table of contents€¦ · web viewor this one, this is a resident in yeronga: ‘the analogy i...

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

The 4566 meeting of the Brisbane City Council,held at City Hall, Brisbaneon Tuesday 14 August 2018at 2pm

Prepared by: Council and Committee Liaison OfficeCity Administration and Governance

Dedicated to a better Brisbane


THE 4566 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,

ON TUESDAY 14 AUGUST 2018AT 2PM

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS_______________________________________________________________i

PRESENT:________________________________________________________________________1

OPENING OF MEETING:____________________________________________________________1

MOTION OF CONDOLENCE – NEVILLE GEORGE WARBURTON______________________________1

MINUTES:_______________________________________________________________________4

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:____________________________________________________________4

QUESTION TIME:__________________________________________________________________6

CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS:___________________________________________17ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE__________________________________________17

A MINOR AMENDMENT TO BRISBANE CITY PLAN 2014 – MINOR PACKAGE E___________________29B DUTTON PARK—FAIRFIELD NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN____________________________________30

PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE_______________________________________________32A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – NEVILLE BONNER BRIDGE_________________________________40

INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE___________________________________________________________41A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – PEDESTRIAN SAFETY_____________________________________53B PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL INSTALL A SCHOOL ZONE ON IPSWICH ROAD, ANNERLEY, FOR

JUNCTION PARK STATE SCHOOL_____________________________________________________54C PETITION – REQUESTING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ROAD SAFETY MEASURES IN KAMARIN

STREET, MANLY WEST_____________________________________________________________56D PETITIONS – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL REINSTATE AND IMPROVE THE BUS STOP (BP STOP) ON

LYTTON ROAD, EAST BRISBANE______________________________________________________58CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE_____________________________________________________________61

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – MERTHYR VILLAGE RENEWAL______________________________67B PETITIONS – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL IMPROVE THE GAYTHORNE SHOPPING PRECINCT_____68C PETITION – REQUESTING THE RELOCATION OF THE LETTERBOXES AT 4 LEWIS PLACE, MANLY WEST_

_______________________________________________________________________________69ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE____________________________________70

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – BRISBANE KOALA SCIENCE INSTITUTE_______________________71FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE_____________________________________________________________72

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – LOVE FOOD HATE WASTE_________________________________78LIFESTYLE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE__________________________________________79

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – POP-UP LIBRARY: FIRST YEAR IN REVIEW_____________________81B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL ASSIST THE GAP LOCAL ORGANIC COOPERATIVE LTD TO

FIND AN AFFORDABLE AND SUITABLE LOCATION TO OPERATE ITS SOCIAL ENTERPRISE_________82FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE_______________________________________83

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – SUPPLIER COMMUNICATION FORUMS_______________________84B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL RENEW THE PERMIT TO OCCUPY FOR THE RANKINS ON

THE MALL NEWSAGENCY TENANCY IN THE QUEEN STREET MALL___________________________85

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:_____________________________________________________87

GENERAL BUSINESS:______________________________________________________________88

[4566 (Ordinary) Meeting – 14 August 2018]





QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:__________________________________91

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:________________________92






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)Vicki HOWARD (Central) Steven HUANG (MacGregor)Fiona KING (Marchant) 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 as such to remove yourself from the Council Chamber for debate and voting, where applicable.

Are there any apologies?

There being no apologies, LORD MAYOR, motion of condolence, please.

MOTION OF CONDOLENCE – NEVILLE GEORGE WARBURTON65/2018-19

The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, announced that before proceeding with the formal business of the day, he would like to pay tribute to Neville George Warburton, who had passed away recently.

LORD MAYOR: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. It has come to my attention that we saw the recent passing of Neville Warburton, a former Alderman of the Brisbane City Council and, of course, someone who went on to be a representative in the State


Parliament. Neville Warburton was a former ALP Alderman for the then Bramble Bay Ward, now the Deagon Ward, between 1976 and 1979. He served on the Transit and Electric Committee, the Planning and Building Committee, and the Planning Policy Advisory Committee, or PPAC as it was known. He was also a part of the Cities and Towns Local Government Development Association, and on the Chermside Hospitals Board.

Nev Warburton went on to run for State Parliament, and served as the Member for Sandgate and Leader of the Queensland Opposition during the years 1984 to 1988. He then served as a Minister in the Goss Ministry from 1989 to 1992. It was unusual in the sense, Madam Chairman, that he had one term in Council and that had actually overlapped with him taking the seat in the State Parliament. In those days you could have both. You could be a Councillor here and also a State Member of Parliament, and I think that was around two years, was my recollection, that Neville Warburton was in both Brisbane City Council and also the State Member, covering primarily the same area.

Madam Chairman, Nev Warburton is survived by his two daughters, Kim and Sandy, and two grandchildren. I did not know Nev, so I cannot comment, Madam Chairman, in relation to him as a person other than what I knew of him via the media. He did strike me as a very genuine contributor to our city and State. He was there at an interesting period, I suppose, of Queensland Parliamentary history. He had the difficult task in opposition as Opposition Leader but, again, was there long enough to be able to see a change in government and have his opportunity and time within the Ministry.

Accordingly, in view of former Alderman Neville George Warburton’s outstanding service to past, present and future residents of Brisbane, the LORD MAYOR moved, seconded Councillor Peter CUMMING, that

This Council extends it sincerest and deepest sympathies to the family and friends of the late Neville George Warburton and pays tribute to him for his dedicated service to the city and people of Brisbane.

The Chairman called for any further speakers.

Chairman: Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise today to pay tribute to a great Labor politician. It was 1986 when respected national political commentator Peter Bowers came to Brisbane to report on the latest Labor leader fighting to unseat the Bjelke-Petersen regime. Bowers admiringly wrote of that leader: ‘Listening to Mr Warburton deliver Labor’s policy speech was like stepping back into another time. He was a good old-fashioned Labor politician delivering a good old-fashioned speech.’

To the many who knew and respected him, that was Neville George Warburton to a T. Old fashioned was meant as a compliment to a man who devoted his life to ensuring everyone, no matter what their place in society, got a fair go. He was an old-style Labor bloke who never forgot his roots.

Nev took a traditional path in the Labor politics of the time. He was a tradie and a talented Rugby League player who, as lock for Norths, made the prestigious Brisbane team that faced rivals Ipswich and Toowoomba in the fiercely contested Bulimba Cup. Warby started his working life with the Brisbane City Council in 1953 as an electrical fitter and mechanic. His constant drive to improve the lot of his fellow workers led to him to become a full time organiser for the ETU (Electrical Trades Union) in 1963 and within two years he was Assistant State Secretary.

In 1976, Nev took the plunge into politics and was elected the Alderman, as they were known, for the ward of Bramble Bay, which has evolved into the Deagon Ward held by my colleague Jared Cassidy. A year later he was elected the State Member for Sandgate and served in both jobs under the rules peculiar to the day until 1979.


- 2 -

Nev rose through the ranks of the Parliamentary Labor Party to become Opposition Leader when Bjelke-Petersen was at the height of his excesses. There were tough times: Nev fought Joh during the SEQEB (South East Queensland Electricity Board) strikes and he kept fighting even when Bjelke-Petersen tried to silence him by launching taxpayer-funded defamation actions, threatening to take away his home and his life savings. Is it any wonder that when he was appointed a Minister in the Goss Government his colleagues say the smile never left his face.

Nev Warburton himself rates a rally outside Parliament House as the proudest day of his working life. He was Wayne Goss’ Industrial Relations Minister, and he was able to announce to the sacked SEQEB workers that the Government would be able to return all of their super Joh took away, with interest. You can see why Nev was so proud. Justice for the workers was an ever-present theme of his working life.

Madam Chair, I didn’t know Nev Warburton personally but, through people who have spoken about him since his passing, I’ve gained an insight into a true gentleman, someone from whose book we could all take a leaf. His fellow Member for Sandgate, Stirling Hinchliffe, said Nev was just a good man, a very good man, who was very approachable and down to earth. Cabinet colleague Dean Wells told of how he cared about those in need, and he dedicated his life to making a fairer and more equitable society.

ETU comrade and former ALP President Dick Williams rated Nev as the most humane person he’s ever met. He called Nev a man who was extremely humble and was extremely dedicated to his principles and his causes. Today’s Council meeting precludes Labor Councillors from attending Nev’s funeral, but he will still be in our thoughts as someone who embodied the principle of fairness, decency and compassion. Vale Nev Warburton.

Chairman: Further speakers?

Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise as I did work with Mr Warburton, as I knew him then, back in the ETU days, and I know that the Chamber has heard me talk about that in the past. I felt that it was fitting today that I should pay my respects to, as everyone has said, indeed, a gentleman. I think it’s very sad that both Nev and Ken Vaughan are no longer with us. They were two gentlemen that taught me a lot in life.

I do recall being stuck in the lift in Trades Hall, when it was Trades Hall then, and Nev standing outside saying: ‘Is that you in there, Vick?’ and I’m going: ‘Yes.’ So he said: ‘It’ll be right, mate’, and he really was such a gentleman. When I heard of his passing, I was reminded of that story. It was such a long time ago, but I do just want to add my respect to his family and to pass on my condolences. So thank you, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Any further speakers?

Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to contribute to this motion of condolence for Neville George Warburton, and rising to talk, not just about the former Alderman for the Bramble Bay Ward or the former State Member for Sandgate or the former Labor Leader in Queensland or Minister in the reforming Goss Government, but to talk about a thoroughly decent man who is still remembered as a gentleman and a leader in my community after all these years.

There are people of a certain age who still remember the work of Nev fondly in the community. I was speaking to Graham Wright of Sandgate, in his 90s now, who was a member of the Deagon branch of the Labor Party with Nev many years ago, long before he entered public office either as the Alderman or the State Member of Sandgate. He remembers their friendship very fondly. He remembers the man who would do just about anything for those who needed it in his community. He remembers Nev and Fran welcoming friends into their home at Christmas time.


- 3 -

I was speaking to John Nagle of Shorncliffe who was a long-standing fisherman in that community. He remembered the times when Nev would come up to the Seaview Hotel and share with the trawler men and women in a beer or two, or maybe a few more, and they also remember the support that Nev gave to the fishing industry in the local community as well. And, of course, talking to members of the Sandgate Bowls Club where Nev was not only a member and a player, but also a competitor and a great advocate for the sport of bowls.

The thing about all of these recollections, when talking to people in the community from locals, is not just of him being an Alderman or a State Member, but him being a friend and an active member and leader of the community that he loved. His time in office, particularly in State Parliament, was a tumultuous time in Queensland politics and particularly for Labor politicians. He led the Labor Caucus here in City Hall as the Secretary of the Municipal Labor Party. He did that with distinction. He led the State Parliamentary Caucus with distinction, and he led his community with distinction. Nev will be greatly missed by his party, by his family and by friends. I say thank you and goodbye, Nev Warburton.

Chairman: Any further speakers?

LORD MAYOR?

I will now put the motion of condolence.

As there were no further speakers, the Chairman restated the motion of condolence, which resulted in its being declared carried unanimously.

MINUTES:66/2018-19

The Minutes of the 4565 meeting of Council held on 7 August 2018, 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:Sarah Thornton – Proposed development at Nudgee Beach (A004795401)

Chairman: I would now like to call on Sarah Thornton who will address the Chamber about a proposed development at Nudgee Beach.

Orderly, please show Ms Thornton in.

Please proceed, Ms Thornton, you have five minutes.

Ms Sarah Thornton: Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors, good afternoon, and a particularly good afternoon to our local representative, Councillor ALLAN. Thank you, Councillor, for your help thus far.

I’m here today to speak with you about the Suez development application (DA) to consolidate waste management facilities at Nudgee Beach. I’m here on behalf of about 180 local residents. We’re a small group but we’re passionate, and we’re supported by thousands across Brisbane who also enjoy Nudgee Beach as a refuge from city life.

Specifically the DA in question proposes to move the existing waste management depot at Banyo to Nudgee Beach transfer station. The community is pragmatic, we don’t oppose the application per se. We understand the need for official waste management services. Rather, our submissions to Council are seeking improvement to the proposal, largely in relation to access.

The key problem is that, at Nudgee Beach, we have three very diverse activities that need to co-exist. The internationally celebrated Ramsar-protected Boondall


- 4 -

Wetlands, visited each year by international conservation groups and weekly by schoolchildren. Secondly, a much-loved recreational zone for the public, perhaps 1,000 visitors a month. Thirdly, a much-needed waste management facility, equally important for Brisbane.

Thankfully at present there’s a buffer between the current waste management operations and the environmental and recreational areas. It’s an almost completely unused road on a strip of grass running adjacent to the Boondall Wetlands. It’s peaceful, it’s quiet, and the predominant noise is bird life. It’s the perfect buffer between these three competing uses.

What we are seeking from Council is threefold: firstly, we need Council to very carefully scrutinise the proposal, even more than you would usually, given the complexity of managing such divergent uses. Secondly, that you do not allow any additional vehicles of any kind to use the access road adjacent to the Boondall Wetlands, the buffer, beyond the current use which we understand is for emergencies and access to the helipad. Thirdly, that a small percentage of money saved by consolidating the waste management facilities be used to plant trees along the buffer and to improve the safety of shared road access along the beach end of Nudgee Road.

Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors, just this morning in Council’s August newsletter, we see three Council-run nature-focused community events in the wetlands at Nudgee Beach: it’s wonderful. Council has done that through its careful protection of the environment and the investment in bikeways and boardwalks that sit only metres from Suez’s proposed access road.

Currently the Suez documents are dismissive of the potential impact on the wetlands, on the recreational facilities and on the safety of drivers, pedestrians and cyclists on Nudgee Road. Nowhere do they acknowledge or address the fact that vehicle movements along the wetland boundary will go from almost zero to, we estimate, over 80,000 per annum, even though this was central to both residents and wildlife group submissions.

As a result, there’s been no adequate assessment of the compliance obligations expressly and publicly raised by the Federal Department of Environment and Energy. Finally, Council has said that the development will save ratepayers significant money. We ask, in line with Council’s environment and sustainability policy, that you allow a small percentage of savings to be invested in protecting the natural urban and recreational environment at Nudgee Beach.

That investment should be an additional tree buffer to enhance that buffer we mentioned, significant beautification of the roadway, and traffic safety features on the recreational end of Nudgee Road. We had a fatal accident there a few years back. That can’t be repeated.

Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and Councillors, in conclusion, we do understand that Council must make the most efficient use of the waste management site. That, of course, is what ratepayers expect. We also know that Council has put a lot of effort, resources, money and publicity into preserving the environmental values of the wetlands and making Nudgee Beach itself such a well-loved, safe, recreational sanctuary. That, too, is what ratepayers expect. Thank you.

Chairman: Thank you, Ms Thornton.

Councillor BOURKE, would you care to respond, please.

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

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Can I start by thanking Ms Thornton for taking the time to come in and address the Council Chamber today about the development application at 1402 Nudgee Road, Nudgee Beach. The development application, as you would know, Ms Thornton, was lodged on 16 November 2017 and, as you outlined, the current site houses the waste


- 5 -

recovery centre, but also involves around 60 waste collection vehicles entering and exiting the site on a regular basis.

Those vehicles are currently stored on an offsite facility at Buchanan Road, Banyo, and the current development application that’s under assessment proposes to house these refuse collection trucks here at the resource recovery centre and also provide a consolidated staff facility for the operations of the centre.

As you would probably be aware, but for the benefit of the Council Chamber, an information request was sent to the applicant on 5 January this year requesting further information around a number of issues including bushfire hazard, landfill gas migration, stormwater, acid sulphate soils and also air quality. The site is zoned for community purposes, and obviously it is an impact assessable DA. So the public notification period did occur between 18 April and 15 May this year, and we received 13 submissions in that formal notification period.

We also did receive a petition presented by your local Councillor, Councillor Adam ALLAN, who has raised the issue and raised the concerns of the community with me on a number of occasions. I also understand that, on 12 July, Councillor HOWARD and Councillor McLACHLAN met with Councillor ALLAN, as well as the Manager of Waste Services and local residents, out on site to discuss the DA and to get a better understanding of the concerns from local residents. Those discussions were quite productive.

Obviously following public notification, we’ve continued to assess the development application. One of the key points that has been raised is the location and proximity to sensitive uses, so not only the wetlands but also housing in the nearby area. But the housing is on the other side of the Gateway Motorway.

At the moment, Ms Thornton, all I can tell you is that the Council officers are continuing to assess the application and we are continuing to consider the submissions that have been made by the public and the issues that you have raised. Obviously all of the applications that Council assesses have to be done in accordance with our own City Plan, City Plan 2014, and also the State Government’s Planning Act. Thank you very much again for coming in this afternoon and raising your concerns about this development application, Ms Thornton.

Chairman: Thank you, Ms Thornton, for coming in.

QUESTION TIME:

Chairman: Councillors, are there any questions of the LORD MAYOR or a Chairman of any of the Standing Committees?

Councillor TOOMEY.

Question 1

Councillor TOOMEY: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. This Administration prides itself on our clean, green and sustainable credentials. Following reports of Energex contractors taken to hacking Brisbane’s street trees when undertaking their works, can you outline for the Chamber now how Council is taking a firm hand with Energex to ensure that they are doing the right thing by our city and our street trees?

LORD MAYOR: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor TOOMEY for the question. Council has received a number of complaints in recent times regarding the hacking of trees along Council streets while Energex is undertaking work which they deem to be emergency and maintenance works. So I thank Councillor TOOMEY for the question. I should preface it by saying that Council has a long and fruitful relationship with Energex on a number of fronts—disaster management and many other areas where we coincide our activity.


- 6 -

Madam Chairman, as it stands, Energex, in terms of their job, they operate under legislation like the Electricity Act 1994 and the Electrical Safety Act 1994, and within those Acts, they have the right to manage any vegetation they deem to be a hazard to their electricity lines, and they can do so without needing to contact Council first.

Despite those powers, we have had over a lengthy period of time an arrangement and an agreed sort of situation where there are some parameters around which they undertake their work. But the reality is that Council has heard of a number of situations where the management of Council trees by Energex contractors has been excessive to the point that it risks the integrity of some of those trees.

While Council isn’t aware of the exact number of cases where this has occurred, we are aware that there have been significant cases in Inala, in Hendra, in Holland Park West, in Chermside and The Gap, to name a few. So, Madam Chairman, some Councillors across the Chamber may be aware of trees in their area being impacted.

So, Madam Chairman, just to give some examples of what I’m talking about here, that is the result of apparently some maintenance work in Inala, at Partridge Street. This is a tree that I think will struggle to survive. There is another one at Inala also, this one is in Hickory Street out there in Councillor STRUNK’s area, and again where a very, very severe pruning has taken place.

I have another example here at Jackson Street, Clayfield, again the sort of destructive nature of that pruning means that that tree will struggle, even if it does survive the nature and shape of it renders it of limited amenity value. Similarly another case at Chermside, Madam Chairman, where we see this. So there’s other cases around, but that gives people an idea, at least, of what we’re talking about here.

Council officers estimate that the rate of excessive pruning has become problematic within the last three months. However, some Councillors have stated that this has been ongoing for longer than that. I understand that the frequency of pruning from Energex seems to have also changed, which no doubt has had an effect on the management practices of Energex’s contractors.

Council, as I indicated earlier, does have a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in place with Energex which agrees to the guidelines of how trees should be trimmed. That MOU has been in place for a number of years, which makes it more concerning to hear of excessive hacking of our trees in recent times. This issue has raised alarms with Councillor Vicki HOWARD, Chairman of Field Services, and she asked for a meeting between Council officers and Energex which was due for a few weeks time, but that has been brought forward and was held last week.

So, Madam Chairman, on Friday 10 August, the Asset Services Manager within Council, together with our Principal Arborist, met with Energex representatives, and there has been an agreement around that meeting. Firstly, Energex will now send to Council their 12-month pruning program for our information. That will work closely with Council and Energex contractors to ensure the level of pruning is appropriate and comply with the agreed Memorandum of Understanding between Council and Energex. Thirdly, in instances where urgent pruning works need to be undertaken, Energex would notify Council.

Madam Chairman, I’ve also had a letter follow-up undertaken by the CEO of Council to the CEO of Energex just reiterating and confirming these arrangements.

Chairman: Further questions?

Councillor CUMMING.

Question 2

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. I refer to an advertisement your Council has placed for a Band 6 Communications Officer to prepare, and I quote: ‘innovative communications solutions’ for the $650 million


- 7 -

a minute Kingsford Smith Drive project. The ad states that, to be successful in the role, the applicant must have, and I quote: ‘ability to apply a level of political awareness in managing effective communication strategies.’

LORD MAYOR, the Brisbane City Council Code of Conduct states employees will, and I quote again: ‘accept and value their duty to provide advice which is objective, independent, apolitical and impartial.’ It also says they must acknowledge the primacy of their public interest and must give Councillors advice that is, and I quote again: ‘thorough, responsive and unbiased.’ LORD MAYOR, how does this politicising of the Council workforce align with the employees’ responsibilities under the Code of Conduct?

LORD MAYOR: Well, Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor CUMMING for the question. I have to say that I am unaware of this particular ad that he refers to. I would, though, in listening to his question, just say this: I would be absolutely aghast in terms of any outcome which placed a person of that sort in any political situation. That would be absolutely inappropriate—absolutely inappropriate.

I might say that there is a difference between—I forget the exact words he used; I think it was political awareness. Madam Chairman, that level of political awareness I would interpret as being not in terms of party political awareness, but in terms of being aware in terms of the community concerns that might surround a project. We do want—

Councillor interjecting.

LORD MAYOR: Well, I would have to say I will take this away, because I also am concerned by that wording. I am absolutely concerned by that wording. I find it inappropriate wording. I will be certainly delving down into this to find why that has happened. Madam Chairman, officers of this Council are and need to be apolitical. That’s number one.

Madam Chairman, number two is that any Communications Officer has to be working in the interests of the organisation and, through the organisation, the people of Brisbane. That means that we will, of course, be informing the community at different times about projects. We will be informing them about initiatives, perhaps, from time to time that this Council is taking, important information to the residents of this city.

So, Madam Chairman, I want to, regardless of what that ad might say, I want to give everybody here an assurance today that no officer, if it is an officer within the organisation of the Brisbane City Council, will be involved in politics in any way in that regard. It would be inappropriate for that person to be so. So, Madam Chairman, again I thank Councillor CUMMING for the question. I will certainly make it my business to see that ad and to inquire absolutely as to why such an inference was in that ad.

To be aware of community concerns is what that ad absolutely should have read, and I don’t have a problem with that. We want officers to have an antenna, if you like, about things that are of community concern. That’s important as an organisation, that we do have savvy officers. But, Madam Chairman, again I have made that commitment to the Chamber, and I’ll leave my comments at that.


Councillor KING.

Question 3

Councillor KING: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is to the Chair of Public and Active Transport Committee, Councillor SCHRINNER. DEPUTY MAYOR, Brisbane City Council is on the record regarding its concerns about the Queensland Government’s proposed Neville Bonner Bridge design, including the lack of provisions for people on bicycles, flooding and also impacts on the safe operation of CityCat services. Are you aware of any other concerns related to the proposed bridge design?

DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, Councillor KING, for the question. As my Deputy, you know well the various concerns that Council has


- 8 -

long been on the record with regarding this bridge. You mentioned no access for people on bicycles—a big one. Given that we are in this city at all levels of government aiming to encourage growth in bicycle use, to build a brand new asset—

Councillors interjecting.

DEPUTY MAYOR: —where cyclists are banned—

Chairman: Order! Just a moment, please, DEPUTY MAYOR.

Councillor CASSIDY and Councillor JOHNSTON, you don’t like anybody calling out when you’re speaking; apply the same courteous respect to the DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman. To build a brand new asset where cyclists are banned is not forward looking, Madam Chairman. You mentioned the impact on the CityCat operations, with the pier of the bridge right in the middle of the river obstructing the current path of CityCats between North Quay and South Bank.

We don’t know the flooding impacts of this bridge, and that issue hasn’t been adequately addressed, in our view. This morning we saw media reports that at least 10 small business river operators, river tour boat operators, will have their most important pick-up and drop-off jetty at South Bank, Jetty 8 South Bank, now taken out of action. They won’t be able to operate from there anymore. We also understand that the original $70 million cost of the project is now a lot higher than that, with reports that it’s up to $120 million now.

You asked if I’m aware of any other issues. In addition to this already damning list, yes, I am aware of some other issues, and I cannot promise that there won’t be more issues that arise, because the one thing that Council hasn’t seen are the detailed plans for this bridge. Despite talk about this bridge since 2015, we are yet to see the plans for this bridge. We have seen a concept; that’s all we’ve seen. No detailed design plans have been given to Council.

So this obviously is a significant concern, and we’ve been providing feedback consistently, yet we’ve got no indication at all that any of that feedback has been taken on board, because we haven’t seen the plans. But, Councillor KING, you asked if there are any other issues. It has come to my attention in recent days that the cultural forecourt, which is one of our major event spaces in the city, will be chopped by up to 25% as a result of the need to create a work zone for the construction of this bridge. So the cultural forecourt, the home of the Brisbane sign, the place where so many thousands of tourists go each year and so many festivals are held, will now be partially closed down for the construction of this bridge.

We know the Brisbane Festival, the World Science Festival, Buddha’s Birthday, the French Festival, the Night Noodle Markets, the Out of the Box Children’s Festival, the Revive Pop-up Fashion Festival which is happening this Friday, the MS Moonlight Walk fundraiser—these are all examples of the many events that are held in the cultural forecourt. Those events now all risk being displaced or moved to other areas.

So this question is yet another unanswered question about the Neville Bonner Bridge. It’s interesting, because we heard Councillor CUMMING parroting the Labor line that it’s too little too late. He does get his speeches written for him by those in George Street. He just toes the party line regardless of the facts.


DEPUTY MAYOR: Well, he obviously doesn’t write those speeches himself; it’s pretty obvious. But the reality is this: we’ve been asked for feedback on this bridge both last year and this year, and we have provided that feedback. Each time we’ve provided feedback, we have raised concerns, and to have Minister Kate Jones and also Councillor CUMMING come out and say: ‘too little too late’—



- 9 -

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Stop yelling out across the Chamber.

DEPUTY MAYOR: —indicates some serious questions about their consultation process. Why did they ask for feedback if they weren’t interested in taking that feedback on board? Why have they ignored the submissions that we put forward?


DEPUTY MAYOR: More importantly, why did they take our feedback on board on the redesign of the Bicentennial Bikeway, just recently, when they came out and said: yes, we got this design wrong, we’re going to change it. Why did they do it for the Bicentennial Bikeway but have completely ignored everything on the Neville Bonner Bridge?

I don’t know what to think. I don’t know whether the Ministers haven’t been briefed appropriately, but we have been consistent in our position on this bridge for a long period of time. Now, someone said we haven’t objected. Be careful what you wish for. I’ll tell you why we haven’t objected: because we haven’t seen the final plans yet, Madam Chairman. Once we see—

Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, unfortunately your time has expired.

DEPUTY MAYOR: —the final plans, we will be in a position to make that decision.


Councillor CASSIDY.

Question 4

Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. Putting to one side your offensive remarks last week regarding the Opposition’s concerns for bus driver safety, I refer to a survey of safety screens by the Rail, Tram and Bus Union (RTBU). Almost 1,000 drivers took part in the survey, which showed 93% support for the introduction of a full screen to protect drivers. The two options offered to drivers by Council for different styles of half-screens were rejected by even greater margins.

With last week’s court hearing regarding the death of Manmeet Sharma again bringing this tragedy to the forefront of our minds, will you commit to investing the budgeted $6 million Transport for Brisbane surplus into the full screens that bus drivers overwhelmingly rate as providing the greatest protection?

LORD MAYOR: Well, Madam Chairman, I just want to start with this nonsense that the Councillor puts forward in his question which he knows is a mistruth of—I’ll be very kind—where he talks about a profit in Brisbane Transport. Madam Chairman, we do not make a profit in Brisbane Transport. There is a $126 million subsidy that we pay as a Council to the Queensland Government via TransLink; $90 million approximately of which is for the bus operations and the remainder for our CityCat and river ferry operations. As one example, the Maroon Glider, we pay the total cost of that service, and the Queensland Government, through TransLink, get the total revenue for that service. So let’s not talk about profit. That’s just a nonsense—

Councillor CASSIDY: Point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: The LORD MAYOR is misleading the Chamber. I said surplus, and it is a budgeted surplus in the budget. It’s in black and white, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY—


Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS! That will do.

Now, Councillor CASSIDY, you referred to funds in your question; the LORD MAYOR was making a statement in relation to that component of your question. He has five minutes to answer.

LORD MAYOR.


- 10 -

LORD MAYOR: Yes, thanks very much, Madam Chairman. On that same page that claims a surplus, Madam Chairman, shows the amount of subsidy that we are putting into public transport in this city. Madam Chairman, the only—


LORD MAYOR: Just keep on saying it, Councillor. If you say it often enough, you’ll then think that people will believe it. Madam Chairman, the question related to the issue around safety on Brisbane buses. I too, obviously, am very conscious of the decision handed down in relation to Manmeet Sharma last week and the disquiet in the community, certainly in the Indian community and the Punjab community around that.

But, Madam Chairman, on the broader issue of safety on buses, as we know, there has been an ongoing State Government inquiry in relation to the issue of barriers for safety measures on buses. That inquiry relates not just to Brisbane City Council; there are bus drivers in a whole host of private companies also that operate on Brisbane streets, on the busway network, and importantly throughout South East Queensland, and the State Government inquiry was very much about acknowledging that and, to date, there is no final decisions around what they may do.

We have already invested, as a starting point, $2 million on bus passenger and driver safety. Those measures came in a number of different forms. There were five key components to it. Emergency exit location decals have been installed now on all buses; emergency release buttons and decals above the rear door have been relocated to all 168 buses that required that; there are new push/pull decals that have been installed on the rear door in all buses; a passenger evacuation education video has been completed and is available on Council’s website; and further information on emergency exits and evacuation procedures is available also now on Council’s website.

Madam Chairman, these were immediately a result of a report following the death of Manmeet Sharma. There’s also a number of other things that have been undertaken. Situational and de-escalation training being conducted by two psychologists and a criminologist has commenced. There’s 2,100 bus drivers, and what we are doing, Madam Chairman, is extensive training for those drivers in how to de-escalate volatile situations.

Our drivers can face a number of dangers in a number of forms. Barriers have been one part of the debate but there are many circumstances where drivers face difficult circumstances. The ability and the skills to be able to de-escalate some of these incidents, Madam Chairman, is important. So we are 90% complete now in terms of training for that de-escalation.

There’s the installation of an additional emergency exit in the rear door, and we’ve done that on 700 buses. We have commenced barriers on all new buses. They are a partial barrier. You know, it’s nice to hear this—

Chairman: LORD MAYOR, your time has expired.

