Former Mayor of Manly, Sue Sacker, has initiated a petition to the NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell, Treasurer Mike Baird and Minister for Local Government Don Page, following the huge attendance at the Public Meeting organised by Good For Manly against Manly Council's plans to build a car park under Manly Oval and demolish existing infrastructure. (See Manly 2015 Stories below) The general sense that Manly Council is 'just not listening' to community concerns has motivated Ms Sacker to move the issue to another level. To Stop the Mega Debt - Sign Petition here.
0 Comments
Following major concerns from our community Precincts, and in particular Little Manly and North Harbour, Manly Council has now undertaken to focus on our street trees by commissioning a Street Tree Inventory of the entire Manly local area; and the development of a Street Tree Policy. This $70,000 project is now underway. One of the first steps is to take an inventory of what we have - how many street trees there are, what they are, which ones are significant and which ones are missing. This is a big task and the council is now asking for help from local precincts to document our tree scape. Once the information is in, it will inform council policy on managing trees in our area. Following recent concerns about the way that Ausgrid butchers our trees, at a recent council meeting Good For Manly councillor Candy Bingham asked the council to take the issue up a level and push for greater rights for all NSW councils over street tree management and the current practices of Ausgrid. This matter will be raised with Local Government NSW and with the Minister of Local Government. Have you had trouble with Ausgrid lopping trees in your street? Let us know here. Manly Council's introduction of a new digital car parking system for residents have caused major confusion and upset many locals. Replacing the old 'sticker on the windscreen' system, residents are now required to register their car number plate on-line, at the Council's website or Customer Service Centre. Instead of the convenient park and go system previously, residents are now need to go to the meter, punch in their rego number for for selected time period and then leave the ticket on their dashboard. The new system has particularly angered regular users of the ocean front who were under the misapprehension that they could park for free for four hours (the time limit as actually two). Council has now changed it to four hours following a motion by Mayor Jean Hay who admitted she was confused too. (This will be effective late March) So, if you haven't already registered your vehicles on-line, Click Here - otherwise you risk getting a nasty parking fine. The Manly 2015 "urban renewal" plan depends on pulling down Whistler St car park and selling off the land for a mixed retail-residential development. Then spending $40 million to build a new a car park under Manly oval - in a flood zone and further away from the shops. Here's a better idea - keep Whistler St. Whistler St car park is for the locals. It's right in Manly CBD, with no major roads between you and the shops. Manly oval car park - way over there on the wrong side of busy Belgrave St - will be for the tourists, who don't know where else to park. If you've got heavy shopping, or it's raining, the oval's too far away. Whistler St makes a profit - $700,000 each year. The oval car park? Maybe after 2030. And that depends on continuing low interest rates on our $30+ million loan, low car park maintenance costs and more people coming to Manly in cars. Maintenance costs. Whistler St doesn't cost a lot to maintain, because it's built above ground. The council already owns an underground car park - the one in Wentworth St - and it's by far the most expensive to maintain. The oval car park would be a multi-level construction, built in a known water course in a known flood zone. How much will we really pay? Whistler St car park does not have concrete cancer. We do not need to spend $5.2 million to bring Whistler St up to fire safety standards. Our advice is that the car park was built in the 1970s and need only conform to fire standards for an existing building. It would need fire stairs on the outside and additional sprinklers. Good For Manly's expert has assessed the upgrade at under $500,000. Whistler St is ugly. Yes it is. Here are some ways to make it beautiful. Install vertical gardens like the gorgeous creations at Central Park, Broadway. Put up murals. Install a screen on the side of the car park and show outdoor movies on it. Convert the small ground level parking area in front to a pedestrian plaza. A car park doesn't mind the noise. But people do. The Manly 2015 Plan is to build apartments on the Whistler St site. But that doesn't work with the rest of the plan, which is to revitalise Market Lane - right next door - and have wine bars and restaurants open till late. We save $30+ million. More if construction costs or interest rates go up. Are there any other good reasons to keep Whistler St car park? Let us know here. Viability of Manly Oval car park makes news in today's Sydney Morning Herald. "Mayor and state treasurer at odds" .
