Amalgamation options for Marrickville municipality

The 5th November 1861 marked the establishment of Marrickville municipality. The population at that time was 600 people. Photo shows Richardsons Reserve in The Warren.

Well it is no longer rumour.  The Independent Local Government Review Panel established by the NSW State Government has put forward 3 options for amalgamation of Marrickville municipality.

From Marrickville Council’s ‘Your Say Marrickville’ website, they are –

• “Merge with the proposed Sydney group of councils, creating a new ‘super Sydney’ council that would include City of Sydney, Botany Bay, Randwick, Waverley, Woollahra & possibly Leichhardt. The Panel believes this option could provide close functional interaction & economic/social links; unify local government to plan & manage Parramatta Road; inner west development; make Burwood a major centre.

• Merge with the proposed Inner West group of councils that would include Ashfield, Burwood, Canada Bay, Strathfield & possibly Leichhardt. The Panel believes this option could provide close functional interaction & economic/social links; unify local government to plan & manage Parramatta Road; inner west development; make Burwood a major centre.

• Merge with the proposed Canterbury Council. The Panel believes this option could enhance the economic & social mix; & remove problematic boundaries to the north and east.

Other options are -

• Oppose amalgamation recommendations altogether & retain Marrickville Council as it is.

• Propose alternatives boundaries, for example, splitting half of the current Marrickville Council area into the proposed Sydney group & the other half into the inner west group.”

• “The Panel has also suggested an alternative to amalgamations which is the creation of strong County Councils, by combining member councils according to the groups listed above (Sydney, Inner West or Canterbury) anchored by a regional centre & sharing services across council boundaries.” 

Marrickville Council is asking the community to give feedback about the proposed options for amalgamation & whether we should appose amalgamation & seek to remain as Marrickville municipality.

On Council’s ‘Your Say Marrickville’ website there is a downloadable report ‘Future Directions for Local Government,’ a quick poll, a discussion forum & an online submission form to be included in Council’s submission to the Independent Local Government Review Panel.  This is a very important issue that will affect all of us so it makes sense to participate in this community consultation.

The deadline for submissions from the community is Friday 14 June 2013.  See – http://yoursaymarrickville.com.au/local-govt-review

Marrickville Railway Station Upgrade

Image of the completed Marrickville Railway Station Upgrade by Transport NSW. Note the shadows on Station Street where there are currently no trees. Perhaps they plan to plant street trees in this location.

Some good news for residents.  It’s finally happening.  Transport NSW has released the plans for the upgrade of Marrickville Railway Station.  The works will take 3-years with completion expected in 2016.

I had a look through the document & like the following points –

• This station will become accessible to everyone with the inclusion of two lifts to service both platforms.
• There will be a family-accessible toilet.
• There will be anti-throw screens, improved lighting & CCTV to cut down the risk of crime.
• The 8 Brushbox & Crepe myrtle trees along the concourse on Platform 2 will be retained if possible.
• Existing vegetation, except for the trees near the stairs & the street tree on Illawarra Road, will be retained with further landscaping design done later.
• They will retain ground-level access to Station Street.
• Space will be given for sheltered bike racks in area covered by CCTV or high passive surveillance.
• The bottom part of Station Street will be a shared pedestrian zone.
• They are planning to reuse up to 90% of waste from site preparation & construction to prevent waste going to landfill.
• They intend to ensure 100% of spoil material is beneficially used.
• There will be waterless urinals. I don’t know how that works, but it sounds good.
• There will be taps that cannot be left running.
• There will be naturally ventilated buildings.
• 95% of timber used is recycled or Forest Stewardship Council Certified.
• They are looking to how it can be a market on the weekend.  I assume this is Station Street.
• They will provide shade with vegetation on the concourse, platform, parking areas & pedestrian pathways.
• They will provide signage about the heritage of the area.
• They will investigate tree-planting opportunities in Station Street.
• Platforms will be extended up to 14 & 19-metres, so plenty of room to add beauty.
• They will be creating a full archive of the current station, including photographs for future generations.