LORD MAYOR: Thanks very much.


Councillor WYNDHAM.

Question 5

Councillor WYNDHAM: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My question is to the Chair of Environment, Parks and Sustainability. Councillor McLACHLAN, Council has recently had to reopen the tender process for a kiosk at Shorncliffe Pier. Can you update the Chamber on the progress of this tender and our plans for the pier in the meantime?

Councillor McLACHLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor WYNDHAM for the question. I am happy to update the Chamber by way of some background on the Shorncliffe Pier.


- 11 -

Madam Chairman, anyone who looks at the Council’s #ViewsOfBrisbane on Instagram can see what a popular destination Shorncliffe is for tourists and visitors alike. On any given day, especially on a day like this, the Sandgate Foreshores Park and Lower Moora Park will be alive with the sounds of people taking in the iconic view of Shorncliffe Pier and enjoying the breeze that comes off the bay.

It’s great to see, if you go down to the pier, to see kids throwing a line in, probably trying out their rod and reel for the first time, and generally catching a fish for the first time—fantastic to see. Of course, not so long ago, the Shorncliffe Pier was dilapidated and dangerous, and Council was forced to close the pier to public access due to safety concerns associated with the condition of the structure. There had been past Band-Aid fixes that simply didn’t work. A number of the pier’s piles, head stock and girders were in very poor condition, and the risk of structural failure was too great to allow the pier to remain open for public use.

So the LORD MAYOR announced in May 2012 that the pier would be renewed, completely rebuilt, with up to $20 million to be invested. No commitment from the other side in this Chamber at the time, but this was a Lord Mayoral commitment to make sure the Shorncliffe Pier would stand the test of time for another 100 years. That was the commitment that was given. The pier removal works commenced in November 2014, construction began in 2015, and the brand new, longest timber pier in Australia was officially reopened, very pleasing to see, and I was down there at the time, reopened to the public on Friday 25 March 2016 in conjunction with the Bluewater Festival.

Madam Chair, the great thing about creating and renewing iconic spaces in Brisbane is that people want to go there and spend time, and it creates the need for additional facilities. So increased visitation, coupled with Brisbane’s fantastic coffee culture, resulted in discussions about a kiosk facility on the foreshore near the pier. Of course, there’s been a long history of commercial activity associated with the pier, not so much in recent years.

The development of a small kiosk was supported by a community survey carried out with residents and businesses in Sandgate and Shorncliffe between February and March 2017. An overwhelming 84% of responses showed support for a kiosk. Council then ran an open tender process in June and July 2017 to select a kiosk owner/operator, and for the construction operation and maintenance of a kiosk in the Sandgate Foreshores Park.

Council undertook the task of writing and submitting the DA, and in August 2017 the Sandgate and Bracken Ridge Action Group, known as SANDBAG, was announced as the successful tenderer. However, and unfortunately, in April this year, SANDBAG decided that they needed to focus on their core business, which includes the provision of a central community services and programs, and they decided they were no longer able to fulfil the tender.

As an aside, SANDBAG has a great mission: to create community connections that strengthen and support individuals, families, communities and engage with people experiencing adversity due to poverty, homelessness, mental illness, domestic violence, disability and discrimination due to age, gender or sexual orientation. So I doff my hat to SANDBAG; they do great work, but unfortunately they pulled out of the tender for the operation of the kiosk at Sandgate.

So we were sorry to see them go, but remain committed to activating this particular element of the Shorncliffe Pier precinct. There is certainly strong community support prevailing for a new coffee kiosk at Sandgate. So we are going back out to tender, Madam Chairman, for a long term opportunity for businesses looking to trade at what is one of Brisbane’s most iconic destinations.

We want to ensure the area benefits from cafe facilities for years to come, and the lease that will be offered will be for up to 10 years. A tender to operate a permanent kiosk at this location will open from 17 August for a period of four


- 12 -

weeks, with interested parties to apply via Council’s supplier portal at brisbane.qld.gov.au. Until a permanent trader is granted the tender to build and operate the new facility, a licence will also be granted for a new temporary vendor, a cycle in, cycle out coffee cart or something similar to start trading shortly on a six-month permit.

Madam Chairman, this is another great example proving that Brisbane is a great place to live. We’re very pleased to see the interest that there is to operate facilities there, both for the longer term contract and for the shorter term contract. Very pleased to see what comes through to our procurement processes when it goes out to tender in the next couple of days. Thank you, Madam Chairman.


Councillor CUMMING.

Question 6

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. In a statement provided to ABC Radio on 6 August in relation to the failed attempt to fine Paul Sutherland for overstaying in the Lang Park traffic area, your Administration claimed that all roads leading into the area were clearly signposted. Mr Sutherland had disputed this.

Days after this statement was made, residents noticed Council installing new signs at various locations throughout the Lang Park traffic area where no sign had been in place before. Has this omission now placed the Council at risk of compensation claims from thousands of motorists who, like Mr Sutherland, entered the Lang Park traffic area on an unsigned road?

LORD MAYOR: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor CUMMING for the question. No, I don’t believe that’s the case at all, Councillor CUMMING. What has happened there is that there has been some additional signage that has been placed, but that doesn’t take away the fact that there was already extensive signage that existed.


LORD MAYOR: In the case, Madam Chairman—and I might say, yes, the signs are a lot more extensive today than what they ever were historically—but that said, Madam Chairman, why at the end of the day Council did not proceed in terms of this court case was that it had to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Our lawyers, at the end of the day, felt that there was an issue about proof beyond reasonable doubt in that particular case.

Why? Because, Madam Chairman, there are a number of flip signs that are in that sporting precinct. We could not prove, at the end of the day, in this case that the signs had been appropriately put in place. A human error had occurred, Madam Chairman, in relation to the signs. So it was the fact that it could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt in this instance was why that case was not pursued.

But those arrangements equally have been in place for a long time. All sporting areas in this city have arrangements in place in terms of traffic precincts. They have those arrangements in place for very good reason. That is, to protect the amenity of local residents, Madam Chairman. Again there is a lot of vying for kerbside space, so we’re caught between: do you allow a free for all in those areas or do you have a regulated situation?

Back in the days when it was Lang Park, it was a free for all, and you could just park the streets out, and we did; people did, Madam Chairman. I used to go to the footy quite a bit, and people just parked all the streets out. Now, the residents, rightly so, got jack of it, and so put pressure on this Council in many years gone by to put in regulated signage, so that happened.

So that’s the reason behind the outcome of this case. But, Madam Chairman, does additional signage put at risk anything? No, it does not. The signs that were


- 13 -

there had absolute integrity, but in the case where human error does occur, then that was the result of this case.


Councillor SIMMONDS.

Question 7

Councillor SIMMONDS: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. My question is to the Chairman of the City Planning Committee, Councillor BOURKE. This Administration is committed to protecting the character and heritage value of our city, despite a select few putting Brisbane’s heritage under threat. Could you please outline the measures this Council is taking to preserve character and heritage buildings in Brisbane, and what can be done to pull rogue certifiers into line?

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor SIMMONDS for his question. As he knows, this Administration is the best friend that character and heritage houses have in this city, and have ever had in this city, Madam Chairman, because it’s this Administration that’s put in place stronger penalties as well as more protection across greater parts of the city to protect our character and heritage fabric. They are part of the city’s landscape, and rightly so, Madam Chairman. This Administration continues to work to protect them and preserve them for future generations to enjoy.

But, Madam Chairman, some actions by some private certifiers, as well as baffling inaction by the State Labor Government, continue to put these homes at risk. Mr Gerhardt, who is a private certifier—and I know the LORD MAYOR and Councillor SIMMONDS have spoken previously in the Council Chamber about this individual—continues to have his State Government Queensland Building and Construction Commission licence valid. What this means, Madam Chairman, is that with a number of adverse findings against him, he is still legally able to practise and provide building certification for the removal and demolition of pre-1946 homes.

Madam Chairman, it’s baffling that the State Labor Government has not taken action to resolve this. This is nothing new. We have actually been, for the last two years, writing and pursuing the State Government to try to take action to strengthen the protection for pre-1946 homes in this city. We’ve written to the Deputy Premier. We’ve written to Minister de Brenni; we’ve written to the Commissioner of the QBCC (Queensland Building and Construction Commission); we’ve written to senior public servants about the need to change the legislation with regards to protecting pre-1946 homes.

We’ve dragged the State Government kicking and screaming to increase the penalties. But what they have not done, Madam Chairman, is change the relevant provisions inside the act to strengthen the provisions. As it currently stands, Madam Chairman, section 86(1) of the Building Act provides a private certifier with five business days to provide local governments with a copy of applications and approvals for demolitions.

What this means, Madam Chairman, is that Council does not find out about a demolition or a removal until after it has happened—until after it has happened, Madam Chairman. So this Council does not get the opportunity or the chance to scrutinise that particular application or to seek the ability to have an injunction about the removal of that property.

Council had, through those various streams of communication that I outlined before, proposed to the State Government that this section of the Act should be amended to provide Council with at least five days prior notice to certify works being undertaken, allowing us as a Council to seek stop-work notices through the courts if it’s apparent that any certifier was going to ignore Council’s direction.

For some reason, Madam Chairman, the State Government has chosen to sit on its hands on these provisions. We’ve written to the State Government requesting that all matters relating to Mr Gerhardt and the demolition of pre-1946 houses be moved away from the Building and Development Disputes Resolution


- 14 -

Committee as it is Council’s belief that all of these matters need to be heard in the Planning and Environment Court.

Madam Chairman, I don’t understand why the State Labor Government has not made these changes. They are needed so that we can continue to protect and preserve the very character and the very heritage that this Administration knows from our recent Plan your Brisbane and Brisbane’s Future Blueprint exercise the residents of Brisbane want to see protected and preserved.

But, Madam Chairman, it’s no surprise, because we know what the Labor Councillors in this place think of character and heritage, Madam Chairman. We only have to go down to Wynnum to the Tower House down in Kingsley Terrace, Madam Chairman, down in Wynnum, and Councillor STRUNK thought I was going down one path there, Madam Chairman, but no, here I am, I’ve got another one for you, Councillor STRUNK. So, Tower House, down in Kingsley Terrace, where the Leader of the Opposition at first in the media said that he wanted to keep the building, but then, Madam Chairman, he had this miraculous back-flip where he said, no, the building is okay to go. Then, Madam Chairman, he had a miraculous back-flip where he said, actually, you just decide, Council.

So the Labor Party cannot even keep a position when it comes to heritage and character consistently in this place, let alone—and just for you, Councillor STRUNK—when we know the Leader of the Opposition is the only person in this place who has knocked down a character house. It is only the Labor Party through their City Plan 2000 that didn’t apply demolition control precincts across all of the zones in the city, Madam Chairman. It’s the Australian Labor Party, through the Lutwyche neighbourhood plan, that took out 600 character houses out of the Demolition control precinct, Madam Chairman. This is the record of the Australian Labor Party when it comes to protecting and preserving heritage or character in this city.

On the other hand, Madam Chairman, this Administration—

Chairman: Councillor BOURKE, your time has expired.

Further questions?

Councillor CUMMING.

Question 8

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. On 15 May, in answer to my question regarding the Engine Room Cafe, you stated: ‘The Uniting Hands Foundation Australia has indicated that they are committed to contribute 10% of the profit post-operations to the charity, and it will contribute that in July 2018 at the conclusion of the financial year.’

LORD MAYOR, can you please inform Councillors how much has been donated?

LORD MAYOR: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Councillor CUMMING, I can, but I just don’t have the figures with me. Again, I’m very, very happy to provide that during the course of this meeting, but I can tell you, yes, there have been contributions made to organisations—from memory, one was the 139 Club, I think. Again, rather than put my foot in it now, Madam Chairman, if I could I will absolutely, during this meeting, make a statement giving Councillor CUMMING the details to that question.


Councillor ALLAN.

Question 9

Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My question is to the Chair of the Finance and Economic Development Committee, Councillor ADAMS. Council’s small business forums continue to be a fantastic resource for new and prospective businesses in our city. Can you update the Chamber on the growth of these forums, and how they assist with building our economy and creating new jobs?


- 15 -

Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Councillor ALLAN, for the question, because we’re very excited about our new series of small business forums that have started in the new financial year. The first one was at Albion on Wednesday 1 August. It was an absolutely fantastic turnout there. It was a smaller room, but I think we had nearly 150 people there, and a waiting list to get in as well.

It’s just one of the ways that we are totally committed to building our local economy and creating new jobs. The way we’re doing it, particularly with our small forums, is making sure we’re supporting them with resources and the ability to start, run and grow their businesses. This, for our small and medium enterprises, is our focus, and we know that this is 90% of the businesses within Brisbane.

The LORD MAYOR began the small business forums in 2012, running them across the suburbs in Brisbane, basically in a direct response to business contacting Council after the 2011 floods saying they needed more access to Council resources; they would love a forum to access other businesses easier so they could learn from each other. What we’ve done with these forums, as they’ve grown over the last five to six years—and they have grown in their format as well—we keep consulting with the businesses on what they want to see and the opportunities they have to network not just with us but with each other at these forums as well.

We have Council officers there from a range of different aspects, providing information and resources relevant to running a business, whether that is running the business in Brisbane with nothing to do with Council or if they’re wanting to do business with Council as well. There is an opportunity to network early in the evening, and we hear from guest speakers throughout the evening. So we’ve gotten to a position where we have people that are following the business forums around. So it may not just be the business forum in their local area, but they are following them around to hear from the guest speakers, to hear from our Small Business Liaison Officer or our Chief Digital Officer on ways to make sure they can engage with digital platforms better.

Since 2012 we’ve had more than 45 business forums that have been held with more than 3,700 attendees. In the last financial year alone we’ve had 870 people attend eight forums across Brisbane. So we’re always looking for better ways to improve the forums. We’ve got a lucky door prize now for those who fill out the evaluation forms online to encourage them to give us the feedback, so we can make it more tailored for them as well. Prizes have included things like an hour with our Chief Digital Officers to up-skill themselves as well.

The Chamber of Commerce have been at the table with us, too, since 2015, and we’ve made sure that they’ve had the opportunity to have their representatives there as well as Regional Development Australia. We’ve also changed the format to allow for more question and answer time for our Chief Digital Officer, our guest speakers and the LORD MAYOR, as well, and of course Teri Cooper started visiting us when she joined Council in 2017 as the Small Business Liaison Officer. Without fail, at every forum and here again today, I will hear the praises for Teri for the small business on how beneficial she has been in making sure that we’re connecting with those businesses one on one to see how we can help them to start, run and grow as well.

Looking forward to working with Teri in the future with the additional money for a support officer to work alongside here, because we’re getting so busy and so much contact now, she needs that extra support. So that will be another person out there on the ground moving between our suburban shopping precincts and assisting our local economies where they need it and how they need it as well.

This year we’ve also started to include some reusable bags with information about our resources. There is so much to take in on the night, we need some of those people to take the information away and digest it over the next week or so, so they really know how they can access Council or how we may be able to help them. We’re constantly listening to feedback and adapting to make sure they are current and up to date, and what the business industry is looking for as well.


- 16 -

We are making sure that we are providing businesses with all the resources that they can get from Council and others to start, run and grow a successful business here in Brisbane. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Chairman: That ends Question Time.

LORD MAYOR, Establishment and Coordination Committee, 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 6 August 2018, be adopted.

Chairman: LORD MAYOR.

LORD MAYOR: Thanks, Madam Chairman, just before coming to the report, I want to come back to that question about the advertisement in the newspaper. Now, Madam Chairman, I don’t resile from any of the comments that I made, but I do love the way Councillor CUMMING can’t wait to get on Twitter land, Madam Chairman. He says here in his tweet: ‘First Lord Mayor Quirk politicised Council ads; now he’s advertising for spin doctors to provide politically aware comms at ratepayers’ cost. It’s got to stop’, he says.

Okay. Now, I don’t resile from anything that I said, but I do want to draw Councillor CUMMING’s attention to an ad recently posted by the Queensland Government, and it’s for a temporary principal engineer, civil, and it’s called ‘WHUP’, or in Councillor CUMMING’s case, it will soon be known as ‘whupsie’. So, Department of Transport and Main Roads.

Let me just read you a part of the description. It says here: ‘Identify and manage networks and alliances for all stakeholders and manage the expectations and issues of all parties, including identifying possible political and high-risk matters to ensure—


LORD MAYOR: I’ll say it again: ‘including identifying possible political high-risk—


LORD MAYOR: Yes, you can squawk now, but the reality is, Madam Chairman, Councillor CUMMING, you need to get your little Twitter system out again and you need to say: ‘Premier, it’s got to stop.’ That will do. You wouldn’t want to be inconsistent in this place, Madam Chairman. That will do. Those simple words: ‘Premier, it’s got to stop.’ So, you know, give me a break, Madam Chairman. The hypocrisy from the Opposition in this place never ever, ever ceases.

Madam Chairman, I do want to come back to Councillor CUMMING’s question; thank you for that. I want to come back to Councillor CUMMING’s question in relation to the final question he asked me, the Engine Room. Madam Chairman, I can advise him, the following charities received funding. It was a total of $7,659.50 that was dispersed. I was incorrect when I mentioned 139 Club. It was Open Doors Youth Service that were provided with funding; Third Space were provided with funding; and Brisbane Youth Service were provided with funding. Each of those organisations received a total of $2,553.17.

Madam Chairman, I do want to comment on just a few events that happened between last Tuesday and this. I just congratulate the Korean Society for their Korean Culture Festival held in King George Square on the weekend. Minister Stirling Hinchliffe was in attendance, as was Councillor Steven HUANG and Member Duncan Pegg was also there. We had a wonderful array of stall holders


- 17 -

and a great entertainment program throughout the day. So I just congratulate the Korean Society of Queensland.

The Lady Mayoress and I also had the opportunity during the week to present some additional funds towards the Next Gen Athletics program. This came from the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Trust which the Lady Mayoress Anne chairs. A number of athletes with mental disabilities were recipients of funds. These people range from tennis players to cricket players to swimmers to tenpin bowlers. Athletes, Madam Chairman, from a range of sports and we just congratulate them on their being the very best that they can be in their sporting field. There will be the INAS Games held next year in our city, and we very much look forward to a lot of those sportspeople competing in that international event in our city, the INAS Global Games.

On Saturday night, I had the opportunity to attend the Wynnum Central Beach Volleyball beach party. This was an event which was in the Wynnum Wading Pool. It gets transformed through some Council assistance that’s provided each year to make it a reusable space in the winter months. A number of beach volleyball courts are located there. The funds raised on Saturday night went to the Live Out Loud Foundation. This is the foundation established by Olympian volleyballer Natalie Cook, and it’s to tackle childhood obesity. So it was good to be able to be down there with that group. There’s a number of volleyball events held there over the coming weeks, including a pro-am competition known as the Battle of Waterloo.

I would move to the report now. Item A, this package of amendments proposes a number of zoning changes which are a result of both completed development and commenced development approvals. In some instances these developments have been approved through the Planning and Environment Court. A large majority of the zoning changes go from emerging community zoned land to low density residential.

These zoning changes are another reflection of Council’s delivery on Brisbane’s Future Blueprint. We are ensuring that suburban development fits within the surrounds by rezoning emerging community land to low density residential, and this is action item 2 out of the principle Protect the Brisbane backyard and our unique character.

At that time, 3.12pm, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Ryan MURPHY, assumed the Chair.

Item B is the Dutton Park—Fairfield neighbourhood plan. Council has been working on the plan now since 2015. The plan aims to facilitate economic growth while protecting the area’s character and heritage. This includes adding 10 new houses to the pre-1911 building overlay. Following a number of engagement activities and State interest checks, the Minister approved for Council to adopt the plan on 27 April 2018.

This approval, Mr Deputy Chairman, to adopt the plan was contingent on a number of conditions: firstly, the removal of the Dutton Park station precinct. The precinct, a purpose statement and two related sub-precincts were removed. Consequently the Dutton Park Station precinct was replaced with an indicative precinct which is subject to further detailed planning and community consultation.

Secondly, one subject precinct zoned mixed use was changed to neighbourhood centre, and thirdly, the proposed changes to building heights in the north and south sub-precincts were also removed. Mr Deputy Chairman, the plan will become effective on 14 September this year. Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman.

Deputy Chairman: Further speakers?

Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman. I’ll be brief. In relation to E&C, item A, Madam Chair—sorry, Mr Deputy Chair—it’s been such a long time since there’s been a Deputy that was a male.


- 18 -

In relation to item A, we could take this Administration at their word and accept that only minor amendments were involved, but we’ve experienced a long history of being misled or deceived, such that we do not trust the Administration. In the circumstances, we’ll be abstaining on item A.

Madam—sorry, Mr Deputy Chair, in relation to item B, we’ll also be abstaining. Again, we don’t trust the Administration. The other thing is, this neighbourhood plan has a long history, and the Administration was forced by what I describe as people power to protect tin and timber close to the Dutton Park railway station.

However, they’ve failed to provide adequate infrastructure for the increased density that is also included in the plan, so we’re concerned that there’s a need for more and bigger parks for the increased population, more bikeways, pathways and the like, and there’s nothing in Council’s future promises that indicates that they will be provided, Madam Chair.

So this is a typical Quirk LNP neighbourhood plan which dumps extra density into the area, but provides no more facilities for people to recreate or play sport. I think this is becoming a real concern, Madam Chairman. We’ve got concerns in society about increasing problems with obesity, and I just think this is part of the problem: in Brisbane we’re not providing enough facilities for people to recreate.

Also, my understanding is there have been no changes since the last version of this neighbourhood plan, despite opposition from local residents and the local Councillors who represent the area, and we don’t think that’s good enough either.


Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Excellent, I rise to speak on item B.

Seriatim - Clause BCouncillor Nicole JOHNSTON requested that Clause B, DUTTON PARK—FAIRFIELD NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.

Firstly, can I place on the record my concern about this neighbourhood plan and indicate that I will not be supporting it. To start, I would like to remind this Council that this is not a neighbourhood plan. This is a political creation of the LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK, a neighbourhood plan carved out of City Plan for an area that was never envisaged to have a neighbourhood plan.

The Moorooka—Stephens neighbourhood plan was forced on us in City Plan 2014, joining together a huge area in Councillor GRIFFITHS’ ward and my ward. After this, in February 2015, so just seven months after he passed City Plan, the LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK, then excised a significant area of the Moorooka—Stephens neighbourhood plan and whacked it into the Dutton Park—Fairfield neighbourhood plan, a plan never envisaged in City Plan 2014.

It does not reflect communities of interest, but divides them. For example, this plan includes parts of Annerley and parts of Yeronga, as well as, in my ward, Fairfield. Nor is it a neighbourhood plan because it is effectively a district plan. We’ve seen these beautiful boutique little neighbourhood plans come through for the LNP areas, with just parts of suburbs. This covers a huge area with some 24,000 households. It is not a neighbourhood plan; it is a district plan.

The consultation has been just genuinely appalling. The Administration has set up meetings that divide residents, that don’t allow them to speak in groups, that really didn’t allow them to sit down and have in-depth discussions about specific issues. Particularly with the community planning reference team, which I’ll get to in a moment, those residents went in in good faith to contribute to this process. They have been ignored, and I’ll come to that in just a moment.

So there’s been limited engagement with the Community Planning Team (CPT), and many of them are very disheartened by the process. There have only been


- 19 -

minor changes, and some of those haven’t even been implemented, so to my knowledge—and I’m sure if I’m wrong the LORD MAYOR will correct me—for example, one of the things that I’ve asked for was a house in Cornwall Street that the resident said was more than 100 years old, we wanted it included in the pre-1911 plan. As far as I know, this plan says that will happen, but I don’t believe it has actually been done through the overlay. So three years on, after a resident asked for something to be done, I don’t believe it actually has been.

Residents clearly in my area wanted to protect their tin and timber pre-1946 homes and, unfortunately, that will not happen because of the way in which the LORD MAYOR has applied the CR2 classification—Character residential 2, which allows backyards to be built full of units, including right up to and touching the character house, which in my ward they can be 100 or 120 years old. This is happening all over my ward. It is a terrible, terrible planning solution, particularly when the LORD MAYOR has said just weeks ago that his whole Plan your Brisbane campaign is about protecting our backyards.

The worst Administration that has happened in this city—I don’t know what Labor did 30 years ago, but the people who are destroying our backyards in character areas right now, and have been for years, is this Administration, the LNP Administration, the LORD MAYOR.

The LGIP (local government infrastructure plan)—people in my area were concerned about the lack of infrastructure and services. It came through overwhelmingly, particularly safe crossing points across Fairfield Road. Do you know what the Council officers actively told my residents—and it’s in the plan? It’s okay, there’s an LGIP coming. You’ll get your infrastructure in the LGIP. Do you know what is in the LGIP for people who live in this neighbourhood plan area? One thousand projects, $2 billion in the LGIP, zero, nothing, not a thing. Nothing for the next 10 years for Fairfield or this part of Annerley and Yeronga. Nothing. Nothing.

It is obscene that this Administration has been telling residents that that’s all right, their infrastructure needs will be addressed in the LGIP. Then the LORD MAYOR stands up and says: oh, it’s not only the LGIP, it’s also other methods, like the budget. Well, we all know how that goes.

So what’s in this plan? Really nothing. It says it’s going to protect character, but it will fail to do so. What it does say it’s going to do is facilitate growth, facilitate higher density. It says it will create a vibrant pedestrian area in Stanley Street and Annerley Road and, as I said, promote increased density. There is not a single purpose in this plan that applies to residents in my area. There is not a single objective in this plan that applies to residents in my area.

I am appalled at what the Administration has done. I do not support this neighbourhood plan. The lack of an enhancement plan or LGIP planning to support it is a fundamental failing of the plan. It was overwhelmingly clear from community feedback and the CPT that residents wanted improvements to local infrastructure and services to create a vibrant, connected and accessible community. This Administration has failed to do so. It is doing so in other plans, all around the city, including Hemmant, Coorparoo, The Gap, Ferny Grove, Upper Kedron, Newstead, Spring Hill and others.

This area has been singled out and treated differently. There is no provision being made for future infrastructure, including bikeways, parks, footpaths and many other community infrastructure upgrades that residents genuinely have spoken to their Council about. So I’m going to give you some of their words, because I want to put them on the record. I just want to say to my residents: I am so proud of them for speaking up, and I am sorry that the LORD MAYOR is not listening to you and this Administration is not listening to you. I know that you have done your best. I know that you have told them what you want, and they are not listening.

So here’s a resident from Fenton Street in Fairfield: ‘We, like many others, feel short-changed by the draft plan put forward by BCC because of the lack of any real substance or improvements that the plan as drafted will mean, particularly


- 20 -

for Fairfield. It appears much of the feedback provided in earlier stages has been completely ignored, and BCC are doing what they want rather than what is of real value and importance to local residents.’

Here’s another resident from Mearns Street, Fairfield: ‘Why does the Council and why does the Mayor think it is good to encourage increased population density here without doing the necessary infrastructure work to prevent flooding or handle increased traffic? Why no improvements for the next 10 years? What the heck is going on.’

Or this one, this is a resident in Yeronga: ‘The analogy I would use for development which is not supported by improvement is like me buying a 1960s VW Beetle and putting a V8 engine in it, without first upgrading the brakes, steering and suspension—a disaster in the making. I urge Council to work across parties and with the community to develop infrastructure planning which is supported and meaningful.’ Well, that hasn’t happened.

Or this one, this is my favourite one, actually. This is a Fairfield resident: ‘Is there someone in charge of design in Brisbane? If there is, could we sack them? If there isn’t, could we get someone to be?’ That’s what people think. There are 77 submissions to the draft plan. I’ve read every single one of them. There is only one from a developer, Pikos—if I’ve pronounced that correctly—that supports the neighbourhood plan. That’s it.

Now, there are a lot of groups in there that don’t support it for a whole range of reasons; some of them I don’t agree with, but this is a neighbourhood plan that is not supported by any of the submissions bar one. It’s not supported by the three local Councillors, one of whom has previously represented this area and the two local Councillors here. It’s not supported by the residents who have made submissions in their dozens and dozens, and who came to meetings and spoke up.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, your time has expired.



Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Mr Deputy Chair. I rise to speak on item B, the Dutton Park—Fairfield neighbourhood plan. Can I say that this is an utter abomination and reflects very poorly on this Administration’s approach to city planning. There are a number of serious concerns with this plan. I’ll speak primarily about the areas impacted within my ward—Woolloongabba, Dutton Park and parts of South Brisbane.

The five key issues that I have the most concern about, flagging that there are obviously many more, is the lack of meaningful consultation and the failure to seriously consider residents’ concerns; the insufficient public parks and community facilities to cater for a growing population; the utter failure to plan for major transport changes taking place within the plan area; the excessively tall and bulky built form of developments that will be allowed under this plan; and the fact that this plan will not meaningfully improve housing affordability for people on lower incomes.

As Councillor JOHNSTON has already identified, there were dozens and dozens of submissions opposed to this plan, and only one submission from a developer named Pikos who has put in a development application within the plan area in favour of the plan. But, above and beyond that, I think residents did try to have their voices heard. They signed petitions; they wrote submissions; they wrote letters to the LORD MAYOR, and the sense that I’m getting from the community is of deep disappointment and disempowerment. People feel ignored. People don’t feel heard. That’s nothing new. That’s what we see with a lot of neighbourhood plans around Brisbane, but this one, the sense of frustration and disempowerment is particularly strong.

Certainly within my ward, residents understand that some level of densification within the inner city is necessary. A lot of these people do live in flats and


- 21 -

medium density housing already. They’re not NIMBYs (not in my backyard). They’re not opposed to development altogether, but they understand that it can be done better, much better than it currently is. I think it’s to the Administration’s great shame and embarrassment that those respectful and serious and thoughtful suggestions that residents have put forward have been utterly ignored.

Residents were supportive on, for example, Annerley Road, of height limits up to six and eight storeys. That’s pretty generous from those residents to accept that, yes, some level of density is necessary; it’s an inner city area. Eight storeys make sense. But this Council Administration is instead allowing buildings of up to 20 and, in some cases, 25 storeys. Now what that significant increase to height and the significant reduction to setbacks will do will be to allow thousands of additional dwellings to be built within the northern half of this plan area for a population increase of around 5,000 residents.

Unfortunately, this particular part of Woolloongabba and South Brisbane is grossly underserved by public parks and community facilities. I think this, LORD MAYOR, should be of particular concern to you that this plan doesn’t even comply with your City Plan’s own desired standards of service. So Table 4.5.6.1.2—Desired Standards of Service, Accessibility Standards for the Public Parks Network, clearly identifies that, in general urban areas, there should be local parks within 500 metres of residents, and there should be district parks within 2 kilometres of residents in area A centres—and I believe the areas I’m talking about would be defined as area A centres. The distance to a local park is only meant to be 400 metres. But in the middle parts of Gabba Hill and the northern part of this plan, there are no local parks whatsoever—whatsoever, within 500 metres in the plan area. So you are up-zoning to 15—

Deputy Chairman: Councillor SRI, please direct your comments through the Chair.

