BALD HILL ROAD 7250: July 2016

It seems that the Aldermen in this case at least have been sidelined or are possibly disinterested in the city's cultural landscapes. The notion that 'cultural landscaping' - planning(?) – can be done in isolation and that those implementing planning decisions should be insulated from 'the community' runs counter to the concept of representational governance. To see the State Govt's Good Governance Guide CLICK HERE

Those interested in Trevallyn's, indeed Launceston's, cultural landscape and the management processes that construct it might well be interested in the questions and answers below.

ITEM 7.1.1
City of LauncestonCOUNCIL AGENDA Monday 11 July 2016 3 7.1.1 Public Questions on Notice - Mr Raymond Norman - 11 July 2016 FILE NO: SF6381

AUTHOR: Anthea Rooney (Committee Clerk)

DIRECTOR: Shane Eberhardt (Acting Director Infrastructure Services)

DECISION STATEMENT: The following questions were submitted to Council on1 July 2016 by Mr Raymond Norman and have been answered by Mr Shane Eberhardt (Acting Director Infrastructure Services).

Background: (Officer Comment - Mr Shane Eberhardt) Repair work was required to the 300mm concrete stormwater main in Bald Hill Road. Due to high intensity rainfall early in 2016 and tree root intrusion, the stormwater main has been over capacity and not able to cope with the amount of water flow it experienced. This has resulted in the joints of each section of stormwater main blowing out, creating large voids around the pipe and damaging the footpath, kerb, manholes and road surface, leaving a number of sink holes

To repair the damage to the stormwater infrastructure, three gum trees located over the stormwater pipe have been removed. Removal of the current damaged pipe will be required to allow for the installation of a larger stormwater pipe (375mm diameter) and new manholes to elevate the capacity issues and damage caused by this. Alternative options of directional drilling or lining the existing pipe have been considered but due to the voids around the pipe, it needs to be removed.

There is a significant safety issue with works required immediately to rectify the damage. If delay to the repair work were to occur, there is a high risk of major failure of the stormwater infrastructure, resulting in possible landslips and closure of this section of Bald Hill Road for months in order to undertake the repair. Bald Hill Road is in close proximity to the Trevallyn Primary School and is also a school bus route.

Answers to the specific questions raised by Mr Raymond Norman are shown below. Questions (typed as received)

As a consequence of council management’s action in order to facilitate the installation of a stormwater drain and in regard to the removal of three healthy trees that were 50 plus years old, all of which had local significance, a number of questions arise. In regard to council’s fundament requirement of accountability and it’s obligation to be accountable to its constituents for decisions made on their behalf:

1. Why did council management proceed with only the most superficial commitment to notifying constituents of management’s intention to remove three trees from a cultural landscape? Indeed, in accord with responsible, participatory and inclusive governance why weren’t the constituents in the immediately adjoining jurisdiction – and who would suffer a loss of amenity along with Launcestonians – given an opportunity to present their objections to council in the same way as Launceston Council constituents?

Response: The works were considered urgent due to risk to public safety and advertised in the Examiner which is consistent with all Council works. Neighbours have been consulted as part of construction planning.

2. Given that Bald Hill Road exists at the very edge of the municipality, at the edge of a designated tourist route, within a scenic protection area and within a cultural landscape, why hasn’t much more careful planning consideration been given to landscape protection in the carrying out of this project given the intended and absolutely anticipatable outcomes?

Response: The area where the construction work is required to repair the stormwater pipe is not in the scenic protection area and landscaping has been considered as part of the project. Once the new pipe has been installed and the voids underground filled, the bank will be re-vegetated with more suitable plants/trees.

3. Given the anticipatable community concerns, and the reported budget of $160,000 for the project, why wasn’t the project and its budget referred to the aldermen for their consideration and/or endorsement given the intended outcomes and anticipatable community concerns?

Response: The project was prioritised over other projects within the stormwater program because the road and stormwater pipe had failed and if not repaired in a timely manner could have the potential to be catastrophic on surrounding infrastructure, private property and pedestrians. This area is in close proximity of the Trevallyn Primary School and Bald Hill Road is a school bus route. Aldermen were advised of the works.

4. Given the reported significance of the project, and the range of sensitivities it confronts, why hasn’t management placed a Development Application before the people who use and traverse the landscape in order to have the project considered at an open council meeting?

Response: A Development Application was not required.

