do. I know we are talking about
lock-out laws in all the rest of the State, but we are not total wowsers just yet in
this city. Reasonable and responsible people are allowed to drink. There is an
entertainment precinct in the Valley where those opportunities are taken up in
abundance. So I don’t think that is a reason to put a kybosh on this.
I take Councillor HOWARD’s point that, following the revamp, this is a space
that we want activated. We know that market conditions haven’t been as
favourable in terms of commercial operations as we had hoped, but let’s not,
because of that, let this space sit idle. Let’s grab the opportunity to support
young people at risk of homelessness in the Valley; let’s grab the opportunities
to support charities in our city, and let’s take the opportunity to create some new
jobs with no extra ratepayer investment in the Valley. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I wish to enter the debate to discuss the draft Albion
Neighbourhood Plan. I understand that this is the time that the Neighbourhood
Plan has been out to consultation with the community. We have now the benefit
of the input from the community before we approve or not.
This is a renew of the Albion Neighbourhood Plan, as there is currently one in
the City Plan. Part of that renewal is essentially to put a new precinct, being the
raceway precinct, that is permitting a maximum of 10-storey residential
development on that site. It includes a new area for mixed use industry and
business along Crosby Road. As well, the Neighbourhood Plan has, as it
currently does, a number of precincts, three of which are around the
Albion Railway Station that are proposing increased density.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 22 It was interesting to hear the LORD MAYOR, because his argument was that
one of the major changes for the refreshing was that there is no hub, there is no
centre to Albion, and the residents were certainly wishing such. His argument
was that the high density around the railway station will deliver this. Well,
LORD MAYOR, I just reflected on that, because I don’t necessarily believe that
high rise means you get a commercial hub. Take Kangaroo Point, for instance.
That is without a hub, and that is something the residents are very aware of.
Where there is actually a dynamic place in our city, is often where you have
really vibrant strip shopping centres, mixed use, in medium to low density.
Boundary Street; Jane Street; New Farm; Bulimba has its street;
Racecourse Road. If you look at those—so the premise that you are actually
looking to achieve is flawed, I will wait to see whether it is delivered, but I
certainly reject high rise, ipso facto, delivers a density and delivers a community
hub.
It is interesting to have a look and see, too, that there were 32 submissions of
this, now, the most crucial time for setting the City Plan. This neighbourhood
plan is what all planners, and certainly the LNP and the Chair for
neighbourhood planning, use when they are expecting the community to
understand the detail, the complex detail of our City Plan. Yet there were only
32 formal submissions.
I know that Councillor COOPER will get straight up and tell everyone that I
don’t understand planning, which is what she says every time, which is actually
far from the truth. It also indicates that, because there are only that number of
submissions, that the community is happy with this. Well, I am quite confident
from the number of people that are approaching Labor Councillors about
neighbourhood plans, they just haven’t got the process of consultation right so
that the community does understand what is proposed in a neighbourhood plan
and what is the significant impact of that neighbourhood plan.
That is why, to have 32 submissions, I would suggest that it should be
considered as a failure of the process, of people understanding what is going on,
because after all, if they did, they could have more submissions supporting it
than you’ve got. So, to me, this is a neighbourhood plan that will create
problems in the future because the community does not understand what is in it.
Let’s look at the submissions that the community did know and were able to
make a submission actually say. The one thing was the Dover Street precinct, or
the north precinct which has been contentious in the Neighbourhood Plan at all
times. This is an area of housing that is covered by the traditional building
character overlay that has high density to the west and now has the northern
precinct of six storeys residential to the east of them, and they are fighting for
their identity. They are objecting to the impact on Dover Street from the
increased density, and have done so consistently since the Neighbourhood Plan
has been mooted. But were any of their concerns given any credence? No.
Absolutely no change in the Neighbourhood Plan.
The other issue that had major concern of all of the submissions—these were the
two that stood out—and that was the traffic issues. The traffic issues that were
particularly of the congestion in the area, the parking congestion in the area, the
need to actually have more parking on sites where you’ve got the higher density,
because residents are very, very well aware that, unless you have a more
innovative approach to parking, the current City Plan will simply deliver
congestion of parking on the streets where everyone will not be able to have any
parking because of the overflow from the units on to the street.
Is there any innovation in this neighbourhood plan for parking? No. Is it an issue
that the LNP are hearing about all the time? Yes, because we are hearing it as
well. So it is not addressing the issues of the residents. It was interesting,
because I went through all the submissions to see if any lucky person was able
to put in a submission and to have a change resulting from it. There was one,
and that was someone who objected to the term ‘excessive’. Wait a minute; I’d
better get the right word. I’d hate to have it incorrect. That was submission 1,
the “overwhelming economic need to be an outcome”. It was agreed that
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 23 possibly such flowery language of ‘overwhelming’ is not consistent with a
statutory plan, and that was removed. That was the only change. All the
substantive planning issues that have been raised by residents were ignored.
The one submission that I would draw to the attention of all Councillors in the
Chamber was a submission that is actually referred to as 4.5 in which it actually
“requests—requests—better clarification of height limit in the Albion Mill site.
The Neighbourhood Plan says 15, but Council is supporting 20 storeys”.
Madam Chair, nothing could have a better snapshot of a community not
understanding the impact of this neighbourhood plan in that they are looking for
it to guide. I believe it should guide the development in the area, but we know
the LNP puts a nominal density, a nominal height limit, and then ignores it,
using the argument of performance assessment.
Well, Madam Chair, the community is saying, even in these submissions, that
they wish a neighbourhood plan, which is that most fine level of planning, to
accurately reflect for the development industry, for the residents, what is
expected on that site. Yet, in the response, it basically says to that submitter: you
don’t know; we are going to approve whatever development density or height
that is asked for by the developers in that area, because that is how we have been
interpreting the City Plan.
That is not good planning. It is unacceptable, and I would urge the LNP to have
a change on the road to Damascus, and actually make this neighbourhood plan
and the heights proposed actually be meaningful for the community, and to
adhere to it unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Further, I am delighted to see that there is actually a new park allocated in the
north precinct where the density is six stories, allegedly maximum, in this
neighbourhood plan. I have looked, but not in any of the material we’ve got,
have we got any indication of the size of that park. As every Councillor would
know, the delivery of parks timely in relation to neighbourhood plans is dear to
my heart, so I would ask the Chair, when she talks to this issue, whether she
would actually notify.
Further, Madam Chair, this is the time when Labor Councillors know what is the
existing population and what is the predicted population. So again I request that
that might be put on the record—
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS, your time has expired.
Further speakers?
Councillor McLACHLAN.
Councillor McLACHLAN:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak to Item B, the Albion Neighbourhood
Plan, and delighted to do so and also perhaps to follow up some of the issues
raised just then by Councillor ABRAHAMS.
I will pick up one of her points about the alleged six storeys in the
north precinct. If Councillor ABRAHAMS ever ventured to the north side of the
city, and in particular to the Albion plan—and I can see she has made all of her
notes based on theory rather than a reality check of going there—she would see
those alleged six storey buildings are already built. They are there in the
north precinct. They have been completed. They are there. So you can come and
measure them yourself, Councillor ABRAHAMS, any time you like, and you
will see that they are subject to the original Albion plan.
I guess that is another point I could make. If you have been here for a little
while, I am now seeing a refresh of the original Albion plan that was introduced
when I first came into this place back in 2006. I think that was the election
where Councillor DICK cut his teeth as the State Director of the ALP’s first
anti-development campaign, and he has had a few since, but that was the
Stop Overdevelopment Now campaign back in 2006 which keeps being
refreshed.
To some of the points that Councillor ABRAHAMS was making, I think one of
the things she clearly has overlooked or forgotten—and I go to the response to
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 24 one of the issues raised in the submissions at 7.1 about the concern about density
and negative impact, I think the response is very well made—very well made
indeed. It says this, “The South East Queensland Regional Plan is the
Queensland Government’s plan to manage population growth for the next
20 years. The South East Queensland Regional Plan forecasts the need for
156,000 additional dwellings by 2031, including an additional 138,000 infill
dwellings. This requirement is translated into the Brisbane City Plan 2014
strategic framework, which identifies Albion as a growth node on a transport
corridor”.
Well, that is right, Madam Chairman; exactly the point that is made by our
planners: Albion is the right place to put this sort of additional housing around
the Albion station. I’ve got to say, it stands in stark contrast to what the
State Government is currently doing now down at Hamilton Northshore where it
is shoe-horning in much taller buildings without any public transport
infrastructure at all, and then hoping like hell that Council comes up with a
solution for them when they’ve put in 7,000 new dwellings down there and all
the additional people without any plan to get them in or out. So that is a slight
diversion, and my apologies for that, but I will come back to the Albion plan.
The existing Albion plan already anticipates growth and change within the area.
That growth is as we have planned for, as this plan allows for, in this refresh to
allow for additional dwellings to be built at or near the railway station. That is a
logical place to put these dwellings. That is what we are talking about when we
are putting a hub into an area that allows for people to get to work on the train,
come home from work on the train, and to walk in close proximity from their
dwelling at or near the railway station to the great shops that are along
Sandgate Road, and a couple of good pubs along there as well. This will be a
great hub, but it does need to have this population uplift courtesy of this plan to
make those areas more viable.
The Councillor also mentioned the park. That is a great addition to this area. Not
only the park which is in that centre of the Neighbourhood Plan that is well and
truly allowed for in the existing development, but also the open plazas that will
be publicly accessible at or around the railway station. So, as the local
Councillor for Hamilton Ward, with Albion as one of the key suburbs, I am
delighted that we are seeing this refreshed plan.
The main issues that were raised with me by residents, was a concern that they
weren’t included in this plan. So I guess the most oft-raised issue that came my
way in the ward office was from residents who wanted to be in the plan, but they
thought the parameters or boundaries should have been amended. But as we
know, that is not the case. This plan is within the defined area. But there is
certainly an opportunity for uplift within the Albion plan area itself.
I know there are people looking to take advantage of the opportunity that this
plan allows for. They are certainly in agreement with us that the recreational
space that is created will be a great benefit for the area as well. I am certainly
looking forward to seeing this ticked off by the State Government in the next
few weeks, and for it to be promulgated as the final version of the Albion plan.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor COOPER.
Councillor COOPER:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I rise to speak to Item B of the report.
I would particularly like to thank the local Councillor for his commentary with
respect to the Neighbourhood Plan. I think it is always really important to
understand absolutely, as Councillor McLACHLAN put forward. We are not
doing this is splendid isolation. Why are we planning for 156,000 new
dwellings? Because we are obligated to do that.
In fact, the Albion area was specifically nominated by the State Labor
Government to see increased density. This is a location which is very well
serviced by a rail station. It has got good public transport services through the
bus line. In fact, it has got fantastic new bikeways that are being delivered in the
area. So this is a place that is rich in all sorts of transport opportunities. In fact,
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 25 this is the second neighbourhood plan that the local community have been
involved in, and this particular plan is really a refresh of the existing
neighbourhood plan, and that is why this community is actually extremely well
informed about planning for their local area, because this is the second time they
have gone through a neighbourhood plan.
So I dispute the comments made by Councillor ABRAHAMS saying that a
minimum number of submissions. It is interesting, isn’t it; a lot of submissions
is a bad thing. Not very many submissions, also a bad thing if you are in the
Australian Labor Party. So what is the magic number for them? What is the right
number of submissions that satisfies the Australian Labor Party for a
neighbourhood plan, because they don’t seem to have one? It seems to be
whatever serves their political purposes.
Councillor ABRAHAMS said that the people had no understanding. Isn’t that
hilarious? People have no understanding. Well, they have a say in a
neighbourhood plan. They don’t have a say when Economic Development
Queensland (EDQ) go out and plonk all sorts of heights, 40 storeys which we
know Councillor ABRAHAMS thought was appropriate down there at
Woolloongabba. What right do people have if the EDQ do any planning? They
certainly don’t have any rights as part of their neighbourhood plan, and there are
no impact assessable applications that are ever lodged under the EDQ unless
they choose to deem it so.
So, with respect to this, we also had Councillor ABRAHAMS suggesting there
had been changes to the Dover Street precinct. Wrong. There have been no
changes to the Dover Street precinct. I note that the Councillor doesn’t seem to
understand what this neighbourhood plan does. It of course reflects that new
City Plan has got provisions in there, so instead of duplicating provisions and
having them both in the Neighbourhood Plan and in City Plan, this new
neighbourhood plan actually makes it much clearer and simplifies, so where
there is information supplied in New City Plan, that takes precedence and
doesn’t require it to be incorporated in the Neighbourhood Plan.
There are provisions relating to step-downs, to interfaces, all those sorts of
things which are, as a matter of course, incorporated in New City Plan. It is
disappointing that Councillor ABRAHAMS seems to forget what that actual
process is.
There has been significant re-engagement with the community. We have had
newsletters go out; we have had Talk to a Planner sessions; there’s been all sorts
of opportunities for people to talk about the future of their local area. In
particular, we have also said that this particular neighbourhood plan is an area
where we would like to see some activity occur. It is, I think, very much an
inner city suburb with fantastic facilities, great infrastructure; we want to see
some greater densities around the village, and around the Albion Train Station.
Councillor ABRAHAMS was talking about saying that basically we thought
that increased density was the only way to activate spaces. Well, if she had been
to Albion, she would know that Sandgate Road is not what I would describe as a
high density environment. In fact, it is quite a low density environment along
Sandgate Road. What we are saying—
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor COOPER:
—well, Councillor ABRAHAMS is saying it is not active, so that is in
contradiction with her previous argument. So consistency is not a strong point
for Councillor ABRAHAMS. What we are saying—
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor COOPER:
—and you can talk and talk and talk, Councillor ABRAHAMS, but you’ve
painted yourself into a corner. What we have said here is there are opportunities
for more places for people to live in Albion, but those are carefully selected,
nominated locations. While in fact we want to make sure that we continue to
protect the significant historical places, the pre-1911 buildings, the traditional
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 26 building character parts of the area, those have to be well located to ensure that
they are protected in the future.
So this neighbourhood plan has been carefully crafted by Council officers to
make sure that new development is integrated with heritage places, ensures that
growth is in specific locations, and that renewal will occur without jeopardising
what the community really values in the local area. I think we have seen a
number of neighbourhood plans occur. We have seen Fortitude Valley really
revitalise that whole precinct. We have seen the activity down there at Newstead
and Teneriffe. There has been quite good evidence that, if we carefully plan,
working with the community, we can deliver fantastic outcomes rather than
seeing what the EDQ principle is, which is a blanket coverage across these sites,
removing any kind of conversation with the community as part of the process.
I would like to thank all of those who have been involved. I would like to thank
the Council officers for their hard work and diligence, and I would like to look
forward to a fantastic new future for the local area of Albion. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and I rise to speak on Items A and B. What a
load of rubbish we have just heard from Councillor COOPER. We know when
the LNP talk about community consultation; they are talking about one-way
traffic. Let’s not have any of that rubbish that we have just heard; that false and
misleading information from Councillor COOPER, that the big bad State Labor
Government made us do this. When will Councillor COOPER accept that she is
in charge of planning in this city; the buck stops with her and the LNP?
Let’s talk about the LNP’s record with community engagement, which we didn’t
really hear a lot of detail about. What was this community engagement where
the community were activated and involved? Well, let’s turn to what it actually
was, and let’s look at the engagement activities. A public notice in The Courier
Mail. A project newsletter. That’s it. That’s it. When you talk about community
consultation, that is the LNP, and they want awards and they want to be
recognised for it. What a load of rubbish!
Here is a document; I bring your attention to page 4, in terms of the attachment
C. Now, if I am wrong, and if Councillor COOPER held public meetings. What
on earth did Councillor McLACHLAN do? We know he is in retirement. We
know that he has put his feet up. But what on earth did the LNP do and go out
and listen to the community? Did they hold planning forums? Did they go to
actually meet with residents in their streets in their suburbs? No, they did not.
Here it is in black and white. A public notice. A project newsletter. That is it.
Zilch in terms of community consultation. What an absolute disgrace!
Then they have the gall to come and talk about the previous, previous
State Labor Government. They don’t talk about when the LNP
State Government was in power, how they just completely rolled over, didn’t
change anything at Hamilton Northshore, not a peep, because they were in on it.
They were absolutely in on it. They were right up to their back teeth in it. So I
am not having any lectures from those hypocrites opposite me when it comes to
community consultation and community engagement.
Councillor de WIT:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Point of order against you, Councillor DICK.
Councillor de WIT.
Councillor de WIT:
Madam Chairman, I think I heard Councillor DICK referring to people on this
side in terms that are not appropriate in this Chamber.
Councillor DICK:
Sure, Madam Chair, I am happy to withdraw. I am the only Councillor who ever
will in this whole Chamber. I will withdraw and say the hypocritical behaviour
of those opposite, which has no end. That is the engagement process done and
dusted.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 27 Let’s talk about actually the changes. What we didn’t hear about was
submissions, what the community said. We hear this rubbish continuously from
the LNP that people are happy with this. They’re not. They’re not. This is the
LNP la la land; this is how happy they are. Is it any wonder there are, week after
week, protest meetings and protest groups and bad media about your planning
decisions? You know what? Keep it up, because right up until 19 March, you
are going to feel the burn of exactly what you are doing, day in, day out.
This is what the feedback was directly from residents, “I oppose the draft plan
and note the six-storey residential building in Dover Street will overshadow my
home and the neighbourhood environment, as well as the diminishment of my
enjoyment that constructions will make, including increased traffic, lack of
street parking, which is already an issue—bold—increased noise, and
impairment of existing views, sunlight and breeze. I oppose the draft plan and
ask it to be rejected”. Item number one.
Number two, “I have lived here since 2007. This is a quiet neighbourhood with
little or no traffic thoroughfare. The proposed plan would add significantly to
the environmental footprint of the neighbourhood, including increased traffic”.
Well, listening to Councillor McLACHLAN, there is no problem. Every one
supports it. He is agreeing. He is agreeing now. He is nodding.
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor DICK:
That is right, six-storey buildings will tower over the beautiful cottages and
homes in the neighbourhood. So once again, the LNP’s extreme arrogance; they
know best. All of these residents who have taken the time, one after the after. “I
strongly oppose the proposal for medium density”. Look at Councillor COOPER
scrambling now, telling the LORD MAYOR what to say, how to get out of it.
“It will be difficult or impossible for residents of existing homes in these new
and narrow streets to exit their own driveways with a parked car to each one and
opposite. Our peaceful enjoyment of our homes will be diminished, and the
above factors will potentially impact on the value of the homes”.
“In particular, in workers’ cottages built in the late 1800s which contribute
significantly to Albion’s character”. What an absolute disgrace that this
LNP Council thinks that all of these residents that took the time and the effort
are completely ignored and dismissed by the LNP. Well, I support them today,
and as a result, Labor Councillors will not and cannot support these changes.
Why? Because they are against what the community want. Once again, we are
seeing whatever the developers want being rammed through because the LNP
know best.
“For Council to allow a maximum of six storeys in Dover Street will also lead to
even further traffic congestion and parking issues for residents and visitors
alike”. If we listen to Councillor McLACHLAN, they’re already built, no
problem, so all these residents, in his own ward, are wrong. What an arrogant
statement to make.
Madam Chair, we know by reading through the submissions and reading
through the issues, time and time again, when you only need to go through page
after page, over 90 per cent of the submissions and the issues raised—no change
proposed, time and time again. Let’s talk about the traffic impacts of this
neighbourhood plan and the LNP cramming their development into these
residents without the community’s wishes. Some 73 per cent in the papers
today, on table R1 on page 39 of the supporting documentation, attachment D,
not one road will be done up until 2026 to 2031. So we are going to allow
increased densities without residential support against the community’s wishes,
and we are not going to lift a finger to actually deal with any of the problems.
Well, I say enough is enough, Madam Chair.
We cannot go down this approach any more with the LNP simply ignoring what
residents are saying, and it is happening right across the city. This is a snapshot,
thinking that they—can you listen even today, the arrogance; they wanted to be
congratulated for it. They wanted a pat on the back for how amazing they were
for ignoring residents, and cutting them out of the process. Is it little wonder that
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 28 residents are meeting week in, week out? Councillor ADAMS, we know what
happened at the Tarragindi meeting. We know when they were all yelling at
you—she is saying no, it was fine. If that was fine, Madam Chair, if that was
fine—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor DICK:
—I wouldn’t want those sorts of meetings happening forever in my life, I give
you the tip. But let’s be clear: on this neighbourhood plan, we will not be
supporting it today because of the issues raised directly on behalf of those
residents. Car parking, lack of impact on amenity, and the fact that residents do
not support the increased densities in their own street. For those reasons, we will
not be supporting it, and more importantly, we will be holding the LNP to
account right up until 19 March to make sure their impacts on residents are
ceased once and for all.
Chairman:
Further debate?
LORD MAYOR, right of reply.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes, thanks very much, Madam Chair. Well, it is interesting to listen to
Councillor DICK. At least he gets himself excited. That is one thing I have to
say about Councillor DICK; he has the capacity to whip himself into a frenzy.
The only trouble for Councillor DICK is that, when I go out to the shopping
centres, I am not feeling that same frenzy that he describes. Mind you,
Madam Chairman, there was a little bit of a burning happening last weekend
over the Kingsford Smith Drive decision for them not to proceed with it, I’ve
got to tell you.
Let’s talk about public consultation around this. The reality is that, as was
mentioned earlier, there were 35 submissions. People had an opportunity to
lodge their submissions for the Albion Neighbourhood Plan. There were
35 submissions lodged, of which 32 were properly made. If you go back before
that, we had the Albion Neighbourhood Plan newsletter update. That was
released for comment back around November 2014. Council received
16 submissions at that time.
Then we had Talk to the Planner sessions. There were sessions conducted at the
start of this process back in November 2013—on Saturday 9 and again on
Wednesday 13 November.
Councillors interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Well, Madam Chairman, I think people have cars, Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes, shocking, isn’t it, that people have cars.
Chairman:
Point of order against you, LORD MAYOR.
Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Will the LORD MAYOR be brave enough to take a question from me?
Chairman:
You’re actually in your right of reply.
LORD MAYOR:
I think Question Time has finished, but the good thing about that—
Councillors interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
No, the good thing about Question Time is there is always another one next
week, Madam Chairman. There were 30 attendees in terms of the Talk to the
Planner sessions. There has been an opportunity for people to engage in this.