Good For Manly has just released a review of the due diligence reports on Manly 2015, in particular the proposed Oval Car Park, which raises a number of major concerns and important questions. It's a short report and worth a read. See copy below: Also, analysis by major Manly property owners:
Concerns Raised by Manly Chamber of Commerce:
Three working days before Christmas Manly Council has released its independent reports in relation to the feasibility of their Manly 2015 multi-million dollar Plan. At its core, the Plan features the demolition of the Whistler Street car park and Manly Library, and the construction of a car park under Manly Oval. The Oval car park planl has been particularly controversial with the Manly Chamber of Commerce and all resident precinct groups raising concerns about the financial viability of the proposal. Below are a copy of the Traffic Demand Study for the Oval Car Park, the Economic Retail Study, and the final report from KPMG which is based on information provided from the studies and Manly Council. Good for Manly's team of financial experts are reviewing the reports and we hope to have an assessment soon. In the meantime, it is of concern that Manly Council plans to submit its Capital Expenditure report to the Division of Local Government in January to proceed with the project before the elected Council members have had an opportunity to meet and discuss the findings. (The next Council meeting is 10 February 2014). You can view Manly Council's assessment of the reports here.
Breaking News: Update The $15m upgrade of Manly 'Boy Charlton' Swim Centre has now been approved by the Joint Regional Planning Panel (18/12/13) who previously raised concerns about the traffic & parking plans for the Centre. Some conditions have been applied to address the traffic and parking issues raised including the provision of a footpath on the northern side of the road. Many locals are still concerned that the road is too busy to accommodate the angle parking proposed. (See video demonstration above). The traffic report indicated that an average of 1012 vehicles currently use Kenneth Road. Many of these are school buses and commercial vehicles, which, with the width of the road at 13m is simply not wide enough to provide safe 30 degree angle parking on the southern side and parallel parking on the northern side . We believe that the proposed provision of traffic calming and reduced speed limit to 50km will only agitate, not solve, the issue.
The Mayor, Cr Jean Hay used her weekly newspaper column (Dec 14) to vow to "right the appalling decision made by the last Council to buy No 40 Stuart Street". Number 40, along with Nos 34 and 36 Stuart St which were bought years ago, was purchased as part of a 40-year vision to increase public land at Little Manly beach - a secluded Sydney Harbour jewel. But Cr Hay says No 40 cost too much - $4.25 million - which the council had to borrow, creating the "huge financial burden" of paying off $500,000 per year for the next ten years. In fact that's exactly what Monday's vote was all about. Public fury and the Land and Environment Court had stopped the council's Liberal block from selling public waterfront at No 34 and 36 to pay for No 40. So attention could finally turn to funding the purchase in another way. The business plan included - raising the timber house at No 34 and using the space underneath for a paid dinghy and kayak lock- up facility; using the house as the new home of the Manly Environment Centre, thus saving $75,000 per annum in rental on the centre's existing premises; and delaying the demolition of the house at No 40, meaning the council could continue to receive rent from the property. Changing the council's loan on No 40 to interest-only repayments was also considered but is not likely to be adopted as it more than doubles the cost of the loan - from $1.1 million in total interest to $2.7 million. Increasing Manly's Environment Levy by 50 cents per rateable property per week was also under consideration but does not seem a likely option. An immediate improvement to public land at Little Manly was on the cards as No 36, the smallest property, has been deemed for demolishion for some time, and the land landscaped for public use and additional outdoor boat storage. The council is to consider the business plan seriously at a strategic workshop in February 2014. Let us know here what you would like to see happen with the Stuart St properties. It's been a long, determined campaign by the Save Little Manly Foreshore Group but finally they have won! Little Manly foreshore will stay in public hands, as it should. This week Manly Council finally abandoned its plan to sell off precious public land at Nos 34 and 36 Stuart St. It's a shame it took months of community opposition and a defeat in the Land and Environment Court to persuade Manly's Liberal councillors not to sell off our waterfront. And it's a pity the Liberals wasted $200,000 of