Councillor SRI: Through you, Mr Deputy Chair, the Administration is up-zoning up to 15 and 20 storey developments, radically increasing density, when the existing infrastructure in that area doesn’t even cater for the existing population.

So thousands of additional residents, no new public parks, no new community facilities. It’s not just the distance to public parks, but it’s also the fact that this whole broader suburban area is rapidly undergoing densification, and the parks that are further away are already under increased strain.

So it’s not just about the distance to parks, but it’s about the lack of green space per person and the fact that there are no useable community facilities within the plan area, and the community facilities beyond the plan area are grossly overused already. A simple thing to do would have been to say that, okay, we’re up-zoning a lot of this area along Annerley Road, let’s acquire a site for a community hall, or a community facility, something that can be booked for meetings, for classes, for community events.

The Council has the money. The Council has a massive budget of around $3 billion a year. You spend hundreds of millions of dollars widening roads. There’s no reason that the Administration couldn’t have set aside a small amount of money to acquire land for a new community facility. There’s no reason the Administration couldn’t have set aside a small proportion of its annual budget to acquire land for a new public park. The failure to do so is not only going to hurt the residents who live there now, but it’s going to be to the detriment of the quality of life of residents for generations to come.

This was our best chance to identify and acquire land for public parks and community facilities. By up-zoning these sites, the Council will increase their land value and make it significantly harder to be able to afford land for public parks in the future. So the Council is knowingly making it harder for itself to buy land for public parks; it’s failing to include public green space and community facilities within this plan, and seems content to say to residents: yes, you’re all going to live in high-rises; you’re not going to have any backyards; you’re not going to have any private green space, oh, and also, we’re not giving you any public parks.


- 22 -

I think that is really short-sighted, and particularly in this area where there are no local parks within walking distance, and where the parks that are further afield, in the realm of a kilometre away are on the other side of busy main roads such as Annerley Road, Gladstone Road, Stanley Street, the access to public space is particularly difficult.

I also want to reiterate my concerns that, even though the Brisbane Metro is coming through is plan area, even though Cross River Rail is coming through, even though there’s a massive bikeway project coming through, this plan doesn’t plan for or accommodate those big changes satisfactorily. A simple example is that the Woolloongabba Bikeway along Stanley Street and Annerley Road is going to close off a lot of right-hand turn options.

That means access to residential side streets is going to be significantly diminished, but on those residential side streets, Council is still up-zoning for eight, 10 and 15 storey buildings. Obviously, there will be no driveway access along Annerley Road because of the bikeway, but even those side streets will be much harder to get into.

So we’ve got that development application at the moment for 52 Annerley Road where the developer has proposed hundreds of vehicle movements a day into side streets which are going to have a no right turn restriction as soon as the bikeway is installed. So the City Council is up-zoning sites for development that do not have adequate vehicle access or will not have adequate vehicle access once the Woolloongabba Bikeway project goes through. This is short-sighted, closed minded planning. I think the word ‘planning’ would be generous.

The failure to plan for those major transport changes is going to result in significantly increased traffic congestion down the track. It’s also going to diminish residents’ opportunities and ability to access public transport hubs. For example, the Metro stops and the Cross River Rail stations, that’s all well and good for commuters travelling through this area, but local residents won’t even be able to safely access those transport hubs because of the lack of spending and prioritisation for pedestrian safety and access.

I should also note that although those high frequency, high capacity services travel through the plan area, the local residents are still underserved in terms of local routes that run along Annerley Road and other key corridors. I also want to add and reiterate the fact that the bulk and height of these buildings is excessive and unnecessary. There are many ways to increase and improve density without going for 10 and 20 storey skyscrapers.

The State Government, to its credit, has done quite a bit of work in promoting and encouraging ideas of what’s called the missing middle, those medium density options that allow for sufficient green space, that allow for adequate separation between buildings but that still increase density and provide a wider range of housing options to support a wider range of demographics. We don’t just have to build more and more high rises. There are many other ways to do this, and the fact that this City Plan does not contemplate or allow or encourage that is a great shame.

Finally, I want to reiterate that increasing the supply of private dwellings in the inner city is not improving housing affordability. Since 2011, the Australian Homeless Monitor Report shows that we’ve had a 32% increase in homelessness in the inner city, that’s despite the construction of thousands of additional dwellings. So the fact that Council is approving further private dwellings does not necessarily mean that affordability is going to improve for lower income residents.

This plan is to the benefit of private developers and investors who will make millions of dollars out of this community while contributing relatively little towards the cost of infrastructure and services. Meanwhile the community, local residents and future residents are losing out big time. This plan is not in the public interest. I condemn this Council in the strongest possible terms for supporting it. I also have to add my criticism of the State Government for signing off on it. This plan should not be supported by this Chamber.


- 23 -

Deputy Chairman: Councillor SRI, your time has expired.

Further speakers.

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chair—Mr Deputy Chairman. I rise to speak on item A and item B. Just starting off with item A, so this is a minor amendment package we have before us today, package E, Mr Deputy Chairman. This is the result of a number of zoning changes, either through approvals and/or through decisions by the Planning Court, and Council is seeking today to amend the planning scheme to reflect the intended use and/or the current and existing use on these sites.

Most interestingly is the site at the Cannon Hill Golf Course which, is the Minnippi Parklands site, and we see today the amendment changes providing for the various zonings that that site will take into the future. This, of course, is a long project. It’s been around for 20 years, and today we finally start to see those zoning changes being undertaken and the development that’s already happening on the site.

But what’s interesting is that the Australian Labor Party is going to completely ignore 100,000 Brisbane residents who had their say and said to us that they want to see Emerging communities (EC) land rezoned to better suit the surrounding development around it, Madam Chairman. That’s what the Australian Labor Party is doing today by abstaining from this item, as the Leader of the Opposition said that they would be doing, Madam Chairman—Mr Deputy Chairman—that is what they will do if they vote.

So I don’t know how Councillor CUMMING is going to go down to his residents down there at Hargreaves Road, Mr Deputy Chairman, how is he going to go down to those residents in Hargreaves Road and tell them that he doesn’t support the EC land around Clifford Street and Compass Close and Hargreaves Road, Sanctuary Street, Schooner Circuit from being rezoned from emerging communities, which gives the owner much more—

Councillor CUMMING: Point of order, Madam Chair.

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

Councillor CUMMING: Can Councillor BOURKE stop talking about—

Deputy Chairman: Councillor CUMMING, wait to be called.

Would you care to make your point of order?

Councillor CUMMING: Not really. I was just going to say they’re all in Doboy Ward. They’re all in Doboy Ward—

Deputy Chairman: That is not a point of order, Councillor CUMMING, resume your seat.

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chairman. I’m happy to take that from Councillor CUMMING. That’s fine, but I’ve got more examples anyway, so we’ll go to Englefield Road in Oxley. Now, that’s not in my ward; that is definitely in the Moorooka Ward, so how is Councillor GRIFFITHS going to explain to the residents down there that he doesn’t support the land down there being rezoned to low density residential?

How is he going to go to these people, look them straight in the face and say: I don’t think that your property should be zoned accordingly with what’s around it to the built form, which is clearly what through the Plan your Brisbane exercise said to us, Mr Deputy Chairman, as a Council that that is what the residents wanted to see.

Of course, Mr Deputy Chairman, we’ve got to facilitate the growth that is coming to our city, and Emerging communities does provide for a range of different uses. But clearly, and the exercise that was undertaken to deliver Brisbane’s Future Blueprint said that the residents of Brisbane want to see Emerging communities land rezoned to suit the development that is around those


- 24 -

sites. There’s a separate recommendation around townhouses, Councillor CUMMING, to take your interjection. There is a separate recommendation around townhouses, but there’s also a recommendation around Emerging communities land.

Turning to item B, Mr Deputy Chairman, interesting arguments and thoughts put forward. We can’t have infill development into people’s backyards by one Councillor; we can’t have high rise development, Mr Deputy Chair, so where do the Greens, the Independents and the Australian Labor Party propose that the growth targets and the number of people that the State Government is saying are moving to the city goes?

You can’t have infill development; you can’t have high rise buildings co-located with high frequency public transport, where are you going to put the people that are coming, because you can’t, as the Australian Labor Party and the Greens have done, stick your head in the sand and just pretend that it will go away. You actually have to plan for the growth that is occurring in our city, and this Administration does that with a long track record of delivering neighbourhood plans to help facilitate that growth, Mr Deputy Chairman, because we know the State Government has provided those targets. The 368,000 people that are coming, over 188,000 dwellings that we need to accommodate between now and 2041.

It was also interesting that, having debated this item here back last year, the only changes we have before us today are changes that were Ministerial conditions, and none of the speakers have actually spoken about the Ministerial conditions. None of the speakers have actually spoken about the Ministerial conditions. What we did have was a cobbled together argument, Mr Deputy Chairman, again from those opposite about what they believe to be the flaws in the award-winning neighbourhood planning process.

We heard about how there hasn’t been any consultation. So, Mr Deputy Chairman, at the risk of repeating what Councillor SIMMONDS may have said in the debate last year, from 6 March to 28 August 2015, there was an online survey; there were information kiosks run on 26 March, 29 March, 21 May, 22 May, 25 June, 28 June, 23 July in 2015; there were Talk to the Planner sessions on 11 May and 23 May in 2015; there were CTPs on 22 April, 20 May, 17 June, 22 July in 2015; there was a Fairfield CTP on 29 April, 27 May, 25 June, 29 July in 2015; there was a local business CTP on 23 April, 20 July 2015; there was a draft neighbourhood plan strategy community engagement process that was undertaken for feedback on the draft neighbourhood plan from 30 October to 11 December 2015; there was a Talk to the Planner session on 10 November 2015; there was also a Talk to the Planner session on 25 November 2015.

There was also then the statutory consultation period between 27 January and 13 July 2017, and then Talk to the Planner sessions on 16 February and 22 February 2017. That’s quite a comprehensive, detailed community engagement; much more detailed and much deeper community engagement than the State Government does when they do, say, I don’t know, a PDA (priority development area) or when they do a Ministerial designation for a school site or for a new ballet complex where they don’t do any consultation or engagement—zero, zip, zilch.

Madam Chairman—Mr Deputy Chairman, this Administration has gone out and engaged with the community. We heard from speakers opposite that there wasn’t the infrastructure. Well, Cross River Rail, three Metro stations, a fourth Metro station just outside the plan boundary—

Councillor SRI: Point of order, Mr Deputy Chair.


Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Will Councillor BOURKE take a question?

Councillor BOURKE: I’m trying to get through my material, sorry.


- 25 -

Deputy Chairman: No, Councillor SRI.

Councillor BOURKE: As I was saying, so bikeways—we heard from Councillor SRI there’s all this infrastructure coming, and we heard from Councillor CUMMING that there’s no infrastructure. Well, you can’t have it both ways. We all know that there is a significant amount of infrastructure being delivered by this Administration and through the Cross River Rail, Mr Deputy Chairman, as well as projects that aren’t in the LGIP. There are other projects that are happening. We spoke about one before, the separated bikeway lanes on Annerley Road.



Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Will Councillor BOURKE take a question about the lack of public parks within the northern part of the plan area?

Deputy Chairman: That’s a no, Councillor SRI.

Councillor BOURKE: As I was saying, there is infrastructure being delivered into this part of the city to support the growth and density that is occurring in this part of the city.

So, as I said, there are three Ministerial conditions that have been put on place. So Ministerial condition number one that came back as part of the feedback for this plan—



Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Will Councillor BOURKE take a question about the lack of community facilities within the northern part of the plan area?

Deputy Chairman: No. Look, Councillor SRI, your repeated questions of Councillor BOURKE I consider to be a device that you are using to create disorderly conduct in the meeting, and I will not allow it. That will be the last one that you will raise while Councillor BOURKE is speaking.

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks for your protection, Mr Deputy Chairman. But there is an extra 3,000 extra square metres of community zoned space if Councillor SRI had bothered to read the plan.

So, Mr Deputy Chairman, Ministerial condition number one is the removal of the Dutton Park station precinct. The precinct purpose statement and the two related sub-precincts were also removed. Consequently, the Dutton Park station precinct was replaced with an indicative precinct which is subject to further detailed planning and community consultation. I look forward to as detailed and as engaging community consultation undertaken by the State Government around those precincts when they, I don’t know, declare a PDA for Cross River Rail at that site, Mr Deputy Chairman.

Ministerial condition number two is a sub-precinct zone for mixed use which was changed to neighbourhood centre. Ministerial condition number three was the proposed changes to building heights in the north and south sub-precincts. Mr Deputy Chair, as I said just before, there is actually an extra 3,000 square metres of community facilities zoned land as part of this neighbourhood plan, and I can assure Councillor JOHNSTON that 47 Cornwall Street, which I believe is the property that was subject to your submission, is listed in this plan as a pre-1911 for protection.

There’s also 10 new buildings that are being listed as part of the pre-1911 overlay. Of course, there was no pre-1911 overlay in the bad, terrible days of planning in this city under the Australian Labor Party, Mr Deputy Chairman, because there is no better friend of character and heritage in this city than this Administration, because not only did they take buildings out of the traditional


- 26 -

building overlay, not only did they remove pre-1946 or character houses themselves, Mr Deputy Chairman, they didn’t try to protect the ones that they clearly had identified. Councillor Hinchliffe, when he was Planning Chair in this place, took 600 properties out of the building character overlay in one neighbourhood plan.

In this neighbourhood plan, we’re actually putting 575 properties into the traditional building character areas, Mr Deputy Chairman—

Deputy Chairman: Councillor BOURKE, your time has expired.

Further debate?

Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks, Mr Deputy Chair. I rise to talk on item B here before us today. We heard Councillor BOURKE talk a lot about the Brisbane’s Future Blueprint and just a couple of months ago, the LORD MAYOR announced with great fanfare the outcome of the Plan your Brisbane exercise which was the Brisbane’s Future Blueprint, and he said he was saving Brisbane’s backyard, that he was going to save and protect Brisbane’s character housing.

But what we all know is that he is saying, when he says these things, that he is going to protect Brisbane’s backyard from himself. He is going to protect the character of Brisbane from the destructive City Plan 2014, his signature City Plan that he brought into this place. This is more spin than substance when he gets up out in the public or in this place and says he’s the best friend of the backyard in Brisbane or of character housing in Brisbane, or that he’s going to provide more open space.

As we hear, there’s going to be 5,000 extra people living in this area, and Councillor BOURKE is crowing about 3,000 square metres of open space that 5,000 extra people are supposed to use. Is this some sort of joke? I mean, this is ridiculous. All the submissions that were received, and the small amount in the grand scheme of things really, because people are well and truly fed up with this Administration ignoring them. We know that this neighbourhood plan was brought into this place; it was fast-tracked by this LORD MAYOR.

In his own words on 22 July 2014, the reason for this neighbourhood plan was not about the future development in that growth area or those suburbs; he said: ‘Through this infrastructure project, the BAT (bus and train tunnel) tunnel’—which is dead, buried and cremated, Mr Deputy Chair, ‘it will generate a bit of market interest, so we need to get out there and get on top of this now.’

So this was never a neighbourhood plan that was there to cater for the needs of this community, this enormous community, this diverse community.

So what we are seeing is the destruction of Brisbane’s backyard written into this neighbourhood plan. I think the people of Brisbane can rightly now realise that the LORD MAYOR’s commitment during his announcement of Brisbane’s Future Blueprint was all spin—it was all spin. It was for political purposes. He knew he was getting on the nose with people, and he had to come up with something. But when the ink hits the paper in these neighbourhood plans, what we’re seeing is they talk about it in here, but they don’t put it into action. Nothing actually changes. Nothing actually changes.

Councillor BOURKE talked about the award-winning neighbourhood planning process. They won an award for a concept of a neighbourhood planning process in 2004. I think if you asked communities that have been inflicted the damage by this LORD MAYOR and his predecessor in this place through various neighbourhood plans, I think they would give many of these plans, and clearly the communities that are going to be affected by this neighbourhood plan, a big fat F.

This is not a neighbourhood plan that caters for this community’s growth. We need density in our city; we need infill development, so where we are having it and where it is appropriate, we need to provide that infrastructure. Councillor BOURKE said: oh, it’s okay, we’re building new—what did he say—


- 27 -

three Metro stations. They’re already there. They’re already there. They’re busway stations. The Metro is the busway. You can’t say we’re providing extra public transport infrastructure when you talk about the Metro. They’re already there.

Submission after submission talks about the provision of active and public transport infrastructure and the lack thereof. Here’s a submission from a member of the Community Planning Team that was engaged throughout this process but clearly ignored. Before I get to that, Councillor BOURKE talks about consultation. Consultation—this hasn’t been consultation. Consultation is when you listen to the feedback of people and then you act on it, and you actually make changes. What they have done is just paid lip service to this four-year long process of asking people to put their futures on the line in this community they live in, and then ignore them in the outcome.

This submitter said: ‘I am disappointed that the draft neighbourhood plan does not deliver improvements in infrastructure that would support walking and cycling in our local community’. These are people who were engaged throughout that process in the Community Planning Team, and they identify at the start of the process that they needed more active and public transport infrastructure, and they get to the end and see what the neighbourhood plan is proposing to invest in their community and to change in their community, and they are deeply, deeply disappointed, Mr Deputy Chair.

This is a flawed neighbourhood plan and we will not be supporting it, and I ask that this item be taken seriatim for voting purposes.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY, it’s already being taken seriatim.

Further speakers?

No further speakers?

LORD MAYOR, would you like to sum up?

LORD MAYOR: Madam Chair—Mr Acting Chairman, sorry—you’re going to get a complex soon! Mr Acting Chairman, I just very, very briefly wanted to add this little bit of information to the debate, and that is to say that it was only about a week ago in this place, in response to Councillor JOHNSTON, that we indicated that we had purchased two blocks of land in Home Street, Fairfield, and that is for the purposes of the development of further parkland in Fairfield.

Madam Chairman, is that in Local Government Infrastructure Plan? No, it is not. As I have said—


LORD MAYOR: As I have said—as I have said, Mr Acting Chairman, once somebody’s quiet, Madam Chairman—Mr Acting Chairman, as I’ve always said, there is a lot of work that we do which are not in the infrastructure plan. Once work is included in the Local Government Infrastructure Plan, we are required by law to absolutely construct that, but there are many other things which we do—pieces of infrastructure on a range of fronts that are included in areas that are not necessarily in the infrastructure plan, and that will continue to be the case. Each budget will see works that aren’t necessarily listed but will be undertaken on top of those matters and those assets that are included in the plan.

Deputy Chairman: I will put the motion for 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.

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


- 28 -

The voting was as follows:

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

ABSTENTIONS: 6 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Kara COOK, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK and Nicole JOHNSTON.

NOES: 1 - Councillor Jonathan SRI.

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 Establishment and Coordination Committee 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, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

NOES: 7 - 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 MINOR AMENDMENT TO BRISBANE CITY PLAN 2014 – MINOR PACKAGE E 152/160/1218/151

67/2018-191. The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the information below.

2. Council is committed to facilitating economic growth and maintaining prosperity in Brisbane through sustainable development regulated by Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan). This requires a robust and resilient City Plan that reflects changes over time in line with community and industry expectations. Minor amendments (the proposed amendment) are proposed to City Plan, to maintain its effectiveness and currency.


- 29 -

3. The proposed amendment will achieve the following outcomes.- Zoning changes to reflect current development approvals, including Consent Orders of the

Planning and Environment Court.- Supporting updates to overlay maps to reflect zoning changes.

4. The schedule of proposed amendments is set out in Attachment B (submitted on file). The proposed amendments are set out in Attachment C (submitted on file).

5. The process for amending City Plan is set out in the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules, made under section 17 of the Planning Act 2016.

6. Should Council resolve to approve the proposed amendment, it is proposed that the amended City Plan will take effect from 14 September 2018.

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

8. RECOMMENDATION:

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

Attachment ADraft Resolution

DRAFT RESOLUTION TO DECIDE TO MAKE A MINOR AMENDMENT TO BRISBANE CITY PLAN 2014

As Council:

(i) pursuant to section 5.1 of Part 2 of Chapter 2 of the Minister’s Guidelines and Rules (the Guideline) made under the Planning Act 2016, decides to make a minor amendment to Brisbane City Plan 2014 (City Plan)

(ii) pursuant to section 5.2 of Part 2 of Chapter 2 of the Guideline, has prepared the proposed minor amendment, as set out in Attachment C (the proposed amendment) (submitted on file),

then Council:

(i) pursuant to section 6.1 of Part 2 of Chapter 2 of the Guideline, adopts the proposed amendment

(ii) directs that notice of the adoption of the proposed amendment be given in accordance with section 6.2 and section 6.3 of Part 2 of Chapter 2, and Schedule 5 of the Guideline.

ADOPTED

B DUTTON PARK—FAIRFIELD NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN152/160/516/399

68/2018-199. The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability, provided the information below.

10. At its meeting of 10 February 2015, Council resolved to amend Brisbane City Plan 2014 (the planning scheme) to include the Dutton Park—Fairfield neighbourhood plan and to make consequential amendments (the proposed amendment).

11. At its meeting of 14 June 2016, Council, having received confirmation of State interests on 4 August 2015 from the then Deputy Premier, Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, and Minister for Trade, resolved to send the proposed amendment to


- 30 -

the Minister and request a State interest review and agreement to publicly consult on the proposed amendment.

12. Following the State interest review, the then Deputy Premier, Minister for Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning and Minister for Trade and Investment, advised by letter dated 20 November 2016 that public consultation could proceed. Public consultation on the proposed amendment was carried out from 27 January 2017 to 13 March 2017, in accordance with the requirements of Statutory guideline 01/16 Making and amending local planning instruments (the Guideline). At its meeting of 13 June 2017, Council resolved to modify the proposed amendment in response to submissions received, and to refer it to the then Deputy Premier, Minister for Transport and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, seeking approval to adopt the proposed amendment.

13. By letter dated 27 April 2018 (Attachment B, submitted on file), the Minister for State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning (the Minister) advised Council that the proposed amendment could be adopted, subject to the conditions set out in Attachment B (Minister’s Conditions) (submitted on file). The proposed amendment to be adopted, which incorporates the Minister’s Conditions, is set out in Attachment C (submitted on file).

14. In accordance with transitional provisions under section 287 of the Planning Act 2016, which commenced on 3 July 2017, the adoption of the proposed amendment shall occur under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and the Guideline, as the process for making the proposed amendment had started under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

15. Changes to align the proposed amendment with the Planning Act 2016 have been made and the Minister has confirmed (Attachment B, submitted on file), in accordance with section 287, that the proposed amendment, as aligned, is in a form consistent with the Planning Act 2016.

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

17. RECOMMENDATION:

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

Attachment ADraft Resolution

DRAFT RESOLUTION TO AMEND BRISBANE CITY PLAN 2014 TO INCLUDE THE DUTTON PARK—FAIRFIELD NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

As Council:

(i) at its meeting on 10 February 2015, resolved pursuant to the Statutory guideline 01/16 Making and amending local planning instruments (the Guideline) to proceed with the proposed amendment to Brisbane City Plan 2014 (the planning scheme) to include the Dutton Park—Fairfield neighbourhood plan and to make consequential amendments (the proposed amendment) with changes and directed that written notice be given to the Minister seeking approval to adopt the proposed Dutton Park—Fairfield neighbourhood plan

(ii) was advised by the Minister, by letter dated 27 April 2018 (Attachment B, submitted on file), that it could adopt the proposed amendment subject to the conditions set out in Attachment B (Minister’s Conditions) (submitted on file)

(iii) has complied with the Minister’s Conditions by amending the proposed amendment to incorporate the Minister’s Conditions,

then Council:

(i) resolves, pursuant to Steps 9.1(a) of Stage 4 of Part 2.4A.1 of the Guideline, to adopt the proposed amendment to the planning scheme to include the Dutton Park—


- 31 -

Fairfield neighbourhood plan and consequential amendments, as set out in Attachment C (submitted on file)

(ii) directs, pursuant to Step 9.A.2 of Stage 4 of Part 2.4A.1 of the Guideline, that notice be given in accordance with the Guideline

(iii) directs, pursuant to Step 9.3(a) of Stage 4 of Part 2.4A.1 of the Guideline, that a copy of the amendment and the notice of adoption be given to the Chief Executive in accordance with the Guideline.

ADOPTED

PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE

The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, Chairman of the Public and Active Transport Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Kate RICHARDS that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 7 August 2018, be adopted.

Deputy Chairman: Is there any debate?

DEPUTY MAYOR: Yes.

Deputy Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Yes, that’s me. It takes 21 days to break a habit, so we’ve got a few Council meetings to go before I stop saying Madam Chairman, sorry.

Two issues I wanted to touch on. First of all, the issue of bus driver barriers which Councillor CASSIDY raised in Question Time. We know that he does the bidding of the RTBU and we know that he gets information fed to him and he asks the questions that the RTBU wants him to ask. He knows who his true masters are, not the people of Brisbane but the unions who give him the money to fund his campaigns, who employed him before he came here. It’s disappointing that he’s not prepared to—

Councillor CASSIDY: Point of order, Mr Deputy Chair.

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

Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: The DEPUTY MAYOR is misleading the Chamber. I’ve never received any donations from the RTBU. I never worked for the RTBU.


Deputy Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY—

Councillor CASSIDY: It’s a different union, that’s right, yes, a very different union, and I represent—

Deputy Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY, take your seat.

Councillor CASSIDY: —Brisbane City Council workers—

Deputy Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY!

Councillor CASSIDY: —our employees, yes.

Deputy Chairman: If you don’t sit down, you will commit an act of disorder. I don’t uphold your point of order.


Deputy Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Very touchy; very touchy about that. Look, there’s so many unions in the mix here, sometimes I lose track.



- 32 -

Deputy Chairman: Hold on, DEPUTY MAYOR. Hold on, DEPUTY MAYOR, I can’t hear you. There will be order in the Chamber.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Madam Chairman, it’s the AWU (Australian Workers’ Union) that supports Councillor CASSIDY and employs him, but we know that the RTBU gives big licks of cash to the Labor Party to help them fund their campaigns. Apparently that’s okay. Apparently that’s fine.


DEPUTY MAYOR: But, Madam—


DEPUTY MAYOR: Just stick that on the record. Councillor CASSIDY said: ‘Yes, it is.’ Madam Chairman, no undue influence there. No impact on decision making.


DEPUTY MAYOR: Anyway, Madam Chairman, the point is this—


Deputy Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, take a seat.

Councillor CASSIDY, your repeated interjections I find an act of disorder. If you continue, you will be warned under section 186A.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chair.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order.

Deputy Chairman: Point of order against you, DEPUTY MAYOR.


Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you, DEPUTY MAYOR. Just to be clear, section 21 of the Meetings Local Law is the section about disorderly conduct, where warnings are made. Section 186 is about noting behaviour in the Minutes or you using your discretion to expel somebody. Just to be clear, so we know which rules you are applying, I’d just ask that you’re clear about that, because what you said is just—you’re mixing those two up.

Deputy Chairman: Yes, thanks Councillor JOHNSTON.

I don’t uphold your point of order.

Councillor SCHRINNER.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Mr Deputy Chair. On the issue of bus driver barriers, now there’s a couple of issues at play here. Last year we conducted consultation with our drivers on what they thought on bus driver barriers. We had originally asked the RTBU what they thought on bus driver barriers, and they said: look, we know, all bus drivers have different views and, you know, we don’t have a particular view. So we thought, okay, let’s be proactive; we’ll consult the drivers. So we ran a survey last year where we showed the drivers photos of various types of barriers and we asked them to provide feedback.

In response to that survey, a strong majority of drivers said they would be supportive of some form of driver protection barrier being installed. Now, one barrier that wasn’t provided as an example was a full enclosure. Why? Because currently there’s no one that makes full enclosures for our buses. We have a range of different models of buses. They would need a different enclosure for each bus. They’ve been made by different manufactures over the years, and this is not a simple thing to install.

So what we did do is we took the commercially available partial barriers—one was a narrow barrier and one was a wider barrier, but both partial barriers—and we used those as examples. So the bus drivers said in a strong way that they


- 33 -

supported some form of those barriers being installed. Now, fast forward to this year, middle of this year, we had an announcement just around budget time from the State Government that they were going to provide funds, to grant funds to bus operators in Queensland to install barriers in existing bus fleet. So we got excited about this. We got ready to start the roll out.

We organised for the roll out of barriers on all new buses coming off the production line but, obviously, the retrofitting of this fleet that we have of more than 1,200 vehicles would require the support of the State Government. Now, it’s estimated that to fit out the entire Brisbane City Council bus fleet with full enclosure barriers, as the RTBU are suggesting, would cost in the realm of $30 million—$30 million. If the State are prepared to pay for that, they need to tell us. But from memory, the grant that they announced was about $3 million for the whole of the State.

So if the RTBU expects full barriers to be fitted to all of our buses, the first thing that would have to happen is they need to go up to their colleague Mark Bailey, Minister Mark Bailey, and ask him to increase the grant funding significantly from $3 million to more than $30 million, and that’s just for Brisbane City Council; forget about every single other bus operator that’s out there. So that’s the first thing they would need to do.

But the second thing they would need to do is ask the State to accelerate their program, because we have been advised that no grant funding will be forthcoming for driver protection barriers until next year. So we were getting ready to gear up in the new financial year to start this program from July, and then we got notified that there’s no money available this year until 2019. So, if Councillor CASSIDY wants to make political points about bus driver barriers, he needs to start by looking in his own team, in his team of RTBU people and his team of Labor mates up in George Street, to work out what it is they want.

If they want full driver protection barriers, and if they’re prepared to fund them, then we’re willing to work with the State and the RTBU on that. But every indication is that there’s not enough money at the State level to fit these barriers. There are no current designs available for these barriers for our bus fleet, and there’s no money at all for barriers to be retrofitted until at least next year. So we have a bit of a problem here. Rather than trying to score cheap political points, he needs to start within the Labor team and the union team to actually get some direction on this issue, because we are, as we always have been, standing ready and willing to work with our employees to make sure that they are as safe as possible. If that is the desire of the State Government to install full protection barriers, then they need to cough up the $30 million that it would cost to do that.

Mr Deputy Chair, the other issue I wanted to raise is the Neville Bonner Bridge. I want to state again that I do strongly support the construction of new bridges across the Brisbane River, particularly green bridges, particularly bridges for walking, cycling and public transport. I also strongly support the naming of a bridge after Neville Bonner. Neville Bonner was a legend, and he deserves to be acknowledged—a Liberal Senator, the first Indigenous Federal Parliamentarian in Australia’s history, and someone that I know that I am very proud of, and all Brisbane residents should be proud of.