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
Well, you talk about that, but in the end, Madam Chairman—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 29 —there were 35 submissions. So people have got the opportunity to lodge
submissions around these plans. We do distributions to the household, so people
can see about the plan and understand that it is in their area, and they had that
opportunity to make further inquiries and also to lodge a submission.
LORD MAYOR:
They don’t have to go to a Talk to a Planner session if they don’t want to. They
don’t have to go anywhere. They can simply pick up the phone and get more
information about it. In the end, 32 made properly made submissions. So,
Madam Chairman, I am happy to support the Albion Neighbourhood Plan.
Clause A put
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of Clause A of the report
was declared carried on the voices.
Clause B put
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of Clause B of the report
was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Milton DICK and Helen ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared carried.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 20 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM and
Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: 7 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Jared CASSIDY, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER,
Steve GRIFFITHS and Shayne SUTTON.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
The Right Honourable, the Lord Mayor (Councillor Graham Quirk) (Chairman); Deputy Mayor (Councillor
Adrian Schrinner) (Deputy Chairman); and Councillors Krista Adams, Matthew Bourke, Amanda Cooper,
Peter Matic, David McLachlan, and Julian Simmonds.
A
PERMIT TO OCCUPY BRUNSWICK STREET MALL, POD 1 – THE
UNITING HANDS FOUNDATION AUSTRALIA LIMITED
112/875/479/35
255/2015-16
1.
The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the information below.
2.
In mid-2014, Council completed revitalisation works to the Brunswick Street Mall (BSM), Fortitude
Valley.
3.
In June 2015, Council received an offer from The Uniting Hands Foundation Australia Limited (The
UHFA) to be granted a nine-year Permit to Occupy and use Brunswick Street Mall Pod 1 for the
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 30 purposes of construction and operation of a restaurant and bar. The UHFA has submitted proposed
restaurant drawings, which are provided at Attachment E, submitted on file.
4.
The UHFA specialises in assisting people in need and other marginalised members of the community
by providing employment opportunities in the hospitality industry. The UHFA also participates in
raising funds for worldwide catastrophes and international humanitarian aid and relief. Funds raised for
international efforts are channelled through Australian-based charities with operations overseas.
5.
The UHFA’s Statement of Assets and Liabilities is in Attachment C, submitted on file, and its
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) Charity Register Summary is in
Attachment D, submitted on file.
6.
As The UHFA is a community organisation within the meaning of section 226(1)(b)(ii) of the City of
Brisbane Regulation 2012, Council can resolve that in its opinion, Council is exempt from the
tendering requirements otherwise described in section 217 of the City of Brisbane Regulation 2012.
7.
This will enable Council to enter into the Permit to Occupy as proposed. The draft Permit to Occupy is
summarised at Attachment B, submitted on file.
8.
The Divisional Manager provided the following recommendation and the Committee agreed.
9.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL RESOLVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAFT RESOLUTION SET
OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder.
Attachment A
Draft Resolution
DRAFT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT TO OCCUPY
BRUNSWICK STREET MALL POD 1 TO THE UNITING HANDS FOUNDATION
AUSTRALIA LIMITED
As:
(i)
Council is the owner of land at Brunswick Street, Fortitude Valley, Queensland, 4006, known
as Brunswick Street Mall
(ii)
the Uniting Hands Foundation Australia Limited, a community organisation, has requested
that it be granted a Permit to Occupy Brunswick Street Mall Pod 1 for the purpose of
operating a restaurant for community purposes
(iii)
section 217 of the City of Brisbane Regulation 2012 requires that Council must not enter into
a valuable non-current asset unless it first invites written tenders or offers for sale by auction
unless Council decides that an exemption applies
then:
(i)
Council is of the opinion that The Uniting Hands Foundation Australia Limited is a
community organisation within the meaning of section 226(1)(b)(ii) of the City of Brisbane
Regulation 2012
(ii)
is of the opinion that because of (i), Council is exempt from the tendering requirements of the
City of Brisbane Regulation 2012 in granting a permit to The Uniting Hands Foundation
Australia Limited
(iii)
approves the entry into a Permit to Occupy Brunswick Street Mall Pod 1 to The Uniting
Hands Foundation Australia Limited in accordance with the terms for permit as set out in
Attachment C and otherwise on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Chief Legal Counsel,
Brisbane City Legal Practice.
ADOPTED
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 31 -
B
ALBION NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
152/160/881/411
256/2015-16
10.
The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the information below.
11.
At its meeting of 12 August 2014, Council resolved to amend Brisbane City Plan 2014 (the planning
scheme) to update the existing Albion Neighbourhood Plan (the Neighbourhood Plan), to make
consequential amendments (the proposed amendment) and to make an interim Local Government
Infrastructure Plan amendment (interim LGIP amendment). On 3 February 2015, Council resolved to
send the proposed amendment to the Minister to request a State interest review and agreement to
publicly consult on the proposed amendment and the interim LGIP amendment.
12.
On 16 February 2015, in accordance with the requirements of Statutory Guideline 04/14 Making and
amending local planning instruments (the Guideline), the proposed amendments were sent to the
Minister. A State interest review and agreement to publicly consult on the proposed amendments were
requested. On 4 June 2015, the Minister advised by letter (at Attachment B, submitted on file) that
public consultation may proceed.
13.
Public consultation on the proposed amendments and the interim LGIP amendment was carried out in
accordance with the requirements of the Guideline, from 13 July 2015 to 24 August 2015. Council
received 32 properly made submissions and three not properly made submissions on the proposed
amendments during the consultation period. The following key issues were raised in the submissions:
support for the draft neighbourhood plan, particularly the consolidation of development and
provision for higher densities in close proximity to Albion Station
concern over the Neighbourhood Plan boundary and whether this changes a property's
designated suburb
concern over traffic and parking congestion throughout the Neighbourhood Plan area and that
increased densities will exacerbate the situation
concern that the proposed increase in density will place pressure on services and facilities in
the Neighbourhood Plan area
objection to the six-storey height limit in the North Precinct, particularly in Dover Street
requests for increased height limits on specific sites
other site-specific requests for amendments to the Neighbourhood Plan.
14.
A summary of the matters raised in the submissions, including descriptions of how the matters raised
have been addressed, has been prepared (Attachment C, submitted on file). Having considered the
submissions it is proposed that the proposed amendment and interim LGIP amendment proceed, with
one minor change as outlined in Attachment C, submitted on file. The proposed amendment package is
provided at Attachment D, submitted on file.
15.
The Guideline requires that, should Council decide to proceed with the proposed amendments and the
interim LGIP amendment, the Minister be provided with the summary of matters raised in the
submissions and that the Minister be requested to provide approval to adopt the proposed amendments.
16.
The Divisional Manager provided the following recommendation and the Committee agreed.
17.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL RESOLVE AS PER THE DRAFT RESOLUTION SET OUT IN
ATTACHMENT A, hereunder.
Attachment A
Draft Resolution
DRAFT RESOLUTION TO AMEND BRISBANE CITY PLAN 2014 TO INCLUDE A
REVISED ALBION NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 32 As:
(i)
Council, at its meeting on 12 August 2014 decided to:
a)
amend Brisbane City Plan 2014 (the planning scheme) to include the revised Albion
Neighbourhood Plan and to make consequential amendments (the proposed
amendment)
b)
make an interim local government infrastructure plan amendment to the local
government infrastructure plan (LGIP) (the interim LGIP amendment) in Part 4 of
the planning scheme
(ii)
Council has undertaken public consultation on the proposed amendment and the interim LGIP
amendment
then:
(i)
Council, pursuant to Steps 7.1 of Stage 3 of Part 2.4A.1 of Statutory guideline 04/14 Making
and amending local planning instruments (the Guideline), having considered the submissions
on the proposed amendment, has prepared a summary of the matters raised in the submissions,
including how the matters raised in the submissions have been dealt with (Attachment C,
submitted on file)
(ii)
pursuant to Step 6.1 of Stage 3 of Part 2.4B.1 of the Guideline, having considered the
submissions on the interim LGIP amendment, has prepared a summary of the matters raised in
the submissions, including how the matters raised in the submissions have been dealt with
(Attachment C, submitted on file)
(iii)
decides, pursuant to Step 7.5(a) of Stage 3 of Part 2.4A.1 of the Guideline, to proceed with the
proposed amendment with no change
(iv)
decides, pursuant to Step 6.5(a) of Stage 3 of Part 2.4B.1 of the Guideline, to proceed with the
interim LGIP amendment with no change
(v)
directs, pursuant to Step 7.2(c) of Stage 3 of Part 2.4A.1 of the Guideline, that each person
who made a properly made submission about the proposed amendment be advised in writing
about how their submission has been dealt with
(vi)
directs, pursuant to Step 6.2(c) of Stage 3 of Part 2.4B.1 of the Guideline, that each person
who made a properly made submission about the interim LGIP amendment be advised in
writing about how their submission has been dealt with
(vii)
directs, pursuant to Step 7.6 of Stage 3 of Part 2.4A.1 of the Guideline, that the Minister’s
approval to adopt the proposed amendment be sought and that notice be given to the Minister
in accordance with Step 7.7 of Stage 3 of Part 2.4A.1 of the Guideline.
ADOPTED
ADJOURNMENT:
257/2015-16
At that time, 4.02pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor
Kim MARX, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 15 minutes, to commence only when all Councillors had
vacated the Chamber and the doors locked.
Council stood adjourned at 4.03pm.
UPON RESUMPTION:
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, Chairman of the Infrastructure Committee, moved,
seconded by Councillor Ian McKENZIE, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 17 November
2015, be adopted.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 33 -
At that time, 4.18, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Vicki HOWARD, assumed the Chair.
Deputy Chairman:
DEPUTY MAYOR.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Thank you, Madam Deputy Chairman, I never can get that right. We had a
presentation. It was really interesting about the city parking initiatives and
particularly the offering of discounted and free parking. We're all aware that as
of 1 January this year all the parking metres in non-CBD areas had 15 minute
free parking introduced. But we also have a 15 minute free opportunity in the
CBD as well. That is in our two parking stations, the King George Square Car
Park and the Wickham Terrace car park. I heard an interjection from one of the
Councillors along the lines of who parks for less than 15 minutes or what can
you do in 15 minutes. Amazing what you can do in 15 minutes.
Councillors interjecting.
DEPUTY MAYOR
Amazing what you can do.
Councillors interjecting.
Deputy Chairman:
Yes, if we can have some order please so we can hear the DEPUTY MAYOR
thank you.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
You can go into a newsagent, buy a newspaper and a scratchie. You can go and
get a coffee. You can go to an ATM. You can rush into a shop where you've got
a layby and pick something up very quickly and get back to your car. There are
a lot of other things that I probably haven't thought of that you can do in
15 minutes. But I can say that after the introduction of this 15 minute free
period, I decided I would personally see what I could do in 15 minutes. So I
went to the Gabba Central Coles supermarket and in the street nearby there's
metered parking. So I rolled up, took one of the 15 minute free parking tickets
and I went in and did a grocery shop.
Now, obviously it wasn't the full scale grocery shop that you would normally do
but I managed to get in and out, buy my groceries in less than 15 minutes. It was
about 14 minutes and 53 seconds but nevertheless I did it. So people are taking
advantage of this.
Councillors interjecting.
DEPUTY Chairman:
Don't be distracted DEPUTY MAYOR. Councillor ABRAHAMS could you
please—
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Obviously Councillor ABRAHAMS doesn't like free stuff, she doesn't like free
parking. She's bagging it. But yes, look, this initiative is certainly being well
used, whether it's the parking metres or the opportunity in the King George
Square and Wickham Terrace car parks. Now the other thing you can do in less
than 15 minutes is actually pick someone up or drop someone off. We find that a
lot of traffic in the CBD is actually circling waiting for someone that they've
either dropped off or waiting for someone that they want to pick up.
So they circle around the CBD streets creating traffic congestion, filling up
loading zones; if they can't get a spot in a loading zone they have to go around
again. So people are now realising that you can actually park in King George
Square car park for up to 15 minutes and wait for the person to come that you're
picking up. Or indeed if you're dropping them off and you need to for example
get a pram out of the car or something like that there's time to do that without
worrying about the two minute loading zone limit that you would normally have
to do. So people are using it for drop-offs and pickups as well which is just
fantastic.
That achieves the advantage of freeing up the on-street space. It also gets the
cars in off the street and frees up those loading zones as well. So we're seeing on
average now several hundred people per month using King George Square; up
to 850 people per month using that 15 minute free parking in King George
Square and up to 250 people per month using it in Wickham Terrace. That
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 34 number is continuing to grow. So as the word gets out there that you can do this
more and more people are taking it up. But the other thing that came out of the
report was the excellent growth that we've seen in parking in the evenings and
on the weekends in Wickham Terrace and King George Square car-parks.
So this initiative for the $5 discounted parking is available after 4.30pm every
single day and all weekend. So you can park all day on Saturday for $5 and all
day on Sunday for $5. Since we introduced this we've seen a 21 per cent
increase in parking in King George Square in the evenings. So 21 per cent more
patrons coming into the car park as a result of this discounted car-parking rate.
Now previously the parking was being charged at a flat rate of $12; that's now
come down to $5 so it's around the 60 per cent discount on what it was
previously.
In Wickham Terrace we've seen a 12 per cent increase in patronage in the
evening which is also a great result. King George Square on weekends has been
more than an eight per cent increase in patronage on the weekends and that
increase in patronage is actually not higher because of the fact that the car park
actually fills up. At least two or three times every weekend, the car park is now
filling up completely. So we're actually having to turn people away from
King George Square because of the popularity of this $5 parking. So the
increase would actually be more, or greater, if we had more space available.
In Wickham Terrace car park we've seen a 14 per cent increase in patronage on
the weekend. We're finding that people that come to the King George Square car
park to get the $5 parking but find that it is full often will go up to
Wickham Terrace and park there. So it's a great outcome. What this essentially
means is that there's more people coming into the city to do business, to go
shopping, to visit all of the businesses in the CBD, to go to the parks and
recreation facilities in and around the CBD, and so it's great for city activation
particularly in those off-peak times.
Obviously we have a peak demand issue in all of our car parks during the week
but this is about encouraging people to come into the city outside of those
normal business hours. It's good for the city and a city that has lots of people
visiting it on the weekend and in the evenings is a vibrant city and that's
definitely what we aspire to be. So with these small but important city parking
initiatives, we're hoping to add to the culture of our city and also promoting and
supporting the businesses in the inner city areas with this discounted and free
parking.
Deputy Chairman:
Thank you. Is there any debate?
Councillor CUMMING.
Councillor CUMMING:
Yes, thanks, Madam Deputy Chair, just quickly, Item B.
Madam Deputy Chairman, a very satisfactory response. I don't think the
petitioners ever expected a permanent reduction to 40 kilometres an hour in the
speed limit. They were quite happy with a school zone being installed and the 40
kilometre flashing lights and the standard hours of 7am until 9am and 2pm to
4pm. I understand that's what's being offered and that's very acceptable to the
petitioners. Thank you.
Deputy Chairman:
Thank you.
Any further debate?
DEPUTY MAYOR?
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Infrastructure Committee
was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 35 ATTENDANCE:
Deputy Mayor, Councillor Adrian Schrinner (Chairman), Councillor Ian McKenzie (Deputy Chairman), and
Councillors Jared Cassidy, Milton Dick, Steven Toomey and Norm Wyndham.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – CITY PARKING – INITIATIVES
258/2015-16
1.
Glenn Gomez, Asset Portfolio Management Manager, Asset Management, Brisbane Infrastructure
Division, attended the meeting to provide an update on city parking initiatives. He provided the
information below.
2.
A number of city parking initiatives are being implemented as per the recommendations of the
Brisbane Parking Taskforce, including:
actively promoting a range of discounted off-peak parking options
offering these promotions/special offers to provide lower-priced parking for the residents and
visitors of Brisbane
introduction of 15-minute free parking in both the King George Square and Wickham Terrace
carparks.
3.
An evening discount period, with a flat parking rate of $5 has been effective from July 2014 to October
2015 in the King George Square and Wickham Terrace carparks. This has increased the number of
patrons per month by an average of 21.45 per cent at King George Square and 12 per cent at Wickham
Terrace.
4.
During the weekend discount period from July 2014 to October 2015, with a flat parking rate of $5 per
day, the number of patrons per month has increased by an average of eight per cent at King George
Square and 14 per cent at Wickham Terrace.
5.
A comparative weekend patronage performance for King George Square and Wickham Terrace
Carparks indicates:
prior to the discounts commencing, neither of the carparks reached maximum capacity
since commencement of the discount period, King George Square continues to reach
maximum capacity every weekend and reaches maximum capacity at least three times per
week during the day
prior to and since commencement of the discount period, Wickham Terrace has not yet
reached maximum capacity.
6.
During the 15-minute free parking period from January 2015 to October 2015, the usage per month
increased by an average of 18 per cent at King George Square and four per cent at Wickham Terrace.
7.
The benefits of the new initiatives include:
increased patronage
improved revenue position
economic benefit to the city by encouraging users to visit the central business district and park
utilising the discounted rates
the availability of 15-minute express bays for patrons.
8.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Gomez for his
informative presentation.
9.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 36 -
B
PETITION – REDUCE SPEED LIMIT ON WYNNUM ROAD TO 40 KM/H
CA15/450347
259/2015-16
10.
A petition from residents, requesting Council to permanently reduce the speed limit to 40 kilometres
per hour on Wynnum Road, outside the Wynnum West State School, was presented to the meeting of
Council held on 16 June 2015, by Councillor Peter Cumming, and received.
11.
The Branch Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure Division, provided the
following information.
12.
The petition with 46 signatures, requests Council to permanently reduce the speed limit on Wynnum
Road outside of the Wynnum West State School, from 60 km/h to 40 km/h. The petitioners are also
requesting the installation of enhanced (flashing) school zone signage.
13.
Wynnum Road is classified as a Suburban Road within Council’s Road Hierarchy Plan. Suburban
Roads connect Arterial Routes in and around suburbs and form important links in the public transport
and inter-suburban freight network. These roads are designed to carry between 10,000 and 20,000
vehicles per day and typically have speed limits of up to 80 km/h. The wide roadway and lack of traffic
calming along the section of Wynnum Road creates a speed environment that is typical for a 60 km/h
speed limit.
14.
The traffic environment around schools is one of the most complex road transport environments
normally encountered by motorists, and the most complex traffic environment encountered by children.
This is because traffic density and pedestrian movements are concentrated in short periods of time
during the school drop off and pick up periods. Due to the limited period of time that school related
activities occur school traffic is generally not considered as part of setting the full time speed limit of a
road section. Instead, a school zone is introduced during these short periods of time to provide a time
based linear speed environment to regulate vehicle speeds in the vicinity of schools.
15.
When considering school zones, Council must comply with guidelines set by Department of Transport
and Main Roads, Queensland Government. These guidelines indicate that a 40 km/h school zone is
applicable only on roads with a speed limit of 50 km/h, 60 km/h and 70 km/h. While the guidelines
previously prohibited the installation of school zones on multi-lane roads, recent changes allow for the
installation of school zones on multi-lane roads. In the 2015-16 budget, the Lord Mayor announced that
Council had allocated funding to implement new school zones at 25 locations across the city, including
Wynnum West State School. It is anticipated that the school zone for Wynnum West State School will
be installed before the start of Term 1, 2016.
16.
School zones on multi-lane roads will consist of two treatments: enhanced or flashing school zone
signage and pavement thresholds (red painted boxes with ‘SCHOOL ZONE’ in white text). The
treatments aim to improve safety for children travelling to and from school and assist in raising
awareness of reduced speed limits in school zones at peak school times.
17.
Unfortunately, Council has found that motorists drive to the conditions of the road and reducing the
speed limit where the road network does not support it, can lead to an unsafe environment with
motorists failing to comply with the speed limit. It should also be noted that for roads with a full time
40 km/h speed limit, a school zone is not considered applicable as the full time speed limit is
considered to be sufficiently low to ensure the safe operation of the school activities. Therefore, should
the speed limit on the section of Wynnum Road be permanently reduced to 40 km/h, the planned
school zone speed limit would become redundant and would not be installed.
18.
It is therefore recommended that Council advise the head petitioner, that Council has listed Wynnum
West State School for installation of a 40 km/h school zone, with enhanced (flashing) signs before
Term 1 2016; and that Council does not have plans to permanently reduce the speed limit along this
section of Wynnum Road to 40 km/h.
Funding
19.
Funding for the school zone has been approved under Program 2 – Enhanced School Zone Signage
program, Table 2.3.2.2.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 37 Consultation
20.
The Councillor for Wynnum Manly Ward, Councillor Peter Cumming, has been consulted and supports
the recommendation.
Customer impact
21.
The petition response will address the petitioner’s concerns.
Preferred option
22.
It is the preferred option that Council advise the head petitioner that Council has listed Wynnum West
State School for installation of a 40 km/h school zone, with enhanced (flashing) signs before Term 1,
2016; and that Council does not have plans to permanently reduce the speed limit along this section of
Wynnum Road to 40 km/h.
23.
Accordingly, the Branch Manager therefore recommended as follows and the Committee agreed.
24.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PREFERRED
OPTION ABOVE AND OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE
Councillor Peter MATIC, Chairman of the Public and Active Transport Committee, moved, seconded by
Councillor Steven HUANG that the report of that Committee held on 17 November 2015, be adopted.
Deputy Chairman
Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Deputy Chairman, just to the committee presentation. It was
about additional early morning BUZ trips. The presentation outlined the history
of the service and its evolution and the popularity of it with its 10 minute
frequency and the requirement that there is no timetable because of the
frequency of the service. It is our most popular large scale routes across the city.
In making sure that we continue to provide that added service, Madam Deputy
Chairman, we've looked at opportunities of enhancing.
Through the presentation we were able to show that those AM periods at around
the 5am time were ones that needed extra servicing. So we've been able to find
that opportunity to be able to meet that increased need. So it's a great outcome
for users generally. It's a clear indication of this Administration's strong
commitment to public transport and filling those gaps, Madam Deputy
Chairman, in those areas that most need it, and providing the level of service
and amenity and quality that Council is renowned for.
Deputy Chairman:
Thank you. Is there any debate?
Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, just briefly, Madam Deputy Chairman, I note the very useful precedent that
the LNP are setting with this matter. That is that Council is directly funding
additional bus services in particular parts of the city because Council thinks it's a
good idea not for any other particular reason. So I note, Madam Chairman, that I
presume the same process will be applied to requests that I now make on behalf
of my residents because up until now Council has said that scheduling is a
matter for TransLink, and clearly that is not the case any longer. It is clear that
this Council will now directly fund additional BUZ services from Council's own
pocket.
Certainly that is a very useful precedent and I thank Councillor MATIC for
bringing it forward for today. I just hope of course that it is a precedent that will
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 38 be applied fairly throughout Council. Where there is support from the residents
for additional services that Councillor MATIC will be just as forthcoming with
those services as he has been with these.
Deputy Chairman:
Thank you.
Further debate?
Councillor de WIT.
Councillor de WIT:
Yes, thank you, Madam Deputy Chairman. I rise to speak on Item A, the
additional early morning buzz services and to say thank you to the
LORD MAYOR and to Councillor MATIC in terms of putting in additional
service for the Moggill BUZ, the 444. This has been a highly successful service
from the time that it started back in 2006. You'll notice in paragraph nine of the
paperwork that the Moggill BUZ actually is the one that has the highest number
of passengers on the early trip, what was the 5.40am trip. So to now have an
additional service is of great benefit to people out there because not only is it for
the people who live in Bellbowrie but also Moggill and all the stops on the way
through Kenmore as well.
It's evidenced particularly out there, if you want to beat the traffic jams on
Moggill Road, the State Government road, there is nothing you can do other
than leave earlier and earlier every day. So that I think is why the increase in
patronage has occurred on the 444, particularly those early services. But the Bus
Upgrade Zone which is what BUZ stands for it was a great initiative going back
to—I forget exactly what year that started. But the fact that people don't need a
timetable and they can rely on just when the bus is going to turn up, has made it
highly successful.
There is no doubt that as time goes on we will need more and more of the BUZ
services. But as with everything in Brisbane when you've got a big geographical
area and a relatively low population, funding of these issues of course is
somewhat problematic. But once again just to say thank you. It is quite a long
route. We get a lot of requests for deviations to that but the distance that this
service has to travel means that it can't be taken off that route to provide any bus
service for some of the areas that are still missing out at the moment.
But I say thank you and I'm sure the Councillors who are represented by all
those other BUZ routes, and even Browns Plains I notice which of course is
outside the boundaries of Brisbane, so we're even looking after Logan people I
believe by having that BUZ service from Browns Plains. So a really great
initiative and thank you, Councillor MATIC.
Deputy Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Thanks, Madam Deputy Chairman. Just a point of clarification. It never ceases
to amaze me that no matter what the presentation is about, it always ends up
being about Councillor JOHNSTON. Look, just as a point of clarification for the
benefit of Councillor JOHNSTON, one; Madam Deputy Chairman, these aren't
new services, these aren't new routes that we are reinvesting back into existing
networks, two; this isn't an individual service for one ward. This is a look across
the whole city of BUZ services that service north, south, east and west, and
three; Madam Deputy Chairman, this isn't any new money at all.
TransLink are ultimately the authority for new services and any requests for new
money out of those new services have always and will always be the
responsibility of TransLink. So Councillor JOHNSTON if you got a new service
or some other service that you want to extend further off an existing one, yes,
TransLink, go back to your friends over with the Deputy Premier and all your
other mates on that side and go and ask them directly. Madam Deputy
Chairman, this ultimately is about making sure that we're reinvesting in the
network and because, Madam Deputy Chairman, we were able to find some
savings within the scheduling internally we were able to make this.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 39 Other than that, Madam Deputy Chairman, ultimately it's always the
responsibility of TransLink. They hold the authority and, Madam Deputy
Chairman, nothing has changed in that relationship at all.
Deputy Chairman:
Thank you. I'll now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Public and Active
Transport Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – ADDITIONAL EARLY MORNING BUZ
TRIPS
260/2015-16
1.
Greg Spelman, Branch Manager, Strategy and Network Services, Brisbane Transport, attended the
meeting to provide an update on additional early morning BUZ trips. He provided the information
below.
2.
BUZ routes are a Council initiative representing quantum change to service planning, providing a
genuine alternative to private vehicle use and as a step up from ‘frequent networks’ elsewhere. Buses
on this route operate at high frequency between 6am and 11.30pm across seven days, with services at
least every 10 minutes during the commuter peak and at least every 15 minutes at other times.
3.
The popularity of the BUZ routes resulted in dramatic growth immediately, both overall and during
off-peak. This service carries nearly half of all patronage including supplements.
4.
BUZ routes provide trunk route connectivity between outer suburbs, the central business district (CBD)
and key educational, medical and employment precincts. They complement rail lines. Eighteen BUZ
routes across the network were introduced from 2004 onwards.
5.
Growth of the BUZ routes from 2004 to 2012 was displayed with the help of Network maps and in a
tabular format.
6.
Reasons for the success of the BUZ routes include:
high frequency across the broad span of hours
seven-day access to major cultural and recreational facilities
the ‘no timetable needed’ service model has proven successful with passengers across the span
of service hours, being relevant for a greater cross-section of residents with wide range of
work start and finish times
the quality of interchange opportunities at the Cultural Centre has been a key factor helping
with significant transfers for cross-city travel
the busway network also helps as a major north-south link, linking the CBD and most nonCBD centres.
7.
The BUZ network reflects Brisbane as a New World City, as it moved the network beyond the one
focused on CBD-based white collar office workers operating during peak times to the current form of
also operating before and after the peak hours.
8.
There is an ever-increasing demand for the BUZ routes as:
employment start and finish times are becoming increasingly diverse
there is an increasing popularity of BUZ services outside of traditional peak times and
particularly on the first trip of the day, including requests for more services during the
midnight to dawn shift
there is customer feedback calling for earlier trips on key BUZ routes and connectivity with
early morning train services.
9.
Examples of additional demand for BUZ routes include (average seating capacity per bus across the
fleet is 40):
130 (Parkinson) averages 42 passengers on the 5am trip
140 (Browns Plains) averages 38 passengers on the 6.05am trip
150 (Browns Plains) averages 47 passengers on the 5am trip
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 40 -
330 (Bracken Ridge) averages 43 passengers on the 5.25am trip
444 (Moggill) averages 51 passengers on the 5.40am trip.
10.
Additional trips are planned to commence on 23 November 2015. Eleven additional early morning trips
have been added to nine BUZ routes in the peak direction. These trips provide additional capacity to
routes where passenger demand exists. The focus is on long-haul BUZ services bringing start times
more in line with rail. A table indicating the new BUZ routes was displayed.
11.
Communication methods about the new BUZ routes include:
passenger notices at stops along the impacted routes
promotions through the TransLink website and social media channels
Journey Planner.
12.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Spelman for his
informative presentation.
13.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT
COMMITTEE
Councillor Amanda COOPER, Chairman of the Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment
Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Vicki HOWARD, that the report of the meeting of that Committee
held on 17 November 2015, be adopted.
Deputy Chairman:
Councillor COOPER.
Councillor COOPER.
Sorry, Madam Deputy Chair, I apologise. I'm so used to you being down here
when we debate this report.
Deputy Chairman:
Indeed.
Councillor COOPER:
So thank you, I rise to speak to the application which was presented to the
committee last week for 1-23 Miles Platting Road, Eight Mile Plains. This was a
development application that followed a presentation from the previous
committee which involved a snake so it was a bit of a tough act to follow. It
certainly had a lot of interest in the room before we got there but we were
delighted to take up that challenge. This site is included in the Brisbane
Technology Park (BTP) which is as we discussed at committee last week was an
initiative of the Queensland government in the '80s with the park opening in
1986.
The State Government allocated land to accommodate established and emerging
knowledge and technology based companies, with a site that's just under
34 hectares. The conference centre was open in 1997 and has a capacity for
between 30 and 700 people and the site was purchased by Graystone in 2008. So
this particular application was lodged with Council on 14 July and properly
made on the twenty-eighth. It is for a hotel of 90 rooms with an indoor gym of
205 square metres operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week; 84 car parks,
12 bike spaces, a drop-off area and building height ranging from four to five
storeys with those five storeys presenting to Logan Road.
The site itself is in the innovation precinct within the park and sits in the
Rochedale Urban Common Neighbourhood Plan which was adopted in
September 2007. It was an impact assessable application and lodged under
City Plan 2014. The zoning for the site is specialised centre, SCI, which is major
education and research facility. As the planning report notes the intent of special
centre 1 is for a major education and research facility designation is to quote,
provide for a range of uses that support or enhance the functionality of the
existing specialised centre or in this case the BTP.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 41 The proposed development is consistent with the zone intent in that. These uses
directly support and enhance the function of BTP. The proposed development
has a strong nexus with the convention centre and other existing and proposed
uses within the BTP.
So the site is at the northern end. Brisbane Technology Park contains
approximately 30 different sites used for technology purposes. The park is
bounded by arterial roads to the north, east and west and is approximately
800 metres from the Eight Mile Plains busway station. There are multi-unit
dwellings on the western side of Logan Road with the distance between these
buildings and the proposed development being approximately 50 metres. It is
very well placed in terms of location with approximately only 15 minutes to the
CBD, 20 minutes to the Brisbane Airport as well as access to Gold Coast,
Logan, Ipswich and the Sunshine Coast motorways.
This application trickled referral to the State Government due to the land being
adjoined to a State-controlled road and we received advice from the State on
1 September; they supported the proposal subject to conditions. As the planning
report also notes these conditions related specifically to noise attenuation and
stormwater management in the State-controlled road reserve. The application
underwent public notification from 24 September to 16 October and received no
formal submissions. Indeed there were no submissions at all lodged with the
team.
In terms of issues, the assessment team considered in their assessment of land
use and zoning, the proposed height and the onsite car parking and servicing.
With regard to the land use and zoning the zoning is as we heard, as I noted
earlier is a specialised centre with the hotel and gym being a complimentary
support to that predominant function of the BTP as a major education and
research facility. Under the former planning scheme the zoning was SP2, special
purpose 2, major education and research facility zone. Prior to that until the
1987 town plan, the site was designated a PD zone, a particular development
zone 75 technology, research and development, manufacture and assembly zone;
say that quickly Madam Deputy Chair.
The assessment team also considered the strategic location with its great
proximity to a whole range of different connections in the city. The height was
specifically a consideration with the hotel being five storeys, made up of three
storeys over two levels of basement. The assessment team took into
consideration existing and approved building heights on the site that were up to
five storeys in this particular precinct, and the proposed height being compatible
with the built form within the park. The majority of the height was facing
Logan Road which we discussed at length at committee last week.
They were happy that the design was well articulated and the proposed
landscaping offered a deep buffer to the impact. Extensive planning has been
proposed; 700 square metres to partially screen the development from
Logan Road as well as provide shade to the proposed car park external to the
building. The design also took in to account the significant fall across the site
which is approximately four metres. In regards to on-site parking the parking
provision is in compliance with City Plan and the TAPS code with 84 spaces
provided including three People With Disability parks.
The development also includes two servicing and loading bays as well as a port
to share offering pickup and drop-off on the ground level. There will be bicycle
parking for 12 bikes as well as access to those riders through to the facilities
provided by the gym. I'm delighted that this hotel will offer three rooms for
people with disabilities and certainly they are very well located. This application
was supported by all at committee last week. I thank the local Councillor for his
attendance at our committee. I note that this is a significant investment of
$14 million in our city with many jobs created through both construction and the
ongoing onsite management of the hotel.
I wish the future visitors to our hotel and to our city a very warm welcome.
Certainly I think an important precinct in Brisbane. Thank you,
Madam Deputy Chair.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 42 Deputy Chairman:
Is there any debate?
Okay, I'll put the motion.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Amanda Cooper (Chairman), Councillor Vicki Howard (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Helen
Abrahams, Ryan Murphy, Shayne Sutton and Andrew Wines.
A
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION UNDER SUSTAINABLE PLANNING ACT
2009: DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR
SHORT-TERM ACCOMMODATION (HOTEL) AND INDOOR SPORT AND
RECREATION (GYM) – 1/23 MILES PLATTING ROAD, EIGHT MILE
PLAINS – STRONGHOLD BTP HOTEL PTY LTD
A004170952
260A/2015-16
1.
The Acting Team Manager, Planning Services South, Development Assessment Branch, reports that a
development application has been submitted on 14 July 2015 by Graystone Pty Ltd on behalf of
Stronghold BTP Hotel Pty Ltd, as follows:
Development aspects:
General description of proposal:
Land in the ownership of:
Address of the site:
Described as:
Containing an area of:
Material Change of Use – Development Permit
Short-term accommodation (hotel) and
indoor sport and recreation (gym)
Stronghold BTP Hotel Pty Ltd
Unit 1/23 Miles Platting Road, Eight Mile Plains
Lot 1 on SP266318
3,223 square metres
2.
The application is over land included in the Specialised centre (SC1) (Major education and research
facility) zone under the Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan) and within the Rochedale urban
community neighbourhood plan (RUCNP). The site is currently vacant and located in the northwestern corner of the Brisbane Technology Park (BTP).
3.
More specifically the site is located within The Innovation Precinct of the BTP which includes the
following uses, a convention centre (capacity 30-700 people), multi-storey carpark, and five new
approved buildings for low-impact manufacturing, research, warehouse and office uses. Buildings
within the precincts range in building heights of up to five storeys with all vehicle and pedestrian
access via Miles Platting Road.
4.
The proposal is for short-term accommodation (hotel) and indoor sport and recreation (gym),
containing 90 rooms and a 205 square metres public gym on the ground level of the five-storey
building. The operating hours for the gym will be 24 hours a day, seven days a week. A basement and
ground-level carpark incorporates 84 carparks, bicycle parking, two loading/service bays and a vehicle
drop-off and pick-up area at the front of the building.
5.
The site is not located within any precinct in the RUCNP. The intent of the SC1 with a Major education
and research facility designation is to provide for a range of uses that support or enhance the
functionality of the existing specialised centre, or in this case the BTP. The proposed development is
consistent with the zone intent in that:
these uses directly support and enhance the function of the BTP
the proposed development has a strong nexus with the convention centre, and other existing
and proposed uses within the BTP.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 43 6.
The proposal was subject to impact assessment and public notification was carried out between 24
September 2015 and 16 October 2015 in accordance with s297 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.
No submissions were received for this application.
7.
Councillor Steven Huang, Councillor for MacGregor Ward, provided comment advising that he
supports this proposal.
8.
The application was referred to the Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning,
State Assessment Referral Agency (DILGP/SARA) for land adjoining a State-controlled road.
DILGP/SARA provided the concurrence agency response on 1 September 2015 supporting the
proposal subject to conditions which relate to:
noise attenuation for the development
stormwater management within the State-controlled Road Reserve.
9.
The Acting Team Manager advises that relevant reports have been obtained to address the assessment
criteria and decision process prescribed by the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 appropriately justifying
the proposal and outlining reasonable and relevant conditions of the approval.
10.
It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the approved plans and conditions
included in the attached Development Approval Package submitted on file and marked Attachment A.
The Committee agreed unanimously.
11.
RECOMMENDATION:
(i)
That it be and is hereby resolved that whereas—
a)
b)
A properly made development application was made on 28 July 2015 to the Council
pursuant to section 260 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, as follows:
Development aspects:
Material Change of Use – Development permit
General description of proposal:
Land in the ownership of:
Address of the site:
Short-term accommodation (hotel) and
indoor sport and recreation (gym)
Stronghold BTP Hotel Pty Ltd
1/23 Miles Platting Road, Eight Mile Plains
Described as:
Containing an area of:
Lot 1 on SP266318
3,223 square metres
The Council is required to assess the application pursuant to Chapter 6, Part 5,
Division 3 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, and decide the application under
section 324 of the Act.
The Council—
c)
Upon consideration of the application and those matters set forth in sections 314 and
324 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 relevant to the application considers that:
1.
the site is within the Urban Footprint of the South East Queensland
Regional Plan 2009-2031, and the use is consistent with an Urban Activity;
2.
the proposal is consistent with the State Planning Policies applicable to the
development
3.
the proposal is consistent with the Brisbane City Plan 2014
4.
the proposal advances the purpose and overall outcomes of the specialised
centre (major education and research facility) zone and is not in conflict
with the Rochedale urban community neighbourhood plan
5.
the proposal supports continued economic growth within the Brisbane
Technology Park and surrounding office parks which accommodates a noninner-city workforce
6.
the proposal would not create any adverse impacts on the safety and
efficiency of the local traffic network, or create a traffic problem, or worsen
onsite car parking
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 44 7.
8.
(ii)
the proposal will not create adverse amenity impacts on the surrounding
area
the development can be accommodated within the existing essential
infrastructure networks.
d)
Accordingly considers that where reasonable and relevant conditions imposed on the
development, it would be appropriate that the proposed development be approved on
the subject land;
e)
Considers that a Brisbane City Council Infrastructure Charges Notice should be
issued for the development pursuant to the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and
Brisbane Adopted Infrastructure Charges Resolution (No. 5) 2015, for the transport,
community purposes and stormwater trunk infrastructure networks.
Whereas the Council determines as in (i) hereof, THE COUNCIL APPROVES THE
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION referred to above and subject to the conditions in the
attached Development Approval Package and directs that:
a)
the applicant be advised of the decision
b)
Queensland Urban Utilities be advised of the decision
c)
the Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, State Assessment
Referral Agency (DILGP/SARA) be advised of the decision
d)
Councillor Steven Huang, Councillor for MacGregor Ward, be advised of the
decision.
ADOPTED
B
PETITION – OBJECTING TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR
HEALTH SERVICES (MEDICAL CENTRE) AT 158 WARRIGAL ROAD,
RUNCORN (APPLICATION REFERENCE A004059861)
CA15/718469
261/2015-16
12.
A petition objecting to a development application for health services (Medical Centre) at 158 Warrigal
Road, Runcorn, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 1 September 2015, by Councillor
Steven Huang, and received.
13.
The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability Division, supplied the following
information.
14.
The petition contains 90 signatures.
15.
The petitioners’ concerns primarily relate to the potential impacts on the viability of the Runcorn Plaza
Medical Practice. The Runcorn Plaza Medical Practice is located approximately 140 metres north of
the subject site and is located within an existing centre, which is located within the Neighbourhood
centre zone.
16.
An application for health services (Medical Centre) at 158 Warrigal Road, Runcorn, was received by
Council on 10 February 2015 under Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan). The application was properly
made on 2 March 2015.
17.
The development application was lodged in response to a Show Cause Notice issued on 2 February
2015 for operating a Health Care Service from a dwelling without an approval. The site is located in
the Low density residential zone and is occupied by a single detached dwelling.
18.
The application was subject to impact assessment and public notification was carried out from 7
August 2015 until 28 August 2015. There were 70 submissions received, of which 45 submissions were
properly made under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA). The Runcorn Medical Centre lodged a
formal submission.
19.
The application is currently under assessment against the requirements of the City Plan and in
accordance with SPA. Potential impacts on the viability of nearby medical centres located within
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 45 centres, potential impacts on the adjoining properties and the street, such as noise, amenity and traffic,
and car parking and access issues will be considered as part of the assessment of the application.
Consultation
20.
Councillor Steven Huang, Councillor for MacGregor Ward, was consulted on 4 November 2015 and
supports the recommendation.
21.
The Divisional Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed unanimously.
22.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAFT
RESPONSE SET OUT AT ATTACHMENT A.
Attachment A
DRAFT RESPONSE
Petition Reference: CA15/718469
Thank you for your petition, presented to Council at the meeting of 1 September 2015, objecting to the
proposed development at 158 Warrigal Road, Runcorn.
Your petition was considered by Council at the meeting of 24 November 2015 and Council can
respond to you as follows.
The development application is currently being assessed against the requirements of Brisbane City
Plan 2014 and in accordance with the provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.
This petition was received outside of the notification period, however, concerns raised in the petition
will be taken into consideration during the assessment of the application.
Details of the development application can be viewed online by visiting Council’s website at
www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/pdonline and searching the application reference number A004001268.
Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Ms Danielle Harris, Senior Planner,
Development Assessment Planning Services South, City Planning and Sustainability, on 3403 8888.
Thank you for raising this matter.
ADOPTED
C
PETITION – OBJECTING TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR A
FOOD AND DRINK OUTLET, A SHOP AND CARETAKER’S
ACCOMMODATION AT 185 THISTLE STREET, GORDON PARK
(APPLICATION REFERENCE A004121400)
CA15/742705
262/2015-16
23.
A petition objecting to a development application for a food and drink outlet, a shop and caretaker’s
accommodation at 185 Thistle Street, Gordon Park, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 8
September 2015, by Councillor Norm Wyndham and received.
24.
The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability Division, supplied the following
information.
25.
The petition contains 56 signatures.
26.
The petitioners’ concerns included the following:
the proposal does not comply with a number of the codes in the Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City
Plan)
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 46 -
there will be a negative impact on the amenity and harmony of the residential area
there will be on-street parking impacts to the surrounding area
the proposal will impact driver safety.
the petitioners believe that the intersection of Richmond and Thistle Streets is already
dangerous and that the proposed deliveries area will impact the vision of the T˗intersection
and will also block the bicycle lane.
27.
The existing pre-1946 commercial building at 185 Thistle Street, Gordon Park, has previously been
used as a shop and has been vacant in recent years.
28.
An application for a material change of use for a food and drink outlet, a shop and caretaker’s
accommodation at 185 Thistle Street Gordon Park was received by Council on 8 May 2015 under the
City Plan.
29.
The application was subject to impact assessment and public notification was carried out from 14
August 2015 until 4 September 2015. There were 399 submissions received of which 215 submissions
were properly made under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA). These included approximately
340 (166 properly made) submissions supporting the proposal and approximately 57 (49 properly
made) submissions objecting to the proposal.
30.
The development application was refused by Council on 2 October 2015, after being assessed against
the requirements of the City Plan and in accordance with the SPA. The key elements of the refusal
included the proposed scale and intensity of the development, appropriateness of use within the
Character residential zone, conflict with the intent of the zone code, insufficient on-site car parking,
lack of on-site servicing and the proposed hours of operation.
Consultation
31.
Councillor Fiona King, Councillor for Marchant Ward, was consulted on 4 November 2015 and
supports the recommendation.
32.