I’m not fond of  –

• Tree removal on Platform 2 – a group of trees at the western end of the platform & one on Illawarra Road are to be removed.  However, to do the works, these trees will have to be removed.
• There are to be up to 6 taxi spaces on Station Street. There is a Taxi Stand on Byrnes Street next to the old RSL space that is next to the railway line – 170-metres away.  To put another taxi stand on Station Street will negatively impact on the availability of parking that helps the shops & cafes in the immediate area.
• The dark grey colour of the buildings.

Of interest –

• Traffic along Illawarra Road outside the station in 2005 was 17,500 per day.  Anyone who lives or drives here knows that traffic has significantly increased since then.

Transport NSW has prepared an interesting & very comprehensive report covering such diverse topics as climate change, biodiversity, local heritage & Aboriginal heritage should anything be found.  You can download the report here – http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects-tap/current-works/marrickville

There are numerous other documents for those who want a fuller picture.

The deadline for submissions is Monday 20^th May 2013.  Railway Station upgrades are few & far between, so it is in the community’s best interest to put in a submission regarding any concerns you may have.

Transport NSW image of the upgrade seen from Station Street.

Transport NSW image of the Railway Station from the shopping strip on the southern side of Illawarra Road.

 

Outcome of Public Meeting Victoria Road Bushpocket site

Showing the corner of the Bushpocket in Victoria Road where the cycleway is to be built. You can get some idea of the width of the current cycle lanes.  Ausgrid will need to relocate the telegraph pole.

Yesterday (24^th April) I attended the public meeting held by Marrickville Council to discuss their recent works that demolished the bio-swale at the Victoria Road Bushpocket site in Marrickville.

To recap: on 21^st March 2013 I saw heavy machinery removing the boulders that made up the swale.  On 28^th March 2013 I posted about the swale, which was gone leaving bare dirt, a telegraph pole in the new road section & sprayed markings that looked like a path.  I heard that the Council works were to create a cycleway.  See – http://bit.ly/XDgLlz

Several senior Council staff attended the meeting.  It was explained that Council had made a mistake & there had been poor communication between departments regarding the swale at the Bushpocket site & the building of a cycleway.  Council apologized unreservedly for this, saying they would work to improve communication across departments.

It was explained that the cycleway works in this location are part of the Camperdown to Cooks River Cycle Route. Specifically, the road was widened here to assist heavy vehicles to navigate the corner.

Where previously cyclists used the lane either side of Victoria Road, the new cycleway will instead put cyclists in one lane as a separated two-direction kerbed barrier cycleway located on the roadside next to the Bushpocket.  The width of the two-way cycleway will be 2.52 metres.  To claim roadway for the cycleway, the swale was demolished.

Marrickville Council said they intend to replace the swale & handed out plans dated April 2013.  Council were unsure of the costs to do this work.

There was concern from one of the residents who specializes in bio-swales that the plans for the swale would not work as the space was insufficient.  Council invited this resident to participate in further planning of the swale.

Council also emailed the residents the plans for the cycleway in this section of Victoria Road & Myrtle Street.  We were told that side from bringing cyclists from both directions onto the same side of the road, the cycleway will direct cyclists to cross to the other side of the road in Myrtle Street.   This explains the path to nowhere & appears to save the street trees on the eastern side of Myrtle Street.  However, this direction to cross the road in Myrtle Street is not on the plans.  See below.

You can download the plans for the cycleway here, though be warned, I found it impossible to read the writing on the plans on my computer or on a printed copy.  The cycleway route however is easily seen. - - http://bit.ly/ZmsG7b

The plans for the swale can be downloaded here – http://bit.ly/11muRpk

As a cyclist, I can’t say that I felt I needed protection in this section of Victoria Road. Both kerbside lanes used by cyclists were around the width of a normal traffic lane & it was rare to see a parked car so it was a roomy ride for me.  It was explained that all that has been lost was the mound of earth on the roadside of the swale. That mound however, was a significant size & part of the Bushpocket where plants grew.