The issue is not whether we have a new bridge; the issue is how the bridge is designed, where it’s located, and who it caters for. So, if the bridge was designed so that it accommodated cyclists and pedestrians, if the bridge was wider than the current 4.5 metre design, if the bridge was designed in a way that didn’t land into the podium level of a mega resort, but rather landed in a public space that’s available to everyone, if the bridge didn’t have a pier that was right in the centre of the river creating unknown flooding impacts and also impacts on CityCat operations, and if the issues of river boat operators and the impacts on the cultural forecourt and the many community festivals and events; if all those issues were resolved and dealt with, we’d be happy to support the Neville Bonner Bridge.

We’d be happy for Queen’s Wharf Brisbane to build that bridge, but we’ve seen no evidence that any substantial changes have been made. I did notice that just


- 34 -

last month there was an advertisement advertised on—we’ve been talking about job advertisements in this meeting—there was an advertisement put online for a Project Manager, Neville Bonner Bridge. Location: Brisbane CBD inner suburbs. Construction project management, full time, negotiable on experience. They’re usually negotiable on wage, but this one’s negotiable on experience. So they’re advertising for a project manager; they’re out to tender at the moment, yet Council has not received the final designs.

This is obviously concerning. We’re doing the right thing by raising those concerns. It’s only reasonable that, rather than the State saying too little too late, that they would go back and actually read our submissions dating from last year. We started raising concerns in September last year, and the chain of correspondence continued all the way through until recent months. All we’re asking is for the State to take on board those concerns, to listen and to advise how they’re going to be resolved when the final bridge design rolls out.

If they can’t be resolved, then we would rightly question whether this is the right asset for the city, and whether money should be put into an alternative bridge, like the Kangaroo Point bridge or some other bridge that provides a great public benefit.

Deputy Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, your time has expired.

Councillor WINES.

ADJOURNMENT:69/2018-19

At that time, 4.08pm, 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 4.10pm.

UPON RESUMPTION:

At that time, 4.25pm, the Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, resumed the Chair.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. Just briefly on the Neville Bonner Bridge. I paid a little bit of attention to this with the media reports this week. In fact, I spoke with some journalists this morning after a Committee because I wasn’t entirely up to date on the issues. As it turns out, as we’ve heard from the DEPUTY MAYOR today, the Neville Bonner Bridge, there are some concerns about its structure, its use, its impacts—all very good things for the DEPUTY MAYOR to raise, but these are the things that he’s been saying about the bridge, both in Council and publicly.

Firstly, that they’ve been making submissions, that this Council has been making submissions to the State Government with their concerns, but the State Government is not listening. Well, boo hoo, DEPUTY MAYOR; I don’t know why you would expect another level of government to listen to you when you don’t listen to your own Councillors and your own residents. You are calling for something that you don’t have the courtesy to do in the place where you have the power to do it. Now, that is hypocrisy in my view.

So, I note that Council would like the State Government to do certain things, but it’s not that the State Government haven’t said they won’t do it, from what I understand either; it’s that the State Government hasn’t got back to Council about it. Now, that’s different to what the DEPUTY MAYOR has just done in


- 35 -

this Chamber which is to not listen to concerns and then to ignore them and do whatever they wanted anyway.

So this is exactly the same process that the LNP uses when they are in Office. So, can I say, it doesn’t seem to be just an issue of ALP or LNP; it seems that when you are in power, you simply then stop listening and fail to think carefully about what you are doing and the consequences of it. So, DEPUTY MAYOR, I have little sympathy for you because this is the way that you treat others.

Secondly, the DEPUTY MAYOR has expressed some concerns about part of a public place, the cultural forecourt, being used for a construction site and construction activity. I was completely surprised by this statement, because this Council’s clear policy is to allow developers all over Brisbane to shut down public spaces, parks and footpaths, and hand them over to developers to use for extensive periods of time. It can be one or two years that a public footpath in this city can be closed.

Now, I know I ring up and object when this happens, but I am deathly surprised today that the DEPUTY MAYOR is saying: oh dear, part of a public space, the cultural forecourt, can’t be used for construction activities because that would be terrible. It would impact on people’s ability to attend festivals and events. Well, DEPUTY MAYOR, this is what you are doing, you and your Administration, and your Council are doing every single day around Brisbane, and regularly I ring up and fight with this Council to make sure it doesn’t happen.

Chairman: To the report, please, Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you. I am going to use your speech here today, Deputy Chairman, the next time that residents complain to me that there is a closure of some public access way, because clearly you don’t support that. You’ve made it clear here today that you do not support the closure of public spaces where pedestrians gather and space that pedestrians use for building or construction purposes.

Now, I appreciate that; I’m not sure that’s the point you were really trying to make, but that is what you have said on the record today.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you are to speak on the report in respect of the Neville Bonner Bridge. Could you please bring yourself back to the report.

Councillor JOHNSTON: I believe that I am, in the sense that it has been raised that there are concerns about the construction impacting on—and I quote from paragraph 8: ‘walking and cycling are key ways people move around the CBD and inner city areas.’ Walking and cycling can contribute significantly to improving our health and wellbeing. That’s the point I am making in a robust political Chamber, of course. Just doing a little comparison.

Calling on the DEPUTY MAYOR to apply the same standards, the same standards to pedestrian movements in South Bank parklands that he is concerned about, or the CBD that he is concerned about, to other parts of the city where this Council and his Administration does exactly what he is complaining about the State Government are doing with the Neville Bonner Bridge. So, I’ve heard a lot of hypocrisy today, and I don’t know why he thought this report coming to Council would be a good idea.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on the report. I must say that I share some of Councillor JOHNSTON’s concerns about hypocrisy. It does always amuse me a little bit when this Administration complains that other levels of government are not listening or consulting. But I’ll leave that point for the moment, and say that while I disagree with this Administration on a great many things, the DEPUTY MAYOR is dead right in his criticisms of the pedestrian bridge to the Queen’s Wharf casino site. It is surely one of the most foolish and ridiculous proposals for a bridge Brisbane has ever seen. I don’t use those words lightly.

There have been a number of transport and mobility and connectivity studies over the years for this city; probably many Councillors in this place can


- 36 -

remember several bridges that were proposed and dismissed and reconsidered and all sorts of options that come and go. But I’m not aware of a single transport study or bridges study that recommended this particular location as a sensible option for a bridge. There is no logical reason why we would place another footbridge on this stretch of the river so close to other bridges. The Victoria Bridge is less than 200 metres from the proposed site of this footbridge.

One wonders at the madness and the irrationality of the planners within State Government that signed off on this, or considered it to be a good idea. I have to say it strikes me as a huge missed opportunity for the City of Brisbane when there are many places along our river, even in other parts of the inner city, where footbridges and improved connectivity across the river would be warmly welcomed and would be of great benefit to local residents, to local businesses, to the city as a whole. I’m thinking, in particular, of the long-standing proposals for a footbridge between Kangaroo Point and the CBD, various proposals for footbridges between Toowong and West End.

There are any number of locations that many Councillors in this place could point to that are sensible alternatives for green bridges. But it is utter madness to place a bridge at this location. I could only speculate as to the dodgy and potentially corrupt deals that have been done behind closed doors between the casino developers and the State Government that have led to this bridge proposal being seriously considered.

I note that the consortium Star Entertainment has donated millions of dollars to both major political parties over the year, and I note that the contracts for the sale of this site, or the leasing of the Queen’s Wharf casino site remain commercial-in-confidence so that the people of Brisbane will never know how much the developers or how little the developers have paid for this site. Presumably this bridge was part of that dirty, corrupt deal, and—

Chairman: Councillor SRI, I remind you that there is no parliamentary privilege in this place. Just consider your words very, very carefully.

Councillor SRI: Thank you, Madam Chair. No, I stand by my comments that this reeks of corruption. The idea that the State Government would give over around 13 hectares of prime inner city riverfront land and a further 13 hectares of rights to develop out over the water is ludicrous and laughable, and not at all in the public interest. The primary party that stands to benefit from this bridge in the proposed location is the casino developers.

This bridge is about sucking tourists in from South Bank across the river to the casino gaming rooms. It does not serve a broader connectivity purpose. It doesn’t cater to cyclists. It interrupts one of the most valuable open stretches of riverfront in the inner city. You only have to spend a few minutes down on South Bank and watch the number of visitors and locals who enjoy those open vistas along this stretch of river between the Victoria Bridge and the Goodwill Bridge. It’s a great spot to watch the fireworks at Riverfire; it’s a great place to take in the views of the CBD and to feel connected to the river. To whack another big bridge in the middle of that would be a great shame. The negative impacts are many, and the benefits are few to none.

I think, really, my greatest frustration is that this City Council hasn’t been more vocal and forthright and assertive in its advocacy against the bridge. I congratulate the DEPUTY MAYOR and I congratulate the Administration for finally stepping up, but I worry that it’s too little too late, and I throw the challenge to you, DEPUTY MAYOR: what further actions will you take to resist this bridge? What further steps will you take to ensure that it doesn’t get built in this location and that the money is instead allocated to a bridge in a more appropriate location that would actually make sense from a transport and connectivity perspective?

The negative impacts to the public realm, the negative impacts to South Bank, the loss of public space on the southside and, of course, the fact that this bridge is basically a glorified driveway or entrance way to a casino that will prey upon poor and vulnerable gamblers, I think, all stand against the case for this bridge


- 37 -

being built at all. With the greatest of respect, I think the Labor Councillors in this place do also need to step up and clearly declare their position, because I know there are plenty of people within the Labor Party who also have concerns about this bridge. Now is not the time to sit on the fence or stay silent.

I’ve heard Councillors in this place repeatedly call for cost benefit studies of any major infrastructure project that’s proposed in this city. Personally, I’m a bit dubious about those studies, because you can make them say whatever you want, just by tweaking the assumptions and variables. But to the best of my knowledge, there has been no clearly articulated public cost benefit analysis for this bridge that confirms that it’s a good proposition for the City of Brisbane. I think all Councillors in this place need to be advocating strongly for a reconsidering of this proposal. If this bridge is built, it’s there for a long, long time, and we will have lost the opportunity to use that funding more effectively for other purposes.

We know that the costs of the bridge are potentially going to blow out. We know that the bridge has negative impacts on CityCat and other river-based transport. We know the bridge is going to have negative impacts on the number of small businesses. We need to stand united and strong as a Council in our opposition to this foolhardy project, and we need to call on the State Government to reallocate the funding for this footbridge to another green bridge at another stretch of the Brisbane River.

I would suggest that reallocating the money towards a footbridge between Kangaroo Point and the CBD would be a much better outcome in terms of reducing traffic congestion and improving access and connectivity for both local residents and tourists and visitors. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the decision to locate a bridge at this location, and I think future generations will look back on the State Government and shake their heads in dismay and bewilderment at the idiocy and lunacy that led to this proposal getting off the ground.


DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you to the Councillors who spoke on this particular matter and, in particular, the Neville Bonner Bridge. Well, I haven’t for a long time heard a more small-minded and petty speech than what Councillor JOHNSTON just delivered. Basically what she was saying is: boo hoo, serves your right, you don’t listen to me—you don’t listen to me, so it’s okay that the State Government ignores the entire Brisbane City Council. That is petty—

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

DEPUTY MAYOR: —and outrageous.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Claim to be misrepresented.

Chairman: Thank you.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Councillor JOHNSTON expresses an opinion on most things, and we always hear her, but our job is to actually represent the residents of Brisbane, not to take everything she says as gospel.

But, as I said, essentially what she was saying is: it serves your right, boo hoo, State Government shouldn’t listen to you because you don’t listen to me. That’s the long and the short of it. I mean, we are all here to represent the people of Brisbane. We are all here to get the best outcome. Now, I haven’t heard anyone stand up in this Chamber and say that the Neville Bonner Bridge, on its current design, with no cycling access and all the other problems that come, is a good outcome for the city. No one has argued that. Even Councillor JOHNSTON said


- 38 -

she had some concerns about the bridge, yet her point was simply a petty political personal attack because she can, basically.

Councillor SRI, I think one of the biggest problems with the debate on the Neville Bonner Bridge is that the State Government has been pedalling this idea that it’s a free bridge. It doesn’t really matter if it’s a crap design; it doesn’t matter if your cyclists are excluded because it’s free. In fact, Minister Bailey was saying that today on social media.

Well, it’s not free. Do you think Queen’s Wharf Brisbane is building this bridge out of the goodness of their heart? Do you think there’s no business model associated with it? Do you think it’s not funded by the fact that they were given a long-term lease over public land? So it is publicly funded, just indirectly. This is not a free bridge. The State Government granted a long-term lease to the resort developer, and in return the resort developer said they would do certain things. It’s not free. There is nothing that comes for free when you’re talking about the use of State Government land or public land. So, effectively, the State is giving something up that they owned for a period, I understand, of 99 years, so there is a give and take here.

So given that there’s a contract and there’s a give and take—and I’m not saying it’s wrong that the resort is built; I disagree with Councillor SRI on that. I think it’s actually going to be a fantastic asset for the city as an integrated resort. It’s just that there’s various components of the proposed plans that we have a strong view on, and we’ve been advocating strongly on. They listened to Council on the bikeway design. There was originally a plan to have a shared zone on Brisbane’s busiest bikeway which would bring pedestrians and cyclists into direct conflict. We advocated strongly on that issue. The State Government listened to us and the plans have been changed or are in the process of being changed.

We’re simply asking for the same thing to happen with this bridge. So it’s not a free bridge. It will become effectively a public asset but it will be an asset that certainly is not as good as it could be, and a missed opportunity for the city. So we’re simply saying, please, we’ve raised these concerns, if you come back to us and say, no, we’re not making any changes, then we’ll have to work out what the next step is. But on the other hand, if you come back and say, we’ve listened to you and we’ve made changes, then that’s a great outcome, and we can all be confident that we’ll get a better outcome in the end.

But ultimately we’ve got a project manager being advertised for; we’ve for the tender process under way for the bridge, yet we haven’t seen the final designs for the bridge. So that gives me concern. While we have consistently been making representations since last year on the same issues, again and again, we have not until very recently been given the indication that those concerns would be ignored. So that is the difference, and that is why right now it is urgent. It appears the project is moving forward without any indication of change being made to that design. So that’s the essence of the concern.

That’s why it’s important right now, and that’s been a significant change in recent events, where there was correspondence back and forward, ongoing feedback provided, and we reasonably assumed that that feedback was being listened to and acted on, but now there’s a big question over whether that’s occurred. So ultimately, like I said, we want more bridges for the city; we want a bridge named after Neville Bonner; we want a bridge that serves pedestrians and cyclists; we want a bridge that doesn’t cause other related problems.

Finally, in relation to the use of public space, like the cultural forecourt, I would never suggest that you can’t build a major project without impacting on a certain amount of public space. That is normal for most public infrastructure projects. The issue is how are you going to deal with the impacts, and what measures are you going to put in place. So far we have received no information about a plan to relocate those community events. It’s fine.

If Queen’s Wharf and the State Government says, okay, we’re going to put these community events in a different location, and there’ll be appropriate planning and communication put in place, that’s okay. We understand that there has to be


- 39 -

construction impacts. The issue is, at the moment we’re not aware of any plan to deal with those, just as we’re not aware of any plan to deal with the small business river boat operators who will be displaced as a result of this project. So there are still too many unanswered questions, and meanwhile the project appears to be going ahead full steam with significant decisions being made in the coming weeks. So that’s the nature of our concern. I probably can’t say it anymore without repeating myself endlessly. We just hope that we get a good outcome for the city and for the people of Brisbane with this project.

Chairman: I will now put the report.

Those in favour say—

Councillor JOHNSTON: Hang—

Chairman: Sorry, your misrepresentation, Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you. The DEPUTY MAYOR said I was saying boo hoo about the State Government’s treatment of Council. No, he’s misrepresented me. I was simply pointing out his hypocrisy and double standards in calling on the State to do something that his Administration and he himself does not do for his own city residents.

Chairman: I will now put the report.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Public and Active Transport Committee was declared carried on the voices.


ATTENDANCE:

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

LEAVE OF ABSENCE:

The Deputy Chairman, Councillor Fiona King.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – NEVILLE BONNER BRIDGE

70/2018-191. Lindsay Enright, Strategic Planning Manager, Major Projects Planning, Transport Planning and

Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on the proposed Neville Bonner Bridge. He provided the information below.

2. Destination Brisbane Consortium propose to construct a new pedestrian bridge as part of the Queen’s Wharf Brisbane project. The bridge will provide for a pedestrian link between the new integrated resort and South Bank. The proposed design incorporates a single centre pylon near the middle of the Brisbane River.

3. Council has provided a number of responses to the Queensland Government in regards to the design of the bridge. Two key matters of concern are the potential impact of the bridge design on vessel navigation in the Brisbane River, and no provision for cyclists.

4. The Brisbane River provides for iconic public transport in the inner city, including the CityCat and City Hopper services. North Quay and South Bank terminals have the highest use in Brisbane. The average daily patronage from ferry terminals over a six-month period is as follows: - North Quay – 1,074- South Bank – 2,016.

5. There are eight bridges in total along the Brisbane River between the Story Bridge and Go Between Bridge. All bridges are designed with a wide centre channel for the provision of river


- 40 -

vessels. This allows for the safe passage of CityCats, City Hopper and CityFerries, tourist vessels and recreational vessels.

6. The proposed Neville Bonner Bridge design includes: - a 340 metre long and 4.5 metre wide pedestrian bridge- a single centre river pylon - a primary navigation channel on eastern side of pylon which is 60 metres wide - a secondary navigation channel on western side of pylon which is 25 metres wide, with a

2.6 metre reduced clearance.

7. Navigation around the central pylon will require CityCat vessels to undertake difficult turning manoeuvres. The initial design of the bridge, with a narrower western channel and 2.6 metre lower clearance, will mean many vessels will only be able to use the eastern channel. The pylon location and navigation channel width are key issues for the safe operation of the CityCat services and other vessels on the river.

8. Walking and cycling are key ways people move around the CBD and inner city areas. The draft Transport Plan for Brisbane – Strategic Directions focuses on the need to develop new walking and cycling opportunities along and across the Brisbane River, to improve mobility and reduce reliance on private car travel in the inner city. Walking and cycling can also contribute significantly to improving our health and well-being.

9. Council has written to the Queensland Government offering to work in partnership to plan or deliver a suitable active transport bridge option. The proposed design of the bridge is for pedestrians only, with no provision for cyclists. Council has raised two ideas with the Queensland Government that could provide for all active transport needs:- redesign the bridge to carry both pedestrians and cyclists, with appropriate connections at both

ends of the bridge- develop an alternative bridge option for both pedestrians and cyclists.

10. Council has advised the Queensland Government that the bridge, in its current form, will not meet CBD needs as a pedestrian-only bridge. Council has requested that a joint working group be set up with the Queensland Government to investigate other river crossings which cater for both pedestrians and cyclists. Council officers will continue to provide technical advice on the design of the bridge to ensure that if the proposed bridge is constructed as pedestrian only, the bridge will still meet Council’s requirements for:- safe and efficient river navigation of CityFerries and CityCats- mitigation of flooding impacts- pedestrian movements between South Bank Parklands and the CBD. Council will continue to lobby for a green bridge across the river.

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

12. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.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 7 August 2018, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor COOPER.

Councillor COOPER: Thank you very much, Madam—now I’m trying to call you Madam Deputy Chair! You’ve really got us confused today. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.


- 41 -

I rise to speak about the presentation that we had at the Infrastructure Committee last week. It was one that was I think a very timely proposal, all about pedestrian safety, talking about the different programs and initiatives that we undertake to promote both pedestrian and cyclist safety.

This included things such as the Safe School Travel program, the School Traffic Management programs that we deliver, planned development as a result of those TMPs (Traffic Management Plans), enhanced school zone signage, the Slow for SAM (Speed Awareness Monitor) program, the LED vehicle activated road signs and active transport network plan development for both the CBD and suburbs.

So we have, and I think that many Councillors are very excited to have the opportunity of using something such as SAM, the Speed Awareness Monitors, which encourage better driver behaviour. Of course, this is primarily a responsibility of the Queensland Police Service to regulate the speeds that vehicles travel through our streets. But Council is being very proactive in trying to encourage people to do the right thing, utilising pester power, and as a mother of three children, I think pester power is remarkably effective. No matter how much you try and resist it, it does eventually seem to change what you might think that you need to do as a priority.

Now we’ve got 98 million vehicles that have passed through the monitors, with 18.8% of motorists who travelled above the speed limit reducing their speed by an average of 8.2 kilometres per hour after passing those monitors. Since the program began, we’ve had 212 million vehicles that have passed the monitors, and we certainly delivered some great results as a result of the program.

We also have a range of different pedestrian crossing facilities which we talked about at Committee, ranging from zebra crossings; refuges; shared zones; underpasses and overpasses; through to traffic signalisation. We’ve also got the Cycling Brisbane safety videos which promote cyclists’ etiquette, and Council’s obviously great investment of $100 million in the Better Bikeways 4 Brisbane program demonstrates the ongoing commitment to improving pathways for both cyclists and pedestrians.

We’ve also installed pedestrian countdown timers, so we’ve got them installed at 472 sites, with more than 2,700 pedestrian countdown timer lanterns installed altogether. Just to remind everyone in the Chamber, the pedestrian countdown timers indicate the time during the flashing red ‘don’t walk’ signal to advise pedestrians of the remaining time they have to safely finish crossing the road. It is not an opportunity for people to jump on and see if they can beat the countdown timers. It is to say to people that, if you are on the crossing already, to please complete that crossing rather than start at the road’s edge. So it’s something that’s important to remind people about how to utilise these facilities.

We’ve also got stickers which we put on traffic signal poles to remind pedestrians to only begin crossing an intersection when the green ‘walk’ signal is displayed. We discussed at Committee last week if anyone knows of any poles that are missing these stickers, please let the team know and they’ll be happy to provide those.

As part of our Move Safe Brisbane campaign, we have had pedestrian cameras installed at the intersections of Ann and Edward Streets, Edward and Adelaide Streets, and Elizabeth and Albert Streets. That data is now being reviewed to help inform what number of pedestrians use those particular crossings, as well as their behaviour noting, of course, that jaywalking is a matter for the Queensland Police Service, and Council officers cannot issue infringements for any of these types of violations.

We have a very strong record on road safety. In 2008 it was this Council that established a variable speed limit and dropped the speed limit in Fortitude Valley in the nightclub precinct to 40 kilometres per hour. In 2009, the LORD MAYOR dropped the speed limit to 40 kilometres per hour for all streets in our CBD except for two, leading the way as the first capital city CBD in Australia to do so. Melbourne followed us in 2012, and Sydney followed on in 2014.


- 42 -

As we all know, speed can be a major factor in pedestrian crashes. However, it is not the only factor. The Queensland Police are certainly confirming that to us anecdotally. I’ve got the most current figures in terms of submissions that we’ve had made to us as part of the Move Safe Brisbane campaign. We have received 2,245 pedestrian submissions, and we’ve received 1,548 cycling submissions. So people are certainly participating in that process, and I do appreciate their efforts.

We will be collating all of that information, and it is certainly an opportunity for us, up until basically one minute before midnight on 28 August—it’s our opportunity to hear from the residents of the city about where there are issues and where there could be improvements. So please encourage residents to provide that information to us.

I thank the officers for their presentation. It was very informative. It’s a good opportunity for the Committee to talk about these sorts of issues. We are absolutely committed to making sure that our city moves safely for now and into the years ahead.

There were also three petitions which I am happy to respond to any commentary on.

Thank you, Madam Chair.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, I rise to speak on item A and item B.

Firstly, briefly on item A, the Move Safe Brisbane consultation. Can I say now that I have encouraged my residents to fill out the form, and I’ve made an effort to suggest the most popular suggestions that have come into me that I put in my budget submission, and that Council officers put in their budget submissions year after year after year that this Administration simply ignores.

I hummed and haard about whether I’d even do it, because this Administration simply ignores feedback. So let me be clear, you’ve talked this up. You’ve told people that you are going to undertake action out of this, so I’ll be holding you to that. My residents are speaking up. They have filled out this map. They are adding things, and they want to see Council delivering on it. They’ve told you in the neighbourhood plan process; they’ve told you in the LGIP process; they tell you through the budget submissions, and you keep ignoring them. It’s no wonder we have a safety problem when this Administration spends millions of dollars on major road projects but won’t fund refuges around schools.

This report says there’s $100 million being spent on bikeways around the city. Zero in Tennyson Ward. The last term it was $120 million and they spent $3,000 on some signs for the deaf school, and that was it—$220 million on cycling infrastructure over eight years and $3,000 is all that's gone into Tennyson Ward. You people are failing my constituents. You are failing the people of Brisbane, which leads me to item B.

Item B, what a surprise. Residents calling for safer access for school children to cross busy Ipswich Road in Annerley to get to Junction Park State School. The catchment is on both sides of an arterial road and we have serious issues with cars running through the traffic lights and putting children and residents at risk.

The first thing I'm going to say here is I've made a formal complaint to the CEO about Councillor COOPER. This matter is in Tennyson Ward. One side of the road is Ipswich Road, Annerley, in Tennyson Ward and the other side of the road is Ipswich Road, Annerley, which is in Coorparoo Ward. Council did not consult with me at all about a petition in my ward. That is contrary to Council policy AP107.

It is also contrary to the CEO's letters to me, which arrived literally two days beforehand saying that, yes, Council had a policy to consult on boundaries and he expected his officers to consult on boundary issues. Well, they did not do so here. So let me be clear: the residents who want this petition spoke to me about it


- 43 -

and I encouraged them to get the petition up. This Council has only consulted with an LNP Councillor, even though one side of this road is in Tennyson Ward and the other side is in Coorparoo Ward.

So that is a huge problem, and I look forward the CEO's latest lot of excuses about why it's okay for the LNP to be consulted, but not the Independent Councillor. The bigger problem is the response. The response before us today basically says, we're not going to do anything about it, and it says essentially that the TMR (Department of Transport and Main Roads) guidelines for school zones do not allow this. That is what it says in the response: ‘the petitioner's request does not meet TMR guidelines for a school zone and is unable to be supported’. Bullshit.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.

As I've said before, this may be a place of robust political debate, but it is also a place of decorum. Would you care to withdraw that language?

Councillor JOHNSTON: I'll withdraw bullshit and I'll say crap, because the DEPUTY MAYOR has said crap is okay today.

So let me be clear, that is an untrue statement. It is a lie. It is wrong. It is factually incorrect and I'll say this: firstly, Councillor COOPER's made some announcements just today about school zones in certain areas and she published to the media what those requirements are, plus, of course, I've gone on the State Government's website and had a bit of a look. So let me be clear: number one, you can have 40 kilometre speed zones on main roads in certain circumstances.

They are where there is a midblock crossing facility for children to cross the road: tick. There are multiple midblock crossing facilities here, outside the Junction Hotel and at Dudley Street. Where children are required to cross in large numbers at an intersection: tick. Absolutely, no question about that. There is a direct access to the school from the multilane road or school related activity occurs on that road: tick. Waldheim Street is the intersection where we are calling for the 40 kilometres an hour and Councillor SRI was just visiting my ward the other day.

You can see the school and Waldheim Street provides direct access to the school, about 50 metres from the intersection. TMR, the TRUM (Traffic and Road Use Management) manual, Volume 2, Part 3, Speed Limits and Speed Management, makes it extremely clear that if you can see a school from the main road, then you are eligible to have a 40 kilometre an hour speed limit. Now, this goes on to say, the report—so, number one, that's not true. It's not what the State Government's guidelines say and the State guidelines make provision for this, absolutely.

The second thing I'll point out is that Councillor COOPER today, and I've confirmed this with the relevant local Councillor, has announced, on a main road a school zone that is not on a school frontage in Gladstone Road in South Brisbane. No school frontage. None. No school frontage, so let's be clear.

Let me recap. Even though this is in Tennyson Ward, I was not consulted—Two, I suspect I wasn't consulted because the information in the report is factually incorrect, it is misleading about the State Government's guidelines, and three, it is wrong to say, as this Council is to residents, that they are ineligible for a school zone 40 crossing, because this Council does it on other main roads where schools do not have a direct frontage, all of which Councillor COOPER has been out talking about in the media today.

Then she brings a report into this place that seeks only to consult with the person who supports her view, which is wrong, and which is contrary to what the residents are asking for, contrary to the State Government's guidelines about where 40 kilometres are eligible on main roads, and contrary to what this Council is actually doing in practice about a kilometre and a half up the street in the adjoining ward. Yesterday, when I read all of this, I was just concerned about


- 44 -

the fact that I hadn't been consulted. But today I'm now concerned that this Council has said in this report something that is untrue.

There are guidelines that allow for this type of 40 kilometre an hour zone on a main road where there is no school frontage. It is a practice that this Council employs and uses, as they are today. This school has a catchment divided by the biggest road in Brisbane, maybe apart from Gympie Road, and it runs through the middle of Annerley and our children have to cross the road to get to their local school. I want them to be able to do it safely.

Our community would like to see a 40 zone through the Annerley Junction area, so that these children are at less risk of being hurt and all residents who have to cross the road to get to the shops, school, church, buses can do so safely. I do not accept that the way in which Councillor COOPER has done this is appropriate, I do not accept that the advice in here is correct.

Seriatim - Clause BCouncillor Nicole JOHNSTON requested that Clause B, PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL INSTALL A SCHOOL ZONE ON IPSWICH ROAD, ANNERLEY, FOR JUNCTION PARK STATE SCHOOL, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Because of this Council's decision to exclude me as the local Councillor for part of this area from the consultation process and the factually incorrect information that this report contains and if—I just say to whoever is going to run in Coorparoo Ward, that this is the standard that the LNP has been prepared to support in this area for years, I would say that the LNP has got a very short shelf life to come in that ward.


Councillor McKENZIE.

Councillor McKENZIE: Thanks, Madam Chairman.

Madam Chairman, I get up to speak on the petition to install a school zone on Ipswich Road, Annerley, for Junction Park State School. Contrary to what the previous Councillor said, let me just outline what is stated with regard to this Department of Transport and Main Roads.

Department of Transport and Main Roads, TMR, set the guidelines. School zones are only permitted on roads to which the school has direct frontage, unfortunately, which Junction Park does not have. The school is readily visible from the road, which it is not, and there is a primary access to the school, which use a main student entry point, which it does not.


Chairman: Just a moment, please, Councillor McKENZIE.

Councillor JOHNSTON, you have just been able to speak for 10 minutes without interjection. Please afford other Councillors the courtesy in this Chamber.


Councillor McKENZIE: Now, it's true that this school is no longer in Councillor JOHNSTON's ward and the entry to the school is in Waldheim Street and Gowrie Street, which are a good 200, 300 metres from Ipswich Road. Now, I'm not saying that Ipswich Road is not a busy road. It is one of the busiest roads. The petition has 57 signatures. The time that I've been Councillor for this area, I've not been contacted at all about this matter from anybody. I don't know how many residents, how many children—


Chairman: Order.