our money in court costs - especially when their argument for selling the properties was that they needed the money. The two properties are next to the only harbour boat ramp in the area and are loved by kayakers, canoeists, windsurfers and scuba divers, as well as boaties. The blocks were initially bought as part of a 40-year vision to increase open space at Little Manly beach, one of our harbourside gems. So the council's February decision to rezone the land to residential so they could sell it off, enraged the Manly community and galvanised opposition to the council's Liberal voting block. Mayor Jean Hay's line that the two blocks needed to be sold to finance council's recent purchase of No 40 Stuart St, was never credible. Until its knockback in the Land and Environment Court, the council hadn't seriously explored other ways to fund the new purchase, - such as making better financial use of its existing Stuart St properties or using "Section 94" development contribution funds, some of which are required by law to be used for this exact thing - open space acquisition. As well the council has no problem spending money elsewhere - it's planning a $16 million swim centre upgrade, and a lavish $80 million revamp to Manly's CBD including a $40 million car park under Manly oval. Both these issues have also been very controversial. On Monday (9th December 2013) the council rescinded its decision to rezone Nos 34 and 36. That means the two blocks stay zoned as community open space. Finally! No 38, the only property the council does not own in the Little Manly block, is still slated to be rezoned as residential. While some councillors and Save Little Manly Foreshore supporters are concerned about No 38 being rezoned to residential, Good for Manly believes the main battle has been won. Good For Manly councillor Candy Bingham congratulates all the Manly residents who fought to keep the land in public hands, particularly the Save LIttle Manly Foreshore group, and formally acknowledges the major job undertaken by Cr Barbara Aird who fought for the vision for years at Manly Council. A circling shark fin is every swimmer's worst nightmare, and the recent death of surfer Zac Young near Coffs Harbour has refocused our emotions on the danger that lurks beneath. But are we really at risk? And if we are, do shark nets - our current shark prevention strategy - actually work? Shark meshing off Sydney's beaches was introduced in 1937 following a series of fatal shark attacks, including several on the Northern Peninsula. Most people think the nets are to stop sharks reaching popular beaches, but that's not true. The nets are there to kill sharks - specifically big (two metre long) sharks. Not only is this a controversial practice at a time when we are trying to protect Australia's declining shark population, but the nets kills a huge number of other marine creatures as well. Late last month, a whale calf drowned after it became entangled in a shark net off Mona Vale Beach. And so far this season, six whales have been caught, and luckily rescued, from shark nets off Queensland. Added up over several years, the carnage is sickening. Over the last 20 years almost 4000 sea creatures have been caught in shark nets off the NSW coast alone. Of these, less than 150 were "target" species - great white or tiger sharks. A massive 96 per cent of deaths were "bycatch" - giving a total of 3795 dead dolphins, turtles, whales, seals, stingrays, penguins, dugongs and harmless sharks. In a further irony it's reported that 35 - 50 per cent of sharks caught in the nets are on the beach side. However the meshing program, which is run by the NSW Department of Primary Industries, has plenty of defenders. Most point to the fact that there has only been one fatal shark attack in the meshed area, which includes beaches from Newcastle to Wollongong, since the program began. And that's despite the huge popularity of our part of the coast, which is enjoyed by 2 million people every summer season. But Dave Thomas, founder of local conservation group Eco Divers, isn't buying. "The risk of having a shark encounter is infinitesimally small," he said. "There are five fatalities in the world per year. There are a lot of things that will get you before that - hippos, vending machines, coconuts." Mr Thomas says the nets, which are 150m long, six metres high and sit in 10-12m of water, are by no good as a barrier as sharks can swim around or over them. What the nets do do well, is act as "indiscriminate killers of everything". He has the support of Surf Life Saving NSW which, along with marine ecologists and environmental and animal welfare groups, is calling for more research into alternative shark protection measures. Ideas already on the table include radio signals, sonar technology, electric nets and swimmer education. There's no debate that swimmers should avoid swimming at dusk, dawn or in murky water. They should also stay out of the water when