· Web viewThis morning in Committee we had the presentation on our international internships for...

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

The 4583 meeting of the Brisbane City Council,held at City Hall, Brisbaneon Tuesday 5 March 2019at 2pm

Prepared by: Council and Committee Liaison OfficeCity Administration and Governance

Dedicated to a better Brisbane


THE 4583 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,

ON TUESDAY 5 MARCH 2019AT 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:___________________________________________31ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE___________________________________________31

A STORES BOARD SUBMISSION – BETTER BRISBANE PROPOSAL FOR GENERATIONYOU – YOUTH EMPLOYABILITY EVENTS___________________________________________________________48

B PROPOSED PURCHASE OF LAND LOCATED AT 64 AND 68 CARRARA STREET AND 8 NURRAN STREET, MT GRAVATT EAST_______________________________________________________________51

ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE (Special report)______________________________52A TEMPORARY LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT 02/19 – PROTECTION OF PREMISES AT 431 ST

VINCENTS ROAD, NUDGEE_________________________________________________________56PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE_______________________________________________58

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – ACTIVE SCHOOL TRAVEL 2018 RESULTS______________________59B PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL CONSTRUCT A CONCRETE FOOTPATH AT THE INTERSECTION OF

DILLINGEN AND DIAMANTINA STREETS, CHAPEL HILL____________________________________60INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE___________________________________________________________62

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – MURPHY ROAD AND ELLISON ROAD INTERSECTION____________66B COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – STREETS OF REMEMBRANCE______________________________67C PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TO REINSTATE THE FOOTPATH ALONG THE NORTHERN SIDE OF

BOUNDARY STREET, FORTITUDE VALLEY, BETWEEN IVORY STREET AND IVORY LANE, AND REINSTATE THE KERB RAMPS ON BOUNDARY STREET, FORTITUDE VALLEY___________________68

D PETITION – REQUESTING THE REMOVAL OF PARKING BAYS IN BANK ROAD BETWEEN YOUNG STREET AND MOLONGA TERRACE, GRACEVILLE_________________________________________69

E PETITION – REQUESTING INCREASED ENFORCEMENT OF CURRENT SPEED LIMITS IN AND AROUND SALISBURY______________________________________________________________________71

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE_____________________________________________________________73A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BRISBANE’S EVENT HISTORY ART TRAIL______________________74B PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL REVIEW A SITING VARIATION APPLICATION OVER THE

DEVELOPMENT AT 57 GOULD ROAD, HERSTON_________________________________________75C PETITION – OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED CHILDCARE CENTRE DEVELOPMENT AT 23 TILLOT

STREET, DUTTON PARK (APPLICATION REFERENCE A004953413)___________________________77ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE______________________________________78

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BUSH NEIGHBOURS______________________________________81B PARK NAMING – FORMAL NAMING OF PARK CURRENTLY KNOWN AS BARRACK ROAD PARK,

CANNON HILL, TO ‘IRENE LONGMAN RESERVE’_________________________________________82C PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL ADD AN ADDITIONAL FENCED SECTION AND INSTALL LIGHTING

AT THE DOG OFF-LEASH AREA AT LOVE STREET, BULIMBA________________________________83

[4583 (Ordinary) Meeting – 5 March 2019]





D PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TRIAL AN INFORMAL, UNFENCED DOG OFF-LEASH AREA AT THE REAR OF THOMAS STREET PARK, SHERWOOD, ADJOINING OXLEY CREEK TO ENHANCE DOG-FRIENDLY FACILITIES FOR SHERWOOD FAMILIES____________________________________85

FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE_____________________________________________________________86A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BOTANIC GARDENS – SEED BANK___________________________90B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL REDUCE THE CANOPY OF A LARGE TREE ON THE

FRONTAGE OF 42 BENTINCK STREET, SHERWOOD_______________________________________91C PETITIONS – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL URGENTLY RESURFACE HOFF STREET, MT GRAVATT EAST

_______________________________________________________________________________92LIFESTYLE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE___________________________________________94

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – FILMING IN BRISBANE____________________________________95FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE________________________________________96

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – DISASTER PREPAREDNESS IN THE BRISBANE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA__________________________________________________________________________97

B COMMITTEE REPORT – FINANCIAL REPORTS (RECEIVABLE, RATES, INVENTORY, PAYABLE, PROVISIONS AND MALLS) FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 2018________________________98

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:_____________________________________________________99

GENERAL BUSINESS:_____________________________________________________________100

QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:_________________________________101

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:______________________102






PRESENT:The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) – LNPThe Chairman of Council, Councillor Angela OWEN (Calamvale Ward) – LNP

LNP Councillors (and Wards) ALP Councillors (and Wards)Krista ADAMS (Holland Park)Adam ALLAN (Northgate)Matthew BOURKE (Jamboree)Amanda COOPER (Bracken Ridge)Fiona HAMMOND (Marchant) Vicki HOWARD (Central) Steven HUANG (MacGregor)Kim MARX (Runcorn)Peter MATIC (Paddington)Ian McKENZIE (Coorparoo)David McLACHLAN (Hamilton)Ryan MURPHY (Doboy) (Deputy Chairman of Council)Kate RICHARDS (Pullenvale)Adrian SCHRINNER (Chandler) (Deputy Mayor)Julian SIMMONDS (Walter Taylor) Steven TOOMEY (The Gap) Andrew WINES (Enoggera)Norm WYNDHAM (McDowall)

Peter CUMMING (Wynnum Manly) (The Leader of the Opposition)Jared CASSIDY (Deagon) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition)Kara COOK (Morningside)Steve GRIFFITHS (Moorooka)Charles STRUNK (Forest Lake)

Queensland Greens Councillor (and Ward)Jonathan SRI (The Gabba)

Independent Councillor (and Ward)Nicole JOHNSTON (Tennyson)

OPENING OF MEETING:The Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, opened the meeting with prayer and acknowledged the traditional custodians, and then proceeded with the business set out in the Agenda.

Chairman: I remind all Councillors of your obligations to declare material personal interests and conflicts of interest where relevant, and the requirement of such to remove yourself from the Council Chamber for debate and voting where applicable.

Councillors, are there any apologies?

There being no apologies, confirmation of Minutes, please.

MINUTES:543/2018-19

The Minutes of the 4582 meeting of Council held on 26 February 2019, 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 Steven TOOMEY.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:


Miss Jean Tiller – New accessible housing options in Brisbane and Specialist Disability Accommodation

Chairman: I would now like to call on Miss Jean Tiller who will address the Chamber on new accessible housing options in Brisbane and specialist disability accommodation (SDA).

Please proceed, Miss Tiller; you have five minutes.

Miss Jean Tiller: Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors, thank you for having me today. So my five minutes today is on accessible housing with a particular focus on specialist disability accommodation. So accessible housing affects everybody – mothers, young children, people with temporary injuries, people who are ageing, people with permanent disabilities; everyone benefits from accessible housing.

So, my name is Jean Tiller. I’m from the Summer Foundation. The Summer Foundation is a national, not-for-profit organisation that’s working to reduce the rates of young people in residential aged care. These people often have complex needs and require a specialist housing response. So, the Summer Foundation is not a service provider; we are an information provider, and we develop and test innovative solutions for the sector.

The NDIS (National Disability Insurance Scheme) approach to housing has radically changed the market. Fundamentally there is a defined separation between the provision of housing and the provision of support. So, all in all, they’re projecting about six per cent of the NDIS participants to be eligible for specialist disability accommodation in terms of the payments through the NDIS plan. So this means that there are 94% of NDIS participants that will require a non-SDA approach to their housing solutions.

The SDA payment through the NDIS is literally a payment to the property owner as a rental return on their investment, completely separate to their support. SDA properties are being built all around Brisbane city as we speak. They’re generally categorised into four design categories, and each of these design categories offer different features that accommodate the needs of people with physical disabilities and intellectual disabilities, or both.

SDA dwellings will always meet or exceed either a gold or a platinum standard of Australia’s liveable housing design guidelines, and you can find these guidelines on the internet.

So, pre-NDIS, the management of housing vacancies were managed by state governments. The housing options were largely limited to group homes, and included support as part of that setup. This significantly limited an individual’s choice and control over where they lived. So, my team in the Summer Foundation is called the Housing Matching team, and we’ve been tasked to make it easier for people to identify suitable housing options in this market driven environment. As a response, we built an online platform called the TheHousingHub.org.au and it’s similar to realestate.com with a difference being that it is focused on the registration and listing of disability suitable properties.

It’s free to list properties on this website platform, and they do not have to be SDA enrolled dwellings. They can be non-SDA housing solutions as well. So, as with any start-up enterprise, what we’re looking for is more listings on this platform, because that will drive traffic of searchers to it.

We also offer a tenancy matching service for housing providers. So we understand there’s a number of new housing providers that are entering into the market, and they haven’t been familiar with the disability sector to date. So they can contract us to assist them to find suitable tenants for the property and tenants that are likely to be eligible for this SDA funding in line with the dwelling that they’re building.

Currently I’m working with an SDA provider on a development that’s in Nundah. It’s an apartment complex. There’s 10 specialist disability accommodation units that are peppered throughout this apartment complex, and I’m seeking tenancy applications for this property. There has been a similar one


- 2 -

done in the Woolloongabba ward, and we’ve successfully identified tenants for that property.

There is a support structure that comes in place with this as well that tenants will organise. They arrange their plan support through the NDIS plan and then part of that also contributes to a 24/7 onsite service that’s located in the same building.

So I guess I’m here today in terms of talking about this topic and wondering how we could work together, how you may help in this sector to promote this. Certainly, the dissemination of information is really critical. So if you can get that out to your constituents through your normal communication channels, that’s really appreciated.

I’m happy to come and talk to any community groups that might be working in this space, and I can talk about specific property developments or SDA more broadly. In terms of property developers, there’s a number of property developers that may be interested in incorporating accessible accommodation into their developments but are not quite sure how to do it, so I’m happy to direct them to Summer Foundation experts that can give them some market insights about the risk returns that might come with an SDA property.

Of course, linking in with your Inclusive Brisbane Action Plan that’s just kicking off, I think it’s really important that, on that page where it specifies ‘Live’, it is really about this accessible housing and there’s a number of agencies that we can all collaborate together to get some really tangible outcomes. So thank you very much.

Chairman: Thank you, Miss Tiller.

Councillor BOURKE, would you like to respond?

Response by Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the City Planning Committee

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks, Madam Chairman, and thanks, Miss Tiller, for coming in today and speaking to Council. I’m more than happy to touch base and set up a meeting and discuss some of those ideas a bit further from a City Planning point of view. I know that Councillor MATIC, from a Lifestyle and Community Services point of view, would be happy to touch base and look at some of the opportunities to partner with your organisation.

Obviously, as you alluded to, Council has a very strong commitment to access and inclusion. We had our original plan that was brought in when the LORD MAYOR took over back in 2011, and has recently been updated with our latest plan being put out there for the people of Brisbane for consultation. One of the key things is obviously making a city that is inclusive, and recognising that about 18% of the population has a disability of some form. We need to make sure that providing housing and options—and it’s great to hear the story that you’ve provided us today about how you’re connecting people and connecting landlords and bringing those people together so that they have places that are safe and affordable places to live.

It’s also very interesting to hear the changes that the NDIS has brought about in this sector as well, and also the opportunities that it will bring about into the future. One of the things that we’re currently doing in Council is we’re about to start our housing strategy. Our housing strategy will look at the option and the choices that we need in our city to help facilitate the growth that we have coming in our city, but also that diversity of housing types, and what opportunities might be there to include some of the principles that you’re talking about is certainly exciting. I’m looking forward to catching up and having that chat with you at a later date so we can talk about more opportunities in that housing strategy going forward. Thank you again for coming in and speaking to Council.

Chairman: Thank you, Miss Tiller. It was wonderful for you to come in today and share that very important work that you’re doing. Thank you.


- 3 -

Councillor CASSIDY: Point of order.

Chairman: Point of order; Councillor CASSIDY.

544/2018-19At that juncture, Councillor Jared CASSIDY moved, seconded by Councillor Kara COOK, that the Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion

That this Council implements a ban on non-essential advertising six months out from the 2020 Council election in line with the State Government advertising code of conduct.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is something that Labor Councillors have been calling for for some time. It’s something that Rod Harding has committed to if elected as LORD MAYOR of this city in March 2020. But what has become abundantly clear is that this LNP Administration will stop at nothing to use public money for their re-election purposes.

So we cannot wait until after the next Council election to implement a ban on politicising Council’s corporate communications. Things like this, Madam Chair, the more to see and do campaign which was just dreamt up as a way of promoting the LORD MAYOR’s image. The Getting you home quicker and safer campaign—of course, the LORD MAYOR’s image shoe-horned onto that; Growing your Brisbane lifestyle, another cook-up from the LORD MAYOR’s Office with his image all over it and, of course, Brisbane Metro—

DEPUTY MAYOR: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Councillor CASSIDY: —his image all over that as well, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor CASSIDY.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Councillor CASSIDY is not establishing any urgency—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order! Order!

Councillor CASSIDY, I just do remind you, it is about urgency at this stage and should the urgency motion be successful, you will be able to elaborate further on your motion.

Councillor CASSIDY: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. This is so urgent because two weeks ago, just two weeks ago, this LORD MAYOR spent $35,000 of ratepayer funds to get his face on a TV program. Now, he talks about what Jim Soorley did back in the 1990s. He’s even got up in this place and talked about what Clem Jones did in the 1960s and 1970s. What is happening right now today is we’re seeing millions of dollars of ratepayers’ funds being spent on advertising campaigns designed wholly and solely to promote the LNP candidate for Lord Mayor.

So this isn’t about—we’re not talking about ward office budgets, we’re not talking about the LORD MAYOR’s Office budget here; we’re talking about the need to stop this hijacking of Council’s corporate communications. We need to bring in strict rules which will mirror the State Government’s Advertising Code of Conduct which means that six months out from the upcoming Council election in 2020, this Administration—whether it’s this LORD MAYOR, whether it’s the DEPUTY MAYOR, whether it’s Councillor ADAMS or Councillor MATIC, we’re not sure yet who’s going to win that race, Madam Chair—whichever candidate that the LNP puts up for Lord Mayor must not be able to use ratepayer funds to fund their campaign.

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 Jared CASSIDY and Peter CUMMING immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared lost.


- 4 -

The voting was as follows:

AYES: 7 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, Jonathan SRI and Nicole JOHNSTON.

NOES: 20 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona HAMMOND, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

QUESTION TIME:

Chairman: Are there any questions of the LORD MAYOR or a Chairman of any of the Standing Committees?

Councillor ALLAN.

Question 1

Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR, it has now been more than a week since the Local Government Minister briefed you on proposed changes to local government in Queensland. Can you please give the Chamber an update on any further information you have received from the Minister?

LORD MAYOR: Well, Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor Adam ALLAN for the question. It is the case that on Saturday afternoon, at around 2pm, a statement was put out by the Minister for Local Government, Racing and Multicultural Affairs, that being Stirling Hinchliffe, in relation to the timing of announcements with regards to proposed changes that he is putting forward to not only the City of Brisbane Act but also that of the Local Government Act in relation to the whole of Queensland, all other councils outside of Brisbane.

Now, Madam Chairman, it has been a case of a drip feed. We have been getting a little bit, you know, sort of one change and then another change, Madam Chairman, in this drip feed format. The Minister, on Saturday, when he sent an email out to all councillors, indicated that tomorrow would be the day that he puts out the proposed changes in total. Those changes will be different in Brisbane to what they are around the State.

But, Madam Chairman, what I strenuously object to in the Minister’s letter to the various councillors, or to all councillors presumably around the State, is the way in which the Belcarra Report is being used as a cover for these changes. I say again, as I said last week, that the overwhelming number of proposed changes—what are called reforms—are nothing to do with Belcarra. If they are to do with Belcarra, we will support them, but they are not. These are electoral changes. These are strategy changes, Madam Chairman, and they are changes, I might say, which are very similar in texture to the noises that are being made by the Opposition in this Chamber over some months.

They are changes which appear to be fairly consistent with Labor’s report into the 2016 Brisbane City Council election. So, Madam Chairman, I think it is insulting; I think it is simply wrong to put up Belcarra as a reason as to why these changes ought to be. Madam Chairman, to do so, in my view, is to do wrong by the CCC (Crime and Corruption Commission). It’s to do wrong by the authors of the Belcarra Report.

Now, this is something that local government throughout Queensland is not going to take lying down. Madam Chairman, whilst the Opposition here, I


- 5 -

presume, will support all of the Minister’s changes, because, Madam Chairman, again it all fits very much with the theme and story that they’ve been presenting in this Chamber over many months, it is interesting to see—

Councillor interjecting.

LORD MAYOR: It is interesting—thank you, Councillor—it is interesting to see, Madam Chairman, that we go back and see what the President of the Local Government Association is saying as well. So, Mark Jamieson, as President on behalf of members of the LGAQ, has simply sent a release out saying: ‘councils will not tolerate major voting changes being forced on the community.’

He’s also, Madam Chairman, attached a copy of a press release that the Premier put out some time back wherein she said that the CCC report on Operation Belcarra is comprehensive and thorough. She went on to say, ‘I will not make rules for local councils that I am not prepared to follow myself’—


LORD MAYOR: —‘So the changes we make will apply to State as well as local government.’ Now, when I put, Madam Chairman, some of these proposed changes to the Minister, what was the response: ‘Oh, no, no, no, we have Westminster System. We have Westminster System.’ So it will be interesting, Madam Chairman, to see as this plays out whether or not the Premier will be true to her words in relation to the Belcarra Report. But the reality is that—I say it again—that these changes, Madam Chairman, are precious little to do with the Belcarra Report and fundamentally to do with a political strategy.

When the Minister says that he has spoken to hundreds of councillors across—and I’ll read his words: ‘our proposed reforms informed by the Belcarra Report and discussions with hundreds of you’—

Chairman: LORD MAYOR, your time has expired.

LORD MAYOR: —‘and your colleagues’—

DEPUTY MAYOR: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, point of order.

545/2018-19At that juncture, the DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER) moved, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that the Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion

Regarding the Minister for Local Government’s false and misleading claims about the need for changes to the electoral system.

Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, three minutes to urgency.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Madam Chairman, once again we’ve just heard the Minister, only this weekend, has been exposed telling porkies about what is the most fundamental proposed changes to local government electoral system we’ve seen in decades, changes that will strip away the system that was put in place after the Fitzgerald Inquiry for very good reason—for very good reason—without any public justification, without any clear consultation, based on discussions with his Labor colleagues.

That is all we can see that is happening here. So, on the weekend—and it’s interesting, I’m not used to receiving emails from Ministers, particularly Ministers for Local Government, but I’m certainly not used to receiving them at 2pm on a Saturday afternoon. Someone’s working overtime. Someone has botched this implementation right from the beginning. It is clear that the Minister is completely out of his depth. He’s been caught out misleading the public, attempting to mislead the media on this issue, and this Council will condemn him and call him out for this absolutely inappropriate way forward when it comes to the local government system.

By all means, if you want to change the electoral system, either at the State or the council level, you go through the appropriate process. You have the public


- 6 -

inquiries, you have the public debates, you call for genuine community consultation, you don’t just ram this through overnight with no specific timeframe, with no justification, and try and hide under Operation Belcarra, because that is clearly what is happening here, Madam Chairman.

So this is urgent. This is something we need to deal with before the State Government rams it through without any public consultation.

The Chairman submitted the motion for the suspension of the Standing Rules to the Chamber and it was declared carried on the voices.

Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, would you like to officially move your motion, please?

546/2018-19At that juncture, the DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER) moved, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES

That this Council:

condemns the Local Government Minister’s false claims that the proposed changes to the local government electoral system are related to findings from the Belcarra Report,

further, calls on the Minister to outline a detailed forward timetable for consultation on the proposed changes, including with the community when he releases details of the proposed changes on Wednesday.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Just a moment. The motion so moved by DEPUTY MAYOR and Councillor WINES.

Councillor JOHNSTON, you had a point of order.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, Madam Chairman. I seek your ruling on whether the statement made by the DEPUTY MAYOR, that there have been false claims made by the Local Government Minister, that the changes to the Local Government Act, informed by Operation Belcarra are defamatory. Matters that are possibly defamatory under the City of Brisbane Act, are not allowed to be debated, and certainly, Madam Chairman, after reading the same email that I got from the Local Government Minister over the weekend, I don’t believe that’s what he actually says. It may be that some of these are not Belcarra recommendations, but some of them absolutely are.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, a point of—

Councillor JOHNSTON: So I’m just concerned it’s defamatory.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, a point of order does not allow you to make an extensive statement. This is the motion. It is up to the DEPUTY MAYOR to basically identify how he feels the claims are either incorrect or correct in relation to the motion.

So we will proceed. So the motion reads—

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order—

Chairman: Just a moment, Councillor JOHNSTON! You do not interrupt when I am speaking.

The motion reads: That this Council condemns the Local Government Minister’s false claims that the proposed changes to the local government electoral system are related to findings from the Belcarra Report; further, calls on the Minister to outline a detailed forward timetable for consultation on the proposed changes, including with the community, when he releases details of the proposed changes on Wednesday.

Councillor JOHNSTON, your point of order.


- 7 -

Councillor JOHNSTON: Madam Chairman, I refer you to section 37 of the Meetings Local Law: ‘whenever the Chairman decides that any motion or other matter is one of the following’—and I refer to (a) ‘possibly defamatory’, you have to make a ruling on that issue, and I’d appreciate it if you do, please.

Chairman: And I’ve made a ruling that we are proceeding with this motion, Councillor JOHNSTON.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I have here before me the 31 recommendations of the Belcarra Review, Operation Belcarra. A review that was done by the CCC, a review that kicked off and very quickly found serious problems in councils that are associated with the Labor Party. A review that in no way has any recommendations specific to Brisbane City Council but a review that has come from Labor-linked councils, Madam Chairman, particularly Ipswich City Council, which we’ve all heard about.

So, the absolute hide of this Labor Government to suggest that these electoral changes are anything to do with Belcarra can quite clearly be proven to be false by anyone having a read of these 31 recommendations. There is no recommendation in Belcarra to change the voting system to compulsory preferential voting. I challenge anyone to have a look through these recommendations and to find anything that talks about that or any recommendation about changing to compulsory preferential voting.

We know also that, when Belcarra was brought down, the Premier made some very clear statements about Belcarra. I have her media release from 4 October 2017. In that media release, it says here: ‘The Palaszczuk Government is considering the 31 recommendations handed down by the Crime and Corruption Commission in its report on addressing integrity and corruption risk in local government. Let me be clear: I fully support these recommendations. The Belcarra Report highlights serious cultural and structural issues within specific councils and Queensland local government more broadly.’

Then it goes on to say: ‘I will bring a submission to Cabinet on Monday that addresses all of the implications of this report.’ Not just some—all. That’s exactly what happened. We saw a submission going to Cabinet and then coming through to the Parliament where it was enacted where all of the recommendations of Belcarra were addressed. That was in 2017.

So to suggest now, under the cover of Belcarra, that there’s some more issues that need to be dealt with, is false and misleading. At the very best it would indicate that the Premier missed some issues in 2017—that’s if we were being kind to them—but at the very worst it is a deliberate attempt to mislead the public, to mislead the media, to mislead local government, and that is exactly what I believe is happening here.

We are seeing changes rammed through that no one is asking for except for the Labor Party. We’re seeing changes rammed through that benefit no one except for the Labor Party. Even this urgency motion that was put up before just goes to show how cynical their approach is. It is quite clear that everything they are doing now is part of a political strategy. I haven’t heard any legitimate debate as to why these changes, particularly to compulsory preferential voting, will benefit anyone—will benefit the democracy and transparency of the system. There has been no indication as to how it will help anyone, and we know it’s all about the Labor Party.

Once again, in this Council meeting, we’ve already seen them try to force through other changes, with the help of their State Government colleagues, which are purely political. Now, can anyone just imagine what would happen if the Federal Government tried to come in onto the State Government and change their voting system, with no inquiry, with no consultation but to use a set of bogus excuses to fundamentally change the way the voting system works? The State Government would never put up with that. The community would never put up with that. The media would never put up with that. But that’s exactly what’s happening here to local government.


- 8 -

Never mind—never mind that each and every local government in Queensland has their own democratic elections, and never mind that each councillor in those local governments have been elected legitimately through an independent Electoral Commission process, the State Government thinks they can steamroll in, override local government, use it as their political plaything and intervene in the democratic process. This is a dangerous precedent. This Council, and other councils across Queensland will not allow this to stand. We will fight tooth and nail against this, and we know that, right across Queensland now, people in communities, and people in local governments are saying no to this interference. They’re saying no to this interruption of the system without due process, without justification, for purely political reasons. So we will fight this.

Today, as I said, we condemn the Local Government Minister’s actions and his attempts to mislead the community on the real reasons for these changes.

Chairman: Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, Madam Chair, I didn’t realise how ignorant Councillor SCHRINNER was in relation to constitutional law. He neglects the fact that the Commonwealth Government doesn’t set up the state governments, it doesn’t legislate how they operate, and to draw a parallel between the Commonwealth and the State, and the State and the Council, is quite ridiculous.

Anyhow, what these changes that are proposed will achieve is consistency in all levels of government. It was in place—it was in place for decades up until the early 1990s, and now we’ll have a—if these changes are made—there will be a uniform, consistent system across the board in the future as well, and that will be a great thing. We’ve already got two levels of government—the Federal and the State having compulsory preferentials, so for Council to join them is common sense. It’s just common sense.

It won’t—as Councillor SCHRINNER says—it won’t benefit any particular party. It, as I explained I think it was last week, there could easily be a breakaway party from the LNP or another right-wing party running for Council, and the LNP will be very keen to maximise the preferences coming back to them. So it’s a system that is fair to all parties. It’s consistent. We wouldn’t even comprehend it not existing at Federal level. It’s been in place for decades at Federal level, and it’s an excellent system. It ties in with compulsory voting.

You’ve got to vote, and you’ve also got to express a preference as to who you want to be as your member. If not that person, then who’s the next best person you’d like. Madam Chair, that’s been a fundamental tenet of Australian democracy at Federal level, as I said, for many decades, and it will be a great thing to bring the Brisbane City Council into line with the state and Federal governments.

The other thing I’d like to say is running stunts like this at Council meetings is no way for a responsible Brisbane City Council to behave. I mean, every week they’re out there bagging the State Government, attacking them. Instead of getting on with the job themselves of running the Brisbane City Council, they’re attacking the State Government at every opportunity. This is a level of government which actually sets up the legislation which controls how the Brisbane City Council operates. It’s just—it’s juvenile behaviour, it shouldn’t occur, and this sort of resolution, we will not be supporting.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yet again, Madam Chairman, we see this LNP Administration in Brisbane desperately playing politics rather than engaging in good governance for the residents of this city. We have footpaths all over the city that aren’t getting fixed; we’ve got roads that desperately need fixing; we’ve got parks that are being taken out, and what’s this Administration want to come and do? Come into this place, play politics, and simply attack George Street.

As I said last week, this is ridiculous. I honestly cannot believe that the thing you voted against last week, which is what I moved an amendment for, calling


- 9 -

for, you’re going to do this week. It’s like—I mean, you people are a joke. You are seriously a joke. I don’t hear you standing up before the Federal election saying, federal compulsory preferential voting’s got to go. I mean, yes, that would be helping ScoMo, wouldn’t it?

The LORD MAYOR obviously, if he thinks it’s good enough for him, he wants to get rid of it at the Federal level, and if I was a member of the media, I’d be going, well, LORD MAYOR, why do you think that Scott Morrison and the Liberals shouldn’t be having the same system you’re proposing here? So I really would question the LORD MAYOR’s motives with this one. It is a ridiculous motion yet again this week. The reason it is ridiculous—and I’ll point two of them out—firstly is, and as I said last week, I don’t think the change is necessary with respect to compulsory preferential voting. I’d be the only one on this side of the Chamber, obviously, who thinks that, but I’m not scared of it like the LNP obviously are—desperately scared of it, because they’re choosing to make that the biggest issue of the day for this city, instead of the things that actually need doing around our city.

That is a poor reflection on this Administration and its priorities for the City of Brisbane. They’re more interested in politics than the practical measures that our ratepayers expect us to do. I expect the fear campaign from the Liberals is going to come. You watch the LORD MAYOR. They’ve voted down a motion to stop advertising. You watch this LORD MAYOR go out and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars telling the residents and the ratepayers of Brisbane how terrible this voting scheme is that the LNP at State level voted for and is in place federally as well.

So, this whole—this whole debate is a joke. It is completely politically motivated, and I’m going to put two things on the record. The DEPUTY MAYOR has said today that these are false claims by the Local Government Minister in relation to the recommendations of Operation Belcarra. That is the part of this that I have a really significant problem with, because there are clearly some Belcarra recommendations that are being picked up in this package, not that we’ve seen it, not that we’ve seen it. We are still waiting for a package of information which is apparently coming tomorrow.

Again, we’re going on the LORD MAYOR’s word of a private confidential briefing he got last week. He hasn’t shared the detail of that with us. He hasn’t come in here or briefed Councillors. He didn’t call a citywide Council meeting and say: this is exactly what the Local Government Minister told me. Did he speak to us? No. He came in here last week and moved a dodgy motion; now he’s come in here this week and moved a dodgy motion. He doesn’t want the facts on the table. He wants to fearmonger. He wants to scare people.

Now, let me be clear: do you know what the number one recommendation out of Belcarra was? That there be spending caps put on local government campaigns. Guess what’s in this package of material before us today, based on the email I got from the Local Government Minister? That there will be spending caps on the campaigns. Now, presumably the LORD MAYOR, who spends millions and millions of dollars, is also very scared of this, and you watch him. You watch him go out there and say no, no, no.

Well, I can tell you, I campaign on the smell of an oily rag, and I have to be—I’m in a fortunate position of standing here with 76% of the vote, so I can tell you it’s not related to the amount of money that you spend, it’s how you work in the community; it’s how you keep engaged with the community. Instead of trying to buy votes with advertising, this LORD MAYOR should be doing just that, but he doesn’t. So that is recommendation number one.

Now, the DEPUTY MAYOR has stood up in here and said that the Local Government Minister has made false claims that the proposed changes to the local government electoral system are related to findings from the Belcarra Report. Now, that is defamatory. That is wrong. That is deliberately misleading. Recommendation 1: directly related to Operation Belcarra. So that’s how much this LNP Administration is prepared to lie to try and mislead the people of Brisbane.


- 10 -

Two—and I’m only going to give two examples, because I don’t have long—recommendation 12 from Operation Belcarra. It’s worded a little differently, and again I haven’t seen what’s proposed in this package, but that recommendation calls for information sessions to be run for all candidates who are running for local government election. Guess what’s proposed in this package of recommendations that we’re being asked to consider over the next month or two: that there is compulsory candidate training for local government candidates.

That’s at least two in the what, eight minutes, the DEPUTY MAYOR was speaking. That’s at least two recommendations from the Operation Belcarra Report that is part of the package, based on the email that I have seen from the DEPUTY MAYOR—email I’ve seen from the Local Government Minister—that is going to be put to us tomorrow. Again, I haven’t seen the detail, but let me be clear: the DEPUTY MAYOR has flat out lied. This motion before us today is factually incorrect. There are at least two that I can see and there probably are more of the Operation Belcarra Report recommendations that I can see are being implemented here today.

Now, I think it is appalling, appalling, that the LNP Administration want to play politics by, in my view, deliberately lying to the people of Brisbane. Now, as I said last week, I absolutely support—I absolutely support a consultation. I want to have a look at the detail of what is proposed. I haven’t seen it yet. I didn’t get a private briefing like the LORD MAYOR got. The LORD MAYOR didn’t ring me up and go, ‘Hey Nicole, this is what Stirling Hinchliffe’s proposing’. Instead he walked in here and he played politics.

He didn’t take that opportunity to brief the rest of us and tell us what’s going on. He spent the last week riling up the LGAQ. Was he given the material last week? I don’t know. I would like to know what the LORD MAYOR was actually told last week. Did he get a preview of the documentation we’re all getting tomorrow? Because what he has done last week and this week is purely political. It is purely about self-preservation, absolutely, absolutely and fundamentally untrue.


Councillor COOPER.

Councillor COOPER: Thank you very much, Madam Chair; I rise to speak to the motion. I note that there has been some commentary just recently, but I think it’s important for us all to really understand what is proposed here. When you think about it, we are all Councillors duly elected by our constituents, and in fact Council itself is actually a creature of the State Government. So we are not enshrined in the Constitution.

We have no reference, and therefore there has been a call for a number of years to actually put in a specific reference to councils in the Constitution to make sure that there is not interference with us, and that is partly enshrining our financial recognition of local government by amending section 96. This would allow the Federal Government to interact directly with local government. This would mean that the current arrangements, where money is disbursed to the State Government who then passes it on generally to local government would be a straight transaction. This is something that has been talked about for some many, many years.

So, of course, as this Chamber is well aware, the State Government has powers to dissolve, to dismiss or amalgamate councils. So they have power over our very existence in this Chamber. So if the State Government decided that we were not to continue, then they could do that. The stroke of a pen, coming into Parliament, bringing in legislation, we would all be gone. There would not be an opportunity for us to argue about it. It would be a fact and that would be incontrovertible.

We know that in both New South Wales and Queensland there were changes proposed to councils, forced amalgamations under the Beattie Government in 2008 where they reduced councils, so they did actually take councils and


- 11 -

dissolve them, essentially. So they reduced councils from 157 councils to 73. What did councils think when Andrew Fraser—I remember going to a lunch where he spoke, and he said, ‘This is going to happen.’ What did councils say in response to those forced amalgamations? Councils rose up and were extremely, extremely dissatisfied with their treatment. There was endless consultation, but you know what: they never listened to local government. They said: this is what’s happening, and they dictated the outcome.