Chairman: That's enough.


- 45 -


Councillor McKENZIE: I've been to a number of P&Cs, Madam Chairman, and we've discussed a range of things. The topic has never come up, depending, I suppose, on how many children do actually cross Ipswich Road to go to this school. There is a crossing. There are lights over Ipswich Road. Council has been very attentive to making sure that these crossing, this crossing, has the right time sequence for the children to cross. They can cross this road, go down Waldheim Street and cross at a secure crossing in Waldheim Street. Council is ever present about the safety of these areas down in this area.

To give some examples in the ward, Greenslopes State School has just been—it's just been announced that we'll be having a similar crossing there. That does meet all the criteria which I outlined above. The school is undertaking a Traffic Management Plan and, as a result, we are looking at increasing the safety of the crossing of Waldheim Street and Gowrie Street, where we believe the majority of children do cross. But Council will continue to work with the school to make possible any improvements that are necessary for the safety of these children.


Councillor GRIFFITHS.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes. Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on several items in relation to the report.

First is in relation to pedestrian safety. Madam Chair, it was interesting to get this presentation. Great things are being done with SAM. That's good. I think all of Councillors in this Chamber support the actions of the SAM program. It is interesting that where these devices are located are speeding and that we're getting approximately a 40% change, or generally an eight kilometres per hour reduction in speed. That's good.

What's disappointing about this program is that we're collecting all this data, we're able to spin all this data out into the community and into the newspapers, but unfortunately we don't share this data with the police. Madam Chair, it seems bizarre to me that we have all this data, that Council has all this data, has all these staff collecting the data, but there is no mechanism for sharing this data with the police. I would call on the Chairperson and the Administration to formalise the way we ensure that this data is shared with the Queensland Police, so that we're actually working to make our streets safer. I know I share the data with my local police, but citywide we should be sharing this data with the police. So that's in the Chairperson's lap.

Secondly, I would like to rise to support Councillor JOHNSTON in regards to Junction Park State School and I was astounded with Councillor McKENZIE saying that he's never been spoken to about this issue, because I know in Moorooka Ward I get spoken to about this issue.

I note on the very consultation we're doing at the moment about places to cross roads safely that these intersections are highlighted as major points where people are concerned about pedestrian safety. So, Madam Chair, I think what we've got to do, I would challenge the Chair and I challenge Councillor McKENZIE. It's one thing to see a rule, but it's another thing to question a rule.

So that if you see that something's wrong, if you see that, well, kids aren't crossing here safely or that parents aren't crossing here safely or that we have 25,000 cars going in each direction along Ipswich Road, wouldn't you want to make the crossing points for kids safer? Rather than saying: well, it's in the rule book and we can't do it, because it's in the rule book and the rule book says this and this and this, why haven't you written to the Minister? Why haven't you written to your local State Members? Why haven't you said: look, I'm concerned about kids' safety. I'm writing to you. I think this needs to be questioned.

I don't think this good enough. I suspect here we've got a lot of politics being played and unfortunately the kids and pedestrians are moving out while the LNP Administration do nothing. Councillor JOHNSTON is right. Down the road, Mary Immaculate School has a 40 km/h zone.


- 46 -


Councillor GRIFFITHS: It has a 40 km/h zone and—yes, you did fight hard for that. This zone would go as you go into the shopping centre at Annerley. It would benefit also the shoppers at Annerley. I don't understand why you can't use your logic, you can't approach the Minister and try and negotiate something that is good for the kids, because this could be setting a precedent that then could be used in other areas across the city or across the State. Madam Chair, I am disappointed with the LNP in their response. The response is that we don't want to do anything. We're, sort of, not responsible for this problem.

Can I tell you, in the upcoming campaign, both at the State and at the local level, this will be an issue that needs to be dealt with by someone, and it will certainly be Councillor JOHNSTON. I know it will be us. I'm sure there will be other people that will come on board to fight for this intersection to be made safe.


Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Thanks, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, in relation to item A, my only comment on that one is just the consultation process, Madam Chair. I'm concerned about some of these consultation processes the Council is running, because I believe there's nothing to stop people doing multiple comments on a particular matter to try to push their viewpoint.

I think, you know, some of the community groups in Brisbane know this is the case and some of these consultations could have been biased, I guess, by that occurring and things like the planning consultation on the blueprint, et cetera, could have suffered the same fate. But, anyhow, I digress from that. I understand that Council could be checking whether there were unique addresses being used, but they haven't been doing so.

The other matter, Madam Chair, is item C, which is a local one in the Wynnum Manly Ward. This is a bit of a sad—it was a very sad case in that the petition arose after a tragic accident when a young motorist was killed. However, consultation with residents on traffic calming received a limited response. There was something like 20% of residents of Kamarin Street responded and most of the responses were in the negative, in that they didn't want traffic calming. Council is prepared to do some work in that area. They're talking about yellow lines on the crest of a small hill in that area.

Also talking about some works on the corner of Kamarin Street and Empire Avenue, where people tend to speed around that corner. I'll be consulting on those proposals as well. They're in the budget for future funding and I think that the residents need to know what's being proposed and see whether they're keen for that. There's also been some lighting improvements on Kamarin Street that have been approved and these may have well been completed by now, but they'll be completed soon, so I welcome those changes that have been made.


Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on items A, B and D.

I'll start briefly with item B, the petition for a school zone, Junction Park, and through you, Madam Chair, with the greatest respect to Councillor McKENZIE, I think your comments reveal, perhaps, that you're not doing enough to engage with your community on this issue, because I too have been contacted by residents from your ward with serious concerns about pedestrian safety on Ipswich Road and the fact that you're suggesting that this issue hasn't been raised with you is concerning and perhaps reflects poorly on your advocacy in regards to this issue.

I note that already the feedback process that Councillor COOPER has set up, the online reporting tool, where residents can map concerns, already there are


- 47 -

14 responses on Ipswich Road in the vicinity of Waldheim Street, where residents have raised pedestrian safety concerns. So even your own data and your own consultation process is showing very clearly that that's a significant issue.

I understand the Administration's line about being limited by State Government rules, but I think this Administration already has form on ignoring State Government rules in regards to speed limits in other locations. I think that's a good thing. I think the Administration was right to drop the speed limit to 40 km/h in the CBD, contrary to the advice of the State Government. Similarly, I know that in Councillor SCHRINNER's ward, there's been a trial of a 40 kilometre an hour zone, I believe, near a shopping centre along an area used by a lot of buses. Again, contrary to the speed limit reviews, processes, recommendations.

So there are multiple examples where this Administration has lowered speed limits, even were the MUTCD (Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices) rules might technically not allow it. I think here again is an example where the Administration should lead, should take a courageous step in favour of pedestrian safety and consider introducing a school zone or perhaps a more permanent 40 kilometre an hour zone for that short stretch, noting that it is a particular problem spot, not just for pedestrian safety, but also for car crashes.

Just briefly on item D, the petition regarding the Lytton Road bus stop, I feel vindicated that Council has finally agreed to at least install that temporary bus stop at that location, but I think the fact that it took so long to get any kind of action or response probably again reflects poorly on this Administration's attitude to consulting with residents. My personal view is that the bus stop should be retained long term, even after the Lytton Road widening is completed. That's because the access to other nearby bus stops is limited due to the long crossing times over Latrobe Street.

So although generally there's a case for rationalising and combining some of these bus stops where there's a large number of bus stops in close proximity, when you have a large main road between those bus stops that inconveniences pedestrians and means it takes a lot longer for them to get to their bus stop, actually having those bus stops, having a few more of those bus stops in closer proximity can make a bit more sense.

I won't dwell too much on that point though, because I want to turn back to item A, and invite all Councillors in this place to imagine a city where the majority of residents travel by active transport and public transport.

I, through you, Madam Chair, I invite Councillors to broaden your thinking and, dare I say, think a little bit radically about the possibility for—to transform Brisbane into a city where the car is not the dominant form of transport and where people feel that they can safely allow their children to walk to school, where people in wheelchairs and elderly people with impaired mobility can navigate this city safely and conveniently without encountering footpath closures, without encountering inaccessible footpaths and staircases where there are no ramps.

For too long, transport planning in this city has been dominated by car centric thinking and the backlash and the response from residents, I think, is telling. Even now, at last, the LNP Administration is picking up on this. There is widespread concern and frustration about the lack of action when it comes to pedestrian safety and about the failure to prioritise funding for pedestrian safety improvements ahead of road projects.

I applaud, sincerely, I applaud the Administration for taking these new steps in terms of new consultation mechanism and a few tweaks here and there, but I don't think it goes anywhere near far enough. I've said repeatedly in this place that I think we need to be considering a default speed limit of 40 kilometres an hour for many parts of the inner city and I'd be interested to hear from other Councillors whether there's support for that—for those lower speed limits in other parts of suburban Brisbane as well.


- 48 -

Certainly, I hear from residents in places like Rochedale, and places like Chermside, places like Mount Gravatt, who contact my office and say: Councillor SRI, it's great to see you're advocating for lower speed limits. We'd like to see that out here too. So this isn't just an inner city issue. This is across the board that residents feel scared. They do not feel safe on their own streets, because this Administration has continued to design a road network that more closely resembles a racetrack.

I think it's a lost opportunity for all of us, but I don't think it's that hard to transform our city's transport networks to something that's more equitable and accessible and sustainable. The kinds of upgrades that Councillors and residents are calling for are not expensive in the context of the other changes that this Council makes in our neighbourhoods, that these are small targeted improvements that have relatively little negative impact on surrounding traffic flow. They have relatively little cost compared to a lot of the big projects.

They can be rolled out quickly and cheaply and I don't really understand why it is that the Administration continues to drag its feet on this. I think part of the problem is that often when pedestrians call for upgrades to traffic lights, to intersections or to crossings, the Council starts from the assumption that any changes to the road network cannot, in any way, reduce traffic flow. I think that is a mistake. I think sometimes this Council Administration does need to be willing to slow down cars and to slightly increase motorists' travel times in order to improve pedestrian safety and convenience.

It's a shame that this Council, unlike so many other councils around Australia and around the world, has been dragging its feet on this issue. So the simple changes that we could be looking at are reducing speed limits at problem areas, introducing more zebra crossings, traffic islands, pedestrian buildouts, signalising intersections without increasing their capacity.

I note that many intersection projects end up costing a lot more, because of the need to relocate services and curb and channel, but that those projects would be a lot cheaper if Council was content to put in pedestrian crossings and traffic lights within the existing road network. There are many options that have been successfully tried around the world that this Council could be following and learning from but, unfortunately, the Administration is incredibly conservative when it comes to road safety. That conservatism is killing people.

I can't say it any more strongly than that, that the failure to introduce and trial these proven methods to improve pedestrian safety is killing people. It's leading to serious accidents. We had a really sad death in my ward a couple of weeks ago. Again, a preventable crash, where if speed limits were lower, if Council had been adopting the sorts of responses that other councils around Australia had been adopting, that woman would still be alive. I think that's a great shame that this Council, while it talks the talk so far, I'm yet to see much meaningful action.

I note that maybe, once upon a time, this Council was a bit more innovative and was willing, for example, to drop speed limits in the inner city, but now you're falling well behind other councils. I know that down in Melbourne some of the local councils there are actually looking at 30 kilometre speed limits for some of their inner city areas. That's actually a really good thing. There's no reason we shouldn't be looking at that here too for areas with high pedestrian volumes. We should be looking at shared streets. We should be looking at plaza designs that prioritise pedestrians and bikes ahead of cars.

There's a broad range of solutions out there, but unfortunately this Council lacks vision and lacks radical thinking. I think that's a shame.


Councillor COOPER.

Councillor COOPER: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, we've heard a range of views this evening. I would just like to say that some of the deliberately sensationalist remarks that have been made by some Councillors is purely for their own political purposes, because if this


- 49 -

Council saw an opportunity to build infrastructure to make it safer for children, why would we not, as long as we were capable of doing that? I have had Council officers confirm—

Councillor JOHNSTON: A point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.

71/2018-19At that juncture, Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON moved, seconded by Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS, that the Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion

Calling on Council to immediately install a pedestrian refuge outside Graceville State School at the corner of Richardson Street, Waratah Street and Acacia Avenue, Graceville.

Madam Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Let me be clear. We've just heard from Councillor COOPER that—a flat out statement that there is no reason why this Council will not install—

Councillor COOPER: A point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor COOPER.

Councillor COOPER: Claim to be misrepresented.

Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor JOHNSTON, to urgency.

Councillor JOHNSTON: There is no reason why this Council won't install pedestrian improvements to make it safer for children in this—that this Council won't do it. She stood up. She said it firmly on the record that there is no reason that this Council won't do it. For seven plus years I have been asking for a refuge at this location. It links a very large active travel school. It links a kindergarten. It links the biggest netball association on the southside of Brisbane and they don't have a safe crossing point. I've brought the motion in here, which Councillor COOPER has voted against personally herself multiple times.

The LORD MAYOR refuses to fund it in the budget. Yet, Councillor COOPER stands up and on the public record today says: ‘we fund infrastructure to make it safer for children’. No, you don't. Not only do you not fund it, when other people make motions in this place to ensure infrastructure for school children is brought forward to be delivered in this city, you vote against it. The statement from Councillor COOPER today that this Administration delivers on infrastructure for school students is just flat out wrong. It's not even this the only school where I've been asking for improvements.

So this is an urgent motion because Councillor COOPER's hypocrisy needs to be exposed. The lies that she tells in this place that Council goes out and builds infrastructure for school students need to be exposed. It is completely unacceptable that she says that this is what the Council does when they deliberately refuse to fund safety improvements like those outside Graceville State School. Let's bring it on. Let's have a proper debate now. If Councillor COOPER can stand up and defend herself, if we have a substantive debate about this issue right now.

Madam Chair, I urge all Councillors to support the urgency motion, so we can have a fulsome and proper debate and we can all reflect on Councillor COOPER's promise that apparently they're building infrastructure for school students.

Chairman: I will put the motion for urgency—sorry.

Councillor COOPER, your misrepresentation.

Councillor COOPER: Councillor JOHNSTON has said that I said that we fund infrastructure for the safety of school children. We do. The SafeST program, the Enhanced School


- 50 -

Zone program, the pedestrian refuges we build. So clearly the comments that I made were absolutely correct and she was not.

Chairman: I will now put the motion for urgency.

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

Councillor JOHNSTON: Division.

The division lapsed for want of a seconder.

Chairman: Councillor COOPER, you were starting your right of reply.

Councillor COOPER: I think I had got about one sentence in, Madam Chair. So I do appreciate the opportunity to actually finish my comments before they were interrupted.

So my comments are that it is this Council who fought to establish the Enhanced School Zone Program, because it was the Department of Transport and Main Roads who install these sorts of facilities on single lane roads. So one lane in either direction. But on multilane roads, the State Government did not fund these sorts of infrastructure upgrade programs. It was this Council who lobbied the then State Government in 2012 to change the rules.

I remember it very distinctly, because at the time the DEPUTY MAYOR was the Infrastructure Chairman and I put to him that one of my schools, Zillmere State School, was impacted when children could not walk to school, because they were directly adjacent to a four lane road and they were not able to encourage children to use public and active transport to get to school because of that lack of facility. So I spoke to him directly about this. We took it up with the then State Government.

We lobbied the then State Government, very heavily to actually change the criteria to allow this program to actually be established. So the nonsense that we hear from those on the other side of the Chamber—except, of course, for the wonderful Councillor RICHARDS—that nonsense, that spurious, confected outrage that they seem to love to come in here and manufacture, it is only this Council that actually set up this program. This program has specific criteria and I have had Council officers confirm, again, to me this morning that this section does not meet the guidelines.

Now, we understand, and the advice we have had very recently, is that they understand that their guidelines do not allow these schools to fit into the criteria, and they confirm to us that their intent is for these schools to meet the criteria and they are willing to consider some changes to their guidelines, which we have been lobbying them to undertake. But it is this Council that established this program. It is this Council that has rolled it out year after year to every single eligible school—


Councillor COOPER: So you, Councillor JOHNSTON, who continues to wilfully yell out and carry on—


Councillor COOPER: —did nothing—nothing—to actually protect any child in this city in terms of this program. You are a disgrace. You get up here—


Councillor COOPER: —up here in this Chamber every week and you lecture and you tell everybody how you know everything. Well, you know what? You know nothing.


Councillor COOPER: Nothing.



- 51 -

Councillor COOPER: You are an example—

Councillor SRI: A point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: A point of order, Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: I would just seek your ruling on whether some of the comments I'm hearing in this Chamber constitutes an act of disorder.

Chairman: Councillor SRI, the comments are in response to a previous speaker and have been directed about the subject matter, so I will allow them to continue.

Councillor COOPER: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

So, Madam Chair, I note and I note that the comments of Councillor SRI says—and I think this is absolutely poor form on his part. He says that we are: ‘conservative in road safety and it's killing people’, unquote. How is that for a comment that is completely inappropriate? This Council delivers, every single year, infrastructure to make the city a safer place for everyone. We can't do every single project, because I can tell you that we will deliver all of those projects for all of those Councillors, and we would not have any money left to do anything else. It is about balance.

It is about making sure that we continue to build parks, that we continue to deliver good public transport options for people. It's about making sure we continue to build bikeways. It's making sure we do everything that we possibly can and we have to do it in a balanced way. There is no government on the earth that can do everything it wants to do, because it has to consider what those ramifications are. Do ratepayers want to pay a huge amount of money every single year? Do they want to increase rates year after year after year? I haven't heard that from the Australian Labor Party.

I haven't heard from the Australian Labor Party that they think there's an endless bucket of money at the State Government, but apparently there's an endless bucket of money in local Council. So find that hypocrisy, Madam Chair. I think it's disappointing, because this is something that Council is absolutely focused on. We do a lot of work in this space and I know that our officers work with each and every Councillor to try and make sure that they protect their community and they look after children.

I am a mother of three. There is no way on God's green earth that I don't take these sorts of matters incredibly seriously. I do my job and every Councillor does their job. We all lobby for projects in our ward, as we should. Why would Council say no to a program that would deliver a road safety outcome, unless it is inhibited by the guidelines. We have, in this case, been inhibited, been—


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, please stop yelling out.

Councillor COOPER: The Councillor for Tennyson wants it every which way, Madam Chair. She never, ever concedes that she is ever wrong and she always thinks everybody should do everything that she says. Well, I would say to you—


Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS.

Councillor COOPER: I would say to you, to the Councillor for Tennyson, through you, Madam Chair, that this Council does its very best each and every day to deliver the kinds of outcomes for all residents of this city, all residents unreservedly, unashamedly. I am proud to be a member of this team—this team, to continue to deliver important infrastructure for the people of Brisbane.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Chairman: I will now put items A, C and D.

Clauses A, C and D put


- 52 -

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

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


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

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


ATTENDANCE:

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

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

72/2018-191. Marie Gales, Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy and Congestion Reduction Unit, Brisbane

Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on pedestrian safety. She provided the information below.

2. Council has a number of programs and initiatives focused on improving pedestrian and cyclist safety, including Safe School Travel, School Traffic Management Plan improvements, enhanced school zone signage, Speed Awareness Monitors (SAMs) and Active Transport Network Plans. Council has also recently initiated a citywide pedestrian review, the Move Safe Brisbane consultation.

3. Council has worked to create a community-friendly identity with programs such as Slow for SAM, a short, memorable message which encourages safer driver behaviour in suburban streets to make ‘SAM’ smile. SAM draws on the familiarity of a smiley face emoji, commonly seen by children and adults alike, and is a fun way to teach children about speed safety which helps them encourage their parents and guardians to slow down and make SAM smile. There are 43 additional SAMs scheduled to be rolled out in 2018-19. Since the program launched in November 2013, motorists travelling above the speed limit reduced their speed by an average of more than 8km/hr across all sites after passing the monitors.

4. Council also uses built form infrastructure such as pedestrian refuge islands, kerb extensions, zebra crossings, childrens’ crossings, traffic signals, overpasses, underpasses, pedestrian malls and shared zones to support pedestrian safety. Network modernisation and corridor improvements also contribute to pedestrian safety. Cycling Brisbane safety videos promote cyclist etiquette and an investment of $100 million in the Better Bikeways for Brisbane program demonstrates Council’s continued commitment to improving pathways for both cyclists and pedestrians.


- 53 -

5. More than 950 sets of traffic signals across Brisbane have signalised pedestrian crossings, with pedestrian countdown timers installed at 472 sites (2,702 pedestrian countdown timer lanterns have been installed). Pedestrian countdown timers count down the time during the flashing red ‘don’t walk’ signal to advise pedestrians of the remaining time they have to safely finish crossing the road. The two-digit display only lights during the flashing clearance period. Council has also produced stickers to affix to traffic signal poles to remind pedestrians to only begin crossing an intersection when the green ‘walk’ signal is displayed.

6. Pedestrian count cameras have been installed at the intersections of Ann and Edward Streets; Edward and Adelaide Streets; and Elizabeth and Albert Streets, Brisbane City. The data collected by these cameras will help inform Council of the number of pedestrians using these intersections as well as the number of jay-walking related violations at these intersections (although Council officers cannot issue infringements for violations of this nature).

7. Move Safe Brisbane is a consultation process that was launched on 31 July 2018. Participants are asked to drag and drop a pin on a map of Brisbane and provide feedback on concerns specific to pedestrian or cyclist activity at that location. Separate maps have been created to capture pedestrian feedback and cyclist feedback. As at 2 August 2018, approximately 620 pedestrian-related comments and 340 cyclist-related comments had been provided.

8. The consultation period for Move Safe Brisbane will close at midnight on 28 August 2018. A report will be compiled based on the feedback received during the consultation period, data from the Queensland Police Services’ WebCrash database, the information gathered by the pedestrian count timers and international best-practice examples.

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

10. RECOMMENDATION:


B PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL INSTALL A SCHOOL ZONE ON IPSWICH ROAD, ANNERLEY, FOR JUNCTION PARK STATE SCHOOLCA18/417907

73/2018-1911. A petition from residents, requesting Council install a school zone on Ipswich Road, Annerley, for

Junction Park State School, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 15 May 2018, by Councillor Ian McKenzie, and received.

12. The Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy and Congestion Reduction Unit, Brisbane Infrastructure, provided the following information.

13. The petition contains 134 signatures. Of the petitioners, 57 reside in Annerley, 71 reside in other suburbs and six reside outside the City of Brisbane.

14. The petitioners suggest that a school zone on Ipswich Road will provide a safer environment for pedestrians travelling to Junction Park State School.

15. Ipswich Road is considered to be an arterial road under Council’s road hierarchy and connects major centres of the city, forming an important link in Brisbane’s bus and freight network. The section of road relevant to this petition has a posted speed limit of 60 km/h and several Council bus services travel along it. Attachment B (submitted on file) shows a locality map.

16. Council installs school zones across Brisbane in accordance with guidelines set by the Queensland Government’s Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR). Under these guidelines, school zones are only permitted on roads to which the school has a direct frontage, the school is readily visible from the road, and there is a primary access to the school which is used as a main student entry point. These


- 54 -

zones provide a signed 40 km/h speed limit each school day from 7am to 9am and from 2pm to 4pm and help to raise awareness of motorists to the presence of children and to drive with care.

17. Junction Park State School has a school zone along the Waldheim Street frontage and the Gowrie Street frontage to its campus. There are also supervised pedestrian crossings on both streets. Attachment C (submitted on file) shows a map of the existing facilities. Council officers are liaising with TMR for approval to extend the hours of operation of the Gowrie Street school zone to be 7am to 4pm which would also permit the installation of enhanced school zone signage between the school campus and the prep facility on Gowrie Street.

18. The petitioners’ feedback about other school zones in the area has been noted. These other locations differ from Junction Park State School in that the schools have direct frontage to the roads where the school zones have been applied and, as such, meet the guidelines outlined by TMR. As the petitioners’ request does not meet TMR guidelines for a school zone, it is unable to be supported.

19. Concerns about students crossing Ipswich Road have been previously raised with Council and, as a result, signal timing of the pedestrian phases were reviewed and optimised for the intersection of Waldheim Street, Ipswich Road and Annerley Road in late 2017.

20. In June 2014, Lord Mayor Graham Quirk established the independent Brisbane Parking Taskforce (the Taskforce) to advise Council how to respond to parking issues and to best manage on-street parking in the future. The Taskforce included representatives from RACQ, P&Cs Queensland, National Retail Association, Multicap, Taxi Council Queensland, Transport Workers Union, Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland, Parking Australia and Council’s Transport for Brisbane, who reviewed more than 1,100 submissions from residents, schools and businesses.

21. In response to many school traffic and parking related issues contained in submissions, the Taskforce recommended that all Brisbane schools develop and implement their own traffic and parking management plan using a template prepared by Council. Using Council’s School Traffic Management Plans (TMP) template offers the benefit of establishing a more consistent approach to parking and traffic management across Brisbane schools, while allowing flexibility for schools to address specific local challenges.

22. Junction Park State School has completed a TMP and Council officers will continue to work with the school to make improvements where possible.

Consultation

23. Councillor Ian McKenzie, Councillor for Coorparoo Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact

24. The response will address the petitioners’ concerns.

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

26. 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.

Attachment ADraft Response

Petition Reference: CA18/417907

Thank you for your petition requesting Council install a school zone on Ipswich Road, Annerley, for Junction Park State School.


- 55 -

Council installs school zones across Brisbane in accordance with guidelines set by the Queensland Government’s Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR). Under these guidelines, school zones are only permitted on roads to which the school has a direct frontage, the school is readily visible from the road, and there is a primary access to the school which is used as a main student entry point. These zones provide a signed 40 km/h speed limit each school day from 7am to 9am and from 2pm to 4pm and help to raise awareness of motorists to the presence of children and to drive with care.

Junction Park State School has a school zone along the Waldheim Street frontage and the Gowrie Street frontage to their campus. There are also supervised pedestrian crossings on both streets. Council officers are liaising with TMR for approval to extend the hours of operation of the Gowrie Street school zone to be 7am to 4pm which would also permit the installation of enhanced school zone signage between the school campus and the prep facility on Gowrie Street.

Your feedback about other school zones in the area has been noted. These other locations differ from Junction Park State School in that the schools have direct frontage to the roads where the school zones have been applied and, as such, meet the guidelines outlined by TMR. As the petitioners’ request does not meet TMR guidelines for a school zone, it is unable to be supported.

Concerns about students crossing Ipswich Road have been previously raised with Council and as a result, signal timing of the pedestrian phases was reviewed and optimised for the intersection of Waldheim Street, Ipswich Road and Annerley Road in late 2017.

In June 2014, Lord Mayor Graham Quirk established the independent Brisbane Parking Taskforce (the Taskforce) to advise Council how to respond to parking issues and to best manage on-street parking in the future. The Taskforce included representatives from RACQ, P&Cs Queensland, National Retail Association, Multicap, Taxi Council Queensland, Transport Workers Union, Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland, Parking Australia and Council’s Transport for Brisbane, who reviewed more than 1,100 submissions from residents, schools and businesses.

In response to many school traffic and parking related issues contained in submissions, the Taskforce recommended that all Brisbane schools develop and implement their own traffic and parking management plan using a template prepared by Council. Using Council’s School Traffic Management Plans (TMP) template offers the benefit of establishing a more consistent approach to parking and traffic management across Brisbane schools, while allowing flexibility for schools to address specific local challenges.

Junction Park State School has completed a TMP and Council officers will continue to work with the school to make safety improvements where possible.

Please let the other petitioners know of this information.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr David Clarke, Senior Transport Network Officer, Investigations Unit, Transport Network Operations, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3178 5601.

Thank you for raising this matter.ADOPTED

C PETITION – REQUESTING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ROAD SAFETY MEASURES IN KAMARIN STREET, MANLY WESTCA18/383685

74/2018-1927. A petition from residents, requesting the implementation of road safety measures in Kamarin Street,

Manly West, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 8 May 2018, by Councillor Peter Cumming, and received.

28. The Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy and Congestion Reduction Unit, Brisbane Infrastructure, provided the following information.


- 56 -

29. The petition contains 402 signatures. Of the petitioners, 135 reside in Wynnum Manly Ward, 11 of which reside in Kamarin Street, 133 petitioners live in other suburbs across the city, with the remaining 134 living outside the City of Brisbane.

30. The petitioners suggest that road safety on Kamarin Street is impacted due to the contour and grade of the road, along with parked vehicles narrowing the width. To address their concerns, the petitioners are requesting a late evening inspection, parking restrictions on one side of the street, traffic calming and lighting improvements.

31. Kamarin Street 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 Kamarin Street. Kamarin Street has a 50 km/h speed limit and is approximately 7.5 metres wide. The southern end of Kamarin Street features a crest between Greta and Adrian Streets. This section of road has a marked centreline to guide motorists to the correct side of the road. The remainder of Kamarin Street is generally straight and flat with good visibility. Attachment B (submitted on file) shows a locality map.

32. Traffic calming involves the installation primarily of devices such as speed platforms and chicanes to discourage non-local traffic and to moderate vehicle speeds, providing a safer environment for all road users. There is a high demand for traffic calming across the city and Council must prioritise funding to those projects that deliver the greatest benefit in terms of safety and amenity for the wider community.

33. In response to this petition, Councillor Peter Cumming, Councillor for Wynnum Manly Ward, conducted community consultation with all properties along Kamarin Street and Empire Avenue. More than 20% of residents responded to this consultation. While the opinions of respondents were divided, the majority of residents of Kamarin Street did not support a traffic calming scheme.

34. As a traffic calming solution was not supported, Council has investigated alternative treatments at the intersection of Empire Avenue and Adrian Street. The alternative treatment for the intersection of Kamarin Street and Empire Avenue consists of traffic islands to better define the traffic lanes which will help calm southbound vehicles approaching the crest and improve pedestrian safety at this intersection. The upgrade will be listed for funding consideration under a future budget and prioritised against other similar citywide projects and would be subject to public consultation.

35. Council will mark yellow lines on the eastern side of Kamarin Street at the crest near Adrian Street. The extent of the line marking is to be determined by consultation with directly affected residents.

36. In relation to the petitioners’ feedback about street lighting, a late night inspection was undertaken along Kamarin Street. It was identified that maintenance works are required, including cleaning and new lamps for three lights. As Energex are responsible for the maintenance and provision of street lighting at this location, a request has been sent to them to carry out these works.

37. As part of the inspection, it was identified that sections of the road would benefit from a lighting upgrade. A design for this work is being prepared by Council. Once complete, this design will be forwarded to Energex to install the upgraded lighting and it is anticipated this will be completed by the end of December 2018.

