HCC: Treading Lightly

Margot Giblin

He hoped the State Government had been misquoted in relation to Council’s responsibility for installation of cameras there. After all, the Government “gets taxes from those bogan drunks”.
Hobart City Council

Open Meeting

Tuesday 10 June 2008

5pm

Councillors Present: Lord Mayor Rob Valentine, Deputy Lord Mayor Eva Ruzicka, Peter Sexton, Ron Christie, Philip Cocker, Bill Harvey, Elise Archer, Helen Burnet, John Freeman, Jeff Briscoe, Darlene Haigh

Leave of Absence: Marti Zucco

Some Agenda Items

50 Elizabeth St. Hobart applied for partial demolition, alterations, extensions and partial change of use to offices.

Haigh was worried about the loss of inter-building walkways, regarded by the Development and Environmental Services committee as an important feature of the central block’s shopping amenity. The developer will be advised of this concern in the hope that either now or in the future the walkways will be re-instated.

The energy efficiency components of the building were commended. The five storey glass front, complete with visible lift, was expected to improve the streetscape of the Mall. The lower two floors will be retail, the rest office space. Burnet applauded the inclusion of bike storage facilities. Approval, with conditions, was unanimous.

68 Napoleon Street, Battery Point applied for rebuilding and extensions to its jetty.

Conditions for approval included the use of locally sourced equipment and materials to remove the potential for relocation of marine pests and the inclusion of a structure over the slipway and jetty “to provide a means for pedestrians to easily traverse when walking along the foreshore”.

Briscoe noted the recent rash of improvements to and building of new jetties by private land owners along the Battery Point foreshore. As there were no heritage objections to them or to this application Briscoe saw the way ahead being smooth for a foreshore walkway. Burnet supported the application on its own merits. It was unanimously approved.

Tender for Centrepoint Car Park Extension. The granting of an 8.5 million dollar tender to Vos Constructions Pty Ltd. was moved by Freeman as chair of the Finance and Corporate Services Committee.

Cocker spoke against it. “When I look at this and see Council spending around $17 million on car parks over the next few years I ask myself – is the city best served by bringing in more cars and at this cost? The era of cheap petrol is over. Other major corporations and cities are looking at how to move ahead in the light of that fact. I donbt support more cars in the city or spending any more on car parking in the city”.

Briscoe responded by pointing out that in the proposed shift of car parking away from the docks there was a need for alternative space in the city. He suggested that Cocker’s “almost motherhood statement, easily made from the high moral ground, might sound good in isolation”.

It was not, Briscoe said, a good viewpoint in relation to the strategic management of the city’s financial future. He hoped other councillors would not be persuaded by it. He quoted Bob Cotgrove’s view that the love affair with cars is not over.

Ruzicka said she also felt Cocker’s views needed addressing. Even if smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles were the way of the future they would need somewhere to be parked. She said that if present and proposed car parks became obsolete they could be converted. She cited the example of Paddy’s Market in Sydney. Ruzicka referred to complaints Council received from suburbs such as South Hobart and Glebe where commuters clog the streets by parking there all day.

Haigh agreed with Briscoe and Ruzicka. “We need to look after our city”.

She anticipated it would be a long time before public transport improved enough to adequately service the city. She maintained that Cocker’s vision for the future was what everybody wanted but that in the meantime the priority was to keep the city vital. She referred to problems related to looming competition from DFOs and the continuing gap left by the Myer fire.

Harvey said it might sound a bit melodramatic but Council was at a pivotal moment in the history of Hobart in relation to transport issues. “We need to decide where to go”.

He felt Council was slowly moving towards decreasing traffic and mitigating climate change but it was time to show commitment. To approve the tender would be to contribute to the problem of over- dependency on cars. He foreshadowed a motion to re-allocate the money to sustainable transport and community education initiatives.

Sexton, while fully understanding Cocker and Harvey’s concerns, felt Council would not be showing itself to be progressive if it made false promises.

“We don’t control the MTT, which provides an inadequate service and one which the elderly are fearful of using”. The present service was not sufficiently customer focussed to allow for stops close to homes, which shoppers would need.

“No-one is saying that we should drive fume belching vehicles into the city”, he said, “but there will be an ongoing need for some sort of family vehicle that needs to be parked securely. We can’t offer a realistic alternative and there is no commitment from the State Government to improve the situation”, concluded Sexton.