The Divisional Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed unanimously.
33.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAFT
RESPONSE SET OUT AT ATTACHMENT A.
Attachment A
DRAFT RESPONSE
Petition Reference: CA15/742705
Thank you for your petition, presented to Council at the meeting of 8 September 2015, objecting to the
proposed development at 185 Thistle Street Gordon Park.
Your petition was considered by Council at the meeting of 24 November 2015 and Council can
respond to you as follows.
The development application was refused by Council on 2 October 2015 after being assessed against
the requirements of Brisbane City Plan 2014 and in accordance with the provisions of the Sustainable
Planning Act 2009 (SPA).
This petition is considered a properly-made submission as defined in Schedule 3 of the SPA. Concerns
raised in the petition were taken into consideration during the assessment of the application.
Details of the development application can be viewed online by visiting Council’s website at
www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/pdonline and by searching the application reference number A004121400.
Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Ms Patricia Jensen, Team Manager,
Development Assessment Planning Services North, City Planning and Sustainability, on 3403 8888.
Thank you for raising this matter.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 47 -
ADOPTED
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Deputy Chairman:
Sorry, yes, point of order.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, thank you, Madam Deputy Chair. I just rise to seek leave to move an
urgency motion.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Seconded, Madam Deputy Chairman.
Deputy Chairman:
Just one second. Just one second if you wouldn't mind. I think that the Chairman
has returned. I'll just vacate the seat and allow the Chairman to take over.
At that time, 4.37pm, the Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, resumed the Chair.
Chairman:
So Councillor GRIFFITHS I understand you want to move an urgency motion.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, that's right, Madam Chair. So the urgency—do you want me to read the
motion?
Chairman:
Mm-hm.
MOTION FOR SUSPENSION OF STANDING RULES:
263/2015-16
At that juncture, Councillor Steve Griffiths moved, seconded by Councillor Helen ABRAHAMS, that the
Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion
That this Council oppose a proposed six storey 94 unit development on land classified as sport and recreation at
the Tarragindi Bowls Club.
Chairman:
Okay. Councillor GRIFFITHS you have three minutes to establish urgency.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Thanks, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, on the weekend or last week there was a
protest by hundreds of residents at Tarragindi who are scared, uncertain and
angry that a proposal for a 94 unit, six or seven-storey development is proposed
for Tarragindi. Madam Chair, these residents are used to seeing this land which
they understood to be sport and recreational, not being open for development.
They are opposed to the fact that we have a site now that Council is looking to
support in conjunction with a developer putting a high rise onto.
Madam Chair, residents want answers. They urgently seek answers to how this
can happen, how can we have a six or seven-storey building in a low-density
area suddenly being supported and being given the tick almost by this
Administration in terms of going ahead. Madam Chair, residents are angry about
the City Plan. They're angry about the fact that in the New City Plan that this
sort of development on sport and rec land—
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Point of order, Councillor SIMMONDS.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Councillor GRIFFITHS needs to speak to urgency. You've given him a lot of
leeway but he's now onto just the City Plan in general which is not specifically
to establishing urgency.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Madam Chair, this is urgent because residents are upset. This is urgent
because—surprisingly—this is urgent because one of their own Councillors, one
of the persons who is a Chairperson has actually come out, and while she has
said to some residents that she supports this development, at a public meeting
she's also said she opposes it. Madam Chair, residents are finding this
confusing—
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 48 Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor GRIFFITHS you are not to argue the motion. You are to put the case
for urgency.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Madam Chair, what residents are seeking is a clear direction from this
Administration about their position. Madam Chair, residents are seeking a clear
position about the City Plan. Madam Chair, people want to urgently know what
this Administration's view is of in regards to development on sport and rec land.
Madam Chair, these residents believe they have a right because they brought in
a low density area of ensuring that developments around them match.
Madam Chair, people are concerned about the confusion and mixed messages
that they're receiving not only from another Councillor in this Chamber but also
from the developers, who are giving mixed messages about the loss of trees and
vegetation, the impact on traffic and public access, and even whether four rooms
that have been set aside for looking after the sick are included in the 94 units or
whether they're in addition to the 94 units proposed.
Chairman:
Councillor GRIFFITHS
DEPUTY MAYOR?
your
time
has expired.
I
will now—sorry,
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Yes, to urgency, Madam Chairman. I can advise the Administration will not be
supporting urgency on this matter.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Point of order Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Chairman, you can't speak to an urgency motion and the
DEPUTY MAYOR is out of order here and I would ask you to move the
urgency motion in the usual way.
Chairman:
Yes. We've got too many microphones on in this place and nothing is being
recorded. So I will now put the matter for urgency.
The Chairman submitted the motion for the suspension of the Standing Rules to the Chamber and it was
declared lost on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Milton DICK and Helen ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared lost.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 6 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS and
Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: 18 -
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.
Chairman:
Councillors, I'd just like to request an adjournment for five minutes. We've just
got a bit of difficulty with the audio. We just wanted to—no, no, no, the
microphones were, because there were too many left on, we just want to double
check the audio because we just need to verify it. So if I can have a motion for
an adjournment for a period of up to 10 minutes just to double check the audio
please Councillor WINES.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 49 ADJOURNMENT:
264/2015-16
At that time, 4.52pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor
Kim MARX, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 10 minutes.
Council stood adjourned at 4.53pm.
UPON RESUMPTION:
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, moved,
seconded by Councillor Fiona KING, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 17 November
2015, be adopted.
Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE.
Councillor BOURKE:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, just before I get to the
fantastic committee report that we had last week in Council, or in committee,
Madam Chairman, I just want to talk about an event that's happened or a couple
of events that's happened.
The LORD MAYOR talked briefly about the cannon that was installed back into
the City Botanic Gardens. I just want to thank and commend all the Council
officers for their hard work in that project and particularly thank
Councillor KING who identified the opportunity to restore and move this
cannon which was one of the original cannons back into the Botanic Gardens
from her community and thank her residents for giving up the cannon that was
out there at Stafford so that we could replace some of the heritage and the
history in the City Botanic Gardens.
Madam Chairman, I had the pleasure on Saturday morning of going out to
Forest Lake to partake in the pest fishing event out there. Madam Chairman, that
event was put on by Brisbane City Council in conjunction with a number of
local native fish organisations as well as fish stocking organisations,
Madam Chairman, that do a great job in promoting sustainable fishing but also
encouraging native fish to be restocked into some of the water bodies across the
city.
This was an educational event as much as a fun day out for families,
Madam Chairman. It was about educating people about the different types of
fish that they can find in our waterways across Brisbane and across the southeast
corner, but also there was Gambusia here, Councillor McLACHLAN—I could
have caught you some to give to Councillor FLESSER—but also a great
opportunity to enjoy some of our great parks and open spaces,
Madam Chairman.
As I said it is a pest fishing event. We were targeting Tilapia which are an
introduced species which are very aggressive. They prey on native fish as well
as introduced fish, Madam Chairman. We caught seven Tilapia; two
Flowerhorns; one Central American cichlid and one very large carp. There are a
number more obviously in Forest Lake, Madam Chairman, but this is a way of
educating people about what not to do. Not to put those fish out of fish tanks or
out of your ponds that are introduced species into our waterways,
Madam Chairman, where they become a problem for native animals and reduce
the biodiversity of our city.
It was a great day. It was great to see mums, dads, kids and a wide broad
diversity of people down at Forest Lake. The LORD MAYOR popped in for a
while with our great candidate for Forest Lake, Leanne McFarlane,
Madam Chairman, and talked to residents. It was fantastic to see people out
using the lake and being educated about how to be more sustainable in Brisbane.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 50 From there, Madam Chairman, I think it's well and widely acknowledged,
Councillor COOPER, that we had the cracker committee presentation of the
year last week, Madam Chairman, at the and Environment, Parks and
Sustainability committee meeting. We had a presentation quite timely about
snakes in Brisbane and what you need to do to be prepared for snake season and
how you can manage snakes. It was a great presentation by the Council officers,
very informative. There are 31 different species of snakes in Brisbane, the
majority of which are venomous, Madam Chairman. We went through a number
of those different species, some of the more prominent ones. We went through
some of the myths and we went through some of the actions that residents can
take and individuals need to take in the off-chance that they are actually bitten
by a snake.
Councillor TOOMEY played patient and was bandaged up so that we could see
how to apply a compression bandage, Madam Chairman. At the end of the
presentation for those of us that were game enough, we had a very large
probably eight foot long carpet snake for display and for people to have a pat of
and a drape across their shoulders, as Councillor TOOMEY did. So it was great
to be able to provide that valuable important information. I'd encourage all
Councillors to make themselves aware of the information and help promote it to
residents so they can be safe, not only in their own homes but also when they're
using our parks and open spaces.
There are two petitions that also came to committee, Madam Chairman. I'm
happy to leave those for debate in the Chamber.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Thanks, Madam Chair, and I rise to speak on Item C just to make some
observation which is the objection to the Walton Bridge Park development
proposal. Listen, from the outset I think it's a lesson reading through the
paperwork on this of how the local Councillor needs to really better engage with
local residents. I note in paragraph 31 this was as a result of The Gap Resident's
Association undertaking significant consultation with residents and as a result to
that, we've seen some community discord and I guess anger across the board.
Then paragraph 31 says, Council therefore requested that the local Councillor
undertake additional community consultation in relation to this matter. Well
through you to Councillor TOOMEY you shouldn't be told to do consultation.
You shouldn't be—that's what it says in the report and he's getting his orders
now from Councillor BOURKE of what to say—but he shouldn't be directed to
undertake community—it should be part and parcel of what happens when work
is undertaken.
So I would suggest as a result you've got to ask the question why the resident's
association in the first place felt the need. Was it because of the Council's
inaction and disinterest on this issue and perhaps Councillor TOOMEY can
enlighten the debate today. That they went out and felt the need to go out and do
that consultation without any Council support. They've done a lot of hard work
on the ground of listening and working with local residents. I understand the
consultation undertaken by the local Councillor, Councillor Steven TOOMEY,
was one consultation session which was held in the park.
I'm getting no response over there but I'm reading that's what from the papers
here. I guess we need to make sure when we are looking at park developments
there is sensible compromise so that you can get significant improvements that
the community will support. It shouldn't be a question of us versus them. It
should be the community coming together.
I note that this the style of consultation certainly on this side of the Chamber and
the local Labor candidate, Shane Bevis who is in the gallery with us tonight,
who has been listening to residents and that's certainly the feedback that
residents expect as a result of not going to the extent of having to do a petition,
worried about the sort of consultation or worried about the proposals. If the local
Councillor had been doing his job from day one, I suggest we wouldn't have
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 51 needed a local community group. I would have suggested that they worked in
tandem together rather than in isolation.
So whilst the new Councillor may be still getting his feet under the desk, I
would certainly suggest that in the future when dealing with complex issues of
park improvements, that we don't reach a stage where the residents feel they
then have to petition Council when they should have been consulted from day
one. So I hope this hasn't meant a further stringing out of the process in terms of
seeing some improvements there.
That we get this right, that The Gap residents who obviously enjoy their open
space just like every other resident, have in fact a proper channel of
communication to make sure that their views are reflected so that they get the
best benefits out of any redevelopment of open space or improvement for park
facilities which they clearly rightly deserve.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor TOOMEY.
Councillor TOOMEY:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Item C as well. Never have I heard
more the pot calling the kettle black really. Madam Chairman, Walton Bridge
revitalisation project was a promise made by the LORD MAYOR at last year's
budget. True to that commitment we've undertaken the engagement with the
community. We've gone out, we've consulted with not only The Gap Resident's
Association, we've had two private meetings with The Gap Resident's
Association.
We've also had meetings with local stakeholders in the park that use the park on
a regular basis, on a weekly basis, sometimes on a bi-weekly basis. We also
undertook contacting the residents, Madam Chairman. We wrote to 5,500
residents of The Gap seeking their response. Along with that we identified
almost 30 interest groups who use the park on a regular basis. We also engaged
with businesses nearby. Madam Chairman, I personally went around and
doorknocked those businesses seeing their feedback and their consideration for
what they would like to see in the park.
Madam Chairman, we received a large number of submissions. In fact I recall
taking them to the chair's office in two bags in which Council officers—they
were in brown paper bags—then Council officers then sorted through the
information and provided a revised plan. I would also like to note that while
Councillor DICK mentioned the candidate for the Labor Party at The Gap, I will
put on record that he failed to put in a submission. When he also attended the
public consultation he failed to talk to the officers as well. Madam Chairman, I
took that—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor TOOMEY:
I took that as a point that obviously the Labor candidate for The Gap did not
care about what was happening at the park. Madam Chairman, we also took
many, many submissions over the phone. We took submissions from residents
who walked into the office and all that was correlated and then handed to
residents. With the public meeting that Councillor DICK spoke about, we had
over 70 people attend over a two hour period. We put on a bit of a show for
them. We had a layout of different items, our thoughts. We were seeking their
feedback. We also had a coffee cart there and Rotary put on a sausage sizzle as
well.
Madam Chairman, it was a great afternoon. We had a guest speaker who was a
member of Save Our Waterways Now (SOWN) who had her say about what she
would like to see in the park. As anybody or any resident in The Gap would
know SOWN are quite active in the area. They look after the park, they weed
along the creek and their insight and their knowledge of the local area was
considered very, very valuable, one that I wanted to see passed onto those in
attendance.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 52 Madam Chairman, at this stage we are at the second stage of the public
consultation process. To date I've had another public meeting out at Walton
Bridge which was yesterday. Councillor BOURKE was in attendance. Council
officers were there and we had a number of people come up and talk to us about
what they would like to see in the area. Madam Chairman, I'd like to thank
Councillor BOURKE and also the Council officers for their assistance so far in
this undertaking. I'd also like to thank my ward office staff who have
documented people coming in, taking information over the phone, also
correlating many of the feedback forms that we had sent out.
I would like to say that we are taking the revitalisation of this park as a Council
very, very seriously. It is the entrance to The Gap. It is a very important park
and we want to make sure that we get this redevelopment correct. Thank you,
Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Nothing further Councillor BOURKE?
Councillor BOURKE:
Yes, thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Look, Madam Chairman, I just thank
Councillors for their contributions to the debate. I can't go past
Councillor DICK's effort. It was the DICK puff piece special,
Madam Chairman. He stood up, he puffed out his chest, he delivered this you're
not doing your job. You should be doing more Councillor TOOMEY. Well,
Madam Chairman, this money was allocated in the Council budget this year by
the LORD MAYOR to carry out a master planning process.
I'm more than happy that The Gap Resident's Association wanted to go out as
they can do as a resident's association, talk to the residents, prepare a plan and
they can submit that as a submission around how the park should look according
to what they would like. This Councillor, Councillor TOOMEY has been out
there talking to his community. He's been talking to the community groups. The
community groups who didn't get to have a say in The Gap Resident's
Association's plan. He wrote to 5,500 people in his ward, in that Gap suburb,
Madam Chairman.
He's been out, standing in the park talking to residents. He's been doing more
when it comes to community consultation than many on the other side would
ever do in a four-year term, Madam Chairman. Through you, Madam Chairman,
Councillor TOOMEY, I wouldn't take too much advice about community
consultation from Councillor DICK because his residents are lining up to see me
down in Darra and Ellen Grove for all the times that he's ignored them over the
last eight years.
So, Madam Chairman, this park is going to be upgraded—see what your vote is
at the Oxley Federal election Councillor DICK—this park is going to be
upgraded. We're going through—that's right 15 per cent, don't forget that, 15 per
cent. But, Madam Chairman, we're going through the process of upgrading this
park—who's running against me Councillor DICK, no one. So,
Madam Chairman, we're upgrading this park, we're listening to the residents. As
Councillor TOOMEY went through, we're doing a second round of consultation.
We've taken all of the feedback, all the feedback from the thousands of residents
that Councillor TOOMEY wrote to, all the feedback from the 30 odd
community groups that wanted to have a say on this park, all the feedback from
The Gap Resident's Association and we've compiled that into a concept plan
which has gone to the whole of The Gap, Madam Chairman. Now we're doing
the consultation. Councillor TOOMEY was there with me yesterday afternoon.
He'll be there on Saturday afternoon with the officers talking to residents.
True to form with the Labor Party, they'll sit on the sidelines, fire the cheap
shots but never put anything in writing. No submission, no comment, no
submission; they did it on the Natural Asset Local Law, they did it on the
City Botanic Gardens master plan. Did they put it in writing? Did they make a
submission? Did they actually say something? No, Madam Chairman. They
stood on the sidelines. They fire the cheap shots, Madam Chairman, but they're
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 53 too afraid to actually put the money where it matters to put something on the
line, Madam Chairman, and actually take a position.
Councillor TOOMEY is out there talking to his community. This Administration
is getting on with the job of actually delivering, engaging with the residents and
providing the parks and the open spaces and facilities that we need to make sure
our city not only remains the most sustainable city in Australia, but a liveable
one.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Matthew Bourke (Chairman), Councillor Fiona King (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Peter
Cumming, Kim Flesser, Kim Marx and Steven Toomey.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – SNAKES OF BRISBANE
265/2015-16
1.
Kristy Thomson, Program Officer - Biodiversity Planning, Biodiversity and Conservation Planning,
Parks and Environmental Planning, Parks and Natural Resources Team, Natural Environment Water
and Sustainability Branch, City Planning and Sustainability Division, attended the meeting to provide a
presentation on the snakes of Brisbane. She provided the information below.
2.
There are 31 species of snakes in the Greater Brisbane region. The most commonly encountered
species in Brisbane include the Carpet Python, Green Tree Snake, Brown Tree Snake, Eastern Brown
Snake, Red-Bellied Black Snake and Yellow-Faced Whip Snake. The colour and size variation within a
species can make identifying snakes difficult.
3.
Images were displayed of various snakes common to Brisbane.
4.
The presenter dispelled common myths about snakes. The common myth ‘The only good snake, is a
dead snake’ is false. Snakes are a protected native species under the Nature Conservation Act 1992.
They play a significant function in our natural ecosystem. Most snake bites occur when trying to catch
or kill them.
5.
Another common myth is that all brown snakes are brown and all black snakes are black. A snake
should never be identified using colour alone, there is great variation in colour within and between
species.
6.
To prepare yourself for snake season you can protect yourself by wearing appropriate footwear and
clothing, remove unnecessary debris such as piles of timber or corrugated iron from around your
property, teach children what to do if they see a snake, never attempt to catch or kill a snake, and
know/learn first-aid.
7.
The presenter gave a demonstration of first-aid and showed the Committee a live Carpet Python.
8.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Thomson for her
informative presentation.
9.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 54 -
B
PETITION – REQUEST THAT COUNCIL INSTALL ADDITIONAL
STORMWATER DRAINS AT 300 BROADWATER ROAD, MANSFIELD, TO
REDUCE FLOODING
CA15/701820
266/2015-16
10.
A petition requesting the installation of additional stormwater drainage at the intersection of
Broadwater and Ham Roads, Mansfield, was received during the Winter Recess 2015.
11.
The Executive Manager, Field Services Group, Brisbane Infrastructure Division, supplied the
following information.
12.
The petition contains three signatures and requests the installation of additional storm water drainage at
the intersection of Broadwater and Ham Roads, Mansfield.
13.
In June 2015, a letter was received by Councillor Krista Adams, Councillor for Wishart Ward, from the
residents of three properties at 296, 298 and 300 Broadwater Road, Mansfield. The petition is the same
letter that was referred to the Chairman of Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee in June.
Briefing notes were prepared by Council’s Asset Services Branch East Region, Field Services Group,
Brisbane Infrastructure Division, and a response was issued from Councillor Matthew Bourke to
Councillor Adams on 10 August 2015.
14.
The petition requests that Council look into ways of minimising the flooding that took place on 1 May
2015, by the installation of further drainage assets and by altering the current pipe and headwall to
move it away from the creek bed.
15.
On 20 July 2015 the Senior Technical Officer from Council’s Asset Services Branch East Region,
inspected the stormwater drainage and surrounding catchment at Broadwater Road, Mansfield. While
onsite, the Council officer had a lengthy discussion with the head petitioner, who explained that the
property flooded from the road and he felt that the stormwater gullies on his side of the road were
inadequate during recent storm events.
16.
The head petitioner made some suggestions about possible methods for remediation of the drainage
issues, which were further discussed with the Council officer. He was advised that although additional
drainage would assist in reducing the frequency of flooding, future flooding was still possible due to
the locality being in the flood plain of the creek.
17.
As there is no evidence, within the gully or at the pipe outfall, to suggest a blockage of the stormwater
system, a pipe survey was deemed unnecessary. Council’s Asset Services Branch will undertake
maintenance works to repair some damaged pipework and will install a surcharge manhole atop the
creek bank, by the end of January 2016.
18.
An additional gully with a discharge pipe in the easement adjacent to 308 Broadwater Road would also
assist in reducing the frequency of flooding. Such works will be listed and prioritised for possible
inclusion in future capital programs.
19.
The additional drainage assets will assist in reducing the flooding during most storm events.
Unfortunately, no matter the number, size or capacity of stormwater assets at this location, Council’s
stormwater system will not be able to prevent flooding occurring at this location in Broadwater Road
during significant storm events. This is due to the location being on or under the expected level of
flooding.
Funding
20.
The installation of the surcharge pit and the minor repairs will be funded within existing recurrent
maintenance funding.
21.
The additional gully and pipework near 308 Broadwater Road will be considered as part of a future
capital works program under program 1, schedule 68.
Consultation
22.
Councillor Adams has been consulted and supports the recommendation.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 55 -
Customer impact
23.
If no work is undertaken, the customers’ properties would continue to flood during storm events, as
would be expected given the location within the flood corridor.
24.
If the proposed work is undertaken, flooding will not be eliminated, however the frequency of flooding
will reduce.
25.
The Executive Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed, with Councillors Peter
Cumming and Kim Flesser abstaining.
26.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL WILL UNDERTAKE THE PLANNED INSTALLATION OF THE
SURCHARGE PIT AND CARRY OUT MINOR REPAIRS BY THE END OF JANUARY 2016.
COUNCIL WILL CONTINUE TO PRIORITISE THE ADDITIONAL GULLY AND
PIPEWORK NEAR 308 BROADWATER ROAD, MANSFIELD FOR INCLUSION IN A
FUTURE CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM.