So consultation in that case was not really consultation; it was information. This is going to happen; this is your destiny; this is the decision of the State Government. So why would we expect anything different? Why would we—and I’m disappointed to say—have to be cynical about the statements that are being made? Because they’ve got form, Madam Chair. They’ve done it before.

We have to put up with the whims—and I choose that word particularly carefully—the whims of the State Government. We have to deal with them, because we don’t have any opportunity to rebuff these sorts of decisions that are made at a State level. So I think that this proposal by the Minister of Local Government is—and I’m being very kind to describe it—as a whim. A sudden urge to change the local government electoral system, ostensibly due to Belcarra recommendations.

So, instead of acting in a long term and strategic manner with careful and deliberate consultation with all affected parties, particularly with our communities, this ham-fisted attempt rates up there with the Bligh Labor Government’s change of election dates in 2012. Do you remember those? Oh, that was a really successful enterprise that they conducted back then. I note—I went back, because I was thinking back how she justified the change in election date, and it was—there was a quote which I found that Anna Bligh made at that time, and I quote from it. It says, ‘I’ve made the judgment which I feel serves the best interest of democracy.’ The best interest of democracy, she said back then. She said that she was waiting for the final flood commission inquiry to be handed down, so she had to change the date of the local government election, and she did that, and she went out there and, boy, that worked out well for her, didn’t it? It worked out tremendously well for her, because she was supposedly saying that she was avowing that it was because of democracy, these changes were made.

The whimsical behaviour towards local government is a repeated pattern of behaviour from those in George Street—repeated. It’s not once; it’s not twice—it’s more than three times. So I would say that this is something we are incredibly cynical about because they do as they choose to do. They don’t do things just for democracy or just because of Belcarra, or just because of the flood commission of inquiry; they do things to suit their own agenda.

This ongoing persistent tinkering with local government has got to stop. I think the point made by the DEPUTY MAYOR is absolutely right. Imagine if the Federal Government whimsically decided to make changes to how things worked on another level of government. I know the comment was: it couldn’t happen because of the Constitution. That’s right, but local government doesn’t have that protection, does it? It does not. So your argument is actually a completely—


Councillor COOPER: —completely plays in with our argument. We have no protection under the Constitution.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Stop interjecting.

Councillor COOPER: —we don’t—


Councillor COOPER: —If we did, then we wouldn’t be so worried—

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Stop interjecting.


- 12 -

Councillor COOPER: Thank you, Madam Chair. Now, I note that there has been a series of events. So we’ve had the LGAQ conference; I think that was in October of last year. I think that the Minister went along and had a chat to people. I think Councillor BOURKE is nodding his head to me. I wonder if he raised it at that I would think a very appropriate opportunity for him to discuss these radical reforms that they’re proposing to our electoral system. Did they do that?

Has there been widespread community feedback that they really feel that they would like compulsory preferential voting? So has there been any widespread debate on this issue? Will it make any real significant improvements to the services that we deliver for our communities? Have people passionately been saying to us: please change the way we vote for you. We really want you to spend a lot of time, a lot of energy, a lot of money on changing the way we all vote for local government. No one?


Councillor COOPER: No one? No one. Gee. It seems to me that the conclusion I draw from this, that the agenda is entirely a political one. It is not community driven. It’s driven by something that I think has been talked about last week—the review into Labor’s Brisbane City Council election campaign 2016. This seems to be the key document. We saw last week the Leader of the Opposition, he acknowledged that he was an advocate for this change. He had no actual argument as to how it benefits his ward or the community at large.

However, there’s one group, one key group that is seeking to benefit—one group who unashamedly are seeking a political benefit. Who might that be? Could it possibly be the Australian Labor Party? Could it be that they see this as a good opportunity for them to potentially win at the next election? Let’s see—page 9. ‘To address some of the systemic disadvantage as Opposition, it would be worth holding BCC Administrations to account; it would be worth having a root and branch review of the legislation governing Brisbane City Council.’

So, oh, and this actually isn’t the only mention of the benefit—and there was a particularly—and I note Councillor Adam ALLAN would be fascinated to know that the Labor Party believe that if there was optional preferential voting in place, they would have probably won Northgate. That was part of their observation in this document. So I think it is absolutely clear that there is a strong motivation from the Australian Labor Party, and that is their own political careers that they’re interested in. Absolutely. They’ve written the document themselves. They’re proud of it. They were saying, oh, it’s all available. Oh, it’s available, and I read it with relish, Madam Chair, because they themselves have provided evidence to convict them in the court of public opinion.

This is about themselves and their political career prospects, and nothing else. I think they should be absolutely ashamed of what they are trying to perpetuate. They don’t really care about what this really means for the people of Brisbane. They care what it means for them and their careers in Brisbane City Council. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Further speakers?

Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks, Madam Chair. I didn’t pick up on the uniform change that the LNP have undergone, the tin hats they’re all wearing over there. All the alfoil hats, Madam Chair. These conspiracy theories are swirling around, Madam Chair.

Councillor JOHNSTON said this is all about self-preservation. I think what this is actually about, Madam Chair, and I think we all know, this is actually about self-promotion by the DEPUTY MAYOR. It’s becoming clearer and clearer now, over the last couple of weeks that the DEPUTY MAYOR has now taken up the mantle of LNP candidate for Lord Mayor. We know the days are ticking down to that—

Councillor MURPHY: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor MURPHY.


- 13 -

Councillor MURPHY: Madam Chairman, this isn’t relevant to this debate.

Councillor CASSIDY: —was a review—


Chairman: Order! Order!

This is the Chamber for robust political debate. I will allow it.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Madam Chair. So we know that the LORD MAYOR comes in and he has a little bit of a go in Question Time these days, but it is the DEPUTY MAYOR who’s prosecuting this case on behalf of the LNP. So it has become abundantly clear that this is about a political strategy for the DEPUTY MAYOR, who’s the Chair of the Public and Active Transport Committee, to shore up his place in his caucus, Madam Chair, to be the presumptive candidate to replace this LORD MAYOR when he slips out of those robes next month.

In response to Labor’s call and Labor’s commitment to crack down on political advertising, who does the LNP Administration put up? The Chair of the Public and Active Transport Committee. So it is very clear what this strategy the LNP have employed is all about.

Now, it would be really refreshing, it would be really refreshing if this Administration who runs the Council actually comes into this place and focuses on things that are of vital importance to the people of Brisbane. Now, if Councillor COOPER spent a little more time dealing with the debacle that Kingsford Smith Drive is instead of pouring over documents from 2016, we mightn’t be in this situation where we are $50 million down the toilet on that project, and a 12-month delay.

If we had the LORD MAYOR actually dealing with things like the four-year backlog of footpath repairs instead of coming in here and grandstanding and having Adrian’s audition over there—

Chairman: Refer to—

Councillor CASSIDY: —Councillor SCHRINNER’s audition over there, Madam Chair, we might actually have some action on some real grassroots issues that are affecting people in this city.

Now, Councillor SCHRINNER likes to talk about the Fitzgerald Inquiry as if he is some authority belonging to a party, the National Party over there, Madam Chair, that has a horrible history when it comes to corruption of public resources in this State. He has the hide to come in here and talk about that, and talk about EARC (Electoral and Administrative Review Committee). One of the central recommendations of EARC was to ban the misuse of public money on advertising politicians. So the reforms that have ensured that Queensland Government Premiers and Ministers cannot use taxpayer funds to promote themselves through public advertising should apply here.

If he’s such a big fan of EARC and the Fitzgerald Inquiry and those recommendations, he would not run for the hills knowing that he’s going to need those millions and millions of ratepayers’ dollars in raising his profile in a fight against Rod Harding, Madam Chair.


Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman; I just rise to enter the debate on the motion that we have before us. We debated at length last week what we knew at the time, Madam Chairman. It’s interesting, the LORD MAYOR sort of used the term ‘drip fed’, and it is really a drip feed of information. The Minister is trying to keep everyone in suspense, Madam Chairman, about what these changes are. He put it out there two weeks ago; again we got a little bit of a taste on Sunday in the paper. We got that email at 2 o’clock on Saturday afternoon, Madam Chairman, where he finally came clean on some of the changes. I don’t know whether they’re all the changes, Madam Chairman; they might not be. But he came clean on some of the changes. So compulsory preferential voting,


- 14 -

compulsory candidate training, proportional representation in undivided councils, tighter regulations on discretionary funds, campaign spending caps and clarification of COI (conflict of interest) and MPI (material personal interest) provisions.

That’s great, Madam Chairman. There is only the campaign caps that are in the Belcarra Report, Madam Chairman. There isn’t, in this list it being driven—it’s not being driven by Belcarra. Yet Belcarra is mentioned three or four times in the letter. You would think that the Minister is trying to give this impression to the community that this is all about Belcarra, that all these changes are being driven out of Belcarra. They’re not, Madam Chairman. You can see, now that that list has been released, that they are blatant political moves to interfere with the democratically elected local governments that we have right across this State.

It is a blatant political interference from the State Government into local government, Madam Chairman. Local government, as I said last week, is not and should never be the plaything of state governments. I get these screams from the other side about there’s the Constitution that stops the Federal Government from interfering in states. Well, where are you standing up for your local government colleagues, to those on the other side with the exception of Councillor RICHARDS, Madam Chairman? Where are you standing up for the councils across the whole of this State who are going to be directly impacted by these changes? You're not. You’re silent.

You’re just literally going, yes State Government, no State Government, whatever you want State Government. Because it is not just about the changes that are going to affect Brisbane City Council here; it is the whole package of changes which is going to fundamentally change how local government runs right across this State, Madam Chairman.

I’ve talked to a couple of your colleagues who are members of your party, through you, Madam Chairman, to those opposite; I told them what the Leader of the Opposition said last week in the Council Chamber when he said, ‘These are going to be good for country councils.’ Well, I would repeat the comment that I got from one of those councillors, Madam Chairman, but it would be considered unparliamentary language to use in this place, Madam Chairman, in the language he described the Leader of the Opposition with.

So, Madam Chairman, this is, I guess, the conundrum for those opposite. They’re sitting here in the bubble, and they’ve own little world where they think that what they’re doing and what they’re pushing and trying to achieve to get their outcome that we clearly demonstrated and clearly see the direct results of winning wards in Brisbane, what they’re forcing upon the rest of the State, they don’t care about. They’re only interested in their own political survival, Madam Chairman. They’re only interested in their own political goals. They don’t care about the collateral damage that they’re going to do; they don’t care about anyone else’s views.

I’ve spoken to a fair few councillors in the last week, and I tell you what, Madam Chairman, I’ve only found—and I’m going to be very careful here, I don’t want to offend Councillor SRI. I only found five councillors who I’ve managed to speak to so far who think this is a fantastic idea for these changes—five out of 579. There’s 579 councillors, in Brisbane City Council and—


Chairman: Councillor BOURKE, your microphone is off.

Councillor BOURKE: —there’s only five councillors, Madam Chairman, who are in support of these changes—five out of 579 Councillors that are in support. So, obviously, I don’t know who the Minister—when the Minister goes on to say—where the Minister goes on and says, ‘I’ve spoken to hundreds of your colleagues’, I don’t know who he’s talking to—



- 15 -

Councillor BOURKE: —I don’t know who he’s talking to, Madam Chairman. He might have talked 20 times each to the five Labor Councillors in this place. I don’t know who he’s talking to, because I tell you what: local government in this State is not asking for these changes.

It’s really interesting that the State Government has this selective ability to implement recommendations of reports. Because while Belcarra doesn’t talk about changing the electoral system, what does talk about changes or maintaining the electoral system was the Soorley report, Madam Chairman, which the Local Government Minister seems to have just picked up, put in the bottom of the drawer and completely ignored. Because it doesn’t recommend these changes either. It was the report into the 2016 local government elections with Jim Soorley, former Lord Mayor of Brisbane; Pam Parker, former mayor of a large SEQ council; and Wayne Kratzmann, former mayor of a regional council—all well respected in the local government family. Did their report call for any of these changes? No. No, it didn’t.

So why, Madam Chairman, is the State Government so hell bent on implementing these changes? The community isn’t asking for them; councillors aren’t asking for them with the exception of the five opposite, so why, Madam Chairman? What is driving it? All it can be put down to is that BCC Labor election review report which said this is going to be a good idea because we might win some more wards.

Well, we’ve now seen that this is a complete political attack on local government. If it wasn’t, if it wasn’t, then the Minister would have had a communications plan from day one. The Minister would have released all the information on day one. The Minister would have provided genuine consultation on day one. He would have had public hearings, opportunities for the community to have their say, forums for councillors to have their say, Madam Chairman, and actually engage collaboratively with the local government family, and they have not.

They have drip fed information out, week after week, to be the most divisive and secretive way possible, Madam Chairman, so that local government couldn’t formulate a view, so that an answer couldn’t be put forward, so it couldn’t be challenged, Madam Chairman. Then they are going to ram it through Parliament in a little over two months without proper engagement or proper consultation.

The Labor Party likes to stand up in this place and go: you should be engaging with people; you should be talking to people; you should be letting them have their say. Well, where are the public hearings? Where are the opportunity for the community, and where is the opportunity for councils from the Cape to Coolangatta to have their say on this amendment, Madam Chairman? It’s not there. And it won’t be in a genuine fashion because the Minister’s own words condemn him where he said in the media that he was going to have this wrapped up and in place before the end of the financial year—sorry, well and truly before the council elections.

They’re not open to changes. They’re not open to any consultation that’s genuine. They just want to implement these reforms driven out of a political agenda to interfere in local government. Local government won’t stand for it, Madam Chairman. Local government won’t.

The Minister has been put on notice by the President of the LGAQ where this is tantamount to ripping up the partnership in government agreement that local government has had with State Government for many years. It is literally ripping up all of the hard work that local government has done to rebuild communities, to provide services.

Local government takes care of some 60-odd, nearly 70% of the infrastructure and facilities that are in our communities across the State on about three per cent of the annual tax take collectively from income tax. We do the heavy lifting in our communities, and we are not the plaything and should never be the


- 16 -

plaything of state governments who just want to run political agendas and interfere in the democratically elected processes that govern local government.


Councillor MURPHY.

Councillor MURPHY: Yes, thank you very much, Madam Chairman; I rise in support of this motion. We’ve heard a lot in this debate about what was and what isn’t in the Belcarra Report. We know that most of the reforms that the Minister foreshadowed in his email have nothing to do with the Belcarra Report. That’s been established by most Councillors now.

In the Sunday email which we all received, the Minister said, ‘Our proposed reforms informed by the Belcarra Report, and discussions with hundreds of you and your colleagues, include—dot.’ It’s funny; like Councillor BOURKE, I cast a wide net around my local government colleagues looking for any of the hundreds of councillors that have been consulted on these changes, and like Councillor BOURKE, do you think I’ve been able to find a single one—a single one other than the five opposite? No. Okay.

So, let’s be clear: these councillors don’t exist. They don’t exist. They are phantom councillors that the Minister has made up—and he can sue me for defamation all he wants, Councillor JOHNSTON, because these councillors calling for these reforms do not exist. They are false.

Madam Chairman, let’s talk a little bit about Belcarra. Now, Belcarra was a corruption probe. It was led by a very good man in Alan MacSporran QC. He uncovered allegations of systemic corruption against persons in local government, many of whom were either formally or informally affiliated with the Labor Party. How sad must he be right now watching from the sidelines as this Minister weaponises a report which was all about cleaning up corruption in order to manipulate the electoral process.

It reminds me of one of my favourite films, Lord of the Rings. ‘But they were all of them deceived, for another ring was made: in the land of Mordor, in the fires of Mount Doom, the dark lord Sauron forged, in secret, a master ring to control all others. And into this ring, he poured his cruelty, his malice, and his will to dominate all life. One ring to rule them all.’

How sad, Madam Chairman, must Alan MacSporran be as the Local Government Minister builds a massive Trojan horse, and in it he puts compulsory preferential voting, compulsory candidate training, new Opposition staffers funded, no doubt, by ratepayers, proportional representation in undivided councils, and undisclosed regulation of discretionary funding. On the side of this great Trojan horse he has constructed, he paints in red letters: Belcarra Reforms—one political fix to change it all.

Madam Chairman, it’s beyond belief that the Minister thought that this would be a good idea, that no one would notice that he just slipped these things in, and perhaps he is embolden. Of course, we know that he changed the Queensland Electoral Act with just nine minutes’ notice and a quick discussion in the corridor with his colleagues. Perhaps he is emboldened because it did win them the last State election. So why wouldn’t they give it another go.

Let’s never forget, Madam Chairman, that the party which has a systemic problem with local government corruption in Queensland is the Labor Party. The only council which has been dismissed in recent memory was stacked to the hilt with Labor Party hacks. As I’ve mentioned before, the Labor Party is steeped in a great tradition of sleaze and criminality. They learn it in the union movement and they take it with them through into their political lives.

Councillor CUMMING said before, you know, he was bending over backwards to extol the benefits of compulsory preferential voting. He said, oh, you know, it could benefit any party. But, Madam Chairman, that’s not what he said after the 2016 Council election, where he said it would exclusively benefit the Labor Party. It would have got us another two wards. He’s literally told journalists this.


- 17 -

This is written down in black and white, and he comes in here and tries to tell us, that’s not what I said. This could benefit anyone. Rubbish.

Madam Chairman, on no fewer than five occasions in their report, which I think we’re all starting to learn now, the Labor Party report into the 2016 Council election is the real document that is behind these changes. It is the real source, the fountainhead of all the reforms that the Local Government Minister is pursuing. Councillor CASSIDY, he couldn’t help himself, he had to come in and defend his good mate, Stirling Hinchliffe. He said this is all about our political strategy. Madam Chairman, only in the fantastic mystical, magic world of the Labor Opposition would the local government reforms being proposed exclusively by the State Labor Government be about our political strategy. You know, this is—we managed to get them to do this somehow.

He said, you should just focus on running this city. Well, Madam Chairman, we can do both things, and we do both things each and every week in this Council Chamber. Believe me, we run this city far better than the Labor Party ever did when they were in Office. When they were in Office, this city was a complete shambles. But you know what: we will come in here, and we will talk about these changes that are proposed to the Local Government Act, because it’s not just about this Council. It’s about—as Councillor BOURKE said—all of local government across Queensland, and they shouldn’t have to suffer at the hands of this Minister because of a political fix that is exclusively targeted at Brisbane.

So, Madam Chairman, this is a blatant attack on local government. It’s a centralisation of power into George Street, and it’s simply a political fix to get more Labor Councillors here in this place, and we won’t stand for it. We will continue to raise it until the Minister clarifies exactly what it is he is proposing.


DEPUTY MAYOR, right of reply.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Madam Chairman, just briefly, it is quite clear that the Labor Party doesn’t want to talk about this. They don’t want to have a debate on this matter. They are not interested in the community having a say on this matter. They simply want it rammed through in absolute consistency with their 2016 election report. It just links into everything that we’re seeing them do. They so far in the lead-up to the 2020 Council elections appear to have released only two policies that I’m aware of.

One of them is to change the speed limit in the CBD to 30 km per hour. The other is that they will trial a grid of protected bike lanes in the CBD. They’re the two policies that have been released by the Labor Party so far, and it’s quite clear why: because they’ve been putting all of their efforts into this political strategy—all of their lobbying, all of their chats with the State Government into winning by hook or by crook.

So, Madam Chairman, it can’t be any more transparent than it is. We will continue to expose what Labor is up to, and we will continue to make sure that we give every opportunity for people to have a say on this, whether it’s councillors across the State, whether it is the community, there should be due process followed. So we will continue to push, Madam Chairman, we will continue to condemn the lack of consultation, the lack of notice, the lack of due process that is being forced upon local governments. Madam Chairman, what message would it send if the Labor Party in George Street and the Labor Party here in City Hall were allowed to get away with this? What message would it send?

The Premier, the Local Government Minister, make proclamations about openness, transparency and the fair and free running of democratic elections. This is what they say, yet on the other hand, what they do is they try and manipulate the system to Labor’s advantage. It is just so disappointing that we are seeing this imposed on local government in this way. So, Madam Chairman, we condemn the Minister for Local Government for trying to wrap this up and hide these changes under Belcarra. It is certainly not the case for compulsory preferential voting.


- 18 -

The first thing that was mentioned on the Minister’s list was compulsory preferential voting. That is the most important thing to the State Government, according to their own list. That is the most important thing to the Opposition according to their own demands. So we will not hear of any suggestion that this is about Belcarra. It is not. Compulsory preferential voting has nothing to do with corruption; it has nothing to do with the investigation into the last election. It is purely about politically advantaging the Labor Party. We must not let this stand.

Chairman: I will now put the motion.

The Chairman submitted the motion to the Chamber and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillors Peter CUMMING and Nicole JOHNSTON immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.


AYES: 20 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona HAMMOND, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

NOES: 6 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK and Jonathan SRI.

ABSTENTIONS: 1 - Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON.

Chairman: We now return to Question Time.

Councillor SRI.

Question 2

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. Late at night, after most visitors to Brisbane’s CBD have gone home, loud music is played continuously in the covered deck area of King George Square for the explicit purpose of deterring homeless people from sleeping there. This music is turned off again around sunrise. What does this say about our city’s attitude to the marginalised and homeless? Do you support this morally reprehensible response to the presence of rough sleepers in Council owned public spaces?

Chairman: LORD MAYOR.

LORD MAYOR: Well, Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor SRI for the question. Madam Chairman, as I have said before in this place, this Council has a significant number of programs that we utilise to assist those in our city who are homeless. Madam Chairman, I am also conscious of the fact that, in recent years, I have made significant additions to the budget to make sure that there are opportunities for additional services for those people who are living rough, living on our streets, Madam Chairman, in this city.

Some of those are well documented. In particular, Madam Chairman, we have made available for—I’m about to be interrupted, I think.

Chairman: Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair. Just on relevance. The question was about whether the LORD MAYOR supports the deterrent music in King George Square.

Chairman: Thank you.


- 19 -

LORD MAYOR.

LORD MAYOR: Well, Madam Chairman, I don’t know what sort of music is played up there. I must admit, I’m not up there of a night time, and I don’t know the nature of that, or what hours that music might be played for. We have, of course, TV screens up there as well that operate significant hours of the day, Madam Chairman. So these things are undertaken.

But what I will say is that it’s important that we continue to work with other agencies in relation to homelessness in the city. I will continue to do that, continue to work to how we can make improvements in terms of the transitioning of people from our streets to—

Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: The question was quite specifically about the music. If the LORD MAYOR doesn’t know, then—

Chairman: And, Councillor SRI, the LORD MAYOR is providing context. He has explained he has not been up there at those times of night, but he is providing context.

LORD MAYOR.

LORD MAYOR: So, Madam Chairman, it’s the question which is in relation to music, apparently, on deck, but I am just simply saying, Madam Chairman, that the city has many people in many situations in terms of homelessness, and in a broader sense, we are absolutely trying to deal with that issue, Madam Chairman. It’s an important issue, and it’s one where we cannot do it alone. We have to do it with the assistance of other agencies. It’s one of the reasons that I partnered with Micah, Madam Chairman, to make sure that, in terms of medical services on the streets at night, Madam Chairman, are provided.

So, Madam Chairman, I understand Councillor SRI’s question, but I also know, Madam Chairman, that there is a lot that is being done by this Council in this space. As I have said previously, we cannot do it alone. It is not a prime responsibility of this Council. It is, Madam Chairman, a State responsibility primarily, but we have contributed to that in a number of ways.

We’ve contributed through providing accommodation through Brisbane Housing Company. We’ve contributed through various other aspects that we undertake, whether it’s Homeless Connect, Madam Chairman, whether it is through those opportunities at night. We have officers of the Council that also deal with those people who are homeless in our city. When I refer to that, I’m referring again to looking at ways we can transition.

We also have a number of voluntary services on our streets. I’m grateful to those who do provide those services. They are necessary services. But my wish at the end of the day is to see wherever possible, and we can’t do it in every case because of mental health issues, but wherever possible to be able transition people from their circumstances of rough sleeping into more formalised accommodation arrangements. That’s our desire; that’s what we will continue to work towards. But we can’t, as I say, do it alone. We have to do it with the assistance of other agencies. We offer rates relief to many agencies across this city that provide housing, Madam Chairman, and we do that willingly and increasingly, Madam Chairman, as housing becomes available, as that housing is administered by community organisations.

We again are prepared to assist with that, as we have, in more recent times increased our assistance towards Brisbane Housing Company in terms of their costs of creating accommodation opportunities in our city.

Chairman: Councillor HAMMOND.

Question 3

Councillor HAMMOND: My question is to the Chair of Infrastructure Committee, Councillor COOPER. The precinct around the Prince Charles Hospital in my ward in Marchant is


- 20 -

experiencing growth with the construction of two car parks being built by the State Government which is impacting on Council’s surrounding road network. Can you please give an overview of what Council is doing to reduce this impact, and update us on any discussions you may have had with the State?

Chairman: Councillor COOPER.

Councillor COOPER: Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I thank Councillor HAMMOND for the very timely question. I recently met with Minister Anthony Lynham on 21 February to discuss the Prince Charles Hospital expansion plans, particularly in relation to these two car parks that are being built by the State Government. When you actually consider what is on that very large site, it’s a 675-bed hospital in Chermside. So it’s not just the main healthcare for northsiders; it’s not only one of the State’s premier cardiac hospitals for Queensland, but it also services northern New South Wales and offers services for heart and lung transplants, adult cystic fibrosis, adult congenital heart disease and complex cardiac care.

The hospital employs around 3,200 staff who provide care for over 420,000 people each and every year. Off their own website, that hospital staff supported more than 86,000 emergency department visits, more than 280,000 outpatients. It has also serviced the Cooper family in times of crisis. So it’s an excellent facility as is Holy Spirit Northside, also in this location.

So it’s a remarkable level of service, and I would like to particularly place on the record my appreciation and respect for all of the staff and volunteers who work at the hospital and provide care, fantastic care, for patients and their families when they need assistance at their most desperate.

This site is designated for community infrastructure since 25 August 2000, which means the hospital is exempt from Council planning. The hospital has grown, and grown significantly. There are concerns about access to the hospital for both staff and patients, as well as the surrounding local community who are finding their streets filled with hospital staff, and this is something that is an ongoing issue for Council to deal with.

When you look at the Holy Spirit Northside, they also have between—and this is off their website—between 200 and 500 beds. They are accessing off Rode Road, so a lot of things going on. We’ve got a new purpose-built treatment and rehabilitation facility also being built on the campus and due for opening in 2020.

As I highlighted to Dr Lynham, who’s the local State member, Council is very keen to work with all of the stakeholders to improve safety to the Prince Charles Hospital precinct. The Minister advised me at our meeting—he was, I have to say, very positive about his engagement with Council. He said that the State Government had recently completed a master plan for the site, and while Council hasn’t been involved in that master plan, the Minister undertook that Council would receive a copy of that master plan. So he confirmed that the State Government proposes to build two car parks under the planning exemption which would propose about 750 spaces in each. Both car parks will be accessed in and out of Council’s road network.

So Council, in response to this, has offered to meet with all the relevant stakeholders and develop a Move Safe plan for the hospital precinct to identify the best ways to try and mitigate the impact on the local road network and to make sure that there is a safe entry and exit point for all users of this important facility. As I discussed with the Minister at our meeting, we are proposing to draft a memorandum of understanding (MOU) which reflects Dr Lynham’s in-principle support for the State and the Council to work together and to deliver a signalised intersection on Hamilton Road.

We believe that this is a really important way for us to form a partnership to make sure we get a great outcome so we continue to see fantastic health and care services for the northside, indeed, all of Brisbane, and in fact parts of northern New South Wales that are being serviced by this particular facility.


- 21 -

The Move Safe plan is one of the specific recommendations that came out of the work that we did last year. So we want to work together with the stakeholders, whether that is the staff, the planning areas of the health department, Council’s understanding of the local road network, the local State member and, of course, the wonderful local Councillor, Councillor HAMMOND, to make sure that we consider the development that is going on, and we minimise the impact on the local community who are very, very supportive of the hospital, but are seeking some support from Council to make sure that the local road network is not unduly impacted by this significant growth that is being experienced.

We think it is a great outcome. I look forward to our continuing discussions. I look forward to the completion of the MOU so we can get on and deliver a great outcome for the residents of this city. Thank you.

Chairman: Further questions?


Question 4

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, not real good on MOUs out my way, Councillor COOPER.

My question is to the LORD MAYOR. Cyclists and pedestrians have reported to Council that the public pathway through the parkland in Howard Smith Wharves, a key connector between the city and New Farm, is regularly being blocked by food trucks, delivery vehicles and tradies utes, and is in a state of significant disrepair. What will you do to ensure this important shared pathway through public parkland is open for cyclists and pedestrians, and is safe to use?


LORD MAYOR: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. I appreciate the question, Councillor JOHNSTON, and there’s no doubt that Howard Smith Wharves has proven to be a tremendously popular place making experience in our city. We’re very grateful, Madam Chairman, that it has been successful. We’re also pleased that people have voted with their feet in big numbers. I’ve been down there I think four times in the last week to different public events, some of them not-for-profit events, that have been held in that precinct. It’s very popular, and it’s just a shame that the State Government prevented us from undertaking that development for a number of years, which was just wrong. We wanted to get on with it and develop it, and I think they are now some of the biggest supporters of it.

Councillor JOHNSTON, directly to your question, we are very conscious of the pathway along Howard Smith Wharves. We have, in fact, had meetings very recently in relation to that. You will see some action in respect of that in the very near future. We’re conscious that some of the pebbles are becoming loose. It’s not acceptable, and that’s been made very clear to the operators that that does need to be fixed. So, Madam Chairman, we are going to see in a couple of weeks’ time down there the Art Series Hotel opened. It will be another—


Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Madam Chairman, my question was not in any way about the development at Howard Smith Wharves; it was about the public pathway through the parkland and what is the LORD MAYOR going to do to ensure it’s open for cyclists and safe to use.

Chairman: And the LORD MAYOR was providing context, and I’m sure he will get to that.

LORD MAYOR—he has five minutes.

LORD MAYOR: Yes, gee, I thought I had been down that pathway myself. Maybe, I don’t know, I thought I’d made it pretty clear, Madam Chairman. I don’t know how I can make it clearer in terms of an answer—



- 22 -

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Councillor JOHNSTON! For the third time, stop calling out across the Council Chamber.

LORD MAYOR.

LORD MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman. So, Madam Chairman, the reality is that the development has a significant number of facilities within its operation. There is a car park that exists within that facility, and we are aware, Madam Chairman, of the pathway issues. So, Councillor JOHNSTON, I’m just saying to you today, and saying to the Chamber today, that we have had meetings in relation to these things, and we have advised the operators that changes need to be made, but also that the pathway itself needs to be better held together in terms of the looseness of those gravels.

There is an issue also that we need to be sure of, and that is that the speed of cycling through the site is not at a level that will cause an impact on patrons to the venue, the various visitors to the various venues that are associated with Howard Smith Wharves. So, there are many complicated aspects down there in terms of the operations, Madam Chairman. There are many function rooms that have to require an access and ability to be able to get the needs of those various facilities to those facilities.

But the operations—it’s early days. This is a venue that only opened late last year. It has, as I said, been proven to be extremely popular, Madam Chairman, and that’s a good thing for the city. People are raving about it. They do visit the site. But we will continue to make improvements as we go.

Chairman: Further questions?

Councillor MURPHY.

Question 5

Councillor MURPHY: Thanks, Madam Chairman. My question is to the Chair of the Finance Committee, Councillor ADAMS. As you would be aware, over three years ago Council entered into an agreement with BMD to build the Cannon Hill Community Links, an 18-hole public access golf course for the eastern suburbs. Since that time, major revegetation works and the residential subdivision have been completed, but it’s a different story for work on the golf course. It was meant to open later this year, but sadly, due to the State Government Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, construction of the golf course hasn’t even started.

Staggeringly, at the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries’ request, the golf course’s retention lakes have been completely redesigned three times. They now meet world’s best practice for golf course design. However, final approval for works in the tidal area have still not been granted. My question to you is: when do you believe that the State Government will finally get out of the way of Council delivering more to see and do for the residents of Cannon Hill?

Chairman: Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Councillor MURPHY, for the question, because it is a little bit like Groundhog Day, because we definitely were here 10 months ago, and I think the year before that, and the year before that, saying again, asking the question: when are we going to get the approvals for the golf links to go through? As my response was 10 months ago, I have to say Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries have been absolutely instrumental in making sure that this has not happened in a timely fashion.

I think it’s also important to remember the history of Cannon Hill golf links which Councillor MURPHY touched on, but this actually has been on the books for 20 years at Cannon Hill. It was identified in 1998 that there was no public golf course on the southside of the river, but there hadn’t been one on the southside or in Brisbane provided for more than 70 years. Council identified the site at Cannon Hill as providing the perfect opportunity to develop a golf course.

It was not an untouched parcel of bushland which you would think the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries are claiming at the moment, but it was


- 23 -

actually a former tip site which was decommissioned in 1977. So in 1998, when BMD were awarded the contract to deliver a golf course and funded from the land sales on the remainder of this site, a contract signed by Lord Mayor Jim Soorley in 2003, we were expecting the revegetation to lead into the land sales to lead into a new golf course in a timely manner.

But what we’ve seen is actually two changes in Administration, four Lord Mayors, the development application in 2007 being approved by Council, and then appealed with environmental concerns. Now, it’s important to remember at this time that the site had not even been remediated from the former tip site, and had very little environmental significance at that time.

So, despite that, BMD addressed the environmental concerns of the appellants and received Planning and Environment Court approval in 2008. The design represented a significantly improved environmental outcome for the site, and we worked with BMD on that site, and in 2015-16 we allocated $5.3 million to the remediation of the former tip site, as is our responsibility for Council with the remediation at this site, and BMD were finally at a point able to submit the operational works for the site, which is literally the ability to start digging up the dirt, turning the remediated tip site into a high quality golf course.