I thank Marrickville Council for responding to the complaint about this issue and holding the meeting.  It was obvious that they wanted the best outcome for everyone.

The bitumen area is reclaimed land from the Bushpocket. Cyclists will soon have a dual cycleway here that goes onto the footpath under the bridge.

The bitumen shows where the swale & surrounding plants used to be. The dirt area is where the new swale is to be constructed.

Marrickville Council’s plans for the cycleway in Victoria Road & Myrtle Street Marrickville with my additions in colour. We were told that the 2-way cycleway would actually cross the road in Myrtle Street, but this does not show on these plans. Click to enlarge.

 

 

Opportunity for street trees to be planted

We would have all seen these along the streets of Marrickville municipality. It would be great if they could all have a tree planted.

The following was posted on Marrickville Council’s Facebook page –

“Nominate a Street Tree. Tell us about that vacant tree pit or tree-less grass verge in front of your house, & Council will come & plant a tree. We are preparing for the 2013 annual street tree planting program & are looking for suitable sites to plant street trees. 

Send your request to council@marrickville.nsw.gov.au & provide the following information:

• Address
• ground surface (ie. Grass verge, concrete)
• power lines above?

The suitability of the site will be assessed by Council’s tree management team & an appropriate tree species determined. Nominations close on Tuesday 30 April.”

Thank you Marrickville Council.  This is a wonderful initiative.  I don’t think it would hurt to let Council know of other locations where tree pits are empty/covered with bitumen or of streets that need street trees either.  They can only say no.

Please spread the word as there is a good chance many won’t hear about this.  The deadline is only 2-weeks away & tree-planting only happens once a year.

Public tree removal in Tempe

A Tallow Wood (Eucalyptus microcorys) in Edwin Street Tempe to be removed.  Edwin Street has wonderfully large verges.

Marrickville Council has given notice that they intend to remove a Tallow Wood (Eucalyptus microcorys) outside number 37 Edwin Street Tempe.

Council gives the following reasons for removal –

• “Tree had a significant limb failure due to high winds & an included branch junction (poor branch attachment) & is now unsafe due to a large exposed wound & lack of structural wood to support the upper canopy.
• Many upper branches have borer damage & are also included & are susceptible to failure.”

Showing the branch that fell

Council says they will replace with another Tallow Wood (Eucalyptus microcorys) during 2013 planting season.

This tree was not included in the list of proposed street trees for removal for Tempe in the recent Tree Inventory.

The tree lost a branch leaving a large hole essentially halving the trunk. This means that the top half of the tree is not sufficiently supported & this is easy to see.  There is also a large area of visible borer damage in the upper trunk.   I will not be writing a submission.

The deadline for any written submission ends on Friday 5th April 2013 – council@marrickville.nsw.gov.au

Showing the wound where the branch where the branch failed. The hole is quite deep & leaves the upper part of the tree on an unstable base.

Showing deep borer damage in the upper trunk. You can see through a hole in the trunk if you stand in the right place.

 

Public tree removal in Enmore

Eucalyptus sideroxylon opposite 24 Browns Avenue Enmore.

Marrickville Council has given notice that they intend to remove two street trees in Browns Avenue Enmore.

Tree number 1: Red Ironbark (Eucalyptus sideroxylon) opposite 24 Browns Avenue Enmore.  This tree is included in Marrickville Council’s audit list of street trees proposed for removal.

They give the following reasons -

• “Tree has significant borer damage & internal decay.
• Tree is structurally compromised & leans towards private property.”

Council says they will replace with a Rough Barked Apple (Angophora floribunda) during 2013 planting season.

The tree is obviously on its way out.

Tree number 2:   a Red Ironbark (Eucalyptus sideroxylon) outside 28 Browns Avenue Enmore.  This tree is included in Marrickville Council’s audit list of street trees proposed for removal.

They give the following reasons -

• “Tree has significant borer & mechanical damage to the trunk.
• Tree is structurally compromised.”

Council says they will replace with a Rough Barked Apple (Angophora floribunda) during 2013 planting season.