38. Prior to this petition, safety improvements at the northern end of Kamarin Street near the intersection with Whites Road had been listed for funding under Council’s budget. These improvements include a pedestrian refuge across Whites Road and a splitter island on Kamarin Street which will provide a safe pedestrian crossing point and prevent corner cutting into this section of the street.

Consultation

39. Councillor Peter Cumming, Councillor for Wynnum Manly Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact


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


- 57 -

42. RECOMMENDATION:




Thank you for your petition requesting the implementation of road safety measures in Kamarin Street, Manly West.

Traffic calming involves the installation primarily of devices such as speed platforms and chicanes to discourage non-local traffic and to moderate vehicle speeds, providing a safer environment for all road users. There is a high demand for traffic calming across the city and Council must prioritise funding to those projects that deliver the greatest benefit in terms of safety and amenity for the wider community.

In response to this petition, Councillor Peter Cumming, Councillor for Wynnum Manly Ward, conducted community consultation with all properties along Kamarin Street and Empire Avenue. More than 20% of residents responded to this consultation. While the opinions of respondents were divided, the majority of residents of Kamarin Street did not support a traffic calming scheme.

As a traffic calming solution was not supported, Council has investigated alternative treatments at the intersection of Empire Avenue and Adrian Street. The alternative treatment for the intersection of Kamarin Street and Empire Avenue consists of traffic islands to better define the traffic lanes which will help calm southbound vehicles approaching the crest and improve pedestrian safety at this intersection. The upgrade will be listed for funding consideration under a future budget and prioritised against other similar citywide projects and would be subject to public consultation.

Council will mark yellow lines on the eastern side of Kamarin Street at the crest near Adrian Street. The extent of the line marking is to be determined by consultation with directly affected residents.

In relation to the petitioners’ feedback about street lighting, a late night inspection was undertaken along Kamarin Street. It was identified that maintenance works are required, including cleaning and new lamps for three lights. As Energex are responsible for the maintenance and provision of street lighting at this location, a request has been sent to them to carry out these works.

As part of the inspection, it was identified that sections of the road would benefit from a lighting upgrade. A design for this work is being prepared by Council. Once complete, this design will be forwarded to Energex to install the upgraded lighting and it is anticipated this will be completed by the end of December 2018.

Safety improvements at the northern end of Kamarin Street near its intersection with Whites Road have been listed for funding under Council’s budget. These improvements include a pedestrian refuge across Whites Road and a splitter island on Kamarin Street which will provide a safe pedestrian crossing point and prevent corner cutting into this section of the street.

Please let the other petitioners know of this information.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Mr David Clarke, Senior Transport Network Officer, Investigations Unit, Transport Network Operations, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3178 5601.



- 58 -

D PETITIONS – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL REINSTATE AND IMPROVE THE BUS STOP (BP STOP) ON LYTTON ROAD, EAST BRISBANE CA18/334418 and CA18/334472

75/2018-1943. Two petitions from residents, requesting Council to reinstate and improve the bus stop (BP Stop) on

Lytton Road, East Brisbane, were received during the Autumn Recess 2018.

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

45. The petitions contains 100 signatures, with 87 signatures from residents from the following wards: The Gabba, Central, Marchant, Morningside, Coorparoo, Holland Park, Enoggera, Jamboree and Tennyson. Thirteen signatories were from outside of Brisbane.

46. The petitioners also requested that Council include stop 14/12 in the P228 express service schedule, install the bus shelter that was taken away when the BP station was refurbished and install pedestrian, wheelchair and pram safety signs at the BP exit driveway to ensure the safety of residents choosing to take public transport. Attachment B (submitted on file) shows a locality map.

47. The Wynnum Road corridor upgrade Stage 1 project is part of Council’s commitment to more than 90 road improvement projects to take real action on congestion, by focusing on a range of solutions to improve the existing road network, getting residents home quicker and safer. However, it is also designed to provide crucial improvements to public and active transport infrastructure in East Brisbane, which will make the area more accessible in the future.

48. Stage 1 of the upgrade will provide long overdue safety improvements by widening traffic lanes to the appropriate standard, removing unsafe right-turns and upgrading the Heidelberg Street intersection. This will also provide improvements for pedestrians using the area at the Heidelberg Street intersection with the addition of an urban space to access the new indented bus stop, shops and crossing on the south side of the road. This additional space will include urban design features and landscaping to make it more user friendly, in addition to improving access to the nearby amenities.

49. The Wynnum Road corridor is a major route for bus services, carrying 201 in-service buses per day with six major routes using the corridor. Rationalising and indenting bus bays within Stage 1 has been part of the project since the concept design was announced and released in the October 2014 community newsletter with new stops advised to the wider community in late 2015, as part of the concept design release.

50. Wynnum Road supports a high frequency bus network which services a large area and where there are bus stops within 400 metres of each other, bus network efficiency and reliability is compromised. The Wynnum Road corridor upgrade project provided an opportunity for Council to rationalise some bus stops in the network to ensure efficient and reliable bus network and road network operations.

51. Patronage is considered as part of the spacing requirements and because the stops along this section of Wynnum Road have high usage, it is particularly important to achieve the spacing of 400 to 700 metres to ensure efficient movement of buses through the corridor and enhance the service reliability and travel times for all road users in the Wynnum Road corridor.

52. Additional factors considered when rationalising bus stops include usage; safety and visibility; congestion on the road network; and available Council land. The bus stops in the project area will be upgraded to achieve compliance with the standards defined in the Australian Government’s Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The proposed changes to bus stops as part of the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade are considered appropriate.

53. The ‘BP Stop’ bus stop 14/12 will be removed as part of bus stop rationalisation for the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade. This will allow for improved efficiency to the bus network in East Brisbane. Patrons can use either the new indented bus bay between Northcote Street and Heidelberg Street or the existing bus stop between Salstone Street and Wellington Road. These bus stops are approximately 580 metres apart.


- 59 -

54. Planning for the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade and subsequent rationalisation of bus stops was underway when Council received the development application for the BP service station. Council included a condition as part of the development application to remove the bus shelter at stop 14/12 in preparation for the project.

55. Council has sourced a temporary shelter which has been installed at this location. The temporary shelter is available to commuters until late 2019, when this bus stop will be rationalised as part of the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade. Following the rationalisation, stop 14/12 will be permanently removed and the new indented bus stop at the corner of Heidelberg Street will be operational.

56. Council’s route planners have considered the request for the route P228 service to stop at stop 14/12 on Lytton Road. This stop is not listed in the stopping pattern for the route P228 service, as the stop is due to be removed during phase one of the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade. Council is not currently in a position to amend the stopping pattern to include stop 14/12. The P228 service will continue to operate from Stop 11 Shafston Avenue at Salstone Street.

Funding

57. Funding has been allocated to the project under Service 2.1.2.1 Build the Transport Network, Wynnum Road Corridor Stage 1, with budget allocated for 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20.

Consultation

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

Customer impact


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

61. RECOMMENDATION:



Petition Reference: CA18/334418 and CA18/334472

Thank you for your petitions requesting Council reinstate and improve the bus stop 14/12 (BP Stop) on Lytton Road, East Brisbane.

Wynnum Road supports a high frequency bus network which services a large area and where there are bus stops within 400 metres of each other, bus network efficiency and reliability is compromised. The Wynnum Road corridor upgrade project provided an opportunity for Council to rationalise some bus stops in the network to ensure efficient and reliable bus network and road network operations.

Council can advise that bus stop 14/12 will be removed as part of bus stop rationalisation for the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade Stage 1 project. Council has sourced a temporary shelter which has been installed at this location. The temporary shelter is available to commuters until late 2019, when this bus stop will be rationalised as part of the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade. Following the rationalisation, stop 14/12 will be permanently removed and the new indented bus stop at the corner of Heidelberg Street will be operational.

Rationalising and indenting bus bays within Stage 1 has been part of the project since the concept design was announced and released in the October 2014 community newsletter. The bus stops in the project area will be upgraded to achieve compliance with the standards defined in the Australian


- 60 -

Government’s Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The proposed changes to bus stops as part of the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade are considered appropriate.

Patrons can use either the new indented bus bay between Northcote Street and Heidelberg Street or the existing bus stop between Salstone Street and Wellington Road. These bus stops are approximately 580 metres apart.

Patronage is considered as part of the spacing requirements and because the stops along this section of Wynnum Road have high usage, it is particularly important to achieve the spacing of 400 to 700 metres to ensure efficient movement of buses through the corridor and enhance the service reliability and travel times for all road users in the Wynnum Road corridor.

Additional factors considered when rationalising bus stops include usage; safety and visibility; congestion on the road network; and available Council land.

Council has considered the request for the route P228 service to stop at stop 14/12 on Lytton Road. This stop is not listed in the stopping pattern for the route P228 service, as the stop is due to be removed during phase one of the Wynnum Road corridor upgrade. Council is not currently in a position to amend the stopping pattern to include stop 14/12. The P228 service will continue to operate from Stop 11 Shafston Avenue at Salstone Street.

The Wynnum Road corridor upgrade Stage 1 project is designed to provide crucial improvements to public and active transport infrastructure in East Brisbane, which will make the area more accessible in the future.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Ms Kate Glover, Communications Officer, Project Management, City Projects Office, Brisbane Infrastructure, on (07) 3178 0817.


CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE

Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the City Planning Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Ryan MURPHY, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 7 August 2018, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman.

Three items on the City Planning Committee meeting last week, so we had a presentation about the Merthyr Village Renewal project. This project is in Central Ward, Madam Chair, and I know Councillor HOWARD will like to say a few points about it, so I won't take too much of her thunder. This was a great opportunity to renew an old SCIP (Suburban Centre Improvement Project) in the very heart of New Farm, Madam Chairman.

The project was undertaken in consultation with the local traders and residents and obviously improvements to footpath works, which made it easier and safer for residents to get around. There was a mish mash of work that had been undertaking since the original works were put in place where contractors or other services had been put across some of our existing pavements.

It also improved the ability for Council to provide better landscaping, but also provide for better bike rack installations, cleaned up some of the existing infrastructure that was on the streetscape as well, Madam Chairman, but also provided opportunities for expanded outdoor dining, as well as improving the visual amenity of the whole precinct, Madam Chairman. Standardised some of the street furniture, but also still kept some unique elements to part of the Merthyr Village design that's down there.


- 61 -

There's also a petition there, Madam Chairman, at item B, requesting Council improve the Gaythorne shopping strip. Madam Chairman, this was a petition presented by Councillor WINES and we're pleased to be able to be funding those works in the Gaythorne Village precinct area as part of the 2018-19 Council budget. Madam Chairman, then there's a petition at item C, which is requesting the relocation of letterboxes at 4 Lewis Place, Manly West. I know that Councillor CUMMING is going to be saying a few words to that effect in the Council Chamber.


Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I will speak on item C, Madam Chair, and the head petition in this matter was told by Council staff before the project was approved that the letterboxes would be located at the main entrance to the complex. This is a townhouse complex, the vast bulk of the townhouses can be entered off—you drive in off Radford Road and that's how you have access to your property. So it would have made just absolute common sense to have the letterboxes on that front of the property.

Instead, they've been put on a side street, Lewis Place, and that's caused considerable annoyance to local residents. It's a busy little street as it is. It's an access to a nearby school and the head petitioner and all the other people living in the streets around that area are quite annoyed by the fact that the letterboxes were located where they are, so I just think Council could have done better. They could have—well, they should have made sure that where the letterboxes were put in the first place is where they said they would be put.

They should have gone in harder and negotiated with the developer while the project was being done to make sure the letterboxes were on Radford Road and now they've just turned around and said: well, look, you'll have to negotiate with the body corporate and ask them if they're prepared to change the siting of the letterboxes, which is—the body corporate is not interested in that and unfortunately nothing is going to happen.

So they'll be lumbered with an inconvenient and annoying situation, which has got some potential to be a dangerous situation too with cars coming in and out of the—where the letterboxes are located onto the busy Lewis Place, especially at school drop-off and collection times.


Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I rise to speak to item A of the report, the Merthyr Village Renewal.

Madam Chairman, Central Ward, not just Teneriffe and Newstead, is all about vibrancy and colour, which is why I'm delighted to rise to talk to item A in the Planning Committee report. Every time I'm in Wilston Village or Taringa or Graceville, I'm reminded of the successful renewal projects that have improved the access, amenity and public artwork projects.

Certainly from the feedback I received from residents across the city through my ward office I know just how valued this initiative is by the wider Brisbane community and I'm sure future activation projects will be just as welcomed by Brisbane.

Keeping Brisbane's public spaces activated, whether they are laneways, parks or footpaths or whole city blocks is important for our community and I'm delighted to read in the minutes and from my experience as a local, that the three improved accessibility ramps, the street furniture upgrades with their bespoke seats, urban stools, bike racks, bins and a community noticeboard that were placed at Merthyr and Brunswick Streets do just that.

As I pass by and wander the site multiple times every day, it's also a joy to see the delivery of high-end, large format street artworks as part of the project


- 62 -

through Council's Artforce program. I know that we, as a Council, are a keen supporter of the creative arts in a growing creative economy. We are big supporters of the Artforce work, because it contributes to our reputation as a vibrant and creative city. It enhances public spaces and makes our city a memorable one for visitors and residents.

Our local artist, Shaun Campbell, was commissioned to provide two artworks featuring bees and ladybugs across the site. The artworks reflect New Farm's farming history, our connection to the Brisbane River and the city's commitment to being clean, green and sustainable. I know that we have been working hard over the last nearly 30 years, renewing our suburbs through the Urban Renewal Brisbane program and, Madam Chairman, I remind you that we are doing so with one primary goal, the creation of local employment.

The economic development of our city and, importantly for me at the micro level, of suburbs is of great importance to those on this side of the Chamber. Madam Chairman, I stand for jobs, jobs for the city and jobs for Central and projects like these, with these fantastic streetscape legacies for community, are just the thing we want to see in Central Ward.

Thank you.


Councillor WINES.

Councillor WINES: Thanks, Madam Chairman. I just rise in support of item B the petition resolution in favour of the Gaythorne Village precinct upgrade.

I just want to begin by showing and expressing my gratitude towards the Committee for this recommendation, in particular the Chairman, for the recommendation that through the budget this upgrade will be funded. I think that it's much needed. Gaythorne is a wonderful place. It is a place full of potential.

This is a neighbourhood two suburbs away, but still in the same arterial line as the recent Alderley SCIP upgrades and people have seen the amazing transformation of that place, the new businesses that were brought in, and the change in attitude, not only to those shopping precincts, but to that suburb as a whole area. Gaythorne is a place, as I say, of a high amount of potential and I think that this project will transform people's attitudes to Gaythorne, people who live there, but also people who pass through there, creating a sense of place.

Gaythorne started its life as a rifle range for soldiers preparing to leave for World War I. It now is a suburb of many people of diverse ranges of backgrounds and housing. These shops, however, sit at the intersection of two major roads, they are an excellent example of a public space that needs a hand. That's why I'm so very grateful to the Committee for this recommendation. I look forward to the works that are coming.

I also want to make special mention that the suburb, when the petition was raised with them, the excellent rate of take-up from the local residents and that was fundamental. I'd like to thank them for wanting to see a better future for themselves and for their own community.


Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. I just rise to speak very briefly on item B, and I congratulate Councillor WINES for his success in advocating on behalf of his community. I would just note though that—


Chairman: Councillor CUMMING and Councillor JOHNSTON, can you please show Councillor SRI some courtesy and stop yelling out across the Chamber.

Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. I would just like to place on record concerns about the lack of transparency behind decision making in allocating funding for these sorts


- 63 -

of projects. I understand this particular urban renewal project will cost in the realm of $2 million. Perhaps Councillor BOURKE will correct me if that's not correct, but $2 million is a lot of money to be allocating on an ad hoc basis without the proper scrutiny of the budget processes.

I would just like to understand exactly what is the criteria that lead to a particular commercial precinct or a particular neighbourhood being allocated funding under this budget item. I wouldn't want residents of Brisbane to arrive at the conclusion that only projects of this nature are getting funded in LNP wards. That's not a suggestion I'm making, but I think there is a legitimate concern in the community about how funding for these kind of infrastructure projects are getting allocated; what criteria are being used.

Through you, Madam Chair, Councillor BOURKE suggested or alluded to in the Committee that the petition was a big part of that decision-making process, which maybe is a good thing, but if you can get $2 million of funding allocated on the basis of 140 petition signatures, I think a lot of other Councillors in this place would be scratching their heads as to why their petitions are being met with the same kind of response. So apart from 141 petition signatures, what were the criteria?

What was it about Gaythorne in particular that meant that it was the successful neighbourhood precinct in terms of getting this funding allocated while so many other areas of the city are in such dire need of improvement? I'm not for a second saying that Gaythorne is not deserving or that the money shouldn't be spent there, but I think in the interests of transparency and accountability, it would be important for Councillor BOURKE to clearly articulate what are the criteria. I'd also ask Councillor BOURKE to let the Chamber know what other particular locations are currently being considered.

Councillor BOURKE would be aware that I've written to him about the Boundary Street precinct in West End and I'm sure other Councillors have similarly—


Councillor SRI: —raised particular suburban precincts that they think are in long overdue for improvements and spending under this budget program. So let's not give the ratepayers of Brisbane the mistaken impression that this budget is being used for pork barrelling. Let's be transparent about how we're making these decisions and how the money is being allocated and let's give all the Councillors a fair chance to advocate on behalf of their wards.

If we all know what the criteria are, then we can all clearly articulate the cases for that spending to be taking place within the areas that we think are most deserving. But at the moment my concern is that these decisions, which involve quite large sums of money, are being made behind closed doors on an ad hoc basis without any transparency or clear process. So I'd just put that question, through you, Madam Chair, to Councillor BOURKE. Can you please let us know what the criteria are? Let us know what other locations are currently being considered.

Let us know when those decisions will be made and let us know what other information Councillor BOURKE, through you, Madam Chairman, let us know what other information you would like to see from Councillors if we're keen to make the case for similar spending in our own electorates. Two million dollars is not a small sum of money and it would be very concerning if these sorts of sums were being allocated without proper process.


Councillor COOK.

Councillor COOK: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair.

I rise to enter the debate in relation to item B, the petition requesting that Council improve the Gaythorne shopping precinct. Madam Chair, I share Councillor SRI's concerns. I can provide a little bit of insight as to what


- 64 -

happened during the budget information session on that issue. Councillor SIMMONDS, the former Chair, was asked that question about whether any projects had been listed. We were told there had been none listed. We also asked about the criteria. The response to that was a summation of previously funded SCIP projects.

There were no criteria provided, because—well, I don't actually know the reason why it wasn't provided. I guess they had some idea at that time. I note that this petition was presented on 22 May by Councillor WINES. So maybe he had some insight as to what was on its way. I don't know. But, Madam Chair, this petition was signed by 141 people. It was presented to Council, as I said, on 22 May by Councillor WINES, the Councillor for Enoggera.

The recommendation before Council is that a village precinct is justified for the Gaythorne shopping precinct and that the planning and design phase for this project will commence in August 2018, with the construction anticipated between January and June 2019. The final design for the project may include street tree planting, additional garden beds, improved pedestrian accessibility, street furniture, footpath upgrades and public art. Council will launch the project with a kiosk onsite to provide the local community with further opportunities for input on the project.

Madam Chair, as I've said, I read this petition with great interest. This project put forward by the petitioners will be funded out of the new Village Precinct Project funding, which is, as we all know, the old Suburban Centre Initiatives Projects, also known as the SCIP projects. Madam Chair, in this financial year, Village Precinct Projects has over $5 million available for the 2018-19 financial year.

To my knowledge, this is the first project approved specifically under the new scheme. Madam Chair, in this place, just a few short months ago I asked LORD MAYOR about his intentions for The Corso shopping precinct in my ward, which was an LNP by-election commitment from this Administration, to revitalise that precinct under the former SCIP scheme. The LORD MAYOR stood in this place and failed to honour that commitment. His candidate didn't win so it was too bad for my residents.

This is despite my residents waiting for funding since 2007, multiple, multiple petitions, hundreds of signatures in this place, advocacy by the former Councillor for over 10 years and strong local support. Here today before us, we now see what that criteria are, what the prerequisites are for funding under the Village Precinct Project with this petition for the Gaythorne shopping precinct. Madam Chair, that criteria seem to be number one, that the precinct be located in an LNP ward; number two, get a petition with around 141 signatures; and number three, that the precinct be located in an LNP ward. Madam Chairman, the magic formula is now finally out, it's before us, it's here, it's presented today. Not only that, Madam Chairman, this project will commence this month, in a number of weeks with construction to be between January and June next year. This is absolutely astounding.

I am genuinely shocked given that my residents have been waiting for over 10 years. I just cannot believe how things seem to work in this Council. I mean I must admit I've been here six months but holy moly it feels like six years. This is just an absolute eye opener. This petition was presented in this Chamber less than three months ago and gets the go ahead. Unbelievable. My residents are just going to be absolutely shocked by this decision after 10 years of campaigning.

Madam Chairman, on 19 July, I wrote to the LORD MAYOR and separately to the new Planning Chair, Councillor BOURKE—I note no response has been received to those letters—to ask them to consider The Corso again. I've launched a further petition last week for The Corso to be upgraded under the Village Precinct Project. I hope, Madam Chair, that we see the same treatment for my community as we do for the LNP wards.

I'm calling on the LORD MAYOR and on the new Chair to take the politics out of these decisions. Treat Seven Hills and my residents of my ward, a non-LNP


- 65 -

ward, one of seven, equally. Deliver on his promise to my community that they've been waiting 10 years for and do the right thing.

Seriatim - Clause CCouncillor Kara COOK requested that Clause C, REQUESTING THE RELOCATION OF THE LETTERBOXES AT 4 LEWIS PLACE, MANLY WEST, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.


Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Just in response to Councillor CUMMING. So Councillor CUMMING talked about this petition down there at Wynnum Manly with regards to the letterbox. The actual—and he talked about having the letterbox moved onto Radford Road but, unfortunately, the actual petition is, and I'm reading from the petition, I request the relocation of letterboxes for the 54 townhouses from Lewis Place, Manly West to the pedestrian gate of the townhouse complex which faces Wondall Road, Manly West.

Now on Wondall Road at this location there is nowhere for residents to pull up and access their letterboxes. So when people are coming home or people want to easily access their letterboxes, the current location there is a visitor carpark. It is located next to the onsite manager's office and so the development application that was approved had the letterboxes in this particular location.

I note having a quick glance through the actual signatures on the petition, Madam Chairman, there's 111 signatures there. There is probably somewhere between 20 and 30 of those 111 who live in the townhouse complex; so they are either members of the body corporate or live in units owned by members of the body corporate, Madam Chairman.

So we as a Council have gone back to or propose to go back to the head petitioner and advise the petitioners that they can actually approach the body corporate. If these people live in the body corporate, I would argue that they would have a pretty good case in putting forward a motion to their body corporate to seek to have these particular letterboxes moved if they so desire. That is the best course of action.

They are private letterboxes. Council has no ability to direct a private entity to move these letterboxes that have been built in accordance with a development application, Madam Chairman. I would just hope that Councillor CUMMING works with the residents who live in the unit complex to approach their body corporate to be able to seek a resolution through that body corporate to address their issues or concerns that they may have with the location of the letterboxes.

Chairman: I will now put items A and B.

Clauses A and B put

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

Chairman: I will now put item C.

Clause C put

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

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



- 66 -

AYES: 19 - DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, 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 Nicole JOHNSTON.

ABSTENTIONS: 1 - Councillor Jonathan SRI.


ATTENDANCE:

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

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – MERTHYR VILLAGE RENEWAL

76/2018-191. Omar Barragan, Urban Design Manager, City Planning and Economic Development, City Planning and

Sustainability, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Merthyr Village Renewal. He provided the information below.

2. Council’s Urban Design, Strategy and Delivery team was responsible for the strategy, design and project management of the Merthyr Village Renewal project (the project), in consultation with the Public Arts team. Urban Amenities, Field Services, Brisbane Infrastructure undertook the construction, and Asset Services, Field Services, and Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure, were project partners. Stage one occurred in 2016 along Brunswick Street and Stage two was completed in March 2018 along Merthyr Road and Brunswick Street.

3. City Planning and Economic Development had a budget of $795,000 for the project and received funding contributions from Asset Services and Transport Planning and Strategy. The project provided three improved accessibility ramps in Stage 1 and 11 in Stage 2, along with street furniture including bespoke seats, urban stools, bike racks, bins and a community notice board.

4. The project faced a number of challenges during the construction process including undertaking night works during trading hours and managing stakeholder and community expectations in relation to project outcomes. The Commonwealth Games Queen’s Baton Relay was scheduled to run through the project area and all signs of construction had to be removed prior to the event.

5. Stage 1 was completed in June 2017 and improved amenity and accessibility with work undertaken managed by Asset Services in conjunction with the Urban Design unit, City Planning and Economic Development. The bespoke seating aimed to create a non-standard seat to replace the older placemaking seating elements that were removed under the artwork strategy. The seating is curved and compact to suit the scale of the refreshed streetscape with standard materials of precast concrete and timber used.

6. The old community notice board was an important community asset, however, was damaged and not weather proof. A new community noticeboard was created as part of Council’s standard suite of street furniture with key design criteria including:- flexible design for one-sided or double-sided viewing- weather protection for notices- easy to use and accessible to all members of the community- easy and economical to maintain.

7. Two Artforce projects on Energex transformer boxes were included in the Project, with a third being commissioned in Sydney Street.


- 67 -

8. The project was delivered on time and within budget as part of Council’s long-term vision for new accessibility features and amenity improvements to help meet the needs of residents and businesses. The Field Services construction supervisor maintained a good rapport with stakeholders, minimising impact of works on the traders and residents.

9. Involvement of the asset maintainers in design, implementation and part-funding the Project created ownership and ongoing maintenance commitment. There was positive feedback from local traders about renewal outcomes and one benefit being the expansion of outdoor dining.

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

11. RECOMMENDATION:


B PETITIONS – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL IMPROVE THE GAYTHORNE SHOPPING PRECINCTCA18/427382 and CA18/442917

77/2018-1912. Two petitions from residents requesting that Council improve the Gaythorne shopping precinct, were

presented to the meeting of Council held on 22 May 2018, by Councillor Andrew Wines, and received.

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

14. The petitions contained 141 signatures.

15. The petitioners request funding to improve the commercial area of Gaythorne, including the provision of new footpaths, artworks, street tree planting, garden beds and improved pedestrian accessibility near the intersection of Samford Road and Pickering Street. The petitioners claim that the proposed upgrade would increase business confidence in the area, and attract more consumer interest.

16. Following these petitions, investigations to assess the condition of the area and placemaking opportunities to facilitate improvements concluded that the commercial strip along Samford Road, and connections to Gaythorne Station along Pickering Street, are in poor condition and in need of upgrades. Pedestrian movement through this area is difficult and accessibility levels are low. There are limited shade trees and garden beds and, as a whole, this area lacks character and identity. This environment has also affected local businesses, which is reflected in the high number of vacant tenancies.

17. It has therefore been determined that a Village Precinct Project at Samford Road, Gaythorne, will bring significant placemaking and accessibility benefits to the area in question, and this has been approved for implementation. The planning and design phase for this project will commence in August 2018, with project construction anticipated between January and June 2019.

18. The final design for this project may include items such as street tree planting, additional garden beds, improved pedestrian accessibility, street furniture, footpath upgrades and public art. Council’s Urban Design team will launch the project in August 2018, with a kiosk onsite to provide the local community with further opportunities for input on the project.

Funding

19. Funding is available under Program 4 (Precinct Projects), to undertake a Village Precinct Project in this location in the 2018-19 financial year.


- 68 -

Consultation

20. Councillor Andrew Wines, Councillor for Enoggera Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer Impact

21. There will be minor impacts on local businesses within this precinct during the construction period.

22. The Divisional Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed.

23. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED OF THE FOLLOWING.- COUNCIL HAS DETERMINED THAT A VILLAGE PRECINCT PROJECT IS

JUSTIFIED FOR THE GAYTHORNE SHOPPING PRECINCT AND, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING AND DESIGN PHASE FOR THIS PROJECT WILL COMMENCE IN AUGUST 2018, WITH PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ANTICIPATED BETWEEN JANUARY AND JUNE 2019.

- THE FINAL DESIGN FOR THE PROJECT MAY INCLUDE STREET TREE PLANTING, ADDITIONAL GARDEN BEDS, IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBILITY, STREET FURNITURE, FOOTPATH UPGRADES AND PUBLIC ART. COUNCIL WILL LAUNCH THE PROJECT IN AUGUST 2018, WITH A KIOSK ONSITE TO PROVIDE THE LOCAL COMMUNITY WITH FURTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR INPUT ON THE PROJECT.

ADOPTED

C PETITION – REQUESTING THE RELOCATION OF THE LETTERBOXES AT 4 LEWIS PLACE, MANLY WESTCA18/339701

78/2018-1924. A petition from residents requesting the relocation of the letterboxes from Lewis Place, Manly West, to

the pedestrian gate of the townhouse complex on Wondall Road, Manly West, was received during the Autumn Recess 2018.


26. The petition contained 89 signatures.

27. The development application for material change of use and reconfiguration of a lot for dwelling houses (five houses on small lots) and multiple dwellings (54 units) was approved by Council’s delegate on 22 June 2015 (application reference A003973077).

28. This development application was impact assessable under the requirements of Brisbane City Plan 2014. The application received 111 accepted submissions objecting to the proposal. There was no appeal in the Planning and Environment Court against Council’s decision on the application.

29. The petitioners are requesting that the letterboxes currently located in Lewis Place be relocated to Wondall Road. The site containing the development has three street frontages being Wondall Road (pedestrian access only), Radford Road (vehicle and pedestrian access) and Lewis Place (limited vehicle access). The letterboxes have been placed on the Lewis Place frontage in accordance with the approved plans of development, in proximity to the townhouse management office and one of the visitor parking spaces.

30. A driveway access is located on the Lewis Place frontage but does not allow vehicle access through to the townhouses as it is restricted by bollards required as a condition of the development. All vehicle access to the townhouses is via Radford Road.


- 69 -

31. As the letterboxes are in accordance with the development approval, Council cannot require the developer or body corporate to relocate them to another street frontage. Council also cannot lawfully enter the property and relocate the letterboxes.

32. The head petitioner can be advised that they are able to contact the developer and/or the body corporate to discuss the potential relocation of the letterboxes. Given many of the petitioners are residents of the townhouses they may be open to the relocation.

Consultation

33. Councillor Peter Cumming, Councillor for Wynnum Manly Ward, has been consulted and does not support the recommendation.

34. The Divisional Manager recommended as follows and the Committee agreed, with Councillor Jared Cassidy dissenting.

35. RECOMMENDATION:

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



The development application for material change of use and reconfiguration of a lot for dwelling houses (five houses on small lots) and multiple dwellings (54 units) was approved by Council’s delegate on 22 June 2015 (application reference A003973077).