ADOPTED
C
PETITION – OBJECTION
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
TO
THE
WALTON
BRIDGE
PARK
CA15/758662
267/2015-16
27.
A petition objecting to the Walton Bridge Park development proposal was presented to the meeting of
Council held on 15 September 2015, by Councillor Steven Toomey, and received.
28.
The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, supplied the following information.
29.
A petition with 62 names was presented to Council at the meeting of 15 September 2015, by Councillor
Steven Toomey, Councillor for The Gap Ward. The petition objects to The Gap Residents
Association’s (GAPRA) plan for the extensive development of Walton Bridge Park north-side (Romea
Street/Lochinvar Lane area). The petitioners’ concerns are that the development will cause traffic,
parking and safety problems including access by emergency vehicles, disturb wildlife habitat and
encourage teenage vandalism/graffiti in the neighbourhood.
30.
Over the last year, GAPRA has undertaken independent consultation within The Gap community and,
as of 5 September 2015, has developed a Walton Bridge Park Master Plan. This Master Plan was
presented to Council and included community consultation activities.
31.
Council has since received numerous letters of concern regarding the master planning activities
undertaken by GAPRA. Council therefore requested that the local ward Councillor undertake
additional community consultation in relation to this matter. Community consultation was undertaken
on 13 September 2015 and has been provided to Council.
32.
Upon initial review, the community consultation indicates that the majority of residents would prefer
an increase of maintenance, the upgrade of existing infrastructure and some new establishments within
the park, rather than the GAPRA proposal.
33.
Walton Bridge Park is a significant part of the parkland network in The Gap and offers a broad range of
facilities and services. It is expected to remain a popular destination for residents and as such, it is
important for Council to maintain and continually improve park facilities to meet the needs of
residents.
34.
Council will continue to listen to the views of residents, including those represented by GAPRA, on the
future development of The Gap parkland network to ensure the needs and expectations of the whole
community are met.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 56 35.
Council is currently preparing a concept plan for Walton Bridge Park and will ensure the views
expressed in the community consultation are considered.
Consultation
36.
Councillor Toomey was consulted on 7 November 2015 and supports the recommendation.
37.
The Divisional Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed, with Councillors Peter
Cumming and Kim Flesser abstaining.
38.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED THAT COUNCIL WILL TAKE A HOLISTIC
VIEW WHEN DEVELOPING THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR WALTON BRIDGE PARK,
ENSURING THAT THE NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS OF THE WHOLE COMMUNITY
ARE MET.
ADOPTED
FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE
Councillor David McLACHLAN, Chairman of the Field Services Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor
Norm WYNDHAM, that the report of that Committee held on 17 November 2015, be adopted.
Chairman:
Councillor McLACHLAN.
Councillor McLACHLAN:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. The item before us, Item A, this was a
presentation in our committee last week on the excellent work undertaken by the
Construction branch of the Field Services Group. We often bring in
presentations such as this to show some of the complex work that is undertaken
by Council officers and our contractors. In this case I think that the whole team
were Council staff. You look at the surface of Kelvin Grove, the intersection of
Kelvin Grove and Windsor Road and say well it's a nice bit of work that's been
done.
What isn't shown as you drive along that road is the complexity of the work
underneath the surface that needed to be undertaken to provide this outcome. So
this was a pretty complex project for a suburban road project. It's indicative of
the sort of work that's being undertaken by this Administration to reduce
congestion on an ongoing basis across the whole of the city. It was completed on
time with very few negative impacts on traffic movements along Kelvin Grove
which was one of the key corridors in our city.
Just some of the major activities that had to be undertaken to allow the project to
proceed; always with these sorts of projects quite complex service relocation
work with gas, electricity, water and sewerage not always shown on the plans
that are provided to the construction crews. Road widening was undertaken,
pavement construction work, new kerb and channel was undertaken. There's a
great new exposed aggregate footpath along the side. There was a lot of
excavation and demolition activity undertaken and micro piling and shotcrete
work to mention some of the pre-work that was done, concluding with traffic
signalisation and street lighting.
So all in all, Madam Chairman, a great project, a great example of local road
improvements being undertaken and certainly an important element in our
ongoing to commitment to congestion reduction in this city.
Madam Chairman, Item B was a petition requesting that Council clear a
stormwater drain running parallel to Hope Street in Norman Park. The
petitioners have been advised—the 13 petitioners have been advised that that
work is being undertaken and due to be completed by the end of November. I
leave any debate on that or any commentary on any of the other Items to other
members of the Council.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 57 Chairman:
Nothing further, Councillor McLACHLAN?
I now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Field Services Committee
was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor David McLachlan (Chairman), Councillor Norm Wyndham (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors
Peter Cumming, Nicole Johnston, Kim Marx and Ian McKenzie
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – KELVIN GROVE ROAD AND WINDSOR
ROAD INTERSECTION UPGRADE
268/2015-16
1.
Shane MacLeod – Manager, Construction Branch, Field Services Group, Brisbane Infrastructure
Division, attended the meeting to provide an update on Kelvin Grove Road and Windsor Road
Intersection Upgrade. He provided the information below.
2.
The scope of works for this project included:
extending the right hand turn lane from Kelvin Grove Road into Bishop Street by
approximately 50 metres. Due to the difference in levels between the inbound and outbound
lanes, this extension required the construction of an 80-metre long, 2.2-metre high cast insitu
retaining wall. The retaining wall now provides a safety barrier separating the inbound and
outbound traffic
other work completed includes widening the inbound lanes on Kelvin Grove Road, installation
of a northbound safety barrier system, an upgrade to the traffic signals and installation of an
Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) communication link between the Bishop Street and
Herston Road intersections
this project has benefited the road users of Kelvin Grove Road, with improved road safety and
reduced traffic congestion.
3.
The challenges in the execution of this project included:
due to the high volume of traffic on Kelvin Grove Road, narrow lanes and a narrow road
corridor, alteration to line marking and permanent lane closures were not possible during the
project. This restricted the available area for construction
the difference in existing road levels between the inbound and outbound traffic lanes meant
that the protection of a safety barrier during construction was required. The installation of
such a system was further complicated due to the narrow traffic lanes and the narrow road
corridor. This prevented any alignment changes to the existing traffic lanes during
construction
this barrier system was required to sit at the top of an unstable excavated steep batter. The
barrier system had to be as light as possible and be ridged enough to deflect a vehicle.
Furthermore, the batter below the barrier system required adequate support and stabilisation to
not only support the barrier system but to also support traffic loads from the existing road.
This was further complicated by the proximity of tram track structures being located at a
shallow depth below.
4.
The solution to the above challenges included:
once the inbound road widening was complete the construction of the retaining wall was
staged to allow work to be completed from the inbound side of Kelvin Grove Road
a special minimum deflection steel barrier system was chosen as the protection system on the
outbound side of Kelvin Grove Road
to support this barrier system and prevent the failure of the excavated batter, a temporary
micro piled retaining system was designed and installed. These micro piles were able to be
installed and anchored through the tram track slab below
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 58 -
5.
a shotcrete treatment was then applied between these micro piles to weather proof the
temporary structure and to further prevent material from dislodging between the piles which
could cause a catastrophic road failure
once the micro piling and barrier system was installed the construction of the retaining wall
and road pavements was able to be completed.
This project was able to be completed on time, while minimising the negative impacts to traffic
movements on Kelvin Grove Road.
6.
Stage 1 of the project, road widening work commenced on 2 February 2014 and was completed on 17
April 2014. Stage 2 of the project, centre median work, commenced on 18 January 2015 and was
completed on 21 May 2015.
7.
Major activities completed as part of this project include:
service relocations and protection work (gas, electricity, water and sewer)
road widening and pavement construction work
new kerb and channel
new exposed aggregate footpaths
excavation and demolition activities
micro piling and shotcrete work
retaining wall construction
traffic signals and street lighting
optic fibre, its communication installation work
asphalt surfacing, line marking and street furniture.
8.
Images of various stages of the project were displayed along with the names of the project team
members.
9.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr MacLeod for his
informative presentation.
10.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
B
PETITION – PETITION REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL CLEAR THE
STORMWATER DRAIN RUNNING PARALLEL TO HOPE STREET,
NORMAN PARK
CA15/528558
269/2015-16
11.
A petition from residents, requesting Council to clear the storm water drain running parallel to Hope
Street, Norman Park, was received during the Winter Recess 2015.
12.
The Executive Manager, Field Services Group, Brisbane Infrastructure Division, provided the
following information.
13.
The petition contains 13 signatures. The Regional Roads and Drainage Coordinator from Council’s
Asset Services branch contacted the Head Petitioner by phone on 30 July to discuss the issues raised in
the petition. The drain in question is currently programmed for cleaning and works are expected to be
completed by 30 November 2015.
Consultation
14.
Councillor Shayne Sutton, Councillor for Morningside Ward, has been consulted and supports the
recommendation.
Customer impact
15.
Completed works will reduce flood impact to residents during some storm events, depending on storm
intensity and tide levels.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 59 -
Preferred option
16.
It is the preferred option that Council currently has programmed the clearing of the waterway that runs
parallel to Hope Street, Norman Park. This will also include any subsequent repairs that are required to
the stone pitched banks. This work is expected to be completed by 30 November 2015, weather
permitting.
17.
Accordingly, the Executive Manager therefore recommended as follows and the Committee agreed.
18.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED OF THE FOLLOWING:
COUNCIL CURRENTLY HAS PROGRAMMED THE CLEARING OF THE WATERWAY
THAT RUNS PARALLEL TO HOPE STREET, NORMAN PARK. THIS WILL ALSO
INCLUDE ANY SUBSEQUENT REPAIRS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO THE STONE
PITCHED BANKS. THIS WORK IS EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED BY 30 NOVEMBER
2015, WEATHER PERMITTING.
ADOPTED
BRISBANE LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE
Councillor Krista ADAMS, Chairman of the Brisbane Lifestyle Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor
Andrew WINES, that the report of that Committee held on 17 November 2015, be adopted.
Chairman:
Councillor ADAMS.
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Our presentation last week was on the beautiful
former Wynnum Central State School site which has been transformed into an
accessible community centre. The new Wynnum Community Centre includes
licensed and hire spaces, halls for stage for community groups, shared kitchens,
toilet facilities, storage and a new elevator to make it fully accessible. Our
objective is to make sure we are delivering an active community by delivering
high quality community spaces where local community groups can gather,
general community can interact, and there are some permanent lease sites as
well on site as well as hireable spaces.
We are delivering this community centre very clearly in line with the feedback
from the community consultation that was undertaken in December 2013
through to February 2014. We had two information sessions at that time; 2pm to
5pm, and 6pm to 8pm. We had 134 people attend and we got nearly 150 pieces
of feedback back from that consultation and in the weeks after that as well.
There was definitely an overwhelming support for the community centre with a
focus on art and cultural activities and community services that can benefit the
local community.
We did go out to expressions of interest in June this year when we had finalised
the actual plans for what was going to be delivered in the building and we knew
how many leasable sites we had and what might work and might not work for
hiring for community groups as well. We received 16 applications, one of which
did not meet the eligibility criteria. Eight community organisations were
successful in receiving an offer for a space in the centre based on their
applications. All these applications and eight successful community
organisations represent a diversity of services of benefit to the local community.
In addition to those eight successful community organisations we also offered a
storage space for the Wynnum Manly District Historical Society who are going
to be very excited to have their space and able to display some of their stuff that
they've got from the historical society as well.
So we have mentioned it before in this place but the Wynnum Community
Centre will now house the Queensland Services Heritage Band, Wynnum Manly
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 60 Arts Council, Wynnum 60 and Better Program, Volunteering Queensland as a
concierge service for the building as well, Bayside Community Legal Service,
BrisStyle Incorporated, Community Childcare Inc, Wynnum Manly District
Historical Society and the National Association for the Prevention of Child
Abuse and Neglect. I think this is a good outcome for the community. It's going
to be keeping the site activated but there are still plenty of hireable sites as well
for the community to use.
As I mentioned, Volunteering Queensland has been approached to take on a role
as the head licensee in that they will have a centre role in their office and a
person to touch base if people are hiring out those rooms during the day. It will
be managed under our community halls or community facilities at the moment
through the Lifestyle portfolio, but as far as having somebody on site through
Monday to Friday, Volunteering Queensland will help with those issues as an
operational manager. I think that will be a good outcome too for people coming
into the building particularly if it's for their first time as well.
We're going to have the opening on Saturday. We can't wait to meet the
neighbours and for the neighbours to meet the new people that are moving into
Big Red as well. There'll be a sausage sizzle, face painting, jumping castles and
community performances. We've invited the whole local area to come along.
We've got those community groups that are moving into Big Red that are going
to showcase their services as well. That's really going to be an opportunity for
them to activate their new spaces and to show—and for us to show the hire
spaces to the community as well so they can get an idea of what is available for
community groups in the future.
So it's fantastic to see the reuse of this beautiful building. The school was
established in 1895. I mean it's a quite an iconic building in the centre of
Wynnum. The contractors have done a beautiful job on the community centre. I
think everyone will be, if you come along on Saturday you will be greatly
pleased with the work that they have done. As well as the things I mentioned
before we've got that hall and stage with the dressing room with full AV
capability, reheat kitchens on each floor, kitchenettes, art sinks for those people
who are doing arts and crafts activities.
There's a main toilet on the ground floor which is also going to be used for park
users as well which will be very interesting if there's—will be very helpful I
should say if there are public events like markets and stuff that could be used on
that site in future as well. Obviously a person-with-disability toilet on each level
and a shower on the ground level as well. Can I say thank you to all the officers
involved in this project. It's taken a lot of hard work and commitment. It's taken
a while to get it right. I think we have got it right. It's going to be a fantastic
building for 100 and more years to come in the Wynnum Central area. Thank
you, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor CUMMING.
Councillor CUMMING:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I refer to Item A. I'm disappointed with the local
groups who missed out on a place in the community centre. Some had been
tenants of the Council shops in front of the old Wynnum Library for many years.
The Wynnum Information Centre had been a tenant for over 20 years. This
group of volunteers used to hand out brochures and provide advice to new
residents and visitors to the district. In addition, a tax help service for lowincome earners was offered each year through the Information Centre. Sadly the
information centre missed out.
Another very worthy group was the Ark Church. Ark runs Ark Help, a food
outlet. Their logo is, sustaining through tough times. The Ark gets their food
from the Foodbank up at Colmslie and makes up hampers. They guarantee at
least $50 worth of food in every hamper which costs the purchaser $10. The Ark
was also in one of the Council shops. The shops were a great location for
community groups because of the passing traffic of pedestrians walking to the
library entrance. The Ark shops were close to Bay Terrace, close to bus stops
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 61 and about 200 metres from Wynnum Central railway station. I was very
saddened by the Ark missing out on a location in the brick building.
The other group which missed out was the Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Queensland (CCIQ) Brisbane Bayside branch which is formerly the
Wynnum Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber did not have space in the shops
but they actually had the right to use some of the rooms in the brick building
more or less ever since the school was closed and the Council bought the
property back in 2012. The problem with the Chamber of Commerce—you
might think they'd have plenty of money to pay private rental. They haven't
because their major source of revenue is payments from the Federal Government
for running training courses for small business.
The current Federal Government had scrapped that scheme so this has resulted
in the cutback of the hours CCIQ staff work and they would have loved the
cheap rent which the community centre provides which is $25 per metre per
year; that's cheap. Instead, groups with no link to Wynnum Manly were given
offices. These may be very worthy groups but they were operating quite happily
elsewhere and why they needed to be part of the Wynnum Community Centre is
a mystery.
I'm interested in how much was spent on refurbishing the building and I
welcome the availability of the toilets close to the park area. There's a demand
for public toilets in that Wynnum Central area. I also just query what's
happening with the grassed area at the back of the brick building. Originally
there was going to be a park of 3,200 square metres around the community
centre which was reduced. That was in the Neighbourhood Plan which was
passed on 1 July 2009. When Council took over this site they reduced the park
to 2,000 square metres. So I'm interested to know whether the grassed area at the
back is going to be added to the parkland.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor ADAMS?
I will now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Brisbane Lifestyle Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Krista Adams (Chairman), Councillor Andrew Wines (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors
Jared Cassidy, Steve Griffiths and Steven Huang.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
Councillor Margaret de Wit.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – DEVELOPMENT OF THE WYNNUM
COMMUNITY CENTRE
270/2015-16
1.
Miriam Kent, Branch Manager, Connected Communities, Brisbane Lifestyle Division, attended the
meeting to provide an update on the Wynnum Community Centre. She provided the information below.
2.
Wynnum Central State School was established in 1895 in response to local community pressure after
the train line was extended to Wynnum Central in 1892. The school was closed in 2010 and replaced
by a new school at Wynnum North. The Wynnum Central State School site was acquired by Council in
March 2012.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 62 3.
The site originally consisted of five buildings. The main building is a three-storey heritage-listed
building made of red brick, which was constructed in 1946. The other buildings were two storeys and
made from timber. Council demolished all four timber buildings in mid-2015 and laid grass.
4.
Council’s key purpose for taking on the development of this significant site was to provide a catalyst
for the reinvigoration of the Wynnum Central Business District as a regional centre for Brisbane. The
project aims to promote an active community by delivering high quality community spaces where local
community groups and the general community can interact.
5.
A community consultation event was held onsite on 12 December 2013, consisting of two ‘Talk to a
Planner’ style sessions in the afternoon and evening. Over 100 comments have been received and the
community overwhelmingly supported a new community centre with a focus on art and cultural
activities, and community services.
6.
A four-page newsletter about the site redevelopment was released in May 2015, including a concept
master plan. A sign showing a potential redevelopment opportunity was erected so that the community
did not assume the site was a permanent park. The concept master plan was also installed as a sign on
each street frontage.
7.
The redevelopment of the site included upgrading the red brick building for community use. Audits and
feasibility studies were conducted into possible configurations for future use. Construction of the
Community Centre commenced in May 2015. The scope of work included:
upgrades to meet accessibility, safety and building code standards
removal of asbestos
upgraded roof and gutters
demolition of old fittings and fixtures
removal of old toilets
external painting
preparation of a lift shaft and installation of a lift
structural upgrades to the floor.
8.
The project was completed on 14 November 2015 and includes 831 square metres of community space.
A variety of community spaces will be available for hire and audio-visual equipment will be installed
in some rooms. The refurbished building also features:
a gallery space
a hall with a stage and dressing room
main toilets on the ground floor, including two for park users
a unisex people with disability toilet on each level with a shower at ground level
new technology allowing power consumption for individual spaces to be read and billed
separately.
9.
Expression of interest for licensed community spaces was advertised in May 2015 with the following
applicants being successful:
Bayside Community Legal Service Inc.
BrisStyle Inc.
Volunteering Queensland Inc.
Wynnum Manly Historical Society Inc.
Wynnum Manly Arts Council Inc.
Wynnum Family Day Care and Education Service
Wynnum 60 and Better Program
National Association for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect
Queensland Services Heritage Band Association.
10.
The Lord Mayor will open the Wynnum Community Centre on 28 November 2015. The opening event
will officially launch the refurbished centre to the community and provide an opportunity to:
activate the new spaces
encourage community participation
showcase how the hire spaces can be utilised by community groups in the future.
11.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Kent for her
informative presentation.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 63 12.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
FINANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Councillor Julian SIMMONDS, Chairman of the Finance, Economic Development and Administration
Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Ryan MURPHY, that the report of that Committee held on
17 November 2015, be adopted.
Chairman:
Councillor SIMMONDS.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just two quick issues. Firstly, it's not part of the
report but it's the first opportunity after the annual report for City of Brisbane
Investment Corporation (CBIC) which was tabled last week by the
LORD MAYOR to make some comment. I just wanted to extend mine as the
Chairman and also the Committee's congratulations to the board of management
of CBIC on another outstanding result for the 2014-15 financial year. Once
again for the one, two, three, four, five—for the sixth year in a row which is the
entirety of their operations, they've made a return of over 10 per cent. That is an
outstanding result.
It's in contrast with other significant funds like the Future Fund which is
currently only returning an average of 7.8 per cent. So the board and the
management are achieving results beyond even the comparable funds and they
should be congratulated for that. Most importantly of course is that it's paying
significant dividends back to the ratepayers of Brisbane; some $50 million over
its period of operation. We know that every, approximately $8 million,
represents a one per cent in rates and you can see just with that
back-of-the-envelope comparison, just the weight that this fund is lifting off
ratepayers.
We no longer have to reach in or ask them to reach into their pockets. We are
able to supplement the Council's income and return more frontline services
thanks to the work of this fund.
Secondly, Madam Chairman, the presentation of the Committee was on
Christmas in the City. This is a staple of our major events calendar. It is a
wonderful period with over 1,000 events throughout the Queen Street Mall,
King George Square. We also have a sister program that's operating at the same
time in the Valley malls through Council as opposed to Brisbane Marketing who
are operating the city one. They are also working of course in conjunction with
South Bank, thanks to the amalgamation of those operations with
Brisbane Marketing. So it will be a Christmas theme that extends across the
entirety of the city.
We would encourage all Councillors to promote these events. You know how
popular from previous years, particularly the light show on City Hall is,
particularly the pantomime parade how successful they are, so please get onto
your e-newsletters and your social media and let people know that these events
will be back this year. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Nothing.
Councillor HOWARD.
Councillor HOWARD:
It's just very briefly, Madam Chairman. I just rise to speak very quickly about
Christmas in the City 2015 because I'm very excited about this year and
particularly also that we'll be having Christmas down in the Valley malls. Again
that's something that I thank Councillor SIMMONDS and his team for helping
us to grow. We all know that every year this just becomes better and better and
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 64 so it's wonderful to see that from 11 to 31 December that we will be having
Christmas in the City.
It's an amazing thing for our traders not only in the Queen Street Mall but also in
Albert Street and in some of those other areas who've already been telling me
that business is looking up. It's a wonderful thing to see so many families
coming into the CBD and to enjoy those experiences. So I'd also like to
recommend to the Chamber the fact that we will have the 12 days of Christmas
and the Land of Sweets and also a pedal-powered Christmas tree so that in itself
is absolutely amazing.
More importantly, as a grandmother of a four year old I'm so looking forward to
Christmas this year because I think that finally my four year old who can now
speak English will be able to really enjoy what this beautiful city has to offer.
I'm very much looking forward to sharing that with her so thank you
Councillor SIMMONDS.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor SIMMONDS?