schools of bait fish are about, to avoid being accidentally bitten by a shark in a "feeding frenzy". As well, shark nets were introduced in an era when our coastal waters were often dirty and sometimes contaminated with offal and blood, which meatworks used to dispose of in public waterways. The situation is so different now, surely our swimmer safety approach should change too. Good For Manly supports research into alternatives to shark meshing. In the meantime we believe the shark mesh season should be shortened. The nets are currently in place between September 1 and April 30, which overlaps the whale migration season from late April to November. This is our debate. There are shark nets off Queenscliff, North Steyne and Manly. Let us know what you think. Help us take a fair shark net proposal to Manly Council early next year. Manly Council has knocked back a chance to resolve financial worries over its proposed oval car park. Today the council rejected a motion by Good For Manly councillor Candy Bingham to commission a realistic "revenue generating" forecast. Cr Bingham proposed that financial services company KPMG prepare a "sensitivity analysis" on the financial return from the car park based on 75 per cent concessional (free) usage. Cr Bingham said previous KPMG modelling had used the figure of 50 per cent use of free car parking, although the council's own surveys show free use actually accounts for 75 per cent of car park visits, as drivers take advantage of Manly's "two hour free parking" rule. Councillors opposing the motion said the council had already asked for financial forecasts on the project. But when General Manager Henry Wong was specifically asked if the 75 per cent figure would be used, he could only reply that he "would expect this would happen". As none of the councillors have seen the brief provided to the analysts preparing reports, we can only speculate on what they have actually been asked to review. According to Many Council's Manly2015 Bulletin dated 12th December, 2013 the following studies are underway: Study Timeline 1. Village Centre Development Mix Study Mid November 2013 2. Retail Centre Study Mid November 2013 3. Parking Demand Study Mid November 2013 4. Independent Due Diligence Advice late December 2013 5. Lodgement of CapEx to DLG January 2014 (Division of Local Government) 6. Lodgement of DA to JRPP March 2014 (Joint Regional Planning Panel) 7. Tender for Oval Car park May/June 2014 The fast pace and timing of this project is alarming with all major reports due over the Christmas holiday season. Mayor Jean Hay tried to criticize Cr Bingham during debate on the motion saying, "This is the 13th occasion you have brought concerns regarding this project to Council". But actually the council should be listening to the concerns raised not only by Cr Bingham and Good for Manly, but all nine of the resident precinct groups, the Chamber of Commerce and four of Manly's most prominent property owners. As the Liberal councillors keep reminding us - "let's see what the independent studies show". One would wonder however, if it was truly necessary to commission these very expensive reports when it would appear that the project is flawed. Council has spend $177,000 in the last financial year alone on consultants for Manly2015, and that was before all these reports were commissioned. In a victory for people power, Balgowlah Heights residents have forced Telstra to abandon its plan to build a mobile phone tower in the suburb. For over a year the telco has been trying to install a new antenna in the area to improve mobile phone reception but strong opposition from local residents and a well-organised campaign by the Balgowlah Heights Precinct group has been successful in stopping the tower. Telstra's initial choice of a site at New St West, only a few blocks from the local public school, enraged the community. Manly Council barricaded the New St West site and in January a resident chained himself to a pole during a determined community campaign that eventually forced Telstra to look for another tower location. The telco's subsequent choice of Balgowlah Bowling Club was also rejected by residents, as it would still have been too close to the school, as well as to surrounding homes. In October Manly Council unanimously voted against giving Telstra permission to build a tower on the club site. Balgowlah Heights Community Precinct and Manly Council suggested nearby Tania Park as an alternative site, but the telco said it was not suitable. Recently Telstra admitted defeat. In a letterbox drop to residents the telco said it had "exhausted all feasible options" to improve mobile phone coverage in the area. Telstra apologised to its customers but said it understood "the importance of listening to the community". (See copy of letter below) Good For Manly congratulates Manly Council, Balgowlah Heights Precinct and local residents who put good health ahead of good phone reception.