What do we see that happened? All other approvals are in place, including the court approval. Operational works should have been a formality in a 20-year process, and we are still where we were 10 months ago. The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries have refused the operational works applications on the grounds of environmental concerns. They have clearly forgotten that the site was a former tip site, more than 40 years prior, and was only remediated in the last three years.

Forgive me, Madam Chair, for being sceptical, but the environmental concern and changes required by the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries feel pretty frivolous given the amount of appraisal that BMD has received for the environmental outcomes of their designs. They actually won an award for UDIA (Urban Development Institute of Australia) Queensland’s Environmental Excellence in 2018 and are going up for a national environmental excellence which will be awarded later this month on their golf course planning.

In addition to that, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries have stated that they do not even support golf courses being developed on this type of land. My question is: what type of land do they think golf courses do go on, if it’s not remediated tip sites for sport and rec uses on the southside of Brisbane—where a public golf course in Brisbane hasn’t been delivered for over 70 years, or now we can probably say 90 years, because that was 1998.

What is the point of spending months and months redesigning a golf course—and as Councillor MURPHY said, three times redesigning that golf course—if the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries are never going to support it? We even wrote to Minister Furner and urged his intervention to ensure there was no more delays, and what did I hear from Minister Furner? Crickets—not cricket, unfortunately, like golf, but actually nothing. Never received a response from Minister Furner.

In one instance, the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries actually raised more than 20 concerns and suggested redesigns that were practically impossible from an engineering perspective on a golf course. I think it is about time the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries stopped playing games with this project and get on with approving it. The residents of Cannon Hill have been waiting for 20 years for this golf course, and it is because of this golf course that we will see the improvement in the environmental outcomes for this area. Thank you, Madam Chair.


Chairman: Point of order; Councillor JOHNSTON.


- 24 -

547/2018-19At that juncture, Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON moved, seconded by Councillor Jonathan SRI, that the Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion

Calling on Council to immediately cease work on the Cannon Hill Golf Course project and redirect any current and future funds into flood mitigation in Brisbane.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, three minutes to urgency.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. We’ve just heard from Councillor ADAMS that this golf course has been a debacle from day one. Now, I know that, and I thank Councillor SRI who has supported motions that I’ve moved in this place previously, as has the Labor Party, calling on Council to redirect funds for a golf course into drainage and backflow valves.

There is a significant problem with this golf course. It’s clearly not going ahead. It is stuck. It wasn’t a good idea in the first place in terms of the expenditure of public money. The public funds should be better redirected to flood mitigation works like improved drainage in the low-lying parts of our city and, importantly, delivering on all the backflow valves recommended out of the flood report after the 2011 floods. This Council stopped doing those things, particularly the backflow valves; that’s just been forgotten.

It’s clear that this project is not working. It’s been delayed; the money has been rolled over. It needs to be redirected to flood mitigation in the city. That would be a much better use of public funds, and if there is support for a golf course, it should come from private funding. Sadly, we are seeing golf courses being lost to development because there isn’t a demand for new golf courses.

I mean, it’s a staggering thing that this Administration is thinking about more golf courses. We’ve already got two on the northside that are publicly owned—at Victoria Park and St Lucia. There’s multiple golf courses in my ward and on the southside of Brisbane, yet this Council is going out and funding a new public golf course that there’s no community demand for, and spending millions of dollars that would be better redirected into flood mitigation works like drainage upgrades and backflow valves in the city.

I’m calling on all Councillors to support the urgency motion to redirect this funding now and in the future to a more practical outcome for all Brisbane residents.

Chairman: I will now put the motion for urgency.


Thereupon, Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON and the DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER) immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared lost.


AYES: 2 - Councillors Jonathan SRI and Nicole JOHNSTON.

NOES: 20 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona HAMMOND, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

ABSTENTIONS: 5 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS and Charles STRUNK.


- 25 -

Chairman: We will now go back to Question Time.

Councillor CUMMING.

Question 6

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. In the lead-up to International Women’s Day last year, you said: ‘The important thing for me as we approach International Women’s Day is to look more and more at what we can do to advance the genuine cause of women in our community in terms or roles and responsibilities.’ You also said that: ‘actions speak louder than words’. Can you please tell the Chamber what specific actions you’ve taken in the past year to advance the cause of women in terms of roles and responsibilities?


LORD MAYOR: Yes, well thanks very much, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor CUMMING for the question. Well, Madam Chairman, in the last year, of course, we have appointed Councillor Vicki Howard to our Cabinet. We now have in this place a situation where women form half the Cabinet. Your role, Madam Chairman, as Chairman. We have, of course—and I would like to announce today that Council has just engaged Ms Tash Tobias who will be the new Divisional Manager of Lifestyle and Community Services. So, she will replace the former occupant of that role. Whilst we wish Paul well, Madam Chairman, in his future, it will be wonderful to have Tash Tobias in this Council as Divisional Manager in that role.

So that’s what I’ve done, Councillor CUMMING. My question to you is: what have you done, as I look across the other side of the Chamber?

Chairman: Further questions—

Councillor COOK: Point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order; Councillor COOK.

548/2018-19At that juncture, Councillor Kara COOK moved, seconded by Councillor Jared CASSIDY, that the Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion

That the Brisbane City Council commits to at least 50% women on all Brisbane City Council boards by 2024.

Chairman: Councillor COOK, to urgency, please.

Councillor COOK: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is urgent. It is urgent because we’ve just heard from the LORD MAYOR exactly what he’s done over the last 12 months—nothing, effectively. It is urgent—


Chairman: Order! Order!—


Councillor COOK: —It is urgent—

Chairman: Order!

Councillor MURPHY!—


Chairman: —Councillor SIMMONDS!

Councillor MATIC!

When we are all silent, we will continue.

Councillor COOK.

Councillor COOK: Thank you, Madam Chair. It is urgent because this is Women’s Week. We will celebrate International Women’s Day this Friday. The theme for this year is


- 26 -

Balance for Better. There is no time more urgent than now for this change to be made. Unfortunately, in this city, under this LNP LORD MAYOR and this LNP Administration, there is no balance. There is no balance for women, and there is no balance when it comes to the number of women on Council boards.

Madam Chair, let’s take a look at a couple of Council boards which demonstrate why this is urgent. The Urban Futures Brisbane Board, as listed on the Brisbane City Council website today. Let’s list them: Bevan, John, Nigel, Chris, Guy, Greg, Andrew, Geoff, Noel, Stephen. That’s it. Not one woman. Where are the Elles? Where are the Lucys? Where are the Ruths? Not here, Madam Chair, not in this Council.

Next, the City of Brisbane Investment Corporation Pty Ltd Board: Edward, Colin, Neill, another Neil, another Neil—three Neils, Madam Chair; Bruce, Jerry. The only woman, Madam Chair, Maria—one out of eight. Madam Chair, there are many more examples. I don’t have time to go through them all today, that’s how urgent this is. What an absolute disgrace. The largest Council in Australia, and we can’t seem to manage at least equal representation on these boards. This is a terrible indictment on this LNP Administration, and it’s time for change.

This is urgent today because we know that companies with more women on their boards have been shown to financially outperform companies that have no women on their boards. We know that companies with women in key board—I’ll continue when there’s silence on the other side of the Chamber, Madam Chair.

We know that there is a link between more women on boards and good corporate governance credentials. We know that there are plenty of women in this city with the skills and experience we need on these boards. We know we’re dealing with a systemic bias, and we must challenge the system by setting clear targets and meeting them. We also know that Rod Harding and Labor called for these changes in 2016, and this LNP Administration has done nothing. This LORD MAYOR has done nothing.

This time last year, the LORD MAYOR said the most significant thing he had done for women was appoint a woman to head up Metro. The LORD MAYOR said this time last year that actions speak louder than words. The only actions we have seen from you, LORD MAYOR, and your LNP mates are sexist, cat-clawing gestures, telling Labor Councillors to grow a pair, and victim blaming. LORD MAYOR, this is your chance: stand with us today, support this motion, support committing at least 50% on boards by 2024.


Chairman: Councillor MARX, please do not call out.

Councillor HAMMOND!

I will now put the motion for urgency.


Thereupon, Councillors Kara COOK and Peter CUMMING immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared lost.



NOES: 20 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona HAMMOND, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,


- 27 -

Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

Chairman: Councillor McKENZIE, Question Time.

Question 7

Councillor McKENZIE: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My question is to the Chair of the City Planning Committee, Councillor BOURKE. Can you please give this Chamber an update on what enforcement action Council has taken regarding the Broadway Hotel? Can you also outline this Administration’s commitment to heritage and character housing in this city?

Chairman: Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor McKENZIE for the question. Councillor McKENZIE, you are right; we continue our work to make sure that the Broadway Hotel is protected, despite the fact that there has been a number of fires on the site over recent years.

Of course, as the whole Chamber knows, the Broadway Hotel is a State heritage listed place, and over the last eight months since that second fire back in September last year, we have seen numerous pieces of correspondence between ourselves and the State Government about what pieces of legislation and what avenues are actually available to both the State and to Council to actually take action against the owners of the Broadway to make sure that the site is safe.

The most recent of those was when Council took the action last Wednesday to issue an enforcement notice, and I am aware that the State has since then issued a further stop work notice, but the enforcement notice is the document that is in place at the moment that is restricting the ability of the owner to actually carry out any demolition work on the site.

That particular notice was following a joint inspection by the owners, Brisbane City Council officers and State Government officers, as well as an engineering firm, Councillor McKENZIE, where they conducted an inspection of the site, and a report was provided back to the State Government. I’m just going to read from the report, because it is very important, I think, that we get an understanding of some of the works that the enforcement is going to be able to enforce.

So, there are local areas where there is structural instability, including parapets along the street frontage, the chimney—chimneys are presently unstable and require temporary supports, and several walls to the rear of the property are presently unsupported and will require temporary supports as well. The roof structure that’s in there needs to be removed, and then propping up of these items needs to be carried out.

Madam Chairman, if that work is carried out as per the report that we have been provided, the advice I have from the Council officers is that they can then get the owner to carry out further works. My understanding from correspondence from the State, and statements that have been made by the State Government, is that they would like to see a roof put on the building; they would also like to see other actions taken, and that is our view as well. That is our view as well in terms of protecting the heritage of The Broadway. But what we do need is these initial works undertaken.

But it is a bit interesting that we’ve had to use the Council powers rather than the State using State powers to protect a State heritage listed building, Councillor McKENZIE, because any person out there in the community would think that the State would have powers to protect and enforce damage, or make owners repair buildings that are State heritage listed, and that Council would have the ability to carry out our powers for locally heritage listed. Well, what this whole exercise has demonstrated is that there aren’t those powers and there aren’t the tools available to the State Government to make these.


- 28 -

At that time, 3.51pm, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Ryan MURPHY, assumed the Chair.

So, we’ve worked collaboratively with them to get to the point where we’re at, but the most recent enforcement notice is not all encompassing. We need to make sure the enforcement notice is carried through. The applicant has a number of days—or the owner, sorry, I should say, has a number of days to respond to that enforcement notice, Madam Chair—Mr Chairman, and we are working now to make sure that those actions are undertaken.

But it does turn me to the letter that we’ve also received last week. Because the LORD MAYOR wrote to the Minister back in September last year, Minister Enoch, seeking powers to have greater enforcement ability. So, this was one of the outcomes of the Plan your Brisbane exercise, Mr Chair, and we wrote to the Minister saying we would like greater powers to enforce local heritage place restoration and maintenance. We received a letter back last week advising that we would now receive those powers. I mean, only five months, that’s not bad, I don’t think, for the State Government. So, they’re now formulating the regulation, and we wait to see the detail of that regulation.

But the community is quite clear. They want to see heritage and history protected, and there is no better friend of heritage and history and heritage buildings in this place than this side of the Chamber, because we are the only ones who have put in place a Pre-1911 overlay. We are the only ones who have gone and sought these powers, and we continue to protect and preserve the history and heritage of our city as we go through city planning exercises right across the city. So, when we do neighbourhood plans, we do that detailed investigation, we check out if there’s sites that have been identified by the community, and we carry that out in consultation with the community.

But, what we have seen unfortunately is the deficiency that there is in the State legislation when it comes to protecting State heritage places in the city.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor BOURKE, your time has expired.

Further questions?

Councillor CUMMING.

Question 8

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Mr Acting Chair; my question is to the Chair of the Field Services Committee, Councillor HOWARD. I refer to the removal of a fig tree in Vernon Terrace, Newstead, that caused considerable anger amongst the local residents. One person who described herself as a blue-blooded Liberal, was particularly scathing of your treatment of residents trying to resolve the issue, saying you refused repeated requests from residents for a meeting, and you refused to show residents arborist reports that supposedly said the tree could not be saved.

The resident described scant information you supplied them as misleading, and further told reporters, ‘It’s a total and utter lack of consultation, treated with utter contempt.’ The self-proclaimed LNP supporter also said, ‘This is not a political thing for us; it’s just very sad, but I hope when people go to the polling booths at the next local government election, that they remember that Vicki is vandalising our suburb.’ Residents want to know: are there any more trees in this area at risk of removal.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor HOWARD: Well, thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman, and I particularly thank Councillor CUMMING for the question, because it does allow me to set the record straight about the most appalling, disgraceful lies that were told to my community, and particularly by the person that you have referred to, Councillor CUMMING. But can I say to everyone in this Chamber: we never want to see a tree removed. This tree has been monitored for more than 10 years.

Councillor CUMMING, every day, I receive requests from some of the people sitting in this very Chamber asking me to remove a tree for various reasons. But can I say to you, to the Chamber, we do not take any of these decisions lightly.


- 29 -

This particular tree has been causing more than $300,000 worth of damage to the local property. It’s been causing damage to our infrastructure, and we have worked for more than 10 years to try and save it. About three years ago, we have had expensive work done to the adjoining property and, as a result of that, there is just nothing more that we could do to save this tree.

Can I say to you, Councillor CUMMING, however—and following on from Councillor COOK’s recent motion, one of the things that distressed me greatly was to see local State representation standing in front of a sign referring to me as a piece of meat.


Councillor HOWARD: Now, in this day and age—and when we talk about—when we talk about women in politics, when we talk about women standing up for their community, which is what I was doing, to have a local community group depict me as a piece of meat is appalling. What is more appalling, though, Councillor CUMMING, is to have Grace Grace and a female member of her staff standing in front of a sign that said just that—


Councillor HOWARD: —so—


Councillor HOWARD: —where was Councillor COOK then? Where is Councillor COOK—


Councillor HOWARD: —no indication, nothing said in the local newspaper. Nobody reports this. Nobody reports that the local State member, standing in front of a sign depicting another politician, another female politician, as a piece of meat.

Now, I have quite a thick skin, and so we know as politicians we have to do that. Can I just say that my local Rotary group was appalled—absolutely appalled. In fact, the signs were removed. So, can I just say to you—

Councillor COOK: Point of order.

Deputy Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor COOK.

Councillor COOK: Can we bring Councillor HOWARD back to the question? I don’t think that anyone is disagreeing with her sentiments and the appalling nature of the signs, but can she come back to the question?

Deputy Chairman: Thank you, Councillor COOK, I don’t uphold your point of order.

Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman. Of course I’ll come back to the question. Councillor CUMMING has reported things that were said in my community. I am putting the record straight. I am also putting on record my disgust that the group that he’s referring to should take the steps that they did.

So, let me say once again to you, Mr Deputy Chairman, and to the Chamber: this tree has caused problems for more than 10 years. Do you know why? It was planted in a footpath 23 years ago under a development application that was very poorly thought out. Do you know who was part of that decision-making process? The very people who are now saying, shame, Vicki, shame—they’re the ones—




Councillor JOHNSTON: Oh, sorry, Mr Deputy Chairman, I’m sorry. Sorry about that. Councillor HOWARD is definitely making adverse reflections upon the hard-working


- 30 -

Council officers in the planning team who would have assessed this application, and I ask that her comments be withdrawn.

Deputy Chairman: I don’t uphold your point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON

Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor HOWARD: Well, thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman. Can I say that there were some very poor decisions made back in Mayor Soorley’s day, and we’re living with those decisions now, every day of the week. Every day of the week I’m looking at some trees that have been planted in the wrong—wrong species in the wrong place. Now, do we love those trees? Of course we do.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Point of order.

Deputy Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor HOWARD

Councillor GRIFFITHS.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman. The question was: are there other trees that are going to be removed nearby. That’s the question.

Deputy Chairman: Yes, I uphold your point of order, Councillor GRIFFITHS.

So, Councillor HOWARD, come to the question in the time you’ve got remaining.

Councillor HOWARD: Well, thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman, and thank you, Councillor GRIFFITHS, because the answer is no. The answer is that we monitor those trees all the time. Can I stand here and say that not one single tree will ever be removed from that street? Of course, I can’t—of course, I can’t. Trees are living, breathing things. They get disease; they fall over when lightning strikes them. But what I can say to you and to everybody else listening—

Deputy Chairman: Councillor HOWARD, your time has expired.

Councillor HOWARD: Oh, what a shame!

Deputy Chairman: Councillor WINES.

ADJOURNMENT:549/2018-19

At that time, 4.01pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steven TOOMEY, 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 4.08pm.

UPON RESUMPTION:

At that time, 4.23pm, the Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, resumed the Chair.

Chairman: As we are at 43 minutes 21 seconds, that ends Question Time.

LORD MAYOR, E&C Report please.

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 25 February 2019, be adopted.



- 31 -

LORD MAYOR: Yes, thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, just a few items to report on before coming to the formal items on today’s E&C Report.

We had a Cabinet meeting in the suburbs last Wednesday evening, Madam Chairman, out at Richlands and it was a good meeting actually. It was very engaging. Thank you for the question though Councillor CUMMING. I was disappointed that Councillor Charles STRUNK was unfortunately unwell on the night and couldn’t attend. I can inform the Council however, that former Councillor Les Bryant was there to keep an eye on operations and to intervene where necessary—


LORD MAYOR: It was a very engaging meeting. The thing I liked about the meeting was how everybody got together and had a beer afterwards. I found that very, very, very, very nice. I stayed late, Madam Chairman, it was great camaraderie among those who attended. So, Madam Chairman, I would just like to also comment on a Rotary breakfast I attended at Paddington on Thursday morning, the morning after the Cabinet in the suburbs. It was a very well attended meeting, not only of members of Rotary but quite a significant number of the local business community there as well and again, a good engagement, Madam Chairman.

There was some great work being undertaken by that particular Rotary Club and I extend my thanks to them for their contribution to our Brisbane community, and also the international involvement they have in terms of third world countries and the work that they are doing to improve the life of those people whose simple task every day is surviving. So, Madam Chairman, also then on the Saturday I had the chance to open the annual Rotary District Conference and was grateful for that invitation.

I want to acknowledge of course International Women’s Day on 8 March 2019 this coming Friday, Madam Chairman. In doing so—I actually do have a rhetorical question of Peter, Jared, Charles, Steven and Kara and that is why they didn’t support the appointment of Margaret de WIT. When it came to this Chamber—when they had a chance, Madam Chairman, to stand up and to support a woman being appointed to the South Bank Board, they couldn’t bring themselves to do it—


LORD MAYOR: Could not bring themselves to do it, Madam Chairman, so that’s why I was a bit surprised—a bit taken aback when that motion came forward today, I have to say.

Madam Chairman, Councillors will see on the building at Brisbane Square that there will be some structural changes happening there in the very near future—they’re external and they relate to the cladding. So, Madam Chairman, we don’t own that building but there has been work that’s being undertaken there and the owners will be starting that work very, very soon on the cladding in relation to that building. So, if you see some scaffolding up or whatever—I’m not sure actually how they’ll do it but, Madam Chairman, you will see obviously activity on that building. All staff will be informed virtually immediately that that work is happening.

Madam Chairman, just finally, I attended a gathering of—which was the Church of South India on Saturday as well, Madam Chairman, after I did the Rotary Annual District Conference. A small church, Madam Chairman, but a church with people from obviously South India. Well the church wasn’t small but the congregation was small but, Madam Chairman, they are an important part again of the Brisbane community and I was delighted to be able to be with them to share their Harvest Festival on Saturday.

Madam Chairman, that’s about it. So, let’s go to the report and the first one is item A. This is a proposal for generationYOU, which is a youth employability events program. Madam Chairman, this item is a Better Brisbane Proposal. This program is one of the ways which Council is ensuring that our City attracts and


- 32 -

retains skilled workers and supports young people to develop competencies and ideas.

The program’s company, Bright Conferences Pty Ltd approached Council through a Better Brisbane Proposal in September of 2017 to hold forums for 17 to 25-year olds. The generationYOU Youth Employability Program forums are aimed to improve the soft skills rather than technical skills with a focus on employability, entrepreneurship, skill development and career management to not only benefit young adults but also their employers and the communities in which they live.

The 2018 forum topics include how to create a CV, networking, enterprise skills, outstanding personal brand, and career management. So, all of these are important skills in the workforce particularly to make people employable and that’s what the sessions are designed to do—to upskill people with those fundamentals around employability. All sessions began with facilitated networking followed by invited speakers who share their experience and knowledge in the relevant field of expertise.

These sessions are free of charge and were held at The Capital. All five of the initial forums have now been delivered which saw 536 young Brisbane people attend. There were also 9,165 unique visitors to the generationYOU website. Feedback received from the program has been overwhelmingly positive and has prompted more of Brisbane’s young people to engage with Council.

So, today we have a new proposal to continue the program through 2019 and discussions between economic development and inclusive communities are being held with generationYOU to recommend four forums which will be delivered throughout 2019. The topics of those to be considered include mastering job applications, growing and nurturing your network, skills to stand out from the crowd, building an outstanding personal brand, career management panel, the future of work and driving your career with an entrepreneurial mindset—So, some double ups there but some fresh material as well. Those events once again will be intended to be held at The Capital and one event will be also held during Youth Week which this year will be 3 to 14 April 2019. The cost of the program again be shared between Economic Development and Youth Development teams but free to those people participating.

Madam Chairman, item B is the acquisition of land at 64 and 68 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street at Mt Gravatt East. So this, Madam Chairman, is people will recall a privately owned block of land at Mt Gravatt East that was completely cleared by owners to make way for a townhouse development. While that was not illegal it did pose a huge problem for our native wildlife and we were alerted to the issue by it when residents contacted the local Councillor Krista ADAMS. Councillor ADAMS approached me about this important parcel of land and that sits right in the middle of a koala corridor.

We also had engagement, Madam Chairman, with representatives, people that are involved in koala hospitals and the issue of the fact that the koalas were using this land as part of a transferring route between Toohey Forest, Whites Hill Reserve and that of Mt Gravatt Lookout—and that representative of course, as I said previously, was from the RSPCA.

All the newly restored vegetation on these properties will be protected on this lot through Council’s Natural Assets Local Law but it will have to be revegetated with a mix of vegetation and again last time out I made reference to a certain species, koala food trees being one of them. The original intention was just to purchase two of the three blocks of land but through negotiation with the developer we have agreed to purchase all three and to on-sell 64 Carrara Street.

So, this is a block that is fully developed, Madam Chairman, and it would be resold and then those monies will be returned to the bushland’s fund. So they—68 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street will be the two that will be providing that natural corridor as is the case at present. So, in other words, we’re returning like-for-like.


- 33 -

Madam Chairman, that’s probably all I need to say on that particular issue. Thank you very much.


Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, in relation to item A, we are supportive of this item. The generationYOU are to be contracted to provide youth employment sessions and it will enable Council to continue to provide an accessible program to support young people aged 17 to 25 years to increase their employability and enterprise skill. It worked out that 836 young people attended the trial and the cost was $20,000. I think that’s $27.31 per head which seems a reasonable price. Perhaps the LORD MAYOR and his summing up, or Councillor ADAMS might say how the people are selected, I guess, whether they—just interested to know whether they came from a broad cross section of wards across the City or how they were selected but anyhow, we’ll support the trial continuing.

We’ll also be supporting item B to prevent this inappropriate housing development from proceeding. However, Madam Chair, however, this expenditure could have been avoided if the incompetent part-time Chair of the City Planning Committee, Councillor BOURKE, had acted on the Labor Opposition’s suggestion of a TLPI (Temporary Local Planning Instrument) over all low-density residential land to stop townhouses being built in that zone. This demand was made from us in November last year but it took until February for Councillor BOURKE and the QUIRK LNP Administration to belatedly act. By then the DA was lodged over the land running from Nurran to Carrara Streets and it was too late for the TLPI to stop the proposed townhouse project.

If an urgent TLPI had been lodged over this land in November, the State Government could have turned around in 48 hours like they did when this Administration stuffed up over Reddacliff Place but having failed through the planning process, Councillor ADAMS was—with her arrogant and out of touch approach towards local residents, had burnt off lots of local residents. She and he LNP were desperate to save her marginal ward and because, Madam Chair, at the end of the day, this land is not bushland, Madam Chair. It was largely a cleared piece of land, it was legally cleared by the developer, there was no VPO (Vegetation Protection Order) over the site and in fact paragraph 19 of the E&C Report states the subject properties are not included in the Bushland Acquisition Program Schedule 2006 to 2020. Well, that’s pretty obvious why that is.

Councillor has a list of genuine high-quality bushland property it seeks to purchase, no surprise these isolated pockets of land were not amongst them. They are being purchased to stop an unpopular development possibly occurring. No decision had been made on the DA, so they went and got approval anyhow, and it’s also to get Councillor ADAMS out of the mess she had dug for herself. Madam Chair, this land is not contiguous to bushland and the nearest piece of high-quality bushland is the Whites Hill Reserve which is about a kilometre away.

The other thing about koala trees is they just don’t grow overnight and our research says it could take up to 50 years for the eucalypts to grow to a level of maturity such as the koalas may wish to live in them. The other thing that we’re concerned about is, if a significant number of trees are planted and they do attract koalas into this area, the animals’ risk of being hit by motor vehicles in trying to get there. Because from Whites Hill Reserve, they’d have to cross Pine Mountain Road or Cavendish Road or Nursery Road which are all busy roads. So, instead of doing something to help the koalas, the Administration may be in fact encouraging koalas to stray from areas where they are to cross busy roads and getting hit by cars, Madam Chair.

So, this proposed purchase is not value for money, Madam Chair, and the actual money is being used to buy out the developer. We have research that shows that 64 Carrara Street, which is 2,367 square metres in area, was sold in May 2018 for $1.545 million. 68 Carrara Street, 2,386 square metres, sold in May to the


- 34 -

developer, $680,000 and 9 Nurran Street, 1,806 square metres, May 2018, again, $1.18 million. So, the developer had bought 6,559 square metres for $3.405 million and what price is he getting now for that land? Well, he’s getting some $5.2 million, Madam Chair, which on my calculations means a tidy profit of $1.795 million in 10 months, which is a 52.72% return on his money. Now, that is a very generous profit for a developer to bail out Councillor ADAMS, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I compare that to land that’s being purchased from under the bushland acquisitions scheme, the genuine fair dinkum bushland in recent times. Looking at the latest report of the bushland acquisition levy, 106 Leacroft Road, Burbank, 9 hectares of land—90,000 square metres that is—acquired on 19 November last year for $3.25 million. 75 Van Dieren Road, Pallara, 1.6 hectares—that’s 16,000 square metres—9 October last year in the low residential zone, $2.466 million. That’s less than half the cost of the Mt Gravatt East land. There’s also another property—interesting address, 0 Unnamed Road, Mount Crosby, Marstaeller Road, 76.7 hectares—which is 767,000 square metres—acquired on 14 September, $4.74 million. Another one I found interesting which is a low residential zone as well, low density residential, 258B Green Camp Road, Wakerley 5.64 hectares—that’s 56,400 square metres—nine times the size of this Mt Gravatt East land, at a price of $610,594—nine times the area of land for one ninth of the cost. Madam Chair, rate payers are not getting value for money for this purchase.

In fact, this purchase provides a precedent, Madam Chair, it provides a real precedent. It means this Administration are now prepared to use the bushland acquisition levy to try to stop unpopular development occurring. So, every proposed development anywhere where there’s been a koala seen in the area at any time—it doesn’t matter if there’s no trees, it doesn’t matter if the nearest bushland is a long way away, it doesn’t matter if it’s not value for money, there’s a chance the Brisbane City Council will move in and purchase it.

What do you think about that? But if it’s—if, if it’s necessary to help out a marginal LNP ward, that’s when it will be done. So, I’m sure we—on this side of the Chamber—and I’ll speak for Councillor JOHNSTON and Councillor SRI, I suppose—or they can speak for themselves. Councillor SRI probably doesn’t have a lot of bushland in his area but you never know, you might be able to find some Councillor SRI. We’ll be making sure we put in request after request for land to be purchased using the bushland acquisition levy and we’ll see what answer we get and I’m sure the answer will be: oh no, under our guidelines you’re not—no, no, no—you’re not on the list for this year or next year. We’re not going to purchase the land that you want purchased, but we did for Councillor ADAMS and we did for Councillor ADAMS.

Madam Chair, we have had our candidate for Holland Park, Ms Karleigh Auguston, campaigning in relation to this issue and attending the public meetings. We undertook to her that we would do whatever necessary to stop this development occurring therefore we are, as I said earlier, we are going to support this purchase, Madam Chair, even though there are many shortcomings. One thing we will commit to drawing up is a comprehensive guidelines for the expenditure of the bushland acquisition levy to ensure that matters like this—this purchase that’s coming before Council today—never happen again without going through due process and proper process and ensuring that ratepayers’ money is properly spent for what it should be spent for and not wasted.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, I thought—thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak on item B. I thought perhaps the local Councillor would stand up and speak about this matter but perhaps she’s just trying to hide given what’s happening here. I agree with Councillor CUMMING. This sets an extraordinary precedent and one that the LNP is obviously prepared to do to try and bail out a marginal LNP seat holders like Councillor ADAMS.


- 35 -

These are residential blocks, zoned low density that have been fully cleared. There is no bushland on these blocks—well there might be a few trees but essentially they’ve cleared the blocks. Now the LNP voted against Temporary Local Planning Instrument last year. In this place that could have taken action to prevent the clearing and the situation that we find ourselves in today, but the LNP Councillors in this place voted against it simply because it was not their initiative. Now, that is wrong.

We are in this mess and having to spend almost $5.5 million bailing out Councillor ADAMS because she voted against doing the right thing six months ago. Now, that’s a situation that we’re in. I mean I don’t know whether other options have been looked at. Have we looked at voluntary conservation covenants over the land to prevent the developer from building in certain areas and revegetating? That would have been a good initiative and it probably wouldn’t have cost us $5.2 something million bailing out Councillor ADAMS but I doubt they did that. Instead they’re paying a 50% profit margin to a private developer who has gone and cleared this block and they’re trying to do it simply to bail out Councillor Krista ADAMS.

Now, this same Administration are the ones who were offered free parkland at the RSPCA site at Yeerongpilly by the State Government and said: no, no, no we don’t want that land, that might cost us a few hundred thousand dollars in remediation costs. So, this is an Administration that is prepared to do one thing for the marginal LNP seat holders and will not do the same thing for other wards in Brisbane. Now, in my ward, in Oxley, we are still waiting for Council to honour the LORD MAYOR’s public request to buy back bushland. He hasn’t done it. He’s the one that went out in the paper almost four years ago and said yes, we’re going to buy back bushland in Oxley and I can tell you now, every time we discuss this in Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, Councillor McLACHLAN’s got no idea what’s going on. No, we’ve had no discussions; no, he can’t tell me we’re having any discussions; and meanwhile, that is hugely significant bushland that is at risk from development.

Now, the other problem with what is happening today is, with this one decision, Council is spending the equivalent of a year’s worth of funding on the Bushland Acquisition Program. It’s about $6 million a year that Council spends purchasing land. This $5.5 million we’re spending to bail Councillor ADAMS out is essentially meaning that other areas in our city will have to wait. Now, let’s hope that they don’t end up at risk because of the need to bail Councillor ADAMS out.

Now, the other problem that I see with all of this is that the idea of the bushland acquisition levy is to purchase and protect bushland. Now, the Bushland Acquisition Program is funded on a levy that is for a specific purpose, that purpose is being changed here today by this decision that is being brought forward. I am extremely concerned and I don’t know whether there’s been legal advice, I don’t know who’s checked it—it’s clearly been a political decision where the LORD MAYOR’s dictated down what’s going to happen—are we using this levy in the way in which we are legally meant to be. Are we using it legally to purchase land that is eligible under the bushland buy back provisions? So, I don’t know that any of those things have actually been addressed but, certainly, I have concerns that the true political purpose of this is simply to bail out Councillor Krista ADAMS.

I went and did a little bit of research about how much land costs in East—Mt Gravatt East—


Councillor JOHNSTON: Yeah, so not only as Councillor CUMMING has highlighted, have we identified that we’re paying a premium for the developer over the past 10 months since he bought the land, but I can tell you that property values of land in Mt Gravatt East don’t appear to be anything like what we’re doing here. The valuation summary included in the Council papers today is one page. It is problematic in the sense that Councillors are not being given the actual valuation report. We used to previously be given valuation reports but, you know, they’ve stopped


- 36 -

doing that. We’re given the contract, we’re given the contract but we’re not given the actual valuation report, and there seems to be some issues around the amount of money between the two different valuers. So, I can see why Council didn’t really want to give us the actual full report to find out what’s going on but there is certainly a problem, I think, with the failure to provide clear and transparent information about the true value of this land.

So, let’s see. Obviously, we have a problem that wasn’t solved in a practical way six months ago when it could have been. We could have had a conservation covenant over this land in place. We could have had a Temporary Local Planning Instrument in place last year but we did not because the LNP Administration refused to act when this matter came to Council.