I now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the Finance, Economic Development and
Administration Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Julian Simmonds (Chairman), Councillor Ryan Murpy (Deputy Chairman); and Councillors
Kim Flesser, Fiona King, Angela Owen-Taylor and Shayne Sutton.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – CHRISTMAS IN THE CITY 2015
271/2015-16
1.
Jane Tighe, General Manager, Events, Brisbane Marketing, attended the meeting to provide an update
on Christmas in the City 2015. She provided the information below.
2.
Christmas in the City 2015 is an initiative that will celebrate the holiday season from 11 to 31
December 2015.
3.
In 2015, Central Business District (CBD) and South Bank will unite to host an extensive four-week,
free festive entertainment program. Since the success of 2014, the two precincts have again
collaborated to create a unified Christmas look-and-feel across the CBD and provide visitors with a
seamless experience on both sides of the river.
4.
This year’s program will provide a suite of events which include the Myer Christmas Parade and
Pantomime and the Gold Lotto City Hall Light Spectacular. Complementing these events will be a full
suite of family-focused Christmas activities at South Bank.
5.
The key objectives of the Christmas in the City initiative are:
creating economic value
driving social value
enhance the visitor experience.
6.
The key events for Christmas in the City 2015 program include:
27 November 2015 – Lighting of the Brisbane City Christmas Tree
11-23 December 2015 – South Bank’s Christmas Markets
11-20 December 2015 – Myer Christmas Parade & Pantomime
11-24 December 2015 – Gold Lotto City Hall Light Spectacular
17-21 December 2015 – Christmas Fireworks Spectacular
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 65 -
17-20 December 2015 – South Bank Christmas Carols
17-23 December 2015 – Christmas Cinema Series.
7.
In 2015, the Christmas in the City program will have a new parade 12 Days of Christmas, new City
Hall Light Show Land of Sweets and a pedal-powered Christmas Tree.
8.
The presenter discussed the 2014 highlights which included over 465,000 visitors attending Christmas
events in the CBD and South Bank. Further highlights were provided, which include an increase of
21.7 per cent of overall daily spend in the CBD and a 166 per cent increase to daily spend in South
Bank during the campaign. The media coverage for the course of the Christmas program was
approximately $1 million.
9.
The creation of the theme for the Christmas in the City campaign includes a focus on the highly
successful concept ‘The Wonder of Christmas’. The key objective of the campaign is to demonstrate
the ‘Wonder of Christmas’ through the eyes of a child. This creative campaign places a unique
perspective on the City which has been captured reflecting the dynamic South Bank precinct and colour
and excitement of the cityscape.
10.
The core target audience of this year’s Christmas in the City campaign is residents and visitors within a
two-hour drive of the CBD. In 2015, there has been an increased focus to target a new audience
including regional television commercial advertising and transit advertising throughout South East
Queensland. Christmas in the City formed part of the Major Summer Events Campaign. In 2015, a new
marketing channel was introduced to increase awareness of the campaign.
11.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Tighe for her
informative presentation.
12.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
CONSIDERATION OF NOTIFIED MOTION – LOCATION OF PARK IN
WEST END:
(Notified motions are printed as supplied and are not edited)
The Chairman of Council (Councillor Angela OWEN-TAYLOR) then drew the Councillors’ attention to the
notified motion listed on the agenda—
That;
Council announces the location of the “indicative” local park of 0.5ha, which is shown in the
Priority Infrastructure Plan in Brisbane City Plan 2014 to be near Rogers Street, West End, prior to the
assessment of the development application at 401-405 Montague Road as this site is an appropriate location for
that local park.
Chairman:
I would like to advise that the notified motion is actually incompetent and
therefore will not be permitted to proceed to debate.
Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
MOTION FOR SUSPENSION OF STANDING RULES:
272/2015-16
At that juncture, Councillor ABRAHAMS moved, seconded by Councillor Milton DICK, that the Standing
Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 66 That;
This Council notes the strong community support for a new park of half a hectare shown as WES-01-001 on the
Priority Infrastructure Plan of the Brisbane City Plan 2014 and call on the Council to deliver it as a matter of
urgency.
Chairman:
Okay. Councillor ABRAHAMS you have three minutes for urgency.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be brief because it is urgent. We all know there
are very few Council meetings between now and the end of the year.
Madam Chair, the motion relates to a park that has an indicative location and
because of the development surrounding it that location needs to be clarified.
Madam Chair, there are development applications pending. It is urgent that this
motion calling on the Council to take action is heard. Madam Chair, I would like
to put a new motion and wish to read it which can be considered at the time of
the urgency.
Madam Chair, the motion reads that Council notes the strong support for a new
park of half a hectare shown as WES-01-001 in the Priority Infrastructure Plan
of the Brisbane City Plan 2014 and call on the Council to deliver it as a matter
of urgency.
Chairman:
Your urgency motion has already been seconded. So are you ready for the
urgency motion to be put?
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Yes.
Chairman:
I will now move the motion of urgency.
The Chairman submitted the motion for the suspension of the Standing Rules to the Chamber and it was
declared carried on the voices.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS you have your time now to debate your motion.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank the Chamber for them giving me the
opportunity—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Point of order Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I just seek a ruling on this matter. It needs to be on the record what's gone on
then. You've ruled that this motion is incompetent on the Agenda but you are
now allowing it in the debate.
Chairman:
No, Councillor JOHNSTON. The motion on the notice paper was incompetent.
The motion of urgency that Councillor ABRAHAMS has put forward is a
different motion. It is a motion of urgency. It is not the same motion. Okay?
Councillor ABRAHAMS, please continue.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Are we calling for a division on the urgency motion?
Chairman:
No, it's your time for debate Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. If that's the case, as I said, I thank the
Council Chamber for giving me the opportunity to discuss this motion, a new
motion but—
Councillor ADAMS:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Point of order Councillor ADAMS.
Councillor ADAMS:
Can Councillor ABRAHAMS move the motion so we know what they're going
to be—
Chairman:
Would you like to move your motion properly?
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Madam Chair, may I move a motion and that motion being, Madam Chair, that
Council notes the strong community support for the new park of half a hectare
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 67 shown as WES-01-001 in the Priority Infrastructure Plan of the Brisbane City
Plan 2014 and call on the Council to deliver it as a matter of urgency.
Councillor DICK:
Seconded, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
It has been moved by Councillor ABRAHAMS—the motion as read by
Councillor ABRAHAMS has been moved by Councillor ABRAHAMS,
seconded by Councillor DICK.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS, your debate on your motion please, your urgency
motion.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I will be quick. I wish to talk to the
facts. The facts are Madam Chair—and I will table them—there is a Priority
Infrastructure Plan for community facilities and in that Priority Infrastructure
Plan it lists WES-01-001 as a local park for informal use and for land
acquisition and embellishment of half a hectare with a fairly reasonable sum
against it, with a timeframe 2011-2016. Thank you.
Madam Chair, as many people in the Council Chamber may be aware of in the
past I have spoken about the parks in the Neighbourhood Plan, in the vicinity of
Montague Road, in the Riverside south precinct of South Brisbane Riverside
Neighbourhood Plan. Madam Chair, as a result of that debate and discussion I
have received letters, communication from the LORD MAYOR. I wish to read
out the letter of 19 December 2013 with respect to the priority infrastructure
charges in the South Brisbane Riverside Neighbourhood Plan.
He advised that the indicative park that we have just referred to “has been
planned or is planned to be built”. He then continues in another paragraph,
Madam Chair, to say “a proposed park is nominated as indicative on the PIP
map until a decision has been made for the most appropriate location have in
regards to the needs of the community and landowners”, Madam Chair.
So clearly there is a park and clearly it has no location. Madam Chair, then the
LORD MAYOR on 20 March 2014 wrote to a member resident in the local area
and he actually said in that area, “Council's planning documents from the last
several years have never identified the Distance Education site as a location for
public space, rather they have consistently identified a new public open space on
a separate site at the end of Bailey Street, West End”.
So, Madam Chair, there was one indication from the LORD MAYOR that there
was a possible indicative site for that park. Madam Chair, the motion today
calling for Council to identify the location is necessary because that site
nominated by the LORD MAYOR is in fact, now has a development approval
on it. Madam Chair, if you look at the development approvals at
24 Kurilpa Street which has boundary with Bailey Street down to Duncan Street,
is a separate site at the end of Bailey Street as referred to by the
LORD MAYOR.
There has also been a development application at 33 Bailey Street and
50 Duncan Street, one site; at 28 and 30 and 50 Duncan Street which is a
neighbouring site; at 17 Duncan Street, 21 Duncan Street and on
333 Montague Road. Madam Chair, the point I am making is that in any vicinity
of where this park should be located there are either approvals or active
development applications. The final one is an application on 401 and
405 Montague which is known to everyone in the community as the former
Distance Education site which is a site that many in the community, I being one,
believe is the most appropriate site for the new.
So, Madam Chair, so as not to deem to pre-empt any planning decision, the
motion is very clear that with the amount of development in the vicinity as listed
and explained, it is prudent, it is essential, it is the right thing to do, which is to
let the community know where that park is going to be located. Madam Chair,
the worse outcome would be for the LNP Administration to just sit on this
decision, to make no decision so that any land that had buildings on it that are
being removed for higher density is in fact all developed.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 68 Then the LNP are faced with an option of either not to deliver a park or if not to
remove houses to deliver that park. Now the LORD MAYOR has told me he
won't do that and I actually believe him. But I need—the community needs, if
they are going to believe him, to see that there is a location for a park. Finally,
Madam Chair, the community saw four Lord Mayors, including for some short
time LORD MAYOR QUIRK, agree to a new park at 281 Montague Road. That
park disappeared with the City Plan 2014 disappeared with just one submission
saying it's my land and I don't want it to be taken for a park.
Madam Chair, you think of just how many submissions we have from
individuals pertaining to their land and neighbouring land, they're ignored. But
putting that aside, Madam Chair, the community has lost that park. This is half a
hectare and I would not be doing my job responsibly if I wasn't here as the
strongest advocate for Council to honour their commitment; honour the
commitment of the funding they have taken in chance of development
applications through contributions from the development approvals in this street.
Madam Chair, it is my responsibility to urge this Council to now timely, so they
even get some kudos in the lead up to the election, the appropriate site for the—
what is it—floating—it's an iCloud park essentially because it's floating up in
the clouds and is yet to land. Madam Chair, I urge all of the Councillors over
there who have had the luxury of a park to support this park that is in the
City Plan. Councillor McLACHLAN you have a new park in the
Albion Neighbourhood Plan that was approved today. You have my total
support for it to become reality. That's all I'm asking for.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor BOURKE:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Councillor ABRAHAMS went all over
the world in speaking to the motion that we have before us. I think she might
have been speaking to the previous motion that was on the motion paper before
us, which was I think the first iteration, the second iteration, the third iteration of
the one that we had before us. I'm glad that they finally managed to get their
stuff together over there Madam Chairman, to actually get a motion that was
competent, that we could have a debate about this afternoon. It took them a
number of goes but we got there in the end. Obviously they're looking one leg
out the door, one foot still in the place.
So this has been the subject of much debate in this Council Chamber previously.
It's also been the subject of much consultation and engagement with the
community, and many Councillors in this place would remember the great
dissertations from Councillor ABRAHAMS that we had back in March 2014,
when she stood up—I think she might have even moved an urgency motion at
the time or there was a motion on the paper about Council identifying where we
should build this park in Rogers Street because she'd been out there telling
residents that Council was coming to resume their homes in Rogers Street;
telling residents that Council was coming to resume their homes.
Scaremongering the poor residents of West End is not the job of a Councillor.
Councillors
should
be
above
that,
Madam
Chairman,
but
Councillor ABRAHAMS chose to go down to West End to Rogers Street and
scaremonger the residents down there saying that Council would be coming to
resume their homes, because Councillor ABRAHAMS didn't get her way about
where Councillor ABRAHAMS wanted a park.
Councillor ABRAHAMS was the former Parks Chairman, and the former
Councillor for Dutton Park Ward, which took in this part of the world, also
ended up being Lord Mayor of this place at some point. So there's been plenty of
opportunities of the Australian Labor Party to put parkland into West End or
into the Gabba Ward or into the old Dutton Park Ward if they'd wanted to,
Madam Chairman, but instead all we've seen around this and other parks across
the city is political stunts.
That's what the motion that was on the paper today was and that's what the
amended motion that we now have before us is; nothing but a political stunt
from Councillor ABRAHAMS who's trying to save her bacon from the residents
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 69 down there in West End, because this plan and this indicative park or this
potential location for a park has been on the table for a number of years.
It goes back to as far as 2009 so it's not something that we've just put into the
plan when we did City Plan 2014. There's been an indicative location for this
park all the way back to 2009. What's worse is that in all of
Councillor ABRAHAMS' debate that we just heard she was talking about
building a park here, building a park there, building a park here and this is where
I think the park should be, but the motion that we have before us doesn't actually
deal with what Councillor ABRAHAMS said in this place if you listened
carefully.
Because the motion that we have before us says that there's strong community
support for a park in location WES-01-001 and that Council needs to deliver that
urgently. If you go to City Plan and you print out the map, the location that
WES-01-001 is, is in Rogers Street, but Councillor ABRAHAMS is saying no
the park should be down in Montague Road or the park should be over here or
the park should be over there. That's not the motion that she's brought before us
today, Madam Chairman.
It's not the motion, so third time lucky, still got it wrong. Still got the motion
wrong, but what's worse is irrespective of what Councillor ABRAHAMS says in
this place, we know that she goes out to the community and says a different
thing. We know—
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Chair?
Chairman:
Point of order against you, Councillor BOURKE.
Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
We've given a lot of leeway to Councillor BOURKE so I'll bring you back to
relevance. It is about a specific location; not the work of
Councillor ABRAHAMS and what she has done over the years. Could you just
bring him back to this actual motion?
Chairman:
Thank you, and Councillor ABRAHAMS did get a fair bit of leeway as well, so
Councillor BOURKE back to the motion please.
Councillor BOURKE:
Madam Chairman, so when we're talking about parkland in West End and in this
location we identified another location to provide parkland, and we bought a
site, 68 Vulture Street, on the corner of Thomas and Vulture Street, a site that
Councillor ABRAHAMS wanted five-storey towers on.
I'm not saying it; it's in her own e-mails where she says, I believe that the
development shows high quality urban design; it's a mixed use development
which I encourage on this site. So this Administration is getting on with
delivering parks for the people of West End and for the people of the
Gabba Ward. Councillor ABRAHAMS wants to build five-storey buildings on
it.
To my point that I was making before Councillor DICK stood up and
interrupted, the problem you've got is you can't listen and believe what they say
in here because when they go out into the community they say a completely
different thing; i.e. I want a five storey development—no I really want parks.
So you can't have it both ways—through you, Madam Chairman, to
Councillor ABRAHAMS. You can't say to the residents Council's going to come
and resume your homes; I'm going to find you a park somewhere else.
Of course Councillor ABRAHAMS has more form on this because she wanted
to turn a park down in East Brisbane into a car park for a smash repair car
business. So the nuts and bolts of this issue comes down to whether or not you
can believe the Australian Labor Party when it comes to their passion and
commitment for delivering parks, or whether you look at their track record and
what they said about parks.
There is about 127 hectares of park in the Gabba Ward.
Councillor ABRAHAMS would go, there's not enough park, there's no park,
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 70 we've got hardly any parks. Madam Chairman, I've done the maths, figured it
out, listed them out, added them up; 127 hectares or just over 127 hectares of
park and a really corkingly good one called South Bank which a lot of people
visit but it's still a park in South Brisbane.
We on this side of the Chamber have delivered a number of new parks over the
last eight years. We've built Frew Park, we've built Ken Fletcher Park, we've
bought and are in the process of consulting with the community about the park
at Vulture Street and we continue to deliver parks.
Those on the other side of the Chamber like to cause fear and concern in the
community. They don't like to work in a collaborative, cooperative way that's
constructive. They don't want to vote in support for projects that deliver parks
across the city and, Madam Chairman, this motion today is nothing but purely
politics for the sake of politics from Councillor ABRAHAMS who's trying in
her little bit of time left here to push her legacy one more time, when she's got a
track record and form on this particular issue.
She's got a track record and form and so we won't be supporting this motion
because it took—
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor BOURKE:
Well you can make the noises, but it took you three goes to get the thing right. I
mean you couldn't even write a competent motion. The Chairman had to help
you sought it out at the start of this debate just before—through you,
Madam Chairman, to the Councillors opposite.
You can't even get the motion right. You stood up and you didn't even speak to
the motion that you presented Councillor ABRAHAMS, and as I said, you can't
get the words right in this place and you go out to the community and you tell
them a different story as we've seen time and time again, not just on parks but on
other projects in this Council.
So for those reasons, Madam Chairman, we won't be supporting this motion
that's before us this evening.
Chairman:
Further debate?
Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I just seek to clarify a matter in the debate or
I can do it as a point of order as you prefer. But I understand that you ruled out
the notified motion on the grounds that the motion was incompetent, but we did
not get a reason for that. I am just seeking the reason the motion was—
Chairman:
Certainly Councillor JOHNSTON. Because the original notified motion was—it
was pre-emptive of the development application process and this Council cannot
approve or debate a motion that is incompetent on the basis that it subverts the
Council's due processes.
Further debate?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order then, Madam Chairman?
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I refer you to section 37 of the Meetings Local Law which notes that there are
five grounds that a matter is defamatory, prejudice, another investigation into
that matter, i.e the legal matter, there's confidentiality issue, there is legal
professional privilege, or there is a legal impediment.
The fact that it's pre-empting the City Plan is not grounds for—
Chairman:
No, Councillor JOHNSTON I did not say it was pre-empting the City Plan. I
said quite specifically that it was pre-emptive of the development application
process which is a statutory process and therefore to have passed a motion or
debated a motion in that regard would have been subject to legal impediment.
So therefore I have ruled it out of order.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 71 Councillor JOHNSTON:
Okay, that's good. I've got your reason, so point of order, Madam Chairman. I
move dissent in that. If there's no DA there is no legal process that is grounds to
refuse this motion, so I move dissent in your ruling.
The dissent motion lapsed for want of a seconder.
Chairman:
There's not a seconder in that dissent motion and certainly
Councillor ABRAHAMS mentioned in her speech that there were DAs pending
if you had been listening.
Further debate?
Councillor DICK?
Councillor DICK:
Look thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to support this motion tonight and I want to be
very clear—what we've just heard from the Chair of Parks and Environment is a
Chair of Parks and Environment who doesn't support parks in Brisbane. That's
exactly what we just heard and on the record tonight—on the record—
Councillor interjecting.
—well Councillor BOURKE, you had your go; now you're going to listen to
what I'm saying.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor DICK:
Now you're going to listen because you like giving lectures but you don't like
hearing any criticism, just as the ingrain built inside the LNP to squash all
dissent which is all they’re all programmed to do. Take a look at the last State
election Councillor BOURKE and you'll learn a lesson.
So, Madam Chair, we know on this side of the Chamber because we've listened
to residents and through their local Councillor, Councillor Helen ABRAHAMS,
that there is strong support for parkland.
The LNP are only interested in increasing density against the community wishes
and not providing open space and parkland for future residents time and time
again. The Chairman is now laughing because he doesn't think the people of
West End deserve open space. He's not interested in listening to what they've got
to say.
I commend Councillor ABRAHAMS for—
Councillor BOURKE:
Point of order, Madam Chairman?
Chairman:
Point of order against you Councillor DICK.
Councillor BOURKE?
Councillor BOURKE:
Claim to be misrepresented, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Thank you.
Councillor DICK?
Councillor DICK:
Well I didn't say what you said so you need to be careful and listen,
Councillor BOURKE, to what I'm saying.
So, Madam Chair, we know that the Chairman of Brisbane City Council Parks
and Open Space, by not supporting this tonight, is not even worthy or willing to
listen to what the community is saying. It is the LNP's way to deal with open
space. We know all. We don't need to engage with the community. We don't
need to consult with the community. We've seen that time and time again.
All the residents of West End are asking for, and indeed all the residents of
Brisbane are asking for, is a fair go from this Council. They understand as our
city grows and as we see development they need a return and they need open
space, because it is good practise.
Once upon a time this Council would match developers when they would
develop for our city and we would provide that. We would show real leadership
when it came to protecting and delivering open space and park spaces.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 72 Listening to the rubbish and rhetoric, the ultra-conservative mantra from the
LNP, which of course has always, and always will be, against the environment
because they are climate change deniers—
Councillor MURPHY:
Okay, Point of order, Madam Chairman. I appreciate the debate is pretty
wide-ranging on both sides but can we get back to the motion please so we can
move on.
Chairman:
Thank you. I remind all Councillors that matters to be discussed are to be
relevant to the motion at hand please.
Councillor DICK:
Sure, thank you, Madam Chair. You can always rely on the young LNP young
fogeys to pull me into line like Councillor MURPHY, but we know by the clear
actions tonight that Councillors who are elected in this Council Chamber have a
clear choice tonight; whether they will support the actions of their local
Councillor and support the feedback from local residents who are demanding
this Council take action.
Don't worry Councillor BOURKE, don't worry, we will be reminding the
residents of West End when the choice came this evening to support their claims
and their reasonable and modest claims for open space and parkland in their
suburb you rejected and you voted against it.
We will remind them that no matter what happens in the campaign of when push
comes to shove, when the rubber hit the road, when the ask was put on the table,
you rejected their concerns. You ignored them and you said you know best.
Madam Chair, I'm delighted that Councillor BOURKE put all that on the record
tonight because I can give a commitment tonight through Councillor
Helen ABRAHAMS and the ALP candidate Nicole Lessio we will be reminding
them exactly what the LNP said when this motion was put forward.
For those other people on that side of the Chamber I ask you to listen to what the
community wants, just once. To actually listen to what the community is calling
for instead of the glib attacks, instead of all the political posturing that we see
time and time again from the LNP, from a tired Administration, from a Council
that's been in office for too long, who's become drunk on power and arrogant,
that you actually start listening to the community, start doing it because you
know what, don't listen to them and you will suffer the consequences at the
ballot box time and time again.
So tonight, Madam Chair, we will be supporting this. We'll be supporting it very
proudly and very clearly because the people of West End have put up for too
long with this LNP disregarding them. Now with the opportunity to right some
of their wrongs I'm proud to support this and I urge all Councillors to support it
tonight.