Alarm over figures for Manly Council's proposed new car park is behind a call for a fresh study into the $40 million project. Good For Manly councillor Candy Bingham will ask Council to commission a new "revenue generating" forecast by financial services company KPMG at its next meeting on December 2, 2013. This time the brief will be to use actual car park usage figures, including 75 per cent usage of free car spaces, as drivers take advantage of Manly's "two hours free parking" rule. Cr Bingham said previous KPMG modelling had used the figure of 50 per cent use of free car parking, although the council's own surveys show free use actually accounts for 75 per cent of visits. Cr Bingham is not alone in her concerns about the car park, which is part of the council's $80 million Manly2015 project. The Manly Chamber of Commerce, all the independent Manly councillors and Manly's precincts (residents' groups) are opposed to the plan in its current form. Recently, four of Manly's respected long-term property owners also queried the viability of the oval car park. Apart from worries over Manly 2015's financial viability, stakeholders are upset at the lack of public consultation on the plan and concerned that the car park will be moved further away from the CBD. But Manly Council says the plan will bring Manly's lane ways back to life and remove traffic from CBD streets. It aims to create a "heart" for Manly based around a new library in Market Place, as well as demolishing the Whistler St car park and building a new 800-space car park under Manly oval. Good for Manly fully supports the activation of laneways and creating a 'heart' for Manly in Whistler Street however we believe this can be done by revitalisation of existing infrastructure, rather than major redevelopment. See related Manly Daily article at http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/iphone/homepage.aspx#_article06cf8f9b-6153-40ef-8f8d-e2ac8a159ef5 UPDATE: More Talk - Less Action Needed .. Concerns are mounting about the haste at which Manly Council is pushing through its DA for the building of a Leisure Centre on the site of the Boy Charlton Swim Centre in Balgowlah Road, Fairlight, with questions being asked about the bland design of the building, the lack of change room facilities, questions are to why the centre needs a gym when there are already 14 in Manly, and the lack of meaningful community consultation. The Northern Beaches Breakers Water Polo Club (which has around 400 members) has now also submitted a solid business case for the area to include a polo pool which the current design doesn't. So why the reason for the rush? According to Council's General Manager to gain access to the $15m subsidised loan obtained by Council as part of the NSW Infrastructure program, everything has to be approved by December. But with a $16m price tag (including professional fees) does Manly run the risk of finishing up with a Centre that is not what the locals want or need? Public exhibition of the $15m upgrade of Manly 'Boy Charlton' Swim Centre now closed.