The tree has obvious damage.  The canopy of this tree spills beautifully over the street, so it will be a big loss to the streetscape.

I appreciate that Council used sticky tape instead of nails to fix the notification of removal signs to both trees.

Submissions can be sent to Marrickville Council at council@marrickville.nsw.gov.au or phone to speak to the Tree Asset Officer on 8595 2434.

As per Marrickville Council’s new way of working there is no consultation period or invitation for submissions.  They say you can telephone the Council’s Tree Asset Officer – 8595 2434 – during normal office hours if you wish to discuss the tree removal.   I am against removing the previous system of community consultation.  See – http://bit.ly/YiHoHt

Eucalyptus sideroxylon outside 28 Browns Avenue Enmore. It’s a beautiful tree.  The tree on the far left is also being removed.

Public tree removal in Petersham

This Willow Gum (Eucalyptus scoparia) at the corner John Street & Addison Road Petersham has Winter Bronzing Bug.

Tree number 1:  Marrickville Council has given post notification of emergency street tree removal of a Chinese Pistachio (Pistacia chinensis) at 44 West Street Petersham.

They gave the following reason for removal –

• “Active shear split between co-dominant stems resulting in an unacceptable risk to the public & property.”

Council says they will plant another Chinese Pistachio during 2013 planting season.  This tree was not included in Marrickville Council’s audit list of street trees proposed for removal.

Tree number 2:  a Willow Gum (Eucalyptus scoparia), corner John Street & Addison Road Petersham.  They gave the following reason for removal –

• “Tree is dying from an infestation of Thaumastocoris (Winter Bronzing Bug) &
• has significant deadwood hanging over the roadway.”

Council says they will replace with a Weeping Lillypilly (Waterhousia floribunda) during 2013 planting season.

Winter Bronzing Bug is a major pest of eucalypt street trees in Sydney.  “The bugs feed by inserting their sharp, tube-like mouthparts into the plant stem & sucking out the sap. The plants lose water & nutrients, becoming pale & defoliating.  Severely infested trees are usually removed unless early detection & treatment is implemented.  Injectable tree insecticide is the only trunk injectable insecticide available for use in Australia & is the most environmental & cost effective ways to achieve insect control in trees.”   For more information see – http://bit.ly/UWA216

The tree does not look like it received treatment & is obviously dying.  This tree was not included in Marrickville Council’s audit list of street trees proposed for removal.

I appreciate that Council used sticky tape instead of nails to fix the notification of removal signs to this tree.

Submissions can be sent to Marrickville Council at council@marrickville.nsw.gov.au or phone to speak to the Tree Asset Officer on 8595 2434.

As per Marrickville Council’s new way of working there is no consultation period or invitation for submissions.   They say you can telephone the Council’s Tree Asset Officer – 8595 2434 – during normal office hours if you wish to discuss the tree removal.  I am against removing the previous system of community consultation. See – http://bit.ly/YiHoHt

Marrickville Council changes consultation process for public tree removals

Wattle – flowering now.

When SoT started in 2009 Marrickville Council posted removal notifications on their website with a period of 3-weeks for the community to send in any submissions, with their views either in favour or against the proposal.  What was important is that the community could have a say.

Then around a year or perhaps 18-months ago Council reduced the consultation period to 10-working days. This usually meant 14 calendar days because weekends intervened.  I was concerned about the loss of one week knowing how time-poor most people are & how this may have a likely impact on people making the submission deadline.

Since then Council has been inconsistent, some times allowing 2 other times 3 weeks.

Sometime last week Marrickville Council removed deadlines altogether.  They now say, “If you wish to discuss this matter please call Council’s Tree Asset Officer, (name) on 8595 2434 during normal office hours.”

This is not good.  I cannot count the number of people who have contacted me because they did not feel confident contacting Council directly.  I’ve written posts on issues because the community requested me, solely because people often tell me they do not feel comfortable discussing their opposition with the very person who made the decision.  Even I have telephoned a Council staff member only twice since starting this blog.  Why? Because it can feel intimidating.  Because it sets up an adversarial event.  Because we know that if a decision-maker has said a tree has to go, phoning them to say I don’t want you to remove the tree is not going to have much of an impact.