Chairman:
Misrepresentation, Councillor BOURKE.
Councillor BOURKE:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Councillor DICK said that I and this
Administration didn't support parks and didn't deliver parks for the people of
Brisbane. I'll just say Ken Fletcher, Frew, Thomas Street, Rochedale, Buranda,
Milton and the—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE—order.
Order.
Order.
Councillor BOURKE, that was way off topic on misrepresentation.
Further debate?
Councillor COOPER?
Councillor COOPER:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I rise to speak to the motion. Just you
wait Councillor FLESSER; anticipation is everything.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 73 Okay, so I rise to speak to the motion. I think this needed quite a bit of
proofreading and I think Councillor ABRAHAMS should thank you,
Madam Chair, for your assistance in getting her over the line to get a competent
motion.
So this seems to be a final attempt for Councillor ABRAHAMS to create a bit of
a legacy for herself. She's on the way out, she's departing for other spheres,
she'll be retiring at the election I understand, and of course it's time for her to
reflect on what she has delivered on behalf of her local residents.
So—
Councillor interjecting.
—Well I understand Councillor ABRAHAMS—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor COOPER:
I would understand Councillor ABRAHAMS that you have conveyed that you
are retiring.
So let's have a look at the facts. Councillor ABRAHAMS was in charge of the
Parks portfolio so she actually in her own website says, I'm quoting, “As
chairperson of the Environment and Sustainability Committee from 2004 to
2008 she delivered incentives for sustainable commercial buildings, the Climate
Change and Energy Action Plan and oversaw the resurgence in bicycle
pathways and infrastructure in our city”, unquote.
So that's self-proclaimed. No commitment to any new parks, however, despite
being the chairman for that particular portfolio. So that's quite clear and
incontrovertible.
So the South Brisbane Riverside Neighbourhood Plan let's have a look at that.
So it requires that sites over 10,000 square metres that 20 per cent of the site be
provided for public realm. So that provision is a requirement of the
Neighbourhood Plan and isn't related to any requirements of the
Priority Infrastructure Plan, the PIP, park requirements. However, the
South Brisbane Riverside Neighbourhood Plan does not cover the area east of
Montague Road around Rogers Street so it's not actually part of that
neighbourhood plan.
The sites that Councillor ABRAHAMS is referring to in Rogers Street sits in the
West End-Woolloongabba District Neighbourhood Plan, a different one. You'd
think she might know that as local Councillor but perhaps not.
So there's only one block of Rogers Street that sits in the South Brisbane
Riverside
Neighbourhood
Plan,
a
neighbourhood
plan
that
Councillor ABRAHAMS doesn't support actually, so it's interesting isn't it. She
supports it, she doesn't support it, well —so the DA that she references in her
commentary, actually she talked about it as the former Distance Education site.
There was certainly—I understand there was an application lodged on
9 November. It's been properly made under the Sustainable Planning Act (SPA)
on 19 November. So Council is going through the assessment. Of course it's
important to note that under SPA it would be premature and completely
inappropriate for us to pre-empt the outcome of the development application on
that site against the planning scheme. So that includes the PIP and the Local
Government Infrastructure Plan, the two respective infrastructure planning
devices.
So Council has not zoned the Distance Education site for a park or included it in
a priority infrastructure plan for park during the South Brisbane Riverside
Neighbourhood Plan or City Plan or Priority Infrastructure Plan for any
infrastructure planning process. In fact, Councillor ABRAHAMS and the
Australian Labor Party have zero credibility when it comes to planning for
parks, because Councillor ABRAHAMS in fact supports development on parks
because we know when it came to—and yes I am going there—when it came to
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 74 2008 Councillor ABRAHAMS put on her website a letter to the editor where
she said, and I quote, “I welcome the decision for ABC's headquarters to move
to South Brisbane”, unquote. There we go.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman?
Chairman:
Point of order Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Chairman, I just raise the issue of relevance. I appreciate you've allowed
a lot of debate, but we're now talking about the ABC at Toowong in 2008 and
that's—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Order.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Wherever it is, the ABC site, it's still—
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
—it's still not relevant to the debate about this particular motion.
Chairman:
Thank you Councillor JOHNSTON. I'm sure Councillor COOPER will come
back to the report.
Councillor COOPER.
Councillor COOPER:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I think it absolutely speaks to the motion. The motion
is calling on Council to commit to a new park and is using the criteria that
should be urgently delivered, when in fact the local Councillor has had lots of
opportunities to deliver all sorts of things in her local area, and she in fact
supported a commercial building on land that should be land available to
everyone in our community, should be freely available as open space. She was
quite proud to say that she did not have any objection to that occurring, and that
was in her own ward.
I hear she says to you here, so she thinks that's the right thing to give up this sort
of important valued space to our community to a commercial building. I
understand that certainly seems to me to be quite clear evidence that her rhetoric
is not actually in any way, shape or form consistent with the way she operated as
a local Councillor.
She also railed against us with the old Milton Tennis Centre. That was sport and
rec land—
Chairman:
Councillor COOPER the Milton Tennis Centre is probably straying a bit.
Councillor COOPER:
Absolutely, so it's important to note, Madam Chair, that his is a Councillor who
did not support the local neighbourhood plan so the South Brisbane Riverside
Neighbourhood Plan. She did not support it but now she's using those
provisions to try and make arguments that things should actually be delivered.
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS, please.
Councillor COOPER:
So it's interesting, when the Councillor has an opportunity to support the
creation of these sorts of spaces in her community, such as under the
Kurilpa Master Plan, this would have seen a doubling of public space, a new
one-hectare riverfront park, 3,000 square metres of riverfront open space at the
end of Brereton Street and an urban playground under the Merivale Bridge. She
did not support it.
So all of these opportunities that the local Councillor has had to actually deliver
these outcomes for her residents she has absolutely squibbed on, Madam Chair.
It's interesting to note—so let's be clear, the Australian Labor Party, the local
Councillor, she doesn't support new City Plan, she doesn't support the
South Brisbane Riverside Neighbourhood Plan, she doesn't support the priority
infrastructure plans. None of these things are endorsed by the local Councillor or
the Australian Labor Party.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 75 They have a longstanding policy of preferring development over park, so they
don't see—they don't support public space being provided as an outcome of the
development. We saw that at Toowong with that particular site, where huge
amounts—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman?
Chairman:
Point of order Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Chairman, she's still talking about Toowong and it's not relevant.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, if you had been listening to Councillor COOPER's
comments she was talking about the City Plan, the provisions in the PIP, the
new parkland and its relevance to the City Plan, the Neighbourhood Plan and the
PIP and the required development of that parkland and what has happened.
So I find that Councillor COOPER's comments are in line with what is
mentioned in the motion, but Councillor COOPER for clarity sake for the other
side if you could probably make it a little bit more specific in regards to the
location referred to in the PIP please.
Councillor COOPER:
So thank you very much, Madam Chair. This proposal put forward by the local
Councillor—a local Councillor that has been the representative for 12 years,
four of those years while she was the Chairman responsible for this area and she
could have delivered these sorts of outcomes—she seeks to be rewriting history
it seems, and yet she puts forward absolutely no suggestion as to how this
should happen, and she says it should happen as a matter of urgency.
So perhaps it's urgent to Councillor ABRAHAMS who's trying to rewrite
history books because she feels it's important to actually leave some legacy to
her local area. If she couldn't deliver this in 12 years then why is it urgent now?
If she's about to leave, exit stage right, why is it that this Council Chamber
should suddenly stand up and deliver on her commitment, because I think we
have all sorts of mechanisms in place to deliver infrastructure for our
community and that is the appropriate way to do it.
273/2015-16
It was moved by Councillor Amanda COOPER, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that the motion be
now put. Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion, that the motion be now put, was declared carried
on the voices.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS would you like your right of reply?
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair, I certainly do want my right of reply.
If you condense everything that we heard from the other side, it was a personal
attack on my integrity and that I have not been consistent and supported the
Neighbourhood Plan, the PIP, every park that has ever been approved in the
city, City Plan and everything that the LNP has proposed from that side of the
Chamber.
Well, Madam Chair, I'm in Opposition and that is unlikely. Just because I have
not supported parts of the Neighbourhood Plan and therefore don't support in
total because it's bad planning and I don't support the density, in no way means
that I do not support the provision of park, limited as it was in that
neighbourhood plan.
So Councillor COOPER your argument is completely spurious in that I have
supported this park and have defended and fought for the park. But,
Madam Chair, it is Councillor BOURKE who I think in his response really
needs most offence.
What Councillor BOURKE's comment was clearly that there was another park
at 68 Thomas Street and that I did not support that, therefore I support no parks.
With respect to 68 Thomas Street I supported the development application till
the very moment I knew it was being acquired for parkland, and then I told the
developer they did not have my support and wrote to that effect.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 76 I support the park in Thomas Street from the moment I knew what was proposed
on that site. The park in Thomas Street was always part of the Neighbourhood
Plan. So I didn't talk about Rogers Street park because that is a debate that we
have had. It is a debate that has been put by the LNP to obfuscate the facts.
Madam Chair, can I say clearly again, the argument I put up was that there is a
park that is in the PIP. It is not in Rogers Street we have learnt. Funnily enough
having Councillor BOURKE told me that I'd absolutely terrified everyone by
telling them it was in that sight, then in the next sentence, he said but the park is
in Rogers Street. Well Councillor BOURKE it is not in Rogers Street. It is
indicatively shown over Rogers Street, as we have debated here, but it has no
site at the moment.
Madam Chair, the issue I am saying is if it doesn't have a site soon there will be
no site for it and that is what this motion—and that is why we're debating it now.
It has nothing to do with 68 Thomas Street. That is a park; it was identified in
the Neighbourhood Plan. The park which we are debating was identified without
a site and it needs to find a location. 281 Montague Road was identified as a
park and the Neighbourhood Plan and it has disappeared. That is why this is
absolutely important.
The argument about the ABC site, certainly I supported the ABC site being
extended over an area that was nominally designated parkland that was mainly
used for bus parking, but you know what the community got as a result of that
development? They got the lovely grassed parkland area in front of Stokehouse
because that was the exchange. It was the exchange where the park was
relocated—don't you shake your head at me. It is my ward. I was there—I was
there with the Premier and that was the decision that was—
Chairman:
To the motion please
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
order.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Madam Chair, the ABC development I totally supported because it delivered a
riverside park.
When it came to this debate I didn't play politics. I just simply said we have a
decision to put a park, it hasn't got a location. My motion is to give it a location
as soon as possible. Nothing to do with my retirement, but the fact the
development pressures and the number of development applications means it
will not be possible.
Did the LNP address that once in the debate? No. Did they address the fact that
they've got a site for the park in this debate? No. Did they even say they
supported this park that is in the PIP? No. So, Madam Chair, don't let them think
that I am going to give in to their personal attacks which are puerile when the
issue here is a community needing a park for the 25,000 additional residents
coming into this area. That is more than any of the Neighbourhood Plan s we
have debated today, but they have had parks. All we're doing is trying to get a
park in this location.
Chairman:
I'll now put the motion.
274/2015-16
The Chairman submitted the motion to the Chamber and it was declared lost on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Milton DICK and Helen ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared lost.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 6 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS and
Nicole JOHNSTON.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 77 NOES: 18 -
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:
Chairman:
Councillors are there any petitions?
Councillor ABRAHAMS you have a petition?
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Oh thank you, Madam Chair. That was very kind to give it to me. I have an
ePetition. It is looking to maximise green space in West End Peninsula.
Chairman:
Councillor DICK?
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I have a petition from residents regarding a tree
removal.
Chairman:
Is there any further petitions?
Councillor WINES, may have a receipt for motion of the petitions.
275/2015-16
It was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Milton DICK, that the
petitions as presented be received and referred to the Committee concerned for consideration and report.
The petitions were summarised as follows:
File No.
Councillor
Topic
CA15/982632
Helen Abrahams
CA15/1002466
Milton Dick
Requesting Council maximize green space in the West End
peninsula
Requesting removal of a street tree in Kookaburra Place,
Doolandella
GENERAL BUSINESS:
Chairman:
Councillors are there any statements required as a result of a Councillor Conduct
Review Panel Order?
There being no Councillors rising to their feet, Councillors are there any matters
of General Business?
Councillor MURPHY?
Councillor MURPHY:
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. It gives me great pleasure to rise to
update the Chamber on the progress that's happening out at 880 Manly Road,
Wakerley on the Manly Road Park.
We hear a lot in this Chamber about the wonderful work that's happening down
at the Wynnum Central State School site; the enormous renovations, the amount
of tenants that are going in, the tenants that aren't going in there, but it's easy to
forget in all that that there is another community facility on the Bayside at
880 Manly Road, Wakerley, that has been undergoing construction for the last
four months.
Bulk earthworks are now complete. I can advise that just this week the
contractors have started preparing the new car park there. They've started
compacting; all the services are now installed; the drains are installed and the
site is now in its final form.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 78 Once the car park is complete, we will then hand over to the architects,
Heathwood Cardillo Wilson, and the client there, Wynnum Manly District
Meals on Wheels, who will submit a development application for the site and
will eventually establish the Bayside's newest community facility and
Meals on Wheels kitchen there.
It is a very proud moment for me to say that we will be taking them off you,
Councillor CUMMING, as I said at the Christmas party the other night, because
we love them so much and we need them to service more residents in the
Bayside. I note when I say that they will continue to service all of
Councillor CUMMING's residents, but they will be able to service
Councillor SCHRINNER's residents for the first time as well, enhancing and
improving what is a vital service in our community. The ability for people who
are elderly or infirmed or otherwise unable to provision meals for themselves, to
be able to get fresh hot meals in their home delivered twice–daily is an
absolutely essential service.
It allows people to continue to age in place all around our community and it's
great that we will see them in a new facility there at 880 Manly Road, Wakerley.
I did commend the President of Wynnum Manly District Meals on Wheels,
Ken Edwards, at the Christmas party for his very diligent work. Ken is a man at
a very advanced age, he's in his 70s, but he still maintains the presidency of that
organisation and has been absolutely diligent in attending the many meetings
that have been requested of him on behalf of Council officers and the architects
in going through all the preliminary approvals, all the correspondence that goes
back and forth between Councillor ADAMS' department and
Councillor BOURKE's department within Council to make sure that everything
is on track for the site there.
It's also very generous of him to have incorporated in their facility a provision
for sporting facilities underneath the building. Underneath the building will be
left vacant in the event that Council will be able to provide a space there for
Bayside Netball or any other sporting facility that may eventually be interested
in becoming a tenant on the site. We're of course reserving the balance of the
site that's unused by the parkland that will be there and the Meals on Wheels
facility and car park for future sporting use. It is the perfect site for netball or
volleyball or some other small ball sports.
Of course the site name, 880 Manly Road, as I said at the Christmas party, isn't a
very catchy name and neither is the D number which it's currently under
Councillor BOURKE's archaic system. But it was a great pleasure for me to
announce to the assembled Christmas party, Madam Chair, that we will be
renaming in the New Year the facility after Bill McFarlane who gifted the land
which Wynnum Manly District Meals on Wheels sold, which gave them the
money to build the site at 880 Manly Road, Wakerley.
So that is a fantastic way I think that this Council will be honouring
Bill McFarlane for the great service that he's provided, not only to the
Wynnum Manly Marching Girls and Meals on Wheels, but as we know,
community champions like Bill who are involved in many aspects of life in the
Bayside.
McFarlane Field has since disappeared from the Bayside, but it gave me great
pleasure to advise on that night and here in the Chamber tonight that
McFarlane Field will soon return to the Bayside to be a permanent part of our
history and of our parkland assets in that part of the world.
So, Madam Chairman, a great result for Bill and his family and a great result for
both my ward, Councillor SCHRINNER's ward and Councillor CUMMING's
ward as well with this new facility about to be constructed. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further General Business?
Councillor JOHNSTON?
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 79 Councillor JOHNSTON:
Oh hurray, thank you. I rise to speak today on several local issues including the
Sherwood Community Festival, a Yeronga State High School student, the
Active School Travel program, and development in Yeronga.
I'd like to start with the good news. Firstly, on 13 November the annual
Sherwood Community Festival was held. Yes, thank you to Councillor DICK
and Councillor BOURKE; they both actually provided a little bit of funding this
year in addition to the funding I provide, and Council also provides as an
organisation. So I thank them for that.
As usual the event was absolutely fantastic. We had clear skies, a beautiful
evening. You could not move on Sherwood Road, it was absolutely brilliant. I
just want to particularly thank Vivienne Rogers, the president of the festival and
her hardworking team. There are a core group of about 10 men and women who
meet right throughout the year to make this festival happen. They work
incredibly hard dealing with a lot of Council red tape I'm sad to say, but they
always put on a brilliant festival, and I do believe this was the best yet.
The LORD MAYOR was missed. He normally does come to this festival but
was not in attendance. So I'm not sure if they had something else on, but I was
very pleased to fill in and open the Sherwood Festival this year which was an
absolute privilege for me so I was very lucky.
I just want to say it's the 20th anniversary of this festival. It is a brilliant part of
what it means to live in Sherwood. It was started by Dr Mackenzie, a local vet,
who wanted to revitalise the Sherwood shopping precinct, and every year this
festival gets bigger and better.
So again my thanks to this hardworking volunteer committee of local residents,
all of the sponsors who have contributed and particularly to Viv Rogers and her
team of hardworking people. I say thank you for your hard work.
Secondly, the AFL draft is actually underway right now and we have a
distinguished local Brisbane boy, Mabior Chol, who has just graduated from
Grade 12 at Yeronga State High School who is in the draft tonight.
He is a Sudanese refugee who is an outstanding athlete for the district, for his
school, for Queensland; plays all kinds of sport, he's an absolutely brilliant
sportsman. I want everybody to cross their fingers tonight that Mabior is
selected in the draft, and I'm sure we would all send him our best wishes tonight
knowing that he has the opportunity to become a professional athlete and a
professional AFL player. I just have all my fingers crossed that he will do well.
He is, by all accounts having met him a couple of times, a delightful young man
as well, and I know that given the hardship in his background, being selected to
play professional sport would be a wonderful achievement for him and his
family. So I wish him well and please cross your fingers for Mabior tonight.
Third bit of good news is I have to say I was very, very excited—the south side
swept Councils 2015 Active School Travel Awards—and I'm delighted to say
that Yeronga State School won School of the Year. They've put in a brilliant
effort over the course of the year with more than 60 per cent of students actively
travelling every week. There was such a range of creative programs that we ran.
I'm delighted to support all the schools that I started with eight years ago and
I've continued to support them all the way through.
I just want to say congratulations to Debbie and to Brett for all their hard work
in making this program a success. To all of the families who've been
participating and the teachers of Yeronga State School thank you very much for
all of your hard work. I know we're looking forward to it again in 2016.
Junction Park State School, who've won twice previously, also won the
School of Excellence Award and I mean they are extraordinary. If there is any
school in Brisbane that should look at the model for Active School Travel and
how it can be holistically incorporated into your school community,
Junction Park State School is a brilliant example of that.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 80 It's hard to explain unless you're there. Everybody pitches in. It is a wonderful
environment. The kids love actively travelling. They regularly have 85 per cent
of their kids, that's a huge amount, actively travelling every week.
So I want to say to Chris, all the teachers at the school and all the parents, Adam
who bakes for our committee, thank you to all of the students, well done, and
their families I appreciate it.
Finally with respect to development in Yeronga, I'm extremely concerned about
a process that is unfolding at the moment with respect to 115 Hyde Road,
Yeronga. A pre-lodgement has been held with Council on the site, and
presumably there will be a development application coming forth.
The developer has put out an anonymous flyer in my community without their
name on it, basically saying that Council has encouraged them to do
consultation about this site. They subsequently have now put out a second flyer
that at least has their name on it, which is an improvement over the first flyer,
and they are holding a series of—they're not public information sessions, you
have to register to attend, so this is no way an open and public process that is
being held by this developer.
Now this developer I know has spoken to Council about its plans through the
pre-lodgement process, but it is telling my community that there is a blank slate
for its development. I have seen unfortunately the way they are scaring the
community that I represent with respect to the development at 115 Hyde Road.
The disgusting photos that they showed the residents in my area of tract housing
that didn't even look like it was in Australia; no trees, no facilities, nothing that
would ever be allowed by this Council under our City Plan even under this
LNP Administration.
The developer is trying to convince residents that that is the type of development
that could happen in their area. It is just inappropriate what they are doing. They
are telling my community that this is a Council-endorsed process. There are no
Council officers involved in it. It is not a neighbourhood planning process, it is
not a master planning process, and I'm extremely concerned about the
misleading nature of what is going on and ultimately what the developer may do
when it lodges its development application.
This Council has refused two previous DAs in this area, both of which were
wanting high-rise, 13 storeys, eight storeys and so on. High-rise development is
not appropriate in this part of Yeronga West. It is a low density environment, it
is very much a family area, it is not in Council's City Plan strategic growth area,
it is not targeted for any kind of development under any planning instrument for
the State or Council, and it is absolutely outrageous that developers are
continuing to try and push for high-rise development in this part of Yeronga
along Hyde Road.
I'm extremely concerned that these development applications continue to come
and it takes years for this Council to do the right thing after objections from me,
from residents, and we are left in a terrible situation where we have to fight off
completely inappropriate development.
Now I'm not allowed to say what I've seen in the pre-lodgement meeting
because it is confidential, but I know what this developer is up to and I will
certainly be holding them to account against the City Plan.
This Council should be undertaking a proper Council-led planning process prior
to allowing development to continue across this precinct in the way that it is. It
is not appropriate for our community to have to fight off developer after
developer for an inappropriate development in this part of Yeronga.
I am also concerned about the RSPCA development. Council has finally told
them that seven storeys is too high after substantial objection from me and 300
from our community, but remember the LORD MAYOR could have had this
site for free—for free, not $5 million like over in Indooroopilly Ward—he could
have had the RSPCA site for free from the State Government, but the
LORD MAYOR and this LNP Administration knocked it back.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 81 They knocked back a free parcel of parkland and as a result the
State Government sold it off to a developer and we are now fighting off
inappropriate development in Yeronga. This type of process is not reasonable.
This Council needs to lift its game when it comes to assessing development in
Yeronga. This is not a place where we want to see high-rise development, and I
am absolutely certain the community does not want to see high-rise
development in Yeronga West.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON your time has expired.
