Miller Street Petersham

This was the Council Meeting. Absent: Clr Peters.  The following is how I understood the meeting & all mistakes are mine.  Note: MC = Marrickville Council.  The Councillors & Wards are as follows – LABOR:  Iskandar/Central, Wright/North, Tsardoulias/West, O’Sullivan/South. GREENS:  Phillips/Central, Peters/North, Byrnes/North, Kontellis/West, Olive/South.  INDEPENDENT:  Macri/Central, Thanos/West, Hanna/South.

Proposed enhancement work at Station Street Marrickville – Clr Olive: Amendment point 2; add, ‘do not include the concept design by Olsen Associates.’ I’m concerned that we have gone with some design plans & we have someone who has consolidated properties & is keen to develop the site. They want clarification & certainty. I’m happy to adopt the concept plans, but concerned about what was put forward by Olsen & Associates to raise Station Street to the level of Illawarra Road. This would be to the severe detriment of the community. This is the only accessible platform in the whole LGA & this plan would take that away. Residents would be annoyed to be forced up lifts or stairs.  MC as the owner should not go into negotiations with Olsen & Associates.

Mayor Hanna; Q: Did the developer ask for it or is MC recommending it? Staff: Olsen’s designs have been adopted by MC & is part of the DCP.  Not to say a different concept could not be put up. I do have problems that you can’t talk about what’s in our DCP at the moment.  Clr Olive: It’s my understanding that if the owner of this land doesn’t give consent, then it can’t go ahead.  Staff: Generally that is correct.  You would need legal advice.  There are difficulties not giving the owner consent.  Clr Wright:  Clr Olive’s issue is with the flow of pedestrian traffic & this would need to go through a DA.  Staff: Plans have developed for State Rail to make the station accessible.

Clr O’Sullivan:  Amend that MC receive an update with development prior to the finalization of the business process. I support the first 2 points. While I recognize the DCP component has limitations, this & other plans will be taken into consideration regarding access issues.  I don’t see the reason to leave out something from the present DCP consideration.  It’s a good thing with DAs initiated with all proposals on the table, in particular Marrickville Migrant Resource Centre. Finalization will be at the pre-DA process.

Clr Phillips: This area has been an issue. It’s a major gateway to Marrickville & one of the most neglected areas in the municipality.  I think the plans look good, but concerned we may leave this area neglected before the developer decides to do it. Look at the RSL across the road & then we have Railcorp to refurbish the station & we all know how long we have waited.  Let’s come back to this swiftly.  A street that goes below the traffic has a lot of potential.  This design puts the people up at the level of the traffic, not a good thing.  I reluctantly support Clr Olive’s motion.    Staff: No guarantees re timing of developers, but the indication was they are interested in moving on this quickly. Should be able to come back within a month or two.

Clr Iskandar: The final decision will be dealt with when the development plans come back in a month or two. Staff: The developer wanted to know whether Clrs are happy with the plan.  Clr Olive: I’m not happy with it. Clr Wright: I’m not supporting Clr Olive’s motion though his point about the flow of people & traffic needs to be taken into consideration.  Clr Macri: Concerned about Clr Olive’s motion because this is what we have in our DCP. We can’t proceed with early works, it’s a major construction zone. It will have an opening on Illawarra Road because of police concerns for safety. Benefits will be the widened footpath on Illawarra Road & a lower courtyard with tree planting.  If this is no good we can throw out the design.  There is still an option for people to walk up Station Street.  We are going to be the reason for delay.

Clr Olive: We won’t be the reason for the delay. I want to give clarity for the developer as they have requested what we would like to see progressed in this area. Olsen & Associates design is overkill in the site.  Lifting it up 2-storeys, what’s going to be beneath it? This is the wrong way to go in civic planning.   Vote for Clr Olives’ motion: For – Clr Olive, Kontellis, Byrne & Phillips. Against: Clrs Hanna, Macri, Thans, Iskandar, Tsardoulais, Wright & O’Sullivan. Lost.

Clr O’Sullivan’s motion.  Clr Phillips: What’s going underneath the road?  Staff: Could be a community space. Clr Phillips:  Who will own it?  Staff: There should be a VPA with this & this has been recognised by the developer. Clr Phillips:  Could be sold to the developer? Staff That needs to be further explored.  Vote: O’Sullivan, Clrs Hanna, Macri, Thans, Iskandar, Tsardoulais, Wright, Kontellis, Byrne & Phillips. Against – Clr Olive.  Passed.

Jack Shannahan Park Basketball Court resurfacing –  Staff said the intention is to do half a court using a minimalist approach – just removing concrete & replacing turf. Carried unanimously.

Renaming May Lane West to Caroline Lane – Clr O’Sullivan spoke about referring to MAC to see if they had an Aboriginal name, but they were happy with MC’s name change. Carried unanimously.

Crystal Street Petersham

Advertisements