The most important issue is transparency & accountability.  If you phone someone, you have no way of knowing that there will be a record of this, or, that any notes that may be kept will accurately & fully describe your views. If you email Council, you get a return email saying they have received your email & will process it.  If an issue requires reports to senior managers or to the Councillors, having a system of written submissions, enables the report to correctly record the number of submissions received, how many agreed or disagreed & what issues they raised.

Accountability is very important. There would be few in the community who would not worry that their phone call has been dismissed, whereas an email has a record somewhere.

A community engagement system that relies on a unilateral decision by the decision maker to record or not record, or, how to interpret what you tell them on the phone is not consistent with the principles of open government, transparency & accountability. It gives a signal to the community that Council wants to be the sole arbiter of its decisions about public trees & the sole arbiter of disclosing whether there has been opposition to its decisions.

The people with whom I discussed this new process were not at all impressed with the latest changes.

14^th February 2013 –  Good news.  Marrickville Council has posted a comment stating that their consultation process has not changed & that an administrative error occurred, which omitted to include the deadline date & email address for written submissions. As per usual, submissions can be sent to Marrickville Council at council@marrickville.nsw.gov.au or phone the Tree Asset Officer on 8595 2434.  See Council’s comment below.

Public tree removal in Marrickville

Marrickville Council has given notice of the following emergency tree removals.

Six dead Poplars were left in Mahoney Reserve to develop holes as habitat for wildlife.

Tree 1:  Small leaf lilly pilly (Acmena smithii) outside 265-273 Illawarra Road Marrickville.

Council gave the following reasons for removal -

• Damaged due to strong winds.
• Failed codominant stem union resulted in a shear split down the centre of trunk.
• The subject tree presented an unacceptable risk to the public & property.

Council says they intend to replace this street tree during the 2013 planting season.

Trees 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7:  6 x Cottonwood (Populus deltoids) at Mahoney Reserve Marrickville South.

Council gave the following reasons for removal -

• Dead trees with extensive basal decay & borer damage.
• The trees presented an unacceptable risk to public safety.

Council says they intend to replace during 2013 Planting Season.  The removal of these trees is disappointing as they were intentionally left to provide habitat for wildlife.

Mountains of woodchip are all that remain of these once majestic trees in Mahoney Reserve.

Public tree removal in Stanmore

 

The arrow points to the street tree to be removed. As you can see, it is the best in Westbourke Street.

Marrickville Council has given notice that they intend to remove 2 street trees in Stanmore.

Tree number 1:  Chinese Tallowood (Sapium sebiferum) at Westbourke Street, adjacent 48 Charles Street.

Council gives the following reasons for removal –

• The tree is causing significant damage to the adjacent building which cannot be over come by any reasonable or practical means other than removal.
• The tree presents an unacceptable risk to the private property.

Council says they will replace this tree with a Crepe Myrtle (Lagerstroemia Sp.) during the 2012-2013 replacement tree-planting program.

As I drove down Westbourke Street I admired a lovely tree that cascaded across the street.  Of course, the tree up for removal turned out to be this tree.  It is entirely unsuitable for the location & sad as it is, I agree that it needs to go.  The roots are large & head straight into the property 1-metre away.  I will not be putting in a submission.

Tree number 2:  Black Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) at the rear of 14 Alfred Street Stanmore (public reserve).  I could not locate an Alfred Street in Stanmore.  There is one in Marrickville & one in St Peters.  Therefore I did not go & look at this tree.

Council gives the following reasons for removal –

• The tree exhibits poor form & structural condition as a result of extensive wood decay & borer damage throughout the trunk.
• The tree is poorly located & is likely to be a sucker from a neighbouring tree of the same species.
• It presents an unacceptable risk to the public & property.

The Deadline for submissions for both trees ends on Friday 11^th January 2013.

Westbourke Street tree to be removed.

Showing the roots.