5. Given that trees that exist within urban landscapes – cultural landscapes – are routinely given a monitory value, what value/s has/have been attributed to these three trees? If in fact no dollar value has been attributed to these trees, why not? Furthermore, what was the total cost of removing these trees from this landscape and what percentage of the project budget does it represent?

Response:The trees required removal as they sit above the stormwater pipe. The trees will be replaced with a more suitable variety as part of the bank re-establishment once the repair work has been completed

6. Given the expectation that council needs to be representative of, and sensitive to, the needs of the entire community why hasn’t a more diligent effort been made to fulfil this expectation in order to be consistent with council’s planning provisions and policies in regard to the sensitive management of this cultural landscape; this area of implied scenic protection; and this significant urban precinct?

Response:.The works are not in the scenic protection area and are permitted under the Launceston Planning Scheme.

7. Can council demonstrate in any way that its actions relative to this project, and the decision making that has led to it, represents effective and efficient management, indeed best practice, in regard to appropriate 21st Century urban stormwater management given the current state of the Tamar estuary?

Response: The works are to repair a stormwater pipe that has failed and if left without Council intervention would result in significant failure of Bald Hill Road and flooding of properties.

8. Upon what expert advice did council rely in the planning of this project and upon what evidence did council management, in concert with the aldermen, rely upon to ensure that the stormwater management proposal was the most effective; the most cost effective; and the most appropriate within council’s budget constraints?

Response: The Council has appropriate stormwater and infrastructure management knowledge.

9. Given that the stormwater being managed originates almost entirely in the adjoining jurisdiction of West Tamar Council, why didn’t the project managers engage with that council towards finding a shared and equitable solution; a cooperative/collaborative strategy; and more environmentally sensitive outcome in regard to this project?

Response: The stormwater pipe that has failed is a City of Launceston asset, therefore is the responsibility of the City of Launceston to repair along with all other affected assets including the road surface, kerb and channel and the footpath.

10. Given council management’s overt commitment to engage with its constituency and the wider community via ‘social media’, why hasn’t council employed this relatively inexpensive and cost effective communication technique in regard to this project given the benefits social media has to offer in regard to engaging with the community – and especially so in regard to this project – towards seeking an inclusive win-win outcome?

Response: The Council has communicated this project consistent with other capital works and the work is not being undertaken for the sake of improving the aesthetic amenity of Bald Hill Road but to carry out emergency repair work to the underground infrastructure that has failed.

11. What does this project represent in regard to appropriate town planning, administrative transparency and accountable governance towards engendering consensus in both the project’s immediate area and the wider community more generally?.

Response: The project is permitted under the Launceston Planning Scheme and was not a long term planned project. The work that is needed to be carried out is emergency repair work and if not undertaken exposes the community to significant risks.

CIVIC VANDALISM is the very best that this outcome can be described as.

Like it is with other manifestations of vandalism it comes about as a consequence of unchecked delinquency and underlying unawareness, inexperience and cultural insensitivity. It’s not like you can point your finger at an individual and the go deal with it all as the ‘problem’ presents itself at every levels, all at once and "all the Bloody time" it seems.

Given the multiple options, the question has to be asked. If a ‘win’ is available for not just one win-win but several why aren’t they being looked at ... or even for? If you're being paid a salary without bonuses and the only way up is to comply ... perhaps that's it. To look like you’re a winner its easy. To learn what needs/could to be done, that's harder. Much harder!

The problem is a rolling predicament where if you perform you get short term congratulations that come with long term expectations, that in turn requires one to develop new skills. That takes time and effort. But it might not earn you any more money. Why do it? Why aspire?

Better to maintain the status quo and not solve problems you can get away with not solving. Then you will continue to keep yourself in a manner to which you’ve become accustomed .... relatively risk free.

Then comes the uncomfortable ‘sidelines’ that come 'one’s way' where one can benefit from oiling the wheels of that wagon over there ... so to say. What goes around comes around.

This little exercise in CIVIC VANDALISM comes with a little side benefit to ‘the operation’ in that a “tree” is in fact just so much BLOODY WOOD CHIP. [LINK]

It becomes expedient to declare a tree as being “in the way”, OR “at the end of its usefulness/life”, OR “diseased” Or a myriad of things. Evidence is not required! Likewise, neither is accountability it seems!

Also, due to the lack of knowledge/culture/experience/whatever its not possible to see all kinds of things that can/should be done even when explained.

While we fail to expect accountability we pay more and more for less and less! It’s all our own faults!