(An impressive 120 submissions were received) The plan includes the building of a new, all purpose aquatic centre which will include a 25 metre, 8 lane pool; seating for 150 spectators; a program pool, leisure pool & spa pool. In addition, the new centre includes a sauna and steam room, administration rooms, plants rooms, gymnasium and group fitness/multipurpose space and kiosk. Following community consultation both the 50 metre and 25 metre outdoor pools will be retained, as will the original change rooms. There will also be change rooms in the indoor facility. One of the features of the new development is the changing of the entry to the Centre from Balgowlah Road to Kenneth Road, with some 200 parking spaces provided on-site and as angle parking in Kenneth Road. The indoor centre has been designed with roofing to provide maximum natural light, and a sliding wall which can be opened when the weather is fine. The exhibition period is until 9th October 2013 and plans can be viewed at the Library or Council Chambers. The Joint Regional Planning Panel is the consent authority for this $15m redevelopment. Go to Council's website for more details UPDATE: Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water .... the future of the Little Manly Foreshore is in question again. After the Land & Environment Court’s recent ruling against Manly Council, it was hoped that the matter of rezoning of the foreshore land from ‘open space’ to ‘residential’ would be taken off the table. Instead, Manly’s Liberal Councillors have effectively delayed this for another month while further legal advice is sought. If Manly Council intends that the foreshore land be used as public parkland, why would the foreshore need to be rezoned to residential? The judgement by Justice Biscoe clearly stated that the Mayor's motion of December 2012 to sell-off the land was no longer valid. It's time Council revisited the four Architect designs which were commissioned in June 2012, but have never been made public, to look at how a park could be created on this land. Council should also prepare a draft plan of management for what is clearly COMMUNITY LAND and stop playing games. It has already cost around $200,000 in ratepayers money in court costs - image what a great park we could have created with that money. ======================================================================================== The judgement handed down by Justice Biscoe on 9/10/13 in the Land & Environment court against the sale by Manly Council of two parcels of foreshore land, currently zoned as 'open space' and extensively used by the community, was in favour of the resident action group. He found that the land at 34 & 36 Stuart Street was in fact 'community' land and therefore could not sold by Council without due process. Council is also to pay full costs. Great win for the residents of Manly and thanks and congratulations to the Save Little Manly Foreshore Group who worked tirelessly to make this happen, and Councillor Barbara Aird who has fought the issue in the Council Chamber for many years. A copy of the judgment is below:
You would be forgiven for thinking that TCorp (part of NSW Treasury) had given the Manly 2015 Plan the tick of approval - after all, all of Manly Council's promotional materials, including their Fact Sheet, brochure and 2015 website stated: "Manly2015 has been independently assessed by KPMG and TCorp" .... not so! Thanks to the hard work of the Good For Manly team, Council has now had to withdraw this statement and when asked is stating: "TCorp did not independently examine any of the business cases or financial assumptions of the individual projects". But that's just the beginning. Recently a meeting of all eight resident Precincts Executives on 19th August, 2013, resolved: "The precincts are opposed to Manly 2015 Masterplan in its current format and they want Council to: 1. Explore other options for the car park and library redevelopment 2. Include all major prospective developments, including Royal Far West, Manly Hospital & Manly Village Public School projects to fall within a more comprehensive Manly Masterplan. The Precincts expressed concern about the major technical, environmental and economic risks associated with the proposed car park as well as the potential for a serious negative impact on the future rates of Manly residents relocating the Whistler Street car park to under Manly oval. The movement against the car park under the Oval is growing despite Mayor Jean Hay's assurances that all proper processes will be followed. Good for Manly's financial experts have found that the budget figures for Manly2015 are flawed. For more on this, watch the quick video below: LATEST UPDATE - 26/9/13. Justice Biscoe of the NSW Land & Environment Court has reserved judgment to consider arguments from the Save Little Manly Beach Foreshore group and Manly Council before making a ruling in this matter. Thanks goes to the efforts of barristers Ingrid King and Justin Doyle and solicitor Bruce Woolf in representing the local residents to ensure that this vital matter of public interest was heard by the court. Also to the Save Little Manly Beach Foreshore group who have been fighting this issue tirelessly since Mayor Jean Hay's decision to sell in December 2012. ========================================================================================= It all started in December 2012 when the Mayor, Jean Hay, moved a Mayoral Minute that the Council-owned foreshore land at Little Manly Beach, 34 & 36 Stuart Street be sold to cover the cost of buying No 40 Stuart Street. The land to be sold has been owned by Council by more than 40 years, and zoned 'open space'. It forms part of the public space at Little Manly Beach and No 34 in particular, is used extensively as dingy and boat storage. A group of residents have got together to challenge the Council's sale of this land claiming it is 'community' land and can not be sold without consultation. The case is listed for 24 & 25th September 2013 in the Land & Environment Court. For a brief understanding of what the case is about - view the short video below. Great coverage on Channel 10 news on September 19, 2013 about the issue.