Now our residents and our ratepayers have to play a second fiddle to Councillor Krista ADAMS and her seriously marginal seat. Our residents have to wait, they don’t get access to bushland funds that should be available to them because we’re prioritising $5.5 million of expenditure on low density residential land where there haven’t been wildlife sightings, where Councillor Krista ADAMS herself has voted against protecting the land. I don’t think that is good enough.

It is an appalling situation that this Administration is putting every Councillor in this place in. This Administration should have looked at other non-financial mechanisms to protect this land and they certainly are ones that we have used successfully in other parts of Brisbane, working with landholders to make sure important areas of bushland are preserved. It is extremely disappointing that this Administration is simply playing political games to protect an endangered creature which is an LNP marginal seat holder.


Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman.

Seriatim - Clauses A and BCouncillor Matthew BOURKE requested that Clause A, STORES BOARD SUBMISSION – BETTER BRISBANE PROPOSAL FOR GENERATIONYOU – YOUTH EMPLOYABILITY EVENTS, and Clause B, PROPOSED PURCHASE OF LAND LOCATED AT 64 AND 68 CARRARA STREET AND 8 NURRAN STREET, MT GRAVATT EAST, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.

Councillor BOURKE: It’s a really interesting retelling of history that we just had from the Leader of the Opposition before—the part-time Leader of the Opposition who prefers to knock down character homes than do his job as a Leader of the Opposition in this place because he seems to forget that in his over 20-plus years in this place the intent of what the Bushland Preservation Levy is. I guess that’s because, Madam Chairman, we know that the Labor Party didn’t like it from the start when Sallyanne Atkinson, the Liberal Lord Mayor of this City introduced the Bushland Preservation Levy, an initiative of the LNP Party, Madam Chairman, and—and well yeah, you might have jacked it up Councillor CUMMING but I’m going to get to that in just two seconds.

They might not have liked it. We know that they didn’t spend all the money when they were in power in this place, Madam Chairman, and we know, we know—and it’s a bit hypocritical when Councillor CUMMING stands up here and says oh we’ll get strict guidelines, well look at what they did, Madam Chairman. When they were in power in this place, the bushland levy was being spent on photocopying and on stationery, Madam Chairman, and we know that because we went back through the files when I was a Parks Chair and Councillor MATIC before me—when Councillor Abrahams was the Parks Chair in this place, the Parks Chair that couldn’t plant a tree, had to write a letter to the LORD MAYOR asking how she should go about planting trees in this city, Madam Chairman.

They were spending the bushland levy on photocopying—on photocopying, so come on Councillor CUMMING. Don’t stand up here and pontificate to the Chamber, don’t stand up here and make all high and moral statements about the


- 37 -

bushland levy, Madam Chairman, through you to the Leader of the Opposition, because it’s all hollow, because we know your history and we know your form on this place. To say let’s tighten the guidelines—because there was this illusion that was being put forward before by Councillors that this—buying bushland like this or buying a parcel of land that doesn’t have trees on it goes against everything that the bushland levy stands for.

It goes against the intent, it goes against the vibe, the Constitution—Mabo to quote The Castle, well, Madam Chairman, if you just bother to read the budget book because in the back of the budget book every year what the bushland levy can be used for, you’ll see quite clearly that this particular purchase we have before us today meets the guidelines and I’m going to read it for the benefit of the Chamber.

So the Bushland Preservation Levy environment function, in the opinion of the Council all rateable land in the Council has benefit or benefit from the acquisition and protection of natural bushland or other areas in the City and the provision of facilities for public access to those areas. Part two, the protection of other natural bushland areas in the City whether privately owned or otherwise and three, the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, management and enhancement of the City’s environment. Well, here we have a large parcel of land with recorded and reported koala sightings on it—does it not tick the boxes? Should we not as a government—if we take Councillor CUMMING at his words before, nothing should be done to save koalas in the City of Brisbane because what he said was there’s not point buying it, it’s going to be too hard, the koalas might get hit by cars, the koalas might get attacked by animals—we should just—

Councillor CUMMING: Point of order.

Councillor BOURKE: —put our hands up and do nothing—

Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Claim to be misrepresented.

Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor BOURKE: Well Hansard, that wonderful thing that we have in this place, Madam Chairman, is there and it will show your words and it will show how you weren’t misrepresented Councillor CUMMING because that’s what you said. You said we shouldn’t buy it because the koalas will be disjointed. Well it is part of a corridor and that’s reported and it’s historically reported. The residents have told the media, they’ve told Councillor ADAMS that, they’ve told Council that—you know what, they even probably told the State Government that when they did their flawed koala mapping, Madam Chairman, because there’s koalas on this block of land so you would think it would be in the State’s koala mapping. Is it in the State’s koala mapping, no, so the State Government got it massively wrong—

Councillor SRI: Point of order Madam Chair—

Councillor BOURKE: —and we know the—

Chairman: Point of order against you Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor SRI?

Councillor SRI: Will Councillor BOURKE take a question?

Chairman: Councillor BOURKE?

Councillor BOURKE: I’m on a roll, I’ve only got 10 minutes I’m sorry, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: No thank you Councillor SRI.

Councillor BOURKE: I’ve got a lot of material to cover here.

Chairman: Councillor BOURKE.


- 38 -

Councillor BOURKE: As I was saying, so the State Government got it wrong with the mapping. They got it wrong with the koala mapping, it’s not in their mapping. We know there’s massive flaws and massive holes in the State Government’s koala mapping, Madam Chairman. They’ve got it wrong. So Council stepped up to the plate and we are purchasing this block of land and we are going restore it and provide the corridor back for the koalas that move between Toohey Forest and Whites Hill Reserve.

The Opposition might be laughing and carrying on and thinking it’s a joke because we know that they don’t take these issues seriously, it’s all part of a political game. It’s all part of putting the politics before the residents of Brisbane because that’s what they do week in week out in this place, Madam Chairman, but on this side of the Chamber, we’re prepared to stump up and take real action to protect these parcels of land and we’ve got a demonstrated track record of that, Madam Chairman. This year alone we’re buying over 700—sorry, this term alone we’re buying over 700 hectares of bushland in this City. That is a significant investment into protecting and preserving those bushland areas for future generations.

Turning to the comments that both of the Councillors that have spoken about this supposed—well the TLPI would have saved this. Well, Madam Chairman, look I’ve reflected—I’ve been reflecting on this issue. We moved an amendment in this place back in September, an amendment to the City Plan to stop multiple unit dwellings in low density residential.

We should have had the State interest check back in early October, we could have gone to public notification before the development application was lodged on this DA. That would have given the weight to that amendment for the Council officers to be able to at least refuse the DA on these grounds if not other grounds as well. But all we have seen is blatant politicking from the Labor Party both here and in State Parliament because, you know what, Madam Chairman, even if we had agreed to their Temporary Local Planning Instrument motion that they had in this place back in late October, it has been nearly four weeks since we moved a Temporary Local Planning Instrument to ban multiple unit dwellings in this place—


Councillor BOURKE: —so are you saying that we might have got it back sooner if we had done it back in October Councillor CUMMING because that’s all I can read into. So if we’d agreed to yours, the State Government would have ticked off on it in two days but because we’ve done one now and it’s come from this side of the Chamber, you’re saying well it wouldn’t be so quick. So it’s taken four weeks when we’re trying to do it, but it would have only taken two days Councillor CUMMING. So you know, that just shows the political games that you and your collages in the State Parliament are playing with planning in this city.

It is a shame, Madam Chairman, that this is what the Labor Party has stooped to. It is a shame that they are now playing political games with bushland, like they’re playing political games with the future of people’s lives when it comes to townhouses in low density residential. Obviously Councillor GRIFFITHS and—well Councillor STRUNK wasn’t there—weren’t listening last Wednesday night when residents of Brisbane said we don’t want townhouses. It’s a shame the Minister wasn’t there. It’s a shame the Minister wasn’t there so he could see why it’s important that we make this change. Why aren’t you going back and telling the Minster what you saw Councillor GRIFFITHS or Councillor STRUNK what you heard through former Councillor Bryant who was more than happy to give Councillor GRIFFITHS a serve at one point last Wednesday night.

Why aren’t you going back and saying this is urgent? This should be happening; you need to stop these because it doesn’t suit your political agenda. It doesn’t suit the program that you have to try and play political games in Council when it comes to planning and now again today, when it comes to this acquisition of an important parcel of land to protect a koala corridor. It’s about time that you stood up and actually stood for something through you, Madam Chairman, to


- 39 -

Councillor CUMMING because what you really are doing is just putting people’s lives at risk.


Chairman: Just a moment please, Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor CUMMING had misrepresentation.

Councillor CUMMING: Yes, the claim by Councillor BOURKE was that I said that—sorry that—I was putting koala’s lives at risk. I said in my speech that I was in fact—the Council policy was to buy large contiguous areas of bushland to ensure that koalas weren’t in isolated pockets where their lives would be put at risk.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, your point of order?

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, Madam Chairman, I’m just seeking clarification on the motion before us today. In his introduction the LORD MAYOR said that there was an intention to sell one of the blocks of land. Can you just confirm that that is not part of the motion before us today because I would think that that would be contrary to the provisions that Councillor BOURKE read out to us. I don’t see it in here but I would like your confirmation that that is not part of the motion before us today.

Chairman: Well Councillor JOHNSTON what we see at item B is the proposed purchase of land located at the address that’s specified. So once it’s purchased it’s—this is the actual motion for the purchase of the land, it’s not anything further than that so that’s what we’re dealing with that the moment.

Further speakers?


Councillor GRIFFITHS: Oh yes, thanks, Madam Chair, and I rise to speak on item B. It was interesting to hear Councillor BOURKE’s interpretation of this particular item. Can I say just looking at the document here—and I don’t know whether Councillor BOURKE can read the document—but it talks about some of the administrative costs that are going to be undertaken with this transfer. Title transfer costs $16,000, legal costs $25,000, approximate mortgage cost another $5000 and professional costs $54,000. Madam Chair, he was going on about using photocopiers—

Councillor BOURKE: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Can Councillor GRIFFITHS take a question?

Councillor GRIFFITHS: I won’t.

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS?

No, he says no.

Councillor GRIFFITHS please continue.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes, so yeah. So it was interesting that Councillor BOURKE criticises Labor for allowing some photocopying under the bushcare levy when it is spending such an extraordinary amount of money on purchasing this block of land that is essentially about propping up and saving Councillor ADAMS and unfortunately Councillor ADAMS hasn’t been doing her job in her electorate. She hasn’t been looking after her community. She’s missed this land. She’s missed this development application, she’s missed it. She is not in touch with her community. I’ve seen it time and again. At Tarragindi we saw it.

I was at a meeting on the weekend in Eric Street with—oh, 50 residents who were dealing with the same issue again—their concern about the natural habitat, their concern about wildlife, their concern about the protection of our environment, their concern about overdevelopment in Councillor ADAMS’ area. It’s interesting, all these signs are against this Council—all of them are against this Council and what this Administration stands for, but in the middle—well there’s one there it says: ‘QUIRK, no more townhouses, save our suburbs.


- 40 -

Council, honour your promise to protect our backyards,’ and you know who is bang smack in the middle of this picture—


Councillor GRIFFITHS: —Councillor ADAMS—


Councillor GRIFFITHS: –ooh, Councillor ADAMS is there fighting herself. Councillor ADAMS is there fighting her own Administration, talk about hypocrisy–


Councillor GRIFFITHS: –talk about absolute hypocrisy–


Councillor GRIFFITHS: —and when—yeah, she voted for City Plan. All the people on that side of the Chamber voted for City Plan. They voted to increase density on townhouse blocks. They voted to decrease parking—


Councillor GRIFFITHS: —they voted to take away residents’ rights—


Councillor GRIFFITHS: —you voted for it. Do you know the interesting thing about this meeting on the weekend was actually residents were saying: ‘you know, we actually aren’t that opposed to townhouses, what we’re opposed to is the density of the townhouses.’ I was really shocked by that because the residents came up with that themselves. They were saying: ‘we understand there’s a need to have good development but this is overdevelopment’—


Councillor GRIFFITHS: Madam Chair, what we’ve got here is a mess. It’s a mess and the solution is to spend $5 million of rate payers’ hard-earned money propping up and saving Councillor ADAMS. No wonder Councillor BOURKE took us off into the blue yonder talking about 20 years ago because he didn’t want to talk about now—


Councillor GRIFFITHS: —and the difficulty is this is a Council decision put in place by an LNP Administration with regard to bad development. Madam Chair, what’s impacting on residents is their lifestyle and their concern about Brisbane’s lifestyle and their concern about our native flora and fauna. Madam Chair, this sets huge precedents for the City and it sets huge precedents for spending money on land that may be isn’t prime land for us to buy as part of the Bushland Acquisition Program. Maybe to buy land that hasn’t been cleared or maybe to buy land that’s part of a corridor—


Councillor GRIFFITHS: —yeah that’s attached to a corridor, maybe they’re areas that we should be buying bushland in. Madam Chair, on this side of Chamber we share—we have huge concerns. Councillor CUMMING’s raised those concerns before—I won’t repeat them, but I do have to say that there is a burning—there is a burning passion out there amongst Brisbane residents against what this Administration has done and continues to do with bad development and boy was it evident at the meeting last week—the Community Forum meeting last week that the LORD MAYOR attended. Was it also evident with these meetings in Holland Park. Madam Chair, we will be supporting this but we have grave reservations about it. We have grave reservations about the spending of money in this particular way.


- 41 -

550/2018-19At that juncture, Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS moved, seconded by Councillor Jared CASSIDY, that the Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion

That this Council saves the remaining intact bushland corridor in Oxley, particularly land adjoining the former Oxley State School site and land in Chapman Place.

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS to urgency please.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair this is urgent because in this Chamber today we’re seeing an Administration that wants to spend over $5 million propping up one of its LNP Councillors to buy bushland that hasn’t been identified as priority bushland for the Bushland Acquisition Program. Madam Chair, we know there are other sites across the City that are crying out that need to be purchased, that have wildlife on them, that have intact bushland on them, that form major corridors for our wildlife that can connect our rivers and our creeks.

This particular piece of bushland that I’m raising in this urgency motion, will form a connection between Oxley Creek and between the Brisbane River. It’s an intact parcel of bushland that forms a significant corridor for our wildlife and currently it’s not protected. Madam Chair, we should be saving this bushland. We should be protecting this bushland and at the moment our priority is protecting an LNP Councillor who hasn’t been doing the work in her community. Madam Chair, the residents of Brisbane expect us to do better with preserving our bushland. They expect us to be looking after all the areas of Brisbane, not just LNP wards that they’re scared of losing. It has to be about spreading the bushcare—this bushland money, this bushland preservation money across the City to have maximum impact for the best benefit for our wildlife and for the residents of Brisbane. I implore everyone in the Chamber to support this motion.


Chairman: I’ll now put the motion for urgency.


Thereupon, Councillors Jared CASSIDY and Peter CUMMING immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared lost.

Chairman: As Councillors are proceeding for the division, I would like to acknowledge the presence in the public gallery of the former Lord Mayor of Brisbane and the former Premier of Queensland the Honourable Campbell Newman.



NOES: 19 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona HAMMOND, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

Chairman: I remind all Councillors that when you are in the front for a Division, you need to respect fellow Councillors’ equipment and information on their desks please.



- 42 -


Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair, and I stand to speak on item A and item B before us today. First of all on item A, as promised in this Chamber I will bring all of the Better Brisbane Proposals to the Chamber for information and this one is the Bright Conferences Youth Employability Program known as genYOU. An absolutely fantastic success last year when we trialled it for the five free events that are held at The Capital teaching 17 to 25-year olds employment skills. We released the Youth Strategy in 2014 and focused on how Council can support our younger generation and here is us walking the walk when it comes to supporting young people in giving them the necessary tools to become contributors in our economy. This also obviously works very closely in with our New World City Action Plan about attracting and retaining students and talent in Brisbane.

As I said we trialled it last year. We had five events—how to create a CV, learn to network like a pro, enterprise skills, build an outstanding personal brand and ensure your career is on the right track. We had over 500 people attending from across five events. I don’t have their addresses I’m sorry Councillor CUMMING but they were advertised on Council’s website, What’s On, Facebook, via our eNewsletter databases, Bright Conferences—also promoted through their networks as well and it is absolutely free and open to anybody who wants to come along. There is no application, there is no selection, it’s come along and take advantage of the opportunity to upskill yourself and really the success of the event became a no brainer for us to contract for another year with a two-year option at $20,000 for each of the events. So it’s fantastic to see this now joining a number of programs which Council dedicates to supporting our younger generation.

Last year the LORD MAYOR touched on our employment programs on helping tertiary, high school and graduates and last year our graduate program saw 94 of the participants between the ages of 17 and 25-year olds in our graduate program. That is fantastic to see. We found that a number of employment programs are actually being oversubscribed because people do really want to connect with Council and get that experience as well. This morning in Committee we had the presentation on our international internships for international students from our sister cities, who can get some paid work experience in their field of study as well. So the best way to get the best talent and skills retained in Brisbane is to have our young adults be the best prepared that they can be for their next step into working life. I look forward to another year of success with generationYOU supporting our younger generation to achieve their absolute best as they step into the workforce.

As I move to item B there’s been a lot of hyperbole and just blatant lies told about this situation on this site. I dare Councillor CUMMING and Councillor GRIFFITHS to come out and stand at one of those meetings that we have on Saturday mornings and explain to the residents around Nurran and Carrara Streets what they just said and what they thought about this site, because of course what we hear here in the Chamber is very different to what they do out there. Usually in here they say they don’t support it and then go out there and support it—well actually that’s what they did do this time isn’t it?


Councillor ADAMS: Chop change, chop change. What we heard from Councillor CUMMING and Councillor GRIFFITHS that this was a waste of money, that is was not worth the purchase, that it was not a priority, that it was not of value, that it was not a corridor and it doesn’t fit the criteria. I dare them to come out and stand in Nurran Street and talk to the residents at the public meetings about that, because I assure you when I have been at every public meeting that they have had and spoken to those residents continually on the phone that is not how they feel. It’s extremely unfortunate those trees were cleared but they weren’t VPO, they were private property but they were cleared with absolutely scorched earth mentality,


- 43 -

which is the not the outcome that anybody wants to see on a dense bushland site which is what this site was—


Councillor ADAMS: There are three large parcels—Councillor CASSIDY, I’ll take your interjection—there’s houses on it. It shows you how much they know about my local area. They claim that I’m not connected to the local group. There is a dilapidated house that has been pulled down and there is a property which clearly says in Paragraph 18, we’ll be on-selling and the money will be going back into bushland acquisition and guess what, the land in Mt Gravatt East is a lot more expensive—no offence Councillor RICHARDS—than the land in Pullenvale and than the land that we see out at Gumdale—


Councillor ADAMS: These are two highly prized parcels of land, three blocks from one of the schools named in The Courier-Mail on the weekend as a very important catchment area but they also provided a very important corridor link for koalas. The LORD MAYOR said it in the media, I have said to the community and they have told me—we spoke to the RSPCA, we spoke to local wildlife carers—there were plenty of koalas that were sighted in that land. We have got koala signs on Cavendish Road and on Pine Mountain Road. VMS (Variable Message Sign) messaging over the koala season on Pine Mountain Road, permanent markings going down in time for the next season. This is a known corridor for koala movement and it’s been even more seen once those trees went 12 months ago. As soon as it came to my attention, within two hours, we had the RRG (Rapid Response Group) out on that site making sure that there wasn’t any illegal movement, any illegal things done. There weren’t unfortunately—but that didn’t mean we haven’t been on their case from that day on around soil and sediment erosion and making sure that those owners of that land now were doing the right thing.

This was never a suitable site for the density of townhouses that the applicant wanted with two narrow easements coming into that site and the topography of that ground did not really even lend itself to a slighter size of townhouses because of the steep nature. There’s retaining walls up to five metres on the side of that property with surrounding properties. So this fits as Councillor BOURKE said every part of the Bushland Acquisition Program in particular the rehabilitation and revegetation and will be working with the local residents, the local wildlife carers and RSPCA to make sure we get those fodder trees back in that can grow within four to five years to be providing suitable trees, fodder and climbing for koalas as well.

The timelines were mentioned. If we got the TLPI in it would have been saved. If we had got the amendment back it would have been saved—


Councillor ADAMS: The amendment went through on 4 September 2018 Councillor STRUNK. Thank you for the October interruption. Let’s get this clear. The amendment was in on 4 September 2018 to Minister Dick. We would have been out at consultation before Christmas. This DA didn’t come in until 8 December 2018. It well and truly would have been sorted.

But we’ve had nothing but absolute disregard from the Minister when it comes to protecting our low density residential areas from townhouses. Yet again half a kilometre away I am working with the residents on a same situation where we have got a stand of trees that have been amalgamated into a larger block where they’re trying to do townhouses. Yes, Councillor GRIFFITHS is correct. They recognise that even less townhouses would here—would not be about outcome, but not the density. Very different topography.

I have to say the residents contacted me straight away. I was speaking to the residents straight away. I raised it with the planning officers. I’ve been at both of those meetings. Interesting Councillor GRIFFITHS had to come along and hold someone’s hand this weekend. But there was no outrage. There was people


- 44 -

concerned, getting their submissions together and actually as I said to them if there’s anything good that comes out of this is that maybe we could get a neighbourhood watch going because the community are actually working together, meeting people and communicating.

It was my pleasure to be at those local meetings. I am very proud to represent my local residents and deliver to them exactly what they want to see and that is a revegetated koala bushland on this site for perpetuity. Thank you, Madam Chairman.


Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on item B, the proposed purchase of land located at 64 and 68 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street, Mt Gravatt East. It’s been a very interesting retelling, recasting of history about this development and how we’ve got to this point by Councillor BOURKE and Councillor ADAMS. Now Councillor BOURKE has a very short memory when it comes to how this progressed at the end of last year, Madam Chair. There was a petition from local residents to this Council calling on Council to reject any development for townhouses on this site.

Councillor SRI will remember when we went into that Committee meeting and saw this petition come there we said, is there any suggestion whatsoever that a developer might like to build townhouses on this site? Councillor BOURKE said no, absolutely not. There’s no suggestion that anyone out there will be looking to build townhouses on this low density residential land. In the week that followed that Committee meeting to the Council meeting here in November last year, it became very evident that a developer had in fact been out in the community telling people that they would be building these townhouses.

Now either LNP Councillors including the local Councillor didn’t know at the time or they didn’t want to let that cat out of the bag, Madam Chair. So they said nothing to see here. When that petition came, they said there’s no problem. There will be no townhouses on this site. We don’t need to do anything. In November last year that’s what those Councillors opposite said. How wrong they were, Madam Chair. Labor moved a motion for a specific TLPI on this property, like we’re about to see in the special E&C report, a TLPI projecting a specific property.

We know when it came to the Coorparoo property or Reddacliff Place when this Council moved for a TLPI over those specific places, the State Government turned that around within 48 hours—within 48 hours. Fifteen days passed between our call for a TLPI to protect this land’s zoning as low density residential which would mean these townhouses would not be able to be built. Any future development could have had conditions that revegetation would have to occur. Fifteen days pass between that call for a TLPI and when the DA was lodged.

There was more than enough time—more than enough time—for this piece of land to be protected. The number one thing for those local residents through that petition was to make sure that a townhouse development didn’t proceed. This Administration could have ensured that, Madam Chair, had they proceeded with an application for a TLPI over the specific site we’re talking about here.

But instead they sat on their hands, a DA was put in for these townhouses. We have now been backed into a $5.4 million corner. As the Leader of the Opposition has said and Councillor GRIFFITHS, we will be supporting the purchase of this which is already at a—in excess of $1 million profit for this developer. That is a 50% increase in profit for that developer over a 10-month period. But we shouldn’t have had to spend this money to protect this land. We could have in fact protected this land through a TLPI.

The community could have been rest assured that those townhouses would not have been built over their back fences. That any conditions on a new development—a development application for low density residential land—


- 45 -

could have been conditioned to ensure revegetation on that site. But instead through the actions of Councillor BOURKE, through this LNP Administration, we’ve been forced into a corner now where if we don’t spend $5.4 million of ratepayer funds on this purchase then this community will be facing these townhouses no doubt.

As Councillor GRIFFITHS said this now does set an incredible precedent here. We’re concerned that of a fairly limited budget for the Bushland Acquisition Program that $5.4 million is going on such a small block there.

551/2018-19At that juncture, Councillor Jared CASSIDY moved, seconded by Councillor Peter CUMMING, that the Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion

That Council purchases number 69, Twenty-Third Avenue, Brighton, for bushland acquisition purposes.

Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY three minutes to urgency.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is very urgent because this is a piece of land that I wrote to Councillor McLACHLAN about in February last year. The response I got from Councillor McLACHLAN—sorry in January last year—‘Dear Councillor CASSIDY. Thank you for your email. It has been forwarded through to the department for investigation and a response will be forwarded through to you in due course.’ Well it’s now been 13 months since that request has gone through. I know other residents have also requested this land be purchased under the bushland acquisition levy.

Why this is urgent now is because what we’re seeing is a bastardisation of the Bushland Acquisition Program for political purposes. We are at risk of missing out on vital properties like the one that Councillor GRIFFITHS detailed earlier and properties like this one at 69 Twenty-Third Avenue, Brighton, because of these decisions. This is a piece of land—4.86 hectares of land—which is currently on the market for $650,000. This is land which is part of one of the most significant parts of salt marsh ecosystem in Brisbane. It abuts a Ramsar listed area of the Pine River at the mouth of the Pine River in Brighton and adjoins the Moreton Bay Marine Park.

This is a no-brainer. We’re talking about a 4.86 hectare property that can be easily rehabilitated from its current partial salt marsh area and partial rural use into a vital part of our local environment up there in the Northern suburbs of Brisbane. So while we’re seeing the maladministration by the LNP in stuffing around at Nurran Street and Carrara Street meaning we have to fork out $5.4 million just to save Councillor ADAMS’ skin there, we are missing out on vital pieces of real bushland that we should be acquiring for the people of Brisbane. So I commend that motion, Madam Chair.

Chairman: I will now put the motion for urgency.


Thereupon, Councillors Peter CUMMING and Jared CASSIDY immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared lost.


AYES: 6 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK and Jonathan SRI.


- 46 -

NOES: 18 - DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona HAMMOND, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.


Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on item B. I must say this has been a very interesting discussion. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the Council Administration was considering purchasing these sites. I’m pleased to be able to support that decision. I think it’s really great. I wholeheartedly welcome the fact that we’re acquiring this land to preserve it for bushland. But I have extremely strong concerns about the process that has led us to this point and particularly about the lack of transparency in—the lack of clearly established criteria around how the bushland acquisition levy money is being used.

We’ve heard from a number of Councillors in this place about other sites which are also of significant merit from an ecological perspective and ought to be acquired and protected. It’s very strange and disturbing to me that those requests have been ignored and seemingly dismissed offhand while requests around this particular site appear to have been expedited. As I said I’ve opposed this particular townhouse development on Carrara and Nurran Street right from the outset but it really does make me wonder how it can be that a decision regarding so many millions of dollars can be made so quickly seemingly in a parallel process to the decision-making processes which would ordinarily be used to acquire sites for bushland and conservation.

Even in the inner city in my electorate I can think of quite a few sites which are worthy of acquisition and protection. I think a lot of residents will be asking the question after today, why not this site too? I think the Administration is setting a very interesting precedent here today. Certainly over the next few months I will be lobbying hard for a range of sites around the electorate I represent and also other sites around Brisbane to be acquired from that bushland acquisition levy. Until now we’ve often been told that sites won’t be acquired unless they are part of a larger wildlife corridor or at the very least protected on the Biodiversity overlay or mapped as koala habitat.

I acknowledge that that’s not always the case and that in the past the Administration has sometimes stepped outside those guidelines and acquired the odd site. But this particular decision seems to me primarily to be motivated by political pressure. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. It actually seems like the LNP are worried about losing a seat and have made a decision to acquire this site. That’s a great thing. That’s actually democracy in action. So while it doesn’t necessarily reflect well on the LNP it shows that to some extent the pressure that the community has been able to mobilise in that area has been effective and has yielded a positive result.

But I think what’s important going forward is that the LNP Administration clarifies and publishes very clear criteria explaining how sites are prioritised and identified and what criteria you use to weigh the relative merits of acquiring different sites around the city. My electorate is bounded on one side by Norman Creek. There’s an established fruit bat colony along there. It’s a relatively intact wildlife corridor that has a lot of ecological value connecting through to the Brisbane River. There are probably a dozen, two dozen blocks of land that I really think the Council should be acquiring, revegetating and rehabilitating to strengthen the ecological value to that bushland corridor.

Through you, Madam Chair, to Councillor McLACHLAN I would respectfully ask that serious consideration is paid to the potential of acquiring some of those former industrial sites along Norman Creek. I’m particularly thinking of sites down near Caswell Street, sites along Stanley Terrace and sites further to the north closer to Churchie High School. I would even go so far as to suggest that


- 47 -

the Council should be compulsorily acquiring some of Churchie’s cricket fields and football ovals and revegetating and protecting them as wildlife corridor.

But it just does strike me as somewhat disturbing that without any clearly transparent process we can make these decisions.

Councillor interjecting

Councillor SRI: I was going to say the term ad hoc as well. Thank you. Is that what you said Councillor STRUNK? I’ll take that interjection. It does seem rather ad hoc. But as I said it’s great to see the site is being protected. I congratulate the residents on their win.


DEPUTY MAYOR, right of reply?

I will now put item A.

Clause A put

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of Clause A of the report of the Establishment and Coordination Committee was declared carried on the voices.

Chairman: I will now put item B.

Clause B put

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of Clause B of the report of the Establishment and Coordination Committee was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillors Matthew BOURKE and Krista ADAMS immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.


AYES: 25 - DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona Hammond, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, Jonathan SRI and Nicole JOHNSTON.

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, Vicki Howard, Peter Matic, and David McLachlan.

A STORES BOARD SUBMISSION – BETTER BRISBANE PROPOSAL FOR GENERATIONYOU – YOUTH EMPLOYABILITY EVENTS 165/210/179/3206

552/2018-191. The Chief Executive Officer provided the information below.

2. The Chief Executive Officer and the Stores Board considered the submission, as set out in Attachment A (submitted on file), on 5 February 2019.


- 48 -

3. The submission is recommended to Council for approval as it is considered the most advantageous outcome for the provision of the required services.

Purpose

4. The Stores Board recommends approval to enter into a contract with Bright Conferences Pty Ltd trading as generationYOU (generationYOU) for youth employability events. The contract will be entered into without seeking competitive tenders from industry in accordance with Council’s Better Brisbane Proposals Policy, as set out in section 1.13(c) of Council’s SP103 Procurement Policy and Plan 2018-19.

Proposal summary

5. Following a successful Better Brisbane Proposal pilot in 2018, it is proposed to engage generationYOU to deliver an annual series of four youth employability sessions. This will enable Council to continue to provide an accessible program to support young people aged 17 to 25 years to increase their employability and enterprise skills.

6. The 2018 pilot delivered a series of five free sessions held at The Capital, with each addressing a tangible skill that young people need to help them either get a job or succeed in the workplace. Five hundred and thirty-six young people attended sessions over the duration of the pilot and positive feedback was received from both participants and speakers.

Rationale for direct engagement

7. Is the proposal a Better Brisbane Proposal as defined by section 1.13(c) of Council’s SP103 Procurement Policy and Plan?

(a) Has Council previously issued a request for tenders, proposals or expressions of interest? Is there an existing arrangement or planned procurement process for this proposal?No, the proposal was unsolicited.

(b) Does the proposal solve a Brisbane problem, address and opportunity for Brisbane, or enhance services Council provides?Yes, the proposal supports Council’s Delivering a youth-friendly city Youth Strategy 2014-2019 for young people to have opportunities to gain the skills and experience they need to enter the workforce and build a career.

The proposal also supports the talent and skills objective in Brisbane 2022 Australia’s New World City Action Plan, which is to attract and retain students and talent from all over the world as a leading Asia Pacific education, enterprise and career hub.

(c) Does the proposal demonstrate value for money (VFM) for Council?Yes. generationYOU brings VFM for this project through its current experience, process and contacts, in delivering seminars successfully to the youth audience. The cost to undertake four events per year is considered VFM as it is comparable to the costs to facilitate Council forums of a similar size.

(d) Is the outcome fair to the supply market because of one or more of the following?(i) there are no known competitors(ii) it contains intellectual property rights or elements(iii) it is advantageous to Brisbane and in the public interest to proceed due to speed of

access, value or innovation?

Yes, generationYOU has created a proven program that successfully engages 17 to 25-year-old students using customised techniques that resonate with the audience. generationYOU creates learning events that bring together mentors, entrepreneurs and employers to share their knowledge, expertise and advice in a format that is highly relatable to the audience.

8. Key risks (if any) associated with the proposal:


- 49 -

The project is low risk due to the successful pilot, the extensive experience of the contractor delivering events for Council and the relatively low value of the contract.

9. Outcome of detailed assessment:Based on the above detailed assessment, it is recommended that Council enter into a contract with generationYOU to deliver youth employability events. The contract is proposed for an initial one-year term with options to extend for up to two years with a maximum term of three years.

Proposed contract

10.Legal name, ABN/ACN and registered address of recommended supplier

Bright Conferences Pty Ltd trading as generationYOUABN 73 144 757 693 ACN 144 757 693Suite 3A, 54 Vernon Terrace Teneriffe QLD 4005

Contract standard to be used:

Council’s standard goods/services once off contract.

Amendments to standards: NoAll non-compliances with contract conditions and specifications resolved?

Yes

Is liability and indemnity to be capped?