The location of the letterboxes on Lewis Place is in accordance with the approved plans for the development. Council cannot require the developer or the body corporate to relocate the letterboxes to an alternative street frontage. Council also cannot lawfully enter the property to relocate the letterboxes. It is recommended that the petitioners contact the body corporate for the site and discuss with them the potential relocation of the letterboxes or discuss an outcome that is satisfactory to all parties.

A request to Council may be made by the body corporate to relocate the letterboxes to the original temporary location (Radford Road, or in close proximity). The body corporate can do this by requesting that the relocation be considered generally in accordance with the development approval. A plan showing the proposed new location of the letterboxes must be included (a site plan can be marked up by hand to show the new location). If the new location is in the previous temporary location or in close proximity, Council will consider a fee waiver in this instance.

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 7 August 2018, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor McLACHLAN.

Councillor McLACHLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just briefly, the item before us is a presentation on the new Brisbane Koala Science Institute at Lone Pine. It was a presentation to the Committee on what has been achieved with the opening of the Science Institute and reflecting on the fact that it went from a Memorandum of Understanding in November 2016 through to completion and opening in June 2018.


- 70 -

So great progress was made over that time to deliver on this commitment that had been made to provide for koala research to be located at Lone Pine. I implore all those who are listening and all Councillors here to actually go and have a look at what's there because it's a fantastic facility and will certainly be a great attraction as well for visitors to Brisbane to not only go and see koalas but understand the research that's being undertaken to ensure their longevity in our urban environment.

So it is a world class facility, Madam Chairman. It brings together universities' research staff to find out everything that we can about koalas and to ensure that that information is shared. The building itself has some really interesting facts as well and you can't see it on the surface, unfortunately, but the building is actually cooled by geothermal technology. They drilled a hole down 80 metres into the ground and they pump air down into the ground and bring it back up to keep the building cool.

So it's an absolutely fantastic bit of science that was delivered in the context of delivery of the building as well but the primary purpose is to provide for a research facility. That's being undertaken, and it will certainly assist the researchers throughout the community of Brisbane and South East Queensland to understand and to share information about koalas and to ensure that they can overcome some of the big problems that they have as they survive in our current environment. Thank you, Madam Chairman.


Nothing further?

I will put the report.

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 – BRISBANE KOALA SCIENCE INSTITUTE

79/2018-191. Wade Fitzgerald, Major Projects and Asset Coordination Manager, Natural Environment, Water and

Sustainability, City Planning and Sustainability, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Brisbane Koala Science Institute (the Institute). He provided the information below.

2. The Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary (Lone Pine) was founded in 1927 and is the world’s first and largest koala sanctuary, with more than 130 koalas. Council has established the Institute in collaboration with Lone Pine, staffed by scientific researchers investigating key issues facing koalas.

3. This facility located at Lone Pine will establish Brisbane as the ‘koala capital’ of Australia and offers residents, interstate and international visitors a unique and memorable experience that celebrates Australia’s most iconic native animal, while helping to educate and engage visitors about how they can contribute to koala conservation.

4. The project budget included $2 million towards the delivery of the Institute, $1.053 million towards research staff and other project-related expenses; and $300,000 towards a koala fodder plantation.

5. The project milestones include:- a memorandum of understanding between Council and Lone Pine signed in November 2016- a funding agreement prepared in March 2017- a concept plan approved in May 2017


- 71 -

- research staff employed in January 2018- construction of the Institute commenced in January 2018- the Institute opening in June 2018.

6. The Institute building is energy efficient, utilising solar power for electricity and geothermal power for all air-conditioning. The solar system will be a 37-kilowatt system, with 205 panels and 40 kilowatts of storage capacity. The carbon offset is expected to be approximately 2.3 tonnes per month, which is the equivalent of 60 trees.

7. Geothermal climate control uses natural temperatures of the earth to either heat or cool a space, instead of using electricity. The 36 kilowatt system pumps hot air from outside to 80 metres below the Earth's surface, cooling it to 21 degrees, before pumping it back up and into the building. It uses approximately 70% less energy to cool the air than a conventional air-conditioning system, therefore reducing the building's carbon footprint considerably.

8. The Institute aims to inspire visitors by the educative interactive displays, encouraging them to take personal action, where they can, to assist in koala conservation. Citizen Science is one such way for everyday residents to contribute to research and conservation projects. Live web cams are installed in some of Lone Pine’s enclosures that are linked to touch screens in the Institute, which prompt visitors to record what the koalas are doing, for example sleeping, climbing, or eating. This is recorded and used for research activities.

9. ‘Animal orchestra’ is an interactive projection where visitors can appreciate the sights and sounds of a healthy bushland ecosystem. Visitors stand on one of four floor mats, each with a picture of an insect, a mammal, a reptile, and a bird, and those animals appear on screen along with their sounds. When all four sections of the orchestra are activated, the whole chorus is very impressive.

10. A sky deck in the trees extends from the southern end of the Institute, surrounding a tree which is home to ‘Rodney’, one of Lone Pine’s koalas. Visitors are encouraged to scrunch and smell eucalypt leaves to learn about koala diet and nutrition.

11. Visitors are able to view actual research taking place in the Institute through each of four windows to rooms, including:- the animal kitchen, which shows staff preparing food for koalas and other wildlife- the lab, which shows researchers undertaking scientific research- the surgery, which shows staff undertaking medical procedures and check-ups

(when appropriate for visitors to view)- the koala enclosure, which shows a koala under observation for research purposes (as and

when required).

12. The Institute’s laboratory is fully equipped and contains essential equipment for koala research. Research staff have dedicated offices and a resource library is available for staff and visitors. A meeting room is also available for research meetings and conferences. Images of the Institute were displayed.

13. The Institute is a world-class facility that brings together universities and other research institutions to advance life-saving research about koalas. It is staffed by scientific researchers that focus on key issues facing koalas in the urban context. Research conducted at the Institute focuses on topics of disease and breed and release programs, and will be supported by other research relevant to the Brisbane koala population.

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

15. RECOMMENDATION:


FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE


- 72 -

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 7 August 2018, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor HOWARD.

Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. We had a committee presentation on Love Food Hate Waste and it was a very interesting Committee presentation. I think that everyone learnt quite a bit and we found out that Australians throw out $8 billion worth of food each year. Madam Chairman, as you know, our Waste and Resource Recovery Services are working very, very hard with the residents of Brisbane to ensure that we keep as much waste as possible out of landfill.

So we're very much looking forward at ways that we can raise the awareness and make sure that food waste can be diverted from landfill through composting, worm farms and through community aid. One of the areas that we've looked at is cooking workshops and we talked about that a fair bit within the Committee.

One of the chefs who had led eight of the workshops carried out a survey on how much the Love Food Hate Waste messaging infiltrated the homes of the participants and the results show that there as 100% increase in participants' food waste awareness and a 92% increase in reducing bread and tomato waste. So we think that's a great success and moving forward we're looking at hosting some suburb-based activation events. So I look forward to all Councillors getting on board with that one.

Madam Chairman, I just want to also remind Councillors that they can join up to the monthly e-newsletter and get even more information about what we're doing in the education field of making sure that we're keeping food waste out of our landfill. Thanks very much.



Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, Madam Chairman, I rise to speak on the Committee presentation Love Food Hate Waste. It was a very informative Committee presentation last week and it led to quite a few questions which Councillor HOWARD very helpfully answered today.

Can I say that I think we're all shocked in the Committee about how much food was actually wasted, including staples like bread which could go in our freezers. It's a good thing that Council has programs in place to look at changing behaviour. The really interesting part of the presentation related to—and it's in paragraph 6 just to be clear before I'm told I'm being irrelevant: Council funded 12 cooking workshops between April and June 2018.

Now it struck me as a bit of an unusual thing. I thought: oh that sounds interesting, where were they held? You know, thinking they'd be perhaps spread out across the city—


Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, you ask a good question Councillor GRIFFITHS. So I did, I asked Councillor HOWARD to tell us where they were and this is what we were told: they were held in Banyo, The Gap and Enoggera. What do those three places have in common? One, there are—


Councillor JOHNSTON: —yes, it's a big joke to these people and we're about to find out why and I'm glad they're laughing their heads off. Big, big joke. Well guess what? They're all on the northside, number one. Yet again this Council is only funding programs on the northside of the city and excluding the southside of the city. This is exactly the same in the waste portfolio when they started with the composting sites and they only funded projects on the northside. It's outrageous that it's only being done on the northside, number one.


- 73 -

Number two, they are all marginal LNP seats. Northgate Ward, one per cent; The Gap, five per cent; and Enoggera Ward, four per cent. So here is a program that Councillor HOWARD told us today was signed off in the usual way at the direction of the then Chairperson, Councillor MATIC, who is pork barrelling private cooking classes in LNP marginal wards without telling any other Councillors—

Councillor ADAMS: Point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor ADAMS: I think—I'm sure she thinks she's so very, very clever, but it is imputing motive and it is offensive and it's continued all evening and it's time and it's enough. Thank you.

Chairman: Thank you, Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor—


Chairman: When the Chamber is silent we will continue.


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, this is about the actual program Love Food Hate Waste, it is not a situation of ward envy or north versus south. Can you please come back to the actual report on Love Food Hate Waste.

Councillor JOHNSTON: I love this robust political Chamber that we're in. Isn't it amazing. Guess what, Madam Chairman, paragraph 6 it is, I'm sorry I think I said eight earlier; paragraph 6, this is actually what we talked about in the committee last week. This is actually what the presentation was about in the committee last week and guess what, I personally think it is outrageous and corrupt—let me be clear, that these decisions are being made—

Chairman: Stop, Councillor JOHNSTON—


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, I—order!

Councillor SIMMONDS—


Chairman: —you do not speak when I am speaking. You've been in here long enough to know section 51.


Chairman: Councillor CUMMING, I don't need you barking instructions from the back bench either.


Chairman: If you are going to behave in an infantile manner, you are going to feel the results and the consequences of the Meetings Local Law. You do not come into this Chamber and bark like a dog at me. That is unacceptable behaviour.

Now Councillor JOHNSTON, you used the word corrupt. That is not an appropriate word to be used in this Chamber without any substantiation.

Councillor JOHNSTON, I remind you that there is no parliamentary privilege in this place and to consider your words extremely carefully. As for all Councillors in this place, I ask you to behave yourselves with an appropriate level of decorum.


Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SRI.


- 74 -

Councillor SRI: Sorry to interrupt but I do want to seek your clarification because I note that I have used the word corrupt a couple of times in this Chamber and I think it's important that we do allow an open debate and that Councillors are able to make those. So I'd just like you to clarify when can we use that word and when can't we use that word.


Chairman: Councillors SRI—order! That's a fair question. It is a fair question, Councillor SRI and when it is targeted and specific it is something that Councillors need to consider their words very carefully. If it is talking about something that is more vague and generalised or a reflection it could possibly be deemed to be acceptable but it would depend on the individual circumstances because to make allegations is a very, very serious use of that word.

So I just remind all Councillors it is your own responsibility to consider your own language and to ensure that it is appropriate for this Chambers.

Councillor JOHNSTON, to the report please, not about what happened in Committee last week. This is about what is contained in the report, thank you.

Councillor JOHNSTON: I draw your attention to paragraph 6 and the presentation in the Committee in the report that we discussed at length was about the cooking schools. It's in the report. So let me sum up, let me be very clear about this, it is wrong when this Administration spends ratepayers' money only on the northside and only in marginal LNP wards without telling anyone else.

The other six Councillors sitting over here near me, did anybody tell you that there were cooking schools out there that you could have people come along to? No, they did not. They certainly didn't tell me. I think it is wrong, it is inappropriate. It is an appalling use of ratepayers' funds to pork barrel in such a way that is all about trying to sure up your marginal seats using ratepayers' funding. It's—

Councillor ADAMS: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor ADAMS: I bring the Councillor back to the point that you made about the report, not the process, about the report and again she is imputing motive and absolutely out of line. If she has a belief that there is pork barrelling or corruption, as she mentioned earlier, please send it to the CEO—


Chairman: Order.


Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, I don't believe your reflection on the CEO was appropriate for this Chamber—


Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, do not answer me back. I don't believe your reflection on the CEO was a fair comment and it is not appropriate for this Chamber.

Councillor JOHNSTON, I believe you may be misreading Clause 8, it says moving forward Council will host suburb-based activation—


Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, don't interrupt me. It says: ‘moving forward Council will host suburb-based activation events which will involve working with Councillors in their wards’. Now in light of that, I ask you to come back to the report and to stop straying onto the other matters that you have been raising.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Let me quote this—

Chairman: Point of—


- 75 -

Councillor JOHNSTON: Let me quote—

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, there is a point of order. You call enough points of order in this place, you know that when a point of order is called, I am required to deal with it.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

DEPUTY MAYOR: I'm really concerned about some of the comments that have been made and thrown around really lightly, like corruption, and then the suggestion—well not the suggestion, the claim about the CEO just now from Councillor GRIFFITHS. I ask that you consider asking Councillor GRIFFITHS to withdraw that comment because I believe it's defamatory.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Well there's nothing on the record, Madam Chairman, so I don't think I have to withdraw that comment.

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, you have made a statement across the Chamber with members—

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Madam Chairman, I think I said I don't—

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, do not interrupt me. Do not interrupt me at all. You have made statements, yelled them out across this Chamber with a multitude of people here present in the Chamber including Council officers and including members of the public in the public gallery. Now, Councillor GRIFFITHS, will you withdraw the comment that you have made and apologise unreservedly in respect of the comment that you have made about the CEO?

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Madam Chairman, my comment was, so that we have this on the record, that I believed the CEO isn't fair. I certainly am happy to withdraw that comment, but I don't apologise unreservedly because I moved motion upon motion, urgency motions, in relation to the way Opposition Councillors are treated in this Chamber and I certainly think that part of that issue relates to how the CEO is how he is doing his job.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Point or order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Just a moment please, DEPUTY MAYOR.

Councillor GRIFFITHS, when Councillor ADAMS said that you should refer, she was talking saying if matters needed referral, then they should be sent to the CEO. You yelled out: ‘like that will be treated fairly by the CEO’. Now in that sense you did make a reflection. I take it that you have withdrawn it.

DEPUTY MAYOR, your point of order now.

DEPUTY MAYOR: The failure to apologise is a real concern here. The CEO is an officer who has worked under various governments of different colours at both Council and the State Government level, at the highest levels, and any kind of reflection like that is just not only inappropriate and potentially defamatory but it is just unfair in itself, Madam Chairman. An apology should be given.

Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, I do recognise that it is an adverse reflection on the character of the CEO, however, Councillor GRIFFITHS at my request has agreed to withdraw his statement. I cannot force him to apologise, however, it is noted he has made this reflection in a public forum. We will now move on. We are back to the report.

Councillor JOHNSTON, come back to the report and what is contained within it, thank you.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. Paragraph 6, I'm going to read it out for you: ‘research shows self-efficiency is a critical barrier to avoiding household foods. With this in mind, Council funded 12 cooking workshops between April and June 2018 with 152 residents in attendance. One of the chefs who led the eight workshops’, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Now I was there, Madam Chairman, Councillor STRUNK was there, Councillor HOWARD was there, Councillor TOOMEY was there—we had a presentation about these cooking workshops and a few other things, yes.


- 76 -

Let me be clear in summing up, it is wrong in my view, it is a misuse of Council funds to simply fund projects on the northside in marginal LNP wards without providing any information about these projects to other Councillors, without providing the opportunity for those Councillors to nominate areas in their wards, without providing information to them about how their residents could participate possibly by attending one of these.

None of that happened. Instead, 12 workshops—so four in each of these suburbs—


Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you. Four in each suburb—Banyo, The Gap, Enoggera—four of them in each of those three suburbs. Not just one, four. Now, Madam Chairman, I know how you think it's important that the CEO acts fairly and I'm certain—I am certain that he would want to make sure that Council funds are being fairly distributed around Brisbane City Council, not just on the northside and not just in LNP marginal wards because guess what's happening, that's exactly what happened here with this program.

Now, Councillor HOWARD's had three weeks of committee. I'm sure she's learnt the lessons of those three weeks. I look forward to many more presentations to come but can I say, Madam Chairman, through you, that when you bring presentations to our Committee that fund projects all on one side of the city and in marginal LNP wards to the exclusion of all other suburbs in the city, particularly those on the southside that I represent, I will call that out every time. I think it is unfair. I think it is wrong and I think it is a misuse of Council funds.

Chairman: Further debate on the report.

Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chairman. I just rise to speak briefly on the Love Food Hate Waste campaign and to congratulate the Administration for its first tentative steps towards addressing this issue. I think I do have some concerns about the way the program has been run and the way some of the projects have been prioritised and where funding has been allocated but in general I think it's great to see that Council is at least making an attempt to address this important issue.

I want to acknowledge that Council doesn't have to do this, this is not necessarily what might be considered core business and I think it is really positive that the Council has taken this constructive step. I congratulate Councillor HOWARD and also her predecessor, Councillor MATIC, for their support for the program.

I do want to make the constructive suggestion that while it's really great to be focusing on the consumption waste patterns of individual residents and I think it's important to put money and resources into those education programs, we should also keep an eye on the waste management practices of the larger supermarkets and businesses which are also responsible for a very substantial amount of food waste.

Many of the large supermarkets, and I'll single out Coles, Woolworths and ALDI, all have terrible stock management practices which result in large quantities of edible food ending up in landfill or ending up in dumpsters. I know that some councils and in fact some whole countries now have introduced very tight rules regulating or issuing fees for those businesses that don't manage their stock appropriately.

I'm not necessarily saying that that's the best course to go down, but I would like to hear more from the Administration in future Council meetings about what steps you're taking to put the onus back on those big supermarkets and say how dare you throw out edible food. How dare you manage your stock so inefficiently that food which could have gone into the stomachs of low income residents ends up in landfill.

It is a disgusting crime that so much edible food gets wasted because supermarkets are prioritising their short-term profits over sustainability and basic


- 77 -

ethics. Other countries around the world are flabbergasted to learn about the proportion of food that's wasted in countries like Australia and the US in particular. We're not alone but it does seem to be uniquely bad in a few countries and Australia is one of those. I think there's a lot more that all of us as elected representatives and that this particular Administration could be doing to address that problem.

So again, I want to reiterate my strong support for the Love Food Hate Waste program but acknowledge that we shouldn't just put all the onus back on those individual consumers and that big businesses need to do their fair share as well. Right now I can go to any dumpster, I do regularly dumpster dive, I can go to any dumpster in this city and pop open the lid and see a huge amount of edible good quality foods that's ended up in the bin and that's wrong when people are going hungry and when people can't afford to feed their families. So hopefully that's something that this Administration will look into further.

Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SRI.

Further debate?

Councillor HOWARD?

I will now put the report.

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


ATTENDANCE:

Councillor Vicki Howard (Chairman), Councillor Kim Marx (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Nicole Johnston, Julian Simmonds, Charles Strunk and Steven Toomey.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – LOVE FOOD HATE WASTE

80/2018-191. Terry Bird, A/Manager, Waste and Resource Recovery Services, Field Services,

Brisbane Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on Council’s Love Food Hate Waste program. He provided the information below.

2. Australians throw out $8 billion worth of food each year, equalling approximately $2,200-$3,800 per household annually. In 2017-18, Brisbane residents disposed of 328,000 tonnes of rubbish in landfill from kerbside bin collections, 270kg per person, of which 70,000 tonnes was food, an average of 60kg per person.

3. At 24%, food waste represents the highest volume of material in the average Brisbane rubbish bin. It is putrescible and is one of the largest contributors to Council’s overall Greenhouse Gas emissions. Council experiences rising landfill costs and food waste can be diverted from landfill through composting, worm farms and community aid.

4. The Lord Mayor committed to the Love Food Hate Waste program which was developed in United Kingdom and is used extensively throughout the world.

5. Council held a Banana Bread Activation event in March 2018 where bananas used in the event didn’t meet cosmetic standards for sale and would have otherwise been landfilled. There were 3,500 pieces of banana bread made from 80kg rescued bananas. The event had a social media reach of 85,000 and 1,200 hits on Council’s website.

6. Research shows self-efficacy is a critical barrier in avoiding household food waste. With this in mind, Council funded 12 cooking workshops between April-June 2018 with 152 residents in attendance. One of the chefs, who led eight of the workshops, carried out a survey of how much the Love Food Hate Waste messaging infiltrated the homes of the participants. Results show that there was a 100% increase


- 78 -

in participants’ food waste awareness and a 92% increase in self-efficacy in reducing bread and tomato waste.

7. At the Green Heart Fair, the Love Food Hate Waste messaging received positive feedback from residents with 700 families attending cooking demonstrations. Council also gave away approximately 1,500 brochures and magnets, and signed up an additional 80 people to the e-newsletter.

8. Moving forward, Council will host suburb-based activation events which will involve working with Councillors in their ward to reach residents in their shopping zone to liaise with shoppers at the point of purchase and work with them to change the behaviour that creates food waste in their household.

9. In September, the Green Heart Fair will include Bike’n’Blend to create smoothies out of produce that would have otherwise been landfilled, while continuing to spread the Love Food Hate Waste message. In December, Council will work with 1 Million Women to host two events which will bring together celebrity chefs and Brisbane-based personalities to raise awareness of food waste in a fun and informal way, while also empowering them with the knowledge and skills to reduce their household’s food waste by 50% as a result of attending.

10. Ongoing initiatives include the monthly e-Newsletter with over 3,800 subscribers, increasing by approximately 300 subscribers per month. Education materials, including a meal and shopper planner, prompt residents to think about what they are going to eat and what they need to buy in order to make those meals. By consciously planning meals and writing a shopping list, residents will avoid buying excessive food that they have no plan to use.

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

12. RECOMMENDATION:


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 7 August 2018, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor MATIC.

Councillor MATIC: Thank you, Madam Chairman. There were two matters on there; the first one being a community presentation on pop-up libraries the first in review but before I—and the second being a petition requesting that Council assist a local group, a co-operative. Before I get to the report, I just wanted to just briefly mention that I had the great pleasure on the weekend of attending the Hamilton Library for its 70th Anniversary. It was a really nice affair, with librarians and a number of the local residents in attendance.

It was my first opportunity to actually go through the Hamilton Library which used to be there for what was then the Hamilton local council. It was their version of city hall and so all of the business of council was conducted there. Subsequently it was then, with the formation of the greater City of Brisbane, a library. So what was great, Madam Chairman, was the opportunity for all to really reminisce about their time.

We were lucky enough to have a retired librarian from Brisbane City Council who was there in the 70s and the 80s and so rather than just have me speak, I thought it was more important that they actually reflect on their time there and share their reminiscences with local residents. So we had three generations of librarians actually give their experiences of their time, of what the library was like.


- 79 -

It was actually quite interesting because the retired librarian mentioned that Sharan Harvey who's our Manager of libraries was actually the junior there at that time in the early 80s and that when they were running those pop-up sessions for and reading sessions for children that the librarians would read and Sharan as the junior was actually making the tea and the hot chocolate for everyone attending. I just think it was amazing.

It's really reflective of the compassion and commitment of all librarians within our libraries and their commitment to community and the genuine passionate love that they have for sharing and engaging. We also had two of our current librarians there talk about their own experiences with the library. We had a small tour. Because it was the previous office of the town council, there's actually a small safe at the back where they used to collect the rates and have the money kept. It was fascinating to see this original vault and the storage shelves inside.

We then had local residents speak then about their own experiences, and then we had the cake and everyone had a great time. One of the residents came up to me and it was actually interesting because she spoke to me about her experiences at the library and with the retired librarian her coming in one day and the librarian actually holding a letter and crying and she asked her what had occurred.

She told me that Jim Soorley had only just come in as Lord Mayor at the time and that he had had a tour of the library and had raised concerns about the state of the library and the cost that would have to be incurred to upgrade it. We were talking about air conditioning, louvre replacement and blinds. So he decided that he was going to close it and he wrote a letter to the librarians informing them of his decision that he was going to close it and so the librarian was in a state of shock.

So the local councillor at the time was Graham Clay and so this resident was telling me of the great efforts that Graham undertook in conjunction with the local community to lobby then Lord Mayor Jim Soorley to not close the library and to actually spend the money to upgrade it and he was successful in that. I really want to acknowledge the work of the community and then Councillor Graham Clay on their work.

It just goes to show that history keeps repeating itself with those in the Opposition in Council about their dislike of libraries and swimming pools in Toowong and in Hamilton and how they're quick to close rather than invest those ratepayer dollars to give back to the community but anyway.

Madam Chairman, there were two items there, the first being the presentation on pop-up libraries and I really want to thank the officers not only for the presentation but for their work in this space. It's such a popular program having the mobile library and these pop-ups, having the reading sessions, their engagement in all of the festivals and fairs on both sides of the river, Madam Chairman. On both sides of the river, Madam Chairman.

Should I just reflect one more time that there are a significant number of pop-up libraries and engagement by Council officers on both sides of the river, Madam Chairman, because of course the officers are, should I say, politically blind to what ward they happen to get the request in. It gives me no end of pleasure to be able to advise the Chamber that there are Councillors in opposition, Madam Chairman, within the LNP and independent Councillors that have great use of pop-up libraries and the mobile library attending fairs and events within their wards. Some of them, Madam Chairman, have more actually than Administration Councillors.

It's quite interesting to see that there are Councillors over there, Councillors who like to wax lyrical and be theatrical in this Chamber, Madam Chairman, speaking of how they miss out on certain things that they actually do get a fair amount of Council services such as the pop-up library in their wards.

Some Councillors, Madam Chairman, that attest to the ethics and the honesty and integrity of the CEO who seem to get more pop-up libraries in their ward than other Councillors do, Madam Chairman, whether that be Administration or not. So it's good to see that the officers are sharing this invaluable asset and the


- 80 -

investment by this Administration in upgrading libraries, providing the pop-ups and the mobile libraries, Madam Chairman, to all Councillors so that everybody in this Chamber and all of the residents across the city get the value of this essential service.

Madam Chairman, the second issue is a petition requesting that Council assist The Gap local organic co-operative to find an affordable and suitable location to operate its social enterprise. This is a great local service strongly supported by the local Councillor, Steve TOOMEY, over the years. It was initially a space provided to them by Councillor Knapp. Because of the nature of the legal structure of this organisation it is not a not-for-profit and we were able to provide them with a licence rather than a lease.

Given the circumstances of their location, Madam Chairman, they were not able to continue to have that licence, but I know that Councillor TOOMEY has worked tirelessly with them, and very supportively of them, to find them appropriate accommodation and continues to do so. So the recommendation unfortunately, Madam Chairman, that we were not able to provide a lease but that as an organisation we have worked with them for quite a while and Councillor TOOMEY has as well. I'll leave it to the Chamber to rise on those issues, thank you.

Chairman: There being no further debate, I will put the report.

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, Kate Richards and Jonathan Sri.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE:

Councillor Fiona King.

A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – POP-UP LIBRARY: FIRST YEAR IN REVIEW

81/2018-191. Sharan Harvey, Manager, Library Services, Lifestyle and Community Services, attended the meeting to

provide an update on the Pop-up Library: first year in review. She provided the information below.

2. Council’s first Pop-up Library launched in May 2017. The Pop-up Library is an outreach initiative which is delivered via a vibrant vehicle and equipment kit and dedicated library staff.

3. The Pop-up Library builds on past successful outreach at festivals and events, building both capability and capacity. Its purpose is to increase library presence and reach beyond the branch network into communities, building awareness and use of Council’s libraries.

4. The Pop-up Library provides bright and engaging library placemaking – a comfortable and flexible environment for visitors to read and relax. Traditional library services such as membership and borrowing are also available. Activation is available through library program delivery such as early literacy programs. Images of the Pop-up Library were displayed and a promotional video was shown to the Committee.

5. The Pop-up Library has had a very busy first year, attending 34 festivals and community events across the city during 2017-18. The Pop-up Library offers a library experience that is tailored for each event. Customers enjoy attractive and comfortable spaces at each event with a variety of shade, seating and ground cover options.


- 81 -

6. Curated library collections are available to browse, read and borrow. A variety of library programs are delivered in the pop-up space, including children’s storytime and technology tinker tables, where visitors of all ages can learn about coding and robotics through fun and creative activities.

7. The Pop-up Library attended a broad range of festivals and community events in 2017-18. Details of those events were shared.

8. The Pop-up Library Children’s storytime in parks commenced in June 2017. Supporting early literacy development, the library staff deliver storytime three mornings per week at six park locations on a fortnightly schedule, with the Pop-up Library space available between 9.30 and 11.30am. The service is delivered with funding from First 5 Forever, a Queensland Government universal family literacy initiative.

9. The First 5 Forever program conducted a parent survey and positive feedback regarding the Pop-up Library’s storytime in.

10. The Pop-up Library had a very successful 2017-18 year, with 8341 attendees at festivals and community events; 10,714 attendees to the Pop-up Library’s programs in parks; and a total engagement of 19,055.

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

12. RECOMMENDATION:


B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL ASSIST THE GAP LOCAL ORGANIC COOPERATIVE LTD TO FIND AN AFFORDABLE AND SUITABLE LOCATION TO OPERATE ITS SOCIAL ENTERPRISECA18/531098

82/2018-1913. A petition requesting that Council assist The Gap Local Organic Cooperative Ltd (The Gap Loco) to

find an affordable and suitable location to operate its social enterprise, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 12 June 2018, by Councillor Steven Toomey, and received.

14. The Divisional Manager, Lifestyle and Community Services, provided the following information.

15. The petition contains 55 signatures.

16. The Gap Loco is a registered worker cooperative and has been managing a shopfront inside the community facility at 98 Yoorala Street, The Gap (the site), under various sub-use arrangements since November 2014.

17. The building was previously occupied by Save Our Waterways Now (SOWN). Former Councillor for The Gap Ward, Geraldine Knapp, endorsed a 12-month sub-user agreement between SOWN and The Gap Loco that commenced on 1 November 2014. SOWN surrendered its lease over the site to Council on 6 February 2015.

18. On 16 February 2015, Ashgrove/The Gap Men’s Shed Inc. (the Men’s Shed) was granted an initial 12-month licence over the building. Council and the Men’s Shed agreed to honour the existing user groups at the site, including The Gap Loco, for the duration of the licence.

19. On 20 July 2016, Council’s Community Facilities Operations Team, Connected Communities, Lifestyle and Community Services, met with representatives from The Gap Loco to discuss its future business plans. The Gap Loco was advised that while Council had supported its use of the site, any future use would need to be formalised through the lodgement of an applicable development application.


- 82 -

20. Council has been actively working with The Gap Loco since 2016 to formalise its use at a suitable facility. Council has assisted The Gap Loco in establishing a relationship with Communify Queensland Ltd (Communify) to potentially relocate to 212 Ashgrove Avenue, Ashgrove (former Newmarket Bowls Club Inc. site).