Christie said that the more he heard from his end of the table the worse it got.

(Seating is based on seniority in time served on Council so Christie finds himself beside Cocker, who is beside Harvey, who is separated by Elise Archer from Helen Burnet.)

“I say to myself, stay down, don’t get up, – but I thank Cocker “he pushes the right buttons for me to have to speak.

“There is no solution offered by the Greens. All they can say is don’t build more car parks. You’ll have to do better than that. I’m sick of hearing about the carbon footprint. It’s like a fashion accessory”

Harvey interrupted “What about congestion?”

Christie “There’s too much around this table already.”

Burnet followed, saying that the wheels of change turn far too slowly on this council.

“I can’t believe it”, she said. “It’s abominable. We have an opportunity now to say no to increased car parking. When I first saw the proposal I did think it’s OK to increase the height on the present footprint but Victoria St. retailers are telling me they are already concerned about congestion there”.

“My main concern”, said Burnet “is the cost. It’s astronomical. We’re looking at $4 million per floor. It doesnbt make economic sense to me. It could be spent on something better. I think we should look at investing in alternatives. We want a liveable city. Christie was at the Tread Lightly Festival but obviously didn’t pick up much.”

Christie objected to this personal comment, adding that he was at the Festival all day.

In the muttering hiatus Freeman insisted that Christie’s objection be dealt with by Valentine.

Burnet withdrew her remark. She then asked for a figure on the cost per parking space to be provided.

Freeman asked if she couldn’t read. This was ignored.

The answer to her question was 27 – 30 thousand dollars.

Although itemised source figures weren’t available Briscoe suggested that about half of the revenue from Council’s parking related activities came from car parks. The resulting fund has $18million in it, he said, which demonstrated their economic viability.

Valentine said that all councillors agreed that petrol was the elephant in the room “but that no matter how vehicles were driven they needed somewhere to park”.

He referred to the Southern Regional Transportation Strategy, being put together by the State Government, which he hoped would be produced soon.

The city centre, he said, is predominantly a retail area and Council needs to look at how to keep that going. If the emphasis on shopping and parking were to be changed it would have to be carefully planned, in concert with neighbouring councils.

He appreciated people like Cocker bringing up such issues but felt his timing was out on this one. It should have been addressed when it first came to Council rather than now, at the point of granting a tender.

Valentine also thought the use of concrete was an issue in relation to the car park extension, given the amount needed and its productionbs harmful emissions.

Freeman concluded debate by saying he thought that councillors were elected to do the best for Hobart. If city car parks weren’t provided people would head for Kingston, Eastlands or the DFOs.

“If that’s good for Hobart”, he said, “I’ve lost the plot.”

The unique thing about Hobart, said Freeman was the CBD, and he didnbt think some councillors had got to grips with how the city works. “We are charged with defending and promoting the city. Those who said they are against this are really conducting a vendetta against the internal combustion engine.”

Cocker objected. He had no problem with such engines he said and he didn’t like the attribution of that attitude to himself.

This was not accepted as a point of order and Freeman repeated the view, adding that he wondered if “they would object if we had stables and horses?”

“Now you’re being ridiculous”, said Harvey.

Freeman is not usually the receiver of such comments. There was an elastic moment’s silence.

Freeman looked surprised then smiled and repeated the need to defend the important part of the city, the CBD.

The approval for tender was granted with Cocker, Burnet and Harvey voting against it.

Elizabeth St. North Hobart – Installation of CCTV Cameras

The motion was for the supply and installation of eleven CCTV cameras between Federal and Burnett Streets at an estimated cost of $45,000.

Debate covered the benefits of CCTV cameras generally and whether they were needed more urgently on the Hobart waterfront or in North Hobart.

Christie, who had originally supported the motion, was of the view that the main trouble spot was now around the docks.

He hoped the State Government had been misquoted in relation to Council’s responsibility for installation of cameras there. After all, the Government “gets taxes from those bogan drunks”.

Valentine clarified the Governmentbs view. While it may wish to contribute to camera installation it doesn’t see the Sulllivans Cove Water Authority as being the appropriate body to co-fund.

Burnet felt the addition of eleven cameras in North Hobart was excessive. No-one would be watching the footage in real time and she saw it as another waste of financial resources.

“We seem to be throwing money around left, right and centre”.