No

Execution date of contract: March 2019Term/period of contract: An initial one-year term with options to extend for up to two years with

a maximum term of three years.Price basis: Lump sumVariation for rise and fall in cost:

Prices will be fixed for the duration of the contract.

Security for the contract: Not applicableDefects liability period/warranty period?

Not applicable

Liquidated damages: No liquidated damages apply but Council’s right to claim general law damages is preserved.

Software component? NoAS4000/4902 Provisional Sums?

Not applicable

Estimated cost and budget

11. The estimated commitment by Council is $20,000 for the first year. The contract includes the option for two additional one-year periods at a cost of $20,000 each.

12. Funds to meet the $20,000 per calendar year are available in Council’s approved budget and will be funded equally between Service 5.4.1.5 Youth Initiatives ($10,000) and 7.3.1.1 Enhancing Brisbane’s Skills ($10,000).

Next steps and timing

13. The proponent is to be advised in writing within five business days that Council has approved entering into a direct engagement contract for the provision of youth employability events.

14. The proposed events for the first year of the program are proposed to be held in April, May, July and September 2019.

15. The Chief Executive Officer provided the following recommendation and the Committee agreed.

16. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE STORES BOARD RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING.


- 50 -

(1) Entering directly into a contract with Bright Conferences Pty Ltd trading as generationYOU, for youth employability events. The contract will be entered into without seeking competitive tenders from industry in accordance with Council’s Better Brisbane Proposals Policy, as set out in section 1.13(c) of Council’s SP103 Procurement Policy and Plan 2018-19.

(2) An initial one-year term with options to extend for up to two years with a maximum term of three years subject to the satisfactory performance of the contractor.

(3) The contract will be on a lump sum price basis for the sum of $20,000 for each of the three years, which totals $60,000 if all renewal options are exercised.

(4) That the Chief Planner, City Planning and Economic Development, City Planning and Sustainability, is authorised to sign, manage and extend the contract on Council’s behalf.

ADOPTED

B PROPOSED PURCHASE OF LAND LOCATED AT 64 AND 68 CARRARA STREET AND 8 NURRAN STREET, MT GRAVATT EAST161/20/439/388-02

553/2018-1917. The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the information below.

18. The subject properties are situated at 64 and 68 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street, Mt Gravatt East, and are described as Lots 406 and 405 on RP116874 and Lot 420 on RP94724 (outlined in red in Attachment B, submitted on file). The land comprises a site area of 6,776 m2 and is contained within the Low density residential zone under Brisbane City Plan 2014. The property at 64 Carrara Street is improved with a large residential dwelling, 68 Carrara Street is vacant land and 8 Nurran Street is improved with a dilapidated residential dwelling. Following acquisition, Council proposes to remove the improvements and restore habitat on the land at 68 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street and on-sell 64 Carrara Street, with any proceeds to be directed to the Bushland Acquisition Program.

19. The subject properties are located to the south of Council’s Whites Hill Reserve. This general area is known to support a significant population of koalas. The subject properties are not included in the Bushland Acquisition Program Schedule 2016-2020. The property owners have lodged a development application to develop the subject land with 29 townhouses and two small residential lots.

20. Prior to negotiations commencing with the owners, Council commissioned an independent valuer to provide an opinion of current market value of the subject properties, which was subsequently confirmed in writing at $4,400,000 excluding GST (refer Attachment D, submitted on file).

21. Following contact with the property owners by City Projects Office, Brisbane Infrastructure, the properties were offered for sale to Council for the sum of $6,500,000 (including GST applicable to 68 Carrara Street only). The owners will only agree to a sale if all three properties are included. Negotiations between Council and the owners resulted in agreement to purchase the subject properties (refer Attachment C, submitted on file). The aggregate cost to Council is $5,200,000 (including GST applicable to 68 Carrara Street, but excluding GST for 64 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street).

22. Council’s offer was based on the minimum aggregate sum which would be payable as compensation if Council resumed the properties by compulsory means under its powers available within the Acquisition of Land Act 1967. In that event, the dispossessed owners would also be eligible for a minimum payment of $360,000 for disturbance. The aggregate sum of $5,200,000 may be justifiably apportioned as follows:

Land (as valued) $4,400,000Likely minimum negotiated margin at 10% $ 440,000Hypothetical adopted land value for compensation $4,840,000Estimated disturbance costsStamp duty on $4,840,000 $ 258,825Title transfer costs $ 16,567Approximate legal costs $ 25,000Approximate mortgage costs $ 5,000Approximate professional costs $ 54,608


- 51 -

Total $5,200,000

23. The Divisional Manager provided the following recommendation and the Committee agreed.

24. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT COUNCIL DETERMINES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAFT DETERMINATION SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder.

Attachment ADraft Determination

DRAFT DETERMINATION TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF LAND LOCATED AT 64 AND 68 CARRARA STREET AND 8 NURRAN STREET, MT GRAVATT EAST

As:

(i) the acquisition of this land will build on previous investments made by Council to restore native vegetation and protect green space

(ii) funding for this purchase is available from the Bushland Acquisition Program budget under Service 3.3.1.1,

then Council:

(i) approves the purchase of land located at 64 and 68 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street, Mt Gravatt East, described as Lots 406 and 405 on RP116874 and Lot 420 on RP94724, for the amount of $5,200,000 (including GST applicable to 68 Carrara Street, but excluding GST for 64 Carrara Street and 8 Nurran Street), subject to terms and conditions considered satisfactory by the Chief Legal Counsel, City Legal, City Administration and Governance.

ADOPTED

ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE (Special report)

The DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER), Deputy Chairman of the Establishment and Coordination Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Peter MATIC, that the special report of the meeting of that Committee held on 4 March 2019, be adopted.

Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman. This report is the Temporary Local Planning Instrument for 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee. Yesterday Civic Cabinet endorsed or considered and endorsed this TLPI. Obviously this is something that we believe required some really urgent action as we have brought many TLPIs to the Council chamber on important issues like this. This was brought to Council’s attention by the local Councillor, Councillor Adam ALLAN, on Friday last week. So we’ve moved very quickly. The property has been advertised online by a company which specialises in house demolitions and removals.

With the advertised threat of either demolition or removal, Council is proposing a TLPI to protect the site. This will give Council more time to properly research the history of the site to determine its historical significance as well as heritage value so that it can be then put on our heritage register if it requires. The property at 431 St Vincents Road contains a large bungalow-style residence from the interwar period, outbuildings and established gardens. It is currently contained in the Low density residential zone.

We know that part of the building was built after 1946 as per Council’s interactive mapping. However, an online source suggests that the original


- 52 -

building at the front of the property was constructed in the year 1900. Due to the current zoning and size of the lot and the risk of either demolition or removal there is a possibility that the site may be subject to a multiple unit dwelling application. It is therefore Council’s priority to save the house and not just the land. A private certifier has proof of the demolition of the site.

We know that there have been some rogue certifiers out there that unfortunately have been taking advantage of opportunities to take advantage of a situation like this. The LORD MAYOR wrote to Minister Dick about this back in September 2018. However, no response was received. So it’s obviously exactly these types of circumstances that Council is concerned about and keen to prevent with this TLPI.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, just briefly, Madam Chairman, yet again we have this LNP Administration who is only governing for itself in order to protect the interests of a marginal LNP seat holder in Brisbane. My understanding is this property has been through a neighbourhood planning process. It wasn’t identified at that point. Now at the eleventh hour this property is being put up to be protected. Now the reason again that this Administration is so behind—they’re playing catch-up—there have been repeated motions moved in this place by myself and the ALP Councillors to undertake an audit of all pre-1946 and all pre-1911 homes to make sure that they are properly protected and mapped in the overlay.

This LNP Administration has voted against every single one of them. So let’s be clear. This is another instance of the LNP who have refused to take action because it was not proposed by themselves. They have put hundreds of houses at risk. In my ward they’ve said no to every single property that I’ve asked to be protected with a Temporary Local Planning Instrument. They have ignored the loss of significant character housing. That is because they’ve failed to undertake an audit. They’ve failed to map these houses in the traditional character overlay. Here’s an example.

But instead of doing this process fairly when it comes up in other non-LNP wards where they do nothing they are bending over backwards to help a marginal LNP seat holder. It is disgusting—disgusting that this Administration has stopped governing for the whole city and is only governing for itself.


Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. I just rise to answer the debate on the Temporary Local Planning Instrument that we have before us today for 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee. Madam Chairman, this is as the DEPUTY MAYOR said, a large site. It is over 3,000 square metres. It has for those who may have taken the opportunity to use Google Street View or Nearmap it does have quite a substantial nice house on it. It is though—sorry it has been altered on the right-hand side as you are facing the property, significantly.

There is an extension out to the right-hand side of the house, Madam Chairman, which has actually been done very sympathetically to the original architecture of the building. The officers following Councillor ALLAN’s phone call and then written request to me, we’ve had a look at this building. We believe that the best way without further forthcoming information to do a detailed investigation before the building is removed from the site given some of the online commentary that we’ve seen, is to implement a Temporary Local Planning Instrument. It is the right thing to do to carry out an investigation.

This is one of the last houses in this particular street that is a pre-1946. So it does not form part of a streetscape. It does not meet the criteria to be mapped as a pre-1946 because it is its sole last building in this street, Madam Chairman. The rest of the street has been developed over the best part of the last 20 years, Madam Chairman. So there aren’t other examples. We have as I’ve spoken about in this place before, a process that we go through as we do neighbourhood


- 53 -

plans where we look for pre-1911s—where we look for pre-1946s, Madam Chairman. We do that as part of that planning process, Madam Chairman.

So this notion that we aren’t interested and we don’t do anything and we don’t list things is completely false—completely false, Madam Chairman—because there was no Pre-1911 overlay in this city until this Administration brought in the City Plan. There wasn’t the level of protection provided to those pre-1946s until this Administration brought in the City Plan, Madam Chairman. Again today we are doing the right thing. Members of the public have raised it through the local Councillor who has raised it to me. We are putting a Temporary Local Planning Instrument on this site so that we can do the detailed investigation.

At that time, 5.46pm, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Ryan MURPHY, assumed the Chair.

Councillor BOURKE: It does not on face value look for—with the addition on the right-hand side—it doesn’t present to the street like a pre-1946 house. But that said we’ve been made aware that it may be an early 1900s house as part of the conversations that have been reported back through Councillor ALLAN. That’s why we’ve taken this opportunity to protect it, to be able to do the detailed investigation and then make an assessment on that information, Mr Acting Chair—Mr Deputy Chair.

The Opposition and Councillor JOHNSTON will no doubt stand up and go, well you could have done this. You should have done it. We’re doing it the right way. I don’t understand what the Labor Party will do if they ever manage to get onto this side of the Chamber, Mr Deputy Chair, because their approach to planning from what we’ve seen particularly in the last six months is a very haphazard approach to planning. Everything is just slap a TLPI on this. Slap a TLPI on that. It’s not a balanced, considered approach to planning that actually involves going through the appropriate mechanisms that are there available for Councils to do planning—

Councillors interjecting

Deputy Chairman: Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting.

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: It is a joke to them, Mr Deputy Chair. That’s why they’re laughing and giggling over there. We on this side of the Chamber take planning issues and heritage very seriously. That’s why we take these—again, laughs again—

Deputy Chairman: Don’t be distracting.

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: It’s great. It’s great. They think planning is funny. That’s great. That’s in Hansard. That’s fantastic. Now we just get personal attacks. That’s even better—


Deputy Chairman: Councillor HAMMOND, cease interjecting or you will be warned.

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Mr Deputy Chair. So as I was saying we take a very balanced approach when it comes to planning. We don’t put Temporary Local Planning Instruments onto properties lightly. It is not our preferred planning method on how to deal with these. But in this case there is a particular urgency and a need to make sure we act to protect this house so that we can go through the process to establish when the house was built, its significance and its value to the community in telling the cultural and history of the area and also to protect that if it warrants protection. I commend the TLPI to the Chamber.

Acting Chairman: Further speakers?

Councillor ALLAN.


- 54 -

Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman. I rise to join the debate on item I the Temporary Local Planning Instrument over 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee. As Councillor BOURKE has indicated this is a well-known property on the main road through the residential section of Nudgee, namely St Vincents Road. The house in question is an imposing old home from the interwar period that provides a window back to the time when Nudgee was farmland. While the houses around it have changed over the years this property has remained as a beacon of a bygone era.

It is a property that is well known by locals and is certainly a landmark in the local area. It sits imposingly on its large site surrounded by outbuildings and established gardens. It is just up the road from a popular local school, St Pius, with many families and students walking past this property on the way to school providing children with flashbacks to their grandparents and great-grandparents’ days. In relatively close proximity to this home are the Australian Catholic University and Seminary, the Nudgee Cemetery, the Nudgee School of Arts building, other heritage and character buildings and the Nudgee Train Station.

Any moves to demolish or move the property would not be well received by the growing local community and would result in the loss of an element of the heritage and history of the area. I ask the Chamber to support this resolution and hope the Minister can respond and provide his support promptly.

Councillors interjecting

Deputy Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Deputy Chair. I rise in support of this Temporary Local Planning Instrument on the property at 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee. This is an extraordinary admission by this Administration who has just gone through an exercise for the Banyo-Northgate neighbourhood plan that you would think would have picked up something as significant as this. Councillor ALLAN has just detailed how well known this site is to those in the local community. Councillor SCHRINNER said earlier that we suspect the house is actually the original house which has been added to was built in 1900. So how it hasn’t been picked up on the Pre-1911 overlay is amazing given the work that has been done in the most recent neighbourhood plan.

While we support this of course and have always supported TLPIs in this place and have sought to initiate a number of them—which this Administration months and months later finally gets on board with—while we’re certainly happy to support this it is quite an admission that this Administration has been very lackadaisical when it comes to identifying and protecting heritage around Brisbane.

Now this might be a property as the DEPUTY MAYOR said that we will now seek to get more information on, maybe something that’s referred to the Heritage Advisory Committee, a Committee that I finally sit on now after being nominated 12 months ago, Councillor CUMMING, something like that only just been finally invited to the first meetings of that. I’ve enjoyed that so far as the only Brisbane City Councillor that goes to them these days—


Councillor CASSIDY: But they are certainly—oh the other two Councillors haven’t been there for a while—


Councillor CASSIDY: Chair and Deputy Chair of the City Planning Committee I believe. I’ll take that interjection from those Councillors around me. It’s clear that the workload that that Committee has and clear from the members on there and what they were telling me at the meetings that I’ve gone to is that there is an awful lot of work to get through in identifying and cataloguing properties that are stumbled across basically—literally stumbled across by this Administration.


- 55 -

So they need better support from this Administration. I’m going to be there to give it to them. But what we also need is, as Councillor JOHNSTON mentioned and moved probably two years ago now, in 2017—it might even have been in 2016—we’re talking years and years ago—and what Labor Councillors moved here—is for a full and proper audit of houses—of pre-1946 houses and pre-1911 houses. Surely—surely this place, 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee, would have been picked up through a process like that.

We shouldn’t just be blindly stumbling around suburbs in Brisbane hoping we’re going to stumble across what is in this case one of the most significant parts of the built heritage of Nudgee and the surrounding area including Banyo. There should be a proper process. You would have thought—you would have thought that this would have been done in the preparation for City Plan 2014. It wasn’t. In preparation for the Banyo-Northgate neighbourhood plan it wasn’t. So this reinforces the case that we need a better system of auditing what is left of Brisbane’s built heritage. We need better support for the work that committees like the Heritage Advisory Committee are doing.


Being no further debate, in the LORD MAYOR’s absence, DEPUTY MAYOR, did you wish to sum up? No?

I will now put the motion.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the special report of the meeting of the Establishment and Coordination committee was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, the DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER) and Councillor Andrew WINES immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.


AYES: 26 - DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona Hammond, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, Jonathan SRI and Nicole JOHNSTON.


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, Vicki Howard, Peter Matic, and David McLachlan.

A TEMPORARY LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT 02/19 – PROTECTION OF PREMISES AT 431 ST VINCENTS ROAD, NUDGEE152/160/1218/404

554/2018-191. The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the information below.

2. The property at 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee, contains a large bungalow-style residence from the inter war period, outbuildings and established gardens on a 3,169m2 site.

3. Further research to assess the cultural heritage significance of the residence, outbuildings and gardens is necessary and immediate protection of the premises is required.


- 56 -

4. The property is currently at risk of either demolition or removal. In addition, any subdivision of the garden would have a detrimental impact on the cultural significance of the house and its important relationship to the garden setting.

5. The property is zoned Low density residential and is not included in the Traditional building character overlay or the Heritage overlay of Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan). Due to the current zoning and size of the site, demolition or removal of the property would result in a vacant lot of land, potentially subject to a multiple dwelling development application.

6. A proposed Temporary Local Planning Instrument (TLPI), entitled Temporary Local Planning Instrument 02/19 – Protection of premises at 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee (the proposed TLPI), has been prepared to make sure the site is protected from demolition or removal, which ensures its potential heritage importance to Brisbane is maintained. The proposed TLPI is set out in Attachment B (submitted on file).

7. Section 23 of the Planning Act 2016 sets out the local government powers to make a TLPI, including that Council may only make a TLPI if the Minister for State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning (the Minister) is satisfied with the matters set out in that section. These matters include there being a significant risk of serious adverse cultural, economic, environment or social conditions happening in the local government area. The demolition of a potential cultural heritage place presents serious cultural and social impacts for Brisbane. The Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (the Guideline) under the Planning Act 2016 sets out the process for making a TLPI.

8. In accordance with the requirements of the Guideline, Council’s reasons for the proposed TLPI are outlined in a letter to the Minister (refer Attachment C, submitted on file). Further, Council will seek approval from the Minister for an earlier effective date for the making of the proposed TLPI to ensure that the identified structure is given the earliest possible protection.

9. Once approved by Council, the proposed TLPI will be forwarded to the Minister for approval to give effect to the request for an earlier effective day. Once adopted by Council, and subject to the Minister’s approval for an earlier effective day, the proposed TLPI will continue to have effect for a period of two years from its adoption, unless rescinded at an earlier date as an amendment to City Plan takes effect.

10. The Divisional Manager provided the following recommendation and the Committee agreed.

11. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT COUNCIL RESOLVE AS PER THE DRAFT RESOLUTION SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder.

Attachment ADraft Resolution

DRAFT RESOLUTION TO PROPOSE THE TEMPORARY LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT 02/19 – PROTECTION OF PREMISES AT 431 ST VINCENTS ROAD, NUDGEE

As Council:

(i) decides, pursuant to section 7.1 of Part 2 of Chapter 3 of the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (the Guideline) made under the Planning Act 2016 (the Act), to make a Temporary Local Planning Instrument 02/19 – Protection of premises at 431 St Vincents Road, Nudgee (the proposed TLPI)

(ii) pursuant to section 7.2 of the Guideline has prepared the proposed TLPI as set out in Attachment B (submitted on file)

(iii) pursuant to section 9(4) of the Act, resolves that the effective day for the proposed TLPI is, with the approval of the Minister, the day this resolution is made,

then Council:


- 57 -

(i) directs, pursuant to section 8 of Part 2 of Chapter 3 of the Guideline, that the Minister be sent the letter in Attachment C (submitted on file), which:(a) requests the Minister’s consideration of the proposed TLPI(b) requests the Minister’s approval of an earlier effective day of the TLPI

being the day this resolution is made (c) contains a statement about why Council proposes to make the TLPI(d) contains a statement about how the proposed TLPI complies with section

23(1) of the Act.ADOPTED

PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE

The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, Chairman of the Public and Active Transport Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Fiona HAMMOND that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 26 February 2019, be adopted.

Deputy Chairman: Is there any debate?

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Yes, very briefly Councillors will note there is a presentation that has come through on the Active School Travel results for 2018. A program that we can all support and a program that has long running support not only in this Council Chamber but out there in the community as well. Why does it have support? Because it delivers fantastic results. So we saw another great year for Active School Travel. A total of 24,300 students and their families participated. Active Travel grew in those schools from 30% to 51%.

We just had another fantastic year across the schools with such great competition between schools as well. So I thank all Councillors for their support of this program and long may it be a program that has bipartisan support.


Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Deputy Chair. It certainly does, DEPUTY MAYOR. We love Active School Travel. I think all Councillors can agree in that. For the first time since I’ve been a Councillor I’ve now had five schools that are participating. The two new schools are our two—two of our parish schools in the Sandgate Brighton area, Sacred Heart and St Kieran’s who have taken off with relish this year. They are joining Shorncliffe State School, Nashville State School and Sandgate State School. So we run a—we know there’s great competition between schools all across the city.

We also run a Deagon Ward cup as well which is the highest percentage of Active School travellers at a school and a $100 Hart Sports voucher goes to each school each term. Last year Shorncliffe State School took that out every term. They had fantastic numbers and blew the other two schools out of the water. But I know competition will be fierce this time. I wish my five schools all the very best this year in Active School Travel.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman. Just very briefly I’m disappointed that the schools that won the Active School Travel citywide competition aren’t actually listed in the report because then they’re not in the Council records and they’re not preserved for posterity. So I just want to congratulate St Sebastian’s at Yeronga who were small school of the year last year. All Councillors will remember students were in here talking to Council. What you heard from the grade six students is the tip of the iceberg about what they have done.


- 58 -

Their integration of IT into the curriculum last year was amazing. It was all driven by the kids and their teachers. I hope that Council follows up on the idea of an app so that we can simplify the gathering of data. I think the students showed us very clearly that it can be a bonus for how the school operates, how it can share information, how we can push it out into the community. So I particularly want to congratulate St Sebastian’s for their remarkable effort last year.

They are continuing on this year together with Graceville State School who are the opposite of St Sebastian’s in that they’re a very large school. They’re a wonderful, passionate group there. This year I’m delighted that there are four schools in my ward that are participating. I thought we had banned Junction Park State School being the school of excellence winner from participating because they are so good, having represented them for so long and worked with them very closely on their program for the first eight years I was in Council. I know that they will be highly competitive this year and innovative in what they deliver.

I hope that it is also the catalyst that Councillor COOPER needs to recognise that now under a Council banner we will have children crossing Ipswich Road every single day without a school zone. If anything brings this into stark contrast it is the fact that they are a Council supported Active Travel School again this year. I’m delighted that Christ the King are back on the program. It’s been a long time since they did it. Yeronga State School and for the very first time Sherwood State School—we had a brilliant launch event last week.

The choir sang walking songs all the way from the Sherwood Arboretum up to Sherwood State School. I hosted a healthy breakfast for them at the school. Apparently they were stretched out through the Sherwood shopping precinct singing all these wonderful songs. Everybody was like, what’s going on? So I just think this year is going to be marvellous. I’m delighted that I have six schools participating in the program this year. I look forward to working with all of them. I have told all of them that they’re the best so it’s going to be a bit of a problem for me at the end of the year, but they really all are.


No further debate?

DEPUTY MAYOR?

I’ll put the motion.

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.


ATTENDANCE:

The Deputy Mayor, Councillor Adrian Schrinner (Chairman), Councillor Fiona Hammond (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Jared Cassidy, Kara Cook, Ian McKenzie and Kate Richards.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – ACTIVE SCHOOL TRAVEL 2018 RESULTS

555/2018-191. Marie Gales, Manager, Transport Planning and Operations, Brisbane Infrastructure, attended the

meeting to provide the results of the 2018 Active School Travel (AST) program. She provided the information below.

2. The key results of the 2018 AST program are as follows.- Fifteen schools joined the program for their first year.- Thirty-one schools were in their second or third year of the program.- A total of 24,300 students and their families participated.- Active travel grew from 30% to 51%.


- 59 -

- By the end of the year, 3,413 students (out of approximately 7,000 students from the first year AST schools) were still actively travelling to school.

- Walking was the most popular mode of active travel (35%).- One in two families participating in the AST program left their car at home.

3. A chart showing the 2018 AST results from the first year schools was shown to the Committee.

4. Bike riding normally accounts for three per cent of active travel, however, the average bike riding rate doubled to six per cent at AST schools who started the program in 2018. In June 2018, three schools achieved exceptionally high bike riding rates:- Everton Park State School (32%) linked their in-school triathlon program to the AST program- Payne Road State School (27%) held ‘Tour de Payne’, an event that encouraged bike riding- Shorncliffe State School (24%) is located in a flat area and is well placed beside separated

bikeways that promoted bike riding.

5. In 2018, 325 students from AST schools attended bike skills sessions and, for the first time, Council collaborated with Cycling Brisbane to make it possible for students and their families to attend popular weekend events, such as ‘Wheely Fun’ learn to ride sessions.

6. Photos of the bike skills sessions were shown to the Committee.

7. In 2018, Council’s AST program received global recognition for its achievements. The program was designated a Landmark Case Study in 2018 by Tools of Change. This designation recognised the program as being one of the most successful, innovative, replicable and adaptable travel behaviour change programs in the world.

8. This year will mark the program’s 15th anniversary. Since its beginning, 162 Brisbane primary schools and 113,000 students and their families have participated in the program. There are currently 230 primary schools in Brisbane, so there are still opportunities for new schools to participate.

9. In 2019, AST will work with 46 Brisbane primary schools, including 18 new schools. From this, Council is planning to engage with more than 245,000 students and their families, and will work with more than 9,200 students for the first time. The 18 new schools include:- Acacia Ridge State School, Acacia Ridge- Brookfield State School, Brookfield- Cannon Hill Anglican College (P-6), Cannon Hill- Christ the King Primary School, Graceville- Darra State School, Darra- Grand Avenue State School, Forest Lake- Islamic College of Brisbane, Karawatha- Junction Park State School, Annerley- Newmarket State School, Newmarket- Sacred Heart Primary School, Sandgate- Sherwood State School, Sherwood- Serviceton South State School, Inala- St Ambrose’s Primary School, Newmarket- St Anthony’s School, Kedron - St Kieran’s Primary School, Brighton- Stretton State College (P-6), Stretton- Wooloowin State School, Lutwyche - Yeronga State School, Yeronga.

10. Following a question from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Gales for her informative presentation.

11. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.ADOPTED


- 60 -

B PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL CONSTRUCT A CONCRETE FOOTPATH AT THE INTERSECTION OF DILLINGEN AND DIAMANTINA STREETS, CHAPEL HILL CA18/941785

556/2018-1912. A petition requesting Council construct a concrete footpath at the intersection of Dillingen and

Diamantina Streets, Chapel Hill, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 16 October 2018, by Councillor Kate Richards, and received.

13. The Executive Manager, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, provided the following information.

14. The petition contains 17 signatures.

15. Council’s Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, previously inspected the existing grass verge at this location and found a track along the grass verge worn by pedestrian use. The verge would benefit from the construction of a new concrete footpath, which would serve as a link joining onto an existing formalised concrete footpath. Attachment B (submitted on file) details the proposed footpath location.

16. A construction estimate was approved by Councillor Kate Richards, Councillor for Pullenvale Ward, who advised Asset Services are to carry out the works as part of the Pullenvale Ward 2018-19 Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund program.

Funding

17. Funding has been approved under the Pullenvale Ward 2018-19 Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund program.

Consultation

18. Councillor Kate Richards, Councillor for Pullenvale Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

19. The Executive Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed.

20. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE DRAFT RESPONSE, AS SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder, BE SENT TO THE HEAD PETITIONER ADVISING THAT COUNCIL WILL CONSTRUCT A CONCRETE FOOTPATH ON THE CORNER OF DILLINGEN AND DIAMANTINA STREETS, CHAPEL HILL, AS PART OF THE PULLENVALE WARD 2018-19 WARD FOOTPATH AND PARKS TRUST FUND PROGRAM.

Attachment ADraft Response

Petition Reference: CA18/941785

Thank you for your petition requesting the construction of a concrete footpath at the intersection of Dillingen and Diamantina Streets, Chapel Hill.

Council has completed an onsite investigation and considered your request.

In the 2018-19 financial year, $14.06 million has been distributed evenly between each Ward to build new footpaths and make local park improvements. You may be interested to know the local Councillor decides which new footpath projects are funded from the Pullenvale Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund, following consultation with adjacent property owners.

Council can advise approval has been granted for the construction of a concrete footpath at the intersection of Dillingen and Diamantina Streets, Chapel Hill, as part of the Pullenvale Ward 2018-19 Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund program.


- 61 -

Please advise the other petitioners of this information.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr Petar Lazarevic, Regional Coordinator Civil Engineering, West Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3407 0013.

Thank you for raising this matter.ADOPTED

INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE

Councillor Amanda COOPER, Chairman of the Infrastructure Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Steven HUANG, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 26 February 2019, be adopted.


Councillor COOPER.

Councillor COOPER: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chair. Just briefly we had a presentation on the Murphy and Ellison Road intersection. We also had a brief presentation about the Streets of Remembrance just to remind all Councillors that we are in that phase at the moment where we’ve got our Streets of Remembrance project which honours our armed forces with the Commemorative Rising Sun and Royal Australian Navy badges on the street signs. So we’re asking for people to nominate. We are this year expanding the project. We will be honouring Australian Armed Forces across all wars and campaigns ahead of Anzac Day 2019 with a focus on the Australian war effort in New Guinea as well as World War I and World War II Victoria Cross recipients.

So please I urge all Councillors to go out there and talk to their communities and see if we can get some additional nominations. I did write to each Councillor to remind them to please do that. I of course want to thank the team for their hard work on that particular initiative. Then we had three petitions which I can respond to. Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Chair.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, just briefly on item D, Mr Deputy Chairman, this is a very complex matter. I’m disappointed that Council has deliberately misrepresented me in the way in which my comments have been reflected in this report. They are in writing to this Council. They were made explicitly clear. This is an issue that I think is unfortunate in the way that Council has handled the matter. Last year I was contacted by residents who were concerned about parking—illegal parking and dangerous parking in Bank Road at Graceville.

As I do with all issues I don’t believe it when one resident says to me there’s a problem. I always conduct a survey. Because if one resident wants change that’s great but we need to understand whether that is supported by the broader street. So I conducted a survey last year. On my letterhead clearly—very clear to residents—I personally delivered it to each household as I always do to ensure not just people on the roll get it, but all households get it. I had an extraordinary response rate.

There are 25 houses on this street. Twelve residents responded. Ten of them were yes, they wanted to put marked parking bays in Bank Road to help organise parking better. Now that’s an almost 50% response rate which I think every Councillor in this place knows is extremely high. That’s an 83% yes rate of the people who responded. Now I then went and put a flyer out to residents telling them of the outcome. Two men—two men—who did not participate in the survey—at first they attacked me saying, we weren’t asked about this.


- 62 -

When I related to them that I dropped the flyer, what the results of the flyer were, they then started down a different tact that I didn’t know what I was talking about, that there wasn’t any Council assessment done of this. It wasn’t a proper survey. Really offensive things, quite personally I think. When I sent them back the outcome of the survey and explained the process to them, they weren’t happy with that. When we added their results in to the survey it went from 12 responses to 14 responses of which 10 were yes and four were no. That made it 56% of all households had responded to the survey and 72% were yes.

Now they were still not happy with that, being told the outcome. They made a complaint to the LORD MAYOR. The LORD MAYOR’s office told them to do a petition. The petition before us today states the following. Councillor JOHNSTON used an informal survey with less than a 50% response rate with not all of the responses being positive. The marked bays were carried out without any formal planning or impact assessment.

Now that’s fundamentally untrue. The Council traffic engineers drew up the plan. They did what they do. The residents were told this. But the LORD MAYOR’s office didn’t tell them this. Council didn’t tell the residents this. I did. They just didn’t believe me. There’s a lack of prominent signage or similar to alert residents to the change and avenues to lodge submissions. Clearly I’m giving people the opportunity to comment. In fact, I had feedback from residents at the far end of the street that they didn’t want the bays there. That’s the feedback that we gave to Council.

So west of Molonga Terrace we did not put bays in. If these residents had given me some feedback I would have been happy to incorporate it. It goes on further. Parking bays have led to a significant increase in non-resident parking outside our homes—no, it’s a hugely busy retail street leading to a train station—and are expected to impact on the character and value of homes in the area. Now this is the high side of Graceville, an area where property values are increasing because it is a beautiful place to live.

Then there’s this statement. All the Bank Road residents between Young Street and Molonga Terrace have discussed and are in agreement that they want these bays removed from their section of the street. Now when you look at the petition that is before us there are actually nine houses in that section of the street. One of the signatories doesn’t live in the street. There are six households that have signed the petition, multiple people from the same households. There are six residents in that part of the street that did not sign the petition.

One of the people who signed the petition has written to me, in writing, saying they support the bays. A neighbour came bashing on the door and said sign this petition and they have. But they’ve written to me saying they support it. Now into all of this is the terrible way in which Council has handled this matter. Instead of I think being up front that this is the way we’ve done the process, this Council knows clearly that it’s a 20% response rate that’s needed to take action. We got here 50% and just over when you take in the additional late noes that I was happy to count.

I think it’s very disappointing that this Council is now going to go and spend more money resurveying. I don’t know if the rest of the residents who didn’t respond will have a view. I don’t know if they’re going to change their view from the last time. But when a 50%+ rate and the 80-odd per cent of residents say to me Nicole, there’s a problem, I act on their feedback.

I want to put on the record some of the feedback from residents that I’ve had. Because if Council makes changes they have to consider the other people who said yes to this: ‘To the Tennyson Ward team, just letting you know the designated parking bays were installed earlier in the week and what an amazing difference it has made. I know it’s early days but we’ve been able to freely get in and out of our driveway since the installation. Can’t thank your team enough for pursuing this and seeing it through. Well done.’

Here’s another one: ‘Often someone will park across my driveway. As an older person I find it difficult to back out as I can’t see what’s coming or going in


- 63 -

Bank Road,. So look, if Council wants to do this, they’re going to go ahead and do it. But let me be clear. I don’t think it’s necessary. That is what I told Council. I’m disappointed that Council is ignoring the views of a clear majority of residents and is going out to do a second survey and yeah playing games.



Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes, thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman. I’m rising to speak on item C, the petition requesting Council to reinstate the footpath along the northern side of Boundary Street, Fortitude Valley, between Ivory Street and Ivory Lane and reinstate the curb ramps on Boundary Street, Fortitude Valley. We’ll be supporting this. But can—I just want to recap on—this has been a contentious issue for some time. I was interested—I know there is—there are different views being expressed in the Chamber with regard to this particular issue.

I was interested to check out the local Councillor’s view. When I went to our Hansard record—I’ll just give you some facts about her views in relation to the changes that were made in relation to this site. Councillor HOWARD goes, I appreciate the opportunity to rise to speak to item B in the Infrastructure Committee report today. Madam Chairman, for many years I’ve been working with body corporates and individuals in this section of Boundary Street in the city to get the intersection of Ivory and Boundary Street upgraded.

Then, I support intersection upgrades and the professional officers who design the changes. I appreciate that there are residents and from what I’m hearing from opposition Councillors in City Hall who don’t like the lights upgraded. Then Councillor—the Councillor goes on to say, the changes are here to stay because as the report says, a new crossing point enhances safety by directing pedestrian movement away from the intersection.

She further goes on to say, I think it’s important to highlight that there are no traffic engineers within Council that are legally prepared to sign off on the modifications that the petitioners would like to see. If there is no support from the professionals in the traffic engineering, then Council must respect that position. Oh and finally, again I realise that petitioners won’t be happy with this assessment. But I am determined to keep our streets and roads safe in Central Ward operating as freely and openly as possible.

Well, Mr Chairman, the petition has come back. The petitioners have come back again and what they were asking for in this original petition we’ve now agreed to. We’ve now backflipped. So we spent $1 million in 2017 on doing this reconfiguration and directing pedestrians away from this particular intersection, directing bikes away from this particular intersection, a whole range of things, but $1 million. Councillor HOWARD was quite stern that anyone who objected to it, anyone who thought that it wasn’t right was wrong.

Well now Council has come back after another petition has been received and has backflipped and has said yes, we think it should be reviewed. Yes, we think there should be better arrangements. Yes, we think things can be done differently. Madam Chair, this is a Councillor who is out of touch with her ward. She’s been out of her touch—out of touch with her ward since the tree massacre. She’s been out of touch with her ward with regards to this issue. She’s been out of touch with her ward with regards to development.

She didn’t stand up for her community and stand up for pedestrians and stand up for the changes that are being made there. She fought her community. She went against her community. Now Council is saying yes, yes actually there is a problem down there. Yes, we have made a huge mistake. Yes, we need to review how we’ve spent this $1 million. We need to go back and do something better. Madam Chair, I would be very interested to hear what Councillor HOWARD has to say given that she was so strong in supporting the changes and not supporting the residents in her ward, not supporting pedestrian and bike movements in her ward. She wanted to support traffic movements. Madam Chair, it’s a shame that Central Ward—


- 64 -

Deputy Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, I know it’s International Women’s Day on Friday but that’s the third time you’ve misgendered me—Mr Deputy Chair is fine.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: —oh, Mr Deputy Chair—

Deputy Chairman: So please just be aware of that.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: —okay cool. Thank you—

Deputy Chairman: Thank you.


Councillor GRIFFITHS: All cool, all cool—Mr Chairman—Deputy Chairman—I’ve probably given you too much authority—Deputy Chairman—Deputy Chairman—we don’t want to upset Councillor OWEN. We believe that this has been a stuff-up. We believe that there have been issues here. We believe that the Administration is backpedalling on a mess that they made three years ago.


Councillor HAMMOND.

Councillor HAMMOND: Thank you, Deputy Chairman. I rise to speak on item A as I have in this place before the Ellison and Murphy Road upgrade. What a fantastic project. I’ve obviously done a lot of public meetings out there at the moment. People in—the majority of people, very strong majority of people, are extremely happy with the project. They understand there’s going to be some delays in the area. We’ve come—I’ve met the most amazing people in Marchant Ward through these public consultations and public meetings that I’ve been doing.

I’m happy to say part of this project has brought up one gentleman we’re going to get my Stafford Men’s Shed to make some habitat boxes to put into the trees. So we’re going to start off with about 20 of these and work with Council officers. But the whole project is very much needed for the northside of Brisbane. It helps basically all of us on the northside with that corridor that goes all the way through. Councillor COOPER I’d like to thank you for your efforts with this project and getting it up to the state it is now.

I know 100% the residents are so looking forward to when this project finishes. But a great start. It’s gone smoothly so far, so thank you for your support.


No further debate?

Councillor COOPER, summing up?

Councillor COOPER: I’d just like to briefly respond to the comments made—I think those comments that were made by Councillor GRIFFITHS are pretty disappointing. He said that we’ve backflipped and that’s actually completely incorrect. The people that are backflipping in the vicinity of Howard Smith Wharves are the Australian Labor Party who never supported the project and now apparently are down there every five minutes throwing every opportunity to celebrate the space that they actually never even supported in the first place.

Councillor HOWARD was absolutely spot on in saying we were going to signalise that particular location to allow better access into and out of that location for her residents. In fact, so, so, so wrong was Councillor GRIFFITHS but inclined to become almost a little bit accepting of that fairly normal situation. So he’s completely wrong. Councillor HOWARD was representing her community and made it clear in her statements that she supported that intersection upgrade because it benefited her residents.

We have said in this petition we will be now—as we said then—we will be looking to see how pedestrian movements are moving into and out of that site. If there are any improvements that we can make, then we absolutely will be doing so as we do across the city. Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Chair.

Deputy Chairman: I will now put the motion.


- 65 -

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Infrastructure Committee was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillors Amanda COOPER and Fiona HAMMOND immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.


AYES: 25 - DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona Hammond, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK and Nicole JOHNSTON.

ABSTENTIONS: 1 - Councillor Jonathan SRI.


ATTENDANCE:

Councillor Amanda Cooper (Chairman), Councillor Steven Huang (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Peter Cumming, Steve Griffiths, Kim Marx and Andrew Wines.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – MURPHY ROAD AND ELLISON ROAD INTERSECTION

557/2018-191. Graham Nell, Program Director, Civil and Transport, Project Management, City Projects Office,

Brisbane Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Murphy Road and Ellison Road intersection upgrade. He provided the information below.

2. The Murphy Road and Ellison Road intersection is a two lane roundabout which provides connectivity to several northern suburbs of Brisbane including Fitzgibbon, Taigum, Bracken Ridge and Zillmere. The Murphy Road and Ellison Road intersection upgrade project will involve an upgrade of the roundabout to a signalised intersection and upgrades to the intersection of Murphy Road and Kittyhawk Drive, and Murphy Road and Butt Street.

3. Classified as a local road of regional significance, Murphy Road is a suburban road which carries approximately 25,000 vehicles per day. Murphy Road is also a significant bus route within northern Brisbane. Ellison Road is a district road which carries approximately 17,000 vehicles per day.

4. Between 2013 and 2018, 11 accidents were recorded at the Murphy Road and Ellison Road roundabout including five hospitalisations, five requiring medical treatment and one minor injury. Between 2013 and 2018, 16 accidents were recorded at the Murphy Road and Kittyhawk Drive intersection including two hospitalisations, nine medical treatments and five minor injuries. Existing traffic volumes exceed the practical capacity of the existing roundabout during the weekday peak periods. It is predicted that by 2021, queue lengths at the intersection of Murphy Road and Ellison Road will exceed one kilometre.

5. The pedestrian facilities at the existing roundabout are close to the roundabout which presents risks for crossing pedestrians. There are no existing on-road cycle lanes on Murphy Road or Ellison Road.

6. The demand on the existing two lanes of Murphy Road is at or exceeds capacity during the AM and PM peak periods. Due to high traffic volumes on Murphy Road, access and egress from Butt Street is constrained. The verges on Murphy Road between Gympie Road and Ellison Road are heavily utilised for informal parking, with consequent safety concerns.


- 66 -

7. The project’s objectives are to:- reduce existing and forecast traffic congestion- improve travel time reliability for general traffic and buses along the Murphy Road corridor- improve safety for all modes of transport- improve pedestrian and cyclist facilities to promote active transport- improve road capacity for the future- improve drainage and reduce flooding on Murphy Road and Ellison Road.

8. The project scope is to:- replace the existing roundabout with a four-way signalised intersection- widen Murphy Road between Gympie Road and north of Butt Street- upgrade and signalise the intersection at Butt Street and Murphy Road- upgrade the Murphy Road and Kittyhawk Drive intersection- widen Ellison Road to four lanes, adjacent to the Murphy Road intersection- provide 1.5-metre-wide cycle lanes along both sides of Murphy Road and Ellison Road for the

extent of the project- introduce two new car parks in 7th Brigade Park and Marchant Park with a total of 80 car

spaces- construct a new road connection to provide alternative access to Navarre Street.

9. Details of the proposed layout plan were provided to the Committee, along with an artist’s impression of the southern view of the upgraded intersection.

10. Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Nell for his informative presentation.

11. RECOMMENDATION:


B COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – STREETS OF REMEMBRANCE

558/2018-1912. Deborah Sketchley, Transport Network Operations Manager, Transport Network Operations, Transport

Planning and Operations, Brisbane Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Streets of Remembrance initiative. She provided the information below.

13. The Streets of Remembrance initiative arose following a community suggestion to change street signs to include the Australian Defence Force Rising Sun badge and Royal Australian Navy badge as a way for Council to acknowledge the Defence Forces’ service to our country and as a mark of respect.

14. The initiative commenced in time for Remembrance Day 2015 to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Gallipoli landings, and sought to acknowledge and recognise the historical significance of streets that share the same names as people, places or events of historical significance to World War I Australian forces.

15. Previous installations have occurred for:- Remembrance Day 2015- Anzac Day 2016- Remembrance Day 2016- Anzac Day 2017- Remembrance Day 2017- Anzac Day 2018- Remembrance Day 2018.

16. Overall, 677 signs in 202 streets (133 unique street names) have been installed as part of the initiative. Themes have included women in World War I; cemeteries; troop ships; Victoria Cross recipients; generals and admirals; and battles and campaigns.


- 67 -

17. The Streets of Remembrance initiative is an ongoing program and further suggestions from Councillors and members of the public are invited.

18. Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Sketchley for her informative presentation.

19. RECOMMENDATION:


C PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TO REINSTATE THE FOOTPATH ALONG THE NORTHERN SIDE OF BOUNDARY STREET, FORTITUDE VALLEY, BETWEEN IVORY STREET AND IVORY LANE, AND REINSTATE THE KERB RAMPS ON BOUNDARY STREET, FORTITUDE VALLEYCA18/1073876

559/2018-1920. A petition from residents, requesting Council reinstate the footpath along the northern side of Boundary

Street, Fortitude Valley, between Ivory Street and Ivory Lane, and that kerb ramps be reinstated in Boundary Street, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 27 November 2018, by Councillor Vicki Howard, and received.

21. The Executive Manager, City Projects Office, Brisbane Infrastructure, provided the following information.

22. The petition contains 33 signatures, with 32 signatures from residents from Central, Coorparoo, Doboy, Hamilton, Holland Park, Marchant, Moorooka, Northgate, Paddington, Pullenvale and The Gabba wards. One signature was from a resident of the Northern Territory.

23. The petitioners also request convenient access to the planned ferry terminal at Howard Smith Wharves.

24. The petitioners refer to Council removing the section of footpath along the northern side of Boundary Street in 2017. Council had previously received two petitions in 2017 (CA17/364334 and CA17/367659) requesting that Council not proceed with the removal of the footpath along this section of Boundary Street.

25. In June 2017, Council completed works to facilitate improved access through the Ivory Street and Boundary Street intersection to assist in addressing access, safety and congestion issues. As part of the works, a new crossing point was provided on Boundary Street with new kerb ramps and connection to the existing footpath. The new crossing point enhances safety by directing pedestrian movements away from the intersection and provides vehicles travelling along Boundary Street with a clear line of sight. Attachment B (submitted on file) shows a locality map.

26. Following the opening of the Howard Smith Wharves development, there has been an increase in pedestrian movements through the area. In response, Council is planning to undertake a traffic and pedestrian study to review the overall performance of the intersection, including pedestrian movements. This study will take place in mid-2019, following the completion of the hotel within the Howard Smith Wharves precinct. Council will provide the outcomes of the pedestrian study report to the petitioners.

Funding

27. Funding is allocated to the project in the 2018-19 annual budget under service 2.1.2.3 Projects Attacking Congestion – Major Traffic Improvements - Intersections.

Consultation

28. Councillor Vicki Howard, Councillor for Central Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.


- 68 -

Customer impact

29. The response will address the petitioners’ concerns.

30. The Executive Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed, with Councillors Peter Cumming and Steve Griffiths abstaining.

31. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE INFORMATION IN THIS SUBMISSION BE NOTED AND THE DRAFT RESPONSE, AS SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder, BE SENT TO THE HEAD PETITIONER.



Thank you for your petition requesting Council reinstate the section of footpath along the northern side of Boundary Street, Fortitude Valley, between Ivory Street and Ivory Lane, and reinstate the kerb ramps at Boundary Street to provide convenient access to the planned ferry terminal at Howard Smith Wharves.

Council upgraded the intersection at Ivory Street and Boundary Street in 2017 to improve access through the intersection and improve safety and congestion issues through the area. Safe pedestrian and cycle access was enhanced with the installation of new kerb ramps on Boundary Street, connecting to the existing footpaths and providing a safer and more accessible route.

Following the opening of the Howard Smith Wharves development in late 2018, Council is aware of increased pedestrian movements through the area. As the development of the precinct progresses with the opening of the hotel and future delivery of the ferry terminal, Council recognises the need to maintain safe and convenient pedestrian access to meet future demands.

Council is planning to undertake a traffic and pedestrian study to review the overall performance of the Boundary Street and Ivory Street intersection, including pedestrian movements to the Howard Smith Wharves precinct. This study will take place in mid-2019, once the hotel within the Howard Smith Wharves precinct is open. Council will provide you with the outcomes of the pedestrian study report when it has been completed.

Please let the other petitioners know of this information.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Ms Marnie Beckett, Senior Communications Officer, Project Communications, Project Management, City Projects Office, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3403 7235.


D PETITION – REQUESTING THE REMOVAL OF PARKING BAYS IN BANK ROAD BETWEEN YOUNG STREET AND MOLONGA TERRACE, GRACEVILLECA18/1093227

560/2018-1932. A petition from residents, requesting the removal of parking bays in Bank Road between Young Street

and Molonga Terrace, Graceville, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 4 December 2018, by Councillor Nicole Johnston, and received.

33. The Manager, Transport Planning and Operations, Brisbane Infrastructure, provided the following information.


- 69 -

34. The petition contains 15 signatures. Of the petitioners, 14 live on Bank Road and one lives elsewhere in Graceville.

35. The petitioners are concerned about the recent installation of parking bays on Bank Road in October 2018 and the impact this may have on property value and resident amenity. The petitioners believe there was no formal planning or impact assessment undertaken as part of the community consultation for the proposal and they are requesting the removal of the parking bays.

36. Bank Road is considered to be a neighbourhood access road in Council’s road hierarchy, providing access to local residential properties. There are no Council bus services operating on Bank Road. Attachment B (submitted on file) shows a locality map.

37. On-street marked parking bays are used to formalise parking spaces to provide guidance to motorists of where they may park and reduce instances of illegal parking over driveways by identifying the available road space. They can be particularly useful in areas of high parking demand such as near railway stations or shopping precincts.

38. The petitioners’ feedback about the process and notification of these changes has been noted. Following feedback from local residents about parking issues on Bank Road, Councillor Nicole Johnston, the Councillor for Tennyson Ward, carried out a community survey in May 2018 to determine if residents would support the installation of marked parking bays.

39. The survey was provided to all residential properties on Bank Road between Honour Avenue and Bell Terrace and provided residents the opportunity to respond to the request. Of the 25 properties surveyed, 12 provided a response. Of the 12 responses, 10 supported the installation of marked parking bays. This was considered to be a majority support rate and accordingly, Council proceeded to install marked parking bays between Honour Avenue and Molonga Terrace in October 2018 at Councillor Johnston’s request.

40. Following the installation, Council has received this petition containing objections to the marked parking bays from residents on Bank Road between Young Street and Molonga Terrace. The petitioners’ feedback about impacts on the street’s character and amenity has been noted. There are no provisions in Council’s planning scheme, Brisbane City Plan 2014, to take account of impacts on the character of homes from changes to the street itself. The Character overlay only takes account of proposed change to adjacent or nearby properties.

41. As only four of the properties between Young Street and Molonga Terrace have signed the petition, Council will consult with all residents living on Bank Road between Young Street and Molonga Terrace to determine if there is majority support to remove the parking bays from this area.

Consultation

42. Councillor Nicole Johnston, Councillor for Tennyson Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact


44. The Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed.

45. RECOMMENDATION:



- 70 -

Attachment ADraft response


Thank you for your petition requesting the removal of parking bays in Bank Road between Young Street and Molonga Terrace, Graceville.

On street marked parking bays are used to formalise parking spaces to provide guidance to motorists of where they may park and reduce instances of illegal parking over driveways by identifying the available road space. They can be particularly useful in areas of high parking demand such as near railway stations or shopping precincts.

Your feedback about the process and notification of these changes has been noted. Following feedback from local residents about parking issues on Bank Road, Councillor Nicole Johnston, the Councillor for Tennyson Ward, carried out a community survey in May 2018 to determine if residents would support the installation of marked parking bays.

The survey was provided to all residential properties on Bank Road between Honour Avenue and Bell Terrace and provided residents the opportunity to respond to the request. Of the 25 properties surveyed, 12 provided a response. Of the 12 responses, 10 supported the installation of marked parking bays. This was considered to be a majority support rate and accordingly, Council proceeded to install marked parking bays between Honour Avenue and Molonga Terrace in October 2018 at Councillor Johnston’s request.

Following the installation, Council has received this petition containing objections to the marked parking bays from residents on Bank Road between Young Street and Molonga Terrace. Your feedback about impacts on the street’s character and amenity has been noted. There are no provisions in Council’s planning scheme, Brisbane City Plan 2014, to take account of impacts on the character of homes from changes to the street itself. The Character overlay only takes account of proposed change to adjacent or nearby properties.

As only four of the properties between Young Street and Molonga Terrace have signed the petition, Council will consult with all residents living on Bank Road between Young Street and Molonga Terrace to determine if there is a majority support to remove the parking bays from this area.

Please let the other petitioners know of this information.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr Kiran Sreedharan, Senior Transport Network Officer, Investigations Unit, Transport Network Operations, Transport Planning and Operations, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3178 1178.


E PETITION – REQUESTING INCREASED ENFORCEMENT OF CURRENT SPEED LIMITS IN AND AROUND SALISBURYCA19/2027

561/2018-1946. A petition from residents, requesting increased enforcement of current speed limits in and around

Salisbury, was received during the Summer Recess 2018-19.

47. The Manager, Transport Planning and Operations, Brisbane Infrastructure, provided the following information.

48. The petition contains 16 signatures. Of the petitioners, 12 live in Salisbury with the remainder living in other suburbs of the City of Brisbane.


- 71 -

49. The petitioners are raising concerns about the speed of vehicles travelling along Orange Grove Road and Lillian Avenue, Salisbury. They also raised pedestrian safety concerns about the existing zebra crossing located on Orange Grove Road near the intersection with Lillian Avenue.

50. Orange Grove Road has a 60 km/h speed limit and is considered to be an arterial road in Council’s road hierarchy, connecting major centres of the city and forming an important link in Brisbane’s bus and freight network. Due to the road’s function, high volumes of traffic are expected. Lillian Avenue has a 50 km/h speed limit and is considered to be a neighbourhood access road in Council’s road hierarchy, providing access to local residential properties. Attachment B (submitted on file) shows a locality map.

51. The petitioners’ request for enforcement of the posted speed limits in Salisbury has been noted. Speeding and reckless driving are considered to be driver behaviour issues which Council cannot enforce. The Queensland Police Service (QPS) is the designated authority responsible for enforcing Queensland’s traffic laws. In response to this petition, Council will refer the petitioners’ request for enforcement to the Police Commissioner, Mr Ian Stewart APM for consideration.

52. While Council cannot enforce the speed limit, it has implemented two specific programs to improve road safety across Brisbane. These programs are the speed awareness monitors (SAM) program and the Light Emitting Diode (LED) Road Signs program.

53. SAMs are installed for a minimum of one month and increase motorist awareness of their travelling speed by acting as a reminder to adhere to the speed limit. The citywide program has seen a marked decrease in the number of motorists travelling over the speed limit when passing the signs, with an average speed reduction of more than 8 km/h across all sites since the program began in late 2013. An existing SAM is in place on Lillian Avenue for eastbound traffic just after its intersection with Tamblyn Road. The SAM has been in place since October 2018 and has been very effective in this location, with the average speed of motorists who were recorded exceeding the limit dropping by 8 km/h after passing the sign. The sign is due to be rotated in early February 2019 and will then be reconsidered for installation again next financial year.

54. In addition, an existing SAM footing is in place for westbound traffic between Tuckett and Harlen Roads, Salisbury. A SAM is due to be rotated into this footing in March 2019. It is anticipated that the SAM sign will improve motorist compliance on Lillian Avenue as has been recorded at other sites across Brisbane.

55. The highly visible LED road signs are triggered when a vehicle approaches the sign above a pre-determined speed set for that location, displaying a ‘Slow Down’ message when activated. These signs are designed to alert drivers of an upcoming hazard, such as a zebra crossing, bend or ‘Stop’ sign. Two LED road signs have been installed on Orange Grove Road on approach to the existing zebra crossing facility.

56. The petitioners’ feedback about pedestrian safety at the existing zebra crossing facility on Orange Grove Road has been noted. Council released the outcomes of its Move Safe Brisbane – Pedestrian Safety Review on 5 December 2018. The review follows a month-long community consultation from 31 July to 28 August 2018 to gain feedback on areas where Brisbane residents would like to see safety improvements. This feedback has been of great benefit to Council and was used to identify and prioritise pedestrian safety projects across our city in conjunction with crash data from the QPS and pedestrian and vehicle counts.

57. One of the outcomes of the pedestrian safety review is the investigation of possible improvements to zebra crossings on four-lane roads. As part of these works, Council proposes to investigate the zebra crossing on Orange Grove Road for possible improvements by December 2019.

Consultation

58. Councillor Steve Griffiths, Councillor for Moorooka Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact



- 72 -


61. RECOMMENDATION:


Attachment ADraft response


Thank you for your petition requesting increased enforcement of current speed limits in and around Salisbury.

Your request for enforcement of the posted speed limits in Salisbury has been noted. Speeding and reckless driving are considered to be driver behaviour issues which Council cannot enforce. The Queensland Police Service (QPS) is the designated authority responsible for enforcing Queensland’s traffic laws. In response to this petition, Council will refer the petitioners’ request for enforcement to the Police Commissioner, Mr Ian Stewart APM for consideration.

While Council cannot enforce the speed limit, it has implemented two specific programs to improve road safety across Brisbane. These programs are the speed awareness monitors (SAM) program and the Light Emitting Diode (LED) Road Signs program.

SAMs are installed for a minimum of one month and increase motorist awareness of their travelling speed by acting as a reminder to adhere to the speed limit. The citywide program has seen a marked decrease in the number of motorists travelling over the speed limit when passing the signs, with an average speed reduction of more than 8 km/h across all sites since the program began in late 2013. An existing SAM is in place on Lillian Avenue for eastbound traffic just after its intersection with Tamblyn Road. The SAM has been in place since October 2018 and has been very effective in this location, with the average speed of motorists who were recorded exceeding the limit dropping by 8 km/h after passing the sign. The sign is due to be rotated in early February 2019 and will then be reconsidered for installation again next financial year.

In addition, an existing SAM footing is in place for westbound traffic between Tuckett and Harlen Roads, Salisbury. A SAM is due to be rotated into this footing in March 2019. It is anticipated that the SAM sign will improve motorist compliance on Lillian Avenue as has been recorded at other sites across Brisbane.

The highly visible LED road signs are triggered when a vehicle approaches the sign above a pre-determined speed set for that location, displaying a ‘Slow Down’ message when activated. These signs are designed to alert drivers of an upcoming hazard, such as a zebra crossing, bend or ‘Stop’ sign. Two LED road signs have been installed on Orange Grove Road on approach to the existing zebra crossing facility.

Your feedback about pedestrian safety at the existing zebra crossing facility on Orange Grove Road has been noted. Council released the outcomes of its Move Safe Brisbane – Pedestrian Safety Review on 5 December 2018. The review follows a month-long community consultation from 31 July to 28 August 2018 to gain feedback on areas where Brisbane residents would like to see safety improvements. This feedback has been of great benefit to Council and was used to identify and prioritise pedestrian safety projects across our city in conjunction with crash data from the QPS and pedestrian and vehicle counts.

One of the outcomes of the pedestrian safety review is the investigation of possible improvements to zebra crossings on four-lane roads. As part of these works, Council proposes to investigate the zebra crossing on Orange Grove Road for possible improvements by December 2019.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr Kiran Sreedharan, Senior Transport Network Officer, Investigations Unit, Transport Network Operations, Transport Planning and Operations, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3178 1178.


- 73 -


CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE

Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the City Planning Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Adam ALLAN, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 26 February 2019, be adopted.


Councillor BOURKE: Yes, thank you, Mr Deputy Chair.

Just very quickly before I get to the report. It was my pleasure last Wednesday to join with a former alderman of this place, Robert Mills, to unveil a plaque commemorating Her Majesty’s Theatre in the Queen Street Mall. For those who do not know, Her Majesty’s Theatre stood on the current site of a section of the Wintergarden. So from the 1880s up through to 1983, there was a large 2,000 seat theatre that hosted many performances, Mr Deputy Chair, from a range of international and domestic celebrities.

Dame Joan Sutherland played there, INXS and a range of other prominent performances were carried out at Her Majesty’s Theatre. Unfortunately, it closed its doors in 1983 and was knocked down to make way for the Wintergarden, as we know it now, but the shopping complex that was built on that site. So we were joined by about 25 people from Brisbane’s local theatrical company, Mr Deputy Chair, to unveil this plaque to commemorate the location and to help tell the history of that particular building and its part in Brisbane’s cultural heritage.

So I just want to acknowledge and thank Mr Mills as well as a number of other individuals who assisted him in gathering the information that was used to help inform that plaque.

Three items on the committee agenda, Mr Deputy Chair, and I am happy to leave those for debate in the Chamber.


There being no further debate, Councillor BOURKE? No?

I’ll put the motion.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the City Planning Committee was declared carried on the voices.


ATTENDANCE:

Councillor Matthew Bourke (Chairman), Councillor Ryan Murphy (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Adam Allan, Jared Cassidy, Steven Huang and Jonathan Sri.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BRISBANE’S EVENT HISTORY ART TRAIL

562/2018-191. Omar Barragan, Design Brisbane Manager, City Planning and Economic Development, City Planning

and Sustainability, attended the meeting to provide an update on Brisbane’s Event History Art Trail (the art trail). He provided the information below.

2. The art trail seeks to reveal Brisbane’s event history through a walkable trail of public art and artefacts associated with showcase events and milestones in Brisbane’s story.


- 74 -

3. Artworks include the Petrie Tableau located in King George Square, which was commissioned and created in 1988 as a way to acknowledge the pioneer families of Brisbane. Human Factor located in South Bank and Venus Rising located at Kangaroo Point are also included on the art trail.

4. The art trail will tell visitors and residents stories through the tangible objects that line our city streets and structures. The art trail project will illuminate the narratives surrounding those objects that are largely already populating the urban fabric, deepening our understanding of the place.

5. The Sir Thomas Brisbane Seat was commissioned by Rotary International and the Queensland Government to celebrate the hosting of the Rotary International Convention in Brisbane in 2003. The work was carved by Dr Rhyl Hinwood and was installed in the Roma Street Parklands in 2003.

6. The art trail itself will be set out in a loop that takes the audience across the city and into the inner suburbs. The developing trail may begin at the iconic Brisbane sign, which is located at South Bank, and was commissioned for the G20 Leaders’ Summit held in November 2014. The trail will continue through South Bank and along the Kangaroo Point Cliffs’ Lower River Terrace, punctuated with World Expo 88 artworks and artefacts including: - Nepalese Pagoda- Plough Inn and Ship Inn- Human Factor sculptures- Sky Needle- Man and Matter – Kangaroo Point Cliffs, Lower River Terrace.

7. The art trail continues past the Goodwill Bridge, named in commemoration of the Goodwill Games which took place in Brisbane in 2001. The art trail then proceeds to the top of the Kangaroo Point Cliffs where the audience will encounter the re-cast and relocated Saluting Scout, originally commissioned for World Expo 88, now destined for Scout Place, Kangaroo Point. An existing plaque describes the 75th Anniversary of Scouts Queensland, which was celebrated in 1984. From there residents are directed to Venus Rising, by Wolfgang Buttress, installed in 2011 in conjunction with the celebration of Q150 – the 150th anniversary of Queensland’s creation.

8. As part of the Brisbane City Centre Master Plan 2014 deliverables for 2018-19, the art trail will be strengthened with some additional items that will be installed in strategic places along the trail. Design Brisbane is re-casting an additional four artworks: the Brisbane Coat of Arms and three World Expo 88 Human Factor artworks.

9. Commissioned for Brisbane’s 1982 Commonwealth Games, a high-relief Brisbane Coat of Arms was installed in a water feature at the northern entrance to Fortitude Valley. The Coat of Arms was carved in timber then cast in fiberglass by renowned craftsperson Mr Colin Blumson. Mr Blumson has created some of Brisbane’s most iconic carvings, including intricate carvings throughout Brisbane’s St John’s Cathedral.

10. For the original artwork to be on permanent display in its current material, a similar large-scale surround would need to be created. To give the work a more contemporary setting, the work is being cast in bronze and brought down to street level, giving the audience a greater opportunity to see the artwork up close. It will be placed in Wickham Park on the corner of Wickham Terrace and Albert Street in Spring Hill. The site provides the city as a wonderful backdrop. Interpretive signage will accompany the artwork, giving audiences an opportunity to gain a greater understanding of the motifs within Brisbane’s Coat of Arms.

11. Council is working with Lendlease and the RNA to locate The Drover and his Mate artwork on Gregory Rest, adjacent to the RNA. The Ramp artwork, which was donated to Council by Stadiums Queensland, will be incorporated into the precinct sign at the Murarrie Recreation Reserve, and will be delivered in June 2019. The art trail will undoubtedly become a cultural tourism drawcard and contribute further to Brisbane’s growing collection of heritage, architecture and art trails in the city.

12. Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Barragan for his informative presentation.

13. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.


- 75 -

ADOPTED

B PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL REVIEW A SITING VARIATION APPLICATION OVER THE DEVELOPMENT AT 57 GOULD ROAD, HERSTONCA18/836134

563/2018-1914. A petition from residents requesting Council review a siting variation application over the development

at 57 Gould Road, Herston, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 11 September 2018, by Councillor Vicki Howard, Councillor for Central Ward, and received.

15. The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the following information.


17. The petitioners have raised the following concerns about the siting variation application over the development at 57 Gould Road, Herston. - The proposed extension to 57 Gould Road, Herston, does not comply with the Queensland

Development Code (QDC) for boundary setbacks.- The proposed extension rises to 9.5 metres with only a one metre setback from the

neighbouring properties.- The QDC requires a 2.5 metre setback for a building of this height for privacy and to avoid

blocking the light to neighbouring properties.- The occupants of the neighbouring properties have strenuously objected to any relaxation of

setbacks.- The proposed relaxation could set a precedent for further non-compliant building development

in a character residential area.

18. The subject site is located in the Character (Infill housing) zone under Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan) and is subject to the Ithaca district neighbourhood plan. The surrounding area is also identified in the Character (Infill housing) zone, which predominantly includes single detached dwellings with a range of heights from one to two storeys. The subject site has a frontage to Gould Road, Herston, and comprises an area of 536 m2. The subject site backs onto Rasey Park, which is identified in the Open space and Sport and recreation zones under City Plan.

19. The subject site has an approval for building work (development permit) for an extension to a pre-1946 dwelling house contained in the Traditional building character overlay, which included an early referral response for amenity and aesthetics. The application was approved against the requirements of City Plan and in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act 2016 (the Act) on 29 May 2018.

20. On 3 September 2018, Council received a siting variation application for the property. The variations sought were regarding the front (road) and side setbacks. On 10 September 2018, Council provided a referral agency response pursuant to section 56 of the Act, in which it was determined that the application was compliant with QDC Performance Criteria MP 1.2 – Design and Siting Standard for Single Detached Housing – on Lots 450 m² and over.

21. Matters considered during Council’s assessment included the location of the side boundary variation in relation to the adjoining lots, the locational aspects of the subject dwelling and dwellings on adjoining lots, slope of the subject site and flooding constraints.

22. It was determined that the proposed development complied with Performance Criteria P2 of the QDC, in that it provides adequate daylight and ventilation into the habitable rooms of the adjoining dwellings and will not adversely impact on the amenity and privacy of residents on the adjoining lots. It was determined that the development provides for good residential design that promotes the efficient use of a lot and acceptable amenity to residents, while facilitating off-street parking.

Consultation

23. Councillor Vicki Howard, Councillor for Central Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.


- 76 -

24. The Divisional Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed, with Councillors Jared Cassidy and Jonathan Sri dissenting.

25. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE HEAD PETITIONER BE ADVISED OF THE INFORMATION SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder.

Attachment AInformation to be provided to the head petitioner

The subject site is located in the Character (Infill housing) zone under Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan) and is subject to the Ithaca district neighbourhood plan. The surrounding area is also identified in the Character (Infill housing) zone, which predominantly includes single detached dwellings with a range of heights from one to two storeys. The subject site has a frontage to Gould Road, Herston, and comprises an area of 536 m2. The subject site backs onto Rasey Park, which is identified in the Open space and Sport and Recreation zones under City Plan.