21. On 15 May 2018, The Gap Loco informed Communify that it would not be pursuing this option due to an inability to meet specific town planning requirements.

22. On 29 May 2018, The Gap Loco advised Council it would be vacating the site and would continue exploring alternative options and partnerships. In particular, The Gap Loco advised they are exploring a potential partnership with The Scout Association of Australia Queensland Branch Inc. to utilise the current Council facilities located at Riaweena Street, The Gap. Council was informed by the Men’s Shed, that The Gap Loco vacated the site on 27 June 2018.

23. Since this advice, Council has not received any further feedback from The Gap Loco, however, should The Gap Loco explore potential sub-use arrangements at Riaweena Street, The Gap, or other existing Council leased sites, Council will be required to approve any proposal or concept plans and can assist the head tenant in working through the appropriate Council requirements.

24. Council’s Community Facilities Policy specifies key criteria that organisations wishing to apply for tenure of Council’s community facilities must be a not-for-profit community-based organisation.

Consultation

25. Councillor Steven Toomey, Councillor for The Gap Ward, has been consulted and supports the recommendation.

Customer impact



28. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE HEAD PETITIONER BE ADVISED THE GAP LOCAL ORGANIC COOPERATIVE LTD DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT UNDER QUEENSLAND FAIR TRADING AND AS SUCH IS UNABLE TO OBTAIN A DIRECT LEASE WITH COUNCIL. SHOULD THE GAP LOCAL ORGANIC COOPERATIVE LTD EXPLORE POTENTIAL SUB-USE ARRANGEMENTS AT EXISTING COUNCIL LEASED SITES, COUNCIL WILL BE REQUIRED TO APPROVE ANY PROPOSAL OR CONCEPT PLANS AND CAN ASSIST THE HEAD TENANT IN WORKING THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE COUNCIL REQUIREMENTS.

ADOPTED

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 7 August 2018, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chairman. There were two items on the report for last week. The first at Committee presentation was a bit of a follow on from the question that I had today in question time around our small business forums. This one is our supplier communication forums; something that we started last year out of the success we had with our small business forums and the interest we saw in people wanting to do business with Council so we thought we'd do a spin-off and


- 83 -

do one for supplier communication and how you can actually do business with Council.

So in particular, the range of services and projects and spends that we have with Council; how to register on our supplier portal; upcoming tender opportunities; how we evaluate offers; and where and how to find more information about doing business with Council. It's been very well received.

We've had four forums in the last financial year on the north and the southside of the city—Chermside, St Lucia, Sunnybank—we've got Carina and Boondall coming up. So it has been really, really great to see the feedback, the majority of people that are enjoying the information and particularly those who have never done business with Council before.

The second item we have before us is a petition, Madam Chair, presented to Council on the removal of the Rankins Newsagents tenancy within the Queen Street Mall. There were just 72 signatures on that petition. This was a situation where the lessees at Rankins have known since November 2014 that the tenancy was going to be removed. We have worked with them through the process for many, many years.

We have done the Queen Street Mall vision, we were working on the design, but things got sped up a little bit because the State Government wanted to improve the DDA compliance for their bus entrance into the Myer tunnel in the Queen Street Busway. So therefore, it was a case of things happening very fast but after many years of working with Ross and the team at Rankins to go through other opportunities with them that unfortunately they did not take up.


Anything further, Councillor ADAMS?

I will now put the report.

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 – SUPPLIER COMMUNICATION FORUMS

83/2018-191. Peta Harwood, Partnering and Innovation Manager, Strategic Procurement Office, Organisational

Services, attended the meeting to provide an update on Council’s supplier communication forums (forums). She provided the information below.

2. Council works with and engages hundreds of small, medium and large suppliers to help deliver efficient, cost-effective and innovative goods and services to Brisbane residents. Council delivers the forums to assist current and potential suppliers to better engage with Council. The forums provide suppliers the opportunity to meet face-to-face with Council’s procurement officers and learn about Council’s vision, policies, services and delivery.

3. In 2018, Council has delivered four forums: at Carina on 5 February, attended by 62 attendees; Chermside on 1 March, attended by 43 attendees; St Lucia on 17 April, attended by 61 attendees; and Sunnybank on 14 May, attended by 80 attendees. Two additional forums are planned to be delivered in 2018, one at Carina on 22 August, and another at Boondall on 24 October.

4. The presentation topics include:- Council’s vision, range of services/projects and spend


- 84 -

- Council’s procurement policies, including sustainable and social procurement- how to register on the Supplier Portal- upcoming tender opportunities- how Council evaluates offers - an introduction to Council officer contacts for categories of supply- Better Brisbane Proposals - where and how to find more information.

5. Interactive participant polls are conducted during the forums to obtain on-the-spot feedback from the attendees. A browser address is provided to attendees to access and they can use their smart phones to participate.

6. Examples of poll results obtained by Council at the forums were displayed along with positive testimonials from the attendees.

7. Based on feedback received during previous forums, improvements made by Council include providing more advanced notice of suburban events so participants can register for the one most convenient for them; providing additional details on upcoming tenders; providing more information on how to register on the Supplier Portal, providing information about opportunities coming-up and how Council evaluates tenders; providing more information on the breadth of procurement that Council undertakes; and providing more examples of Better Brisbane Proposals.

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

9. RECOMMENDATION:


B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL RENEW THE PERMIT TO OCCUPY FOR THE RANKINS ON THE MALL NEWSAGENCY TENANCY IN THE QUEEN STREET MALLCA18/383721

84/2018-1910. A petition requesting that Council renew the Permit to Occupy (PTO) for the Rankins on the Mall

newsagency tenancy in the Queen Street Mall (QSM), was presented to the meeting of Council held on 8 May 2018, by Councillor Vicki Howard, and received.


12. The petition contains 72 signatures.

13. The petitioners assert that the eviction of the tenants of Rankins would be detrimental to the appeal of the QSM through the removal of a widely-known and well-patronised establishment in exchange for open space.

14. The original PTO with Rankins was first due to expire on 15 February 2010. An agreement was reached with the permittee to extend the PTO until 15 November 2014 by a Deed of Extension and Amendment. Since this date, two additional Deeds of Extension and Amendment have been agreed, with Rankins operating under a temporary PTO.

15. In 2015, Council conducted a visioning exercise with industry stakeholders, local businesses and the community. The QSM Visioning Plan was the outcome of this exercise, and seeks to ensure that the QSM continues to be a world-class venue for businesses and visitors well into the future. Council consulted with over 1,000 people on how to improve and support the QSM, with great support expressed for improved pedestrian movement and lines of sight.

16. Utilising the QSM Visioning Plan, Council engaged a specialist urban designer to undertake a tenancy and public realm design review of the QSM, which was completed in late 2016. The public realm


- 85 -

design review proposed new elements which included a new water feature and the relocation of the existing tenancy for Rankins.

17. In December 2016, Council undertook an open tender process for the design, construction and operation of two retail tenancies in the QSM. One of the locations offered was in a similar location and size to the Rankins tenancy. In January 2017, officers from City Malls Management met with the permittee to discuss aspects of the tender. Subsequently, the permittee did not submit a proposal under this tender process.

18. In conjunction with Council's revitalisation works mentioned above, the Queensland Government's Department of Transport and Main Roads recently commenced construction of a new glass lift for the Queen Street bus station. This lift requires the demolition of the former Rankins tenancy area.

19. From May 2017, Rankins operated under the holding over clause as per the provisions of section 17.8, Schedule 2, of the terms and conditions of the PTO. Council did not enter into any further formal extensions of the PTO with Rankins as both parties were aware that the site was to be demolished. Rankins continued to operate on a month-to-month basis until the expiration of the PTO.

20. By letter dated 28 March 2018, the permittee was advised that the Rankins tenancy must be handed over to Council on 31 May 2018, with all fixtures and property belonging to the permittee being removed by this date. In addition, Council reiterated its intention to demolish the building at the tenancy in order to undertake the QSM revitalisation project. The correspondence also acknowledged the permittee’s contribution in operating the business from the tenancy and advised that Council would continue to inform the permittee of any future opportunities available to re-establish the tenancy elsewhere in the QSM.

21. Rankins ceased operations at the subject site on 29 May 2018 and has since vacated the premises.

Consultation

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


24. RECOMMENDATION:

THAT THE HEAD PETITIONER BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAFT RESPONSE SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A hereunder.



Thank you for your petition requesting that Council renew the Permit to Occupy (PTO) for the Rankins on the Mall newsagency (Rankins) in the Queen Street Mall (QSM).

Your petition was considered by Council at its meeting held on (date), and I can now respond as follows.

Council notes your concerns regarding the requirement for Rankins to relocate from the tenancy located in the QSM.

The QSM plays host to more than 26 million visitors per year, and is home to more than 700 department stores, boutiques and high-end retailers. To ensure that the QSM remains one of Australia's most successful pedestrian malls, Council is currently undertaking a revitalisation project as part of the QSM Visioning Plan (Visioning Plan) which was released in 2015.

In 2015, Council consulted with more than 1,000 people on how to improve and support the QSM, with great support expressed for improved pedestrian movement and lines of sight. The QSM will be revitalised in stages, with the Albert Street intersection upgrade set to undergo construction mid-year.


- 86 -

The works will include a new water feature and, in conjunction with Council's works, the Queensland Government's Department of Transport and Main Roads will be constructing a new glass lift for the Queen Street bus station. These works required the demolition of the existing Rankins site.

Council has been communicating these changes to Rankins’ management since the release of the Visioning Plan in 2015. Rankins had operated under a temporary permit for the site since 2014 and, from May 2017, was permitted to occupy the tenancy on a month-to-month basis, knowing that this site was part of the revitalisation works.

In February 2018, Council formally advised Rankins that the lease would expire on 31 May 2018, to allow the Queensland Government to construct the improved accessibility to the Queen Street bus station. You may be aware that Rankins has ceased operations on the subject site and has vacated the premises.

I can advise that Rankins was offered the opportunity during a tender stage to construct and operate a tenancy in a new prime lease site in the QSM. However, Rankins did not submit a response.

While Council cannot agree to your request to renew Rankins’ PTO, I can assure you that Council officers will continue to keep Rankins informed of any other opportunity to provide an expression of interest to lease a retail site at a later date, following the completion of QSM upgrades.

I trust this information is of assistance. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr John Dwyer, Economic Precinct Manager, City Malls Management, City Planning and Sustainability, on (07) 3403 8196.

Would you please advise your fellow petitioners accordingly.

Thank you for raising this matter with Council.ADOPTED

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:

Chairman: Councillors, are there any petitions?

Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I've got a number of petitions about a village precinct project enhancement at Jindalee I'd like to present.

Chairman: Councillor ALLAN.

Councillor ALLAN: Madam Chairman, I have a petition on a village precinct project at Wavell Heights.

Chairman: Thank you, Councillor ALLAN.

Any further petitions?

Councillor CASSIDY.

Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks, Madam Chairman. I have a petition requesting Council install a speed detecting/monitoring device along Blackwood Road, Deagon.

Chairman: No further petitions?

Councillor WINES, may I have a motion for receipt of the petitions please.

85/2018-19It was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Jared CASSIDY, that the petitions as presented be received and referred to the Committee concerned for consideration and report.

The petitions were summarised as follows:


- 87 -

File No. Councillor Topic

CA18/740100 Matthew Bourke Requesting Council include the Jindalee Place shopping precinct as part of the new Village Precinct Projects initiative for the 2018-19 financial year.

CA18/732536 Adam Allan Requesting Council include the shopping precinct on Hamilton Road, Wavell Heights as part of the new Village Precinct Projects initiative for the 2018-19 financial year.

CA18/720358 Jared Cassidy Requesting Council install a speed detecting/monitoring device along Blackwood Road, Deagon.

GENERAL BUSINESS:

Chairman: Councillors, are there any statements required as a result of the Councillor Conduct Review Panel Order?

There being no Councillors rising to their feet to speak, Councillors are there any matters of general business?

Councillor KING?

Councillor KING: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak about a recent conference I went to for ALGA (Australian Local Government Association) down in Canberra with Councillor MARX. Although it was cold down there, it was quite refreshing to see the difference with the city of Canberra because I haven't been down there since I was 13 so it certainly has changed a lot.

Madam Chairman, I found the whole experience and some of the speakers quite informative. I must make mention of Councillor Vonda Malone, she's the Mayor of the Torres Shire Council. It's interesting—I will note here or put on the record that she actually was awarded the prestigious McKinnon Prize for Emerging Political Leaders of the year this year. She's an outstanding woman and has made some major changes for not only employment up there but trying to get the tourists into the area to gain some money into the beautiful areas up north.

She spoke about the challenges of women in the area and her focus is to get more women into employment. I love the fact that she understood the importance of the tourist dollar into her town. I take my hat off to her with the many challenges in the isolated community that she represents and the difficulties of getting the suppliers and moving forward. Congratulations Vonda and I'll certainly be interested in hearing some more about you as you go on in your career.

Madam Chair, there was also another speaker that I probably could have listened to for about four hours. He was so interesting, engaging and the knowledge that this man has and that man's name is Mr Bernard Salt. He went through with the changes in the census and how the Catholic religion is still the number one religion in Australia but it has dropped slightly but what has increased astronomically is the amount of people who no longer identify with a religion. So I found that quite interesting with the large jumps in our community of people who don't identify with a particular religion.

He also went through the changes in local government but he described it—which was quite interesting—through how our houses have actually changed. How our houses actually adapt with our lifestyles, but also the international and our immigrants influence into our lives.

He was saying, which is so true if some of you are old enough and some of you are in this room, do you remember going to visit your grandparents and you'd walk through and—you'd have a little balcony, then you'd walk straight into a lounge where the mantle was with all the displays that that family had to show.


- 88 -

Then you would walk into a formal dining area where guests would then go and eat. You very rarely went into the kitchen. Of course, you would go nowhere near the bedrooms. It's interesting how things have changed.

With the Mediterranean influence and the more—what do we call it—alfresco areas that we have now, our houses have actually changed with the influence of the European design. We now go through a long corridor into people's houses. Where do we walk straight into? The kitchen with the waterfall kitchen bench. We walk into the dining area where we've got a beautiful if you're lucky—I don't have one, I'll get my husband onto that—a beautiful outdoor area where we entertain.

He went into the fact of our foods, how they have changed. It wasn't that long ago that we didn't eat pasta. We certainly didn't eat sundried tomatoes, but we have come along with the influence of the Italian and Greek community into our lifestyle. What is changing even more now is we're coming more into the Asian way of eating and that's a direct influence with the immigrants that are coming to this great country and our multiculturalism.

He then went on to say the best time to be a young 20s person was in the 1990s and there's a few of us, including myself, who were in that boat. The reason why he said that is because in your early 20s in the 90s, you didn't have the hardship that they had in the previous generations. We didn't go through the great wars, we did not go through the Depression, we did not go through the 80s with interest rates up to 18% or 19%. The interest rates have dropped in the 90s and continue to stay steady and in some cases even drop lower.

Then he goes on to say, which was very interesting and I think a lot of us will relate to this, on both sides of the city, both sides of this Chamber, that that has created a sense of entitlement with people because things are a lot easier than what they were for say our parents and our grandparents, depending on how old you are in this Chamber. Many people, I will admit, have still go their ups and downs, absolutely, and their hardships here, but in comparison to when our grandparents, or even before that, grew up, we are certainly a lot better off than what they are.

He went on continuously to say more and more about this issue but what actually left me thinking: if we went through a depression now, how would my kids cope? How would all of this generation including some of our poorer parts of our community, how would they cope because we are not used to that in this city. We are so lucky with the GFC (Global Financial Crisis) that we were protected by a very wise Prime Minister, Prime Minister John Howard. He gave us the buffer to actually get us through that GFC quite unscathed in Australia.

It didn't take the next government to get rid of that buffer but it was just honestly, Madam Chairman, if any of you have the opportunity listen to Bernard Salt, I would. He calls it the ‘smashed avocado’ era because we go out to cafes now and we'll go out and we'll spend $17/$18 on smashed avocado on bread, on toast, at our cafes.

That was unheard of, Madam Chairman, to have that amount of luxury back—I think Councillor WYNDHAM’s agreeing when he was probably a child—you never went out to actually indulge in that kind of luxury. So again, anyone who has the opportunity to listen to Mr Salt, I would strongly recommend it.

The other thing that I found interesting and you know a lot of people say about women in local government, there are so many women in local government. There are so many mayors across Australia who are women representing their community. So it was great to have the opportunity and I thank the LORD MAYOR for extending that opportunity to Councillor MARX and myself, and I certainly hope I'll be considered next year. Thank you.

Chairman: Further general business?

Councillor SRI.

Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chairman. I'll just keep it brief. I rise to speak on an anti-racism rally I'm organising in a few weeks but I also might just add in response to


- 89 -

Councillor KING's comments that I think it's important to pick your words carefully and I think a lot of people would find some of what you'd said quite patronising and offensive, and I think Bernard Salt has been widely discredited for his offensive and ridiculous remarks suggesting that people today are privileged and entitled.

I think that's fair to say that some people are, but actually a lot of people are struggling and I'm not saying that you were denying that fact but actually we've seen massive increases in homelessness in recent years. We've seen people working longer hours for less pay and under poorer conditions. We're seeing young people really struggle to get into the housing market and to get by.

I think all of us in this place should be really mindful of our privilege and should be cautious of accepting this misguided rhetoric that somehow today people have it easier than our parents' generation when while that's true on some indicators and in some contexts, it's not true in all of them. Certainly, a lot of the people in my electorate are really seriously struggling and would strongly resent the suggestion that they have it easier than their parents' generation did but I don't see the point to debate that now.

Councillor KING: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor KING.

Councillor KING: I just put on the record that I was misrepresented.

Chairman: Councillor SRI, if you'd like to come back to your point of general business.

Councillor SRI: Thanks. On another note though, I would like to extend a sincere and respectful invitation to all Councillors in this place to attend a community event which has been organised for Saturday 8 September at 11.30am in King George Square. This is a—I guess it's called a rally but it's a community assembly in support of multiculturalism. The majority of the speakers will be poets and singers from migrant communities and people of colour, First Nations peoples.

As many of you will be aware, there's been a bit of rise recently in racist rhetoric in Australia. In particular, we've had a few hard-right commentators making very inflammatory and disrespectful remarks about immigrants and the over deliberate targeting and persecution of African-Australian migrants, of Muslim-Australian people and obviously First Nation people. So this is an open invitation to any Councillors who wish to attend, your presence would be warmly welcomed there.

It's not so much a party-political event and we're going to keep the politicians' speeches to a minimum, but there are a lot of people who are really concerned at the moment about rising racist rhetoric in this country. There are a lot of people who feel that in some senses the political establishment is letting them down because people like us aren't showing up in strong numbers to raise our voices against racism.

I just want to warmly encourage all Councillors in this place to consider attending. I won't write to you individually, I trust that you'll take this invitation at face value. The time again is 11.30am, it's on Saturday 8 September. There will be a short rally and a few speeches and after that there will be a community meal in King George Square where we're encouraging people to bring along a bit of food and share it round.

If you'd like to show your support for multiculturalism, if you'd like to send a strong message against racism and fear-mongering and xenophobia, I genuinely would appreciate it if you could come. Thank you.

Chairman: Councillor KING, your misrepresentation.

Councillor KING: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I think Councillor SRI has taken me totally out of context. What I was actually talking about is we didn't—none of us have gone through the great wars like our grandparents. None of us have gone through a great depression like our predecessors. What I also said was the immigrants who have come into our country, every day talk about racism, they come in every day


- 90 -

and they enrich our lives every day. So I don't appreciate your comments in trying to slur what I was saying.

Chairman: Further general business?

Councillor ALLAN.

Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak briefly on a couple of initiatives in Northgate Ward that are aligned to our aspirations of being a Clean, Green and Sustainable city. There is a lot happening in the Northgate Ward at present around recycling, litter removal, composting and as you heard earlier from our public speaker, waste management.

From a waste management perspective, we've circulated a newsletter across the ward outlining the various elements of Council's waste services including waste vouchers, free composting caddies, community composting hubs, our green waste service, our recycling initiatives; the list goes on. So that's been very, very popular and well received

We followed that up with a fridge magnet which outlines—it's essentially a recycling guide. That also has been really well received and certainly what we're seeing from a community perspective is that people are engaged. I'd also point out that the waste newsletter was an initiative of Councillor KING which I chose to take on board. So thank you very much, Councillor KING.

We're also running an additional 104 or more event in the Nundah Village and this follows a very successful Burbs to the Bay program that we ran earlier in the year. The one in Nundah Village is going to include engagement from some of our local cafes and gyms. Certainly, from what we're seeing, these events are being supported by the community. The 104 or more bags that we're seeing available, the black and green ones, are a great catalyst to talk to the community and start the discussion around litter reduction.

The community composting hubs, we've got two in Northgate Ward; one in Nundah and one in Wavell Heights. These are increasingly well supported. The demand for the composting caddies is high. One of our key distribution points at the Nundah Neighbourhood Centre in Nundah regularly comes to us for restocking. So once again, this program has captured the imagination particularly of the unit dwellers in that area.

We've spoken somewhat animatedly about the Love Food Hate Waste program earlier today and I am very proud to say that a restaurant in Banyo was a key supporter of this. The restaurant Putia Pure Foods is run by Dominque Rizzo who's a celebrity chef often features at the Noosa Food Festival. Dominque provided great advice on how to limit food waste, save time and money, create delicious meals at home. She gave expert tips on how to turn, sort of, unloved food in the fridge into delicious meals and really provided the attendees with some great insights.

The Council reusable cup campaign is continuing vigorously in the Northgate Ward. The Coffee Club, Nundah, and Lilypad Espresso were the latest additions to the group. They join Be Bold, the Power Station, Espresso Train and Yummy Goodness as participants in Council's reusable cup campaign.

The kerbside collection program, which runs across the city every year, is currently in full swing in the Northgate Ward and judging on the piles of rubbish out on the footpath, the community continues to value this service.

So, Madam Chairman. I strongly believe that the Clean, Green and Sustainable initiatives that Council is currently running, are supported by the community. Certainly, we're seeing increased engagement. I applaud these programs and encourage everybody to get on board. Thank you.

Chairman: Thank you, Councillor ALLAN.

Any further speakers?

Thank you, Councillors.

I declare the meeting closed.


- 91 -

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 6 August 2018Q1. How many minor change applications to development applications in Brisbane were lodged, approved

or refused by Council in 2017-18, 2016-17 and 2015-16? Please provide an answer in the attached table.

Minor Change applications No. approved No. refused2017-182016-172015-16

Submitted by Councillor Nicole Johnston on 7 August 2018Q1. Was the C8 foam fire fighting system tested when installed at the Sherwood Bus Depot?

Q2. How was the C8 foam fire testing system checked to be in good working order during the life of its installation at the Sherwood Bus Depot.

Q3. What drainage system was the C8 foam fire fighting tank connected to?

Q4. Is C8 foam used at any other Council facility?

Q5. In what year was the C8 foam fire fighting system decommissioned at the following bus depots:

A. ToowongB. CarinaC. WillawongD. Upper Mt Gravatt

Q6. Is Council using C6 foam or other compliant product in accordance with State and Federal directives/policy?

Submitted by Councillor Steve Griffiths on 9 August 2018Q1. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how

many responses were there?

Q2. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), please provide a suburb breakdown of the respondents.

Q3. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how many IP addresses were used in total?

Q4. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how many IP addresses were used only once to lodge a response?

Q5. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how many IP addresses were used twice to lodge a response?

Q6. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how many IP addresses were used three times to lodge a response?

Q7. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how many IP addresses were used four times to lodge a response?

Q8. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how many IP addresses were used five times to lodge a response?

Q9. In relation to the recent online survey for the North Brisbane Bikeway (Price St to Kedron Brook), how many IP addresses were used six times or more to lodge a response?

Q10. How many wood burning BBQ’s are still in use in Brisbane City Council Parks?

Q11. Are there any gas fired BBQ’s in service in Brisbane City Council Parks?

Q12. Can you list the current suppliers for the Electric BBQ’s used in Brisbane City Council Parks.


- 92 -

Q13. How many of the BBQ’s in Brisbane City Council Parks have a shelter over them?

Q14. How many Brisbane City Council Park BBQ’s have a potable water tap in close proximity for BBQ users?

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 Steve Griffiths (from meeting on 7 August 2018)Q1. Please list all Council community leases that have expired and are awaiting renewal.

A1. There are currently 62 leases that have expired and Council is negotiation of over 600 leases across Council. The list below includes a number of leases that have received full Council approval to enter into negotiations for a new lease, however final terms have not yet been agreed upon. During these negotiations, the terms of the current lease remain in place.

Banyo Rugby League Club Inc.Bracken Ridge District Cricket Club Inc. Bramble Bay Pony Club Inc. Brisbane Softball Association Inc. and Brisbane Women's Hockey Association Inc.Brisbane Women’s Hockey Association IncBrothers St. Brendan’s Rugby League Football Club Hands on Art Inc.Merthyr Bowls Club Northern Suburbs Hockey Club IncNorths St Josephs Junior Rugby League Football Club Ltd. Portuguese Family Centre Sport & Recreation Association Returned Services League of Australia (Nundah Northgate Sub Branch Inc.)Sandgate & Districts Senior Citizens Centre Inc. Sandgate PCYC Sandgate-Redcliffe District Cricket Club Inc. The Fig Tree Pocket Equestrian Club Inc. The Lions Rugby Union Club Inc. Valley District Cricket Club Ridge Hills United Football Club Inc Aspley East Kindergarten and Preschool Association Inc. The Australian Hellenic Sports & Cultural Association Bald Hills Junior Cricket Club Inc. Bayside United Sports And Recreation Club Inc. Benarrawa Community Development Association Inc Brisbane Rugby League Referees Association Inc. The Brisbane Tramway Museum Society Bulimba Senior Citizens & Community Centre Inc Carina & Districts Committee on the Ageing Corinda Horse & Pony Club Inc. Ferny Districts Cricket Club Inc. Ferny Grove Bowls, Sports and Community Club Inc. Geebung Meals on Wheels Inc. Brothers Junior Rugby League Football Club - Gibson Park Committee GPS Old Boys & Brisbane Rowing Club Inc Greening Australia Kangaroo Point Rovers Football Club Inc Griffith Moorooka Australian Football Club Mt Crosby Bowls Club Inc Mt Gravatt Youth & Recreation Club Inc. North Brisbane Junior Motor Cycle Club Inc. Southside Community Group Pty Ltd Wynnum/Lota PCYC Zillmere PCYC Returned Services League of Australia (South Eastern District Branch) Rotary Club of Jindalee Inc. Runcorn Horse & Pony Club Inc. Souths United Soccer Club Inc. Clubhouse


- 93 -

Spanish Centre Ltd. Stafford & District Meals on Wheels Association The Gap Historical Society Inc. Toombul Croquet Club Inc. Western Districts Youth Club Inc. Wilston Grange Australian Football Club Inc. Zone 4 Eastern Districts Junior Cricket Association Inc. North Star Football Club Inc. Brisbane Softball Association Kitchener Road Children’s Centre Association Inc. North Brisbane Rugby Union Club Inc Souths United Soccer Club Inc. Field Lease Bayside Radio Controlled Car Club Inc. Cubberla Witton Catchment Group Voices of Birralee Inc.

Q2. Please list all Council community leases that are due for renewal in the next 12 months.

A2. There are 58 leases that will expire within the next 12 months.

Aspley Leagues Club LimitedHelp EnterprisesBaseball QueenslandNuer Community Association in Queensland Inc.Spinal Home Help Inc. St Catherine’s United Football Club Inc. The Community Place Inc. Lions Club of Brisbane Macgregor Inc. Souths Junior Cricket Club Inc. Yeronga Tennis Club Inc. Queensland Country Women's AssociationMacgregor Souths Cricket Club Inc. Sandgate Kids Early Education Inc. Kedron Football Club Inc. Wynnum Vikings Australian Football & Sporting Club Central Service Office Brisbane Inc.Brisbane Community Arts Centre Al-Seraj Iraqi Association Inc. New Farm United Junior Soccer Club Inc. (Club House) South Brisbane District Cricket Club Inc.Centacare Child Care Services/Our Place OSHC Northern Suburbs Pony Club Inc. Te Kohanga Ote Whenua Hou Association Inc.SeQual Association Inc. South Brisbane Federal Band Inc. Algester Branch Little Athletics Centre Inc. Everton Districts Cricket Club Inc. Greenslopes Bowls and Community Club Inc. Regional Service Office Queensland Inc. Graceville Croquet Club Inc.Qld Ornithological Society Inc.Queensland Lions Football Club Brisbane Institute Of Art Inc. Brisbane Netball Association Inc. Cannon Hill Community Sports Club Inc. The Australian Red Cross Society The Uniting Church in Aus Property Trust Everton Districts Sporting Club Grange Thistle Soccer Club Hawks Sporting Club Inc. Inala Community House Indooroopilly Canoe Club Inc. Jabiru Community Youth And Children's Services Association Inc.Mitchelton & District Senior Citizens ClubNundah Memorial Hall Association Queensland Gaelic Football Association Inc. South Brisbane Softball Association Inc.


- 94 -

Souths Graceville Rugby League Club Inc. Southside Eagles Soccer Club Inc. Sunnybank Bowls Club Inc. Sunnybank Contract Bridge Club Inc. The Community Place Inc. Waterloo Bay Leisure Centre Inc. Westside Sports Club Inc. Wynnum Tennis Association Inc. Wynnum Softball Association Inc. Wynnum Table Tennis Association Acacia Ridge Meals on Wheels Inc.

Q3. Please detail the number of successful development applications to demolish pre-1946 dwellings in the 2017-18 financial year.

A3. 29.


A4. 35.


A5. 35.


A6. 30.


A7. 10.

Q8. Please detail the current Neighbourhood Plans being considered for renewal or new Neighbourhood Plans being considered as part of the 2018-19 budget allocation.

A8. Council will commence a neighbourhood planning exercise to guide future development in the Sandgate area, as part of the 2018-19 budget allocation. Further neighbourhood plan strategies to be progressed as part of the 2018-19 budget allocation are yet to be determined.

Q9. Detail the separate costs for design, production and distribution of the latest Brisbane Metro Update (letter from the Lord Mayor, Flyer and envelope) dated July 30 2018.

A9. Design $0Production $77,070.00Distribution $50,162.28

RISING OF COUNCIL: 6.55pm.

PRESENTED: and CONFIRMED

CHAIRMAN


- 95 -

Council officers in attendance:

Jade Stopar (Acting Senior Council and Committee Officer)Shivaji Solao (Council and Committee Officer)Billy Peers (Personal Support Officer to the Lord Mayor and Council Orderly)


- 96 -

table of contents€¦ · web viewor this one, this is a resident in yeronga: ‘the analogy i...

Documents