Haigh regarded cameras as useful. Assaults and damage to public property were down in North Hobart, where two cameras were already installed. Haigh also felt they had been useful in relation to the London Underground bombers.

She advised against Council criticising the State Government. “You catch more bees with honey than vinegar”.

Archer fully supported more cameras being installed given the difficulty police have in prosecuting due to lack of evidence. She had supported the increased number of cameras in North Hobart on the basis that “if we’re going to do it, do it completely. I supported cameras right down to the Republic Bar”. She saw the waterfront as being a separate issue.

Briscoe said his opinion had shifted over the years from regarding cameras as part of an undesirable super surveillance system to being a good idea in high usage areas. The cost of CCTV cameras would continue to come down, he said.

He drew a connection between Britain’s high camera presence and its low murder rate. He saw cameras as a necessary response to the problems associated with the Australian binge drinking phenomenon. “We need to be pragmatic in helping create social order and social coherence”.

Cocker said that in the hierarchy responsible for coping with public anti-social behaviour the starting point was not Council. It starts with the police and how they manage areas and issues. The police have said that crime figures are down, despite the moral panic emanating from some incidents, said Cocker.

He stressed the need for the licensing act to be adhered to in relation to the responsible serving of alcohol. “We don’t have a culture of refusing alcohol to anyone”.

Cocker’s main concern was the lack of hard data on what is happening in the city.

How many incidents? Where are they occurring? What is their nature? What changes have occurred since the new police task forces have taken a more pro-active approach?

Council is not in a position to make the right decision in relation to cameras, Cocker said. Data from the police was needed rather than emotive descriptions of particular incidents.

Harvey distinguished between behaviours associated with venues in North Hobart and those on the waterfront . The Republic, for instance, offered the attraction of live music while many Sullivans Cove establishments focussed on the sale of alcohol. He felt more cameras in North Hobart could be overkill.

Ruzicka said that while there seemed to be general acceptance of the usefulness of cameras she wondered if better street lighting might be part of the solution.

She suggested it might be best to defer deciding on installing further CCTV cameras until a report based on discussions with State Government and Tasmania Police was produced.

This was agreed to.

George St/Wellington St North Hobart. Right of Way.

This right of way is on private land belonging to an untraceable owner and continues to be used by the public. A past problem, now dissipated, involved a neighbourbs desire to fence it. The motion now before Council was that no further action be taken.

Burnet expressed her disappointment with this, given that the original resolution had been to negotiate with the North Hobart Residents Association, and possibly Rotary, to care for the space. She was assured in debate that a letter to the Association had received no response. Despite this Burnet asked for a deferral so that the original plans could be further explored. Seconded by Ruzicka the deferral was carried. Christie commented that this was bmore waste of officersb timeb.

Catering Suppliers Use of Non-Battery Eggs

The motion was that Council write to those caterers providing a service to Council requesting that they not utilise eggs produced by battery hens.

Debate suggested that an honour system would have to be settled for, given that Council has no facility for checking egg origins and the egg producing industry has no certification system.

Cocker said that free range eggs should be specified rather than requested and the motion was amended accordingly.

All were in agreement except Christie who said he had been fine with the motion until a distinction had been drawn between free range and barn laid eggs, which he could not support.

He said there was evidence that enclosed hens were happier than free range hens. The latter, he said, demonstrating the look, were nervous and constantly looking over their shoulders.

Debate moved on. The point was made that free range hens are free to go inside if they so desire. There was some discussion about the comparative merits of free range produce. Haigh said she didnbt know anyone who didnbt eat free range eggs.

Valentine said the debate was about the state of the chook, not the egg.

Free range eggs only will now be a specification in Council catering contracts. Christie was the sole No voter.

Comment

Whatever happened to?

At the open Council meeting of 30 July 2007 Councillor Helen Burnet moved that a report on the allocation of free petrol for ex- councillors be prepared. She proposed that the report set out the background as to how the allocation was arrived at and be prepared with a view to cessation of the practice.

At that meeting, ( see TT:The Real Question), her motion was expanded and altered to include a comparison of payments with other capital city aldermen The precise suggestion that the petrol allowance cease was dropped, although the possibility that this might be an outcome of the report remained.

No report has been forthcoming.

The past year has seen a rise in petrol prices, an increase in the number of ex councillors and a submission for a rise in serving councillorsb remuneration. The question of free petrol for ex councillors is not one that has diminished in importance.

Where is the report?