The subject site has an approval for building work (development permit) for an extension to a pre-1946 dwelling house contained in the Traditional building character overlay, which included an early referral response for amenity and aesthetics. The application was approved against the requirements of City Plan and in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act 2016 (the Act) on 29 May 2018.

On 3 September 2018, Council received a siting variation application for the property. The variations sought were regarding the front (road) and side setbacks. On 10 September 2018, Council provided a referral agency response pursuant to section 56 of the Act, in which it was determined that the application was compliant with QDC Performance Criteria MP 1.2 – Design and Siting Standard for Single Detached Housing – on Lots 450 m² and over.

Matters considered during Council’s assessment included the location of the side boundary variation in relation to the adjoining lots, the locational aspects of the subject dwelling and dwellings on adjoining lots, slope of the subject site and flooding constraints.

It was determined that the proposed development complied with Performance Criteria P2 of the QDC, in that it provides adequate daylight and ventilation into the habitable rooms of the adjoining dwellings and will not adversely impact on the amenity and privacy of residents on the adjoining lots. It was determined that the development provides for good residential design that promotes the efficient use of a lot and acceptable amenity to residents, while facilitating off-street parking.

ADOPTED

C PETITION – OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED CHILDCARE CENTRE DEVELOPMENT AT 23 TILLOT STREET, DUTTON PARK (APPLICATION REFERENCE A004953413)CA18/988918

564/2018-1926. A petition from residents objecting to the proposed childcare centre development at 23 Tillot Street,

Dutton Park, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 6 November 2018, by Councillor Johnathan Sri, Councillor for The Gabba Ward, and received.

27. The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the following information.


29. The petitioners’ concerns are summarised as follows:- impact on the traffic network- insufficient need for a childcare centre- cars will rat-run in residential streets- the development does not have enough open green space or deep planted trees


- 77 -

- new structures are too close to the property boundary.

30. On 19 June 2018, a development application for a childcare centre (59 spaces) at 23 Tillot Street, Dutton Park, was lodged with Council. The application is currently being assessed against the requirements of Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan) and in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act 2016.

31. The subject site is located within the Character (infill housing) zone and the West End—Woolloongabba district neighbourhood plan (no specific precinct). The existing building was previously used as a welfare institution (healthcare service) for Spina Bifida Hydrocephalus Queensland. The subject site is surrounded by character residential housing comprising of one and two storey buildings and is opposite a commercial character building to the south at 43 Lochaber Street, Dutton Park. Dutton Park State School is located approximately 250 metres to the west. Boggo Road bus station is approximately 540 metres walking distance to the east of the subject site.

32. The application is impact assessable under the requirements of City Plan and underwent public notification between 17 August 2018 and 7 September 2018. A total of 52 submissions were received, of which 43 were properly made.

33. Further Issues letters about the application were issued on 9 October 2018 and 12 December 2018. The applicant responded on 8 January 2019 providing further information regarding noise attenuation from outdoor play areas and car parking that may affect nearby residents. This response is currently under assessment by officers from Development Services, City Planning and Sustainability, including Environmental Management Officers.

Consultation

34. Councillor Jonathan Sri, Councillor for The Gabba Ward, has been consulted and does not support the recommendation.

35. The Divisional Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed, with Councillors Jared Cassidy and Jonathan Sri dissenting.

36. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED OF THE INFORMATION SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder.

Attachment AInformation to be provided to the petitioners

Petition reference: CA18/988918

On 19 June 2018, a development application for a childcare centre (59 spaces) at 23 Tillot Street, Dutton Park, was lodged with Council. It is currently being assessed against the requirements of Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan) and in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act 2016.

The subject site is located within the Character (infill housing) zone and the West End—Woolloongabba district neighbourhood plan (no specific precinct). The existing building was previously used as a welfare institution (healthcare service) for Spina Bifida Hydrocephalus Queensland. The site is surrounded by character residential housing comprising one and two storey buildings and is opposite a commercial character building to the south at 43 Lochaber Street, Dutton Park. Dutton Park State School is located approximately 250 meters to the west. Park Road bus station is approximately 540 metres walking distance to the west of the site.

The application is impact assessable under the requirements of City Plan and underwent public notification between 17 August 2018 and 7 September 2018. A total of 52 submissions were received, of which 43 were properly made.

Further Issues letters about the application were issued on 9 October 2018 and 12 December 2018. The applicant responded on 8 January 2019, providing further information regarding noise attenuation from


- 78 -

outdoor play areas and car parking that may affect nearby residents. This response is currently under assessment by officers from Development Services, City Planning and Sustainability, including Environmental Management Officers.

Council cannot refuse to assess applications and must assess each proposal on its merits against the provision and requirements of City Plan and any relevant Queensland Government legislation.

ADOPTED

ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE

Councillor David McLACHLAN, Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Norm WYNDHAM, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 26 February 2019, be adopted.


Councillor McLACHLAN: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman.

Just before I move on to the Committee report before us, I just wanted to respond to Councillor CASSIDY from Deagon Ward about issues he raised earlier in relation to bushland acquisition. My apologies to him if he wrote to me last year. I do remember that and I thought a response had been sent but if he has not received a response, my apologies. I will check up on that as to why that response did not go through.

However, I have checked the real estate app to which he refers for that property. It is advertised for sale, he is right. It is advertised as land use for cattle fattening, zoned non-urban and says that creative uses might be required if anybody wants to do anything. Given it is zoned non-urban, there is not much that a purchaser could do other than continue the practice, it would appear, of cattle fattening.

But it does adjoin the—it is outside the regional plan’s urban footprint so it is not under threat from development. It does adjoin land owned by the Queensland Government so perhaps the Council could suggest to the State Government that they acquire it and join us in our desire to acquire land for bushland acquisition purposes and rehabilitation purposes which would be great if they did that. However, I refrain perhaps from suggesting that because then it might fall into the hands of Economic Development Queensland and we know what they do.

They would declare it a priority development area and do all manner of things with it. We have seen what they are doing at Oxley. I heard Oxley come up before, the Oxley College issue, and again I remind Councillor GRIFFITHS that the Oxley College is a priority development area of the State Government and wouldn’t it be wonderful if they joined with us in our protection and preservation of bushland rather than selling off land for significant development.

We know that they are doing that also at Toohey Forest and I have not heard Councillor GRIFFITHS say anything on this particular issue, knowing that Mark Bailey wants to preserve it and has written to Cameron Dick requesting very politely that that land be provided to Council for preservation, bushland preservation purposes. But the response to date has been that the State Government through EDQ has aspirations for significant development on that land and we will all be the poorer for that when that happens.

We do have a great program of bushland acquisition as has been talked about and I know this has bipartisan support in the Chamber. Our Bushland Acquisition Program that has been underway since Sallyanne Atkinson introduced it into this place and we are well on target in this term for the acquisition of 750 hectares, the LORD MAYOR’s target for this term and currently 9,500 hectares of natural area acquired under the Bushland Acquisition Program, a fantastic program.


- 79 -

Sometimes it is in small licks and sometimes it is in large licks but overall we are well and truly on target for making sure that we have great habitat coverage and protection in our city, Mr Deputy Chairman.

The report before us went in part to the issues we have in terms of our interests in bush preservation. At the other end of the scale, the Committee presentation last week was on our Bush Neighbours program which is a great program run through the Council’s environment centres. They are at Downfall Creek, at Boondall Wetlands and at Karawatha Forest’s Discovery Centre. This is a particular program aimed at younger school kids in years four to five and it is targeted to geographical areas where there has been in the past undesirable practices, vandalism, littering, arson, in some of our bushland areas.

So this is a great program. We talked about it in Committee about the need to promote that more. I take that point on board that this is a program that we do need to air a little more widely and I am happy to take that on board to see what we can do to make sure that school groups are aware of this program. But as I say, this has a specific purpose of getting to those school kids in years four to five where there have been issues in the past in relation to littering, arson and harmful and uncontrolled practices.

Mr Deputy Chairman, we do have a couple of other items there. I will leave that for any debate from any other Councillors. Thank you.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes. Just briefly on item A and item D.

One way in which Councillor McLACHLAN could start with a promotion of the Bush Neighbours question is perhaps him answer the questions he took on notice last week at Committee about which schools had participated in this program. He was not able to get through the agenda in our Committee today, the items on the agenda, so we did not get to General Business. But Councillor McLACHLAN, to my knowledge, has made no effort to provide me with those answers.

It was interesting. The only schools discussed were those in LNP wards and I will be pursuing the answers to my questions on notice so we can find out which schools have participated in this program over the past—it is quite a long time—15 years or something like that. Just on item D. We do not have a dog park in Sherwood. The nearest dog park is in Graceville at the edge of Chelmer and down the far end of Corinda, the Oxley end of Corinda. So they are quite a way away.

I am not sure how this is going to go. There are a lot of dog owners in Sherwood. There are eight of these unfenced dog areas around Brisbane and this will be the first one that has been done in my area. It is a trial. I certainly hope that all residents will respect the fact that there still will be a designated area for the dogs to be off leash and that we will be patrolling to ensure that that is the only area that is.

I will be very interested to see how it goes and hopefully we can come to a consensus as a community as to whether it should be a permanent arrangement in due course following consultation.


No further speakers?

Councillor McLACHLAN, right of reply.

Councillor McLACHLAN: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman.

Mr Deputy Chairman, I can respond to that question. Thank you very much, Councillor JOHNSTON, for reminding me of it. So the list of schools that participated in this program, 15 schools in 10 wards.


- 80 -

Pallara State School in the south region, Moorooka Ward, Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS. Hendra State School, North, Hamilton, Councillor David McLACHLAN. McDowell State School, North, McDowell, Councillor WYNDHAM. The Queen of Apostles Catholic Primary School, North, McDowall, Councillor Norm WYNDHAM. The Guardian Angels Wynnum Catholic School, East, Wynnum Manly, Councillor Peter CUMMING. The Northgate State School, North, Northgate, Councillor Adam ALLAN. Shorncliffe State School, North, Deagon, Councillor Jared CASSIDY. The Islamic College of Brisbane, South, Calamvale, Councillor Angela OWEN. Lota State School, East, Wynnum Manly, Councillor Peter CUMMING. The Newmarket State School, West, Enoggera, Councillor Andrew WINES. The Boondall State School, North, Deagon, Councillor Adam ALLAN. Ferny Grove State School, West, The Gap, Councillor Steve TOOMEY. St Mark’s Catholic Primary School, Forest Lake, Councillor Charles STRUNK and Richlands East State School, Forest Lake, Councillor Charles STRUNK.

So I think you will find that there is a predominance of schools in Labor wards on that list, Councillor JOHNSTON, to your question. Thank you very much.

Deputy Chairman: I will put the motion.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee was declared carried on the voices.


ATTENDANCE:

Councillor David McLachlan (Chairman), Councillor Norm Wyndham (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Steve Griffiths, Nicole Johnston, Angela Owen and Julian Simmonds.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BUSH NEIGHBOURS

565/2018-191. Peter Owen, Delivery Manager – Greenspace, Business Delivery, Asset Services, Field Services,

Brisbane Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on bush neighbours. He provided the information below.

2. Bush neighbours is a free program for the community run by Council’s Environment Centres; the Downfall Creek Bushland Centre, the Boondall Wetlands Environment Centre and the Karawatha Forest Discovery Centre.

3. The environment centres receive more than 140,000 visitors annually including families with toddlers to teenagers, retirees, international tourists, and people with disabilities, often with some repeat visitations. Local residents also use the reserves along with school groups.

4. Environment centres are a part of the Community Conservation Partnerships program along with the Creek Catchment program, Habitat Brisbane and the Wildlife Conservation Partnership program.

5. Council’s environment centres have a vision to deliver a customer experience that builds connection to the environment and drives behaviour change. Every environment centre has three streams: volunteer, school services and visitor services.

6. The bush neighbours program is aligned to Australian primary school curriculum, which builds partnerships between schools, councils and the local community to raise the profile of the local bushland and waterways. It aims to build connection, understanding and sense of stewardship of their local environment in primary school children and the school community of their local environment.

7. The bush neighbours program works with school years 4 to 5. It is targeted to geographical areas experiencing undesirable behaviours such as vandalism, littering, arson, harmful recreation and uncontrolled pets.


- 81 -

8. The bush neighbours program helps students and the local community to become aware of the value of their local bushland reserves, waterways, school yards and backyards, to adopt sustainable behaviours to support these areas and to become stewards for these areas.

9. The bush neighbours program was introduced by Council in 2006 to help reduce illegal and damaging behaviours in Council’s conservation reserves, increase community stewardship of the reserves and reduce reserve management costs.

10. The bush neighbours program is reviewed and improved each year to meet student and teacher needs and better the behaviour change outcomes. It has a teacher satisfaction rating of more than 90% over the past 13 years, with the program having evolved significantly. The program now involves multiple partners, and resulting in a deeper learning by the students.

11. The learning objectives are to:- develop an understanding of the value of the natural environment- gain a sense of connectedness- adopt sustainable practices- learn how to be good bush neighbours.

12. Stakeholders of the program include the school community (principals, teachers, ground keepers, parents and students); local bushcare and catchment groups; community groups; wildlife carers; utility providers; businesses and the local Councillors. Currently there are 15 schools across 10 wards involved.

13. The bush neighbours program is a four part program.- Session 1: Introduction to bush neighbours, including an interactive lesson on habitat values

and fun wildlife corridor games.- Session 2: Live wildlife presentation, including an exciting session where students interact

with live native wildlife.- Session 3: Local reserve visit, a rotation of hands-on activities with support from a range of

volunteers and community groups.- Session 4: An in-school project funded by the school. Previous in-school projects included

outdoor classroom activities, wildlife gardens, nest boxes and insect hotels, and wormfarms.

14. Council aims to grow this program to 20 bush neighbour schools by 2021 and to establish an environmental leadership program for bush neighbour schools.

15. A video and images of the bush neighbours program and related activities were shared with Committee members.

16. Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Owen for his informative presentation.

17. RECOMMENDATION:


B PARK NAMING – FORMAL NAMING OF PARK CURRENTLY KNOWN AS BARRACK ROAD PARK, CANNON HILL, TO ‘IRENE LONGMAN RESERVE’161/540/567/180

566/2018-1918. The Manager, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, provided the following

information.

19. Council received a petition to rename the park currently known as Barrack Road Park (D0032), Cannon Hill, to ‘Irene Longman Reserve’. The petition response was approved by the Environment Parks and Sustainability Committee on 22 May 2018.


- 82 -

20. Councillor Ryan Murphy, Councillor for Doboy Ward, had previously carried out consultation to rename Barrack Road Park, which runs between Cedar Street, Bunya Street and Barrack Road, Cannon Hill, as ‘Irene Longman Reserve’ to recognise her significant contribution to Queensland and, in particular, the eastern suburbs and the role of women in politics.

21. Ms Longman was the first woman to be elected to Parliament in Queensland, winning the seat of Bulimba from Labor for the Country and Progressive National Party in 1929.

22. During her term, she was instrumental in appointing the first female police officer in Queensland, creating a separate Children's Court and appointing an advisory panel in challenging cases of juvenile delinquency. Her political career was short-lived, with Ms Longman losing her seat in the landslide which swept away the Moore government in 1932. Ms Longman died on 29 July 1964 in Brisbane and sadly, did not live to see another woman elected to Parliament in her lifetime. Though the Federal Division of Longman was named after Ms Longman, there is little local recognition of her achievements.

23. Local school students from Ms Longman’s former electorate of Bulimba use the sportsfields in Barrack Road Park. Ms Longman had a long history of working for the welfare of children as both an educator in her earlier years and later as an elected representative.

24. It is proposed to erect a park naming sign panel with the following wording:

‘Irene Longman Reserve

Irene Longman was Queensland’s first female parliamentarian, winning the seat of Bulimba in 1929 for the Country and Progressive National Party.

Irene was an influential voice for the rights of women and children throughout her life and held positions on numerous associations benefitting the wider Queensland community until her passing in 1964.

This reserve was named after Irene Longman on International Women’s Day, 8 March 2019 in honour of her contribution to the people of Brisbane and Queensland.’

Funding

25. Funding for the park name sign and history panel is available in the East Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, recurrent budget allocation for 2018-19.

Consultation

26. Councillor Ryan Murphy, Councillor for Doboy Ward, was consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact

27. The park naming will give recognition to Ms Irene Longman.


29. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT APPROVAL BE GRANTED TO RENAME THE PARK CURRENTLY KNOWN AS BARRACK ROAD PARK, LOCATED AT 26 CEDAR STREET, CANNON HILL, TO ‘IRENE LONGMAN RESERVE’ IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL’S OS03 NAMING PARKS, FACILITIES OR TRACKS PROCEDURE. IT IS ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT A PARK NAME SIGN WITH A HISTORY PANEL BE ERECTED IN THIS PARK.

ADOPTED


- 83 -

C PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL ADD AN ADDITIONAL FENCED SECTION AND INSTALL LIGHTING AT THE DOG OFF-LEASH AREA AT LOVE STREET, BULIMBACA18/1093284

567/2018-1930. A petition requesting Council add an additional fenced section and install lighting at the dog off-leash

area at Love Street, Bulimba, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 4 December 2018, by Councillor Charles Strunk on behalf of Councillor Kara Cook, and received.



33. Bulimba Riverside Park is a district park located on the Brisbane River and was created in March 2009. It contains major infrastructure required for a district park, including a section of the riverwalk, which is lit. The existing dog off-leash area was constructed after community consultation when the park was developed. Since its creation, several high-rise units have been constructed directly facing the park and some of the residents claim that the DOLA is affecting their quality of life as some properties are approximately 20 metres away.

34. Consultation is required among the broader community to ensure all affected stakeholders have the opportunity to comment. The consultation will be completed by Councillor Kara Cook, Councillor for Morningside Ward, by the end of June 2019.

35. Once the consultation has been determined, parks officers from Council’s East Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, will list for consideration an upgrade of the dog off-leash area and installation of lighting at Bulimba Riverside Park, Bulimba, as part of Council’s capital works program. Each June, all listed projects are prioritised and assessed against the overall needs of the city. The works that get approved have the highest priority in terms of public safety, convenience and the number of people directly benefitting in relation to the cost.

36. It has also been forwarded to Councillor Cook for consideration as part of the Morningside Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund program.

Funding

37. Funding has been listed for consideration as part of Council’s capital works program and forwarded to Councillor Kara Cook, for consideration as part of the Morningside Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund.

Consultation

38. Councillor Kara Cook, Councillor for Morningside Ward, was consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact

39. Bulimba Riverside Park DOLA users will continue to utilise the existing area with other dogs.


41. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE DRAFT RESPONSE, AS SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder, BE SENT TO THE HEAD PETITIONER ADVISING THAT CONSULTATION IS REQUIRED AMONG THE BROADER COMMUNITY TO ENSURE ALL AFFECTED STAKEHOLDERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT. THE CONSULTATION WILL BE COMPLETED BY THE LOCAL COUNCILLOR KARA COOK, COUNCILLOR FOR MORNINGSIDE WARD, BY THE END OF JUNE 2019. ONCE THE OUTCOME HAS BEEN DETERMINED, COUNCIL WILL LIST FOR CONSIDERATION AN UPGRADE OF THE DOG OFF-LEASH AREA AND INSTALLATION OF LIGHTING AT BULIMBA RIVERSIDE PARK, BULIMBA, AS PART OF COUNCIL’S CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM. THE REQUEST HAS ALSO


- 84 -

BEEN FORWARDED TO THE LOCAL COUNCILLOR FOR CONSIDERATION AS PART OF THE MORNINGSIDE WARD FOOTPATH AND PARKS TRUST FUND.



Thank you for your petition requesting that Council add an additional fenced section and lighting at the dog off-leash area at Love Street, Bulimba.


Consultation is required among the broader community to ensure all affected stakeholders have the opportunity to comment. The consultation will be completed by Councillor Kara Cook, Councillor for Morningside Ward, by the end of June 2019. Once an outcome has been determined, Council will list for consideration an upgrade of the dog off-leash area and installation of lighting at Bulimba Riverside Park, Bulimba, as part of Council’s capital works program.

The request has also been forwarded to Councillor Cook for consideration as part of the Morningside Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund. If you would like to discuss your request directly with Councillor Cook, please contact her ward office on (07) 3407 8200.Please advise the other petitioners of this information.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr John Niukkanen, Regional Coordinator Parks, East Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3407 1477.

ADOPTED

D PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TRIAL AN INFORMAL, UNFENCED DOG OFF-LEASH AREA AT THE REAR OF THOMAS STREET PARK, SHERWOOD, ADJOINING OXLEY CREEK TO ENHANCE DOG - FRIENDLY FACILITIES FOR SHERWOOD FAMILIESCA18/1055916

568/2018-1942. A petition requesting Council trial an informal, unfenced dog off-leash area at the rear of

Thomas Street Park, Sherwood, adjoining Oxley Creek to enhance dog-friendly facilities for Sherwood families, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 20 November 2018, by Councillor Nicole Johnston, and received.



45. Thomas Street Park is located along Oxley Creek, Sherwood, and is predominately an open space parkland that houses a shared pathway linking Strickland Terrace Park with Thomas Street Park.

46. Subject to event flooding, the parkland hosts no park infrastructure except for the shared pathway and boundary bollards on Egmont Street frontage.

47. Council’s Regional Coordinator Parks, South Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, supports the installation of a trial unfenced DOLA at Thomas Street Park. However, as the proposed DOLA will be unfenced, it is recommended that DOLA signage and clear delineation is provided for park users. In addition to perimeter bollards, signage will be installed that will identify both off-leash and non-off leash areas.

Funding

48. DOLA signage will be funded by the Tennyson Ward, 2018-19 Footpath and Parks Trust Fund and the installation of bollards will be funded from 2018-19 Asset Services Parks Maintenance Budget.


- 85 -

Consultation

49. Councillor Nicole Johnston, Councillor for Tennyson Ward, was consulted and supports the recommendation.


51. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE DRAFT RESPONSE, AS SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder, BE SENT TO THE HEAD PETITIONER ADVISING THAT COUNCIL SUPPORTS A TRIAL OF AN UNFENCED DOG OFF-LEASH AREA WITHIN THOMAS STREET PARK, SHERWOOD, WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF BOLLARDS ON THE EASTERN AND WESTERN BOUNDARIES WHICH WILL FORM A PERIMETER BOUNDARY AND DOG OFF-LEASH AREA ORDINANCE SIGNAGE WILL BE INSTALLED TO ASSIST PARK USERS.



Thank you for your petition requesting Council trial an informal, unfenced dog off-leash area at the rear of Thomas Street Park, Sherwood, adjoining Oxley Creek to enhance dog friendly facilities for Sherwood families.


Council supports a trial of an unfenced dog off-leash area within Thomas Street Park, Sherwood, which will include the installation of bollards on the eastern and western boundaries which will form a perimeter boundary and dog off-leash area ordinance signage will be installed to assist park users.


Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr Warwick Davies, Regional Coordinator Parks, South Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3407 0639.


FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE

Councillor Vicki HOWARD, Chairman of the Field Services Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Kim MARX, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 26 February 2019, be adopted.


Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman.

Mr Deputy Chairman, we had a wonderful Committee presentation on the Botanic Gardens Seed Bank and that was provided to us by the curator of the Brisbane Botanic Gardens. The seed bank is, in fact, a wonderful Council asset, not only for the residents of Brisbane but so too for Queensland and Australia. The seed bank carries out vital and important conservation of Queensland’s native species. National parks and reserves are by far the most significant method of preserving species and in fact entire eco systems.


- 86 -

So we were told about the living collections at the Botanic Gardens being the best way to ensure a living seed bank outside of national parks for certain species and to educate the public on the importance of plants. However, as we learnt last week, many of Queensland’s rain forests species seeds cannot be stored for long periods as they evolve to fruit and germinate quickly in moist conditions. A changing and drying climate will also impact on the future success of natural germination and regeneration of forests.

So collecting and storing seeds in the seed banks is one of the best ways to combat the global decline of plant diversity. The seed bank really is a vital asset, not only for Brisbane but so too for our State and country, especially seeing as though there is no official State Government botanic garden in Queensland to undertake conservation. So Council really does lead the way in this important conservation work.

We are also very proud of the fact that Brisbane City Council is currently the head of the Australian Botanic Gardens Association which oversees the operation and targets the Australian Seed Bank partnership. So I would like to take this opportunity to thank our dedicated Council officers for the incredible work that they do for conversation in Brisbane and for our State of Queensland, and I encourage residents to take advantage of the opportunity to not only get out to our botanic gardens and enjoy the beautiful gardens on display, but also to take the opportunity to learn about all the wonderful conservation work that our Council officers do to ensure that our native and diverse plant species will continue to thrive and be available to future generations.

Mr Deputy Chairman, we also had two petitions. One requesting that Council reduce the canopy of a large tree on the frontage of 42 Bentinck Street, Sherwood and a petition requesting that Council urgently resurface Hoff Street, Mt Gravatt East and I will leave it for debate to the Chamber.


Councillor STRUNK.

Councillor STRUNK: Yes, thank you, Deputy Chair.

I rise to speak on the petition about the urgent request that the Hoff Street, Mt Gravatt be urgently resurfaced. Now, there was actually two petitions contained in this item and it is really sad because—I mean, the petitions were not really necessary if the local councillor, Krista ADAMS, had taken notice of the assessment identified in June 2017 by Council officers. Various maintenance work, as we have found out, has been undertaken probably before, or definitely before, and since, which I will come to later.

But what was really needed by residents, what they really wanted was the resurfacing. Now, Asset Services in December 2018 listed the street for consideration as part of Council’s future capital works program. Now, I would have thought that Councillor ADAMS would have, through the budget round 2018-19, have made resurfacing of Hoff Street a priority. But it looks like that did not happen and the residents of Hoff Street became frustrated and had to bring two petitions to the Council for this basic service and request.

Now, I am not a road engineer but anyone looking at the state of this road would probably come to the conclusion that this road has not been resurfaced since birth. So, Mr Deputy Chair, I would like to think that after two petitions now, Councillor ADAMS has heard clearly, loud and clearly, from her constituents that they are tired of waiting and would hope now that she would have this moved from just for consideration to a priority for the Hoff Street residents.

I would just say to Councillor ADAMS with respect just get on with it and make sure that Hoff Street, the people that live in Hoff Street, live in a road that does not look more like a patchwork quilt. Thank you, Deputy Chair.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, not really a surprise, is it?


- 87 -

Seriatim - Clause BCouncillor Nicole JOHNSTON requested that Clause B, PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL REDUCE THE CANOPY OF A LARGE TREE ON THE FRONTAGE OF 42 BENTINCK STREET, SHERWOOD, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.

Councillor JOHNSTON: I am very disappointed in the decision that Council has reached with respect to this very large tree which is a leopard tree, so it is not a significant tree. The residents for some years had been trying directly with Council to ensure that this tree was trimmed. They are extremely large and heavy, leaving branches that cross the footpath and well into the front yard of their property. They are not that far off from reaching the house as well.

As with most families, their grandchildren tend to play in the front yard and they are extremely concerned that these large, heavy leading branches will fall and someone will be injured. Their request to Council over the last few years have gone largely un-responded to, which is the disappointing part and I find this unfortunately quite a bit that residents have usually tried directly with Council for some time before they come to me. I met the family involved last year and I certainly support the request to trim back these very large leading branches that hang over their property. They have a genuine concern about what might happen here.

I think a lot of these problems around street trees could probably be addressed with more sensible kind of pruning and if it was done at an earlier point, you know, years ago when these trees were growing, instead of letting them get to such a size where now with the Australian standards we are not allowed to touch certain parts of the tree, we would probably get a better outcome. But the problem is Council’s tree trimming is under-funded and it is reactive and there are so many trees out there that are not being managed environmentally and practically for the residents of Brisbane and I think this tree has fallen into that category.

I am very disappointed for the residents. I have advised them of the outcome. They do not want to see the tree go. They were very clear that they did not want it removed. Their neighbours in the street support their request for trimming. I think everybody understands what is going on here. I find it really disappointing that Council is unable to find a practical way to address the problem with the leading branches that are hanging over this property in Bentinck Street at Sherwood.

They were quite disappointed. I do not support the decision here. It does not address the residents’ safety concerns and I just certainly hope that no one is hurt in the next big storm if these branches fall because that would be a terrible outcome, given that Council is fully aware that there is a safety problem here. So I have asked that this be taken seriatim for voting purposes. Thank you.


Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chair.

I rise to speak on item C. Very interesting, I have to say, the third male Councillor on the other side to get up and attack the man not the ball tonight and in this case the female in the Holland Park Councillor. Me thinks that maybe the Opposition candidate put their head up and realised oh bugger, it’s not a marginal seat. So somebody else has to do the work for them in Chamber at taking her down because she works so hard in her local area. Personal attack after personal attack after personal attack.

What we see here is a petition from residents in a street in Mt Gravatt East, an extremely popular suburb over the last five to six years and in particular in Hoff Street, a street that has definitely been resurfaced in the last 20 years but is in a suburb that is a very old subdivision, I think late 60s it may have been subdivided. It was when it was still called the Terminus out in Mt Gravatt East.


- 88 -

But this street has seen the Soorley sardine of suburbs splitting the blocks, double the driveways, double the houses, continually over the last five years. It is in low density residential. The area is code accessible but this street has doubled the number of houses in this street in the last five years. You know what double the number of houses means? It means a lot of tradies and a lot of work has been going on in this street.

The resurfacing on this street is absolutely not failing. It is also, I do not think, financially responsible to resurface a street that is not failing when there is still considerable development activity going on in that street. That is all it comes down to. I have had this street on my list for years. It has not been a citywide priority. Surprise, surprise, it was listed in December 2018. That is when I would have met with Asset Services and told them that I think it should go up the list now. Most of the development is done. I have told the residents that. I support that this street gets resurfaced on a citywide priority but the resident who is the head petitioner in this case has a history of not agreeing with me surprisingly and so the petition came in as petitions are wont to do. I am happy to support the recommendation of this and as it says in the recommendation, it is already listed. Yes, it is already listed but it has not been done because it would have been financially irresponsible to resurface a road that had a lot of work still happening in the street with tradies.

I support the petition in front of us.


No further debate?

Councillor HOWARD.


Mr Deputy Chairman, it is wonderful to hear the experts on the other side, absolutely wonderful. I did not know that Councillor JOHNSTON was an arborist as well as everything else. Can I say to the Chamber we rely on the expert advice of our arborists and if you read the report, it quite clearly says that the tree has been pruned in accordance with all of the regulations. It also quite clearly says that we have monitored it. It is the most beautiful tree. Hop on to Google, you will be able to see it.

So can I just say to the Chamber that, you know, we rely heavily on our experts and I think it was Councillor JOHNSTON that said in a previous debate that I was, you know, not supporting the DA (Development Assessment) people that had planted a tree in a footpath 23 years ago. Well, Councillor JOHNSTON, I do not think that we have —

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Mr Deputy Chairman.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Claim to be misrepresented.

Deputy Chairman: Thank you, Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor HOWARD.


So, Mr Deputy Chairman, just to finish up. We take the expert advice of our arborists. We make sure that we are doing everything that we need to do for our trees. We are very proud of our smoother suburban streets program and I commend the report to the Chamber.

Deputy Chairman: I will now put the motion for items A and C.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Mr Deputy Chairman, point of order.

Deputy Chairman: Sorry, Councillor JOHNSTON, on misrepresentation.


- 89 -

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes. Mr Deputy Chairman, Councillor HOWARD is misrepresenting what I said. Earlier in the debate I said that she had made adverse reflections upon Council officers who had made a planning decision. This is a big no-no under the Council Rules and is something that I have been pulled up for if I say something critical of them and that is certainly what Councillor HOWARD did. Nothing to do with the trees.

Deputy Chairman: I will now put the motion for items A and C.

Clauses A and C put

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of Clauses A and C of the report of the Field Services Committee was declared carried on the voices.

Deputy Chairman: I will now put the motion for item B.

Clause B put

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of Clause B of the report of the Field Services Committee was declared carried on the voices.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Division.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you have no seconder.

The division lapsed for want of a seconder.

Councillor SRI: I will second the division.

Deputy Chairman: You need to be quick in here. The quick and the dead.

The item is carried.


ATTENDANCE:

Councillor Vicki Howard (Chairman), Councillor Kim Marx (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Nicole Johnston, Julian Simmonds, Charles Strunk and Steven Toomey.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BOTANIC GARDENS – SEED BANK

569/2018-191. Mr Dale Arvidsson, Brisbane Botanic Gardens, Mt Coot-tha, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane

Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Botanic Gardens Seed Bank. He provided the information below.

2. The Queensland Conservation Seed Bank under the Australian Seed Bank Partnership (ASBP) is a seed banking project managed by Council through the Brisbane Botanic Gardens, Mt Coot-tha. The project focuses on the ex situ conservation of Queensland’s native species.

3. National parks and reserves are by far the most significant method of preserving species and entire ecosystems. However, some are only fragmented remains of the original forest communities, and with a variety of pressures including weeds, drought, fire and a changing climate, other methods to ensure the viability of species are required.

4. Living collections at botanic gardens are the best way to ensure a living seed bank outside of national parks for certain species and to educate the public on the importance of plants. Many of Queensland's rainforest species seeds cannot be stored for long periods as they evolve to fruit and germinate quickly


- 90 -

in moist conditions. A changing and drying climate will also impact on the future success of natural germination and regeneration of forests.

5. The most secure way to ensure ex situ conservation is to store seeds via the Queensland Conservation Seed Bank that operates at Brisbane Botanic Gardens, Mt Coot-tha. Collecting and storing seeds in seed banks is one of the best ways to combat the global decline of plant diversity.