Further General Business?
Councillor WINES?
Councillor WINES:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'm just going to speak briefly to give recognition
to two retiring Councillors from the Moreton Bay region to the north of my
ward.
At next year's election it will be the end of an era for the Moreton Bay and
Pine Rivers region with Councillor Bob Millar, a 16 year veteran of that region
retiring, and he's been representing the Samford area for a long time—for that
whole period Samford and part of Camp Mountain.
I'd like to thank him and recognise him for his service and friendship over the
last eight years. It's been good to get to know Bob and his family and I wish
them all the best in their new endeavours.
But I rise especially to recognise the efforts of Councillor Brian Battersby who
assures me that he is the longest serving shire Councillor in Queensland, and
there's many ways to define that, but he is. I've checked it with him and I'd like
to thank Brian for his friendship and his generosity over our time serving
together. We share many community groups and an extensive border at Kedron
Brook at the north-west of the city.
I remember when I was a brand new Councillor he took me aside and he said
there are three keys to success and they are—and this is—I provided this to you
Brian to prove that I was listening—return your phone calls, carry a notebook
and a unified council is a re-elected Council. I said to him it's a little bit different
in a partisan environment to be united, but he assured me that that was the
secret, and a man who's been elected 14 times is probably someone we should
pay attention to on these matters.
I very much enjoyed hearing his early stories as a man who agreed to run for
Council because his good friend, Brian Burke, asked him to fill a ticket for what
was a multi-member electorate at the time. Then Brian won, much to his own
and many people's—against their expectations, and he's eclipsed everyone on
that Council and he's the only person to have survived two major changes—the
move to single-member electorates and the move from Pine Rivers to
Moreton Bay, and so well regarded by his own constituents that between 12
elections he was not contested.
So Brian I'd like to thank you again for all your support and friendship over the
last years, and to recognise your efforts for 40 years representing the people of
Pine Rivers and Moreton Bay Regional Council.
Chairman:
Further General Business?
Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise tonight to speak on the retirement of the former
chairman of Foodbank, Ian Brusasco.
After 19 years Ian has called it a day as one of Brisbane's leading business
identities and of course as a former alderman in this place as the long term
Councillor for the CBD and surrounds.
I want to pay tribute tonight particularly to Ian's work as chairman of Foodbank.
There are around currently 21,000 people—are currently homeless in
Queensland; 580,825 Queenslanders live below the poverty line; 10.9 per cent
of children live in poverty; one in four pensioners live in or close to poverty, and
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 82 25 per cent of households located in disadvantaged areas of Brisbane are
food-insecure.
Now many of us in our work as local Councillors have the privilege to be able to
work with churches, community organisations, which provide food hampers,
food support to many of the marginal and disadvantaged in our community, and
all of them really have one thing in common; they all rely on the generosity and
the donations from Foodbank.
Now I've been privileged to have a bit to do with Foodbank over the years
through some of my organisations, and I think it's safe to say, without the work
of Foodbank literally tens of thousands of Queenslanders would go without.
Foodbank was established because this was this identified need, and over the
years it's gone from strength to strength, really now as an integral part of looking
after the marginal and disadvantaged in the community. A lot of that has had to
do with the drive and passion and dedication of Ian and the board at Foodbank;
volunteers in design, volunteers by all of their work that they've done over so
many years.
I know speaking with Ian over the years how proud he has been of the work of
Foodbank. He's been ably supported by his loving wife of many, many years,
Patsy, and tonight I wanted to place on record on behalf of Labor Councillors—
and I'll go as far to say on behalf of all Councillors—for the great work that
Foodbank has done, particularly under the leadership of Ian Brusasco.
Chairman:
Further General Business?
Councillor MARX?
Councillor MARX:
Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak very briefly on the graduation of
all the Year 12 students that has happened over the last couple of weeks.
Various schools; obviously usually the private Catholic schools finish up first
and then the State schools one by one finish as well, and I know a lot of the
students have headed down to the Gold Coast.
So I just wanted to say to them all, as I was asked to speak at the
Islamic College Year 12 graduation last week, and as I said to them, I was
sitting there wondering what I would say to these students who are going off
into the big wide world and then I thought to myself well I'll say to you what I
would like someone say to my child and to me as a mother of a Year 12
graduating students. It's a happy time but it's also a sad and scary time. The next
six weeks of the holidays are the time to sit back and reflect on everything that
you've done for the last 12 years at school. It's a time to have a bit of a break,
have some sleep in, have some fun with your family and friends, but then as the
year draws to a close and 2016 starts, you need to start thinking seriously about
what you want to do with your future because it is a very important decision that
you need to make.
But ultimately I want as a mother, as every mother wants all their children to be,
is to be healthy and happy and have lots of fun. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further General Business?
Councillor CUMMING?
Councillor CUMMING:
Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of being
involved with a program called One Tree Per Child. It's an organisation that's
tied up with the Griffith University EcoCentre. The process was started at
Lota State School. I joined a fellow called Jon Dee who's one of the people who
started up the program.
It was originally started I'm told by Olivia Newton-John and Jon Dee. They
were the directors of the successful National Tree Day. During that time Olivia
and Jon fronted National Tree Day, 10 million native trees and shrubs were
planted across Australia and hundreds of thousands of children were involved.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 83 The new initiative aims to have every child planting one tree as part of a primary
school activity and Lota State School was lucky enough to be the first school in
Queensland to get involved with the program.
So about 30 children joined myself and Jon and the trees were planted,
accompanied by the school principle, Victoria Hyne. The planting will help to
build a green wall along one side of the oval, with young minds exposed to the
many benefits of tree planting, and I'm sure there'll be good shade there in time
to come.
Any other Councillors interested in involving the program should contact the
One Tree Per Child website and I can give you the details, or call the
Griffith University EcoCentre.
The other thing I just wanted to mention too—sorry I should have mentioned
that at the start—one was streets to be resurfaced. Now I'm sure I reckon I heard
a couple of weeks ago Councillor SCHRINNER got up and said the list of
streets that are being resurfaced was—the additional streets being resurfaced
was going to be on the website, and I think he told me it was already there. I still
can't find it and no one else I know can.
But I know Councillor SCHRINNER has now handed out a list of the streets to
be resurfaced. The only problem was the LNP candidate got it before me so
that's—
Councillors interjecting.
—oh, it's my fault, sorry. That's right, yes.
The other thing was the CBIC. I know Councillor—this was mentioned
earlier—oh CBIC I meant to mention that too—I read the report last week and
I'm still—as from the outset on this side of the Chamber we're a bit dubious
about their rate of return figures, because I was thinking how did they get the
property. For example, the Wynnum Central State School property. How did
they get that? They paid Council for it did they? They bought it off Council or
Council just gave it them because a lot of developers would probably tell you if
they were given the land and didn't have to pay for it they'd make a pretty good
return on it sort of thing.
So I was looking through the report and they actually purchased the site from
Council with considering of issuing one million ordinary shares of one dollar
per share. Now again I still think that's a pretty good deal because out there in
the real world someone who'd acquired a property would have had to probably
borrow the money and pay interest on that money to be able to develop it and
get a rate of return.
There's 375 Hamilton Road, Chermside; they'd issued 350,700 shares.
225 Progress Road, Richlands; 662,551 shares. So, yes, I'm not sure that a rate
of return generated on properties acquired or issuing shares is comparable to
perhaps people operating in the real world not being given properties.
So I just query how accurate the figures for CBIC are. I'd like to know when its
report's going to be up on the website as well, and I think the rate of return
figures are what I would describe as somewhat rubbery figures.
Chairman:
Councillor HOWARD?
Councillor HOWARD:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I just wanted to update the Chamber about an
important gathering in Central Ward last week, the Transgender Day of
Remembrance Service at New Farm Park.
Transgender Day of Remembrance occurs annually on 20 November and is a
day to remember those who have been the victims of violence against this
community. Violence is never acceptable against any community, but
particularly the already marginalised, and on Friday past we came together at
our beautiful New Farm Park to remember, reflect and recognise the struggle for
many transgender people.
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 84 Standing before the crowd I saw a sea of faces of people whose identities and
life experiences were uniquely their own, but who all have one thing in
common; a common goal through Friday's international effort of calling for the
end of violence against people based on their gender identity or expression.
The Day of Remembrance allows us to raise awareness of the ongoing violence
and hate crimes against transgender people historically and still today, and
reminds us that there is still much to do to fulfil every person's right to a life free
from violence.
We have made great strides as a city with inclusiveness and access, but it is still
the sad fact that many transgender people face incredible obstacles in their
personal and work lives and in the community generally.
For me, for the LORD MAYOR and I'm sure for the whole Chamber, it is
simply unacceptable that any Australian should be subject to violence, bullying,
intimidation and ridicule as a result of who they are, and as a small gesture but
with huge impact, we lit the Story Bridge pink, blue and white on Friday in the
colours of the transgender flag and have now turned the bridge red for the
upcoming commemoration for World Aids Day on 1 December.
So, Madam Chairman, transgender people themselves, not others, are the
experts on their lives and the issues affecting their community. I look forward to
continuing to walk alongside their community to gain an even greater
understanding and knowledge of their issues as we build an even more inclusive
city.
Chairman:
Councillor ADAMS.
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I stand to speak on the proposal for retirement living
on Tarragindi Bowls, and I see it's very disappointing that the Councillor for
Moorooka is no longer joining us in the Council Chambers because I think it's
very important that we correct some of the very clear untruths that we heard this
afternoon from those on the other side.
What we have before us here is a proposal by a company trying to gauge support
from the local community about retirement facilities being developed on the
Tarragindi Bowls Club with the Yeronga RSL.
There has actually been two information sessions held by that company
organised last Saturday afternoon and Thursday night to gauge that feedback
from the local residents. I attended both sessions and I spoke to many residents,
and I addressed the group that Councillor GRIFFITHS gathered outside the
forum as well.
I'd just like to correct the record; I was not yelled at by anybody in that forum.
They were more than polite. They did ask me some questions which I happily
answered as well, but it was not an angry forum. They were there to find out
information as was the information sessions set up for.
I made it very clear at that opportunity that I do not support this proposal, and I
have never told anybody else anything different, contrary to what
Councillor GRIFFITHS claimed this afternoon. In fact, I stood up at the public
meeting to make it very clear to the locals that I was agreeing wholeheartedly
with the words of Councillor GRIFFITHS and the local member, Mark Bailey,
who had spoken before me.
Councillor GRIFFITHS stated very clearly, and I wrote it down word for word, I
do not support it in its current form. That is not an opposing comment. That is I
do not support it in its current form. It should be more like LMR. They were his
actual words. I agreed with his actual words.
Mark Bailey said it was over the top, there is a need for open space requirements
into the future, it needs to be adjusted to a more reasonable height. I agreed with
Mark Bailey MP on his comments on this proposal as well.
Of course what do we see from the Councillor of Moorooka as soon as I agreed
with him? He jumped up screaming going oh no, no, no, I'm going to change
what I say, I'm going to change what I say, I actually oppose it now. The
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 85 interesting thing from that is my understanding that the Yeronga RSL board who
was putting this proposal forward might be very surprised to hear that their local
Councillor has done a 180-degree turn on a proposal that he supported to them
in recent conversations.
The other things we hear from those on the other side that is constantly being
used in this debate is that City Plan 2014 has changed the rules on what can be
done on sport and rec land. Now under City Plan 2014 this club is zoned sport
and rec. Under City Plan 2000 it was zoned sport and rec. There is nothing in
the City Plan that makes this development any more favourable now than it was
in City Plan 2000.
I made that very clear at the public meeting on Thursday night, and if you have a
look on local Facebook posts the locals are starting to understand that there is a
political agenda by their current Councillor and my Opposition.
The thing to remember is that there has been no DA lodged on that site, so the
motion that we heard earlier today from Councillor GRIFFITHS that we need to
oppose this DA—One; there is no DA that has been opposed on this site. There
is no DA lodged and Councillor GRIFFITHS knows full well, as does the local
MP who reiterated these comments with me on Thursday night, that under the
State Government's planning legislation Council cannot refuse to assess an
application.
Councillor GRIFFITHS knows that but he still grandstands in this place, tells
people one thing, does another; incompetent motions which we've seen all day
from those on the other side. We cannot outright reject a DA that has not been
submitted, let alone if one that is submitted it needs to be assessed under the
Sustainable Planning Act.
It was an incompetent motion that was put forward this afternoon and it
deserved to be voted down as it was. Any application for a retirement facility on
this site will trigger the highest level of assessment under Council's City Plan. It
will be impact assessable. They will have full at least 15 business days of
advertising which will obviously be notified in our usual manner of every road
frontage local newspaper. I'll be definitely telling the local community; I'm sure
Councillor GRIFFITHS will be as well.
This will have full community consultation through the submission period as
well. So I just remind those in the place here tonight that there is no application
that has been put forward for aged care or retirement facilities. The applicant
made it clear last Thursday night to all of those—not hundreds, but many tens of
people—that were there that they have withdrawn their proposal and they are
going back to the drawing board. The ball is in their court. Thank you,
Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Further General Business?
I declare the meeting closed.
QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:
(Questions of which due notice has been given are printed as supplied and are not edited)
Submitted by Councillor Shayne SUTTON on 19 November 2015
Q1.
What was the total cost of running the Lord Mayor’s political office in the following financial years:
Financial Year
Total cost of running the Lord Mayor’s office
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 86 -
Q2.
What is the budget for running the Lord Mayor’s political office in the 2015/16 budget?
Q3.
What was the total staffing costs for the Lord Mayor’s political office in the following financial years:
Financial Year
Total staff Costs
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Q4.
What is the total staff budget for the Lord Mayor’s political office in the 2015/16 Budget.
Q5.
What was the total amount spent on domestic travel for staff and elected representatives in the
following financial years (if all information is not readily available I will accept any information that
can be accessed in a timely manner):
Financial Year
Total cost of domestic
travel for Council
Officers
Total cost for of
elected
representatives
Total cost across the
organisation
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Q6.
What is the total amount budgeted for domestic travel for staff and elected representatives in the
2015/16 financial year?
Financial Year
Total cost of domestic
travel for Council
Officers
Total cost for of
elected
representatives
Total cost across the
organisation
2015/16
Q7.
What was the total cost for design print and distribution of corporate publications for Brisbane City
Council across all Council programs in the following financial years (if all information is not readily
available I will accept any information that can be accessed in a timely manner):
Financial Year
Total Design
Cost
Total Print Costs
Total
Distribution
Costs
Total Combined
Cost across the
organisation
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Q8.
What was the total cost for all other corporate promotional material and marketing collateral (including
branded merchandise eg pens, balls, blankets, bags, hats, t-shirts, drink bottles etc) for Council events,
activities and programs in the following financial years (if all information is not readily available I will
accept any information that can be accessed in a timely manner):
Financial Year
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Total Costs
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 87 2013/14
2014/15
Q9.
What is the total budget for design print and distribution of corporate publications for Brisbane City
Council across all Council programs in the following financial years in the 2015/16 Budget.
Q10.
What was the total budget to purchase all other corporate promotional material and marketing collateral
(including branded merchandise) for Council events, activities and programs in the 2015/16 budget (if
all information is not readily available I will accept any information that can be accessed in a timely
manner):
Q11.
Can the Town Clerk provide the number of SQIDs, the number of floating litter traps and any
alternative devices to capture and remove litter from Brisbane waterways so that the litter does not flow
into Moreton Bay?
Q12.
Can the Town Clerk provide of the maintenance schedules for the difference type of litter removal
devices?
Q13.
Can the Town Clerk provide the average cost of maintenance of SQUIDS, the average maintenance
cost of floating litter traps and the average maintenance cost of any alternative devices?
Q14.
Can the Town Clerk provide the total maintenance cost of all litter reductions devices in Brisbane
waterways?
Q15.
Can the Town Clerk provide the total amount of litter that is collected from SQIDS, floating litter traps
and any alternative devices? The time period used for Council’s records would be adequate so long as
it was stated.
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN
GIVEN:
(Answers to questions of which due notice has been given are printed as supplied and are not edited)
Submitted by Councillor Shayne SUTTON (from meeting on 17 November 2015)
Q1.
Please advise the number of occasions Transdev have reported “Dual Duties” arrangements to be in
operation on Brisbane’s City Cat Services in the following periods:
Time Period
Number of Occasions Dual Duties have been in
recorded as being in operation
Financial Year 2011/12
Financial Year 2012/13
Financial Year 2013/14
Financial Year 2014/15
Financial Year 2015/16 to date as of
12/11/15:
A1.
The information requested in not readily available and would require every single shift being reviewed
over the last five years. The information requested would take an unacceptable amount of time to
collate within a timeframe that accords with the Meetings Local Law 2001. Retrieval and collation of
the material will cause an unacceptable increase in the workload or delay in the performance of
normal day to day services of Council Officers.
Q2.
Please advise the number of occasions Transdev have recorded passengers “left behind” at Brisbane’s
City Cat Stops for the following periods:
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 88 -
Time Period
Number of Occasions Transdev have recorded
passengers “left behind: at Brisbane’s City Cat
Stops
Financial Year 2011/12
Financial Year 2012/13
Financial Year 2013/14
Financial Year 2014/15
Financial Year 2015/16 to date as of
12/11/15:
A2.
Council does not have this information in financial years, only calendar years
2011
51
2012
117
2013
127
2014
46
2015 (year to date) 81
Q3.
Please advise the number of occasions Transdeve have recorded passengers “left behind” at Brisbane’s
CItyCat Stops while “Dual Duties” arrangements were in operation:
Time Period
Number of Occasions Transdev have recorded
passengers “left behind: at Brisbane’s City Cat
Stops
Financial Year 2011/12
Financial Year 2012/13
Financial Year 2013/14
Financial Year 2014/15
Financial Year 2015/16 to date as of
12/11/15:
A3.
Council does not have this information in financial years, only calendar years
2011
1
2012
8
2013
13
2014
2
2015 (year to date) 8
Q4.
Please provide the total cost of the “It’s a Wrap” City Cat Design Competition including staff time
spent developing the campaign
A4.
$2432.50
Q5.
Please provide the total cost of the recent Quest Newspaper Promotional Wrap for the “It’s a Wrap”
City Cat Design competition.
A5.
The Quest paper wraps were all a part of the Quest Partnership that was agreed upon with costs stated
above. The cost of the paper wrap is not discernible as it all fell under the partnership as a whole.
Council’s investment in the advertising package is $24,581. The major contributor to advertising costs
for this campaign is Quest.
Q6.
What was the net revenue to did Brisbane City Council receive from the King George Square car park
in the following financial years:
Financial Year
2010/11
2011/12
Revenue Received
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 89 2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
A6.
Financial Year
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
Q7.
Revenue Received
$4,229,582
$4,961,050
$4,844,036
$4,595,368
$4,533,739
What was the net revenue to did Brisbane City Council receive from the Wickham Terrace car park in
the following financial years:
Financial Year
Revenue Received
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
A7.
Financial Year
Revenue Received
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
$4,091,523
$4,492,443
$4,027,950
$3,761,562
$3,531,289
Q8.
What is the expected net revenue budgeted to be received from the King George Square car park in
2015/16?
A8.
$5,043,113
Q9.
How much net revenue is budgeted to be received from the Wickham Terrace car park in 2015/16?
A9.
$3,915,225
Q10.
What was the total amount spent on marketing and public relations across Brisbane City Council in the
following Financial years (if all information is not readily available I will accept any information that
can be accessed in a timely manner):
Financial Year
Total Amount spent on marketing and public
relations
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
A10.
Financial Year
Total Amount spent on marketing and public
relations
2010/11
2011/12
$12.08 million
$10.71 million
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 90 2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
$11.43 million
$12.11 million
$11.57 million
Note: By way of comparison with the last two financial years of the previous Labor administration,
$16.43 million was spent in 2002/03 and $13.24 million in 2003/04 (in today’s dollars).
Q11.
What is the total marketing and public relations budget for the each of Council’s 8 Budget Programs in
the 2015/16 Budget:
Program
Marketing and Relations Budget
Program 1
Program 2
Program 3
Program 4
Program 5
Program 6
Program 7
Program 8
TOTAL for the entire organisation:
A11.
Program
Marketing and Relations Budget
Program 1
Program 2
Program 3
Program 4
Program 5
Program 6
Program 7
Program 8
TOTAL for the entire organisation:
$846,000
$356,000
$9,000
$285,000
$0
$0
$23,000
$2,248,000
$11,392,000
Please note: Corporate overheads which fund a majority of ongoing public awareness projects such as
disaster preparedness, community safety and public health campaigns make up the difference between
program specific allocations and the total.
Q12.
What was the total amount spent on consultancies across Brisbane City Council in the following
Financial years:
Financial Year
Total Amount spent on marketing and public
relations
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
A12.
To isolate consultancy costs across all years would require examination and classification of all
transactions. Such a review would require considerable effort and resources due to the large number
of transactions and the additional information that would need to be collated to correctly classify
transactions as consultancy. The information requested would therefore take an unacceptable amount
of time to collate within a timeframe that accords with the Meetings Local Law 2001. Retrieval and
collation of the material will cause an unacceptable increase in the workload or delay in the
performance of normal day to day services of Council Officers.
Q13.
What is the total budget for consultancies across the each of Council’s 8 Budget Programs in the
2015/16 Budget:
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]
- 91 -
Program
Marketing and Relations Budget
Program 1
Program 2
Program 3
Program 4
Program 5
Program 6
Program 7
Program 8
TOTAL for the entire organisation:
A13.
To isolate consultancy costs across all years would require examination and classification of all
transactions. Such a review would require considerable effort and resources due to the large number
of transactions and the additional information that would need to be collated to correctly classify
transactions as consultancy. The information requested would therefore take an unacceptable amount
of time to collate within a timeframe that accords with the Meetings Local Law 2001. Retrieval and
collation of the material will cause an unacceptable increase in the workload or delay in the
performance of normal day to day services of Council Officers.
RISING OF COUNCIL:
6.52pm.
PRESENTED:
and CONFIRMED
CHAIRMAN
Council officers in attendance:
James Withers (Senior Council and Committee Officer)
Robert Southwood (Acting Council and Committee Officer)
Billy Peers (Personal Support Officer to the Lord Mayor and Council Orderly)
4485 (Ordinary) meeting – 24 November 2015]