Update: At the Council meeting on Monday 9/9/13, following major protests by dog owners, a five month 'cooling-off' period was agreed to and a working party is to be established to address this issue. It's been an ongoing issue for years - the users of the playing fields vs dog owners at LMGraham Reserve at Fairlight. Following ongoing complaints about dog poo on the fields and kids getting covered in it during matches, the Council has stepped in to create a designated area for dogs by fencing off an area in the Reserve for dogs. Council’s planned area will be bounded along Kenneth Road and measures 130mtrs x 20mtrs. = 2,600 square metres for dog off leash area as a dog designated exercise area. See map below. The new fencing will cost $25,000 and contractors are expected to get working next week erecting it. Included in the area will be a tap for dogs water, a bin for the bags, and a park bench seat under the trees will be installed. Other off-leash dog areas in Manly are at: Seaforth Oval, Tania Park, North Harbour Reserve, Manly Cemetery and Manly Lagoon Park The Manly 2015 Plan is ambitious to say the least and with Capital Works expected to cost around $100m in the next four years to deliver a number of projects, alarm bells are starting to ring.
Top of the list is the proposed car park under Manly Oval which KPMG have costed around $40m (against Council's estimate of $33m). Next is the demolition of the Whistler Street car park and 18 year old Library with part of the site to be sold to developers for retail and apartments and the Library rebuilt (add another $35m). Then you have $15m for public domain works and a further $15m for the upgrade of the Manly Swim Centre. But is this ambitious 'Vision' a potential nightmare for Manly ratepayers. The oval car park development in particular is a high risk proposal. The Council's revenue-generating figures are based on 600 cars, every day of the year, paying $15 each ..... and if you include the two hour free parking option, then the car park will barely cover its operating costs, let alone pay-off the debt. An important point to remember - Council's have unlimited liability, as the ratepayers of these Council's have discovered:
Does Manly really need to be redeveloped? We don't think so! So much can be done to revitilise the area for a more modest , low-risk budget. Our 'Local's Plan' is just one approach. Why can't Council present another option - that is what could we do if we kept the Whistler Street car park & Library? I know a number of local architects who have plenty of great ideas. What would you do? It would be reasonable to say that there is confusion by Manly residents of the terms 'boarding house' vs 'affordable housing' due to the areas long history of boarding house accommodation. So here's some quick background: Under the NSW SEPP (State Environmental Planning Policy) legislation, which overrides local council's Local Environment Plans, new types of housing have been allowed in an attempt to overcome Sydney's housing crisis. These include 'New Generation' Boarding Houses and housing for seniors This type of housing has been referred to as 'affordable' but is not to be confused with social or crisis housing provided by the Department of Housing and others. Because the cost of land, and limited floor space ratios allowed with these developments within Manly, we are in effect talking about “Studio Rooms” not the old-style boarding house accommodation. $350 per week rent for a self-contained room with kitchenette & en-suite bathroom is targeting quite a different group of residents – fulfilling the need of accommodation for international students, young professionals and maybe even those in-between marriages! To get these types of developments moving quickly, the State Government has made them very attractive to developers with a number of usual taxes and Section 94 contributions removed. The policy also allows for smaller rooms, a limited need for providing car parking spaces and other amenities than would usually be required for a new development. Current examples of DAs for Boarding Houses include: 323 Sydney Road, Manly - 14 studios (no car park spaces) 135 Griffiths St, Balgowlah - 17 studios 112 Sydney Rd, Manly, 21 studios (6 car spaces) 120 Pittwater Rd, Manly, 10 studios (no parking) * (*No 120 Pittwater Rd was recently approved by MIAP following two years of to-ing and fro-ing. Although no car parking spaces have been provided, it was an agreement that residents would not be entitled to Resident Parking Permits.) To address the issue Manly Council recently made changes to its LEP in the hope of adding more controls to the developments, although, of course, at the end of the day it's the State Government's SEPP that has precedent. This LEP is currently on exhibition. Manly Council has released its latest images for the Manly 2015 Plan moving the focus away from the car park under Manly Oval to The Library. The $80m plan is more of a re-development of Manly rather than a re-vitalisation with experts saying that if the Plan goes ahead the Whistler Street triangle will be a construction site for years. This will affect the livelihood of the dozens of businesses that are now trading in the area. Part of the Plan is the possible demolition of the award-winning 18 year old Library, and replacing it with a $35m modern new building. The Plan includes the demolition of the Whistler Street car park and selling -off that site for "the highest & best use DA". That will be retail at ground level and apartments, lots of them. By adding apartments to the mix you immediately change the use of this potential piazza site. Experience in Manly shows that 10pm noise curfews are demanded by residents living in the CBD thus creating what should be a vibrant, night-tine meeting-place - into a dead space. See the pictures and story from the Manly Daily here Just heard that Manly Council will hold the sale of foreshore land at 34 & 36 Stuart St, Little Manly, pending an application to the Land & Environment court by the Save Little Manly Foreshore Inc. over the land classification and sale. The matter is expected to be heard by the Court in early August.