6. There is no official ‘State’ botanic garden in Queensland to undertake conservation. In the 1990s, Brisbane Botanic Gardens, Mt Coot-tha, opened a 15 ha Australian plant communities section. A further planned expansion in the 2000s enabled the Brisbane Botanic Gardens role to move away from amenity horticulture and into a centre for educating school children.

7. There are a number of partners involved in the conservation of plant species. The Millennium Seed Bank Partnership (MSBP) is the largest plant conservation program in the world, operating in more than 84 countries with more than 200 partner organisations. The MSBP follows an integrated conservation strategy – ex situ long term conservation of seeds supporting in situ conservation actions.

8. The Council of Heads of Australian Botanic Gardens oversees the operation and targets of the ASBP. Partners include the capital city botanic gardens in Adelaide, Brisbane, Darwin, Hobart, Melbourne, Perth, Sydney, along with the Australian Network for Plant Conservation.

9. Targeting species often begins by targeting regions or localities based on rainfall patterns for the 6 to 12 months prior to collection of seeds. Council uses Queensland Herbarium records on species locations to understand species distributions or presences/absences at locations as well as plant phenology – the study of plant life cycle events and how these are influenced by seasonal variations in climate, as well as habitat factors such as elevation.

10. Specimens containing a pressing of the plant that the seed was collected from are also studied and sketched to allow the field botanists on the collecting trip to study species not seen in the wild before, and to provide a sample to the Queensland Herbarium and the MSBP.

11. When a suite of target species from a series of locations have been compiled, field botanists plan a collecting trip which can range from one day to up to two weeks, based on the remoteness of the location. Once a target species has been located and positively identified in the field, collectors assess the population for seed output, maturity and health to determine if a collection can be made. A collection consists of anywhere between 1,000 and 20,000 seeds.

12. In the lab, collected material is placed in the dry room which provides a stable cool dry environment (relative humidity 15% and temperature 15°C) to allow the seed to mature in optimal conditions. Fluctuating or high temperatures and moisture reduces seed viability. Seed matured and stored in stable cool dry conditions ensures the greatest life span trajectory for a particular collection in long-term storage.

13. Baseline germination trials are carried out at Brisbane Botanic Gardens, to determine seed health/viability and to identify dormancy issues, prior to sending the seed to the MSBP. Successfully propagated plants then move into the living collections for education and as a living source of further seeds.

14. When the seed has reached equilibrium with the relative humidity in the dry room it is then ready for storage in a frozen state. In 2017, Brisbane Botanic Gardens obtained a new freezer, and storage and seed processing equipment to provide a greater security to the seed bank operations over the next 10 years.

15. In December 2017, Brisbane Botanic Gardens, took a lead role in delivering seed conservation techniques training in New Zealand with collaboration between MSBP, ASBP, the New Zealand Government, New Zealand Botanic Gardens and the Te Tira Whakamātaki (the Māori Biosecurity Network). The training covered seed conservation and Myrtle Rust identification and management as the disease had just reached New Zealand.

16. An opportunity exists to elevate the focus of conservation at Brisbane Botanic Gardens and increase conservation activities through the expansion of the Seed Bank program with increased resources and greater public engagement and education, plus scaling up seed bank storage refrigerated facilities.


- 91 -

Proposed in the Brisbane Botanic Gardens Mt Coot-tha Master Plan 2018 is a purpose-built publicly viewable seed bank that will allow schools and the public to see this important work undertaken by Council staff.

17. Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Arvidsson for his informative presentation.

18. RECOMMENDATION:


B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL REDUCE THE CANOPY OF A LARGE TREE ON THE FRONTAGE OF 42 BENTINCK STREET, SHERWOODCA18/1081705

570/2018-1919. A petition requesting that Council reduce the canopy of a large tree on the frontage of 42 Bentinck

Street, Sherwood, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 27 November 2018, by Councillor Nicole Johnston, Councillor for Tennyson Ward, and received.


21. The petition contains eight signatures.

22. Since June 2015, the head petitioner has submitted three requests, with one of them requesting that Council reduce the canopy of the leopard tree at 42 Bentinck Street, Sherwood. Council records indicate the most recent tree works were undertaken on 2 October 2018, which entailed a medium canopy prune to the leopard tree. These works were done in accordance with Council guidelines, however the head petitioner was not satisfied and requested a more substantial prune be done.

23. ‘Over pruning’ can compromise the long term health and vigour of the tree. Substantially reducing the tree canopy leads to less foliage which in turn decreases the tree’s ability of using sunlight and the process of photosynthesis to produce energy. The less energy a tree produces the more susceptible it is to pest and diseases. In addition, the tree will sprout excessively in response to substantial canopy loss which leads to long-term weakened branch unions. It is to be noted that excessive sprouting requires constant pruning to maintain the aesthetic qualities of a tree, greatly increasing the cost of ongoing maintenance.

24. Leaf fall, seed pods, flowers and fruit are all natural processes of a tree’s growing cycle. It is Council policy to maintain canopy roof clearance in accordance with Council guidelines and also maintaining the health and vigour of the trees in Brisbane wherever possible. Generally, if a tree is found to be in good health and structure and there is no arboriculture or public safety reason to prune the tree, no additional pruning will be undertaken. The leopard tree at 42 Bentinck Street has met all of the above and as a result will not be pruned any further during this growing season.

Consultation

25. Councillor Nicole Johnston, Councillor for Tennyson Ward, has been consulted and does not support recommendation.

26. The Executive Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed, with Councillors Nicole Johnston and Charles Strunk dissenting.


- 92 -

27. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE DRAFT RESPONSE, AS SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder, BE SENT TO THE HEAD PETITIONER ADVISING COUNCIL WILL NOT UNDERTAKE ANY FURTHER CANOPY REDUCTION ON THE LEOPARD TREE AT 42 BENTINCK STREET, SHERWOOD. THE TREE WAS FOUND TO BE IN GOOD HEALTH AND STRUCTURE AND MEETS COUNCIL GUIDELINES.



Thank you for your petition requesting Council reduce the canopy of a large and dangerous tree on the frontage of 42 Bentinck Street, Sherwood.

Asset Services has completed an onsite investigation and considered your request.

Council values the trees in our city as they contribute significantly to the environment both ecologically and aesthetically. These values are supported by Council’s tree policy which ensures the preservation of Council trees, and substantial canopy reduction pruning is considered an important issue.

Council will not undertake any further canopy reduction on the leopard tree at 42 Bentinck Street, Sherwood. The leopard tree was found to be in good health and structure and meets Council guidelines.


Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Miss Anastasia Browne, Regional Coordinator Arboriculture, South Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3407 0639.

ADOPTED

C PETITIONS – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL URGENTLY RESURFACE HOFF STREET, MT GRAVATT EAST CA19/2086 and CA19/118468

571/2018-1928. Two petitions were received from residents requesting that Council urgently resurface Hoff Street,

Mt Gravatt East. The first petition (CA19/2086) was received during the Summer Recess 2018-19, and the second petition (CA18/118468) was presented to Council at its meeting of 5 February 2019, by Councillor Krista Adams, Councillor for Holland Park Ward, and received.


30. The first petition contains six signatures, and the second petition contains 48 signatures.

31. Hoff Street, Mt Gravatt East, was initially identified in June 2017, as meeting intervention standards to warrant resurfacing. Various maintenance works in the form of pothole patching have been undertaken on the street since that time. East Region, Asset Services, listed the street in December 2018, for consideration as part of Council’s future Capital Works Program.

Funding

32. Resurfacing has already been listed for consideration as part of Council’s future capital works program.

Consultation

33. Councillor Krista Adams, Councillor for Holland Park Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact


- 93 -

34. The residents will continue to utilise the street in its current condition.


36. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE DRAFT RESPONSE, AS SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, hereunder, BE SENT TO THE HEAD PETITIONER ADVISING THAT HOFF STREET, MT GRAVATT EAST, HAS ALREADY BEEN LISTED FOR RESURFACING, AS PART OF COUNCIL’S FUTURE CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAM.


Petition References: CA19/2086 and CA19/118468

Thank you for your petition requesting that Council urgently resurface Hoff Street, Mt Gravatt East.


Council has already listed Hoff Street, Mt Gravatt East, for resurfacing as part of Council’s future capital works program.

Each June, all listed projects are prioritised and assessed against the overall needs of the city. The works that get approved have the highest priority in terms of public safety, convenience and the number of people directly benefitting in relation to the cost.


Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr Donald McKay, A/Regional Coordinator Civil Engineering, East Region, Asset Services, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3407 1477.

ADOPTED

Deputy Chairman: Councillor MATIC, Lifestyle and—

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Mr Deputy Chairman.

Deputy Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Councillor COOPER was extremely slow earlier today when she called the division on a matter and that was allowed and I have a seconder for the division. I would ask that you allow, given that Councillor SRI clearly stood up on the record.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor—

Councillor JOHNSTON: Given that Councillor SRI clearly stood up on the record and also called for a division, I would ask that you reconsider and allow that. Thank you.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, I do not uphold your point of order. I did give some time for Councillors to stand. You all kind of looked at each other, and did not figure out whether you were standing or not. We have to set some kind of a time period for when a division can be called and I think you exceeded it on this occasion. So I do not uphold your point of order.

Councillor JOHNSTON: I move—sorry, point of order, Mr Deputy Chairman.

Deputy Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.

572/2018-19Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON moved, seconded by Councillor Jonathan SRI, that the Chairman’s ruling be dissented from. Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion of dissent was declared lost on the voices.


- 94 -

Thereupon, Councillors Jonathan SRI and Nicole JOHNSTON immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared lost.



NOES: 18 - DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Fiona HAMMOND, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

LIFESTYLE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE

Councillor Peter MATIC, Chairman of the Lifestyle and Community Services Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 26 February 2019, be adopted.


Councillor MATIC: Mr Deputy Chairman, there was a Committee presentation on filming in Brisbane and it was an informative presentation on the Filming Approvals Liaison office and the significant amount of work that they do and the very positive outcome that we get from the film and television industry when they are filming in Brisbane. Thank you.


Councillor MATIC?

I will now put the motion.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Lifestyle and Community Services Committee was declared carried on the voices.


ATTENDANCE:

Councillor Peter Matic (Chairman), Councillor Andrew Wines (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Kara Cook, Fiona Hammond, Kate Richards and Jonathan Sri.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – FILMING IN BRISBANE

573/2018-191. Shane Hackett, Manager, Customer Services, Lifestyle and Community Services, attended the meeting

to provide an update on filming in Brisbane. He provided the information below.

2. Brisbane is fast being recognised as a film-friendly city with an increase in filming each year. Council first introduced the role of a Filming Approvals Liaison Officer (FALO) in 2002 to provide a dedicated contact for filming enquiries within Brisbane. In 2012, it was identified that the filming approvals function aligns closely with the broader aims of the Business Hotline team and was brought into this team to create a more efficient service.

3. The FALO is dedicated to helping the film industry apply for and receive the relevant permits they require to film in Brisbane quickly and efficiently, and assists with enquiries relevant to filming including requests for suggestions regarding suitable filming locations. The FALO also processes applications for filming within Brisbane locations and acts as a conduit between internal stakeholders and customers to ensure a seamless experience for the customers.


- 95 -

4. Compared to the filming approvals in Brisbane in 2011-12, the number of approvals has doubled for 2017-18, having progressively increased each year. Based on the production budget information provided by producers, more than $73 million was injected into the South East Queensland economy during 2018-19 to date.

5. The type of filming that occurs within Brisbane is quite broad, from high school student assessments through to Hollywood feature films. An analysis of the filming type percentages indicates that television commercials/advertising constitute up to 20% of the total filming in Brisbane; followed by social media, web content and awareness campaigns (19%); student filming (19%); corporate videos (10%); still photography (10%); reality TV (7%); short films (5%); television programming for kids, drama and documentaries (5%); and music videos, feature films and vox props making-up the remaining 5%.

6. The economic benefit filming brings to Brisbane is significant. A proportion of the production budgets being is spent with local businesses, including traffic management, catering and accommodation. From urban/city scenes within the CBD to bushland at Anstead Reserve, Council has a diverse range of locations which are extremely popular within the filming industry. Brisbane’s subtropical climate, historical buildings and outdoor living spaces make it the perfect fit for many filmmakers. Popular locations are often iconic Brisbane landmarks including the Queen Street Mall, King George Square, Mt Coot-tha Lookout and Story Bridge.

7. Something that is becoming increasingly popular is for Council to provide consent for filming to take place at properties that have been acquired through land acquisition processes. These properties have provided amazing opportunities for productions to be onsite for extended periods of time, utilising the property as a unit base while securing diverse scenes all at the one location. Some examples of filming at these properties are Harrow, The Family Law and Hoges: The Paul Hogan Story.

8. The Spring Hill Reservoirs are also becoming a popular filming location with children’s television shows, music videos, short films and still photography shoots taking place in this iconic venue over the past few years. Other popular locations are City Hall, the Wickham Terrace Car Park and William Jolly Bridge.

9. The recent major productions that took place in Brisbane include:- several car commercials including the SsangYong 2019 campaign and the Toyota Corolla

2018 campaign- the Netflix original television series Tidelands- Harrow season 1, with season 2 currently filming - The Family Law, seasons 1 to 3- reality television series Married at First Sight and MasterChef- the television series House Hunters, Grand Designs and Australian Ninja Warrior - promotional footage for the Battle of Brisbane, which was aired worldwide- Hollywood feature films including Thor: Ragnarok, Pacific Rim Uprising, San Andreas and

Dora the Explorer.

10. Twenty episodes for the first season of the television series Bureau of Magical Things were filmed under the Story Bridge in August 2017, with funding recently being secured for a second season. The story was written by a Brisbane-based writer who lived at Kangaroo Point. He was inspired by the view of the Story Bridge and Captain Burke Park from his apartment window. The television series was picked up and aired by both Network 10 and Nickelodeon, and screened in more than 170 countries and territories in the second half of 2018.

11. The FALO presents to filming students at universities, private film academies and high schools. Regular site visits are another way they are making it easy to film in Brisbane, building and maintaining strong relationships within the industry and creating a positive experience for the film makers of Brisbane.

12. Council received positive feedback about the FALO on numerous occasions with customers mentioning that filming in Brisbane has been an extremely positive experience and what is normally a complex task in other cities being made simple by the efforts of the FALO. Examples of such feedback were shared with Committee members. Since records were kept, the FALO has facilitated 4,041 formal filming consents.


- 96 -

13. Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Hackett for his informative presentation.

14. RECOMMENDATION:


FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

Councillor Krista ADAMS, Chairman of the Finance and Economic Development Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Adam ALLAN, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 26 February 2019, be adopted.


Councillor ADAMS.


Before I get to the report, I would just like to talk about an event that is happening tomorrow which is the City Welcome Festival in King George Square. I am very proud to say that we have seen a doubling in the past 10 years of the impact to the economy with Brisbane’s international student numbers. So that is a fantastic outcome. What we have seen in the last 12 months is a 10% increase on international students choosing Brisbane as their choice of place for tertiary education.

We are increasingly positioning ourselves as an international study destination of choice and of course they are going to receive not only a superior education but also an enviable outdoor lifestyle while they are here as well. I have to say, through you, Mr Deputy Chair, this growth has not happened by accident. We introduced the Study Brisbane program to work closely with our institutions in 2009 and at this time, when Brisbane was home to an estimated 45,000 students and the sector was worth more than $1.3 billion to the Brisbane economy.

So we are very proud to announce the numbers for the year ending 2018. We have surpassed 95,000 enrolments and the sector delivers more than $3 billion to economic impact for the city and this is a fantastic outcome and justifies why we looked at incentives like student accommodation to make sure that those visitors would have a lovely safe place to stay. We have seen that accommodation definitely been a part of the lifestyle choices that they have made to come to Brisbane as their place for tertiary studies.

Tomorrow the City Welcome Festival is where we throw out the welcome mat and provide information to our international students about all the wonderful things that they can do while they are here and how we can support them through City Council, through Study Brisbane, through TEQ (Tourism and Events Queensland) and all the other partners that we work in with our Study Brisbane guys. So well done to Rachel Colaso and the team in Study Brisbane but also to of course our tertiary institutions too that just do such a wonderful job in promoting the work that they do in showing that Brisbane really is the place of choice for tertiary education.

To our Committee report last week, Mr Deputy Chair, we had an update from our SES manager, Peter Jeffrey. It was timely. We were worried we might have been doing an update after a cyclone but the cyclone did not actually occur but it was interesting to see what we do in the preparation for that storm season which we are not out of just yet and there was a lot of lively questions and information. I thank him for the presentation and commend the report to Chamber.



- 97 -

No further debate.

Councillor ADAMS?

I put the motion.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the Finance and Economic Development Committee was declared carried on the voices.


ATTENDANCE:

Councillor Krista Adams (Chairman), Councillor Adam Allan (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Peter Cumming, Charles Strunk, Steven Toomey and Norm Wyndham.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – DISASTER PREPAREDNESS IN THE BRISBANE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA

574/2018-191. Peter Jeffrey, Manager, Disaster Management, City Administration and Governance, attended the

meeting to provide an update on Council’s disaster preparations. He provided the information below.

2. The potential hazards experienced in Brisbane include high risk events such as severe storms including The Gap Storm in 2008 and the hail storm in 2014; and flooding, including the 1974 and 2010-11 floods.

3. Medium risk disaster events include high tides and storm surges, cyclones, bushfires and heatwaves. Cyclones are not as severe as those experienced in North Queensland, however, the effects of cyclonic storms are felt via severe rain events in Brisbane and surrounding areas which may cause flash-flooding.

4. Council’s strategy for disaster preparedness, also referred to as PPRR, includes the following four steps:- preparation- prevention/mitigation- response- recovery.

5. As part of preparation and prevention, Council delivers community education at engagement activities and events. Council also communicates with the community using information materials to guide the community to be prepared for themselves and for their neighbours if necessary. Community service announcements are made using traditional and social media. Council also provides real time flood information via its website.

6. Council works closely with the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) and relays alerts and warnings using the latest information received from BOM.

7. Council supports the Brisbane City State Emergency Services (SES) unit with funding and training of volunteers, and with materials and equipment such as chainsaws and flood boats.

8. Council’s Disaster Management works closely with other relevant business areas of Council for better land use planning to mitigate the effect of future storms and reduce the severity of their impact on residents.

9. As part of response and recovery preparedness, Council operates a Local Disaster Coordination Centre, with more than 450 employees trained to work as volunteers in the event of a disaster in Brisbane. These volunteers also receive refresher training and updates from time to time.

10. Council’s preparedness for response includes sandbagging facilities and evacuation centres. Council recently purchased a new wheeled sandbagging machine, consisting of a hopper and conveyor belt which ensures speed, reduces wastage and manual labour, ensuring better health and safety for the users.


- 98 -

11. Council’s Disaster Management also works closely with the Brisbane City SES unit and Field Services for joint disaster response and recovery preparedness before disasters and implementation during and after a disaster event.

12. Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Jeffrey for his informative presentation.

13. RECOMMENDATION:


B COMMITTEE REPORT – FINANCIAL REPORTS (RECEIVABLE, RATES, INVENTORY, PAYABLE, PROVISIONS AND MALLS) FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 2018134/695/317/929

575/2018-1914. The Divisional Manager, Organisational Services, provided a detailed report, submitted on file, on

Council’s position relating to accounts receivable, rates, inventory, accounts payable, provisions and malls for the period ended December 2018.

15. The Chairman and the Committee noted the report. The financial report on Council’s position relating to accounts receivable, rates, inventory, accounts payable, provisions and malls for the period ended December 2018 is now presented for noting by Council.

16. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE REPORT, as submitted on file, BE NOTED.

ADOPTED

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:

Deputy Chairman: Councillors, are there any petitions?

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Chair.

I have a petition from residents in Seventeen Mile Rocks in Oxley about parking restrictions.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor ADAMS.


I have a petition requesting a review of traffic arrangements for Cavendish Road.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor MARX.

Councillor CUMMING, just—

Councillor MARX: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman.

I have a petition here from some parents at Sunnybank State School.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS.

Councillor SIMMONDS: Thank you.

I present a petition regarding safety enhancements.


- 99 -

Deputy Chairman: Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

I have got an ePetition and a hard copy petition in relation to the Beelarong development proposed in the Morningside Ward.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes, Mr Deputy Chairman.

I have got a petition regarding the Chikara Martial Arts and a zoning application.

Deputy Chairman: No further petitions?

Councillor WINES.

Councillor WINES: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

I have a petition here supporting Council’s project in preparation for upgrading Kelvin Grove and Enoggera Road.

576/2018-19It was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS, 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 TopicCA19/212217 Matthew Bourke Requesting Council significantly increase the available parking

on the eastern side of Fort Road, Oxley, to restore what was previously available.

CA19/197820 Krista Adams Requesting Council review the traffic arrangement along Cavendish Road, between Opal Street and Coolong Street to improve public safety.

CA19/197608 Kim Marx Requesting Council visit the Sunnybank State School more frequently to issue fines for illegal parking or put something in place to stop parking, in addition to making the ‘no stopping’ signs bigger.

CA19/197695 Julian Simmonds Requesting the concept design for the proposed pedestrian safety enhancements for Moggill Road and Taringa Parade at Indooroopilly State School be reconsidered to allow for community input.

CA19/203763 Peter Cumming on behalf of Kara Cook

Requesting Council rejects the proposed change to the zoning at 54 Beelarong Street, Morningside (A005003693).

CA19/212555 Peter Cumming on behalf of Kara Cook

Requesting Council rejects the proposed change to the zoning at 54 Beelarong Street, Morningside (A005003693).

CA19/203701 Steve Griffiths Requesting zoning reconsiderations for Chikara Martial Arts centre, located in Blunder Road, Oxley, and reconsider zoning requirements and guidelines for all indoor sport and recreation businesses within the city.

CA19/197660 Andrew Wines Requesting Council urgently prioritise and fast-track the investigation and design for the Kelvin Grove Road and Enoggera Road upgrade to be completed in the 2018-19 financial year, so that the necessary budget funding required for the upgrade can be included and completed as part of the 2019-20 budget.

GENERAL BUSINESS:

Deputy Chairman: Councillors, are there any statements required as a result of a Councillor Conduct Review Panel order?


- 100 -

Councillor GRIFFITHS? No?

There being no Councillors rising to their feet, are there any matters of General Business?

Councillor HUANG.

Councillor HUANG: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chair.

I rise to speak briefly on the Wishart Park Run and the benefits it brings to our community. Mr Deputy Chair, I recently attended the Wishart Community Park to meet and greet the runners participating in the Park Run. It was a pleasant morning. By 7am more than 200 runners already were ready to go and enjoy the Saturday morning run. Unfortunately, because I have not fully recovered from my recent leg injury, so I was not able to join them for the morning run.

Park Run is a voluntary organisation, organises free weekly 5 km timed runs around the world. These events take place in pleasant parkland surroundings and people of every age and ability can take part. The 235 runners that joined the Wishart Park Run came from surrounding suburbs, as far as Eight Mile Plains, and we even had a guest runner, Nathan, come all the way from the US State of Utah.

Mr Deputy Chair, Park Run not only promotes a healthy lifestyle, it also brings our community closer together through shared co-activities. I am proud to have the Wishart Park Run as part of my community and will continue to support them for the invaluable contribution they bring to MacGregor Ward.

Deputy Chairman: Further General Business?

Councillor McKENZIE.

Councillor McKENZIE: Thank you, Mr Acting Chairman.

Mr Acting Chairman, I would like to just outline a couple of the wonderful institutions that take place in the Coorparoo Ward and a couple of the number of the ones that I have been attending over the last couple of weeks. I was unable to get up to speak on the Australia Day celebrations put forward by the Fijian Seniors. This was held in the Brisbane City Council Multicultural hub at Coorparoo and the main mover of that was Mr Surendra Prasad. He is the instigator of the Federation of Indian Communities, was president of the Lion’s Club at MacGregor and currently the president of the Fijian Senior Citizens Organisation.

Another organisation is the Coorparoo and District Heritage Group. Just recently the president of that group, Mr Ron Baker, received an award by the LORD MAYOR for his contribution to society and to the historical continuance of Coorparoo.

The Woodturners Association of Queensland is a wonderful organisation that resides in Pine Street, Greenslopes. The president, John Crease, has been actively involved in the organisation since I have been the patron of the organisation for the last 11 years. This organisation is, as I said, the Woodturners Association. It has got an expansive membership and they are continually looking for ways to improve their organisation. They have displays at the Botanic Gardens with their groups. It’s very popular and they have an open day on Saturday 23 and 24 March.

Also probably one of the most important or one of the most interesting organisations I am going to tomorrow is the Women’s Creative Centre at Greenslopes Mall. Tomorrow I will have the pleasure of meeting Valerie Ebb who is an active creative worker in that centre and her birthday is tomorrow and she will turn 100 years of age. So I am looking very forward to meeting and greeting her.

Deputy Chairman: Further General Business?

No further General Business.

I declare the meeting closed.


- 101 -

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 Nicole Johnston on 27 February 2019Q1. Please provide a list by address of properties purchased under Council’s Flood Buy-back scheme for

the past five years:a) 2018-19 to dateb) 2017-18c) 2016-17d) 2015-16e) 2014-15

Q2. How many homes are eligible and awaiting Flood buy-back funding at a future date but have not yet been purchased by Council?

Q3. How many properties that applied did Council refuse to purchase under the Flood Buy-back scheme for the past five years:f) 2018-19 to dateg) 2017-18h) 2016-17i) 2015-16j) 2014-15

Q4. What was the allocated Council Budget for the Flood Buy-back scheme in 2018-19?

Q5. How much of the Council Budget for Flood Buy Back scheme has actually been expended as at 27 February 2019?

Q6. What is the speed limit on Council footpaths within the CBD?

Q7. What is the speed limit on Council footpaths through Council Parks in the CBD?

Q8. Are there any speed limits on any Council footpaths in Brisbane?

Q9. Please provide a list of streets with Council footpaths, by name and suburb, with speed limits in Brisbane and their associated speed limit?

Submitted by Councillor Steve Griffiths on 28 February 2019Q1. Please provide an itemised list of projects delivered under “Corridor Planning” Budget Service 2.1.1.1

– Plan and Design the Network in the 2018/19 Budget.

Q2. Please provide an itemised list of projects delivered under “Transport Planning Studies” Budget Service 2.1.1.1 – Plan and Design the Network in the 2018/19 Budget.

Q3. Please provide an itemised list of projects delivered under “Road Corridor Management” Budget Service 2.1.4.1 – Manage the Network in the 2018/19 Budget.

Q4. Please provide an itemised list of events delivered under the “Green Heart Sustainability Events” Budget Service 3.1.1.1 – Engagement for a Clean Green City in the 2018/19 Budget.

Q5. Please provide the actual amount expended to date from the boat ramp upgrade at the Colmslie Recreation Reserve Budget Service 3.4.2.1 – Wharves, Jetties, Pontoons and Fishing Platforms in the 2018/19 Budget.

Q6. Please provide an itemised list of projects delivered under the “Building Stronger Communities – Facility Grants” Budget Service 5.3.2.1 – Sport and Recreation Organisational Development.

Q7. How many street sweepers are there in the Brisbane City Council fleet?


- 102 -

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 Nicole Johnston (from meeting on 26 February 2019)Q1. Please provide a list of Multiuser Games Areas MUGA’s by park name, suburb and ward either built or

planned in Brisbane?

Q2. please provide a list of outdoor gyms by park name, suburb and ward either built or planned in Brisbane?

A1 and A2.This information is publicly available. The Brisbane City Council website lists all facilities, including outdoor gyms, in parks across Brisbane. Please refer to www.brisbane.qld.gov.au.

Q3. How many outdoor gyms have been built using Footpath and Parks Trust Funds? Please provide a list by park name, suburb and ward?

A3. It is assumed this question relates to this financial year. Projects over $50,000 are made by decision of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee and minutes of these meetings are publicly available.

No outdoor gym projects were completed in this financial year under $50,000 that were funded through a Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund.

Q4. How many outdoor gyms have been built using using capital funding from the Council Budget? Please provide a list by park name, suburb and ward?

A4. This information is collated by suburb.

Robinson Park TingalpaC.J. Greenfield Complex Park RichlandsNixon Park OxleyPerrin Park Taringa

Q5. On what date was a request for a stairway/footpath access through Victoria Park to the St Joseph’s (Terrace) tennis courts first made to Council?

Q6. How many requests for a stairway/footpath access through Victoria Park to the Terrace tennis courts have been made to made to Council? Were the requests made by a resident or group (no names required)?

A5 and A6.Two requests have been made to improve access on a very steep slope between a car park and other section of the park, including the Council-owned lower level tennis courts.

Council officers are investigating options to respond to these requests, however no funding is allocated for construction.

Q7. How much will the stairway/footpath access through Victoria Park to the Terrace tennis courts cost?

A7. No cost estimate has yet been sought.

Q8. Was funding included in the 2018-19 Budget for a stairway/footpath through Victoria Park to the Terrace tennis courts?

A8. No.

Q9. Has a heritage exemption certificate been approved for a stairway/footpath access through Victoria Park to the Terrace tennis courts? If not, when will it be sought?

A9. No. If a heritage exemption certificate is required, it is usually sought once funding is available for delivery.


- 103 -

Q10. Given some 750 public footpaths are waiting to be fixed as per the notice paper answers to Questions on Notice, why is this project being prioritised given their is easy access nearby?

A10. The premise of this question is false.

Q11. Had the Lord Mayor through Council sought permission from the State Government to make Oxley Rd Corinda, Old Cleveland Rd Stones Corner and mains Rd Sunnybank 40km prior to his public announcement in September 2018?

A11. No. The State Government, through its representatives on the Local Speed Management Committee (QPS and TMR) approved the 40 km/h speed limit for Oxley Road on 21 January 2019. The Speed Limit Review reports for Old Cleveland Road at Stones Corner and Mains Road at Sunnybank are still in progress.

Q12. On what date did Council receive permission from the State Government to make Oxley Rd Corinda, Old Cleveland Rd Stones Corner and Mains Rd Sunnybank 40km?

A12. The State Government, through its representatives on the Local Speed Management Committee (QPS and TMR) approved the 40 km/h speed limit for Oxley Road on 21 January 2019. The Speed Limit Review reports for Old Cleveland Road at Stones Corner and Mains Road at Sunnybank are still in progress.

Q13. If no State Government approval has been sought, under what power is Council reducing the speed limit on Oxley Rd Corinda, Old Cleveland Rd Stones Corner and mains Rd Sunnybank 40km?

A13. Approval was sought and obtained in accordance with Part 4 of the State Government’s Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

Q14. Did Council seek State Government permission before reducing the speed limit on Ann St, Brisbane?

A14. Yes. The State Government, through its representatives on the Local Speed Management Committee approved the 40 km/h speed limit for Ann Street, in accordance with Part 4 of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

Submitted by Councillor Steve Griffiths (from meeting on 26 February 2019)Q1. How many reconstructed footpaths across Brisbane has council used bitumen instead of concrete?

A1. Council does not replace reconstructed footpaths with asphalt from footpaths that were previously concrete.

Q2. Which road and cycling bridges, and there locations across Brisbane, have been identified and scheduled for a maintenance upgrade?

A2.Bridge SuburbWilliam Jolly Bridge Brisbane CityStory Bridge Kangaroo PointBeaudesert Road RockleaBrookfield Road BrookfieldBanksia Drive Mount CrosbyEleanor Schonell Bridge Dutton ParkAshgrove Avenue AshgroveWalter Taylor Bridge IndooroopillyWaterworks Road The GapBreakfast Creek Road NewsteadCurtin Avenue PinkenbaToombul Road Northgate

Q3. How many, and at what locations, are fishing platforms scheduled to be constructed that funds were listed in the forward estimates of this year’s budget?

A3. Moggill Ferry Park, Moggill.


- 104 -

Delivery of the River Access Network including retrofitting existing pontoons along the Brisbane River will also allow fishing. In 2018/19 financial year, Council has built and opened a pontoon at West End which allows fishing activities.

Q4. List where any 40km signed school zones are located on primary freight route classed roads in Brisbane.

A4.Centre Name Address Suburb Post

codeFreight Route with School Zone

State or Council Road

Existing School Zone Enhanced or not Enhanced

Boondall State School

Cnr Sandgate and Roscommon Roads

Boondall 4034 Sandgate Road

State Road

Enhanced by State

Earnshaw State College

Cnr Earnshaw and Tufnell Roads

Banyo 4014 Tufnell Road

Council Road

Enhanced by State

Agnew School (Brisbane)

190 Ingleston Road

Wakerley 4154 Ingleston Road

Council Road

Not Enhanced and not aware that it is on State’s list to enhance in 18/19

Mary Immaculate Primary School (Annerley)

616 Ipswich Road

Annerley 4103 Ipswich Road

Council Road

Enhanced by Council (multi-lane road)

Our Lady of Fatima Primary School (Acacia Ridge)

350 Mortimer Road

Acacia Ridge

4110 Mortimer Road

Council Road

Enhanced by State

Iona College (Lindum)

85 North Road

Lindum 4178 North Road

Council Road

Enhanced by State

Moreton Bay College (Wynnum)

450 Wondall Road

Manly West

4179 Wondall Road

Council Road

Enhanced by State

RISING OF COUNCIL: 6.58pm.

PRESENTED: and CONFIRMED

CHAIRMAN


- 105 -

Council officers in attendance:

Jade Stopar (Acting Senior Council and Committee Officer)Victor Tan (Acting Council and Committee Officer)Billy Peers (Personal Support Officer to the Lord Mayor and Council Orderly)


- 106 -

· Web viewThis morning in Committee we had the presentation on our international internships for...

Documents

Transcript of · Web viewThis morning in Committee we had the presentation on our international internships for...