Alarm bells have started to ring regarding the ‘revenue generation’ model for the Oval Car Park which is based on a turnover of 600 cars, everyday, paying an average of $15 each. This figure (which seems very unlikely) does not take into account Council’s current policy of two hours free parking, and no analysis of demand has been undertaken. A recent study of the utilisation of Council’s existing car parks by the operators of Manly Wharf has confirmed Council’s own study that the existing car parks are under-utilised, expect during major events and summer weekends. The funding of the car park will be over 50 years with Council borrowings of around $33m, (although KPMG have put the figure at closer to $40m). Many are questioning the wisdom of the plan. On the 3rd June at Manly Council meeting the Manly 2015 Plan and the proposal for the car park was debated for 2 hours as part of the total 10 year Strategic Plan which included the controversial 2015 Plan. The Good For Manly campaign to stop the Oval car park & save Whistler Street car park was successful in slowing down the process and getting an independent due diligence review of the projects, more consultation and therefore more time to get the facts known. This resulted in a compromise resolution put forward by the Liberals which is why Good for Manly's Councillor, Candy Bingham, supported the motion. Without our campaign the Oval car park would now be a reality. While the resolution at the June 3 Council meeting has bought us more time it is concerning that the Mayor, Jean Hay, at recent 2015 briefing sessions, is speaking as if the Plan is going ahead. A report commissioned by Council by KPMG on the feasibility of the key components of the Plan has not been made available to Councillors despite a major campaign by Clr Bingham who is stressing that Councillors need to be fully briefed on the financial consequences of the Plan and confirmation by the Division of Local Government that the document must be provided to Councillors. To date, every Manly Precinct has opposed the Oval car park plan, 200 people attended a recent public meeting arranged by Good for Manly against the Plan, close to 100 individual letters have been received by Councillors against the Plan plus letters in the Daily. So what else do we need to do to get the Liberal Councillors to listen to what their community wants? As part of the $16m upgrade of the Boy Charlton Pool, Manly Council voted on Monday night (15/7/13) to retain two outdoor pools, the 50 metre and 25 metre, in addition to a new indoor pool. Research clearly showed that locals wanted to retain their outdoor pools and were not sold on the idea of a new indoor pool replacing the aging existing outdoor 25 metre pool. Architects have now been engaged to draw up plans for the new-look swim centre which at this stage will include an indoor heated pool, gym, creche and cafe. Council has been successful in obtaining a subsidised loan from the State Government for the project, which is expected to be self-funding. Manly Swim Centre is a very popular facility, and it is believed the upgrade of facilities will enable new users to enjoy the pool all year round. |
AuthorCandy Bingham, Deputy Mayor & Manly Ward Councillor on Northern Beaches Council. Background in marketing, public relations and community engagement. Author of five business books. Former Lady Mayoress of Sydney. Aka Candy Tymson. ........................................
View Videos
|